LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 University of California. 
 
 RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE 
 
 Class 
 
 7s\ ; 
 
DEMOSTHENIC STYLE 
 
 IN THE 
 
 PRIVATE ORATIONS 
 
 THESIS 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 WILLIAM HAMILTON KIRK 
 
 BALTIMORE, i8g^. 
 
 BALTIMORE 
 THE FRIEDENWALD COMPANY 
 
 r895 
 
DEMOSTHENIC STYLE 
 
 IN THE 
 
 PRIVATE ORATIONS 
 
 THESIS 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM HAMILTON KIRK 
 
 BALTIMORE, 1895. 
 
 mi VIE- ./?Y 
 
 ^w 
 
 B A L T I M (JJUT 
 
 THE FRIEDENWALD COMPANY 
 
 1895 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 I 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/demosthenicstyleOOkirkrich 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I. — Establishment of Tests. 
 
 1. Denunciation 8-9 
 
 2. Repetition 9-1 1 
 
 3. Asyndeton 11-12 
 
 4. Irony 12-14 
 
 5. Apostrophe 14-IS 
 
 6. Interrogation 15-18 
 
 7. Rhetorical Answer 18-19 
 
 8. Deictic Expressions . 19-21 
 
 9. Transitions 21-22 
 
 10. Prooemia 22-25 
 
 II. — Comparison with Lysias and Isaeus. 
 
 1. Denunciation 26 
 
 2. Deictic Expressions 26 
 
 3. Apostrophe 27 
 
 4. Interrogation ; Rhetorical Answer 27-28 
 
 5. Irony 28-30 
 
 6. Repetition 30-32 
 
 7. Asyndeton; Prooemium 32-34 
 
 III. — Examination of Suspected Speeches. 
 
 1. Oration 32 34-35 
 
 2. " 33 35-36 
 
 3- " 34 36-38 
 
 4. " 35 38-39 
 
 5- " 40 39-41 
 
 6. ** 46 41-42 
 
 7- " 56 42-43 
 
 166468 
 
% 
 
DEMOSTHENIC STYLE IN THE PRIVATE 
 ORATIONS. 
 
 I. — Establishment of Tests. 
 
 Of the sixty speeches which have been handed down to modern 
 times under the name of Demosthenes, forty-two (Orr. 18-59) are 
 pleadings before a court ; and of these again twenty-nine (27-50, 
 52-56) are more nearly defined as ^^oyot idtioruoi — a term which 
 has no exact equivalent in English, and which, even in Greek, is 
 not absolute in its definition, since Or. 51 (jTep\ rod GTt<p. t^? 
 Tpirjpap)^.') in all manuscripts, and in some Orr. 57-9 (jtpdq Eu^oo- 
 Xidfjv, xard Osoxpivou, xard Neacpaq), appear in this class (Blass, Att. 
 Ber. Ill 49-50).^ This uncertainty is reflected in the pages of 
 Blass, in whose index these four orations are entered under the 
 heading Privatrederiy although in his remarks on 58 and 59 (III 
 440, 476) he emphasizes the fact that they belong among the 
 bixaviAoX dr][x6(jioi. Or. 57 he qualifies (III 429) as being in char- 
 acter, though not by strict construction, a private speech, and he 
 seems half inclined to yield a like place to Or. 51 (III 215). But 
 the latter was delivered before the Athenian Senate, and its theme 
 is the claim to a public distinction ; the former is addressed to 
 an ordinary court, and, although connected with a public measufe, 
 deals with matters of an essentially private nature ; I have there- 
 fore followed Blass in including it among the idtwnxoi, while 
 leaving 51 in the class to which it formally belongs. 
 
 The question how many of these speeches may be considered 
 Demosthenean has been variously answered, and certainly with 
 more reasonableness by Blass, who reckons fourteen (including 57) 
 than by the more destructive among modern critics. The first 
 speech against Stephanus, Or. 45, has been a great stumbling- 
 block, and Arnold Schafer's objections to its morality blinded 
 him to the beauties of its style ; but Blass has given a plausible 
 
 ' Cited by the pages of the first edition. 
 
reason for the advocacy of ApoUodoriis by Demosthenes, and 
 stylistically the speech refuses to be excluded. Schafer's argu- 
 ments against the genuineness of the third speech against Aphobus, 
 Or. 29, have been sufficiently, though not exhaustively, refuted 
 by Blass ; and his view, which was also that of Westermann, that 
 this speech is the forgery of a late rhetorician, is wholly untenable, 
 as well for this as for any other of the private orations. The 
 most marked feature common to all, to the obviously spurious no 
 less than to the admittedly genuine, is their character of reality. 
 They deal with cases, and enter into details, such as no forger 
 would have been at the pains to handle or invent ; the poorest 
 among them is instinct with that breath of life which literature 
 draws only from contact with fact ; and the purity of their Attic 
 dialect gives final assurance that those which are not by Demos- 
 thenes himself must be attributed to contemporaries of his and to 
 the best period of Attic oratory. 
 
 For distinguishing the genuine from the spurious, or for assign- 
 ing certain of the latter to a possible common author, vocabulary 
 is an aid to be used with much caution. Two influences conspired 
 to keep the language of these brief compositions as nearly as 
 might be on a level with the ordinary phraseology of educated 
 Athenians : first, their intensely practical spirit and purpose ; and 
 secondly, the fact that at Athens a suitor usually pleaded his own 
 case, and often did so in a speech prepared for his inexperience 
 by some trained and practised orator. Dionysius of Halicar- 
 nassus dwells on the art with which Lysias assumed the layman ; 
 the stronger genius of Demosthenes showed an even more 
 wonderful pliancy in this respect ; and if inferior speech -writers^ 
 were incapable of achieving a like delicate perfection, they were 
 certainly guided by the same general conception of fitness. 
 Individuality of expression must have been further obscured by a 
 rhetoric which prescribed stock arguments and reflections and 
 allowed set formulas of introduction or conclusion ; and when we 
 remember how little remains out of an immense mass of oratory 
 
 ' It is to be regretted that in English the word logographer should be 
 employed, after Thuc." i, 21, to denote writers of history. The Greek 
 ?u}yoypd^og usually signifies one who wrote speeches for others to deliver ; 
 and we need both logograph and logography to express a practice which is 
 never to be left out of sight in considering the forensic oratory of the 
 Athenians, and which had much to do with its unrivalled excellence. 
 
 I 
 
subjected to this rhetoric, we may hesitate to find evidence for 
 individual authorship in the coincidence of phrases often essen- 
 tially commonplace. In his attempt to show that one man was 
 the author of the speeches against Macartatus, Euergus and 
 Olympiodorus, as well as of those in behalf of Apollodorus 
 (excepting the first against Stephanus), Blass has not only laid 
 undue stress (III 496, 500-1) on such coincidences, but has some- 
 times neglected to observe that expressions which he reckons 
 distinctive are to be found in compositions of other authorship. 
 Thus the predicative use of i^ dvayx-qq can be paralleled from 
 Isaeus, 2. 22 and 3. 65 ; for the combination of £u{^uq or ed^Hwq 
 with Tzapa^pT/fxa compare i. 11 and 3. 7. 48 of the same author 
 and Dem. 29. 15 ; in Dem. 15. 7 and 39. 24 we find axoXou^oq 
 in the sense in which Blass quotes it for 46. 17 and 48. 4, or, if he 
 insists on an impersonal neuter, we can point to Ep. 3. 10, 
 where, however, the construction is with the genitive, not the 
 dative. That sart dk ^pa^oq 6 Xoyoq is a mere formula is plain 
 from the variations found in 3. 23, 21. 77. 160, 34. 3 (compare also 
 18. 196 and Lys. 24. 10, ou TioXhq 6 Xoyoq, sc. iffri) ; it can hardly be 
 that the critic attaches importance to the particular form in which 
 this trivial sentence is cast. The essential difference between the 
 introductory sentences in 43. 31, 48. 33, and those in 27. 13, 29. 39, 
 54. 6 lies in the greater neatness and compactness of the 
 Demosthenean formulas ; but all are shaped on the same model, 
 and it cannot surprise us that at a lower level of art there should 
 be less variety of execution. Distinctions of style fade with a 
 decrease in artistic power and refinement ; and even if the common 
 authorship for which Blass argues is not improbable, it cannot 
 properly be maintained on the ground of stereotyped expressions 
 or literary imperfections which may belong as easily to several 
 inferior writers as to one alone. Even in larger spheres of com- 
 parison the importance of vocabulary as an index of style lies 
 chiefly in the tone and spirit which words convey ; otherwise, the 
 difference between prose and poetry would be in the main a 
 mechanical one, which, with the Greeks, it never was. 
 
 This protest against an occasional over-interpretation of unim- 
 portant phenomena does not affect the sense of obligation which 
 I, in common with all students of Demosthenes, feel to the great 
 work of Blass. The German critic has usually trodden a surer 
 path and taken a broader sweep ; that it is still possible to glean 
 
where he has reaped, I hope to show in the following pages, 
 where I shall first take note of certain traits of Demosthenic style 
 exhibited in the fourteen private speeches accepted as genuine, 
 and shall then, after a glance at Lysias and Isaeus, proceed to 
 examine, from the point of view thus gained, some of the doubtful 
 orations. And I shall begin by calling attention to a class of 
 words which stands in intimate relationwith the tone of the orator, 
 and the use or omission of which may fairly be said to have an 
 artistic value and effect. 
 
 Denunciation. 
 
 This is what may be termed the vocabulary of denunciation, 
 which comprises words expressive of the adversary's baseness or 
 impudence. Such are the adjectives watd^jq (36. 33, 37. 3. 27, 
 
 54. 38), avaiffxovToc; (27. 18, 29. 53, 55. 28), 7:o)^7jp6c; (45. 80, 54. 24, 
 
 55. 30), xaxSq (30. 4, 45. 4), aSuoc; (29. 27, 30. 4, 36. 55, 45. 80), 
 (paoXuc; (37. 50), fiiapoq (36. 58, 37. 48), ^delupoq (54. 22), avoaioq 
 (28. 16), dxd^aproq (2,7. 48), ax^rXwc; (29. 19, 30. 46) ; the adverbs 
 dvac8(bc; (27. 16. 24. 62), alaypibq (27. 57. 62, 29. 49), ddUutq (57. 5), 
 7:Xeov£xrix€)q (57. 5); the substantives dvaideta (27. 22. 24. 31. 34, 
 29. I, 31. 6, 36. 61, 37. 45, 45. 44. 71. 73, 54. 37, 55. 8, 57. 64), 
 dvat(Txo>T{a (27. 38. 64, 38. 5), 7:o>7]pta (27. 26, 36. 56, 45. 2, 54. 37), 
 aiaxpoxipdeta (27. 38. 46, 29. 4, 45. 2), r.avoupyia (29. 5 1, 30. 24), 
 fitapia (29. 4), xaxoupyia (45. 39). To these may be added the 
 verbs dvaiaxwrtlv (29. 57, 45. 44) and -avovpy^vj (29. 5). I omit 
 such words as o^pK; and daiXyeia, which are specifically applicable 
 to cases of violence, and cite only those passages in which the 
 term of reprobation appears as a clear and frank expression of the 
 speaker's own sentiments concerning his adversary. 
 
 An examination of this hst reveals two facts worthy of note: the 
 first, that Orr. 39 (the first against Boeotus) and 41 (jzpoq I-oodiav) 
 are absent from it ; the second, that the proportion of denuncia- 
 tory expressions is larger in the speeches delivered by Demos- 
 thenes himself than in those composed at a later period for clients. 
 The five orations, 27-31, contain thirty-one such words against 
 thirty-four to be found in seven other speeches ; and fifteen occur 
 in Or. 27 (xara 'AcpoiSoo a'), ten in Or. 29, while Or. 45, longer than 
 either of these and extraordinarily bitter in tone, has not more 
 than eleven. It would seem that in his youth Demosthenes gave 
 a freer rein to the passion which seeks issue in vigorous and down- 
 
right abuse, while later he learned to clothe the same sentiment in 
 a more refined and subtle expression. The triumph of this refine- 
 ment is seen in the first speech against Boeotus, where, without 
 the employment of any harsh word, the adversary is loaded with 
 scorn and rebuke. The cause lies in the rji^oitoua^ of the speech ; 
 Mantitheus, whose case has no support in law, wishes to arouse 
 in the judges a sense of what is fair and considerate ; accordingly 
 he poses throughout as a person of scrupulous fairness, and 
 displays an ostentatious consideration for the rights and feelings 
 of a brother whom he despises and repudiates, while admitting 
 and satisfying his legal claims. Recalling the situation presented 
 in Or. 41, we may trace there the influence of the same element. 
 A respectable citizen of mature years has a dispute about property 
 with Spudias, the husband of his wife's sister ; he regards Spudias 
 as a litigious individual (§2 TzoVAxiq — sh^Lffiihoq, §24 oW — r^apip-^s- 
 rai), and does not hesitate to speak his mind about the course 
 pursued by him (§29-30 did rdbra •/,. r. f.); but as there is no other 
 quarrel between them, and obviously no desire on his part to 
 envenom this and destroy all harmony in the family, the respect- 
 able man refrains, in rather a dignified way, from using harsh and 
 unpleasant epithets. 
 
 Repetition. 
 
 Rhetorical figures belong to the common stock of oratory ; but 
 some of them at least possess, or are capable of receiving, such 
 
 ^ By this term I wish to denote the expression in the writer's style of 
 the speaker's personality ; it applies only to those speeches which were 
 written for others to deliver, and has nothing to do with characterizations 
 of a third person {xapaK-ripLaiiog). Thus in the speech for Phormio (36) the 
 ijdoTzoua lies only in the complete self-suppression of the advocate ; in 
 such speeches as those against Pantaenetus and Conon the mental linea- 
 ments of the speaker are in a measure revealed to us. Of course, this 
 reflection of character in style is an artistic, not an absolutely truthful, one. 
 For this somewhat arbitrary use of an elusive and ill-defined word I find 
 support in Nicolaus Sophistes, Progymn. in Spengel Rhet. Ill 489: 
 T/OoTzoua earl TioyoQ dp/xd^cov rolq vKOKeifievoi^, rj^oQ rj 'ko.'&oq kjucpaivuv rj koL avva[i- 
 (j)6Tepa ' dpfzo^cov fiev rolg vTiroKeifievoig, EKecdij del oroxd^eo-^ac koI tov Tieyovroq Kat 
 TTpbg ov "keyet • fj'&oq 6k Kal ird'&og tj kol avvajucporepov, eTVEtd^ fi irpbg rd Ka-&67iov rig 
 d7roj3?J'!ret rj Tvpog to ka Trepiardaeug yivojuevov. The idea here conveyed is not 
 always easy to distinguish from that implied in the term to TrpiiTov ; but 
 the definition is more consistent and satisfactory than those which con- 
 found 7]-&oiroua on the one hand with TrpoawKOTzoua^ on the other with the 
 purely moral rj'&og. 
 
10 
 
 distinctive tone and character as to cast light on the mental quali- 
 ties of the writer who uses them. Among the figures of speech 
 {axriiJ-ara U'^tio<-) employed by Demosthenes, Blass notices repeti- 
 tion in its various forms. Of these, epanadiplosis ^ is not very- 
 common in the private speeches; I have observed only seven 
 examples : ohx ean tovt' ohx effzt, 27. 57, 29. 49 ; jSorji^TJaar* o5v i^filv 
 ^o7ji^ij(TaT£, 28. 20; ou fid AC oby^ 29. ^9; tooto dij tout', 41. 22; 
 a2X' ouy ouTocn Z. oux cuxvrjffe, 45. 56; Tzir^ripoq a> a. M. Tzovrjpoc; ohroq 
 45. 80. Anaphora is much more frequent, either in asyndeton — 
 which is decidedly the strongest form — or with connectives, 
 usually fikv — di. Of the asyndetic arrangement we find examples, 
 with iteration of one word, in 36. 38 (6V ivec/xaro, 6V eiffB-npa^aro, 
 Off' sUfjipe), ib. 53 (the negative particle five times repeated), 37. 
 36. 37, 38. 28, 54. 28; of two words 27. 38 (rdbr' 00 /xsydXrj xai 
 TZtpKpavTjq dvaiff^uvTta I raDr' ouy UTzep^ukrj dsiur^q aiff^poxepdeiaq ))^ 30. 
 30? 37* 44- Examples with ixh — di are more in number : 27. 30 
 {xtxTfiiihirj fih — xtxTT^ixivov di)^ 28. 18, 37.44, 38. 16 (where the shift 
 of tense shows that the speaker might have said rore fxkv — vDv 8i, 
 and that rove is used for the sake of the emphasis which lies in 
 repetition), 39. 34, 41. 22, 45. 21. 42, 55. 20. 35 ; and with change 
 of inflection m 36. 23 {yeyevrjiiivoo fiiv — y£yev7j;xiv7)q di^ and 45. 86 (a 
 double instance : duu?.ot [ih ixslvot, douh)^ 8'ouroq ^v, dsa-Korai d'u/xslq^ 
 SsffTtoTTjq d'^v kyu)). Formally, of course, anaphora may be said to 
 occur with the repetition of any word, however unimportant or 
 inevitable ; but the repetitive effect, which comes sharply and 
 vigorously in the reiteration of the monosyllabic demonstrative, 
 29. 45 (compare also ri di, 39. 15), is hardly to be felt with less 
 
 ' In the terminology I have here followed Blass, III 144-7 ; cf. also Reh- 
 dantz, Neun Philipp. Red. Ind. pp. 5-6, 12, 22, Ernesti, Lex. Techn, Rhet. 
 Thus(£7r)avaJi7r;ia)aiC is the — asyndetic — repetition of a word within the same 
 clause, or (Dem. 28. 20) of a word which itself constitutes a clause; in 
 (£7r)ava^opd two or more clauses begin, in avriarpo^i] end, with the same word 
 or words ; ovj.i'KTMK.rj is the combination of these two figures, or, in substance, 
 the repetition of a clause of several words. In KVKkoq the second clause 
 ends with the initial word of the first, in avacrpo<^7] it begins with the last 
 word of the preceding clause. The various relations might be symbolized 
 as follows : 
 
 1 
 
 epanad. 
 
 a a 
 
 anaph. 
 
 a — , a — 
 
 antistr. 
 
 -b,— b 
 
 gviittTi, 
 
 a— b, a— b 
 
 KVK. 
 
 a — , — a 
 
 anastr. 
 
 — b, b— 
 
II 
 
 accumulation, such as we see in 29. 7 or 41. ii. Anaphora with 
 three words connected by ij appears in 31. 13 (jtaiq kazt. dixatov — 
 ij 7t. L <5.) ; and the same passage shows a somewhat irregular 
 form with change of inflection (^dv /xiv oydorjxovra fivaiv d^fjq opouq, 
 SydoTjxovra fxvdg ehai rijv 7cpo~ixa\ as well as two clear-cut examples 
 of anastrophe (^av dk itkeiovoq -Kkelov, idv d' iXdrrovoq e'Aarrov), tO 
 which figure there is an approach in 31. 3 (si dtxaiwq — dtxaiwq), 
 and 30. 24 (o)q drcXol Tivzq — aTzkibq ouS' dv ficxpov). There is an 
 imperfect xuxXoq in 57. 54 (^yov — ^^ov), antistrophe in 45. 38 
 (^iiriTpoTTeuffac. fxev xard diad^TjXrjv — obd^ i-ntrponeu^TjVac xard dcai^ijx7jv\ 
 ib. 82 (ei pTjdevoq ruiv ilXXiov eXarrov^ ifxou y' eXazrov)^ and in 45. 37 tWO 
 fine examples ;ioted by Blass, III 147, of auinzXoxij ; a third, less 
 perfect, occurs in 29. .14 (a>c T^^p^ p-iv zivioi^ aa<prjq i) ^daa^oq, Ttsp), 
 8'ao zi'^iov 00 aacpyjq). In 37. 3 {dixojv — dixrjv') there is a rather loose 
 application of the principle of repetition. 
 
 This figure, which conveys an eflfect of insistent lucidity and 
 energy, is sufficiently well represented in the private speeches of 
 Demosthenes to be cited as characteristic, though his use of it is, 
 on the whole, sparing. It appears with most frequency and in 
 greatest mass in Or. 45, but is relatively less abundant in the other 
 speeches written for clients than in the five delivered by the orator 
 himself, and is very weak in two of the finest orations, 39 and 54 
 (xazd K6vu)voq), and in one of the longest, 57 (jtpdq Ed^ouXtdr^v'). In 
 these, however, we find, with other marks of the great orator's 
 hand, numerous examples of a still more important rhetorical 
 figure, which has also a syntactical value, asyndeton. 
 
 Asyndeton. 
 
 This is employed by Demosthenes with no little variety of tone. 
 It is least eflfective when merely explanatory, as in 57. 41 (o Upwzo- 
 pa^oq Tihriq ^v) ; and the weakest use of this explanatory asynde- 
 ton is found in the resumption of the speech after the introduction 
 of documents or testimony. To the expression of feeling this con- 
 struction lends great force; compare, for indignation, 29. 3, 30. 8. 
 24. 38, 36. 50, 37. 40, 45. 80 (two fine examples of fierce energy), 
 55' 25. 31, 57. 60. There is scorn in 30. 14 and 31. 8 ; irony in 31. 
 12, 36. 52, 39- 34- 36, 57- 61 ; pathos in 45. 85 and 57. 36. A use 
 of the asyndeton to express haste and eagerness is found in the 
 introduction of testimony ; the command to the clerk is usually 
 prefaced by xai, ow^ (to di^ but often Demosthenes says curtly 
 Aa/S^, or Xi^'s. 
 
12 
 
 This figure acquires greater weight when it is made cumulative 
 by the asyndetic sequence of several clauses or words. It may 
 then convey an effect of rapidity and may be strengthened by 
 anaphora; cf. 37. 36 (av rixprj rtq, av OTzk' intyipr)^ av iTruararifivi^), 
 39- 35. 57- 28, and especially the very elaborate example in 28. 20, 
 which, in the words Uersuto ayrt^oXo), shows a heightening of the 
 force by an accumulation of words cognate in meaning, a figure 
 which is also described as a form of epanadiplosis (Blass, III 
 147); cf 36. 52 {iXauvziq dtcoxsiq auxncpw^relq)^ ib. 47, 39. 34. In 
 37. 14 vividness is thus given to the action of a third person. 
 
 Participial clauses are also found in asyndetic sequence ; cf. 27.48 
 (r^v dia^TJx7)v TJ^a'^r/.ora, zd d^dpdrzoda Tzeizpaxora^ raXX^ odtu) izdvra diw- 
 xTjxoTa), where this construction, occurring at the end of a long 
 polysyndeton, gives a strong effect of increasing warmth and 
 vehemence, which is heightened by the hammering beat of the 
 homioteleuton. In 29. 55-7 there is a succession of nine participial 
 clauses without connectives ; shorter complexes of like character 
 appear in 41. 16 and 57. 56. In 41. 14 two participles are com- 
 bined with an adjective, in 54. 27 with a substantival expression 
 of time ; in 54. 30 a relative clause stands between two substan- 
 tives, and in 45. 36 the two participles have substantival force. 
 Often the whole series consists of substantives, to the utterance 
 of which this figure may lend an air of haste, as in 30. 17, 39. 9, 
 or of serious emphasis and stress, as in 57. 24. 55, while emphasis 
 is colored with indignation in 36. 53 and 45. 39. 
 
 Among figures of thought ((T/7jfiara diavoiaq) three stand out 
 prominently in the style of Demosthenes : irony, apostrophe, and 
 interrogation. 
 
 Iro7iy. 
 
 The quality of his irony is vivid and cutting; cf. 28. 6, 31. 12 
 (00 -portpov y* ri r^apd (To\, vov el dXyju^r/ Xiyec;'), 36. 44 (<T£ yap dv 
 TtpoTEpov ■)^p-q(Trov Inoirjffsv d ^v ^tt' kxeivw) ; see also 30. 20, 36. 54, 
 37- 38, where in the sarcastic emphasis given to the opponent's 
 name there is a concentration of the irony which suffuses the 
 whole context of these passages. This suffusion with ironical 
 coloring is very noticeable in Or. 39 ; it appears also in Or. 37 
 and in long episodes of Or. 36. 43-7 and 49-54. Especially to 
 be remarked is the accumulation of sneering phrases in 36. 52, 
 37. 36. Sometimes again the utterance is very brief, as in the 
 scornful dXX' 00 d-qitou w S., 41. 16, and the sharp side-cut in 38. 20 
 
 (oTZoToi TLviq eiaiu dyvibreq)^ 
 
 n 
 
13 
 
 The temper which reveals itself in ironical utterances is visible 
 also in other ways in Demosthenes ; as in the scornful roughness 
 of 36. 44 (ttSv av dyvoijaetaq)^ 37. 31 (xaizot rtq S.v aol dpa^fiijv sSioxe 
 fJ-io-v), 45. 66 (aAA' ^m tw xspdaiveiv Ttay wj ooroq Ttoiijffeisv), and in 
 the paradoxical turn of 29. 13 {ffo^tffzrjq xdl ff<p6dp' ixajv rd dixai^ 
 dyvoelv 7:po(j7zoiobiJ.evoq: repeated in a slightly different form, 
 30. 36), and of 45. 19 {ooTOi de <pwpai^£l£v). 
 
 The same sense of superiority, the same air of towering above 
 the adversary, is manifested in the rebukes which Demosthenes 
 sometimes administers. Compare the tone of 28. 9 (dW dvayx-q 
 fjLsydXrj X. r. f.), and of 38. 27 (^7r' ixeivoK; ixXdsT^ uv o\q kTzoielre 
 dixaiwq) ; compare Or. 39 passim^ and especially the mingled 
 irony and rebuke of the passage beginning dXX' w xf^XeTrcurare 
 Botiori, 34 ; finally much of the passionate arraignment in Orr. 36 
 and 45. A similar feeling finds expression befitting the youth of 
 the speaker in 54. 23. 34. 40, and in the naive irony of 55. 18 
 (ow ydp ixTiielv ■jrs d-JTZoo x. r. A.). 
 
 It is to be remarked that in Demosthenes apostrophe is often 
 tinged more or less deeply with irony ; many of the passages 
 cited above are apostrophic in form. Further, what is important 
 to recall, this (txw^ of the rhetoricians is in truth a ??£<r, a mental 
 habit, and, like all innate tendencies, would be prone to emerge 
 whenever occasion permitted, while to minds not thus endowed 
 by nature it would be less attainable than the more mechanical 
 among the figures of thought. And as Demosthenes would, 
 where he could, give free play to this quality of his mind, so, 
 where he was obliged to hold it in check, we may yet expect to 
 see it revealed by brief flashes, little darting tongues of ironic fire. 
 This is what happens in Or. 57, and it seems to me one of the 
 most satisfactory guarantees for the authenticity of that speech. 
 A. Schafer's doubts concerning it arise from the freedom and 
 boldness with which Euxitheus, a man of inferior position, con- 
 fronts his powerful enemy, Eubulides ; but the Athenians prided 
 themselves on their nappTjaca, and it was essential to the complete- 
 ness of his defense that the speaker should expose the character 
 and motives of his accusers. Accordingly he is bold and down- 
 right in asserting those facts which he can prove to their discredit, 
 as in stating the proofs of his own citizenship ; but the conscious- 
 ness of his weakness in the face of this " gang" (of TuOra) ffuvearu)- 
 '^£^) §13) cf. §10 and §16), and the circumstances of the time, 
 
14 
 
 inspire a nervous anxiety, which is easily felt in the lengthy and 
 generalizing prooemium, in the eager pathos of the conclusion, in 
 the appealing humility of §36 (ixrjdaixibq w a. d. x. r. i.) and §45 
 (xa£ yap ei raneivdv x. r. A.), in the resigned tone of §33 {aXka yap 
 X. T. A.) and of §66 mit. This nervousness tempers the boldness 
 and causes a certain indirectness of speech in attack; cf §7 (rcq 
 — xaracTTafftaffi^eiq), and the vague form given to the accusation of 
 sycophancy in §§32, 34, 49. It is true that the first of these slurs 
 is followed by a more direct denunciation (iize} — dta^dlke^q) ; but 
 the speaker at once checks himself and falls back on insinuation 
 (a yap o/ie'tq iffre x. r. A.). The same fear of venturing too far 
 appears in the fleeting shade of irony conveyed by the repetition 
 of the proper name, §15-16; and the more vigorous sneer in §5 
 (xai fj.dXXov r) Tzpoar^xev) is yet very brief. A comparison of this 
 speech with the first against Stephanus or with the defense of 
 Phormio shows the full extent of the reserve which has, however, 
 not prevented the orator from bringing out clearly much that is 
 damaging to the accuser. It is the ironic tendency controlled by 
 an admirable art which produces this subtle blending of frank 
 vigor with tremulous slyness ; and here, as elsewhere, we feel the 
 iji^oTioita which, with Demosthenes, consists not in descending to 
 his client's level, but in raising the latter to his own height ; he 
 dignifies the lowly Euxitheus, as he lends grace to the rusticity of 
 the opponent of Callicles and loftiness to the rage of Apollodorus.^ 
 Apostrophe and interrogation are figures at any orator's com- 
 mand; and while their absence from a speech has a certain signifi- 
 cance, the effect of their presence depends on the tone imparted 
 to them by their position and by the feeling which they convey^ 
 
 Apostrophe, 
 
 In the use of apostrophe — a term meant here to include only 
 the act of turning from the judges to address the adversary — 
 the fourteen speeches exhibit great variety. There is no example 
 of this figure in Orr. 27 and 30; only one, and that very brief 
 in Or. 54 ; while it abounds in Orr. 36, 37, 39 and 45, and is 
 not infrequent in the remaining speeches. Sometimes it occu- 
 pies passages of considerable length, as in 28. 7-10, 36. 43-54, 
 
 'Other examples of irony or superiority of tone in 27. 22, 28.7, 29. 14, 
 31. 10. \2fin., 36. 21. 34, 37. 34. 54, 39. 13. 38. 16. 26, 41. 20. 24, 45. 26. 30. 50,. 
 54. 41 fin. 
 
15 
 
 45- 78-80; sometimes is confined to a brief phrase or two, as in 
 31. 12, 41. 26, 45. 84, 57. 31. The apostrophe is essentially pas- 
 sionate in tone, and is therefore in general not used by Demos- 
 thenes as a mere vehicle of argument ; the exceptions are sus- 
 ceptible of explanation on artistic grounds. So in certain rapid 
 and brief passages (36. 10. 19. 22, 39. 24, 41. 26) the personality 
 gives a sharper point to the argument, an effect which depends on 
 the very brevity ; the incontrovertible statement is like a defiance 
 flung at the adversary/ In 39. 28 we have a passage which may 
 be explained by the influence of the dramatization in ti — ovo[j.a] 
 having fallen thus into direct address, the orator continues it to 
 the end of the short argument. Or. 31 (the second against 
 Onetor), a very short and very passionate speech, closes in 
 mingled apostrophe and interrogation; it would seem as if the 
 reduction of these emotional figures to an argumentative and 
 expostulatory tone were the only way in which the orator, with 
 little space at his command, could pass from the vehement fierce- 
 ness oieTzsLza TO decvorarou and the sharp questions following it 
 into the quieter and more dignified manner better suited for the 
 delivery of the final words. In Or. 55 (j:pdc KaXXixXia) also the 
 apostrophe, in §5-7 and §29, is infused with expostulation ; that 
 is a part of the rjf^oTzoda of the speech, and contributes to the 
 impression of youthful candor and honest simplicity which the 
 speaker makes upon us. But a dominance of the argumentative 
 quality is, on the whole, unusual with Demosthenes; more char- 
 acteristic are the sudden and brief turns on the adversary of 
 which, among the speeches exhibiting this figure, Or. 28 alone 
 furnishes no example.'' 
 
 Interrogation. 
 
 The question also must be considered with reference to the 
 varying degrees of force involved in it; its primary effect in style 
 is to express the irruption of feeling, and in judging a particular 
 
 1 There is a very beautiful instance of this in 36. 20-1 ; the argument is 
 first hurled at Apollodorus in the form of a challenge (f/c tto/wv — i\ayx(i'Vtq\)y 
 and is afterwards repeated in a form which, though still aggressive, is 
 brought nearer to the argumentative tone by the use of the third person 
 and by the preceding conditional clause. 
 
 'Other examples of apostrophe occur in 29. 36-7. 41. 42, 31. 6-8. 13-14, 
 36. 20. 30-32. 39, 37. 26. 29. 30-31. 36. 49-50- 54- 55- 57» 38. 16. 18. 23. 24. 27, 
 39. 8. 9. 10. 21. 24. 26. 28. 30-32. 33-36, 41. 16. 17. 18, 45. 38. 69-70..&fcr-&i^84, 
 
 54-40, 57 3^-32. ,.;■? .; 
 
 ."la *--' '» 
 
i6 
 
 style we have to ask what is the range of the feeling so expressed. 
 For this purpose some sort of classification seems necessary, not 
 like that quoted from Tiberius by Rehdantz, Index, s. v, Frage, 
 which looks only at the speaker's object in employing the form of 
 interrogation, but one which shall regard the content of each ques- 
 tion apart from its rhetorical form. Arranging on this principle 
 the interrogative phrases in the genuine private speeches and 
 omitting such rare phenomena as the imperative and dubitative 
 questions, I find that in each instance one or the other of the fol- 
 lowing five elements markedly predominates: i) argument; 2) 
 appeal ; 3) assertion ; 4) challenge ; 5) suggestion. 
 
 Of these conceptions the first, which is unemotional, is hardest 
 to discover in Demosthenes ; most of the examples which one 
 attempts to get for it melt away and dissolve themselves into 
 assertion, appeal, or challenge. That is to say, even when the 
 question is intended as an argument, the liveliness of tone which 
 accompanies it causes it to be felt as something more emphatic. 
 Compare, however, the close of Or. 31, already cited for the apos- 
 trophe ; the explanation given for the argumentative use of that 
 figure applies also to the interrogation which is combined with it ; 
 compare also 36. 11 (xaixot ei rjv idia ri^ dipopfirj rourun Tcpoq rfj 
 rpani^Tj^ rt dij ttot* dv e^Xero rouro fxaXlov ^ xsivriv ;). It is indeed in 
 hypothetical sentences having a question as one of their members 
 that Demosthenes approaches nearest to the tone of simple 
 argument ; but if we contrast the passage just quoted with 29. 20 
 (xairot ei y'^v douXoz — zi /xad^wv ^/j.apTup7j<T£>j aXk^ oox k^ofxoffaq aTifiXXdyr) 
 TOO Tzpayixazoq ;), we see how the hypothetical form modifies the 
 vehemence of the interrogative expression, which, with the omis- 
 sion of av, springs back to its natural attitude of aggressive force. 
 
 Appeal, whether pathetic or indignant, is very common ; under 
 this head may be included especially sentences beginning with 
 eira or apa, Cf. 28. 1 8 (ap^ 00 fisydXa — ^XaTzroiiai)) ) 36.56, 45. 70 
 {eW dv opdr^ — ou rt/xiopTjffeff^e ;), 54. 20 ; also those in which a 
 verb of thinking, or a corresponding expression, makes an appeal 
 to the opinion of the judges, as in 30. 20 (xairoi roT zob^^^ u/iajv 
 Tziffzov ;), 57. 26 {oUzai zt^ dv x. z. X.) ; and finally the simple 
 exclamation seen in 30. 36 (zouzou yivuiz' av ztq (T^ezXicuzspot; 
 avd^ptoTzofz ;), 27. 28 {zi oov — do^ei ;). 
 
 The assertive question comprises notably the numerous sen- 
 tences which begin with ttw? or ttwc ov. Thus, in 29. 55, the 
 
17 
 
 demand, ttoJc av dbvano rcz aa<piffTtpov i^sX^y^at, is Only a rhetorical 
 mode of saying oux uv duvacrd rsc <Ta^. i^.; and in 30. 18 the expres- 
 sion, Tzaj^ uu <fav£pdv on — ^rjToofftv, differs only rhetorically from 
 the St^Xov }xh roivuv — on — roXpMfft Trpdrreiv in the same paragraph. 
 Compare also, in 38. 24, the parenthetic ttw^ yap following oneVrc 
 ph odx tffov. The same value belongs also to many of the ques- 
 tions introduced by an interrogative pronoun ; cf. 36. 44 (dXX' 
 ol/xat T^c <J"^C dT^h]Gxiaq — xiq av duvatr' k(pui<Ti^ai =z obdeiq dv duvatr* 
 i<ptxi<7i9ai), 41, 7 (r£ dv art pel^ov x. r.^ A.), 45. 41 (t{<^ yap outw<: 
 atppwv X. r. ^.). 
 
 The tone of the challenge is easily felt ; the speaker seems to 
 demand an answer to his question and at the same time to be con- 
 fident that no answer is possible; cf. 29. 41 {rivi rwv (peudopap- 
 roptdjv i-KeffXTJipw ; deX^ov. dAA' ovx dv e^oi<; dsl^ai) ; 37. 26 (ri ydp^ ei 
 xari<TTrj<T£v Euspyoi:, kyd) tr* ddtxcb ;), where the vivid and brief apos- 
 trophic interrogation turns the argument into a defiance; 41. 22 
 {ri dij TlOt' — auraJv ;), 57. 55 (sir' iyo) ^ivo^ ; ttoD perotxcov xarai^ir: ;). 
 
 The distinction between these four classes is a subjective one, 
 dependent on the reader's feeling ; the fifth class has a formal 
 character, which renders it unmistakable and stamps it as a thing 
 apart from the others. We must weigh them to ascertain their 
 value; it is a bit of current coin. This is what Tiberius calls the 
 question d^ -Kpoaoyj^v, to arouse attention ; and his term may be 
 accepted if we permit ourselves to understand it not of tone, as 
 does Rehdantz — who objects that to excite the attention of the 
 hearer is the object of every rhetorical interrogation — but as 
 referring to the content of the question. It suggests to the judges 
 what the speaker is about to say and thus fixes their attention 
 upon it; cf. 27. 38 {ybv dk ri Tzotooaiv ]) ] 41. 5 (Tivo<: oZv ehex^ — 
 sItzov ;) ; 37. 26 (Troi^ obv — ypd(pat ;') ; 57. 15 (ri — Ei>l3ouXt8rj ;). 
 
 The suggestive question imparts liveliness to narrative; the 
 challenge is bold and emphatic. Neither is found in all of the 
 genuine private orations; I have noted examples of the first only 
 in eight speeches (27. 38, 29. 8. 11. 19. 31. 33, 31. 3, 37. 26. 27. 
 29. 36. 37. 50. 38. 25, 39. 13. 29. 35. 37, 41. 5. 18. 20. 27, 57. 8. 15. 
 17. 61. 68), of the second in nine (28. 7, 29. 41. 47, 31. 9. 14, 36. 
 20. 31. 54, 37. 26. 28. 54. 67, 38. II. 16, 39. 14. 21. 24. 28, 41. 17. 
 22, 45 38.84). The absence of either from a doubtful oration 
 would therefore not seem to be in itself evidence against genuine- 
 ness ; but it may add greater weight to other indications of tame- 
 
i8 
 
 ness or lack of spirit, defects by no means Demosthenean. It is 
 to be observed also that eleven out of the fourteen speeches 
 exhibit one or the other of these two kinds of question, and that 
 Or. 54, which shows only the suggestion in indirect form (§13), 
 and Or. 55, which contains neither kind, have in common a certain 
 modesty of tone mingled with pathetic warmth, to which the 
 keenness of the challenge and the rather dramatic pose of the 
 suggestion are essentially foreign. 
 
 Rhetorical Answer. 
 
 The rhetorical question may be answered rhetorically ; and 
 this answer may be put either as an expression of opinion or as an 
 assertion of fact. So we find in 31. 5 Iij-o\ fj.h yap ou8h a> doxsT ; 
 in 31. II iycb fxev uddev ol/xat, which latter phrase reappears under 
 varying forms in ten other passages : 31. 13, 37. 37, 38. 12, 39. 24, 
 45- 13. 54- 20. 22. 43, 55. 13, 57. 35.' Corresponding affirmative 
 expressions are ^yo) ol/iat, 29. 34 ; (prjaed fav riq, 30. 30 ; sywy' av 
 (pai-qv, 45. 65. Or a verb of knowing may be used with a negative ; 
 compare obx olda in 27. 48 and 29. 24, and the similar use of e/o* 
 in 27. 63 and 29. 57. As a more emphatic form of reply we have 
 oux sffTt raura, 27. 57, 29. 49, 57. 53 ; oux s'xet raur' dXyji^eca'^, 30. 34 ; 
 and the various combinations of oddi with other words in 27. 59, 
 36. 19. 25, 39. 40, 45. 12, 55. 13, 57. 55. So too odx k'ueffzi drJTZooi^eu, 
 30. 16, and the affirmative Trdvo ye, 39. 14. In 37. 56. 60 and 38. 22 
 we find what corresponds to these replies in form, but scarcely in 
 force, an appeal expressed by fj.y)8a/xd)q. 
 
 The effect of these phrases is to impress the speaker's opinion 
 or conviction upon the mind of the hearer. The same purpose is 
 served by similar curt utterances following on a supposition, as in 
 36. 22 (ouz k'ffzt rauza), 39. 20 (oox k'ywy* ■^youfiat), 45. 45 (ou dyJTtou), 
 Oftener this form of contradiction is introduced by dXXd ; cf. 29. 39 
 (aAA' ob-)^\ zoiouzov iaztv), ib. 4 1 {d?jJ oox TJdtxTjfxevoq <TOxo<pa>zei<;^, 
 
 ' 31. 5 £f^ol fiev yap ovSev av doKtl rovrov /xel^ov evpe'&^vai., and 54. 22 eyu juev 
 yap ov6^ cnro'&avdvT^ ol/iac, show in the use of the causative particle a slight 
 divergence from the usual asyndetic form of the rhetorical answer ; and 
 there is a more substantial difference in the fact that the words evpe'&^vac and 
 a'Ko-&av6vr'* introduce a conception not found in the preceding sentence. In 
 the first case this is unimportant, as the verb conveys really the same idea 
 as that expressed by /lel^ov av ri yevoiro ; but the amplification in a-o'&avovT^ 
 ought perhaps to prevent us from regarding this passage as purely rhetor- 
 ical. 
 
 1 
 
19 
 
 36. II, 37- 37, 41- 26, 54- 4i» 57- 25. 49- S^- So in 29. 59 and 41. 20 
 we have emphatic parentheses after a negative assertion ; in 36. 54 
 the sentence, oux 7]dcxuu, dAA' olfj.ac ffoxocpa^^reTq vt)v, follows on a 
 question, less as an answer than as a refutation of the implied 
 hypothesis. 
 
 As lucid argument and firm construction are among the recog- 
 nized excellences of Demosthenes, it will be worth while to inquire 
 into the mechanical means by which he achieves this clearness 
 and solidity. 
 
 Deictic Expressions, 
 
 Two particles seem of especial importance as constructive 
 elements : roivuv, and ow in the combination jj.kv oZv. Both are 
 employed to mark the introduction of an important statement, a 
 new incident, or a fresh link in the chain of reasoning ; they serve 
 in a formal way to call attention to what is about to be said. The 
 attention of the hearers is also engaged and fixed upon a desired 
 point by a free use in emphatic positions of the demonstratives 
 ooToq, TotovTO'-, ToffooTor, iz££voc; and a more open demand is made 
 upon them by the employment of verbs and verbal phrases. 
 Thus we find, pointing forward, the futures Sei^iu^ dtdd^w, ^'laeads, 
 yv^ffsffd^s; the imperatives ^rxoTrelre, ffxi(f>a(Ti9e, dxouffare; the phrases 
 Set, or ^Utiov ^(ttc, ufidq fia^sTv, or dxouffat; pointing backward, the 
 perfects dxTjxdare, fxefxai^TJxarSj ixefiaprbprirat. There are also the 
 expressions ^^Aov ^<xrc, (pav£p6v ^o-rc, padidv lart fiat%Tv ; the introduc- 
 tion of testimony is often prefaced by hq, or ort, dXr^iH^ Xiyw ; and 
 in the same connection a summary of facts is often given. The 
 variety of such phrases is scarcely indicated by those quoted; and 
 the effect of variety is increased by the habit of employing several 
 together; thus h' eidr^re is often followed by wq dXrji^rj Xiyw, the 
 latter often by a summary of facts. Cf. 38. 9, where we have ore 
 fiev oZv .... Ixavd)^ Travra^ -^youfxai (iep.ad^rjxivat, on 5' o(TTepov .... 
 rouTo ^ouXofxat dsl^at, with a recital of facts that have been and are 
 to be stated. A similar arrangement is found in 54. 13; and 
 while not all combinations are equally full, the accumulation of 
 several deictic words or phrases is always a notable feature. 
 
 It is as important to note the limitation of such expressions as 
 their use ; both are well illustrated in Or. 27. About six-sevenths 
 of that speech, sections 1-59, are taken up with the statement of 
 the case; and here we find fj.h oo> nine times, ror^uv twenty times, 
 some two dozen emphatic demonstratives and as many monitory 
 
20 
 
 verbs. So far the movement of the speech is deliberate and 
 regular ; in spite of the outburst in §47-8 we feel that the orator has 
 himself well in hand and is bent only on reasoning and convincing. 
 At the beginning of §60 he reminds the judges in set phrase of 
 what they have heard {roffavrrj<: roivuv ovaiar: . , . oa-qv . . . TJxoOffare^ 
 and then, putting aside finally all such restraints on the flood 
 of speech, moves on to the close in a rapid torrent of crowding 
 sentences, which breathe mingled denunciation and entreaty. 
 And since, in this passage, we find none of the deictic utterances 
 noted above, it becomes plain where their province lies ; they 
 belong to demonstration and are expelled by the intrusion of 
 passion. If found in a passionate passage, they immediately give 
 the effect of a pause, an attempt at restraint ; compare, in 36. 48. 
 54, the evident check imposed on the current of denunciation by 
 the clauses beginning dXXd [iyjv or:, Tjyouiiai roivuv, toutwv Toivuv. 
 
 Although these particles and deictic phrases do not belong to 
 emotional utterance, their frequency seems hardly to stand in 
 inverse ratio to the predominance of the latter. A rough calcu- 
 lation as to the proportion of such expressions in each speech 
 yields the following result : 
 
 
 No. of pages 
 
 No. of deictic 
 
 
 Or. 
 
 (Teubner). 
 
 expressions. 
 
 Proportion 
 
 38 
 
 8 
 
 33 
 
 4-125 
 
 36 
 
 lyi 
 
 63 
 
 3.6 
 
 27 
 
 20 
 
 68 
 
 3-4 
 
 31 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 3-25 
 
 30 
 
 lOj 
 
 33 
 
 3-14 
 
 29 
 
 17 
 
 50 
 
 2.9 
 
 37 
 
 17 
 
 46 
 
 2.7 
 
 57 
 
 20i 
 
 53 
 
 2.59 
 
 45 
 
 25 
 
 62 
 
 2.48 
 
 41 
 
 Si 
 
 21 
 
 2.47 
 
 39 
 
 Ilj 
 
 26 
 
 2.26 
 
 55 
 
 9i 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 54 
 
 14 
 
 27 
 
 1.9 
 
 28 
 
 7 
 
 12 
 
 1.7 
 
 1 
 
 This would seem to indicate a relation between these phrases 
 and the predominance or subordination of the legal element in a 
 speech; for we find at the head of the list Or. 38 (tt^ooc Naoaifxaxov 
 xai SevoTteid-riv), which deals chiefly with a point of law, Or. 36 (oTtkp 
 
OF 
 
 S^UFORNAi^ 
 21 
 
 0epiiiu)vo<z), delivered by an advocate, and the lawyer-like speeches 
 of Demosthenes himself; near the foot the two orations, 54 and 
 55, especially marked by naweti and simplicity of tone, one, 39, 
 which turns on no point of law, and one, 41, the speaker of which 
 announces himself as a quiet citizen, unaccustomed to the courts ; 
 as for Or. 45, far more of its considerable length is devoted to 
 vilification than to argument. One indeed of the speeches delivered 
 by the author, 28 (xara "Aipo^ou /?'), stands last on the list, and it 
 is interesting to observe the difference between this and 31, both 
 being epilogues and both full of warmth and vehemence. Each 
 begins with an argument; but the former passes into summary 
 and appeal, the latter continues with argumentative criticism of 
 the adversary's pleas. That is to say, Demosthenes, however 
 moved by passion, would not argue without the help of the 
 formulas which made for lucidity, while in the recital of matters 
 already familiar to the hearers he abandoned himself to the least 
 impeded flow of rapid utterance; on the other hand we see the 
 influence of rj^^onoua and the sensitiveness of the artist in the 
 degree to which this born reasoner subdued his tendency to 
 emphatic and pointed demonstration when writing for such per- 
 sonages as Ariston (in the speech against Conon), or for the 
 unnamed adversaries of Spudias and Callicles. 
 
 Transitions. 
 
 This love of clearness is especially observable in the careful 
 deliberateness with which the orator passes from one to another of 
 the main divisions of a speech. The transition from prooemium to 
 narrative was hardly neglected even by inferior writers, since the 
 prooemium itself had a certain fixity of form,' but that from narra- 
 tive to argument, or any shift of topic, is, with Demosthenes, habitu- 
 ally marked and emphasized. Compare 27. 7, where the passage 
 from the statement of the case to that concerning the amount of 
 the property is elaborately defined : xa\ zd fiev x£<pdXaiov . . . rodr' ^y 
 . . . TO dk 7tX^y%(; . . . on rour' 7]v x. t. X. Compare also the intro- 
 duction of the argument in 29. 10, 45. 7, 57. 17; the closing of the 
 narrative in 30.9, 36. 18, 37. 17; the elaborate transition from 
 narrative to criticism of the adversary's defense in 54. 13. Such 
 passages, which stand out like seams in the oratorical web, at once 
 
 'Though, as will be seen later, the difference in tone at this point some- 
 times serves to distinguish the greater from the lesser artist. 
 
22 
 
 linking and defining its different sections, are too obvious to call 
 for much comment ; some curious exceptions in Or. 38 deserve 
 more notice. The formal prooemium of that speech seems to end 
 with the words ^o-qd^rjaai fiot TO. dtzata, found also in other prooemia 
 (27. 3,45. 2, 54, 2), but there followed by some deictic phrase intro- 
 ductory of the narrative. Here, on the contrary, there follows, as 
 if in parenthesis, a sentence, explanatory of the words fxi) Trpoff-^xov- 
 roq iyxXyjixaro^, which would naturally be placed within the pro- 
 oemium, as would also the next sentence, ri)v fih gov . . . el'ffsff'&e. 
 That they are really beyond its limits, or, if we like, that it has no 
 definite limit, appears from the immediate introduction of the 
 testimony on which the opening argument is to be based, and 
 which takes the place of a dtij)rfjfft<: ; after having thus stated his 
 case vicariously, the speaker proceeds to that discussion of the 
 demurrer, which is the real body and substance of the speech, and 
 this he prefaces by a series of deictic phrases which, in their 
 nearness to the incomplete prooemium, seem to stand for its 
 formal conclusion. In fact the prooemium is constructed with 
 exceeding looseness, and the dtijy-qfftq is, so to speak, telescoped into 
 it. Looking further at the singularly abrupt introduction of new- 
 arguments in §23 (ouz iiiiaf^waav x, r. A.), and at the ** purple patch" 
 in §21-22, which overweights the short speech and is less fitly 
 placed than as epilogue to Or. 37 {jzpo^ TlavrahtTov), we may con- 
 jecture that, in handling this slight case, Demosthenes saved time 
 and trouble by declining the labor of careful construction. The 
 imperfections furnish, however, no good reason for doubting the 
 genuineness of the oration, which not only has many Demos- 
 thenic features, but is, even in its scamped state, notably lucid and 
 effective, and is not to be called inartistic, but rather the unfinished 
 product of a manifest artist. 
 
 Prooemia. 
 
 Such careless dealing with the prooemium is the more notice- 
 able, because some of the speeches show in precisely this part a 
 remarkable subtlety and delicacy of finish. In the earliest orations, 
 indeed, the introduction has only the excellence of a severe correct- 
 ness ; that of Or. 27 is a simple captatio beiievolentiae, that of Or. 
 30 a conflatio invidiae, while these elements are mingled in Or. 
 29 ; in the two latter a statement of the points at issue is added 
 (29. 5, 30. 4-5). But in turning to the prooemium of 36 we find 
 
 I 
 
23 
 
 ourselves in contact with a much finer and more original piece of 
 workmanship. This compact little masterpiece fulfills indeed all 
 conventional purposes by exciting good-will for one party, preju- 
 dice against the other, and defining the points to be proved ; but 
 there is no conventionality in the exquisitely felicitous phrasing 
 and the effect produced may be compared to that of an operatic 
 overture, which does not merely preface the following composition, 
 but indicates its tone and character. The simple gravity of the 
 opening words foreshadows the fine impersonal dignity which the 
 advocate maintains throughout; the warmth and rapidity of the 
 sentence oVa ydp Go-/.oipwnil, with its unusual and startling anacolu- 
 thon, breathes the spirit of all that ardent vituperation and lauda- 
 tion to which so much of the speech is devoted; and the final 
 sentence, i^ ^PvM — axobaavreq^ while constituting the formal tran- 
 sition to the narrative, sums up with noteworthy sharpness and 
 emphatic brevity the whole purpose of the speech in the mention 
 of the two main topics — the point of law (Joq oux eiffayatyi/xo': i) dUrP) 
 and the rascality of Apollodorus (rojv toutou (Tuxo^avrtav), A minor 
 delicacy of more mechanical sort, but important for purposes of 
 comparison, lies in the fact that stress is laid on the object of the 
 demurrer (rijv ijAy ow — xy^t'a), while the grounds on which it is based 
 are only incidentally touched upon. So in Or. 37 the speaker 
 makes only an allusion to the aipeaic, xai dnaXXayTj ; he first suggests 
 the character of his defense, which will rest on his own innocence 
 (oddev ijdtxrjxa rourov') and on the illegality of the action (Tzapd rdv 
 vopLov X. T. f.), and then foreshadows its spirit by a vigorous and 
 cutting denunciation of the audacity of Pantaenetus (2 ei [xh oov 
 kTZSTZoyf^si X. T. f. ; oodk'^ 7Jdix7jfi£voq .... (Tuxo^a'^TsJ ; 3 noXXaiv .... 
 T£T6Xfj.rjxs'^). This introduction, while stamped with the same 
 character of suggestiveness that belongs to that of 36, is much 
 inferior to it in comprehensiveness and neatness ; admirable, on 
 the other hand, is the very brief and closely woven prooemium 
 of Or. 45.* The suit, brought against Stephanus for perjury, is 
 meant as an attack on Phormio, and the first words betoken its 
 double nature : xazaipeudoiiaprup-q^siq — he does not think it worth 
 
 ^ I do not wish to seem unduly to depreciate the admirable prooemium 
 of Or. 37, which, in its loftiness of tone and largeness of outline, well 
 balances the magnificent epilogue of the same speech, but lacks the pecu- 
 liar preluding quality and the brilliant condensation to which I desire to 
 call attention. 
 
24 
 
 while to say by whom, but hurries on to the real author of the 
 false testimony — xal iza^wv bizd ^opixiiDvo<z b^piarua /.ai dtvm\ and 
 at the end he repeats this double charge in chiastic form (tt^'v r* 
 kxtivou TZOMTipiav . . . xaX robrouz on to. (peudrj [leiiaprop-^xafft)] while 
 between comes a touch of Apollodorean plaintiveness (^p-iya yap roiq 
 TiTo-pixoaiv X. T. f., cf. §§57, 85), and then a summary of the three 
 main points in the denunciation of Stephanus — that he has per- 
 jured himself, and that for money, and stands self-convicted ; this 
 put with the most vigorous bare curtness in swift participial con- 
 struction and clinched with an asyndetic phrase which is rendered 
 doubly emphatic by its unusual position in the very beginning of 
 the speech. A similar initial sharpness of suggestion appears in 
 the first word of Or. 54, ulSpKn^scc; for the plaintiff, who brings a 
 charge only of aut'a, regards Conon as guilty of o^ptq, and this 
 conception he enforces upon the judges from the start, and justi- 
 fies by the words immediately following, xat Tcai^tbu . . . 7T£pi<peu^£(Ti^ai 
 pe, which are significant in their simplicity ; they tell nothing of the 
 manner of the offense, which is here immaterial, but reveal in full 
 its consequences to serve as pendant and righteous apology to the 
 utterance fjdcffz' uv d-a'^druo xpbaq TouTuv. Here the note is struck 
 which is to dominate the whole; so, too, in 55. i, where the plain- 
 tive reflection, obx ^v . . . ru^slu, harmonizes with the naive and 
 expostulatory tone of the speech, and at the same time gives with 
 refreshing novelty of form the common disclaimer of litigiousness^ 
 Then follows a brief recital of facts to support the accusation con- 
 tained in the words rur^rjpov xa\ TzXeouixTou ; and the transition to the 
 narrative is made by an appeal which reflects the diffident modesty 
 of the speaker in the words ou^/ — eiTzslv, and his strong sense of 
 injury in the final, and therefore more emphatic, ^avspcbq ffuxutpav- 
 
 TOUpLat, 
 
 In the rough-hewn prooemium of 38, the only point to be espe- 
 cially noted is, that here, as in 36 and 37, the argument on the 
 Tzapaypaipri is not anticipated. That of 41 has a touch of sug- 
 gestive quality in the opening words {ri^elcpaq h^^opsv S) a. d. yovai- 
 xaq X. T. i.), which establish a reason for the reserve that char- 
 acterizes the speaker's language, while the quiet simplicity of the 
 whole passage agrees with the unemphatic tone of the short 
 speech; thus the concluding words of the prologue (^opwq x. r. f.) 
 and those of the epilogue (§307?^.) are alike singularly untinged 
 with the pathos habitual in such appeals. In the prooemium of 
 
25 
 
 39 a narrative is smoothly interwoven with the deprecatio invidiae 
 which constitutes its essential purport (cf. §i obdsiua cpdoTzpay- 
 fioffuvT) ; §6, oox ooroj (Txaioq) ; this exceptional arrangement is both 
 logical and artistically effective, inasmuch as the events narrated, 
 while yielding excellent ground for the assertion that the plaintiff 
 is not actuated by a spirit of mere perversity, do not form the 
 subject of the argumentation, that is, do not correspond to a real 
 dtrjyqatq in the strict sense of that term. The character of the 
 whole is slightly foreshadowed in the absence of comment on the 
 methods by which the adoption was brought about, in the stress 
 laid on the speaker's fulfilment of all legal claims (§6 rd rpirov 
 ^£iixaff{^at. [lipoq)^ and in the cumulative asyndeton in §4 {tlGriyaY\ 
 iTTotTjffaro . . . lYYpd<pei)^ a figure especially frequent in this speech 
 and here affording a brief hint of the rapidity and warmth which 
 are to prevail throughout. Finally, the unusually long prooemium 
 of 57 is the speech in miniature, a pathetic and anxious app< al 
 with flashes of vehemence cautiously restrained ; anticipatory of 
 the whole in manner, not in matter, since here the appeal is based 
 on general considerations proper to the partly public sphere of 
 the case. 
 
 II. — Comparison with Lysias and Isaeus. 
 
 It need hardly be said that none of the figures or phrases which 
 have been reviewed is, any more than the prooemium itself, the 
 exclusive property of Demosthenes; it is only the manner of 
 handling the common material that reveals the orator's tempera- 
 ment and artistic power. A brief comparison with the usages of 
 his two chief predecessors in forensic oratory, Lysias and Isaeus, 
 may enable us more clearly to define his individuality and more 
 easily to discover or deny its presence in compositions of doubtful 
 authorship. In studying Lysias I have left out of consideration 
 not only the orations marked as spurious by Scheibe (2, 6, 15, 20), 
 but also Orr. 8, 11, 33, and 34. The first and third of these are 
 epideictic; the second is, as Scheibe remarks, an epitome of 10; 
 the last is a mere fragment. This is true indeed of several 
 speeches included in my study, but they at least belong to the 
 judicial sphere, while the speech on the constitution is deliberative. 
 The comparison with Lysias is in any case less exact than that 
 with Isaeus, as only a few of the former's extant speeches (10, 17, 
 23, 32) belong to the class of idtionxot. 
 
26 
 
 Denunciation. 
 
 The denunciatory epithets employed not infrequently by Isaeus 
 have much the same range and tone as the Demosthenean : avai- 
 ai^roq, -£«, -efv, I. 8. 26. 47, 3. 35. 40. 72, 6. 54, 8. 13. 40, II. 14 ) 
 w^atdijq, -eta, I. 2. 7, 2. 28, 3. 18. 67, 4. 19, 6. I3. 43. 46, 7. 21. 23, 
 II. 6; 7rov9y/)o?-, -£a 3. 39. 40, 5. 13. 35, 6. 55, II. 20; aiffxpoxipdeta 
 I. 8 ; fitapia 5. II ; dduia 5. 31 ; rrXsoue^ca 8. 2, II. 36 ; d\^6(noq 4. 19 ; 
 (T^^irhoq II. 6 ; under the same head may be brought (ptXo^p-qixareJv 
 10. 17. Words of this class are wanting in Or. 12, a fragment 
 devoid of all rhetorical coloring, and in Or. 9, where their 
 absence might be attributed to rji3-o7totia, if the sympathetic plas- 
 ticity which this word implies could be otherwise discovered in 
 the somewhat uniform and rigid style of Isaeus. He may in this 
 case have exercised a reserve imposed by the position or character 
 of his client, but the latter's personality is not otherwise felt, and 
 the absence of vituperation fails therefore to have, as with Demos- 
 thenes, a distinct stylistic effect.' The sphere of the Lysianic 
 speeches seems in general to render a detailed comparison on 
 this point superfluous ; in those which enter into consideration we 
 find xaxia §10. 28, avatffywria §32. 20, izovTjpta ib. §23. In Or. 3, 
 which Dionysius compares with the speech against Conon (Dem. 
 54), Tzovripia occurs twice, §9. 44, in neither case with strong 
 emphasis ; Ttavodpyoq ib. 44 is quite indirect. 
 
 Deictic Expressions. 
 
 Of deictic words and phrases, which are frequent in both orators, 
 little need be said ; their proportion seems to be highest in 
 Demosthenes, lowest in Isaeus, and to vary most in the different 
 speeches of Lysias. The ratio oiroho\> to pe)/ oo^^ is much higher 
 in Demosthenes than in his two predecessors, the figures being : 
 
 
 Lys. 
 
 Isae. 
 
 Dem, 
 
 Toiuov 
 
 I2I=.6 
 
 77 =.66 
 
 180 = .83 
 
 pkv ovv 
 
 80=1.4 
 
 40 = .34 
 
 36 = . 17 
 
 ^ The remarks of Moy, Plaidoyers rf'/j/<f VIII, do not tell against this 
 view. It is true that Isaeus does not " make little fishes talk like whales "j 
 but the subtle reflection of another's character in his own style, the high 
 dramatic perfection of ^-^oTroua achieved by Demosthenes and by Lysias, 
 were beyond his reach. 
 
27 
 
 Apostrophe. 
 
 Lysias uses apostrophe in a lew orations with telling effect ; cf. 
 ID. 8-IO. 12-14. 16. 17. 18, 13. 48. 58-9. 61. 75. 87, 30. 5. 17. 19; 
 also 26. I, where the mutilation of the speech leaves the precise 
 force of the apostrophe uncertain. It is to be observed that, in 
 the first examples cited from 10, the apostrophe, while externally 
 argumentative, becomes ironical through the fact that the argu- 
 ment turns on a hypothetical instance of the cowardice with which 
 the adversary is slyly taunted throughout. In 7. 20-22 the figure 
 is argumentative and expostulatory, as in Dem. 55, and with the 
 same justification. That Lysias should have used so rarely a 
 form of speech, the capabilities of which he so well understood, 
 may doubtless be explained in large part from the circumstances 
 attending each particular oration ; but it must also be borne in 
 mind that the apostrophe is essentially and pre-eminently aggres- 
 sive, while persuasiveness is the dominant quality in the graceful 
 eloquence of Lysias. Isaeus employs this figure only in four of 
 his twelve speeches. The long apostrophic denunciation in 5.43-7 
 recalls some passages in Dem. 36 and 45, but is artistically less 
 satisfactory because carried to the end of the speech, instead of 
 being relieved by a final address to the judges. The sharp, brief 
 turn in 6. 54 is quite Demosthenic ; and the expostulation with the 
 witness (who is an uncle of the speaker) in 9. 23 exhibits an 
 effective use of the apostrophe of a kind not to be paralleled from 
 Demosthenes or Lysias. The remaining passages (3. 40-41. 
 45-6. 48-9, 6. 25-6) show a decided weakness of treatment; apos- 
 trophe and interrogation combined are made, what Demosthenes 
 rarely permits either to become, the vehicle of argument. This 
 is comprehensible enough in a writer whose strength lay in argu- 
 mentation, and who evidently possessed rather a technical com- 
 mand of tropes than a natural or artistic leaning toward tropical 
 expression; but it helps to mark the far lower level of art on 
 which this trained advocate stood as compared with the literary 
 craftsman who preceded, or with the great statesman who followed, 
 
 him. 
 
 Interrogation, 
 
 Interrogation occurs in most of the Lysianic orations (not in 5, 
 17, 23, 28) and abounds in the Isaean; but the two livelier forms, 
 the challenge and the suggestion, are infrequent with both writers. 
 Lysias has two examples of each in two speeches : the challenge 
 
28 
 
 in 4. 5. 19, the suggestion in 13. 20. 64. These turns of speech 
 have an abrupt resilient quality that does not perfectly accord 
 with the continuous, easy flow of his style ; and we may account 
 in like manner for the fact that the rhetorical answer, which he 
 employs rather more frequently, exhibits only in two instances 
 the asyndetic form preferred by Demosthenes ; so 13. 74, 31. 28; 
 with r^p 3. 36, 4. 7. 19, 26. 7; with dUd 4. 5, 19. 38-9. The 
 failure of Isaeus to employ the challenge (found only in 5. 43) 
 may be ascribed to the unimaginative and essentially argumenta- 
 tive nature of his oratory, which does not easily rise to dramatic 
 effects ; it is more surprising to find the suggestive question only 
 in four speeches (5. 13, 6. 36. 63, 8. 9, 11. 11. 32. 34). No doubt, 
 the very vividness of this figure prevented him from using it 
 more lavishly ; his close, coherent style holds, but does not arrest, 
 the attention. Of the rhetorical answer, on the other hand, 
 which is simply a form of emphasis, Isaeus furnishes not a few 
 examples, usually in asyndeton (i. 29, 2. 22. 39, 3. 25. 34. 37. 39. 
 48. 49. 51. 66, 7. 32, 8. II. 28, 9. 31, 10. 17, II. 12. 19. 26) ; it is 
 curious to observe how many of these occur in Or. 3 and with 
 what similarity of phrasing ; thus §25. 39. 49 val /j.d Aia^ et rjv 
 dXyji%q TO izpdyfia ; §48 v^ AC ei rjv aX-qd^rj ', §34, tzoXo ye fidXcffr* d>, ei 
 ^v dXrji^eq to Tzpdy/jLa. 
 
 Irony. 
 
 Irony is not a habit with Isaeus ; the sharp utterances in 5. 40 
 (riyv obaiav^ if^ r vDv i'Tzi XapL-npoq^ dkXorpiav') and II. 4 (^iirsidi] detvoq 
 el dia^dXXetv xat tou<; v6[xooq dta(TTpi<peiv) are isolated instances of a 
 really vigorous use of this figure. A few fainter touches occur in 
 2. 21 (rou (pdffyur^Toi; to <ppovt~iv'), 3. 29 (doxel dv Ofilv x. r. f.), ib. 70 
 (<2» 'yaH) ; in 5. I the repetition of the proper name conveys not 
 sarcasm, but reprobation. Lysias, with his lively, flexible intel- 
 lect, has a larger command of ironical expression ; but the Lysi- 
 anic irony is neither as constant as the Demosthenic, nor has it 
 equal range or weight. One speech indeed (10, xard Oeo/xvrjfrrou a) 
 is conceived almost throughout in this spirit ; the defendant had 
 before been accused of cowardice in battle, and around this charge 
 the speaker plays with clever insinuation ; especially neat are the 
 turns in §11 Qj.S[xeXir-qxaq — Xiyeiv ; ^^ijpxei — rijv dffTrida), §22 {aoToi^ 
 8e adxyaq rijv d<nzi8a), §23 {dXX^ on dTtofte^Xrjxux; rd onXa). The 
 words <pauXou ydp — 7^you/j.rjv in §2 have an ingenious doubleness 
 
29 
 
 of meaning; they may signify either the contemptible nature of 
 such an imputation or the slight value to be set on such a life as 
 that of the father of Theomnestus, and the latter sense is brought 
 out by the praise of the speaker's own father in §3 (^ourw tzoXXov 
 di^ioo). At other moments the character attributed to Theom- 
 nestus stirs the accuser into frank indignation (§13-14, 28-9) ; 
 just as the tone of sarcastic bonhomie in §11 {oozoq di fun doxei 
 X. T. i.), and in the explanation of the legal phraseology §16, 17, 
 18, varies with that of indignant superiority in §20 (jutdripouc; — 
 dr)X<i)ffet df) and §23 {obx av auroq d^id)<je(.ev) ; but the general im- 
 pression is one of feline mischievousness, and we feel that the 
 taunts under which Theomnestus may have winced must have 
 provoked laughter from the judges. The paradox in §26 {axob- 
 Gavza xaxwq rd TTpoffijxovTa) is very neat in its brevity and shows a 
 characteristic lightness of touch; cf. 7. 23 (ou yap — fiapTbpiov)^ 
 12. 27 (oy ydp—iXdfj.^avov\ 32. 22 (jpdp.[iaTa — dvri ^pTj/jAzajv). In 
 12. 7 (dTToxTt^vuvat — iTTotouvTo') the collocatlou of ideas, in 12. 86 
 (i^ouXofjLTjv — dTzoXXovat) the contrast, yields an ironic flavor ; in 30. 
 17 the brief apostrophe and rapid return to the judges impart a 
 sarcastic coloring to the argument. Coarser and more obvious 
 are the brief sneers in 24. 3 (W robroo dwiffw)^ ib. 21 (raiv oiioiwq 
 Tobro) <pabXu)v'), ib. 27 (jwv 6fioiw)/ abro)) and the sarcasms in 13. 44 
 ("v' eidTize x. z. f.), 30. 7 {zobziov — Xoidopoixnv). There is a curious 
 obscurity in 12. 63 {xaizoi a<p6dp^ dv x. z. f .) ; and this, like the 
 extreme brevity of the implication ib. 7 (where the one word 
 p-zzoixoiq involves the idea of the citizens and the wrongs done to 
 them by Eratosthenes), is akin to an allusive tendency which 
 appears, apart from irony, in some Lysianic passages, as 9. 5 
 {Xiyovzsq — hdrjixoir^, ID. 24 (rj'i? dv obx kXsijaeis Aiu\'b(Tio>'); and SO the 
 indirectness of 16. 19 (ttoAAo) — eipyaffp.ivot) is to be contrasted with 
 the distinctness of Dem. 37. 52 and 45. 77, where the speakers are 
 made to dwell more frankly on their personal disadvantages. No 
 doubt, Lysias could count on being understood ; but this very 
 inclination to rely on the comprehension of his hearers recalls the 
 fact that he trained himself in writing not for the public, but for a 
 small circle of admirers, such as Plato's Phaedrus shows gathered 
 aoout him, while the insistent clearness of Isaeus and Demosthenes 
 suggests the larger and more varied audience of the law courts. It 
 is in part this divergence in their early surroundings that explains 
 for us the difference between the irony of Lysias and that of 
 
30 
 
 Demosthenes ; the former was accustomed to amuse and delight 
 applauding friends by easy insinuating dexterities of speech ; for 
 the latter, reared in an atmosphere of combat, the most finished 
 utterance was never without a certain grim earnestness of inten- 
 tion. Of course, character must also be taken into account, and 
 here the element of i^{^o7zoua^ as exhibited in each orator, comes 
 into consideration. Even when he wrote for others to speak, the 
 language of Demosthenes was necessarily ironical, lofty, incisive ; 
 his powerful nature absorbed and transmuted the personality 
 with which it had to become identified. Lysias exhibits greater 
 diversities of tone and attitude ; like irony, other qualities, found 
 in one oration, are absent from another, and sometimes his com- 
 positions rise above mediocrity by talent only, not by force of 
 character ; the plasticity of his nature expressed itself in his cling- 
 ing style, that rarest of styles, which, like an elastic and trans- 
 parent mask, reveals indifferently the native features, or the 
 grimaces, of all who borrow it, from the pensioner to the patriot. 
 
 Repetition. 
 
 In dealing with repetition in Isaeus and Lysias it is necessary 
 to distinguish the rhetorical figure from a mere reiteration without 
 rhetorical effect. This last is, as Blass observes (II 502), a 
 tendency with the former orator ; cf. 6. 50, where the words tldi 
 yvrjfftot are twice repeated with a certain awkwardness of distinct- 
 ness. In Lysias this apparently artless reiteration appears a part 
 of that studied simplicity on which Dionysius remarks (de Lys, 8) ; 
 so in I. 17 {jzavra [loo — ()7:o(piaq). In a comparison intended to 
 show the artistic use of the figure in the three orators it seems 
 reasonable to set aside not only such cases, but also those in which 
 a word used in anaphora is inevitable and therefore unemphatic, as 
 is the case with 6Va, Dem. 36. 38, and aV, Dem, 37. 36. 37, and to 
 confine ourselves to the most regular or most emphatic forms. Of 
 these Lysias has four : anaphora with [ih — di (7. 41, 10. 27, 12. 19. 
 21. 76. 77. 78. 94, 13. I. 44, 16. 8, 18. 3, 19. 9. 62, 21. 25, 23. 11), 
 asyndetic anaphora (3. 46, 14. 6), epanadiplosis (13. 93, 31. 22), 
 xuxkoq (4. 16). Isaeus exhibits a greater variety; anaphora with 
 fxev — di (5. 9. 20, 6. 43, II. 9. 10), asyndetic anaphora (8. 14, 11. 6. 
 35), epanadiplosis (11. 35 bis), (juinckox-q (5. 25, 6. 53), x6zAo<r (5. 46), 
 anastrophe (8. 17). The number of occurrences and proportion 
 per Teubner page for the three orators are : 
 
31 
 
 
 Lys. 
 
 Isae. 
 
 Dem, 
 
 anaphora with ixh — di : 
 
 i6 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 asyndetic anaphora: 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 epanadiplosis : 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 <tu/jl7lXoxij : 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 xoxXoq : 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 anastrophe : 
 
 ... 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 antistrophe: 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 2i = .ii4 i4 = .ioi 35 = . 185 
 
 Of the Lysianic instances four-fifths belong to the first class, 
 the weakest and least rhetorical of all; and it is noticeable that in 
 his two cases of epanadiplosis the natural sharpness of the figure 
 is softened by the wide interval at which the word is repeated — 
 an effect found also in §13 of the speech against Conon, which 
 approaches nearer to the Lysianic style than any other Demos- 
 thenic oration except that against Callicles. And if Demosthenes 
 uses stronger repetitions than does Lysias, he employs these 
 strong forms with more variety* and force than does Isaeus. His 
 ffu/xTzXoxyj is more massive ; his asyndetic anaphora is often com- 
 bined with interrogation ; and his language is sometimes colored 
 by a warmth of feeling which lends greater weight to repetition. 
 This is noticeably the case in 28. 20, where the epanadiplosis 
 marks the rise of passion and is followed by a wonderful series of 
 short asyndetic clauses, two of which, (Tdxrar' iXeyjffare: and Uereuu) 
 dvTt^oXo), represent a variant form of epanadiplosis. Moreover, the 
 habitual care with which Demosthenes varied his phrase, avoiding 
 alike the naive iterations of Lysias and the loose usage of Isaeus, 
 throws into relief the distinct rhetorical purpose of his repetitions ; 
 they acquire artistic finish and significance from their setting, no 
 less than from their form. It is difficult to attribute to Lysias any 
 lack of artistic power ; and an example of asyndetic anaphora not 
 cited above (32. 16) shows how well he understood its value for 
 the expression of feeling. But that vehement sentence is not an 
 integral part of the oration in which it occurs ; it is quoted, or 
 rather professes to be quoted, from the excited utterance of a 
 grieved and angry woman. For this reason I have not chosen to 
 count it as an example of Lysianic repetition ; it shows what the 
 orator could do, and, by its position, what he habitually refrained 
 from doing. The high fervor and dramatic pitch which Demos- 
 
32 
 
 thenes brought upon the tribune Lysias found inappropriate, save 
 when excused by the device of dramatization. 
 
 Asyndeton. 
 
 To discuss at length the employment of asyndeton in the three 
 orators would be too large a task for the limits of this paper ; a 
 few observations will serve to indicate the development, extensive 
 and intensive, which this construction received at the hands of 
 Demosthenes. In the proportional number of occurrences we find 
 a steady increase from Lysias through Isaeus to Demosthenes, 
 the figures being : 
 
 Lys. 128 = 0.7 per Teub. p. Isae. 142=1.0 Dem. 302= 1.6 
 
 A singularly regular progression appears in the introduction 
 of documents or testimony, where asyndeton in the summons to 
 the clerk or witness gives an effect of sharpness and eagerness. 
 The total number of such commands, the instances of asyndeton, 
 and the proportion of these to the whole, are : 
 
 Lys. 65:4 = . 06 Isae. 83 : io = .i2 Dem. 129: 31 =1.24 
 
 In the use of the weightiest form of asyndeton, the cumulative, 
 Demosthenes exhibits a much greater advance on his prede- 
 cessors : 
 
 Lys. 4 = .02 per Teub. p. Isae. 12 = .08 Dem. 43 = .2 
 
 Demosthenes employs asyndeton freely in emotional passages. 
 Especially characteristic are the following abrupt utterances : 
 a'l^cov ye 28. 6; oux eta ixifff^oov 28. 7^; ob Ttpdrspov 31. 12; op<f<^ 
 TOW 'A, 36. 50; (h jSiXziffT* ib. 52; oux TJdixoo ib. 54; dp^wq y' u) 11. 
 37. 26; ^tt' kxeivotq 38. 27; olda xayd) 39. 12; Tzaoaai iih and oudslq 
 cLTzeXaovei ib. 34 ; Tzovfjpdq w. a. 'A. 45. 80. Somewhat similar are, in 
 Isaeus, the brusque ipwrijauj ae u. 5, oux a^iov ib. 47; but in gen- 
 eral this orator uses asyndeton chiefly for the sake of emphasis. 
 Characteristically Lysianic is its use in transitions or in a simple 
 continuation of the narrative or argument; so i(Tta)7:(ov iyco i. 14; 
 wfioXoysc raora Tzotelu ib. 22 ; iyioy^ av auiffov 4. 17 ; 7toX?Aq ay 7. 14 
 (where it is unnecessary to assume a lacuna, as is done by Scheibe 
 
 ^The introductory clause preceding distinguishes this passage from the 
 similar one in 38. 23, which seemed to suggest that that oration had not 
 been carefully worked out. An asyndetic transition from one topic to 
 another is not characteristic of the finished work of Demosthenes. 
 
33 • 
 
 and by some other critics); a> [ih TpoTzuj 9. 13; obx eyu) 18. 24; 
 Ttpoffi'/oufTc Tov voov 30. 2^, ', T^oXo S.V ^Tj 32. II. SucH lostances are 
 rare in Demosthenes : ovroq eXafie 4i« 35 ^''^^vov ixdffzo^' 54. 3; ttoAA' 
 av einsiv ib. 44 (at the beginning of a brief epilogue ; of. Lys. 31. 
 34) ; TToXXd dooXtxd 57. 45 ; and SO Isaeus 10, 22 tooto fih old' ore. 
 
 The tendency of Demosthenes to employ asyndeton in connec- 
 tion with warmth of tone is further indicated by his comparatively 
 rare use of it in the quiet beginning of a narrative. The dnjyyjfftq 
 is introduced by an asyndetic sentence in Lysias four times (9. 4, 
 12. 4, 17. 2, 32. 4), in Demosthenes twice (37. 4, 54. 3); in a 
 secondary narrative it occurs twice in Lysias (i. 22, 13. 55), twice 
 in Demosthenes (38. 12, 57. 41). Isaeus has it in secondary narra- 
 tive 6. 19, where two asyndetic sentences occur in succession ; in 
 10. 4 the dtijyiqfftq is introduced with ydp, and then follows an asyn- 
 detic continuation, ooroq k'Xaj^s ; this is the case also in Dem. 41. 3. 
 Noteworthy is the triple asyndeton ' in Isae. 7. 5, following on the 
 introduction with ydp; contrast Dem. 54. 3, where a sentence with 
 oov is placed between the two asyndeta. 
 
 A not uncommon use of this construction is in clauses intro- 
 duced by a demonstrative which contain a comment on or an 
 explanation or resumption of what has just preceded. I do not 
 refer here to the occurrence of such cases after documents or testi- 
 mony, which is in general one of the weakest forms of asyndeton, 
 though its possible vigor in mass may be seen from Dem. 28. 
 11-13. Where these clauses break the flow of the speech, they 
 have usually, in Demosthenes, a warmth of tone which is less often 
 to be felt in the other orators. Cf. 
 
 Lys. I. 2. 17, 3. 13, 4. II. 16, 9. 7, 13. 26. 31. 60. 71. 79. 81, 23. 9, 
 26. 20, 32. 21 ; with warmth 10. 28, 12. 20. 84, 13. 47. 
 
 Isae. I. 10, 2. 20. 21, 3. 67, 5. 10, 7. 9. 16. 28. 45 dis, 8. 24, 11. 3. 
 42. 43; with warmth 2. 23. 37, 3. 23 dis, 5. 11, 7. 21. 23. 
 
 Dem. 27. 9, 29. 10, 30. 6. 14, 37. 36, 55. 25 ; with warmth 27. 25. 
 31, 30. 8. 24 dis. 38, 37. 41, 45. 2, 57. 65. 
 
 ilsae. 6. 19 and 7. 5 are not to be regarded as instances of cumulative 
 asyndeton ; this term is meant to include only those cases in which the 
 asyndetic clauses are intimately connected, embodying essentially one idea 
 and conveying an impression of rapidity. So in Dem. 28. 20 we have not 
 one instance, but four, of cumulative asyndeton : cuaar'' e?ier/oaT£, Iketevu 
 dvTijSoTiUj TTpoQ — v[uv, ovTug — fie. The pauses after rjleTjaav, Tre(pev-ya/uev, v/x'iv 
 are strongly felt J they represent the catch in the breath, the breaking of 
 the voice between these rapid utterances of passion. 
 
34 
 
 The number of instances in each class is therefore : 
 
 Lys. 15 : 4, Isae. 14 : 7, Dem. 6 : 9. 
 
 It appears then that this kind of asyndeton is used more fre- 
 quently by the two earlier orators than by Demosthenes, and that 
 the latter oftener infuses into it a tone of strong feeling. 
 
 Of the prooemium in Lysias and Isaeus there is nothing to be 
 said, save that neither orator anywhere exhibits that intense cul- 
 tivation and exquisite finish of this part of the speech which were 
 found in some orations of Demosthenes. 
 
 III. — Examination of Suspected Speeches. 
 
 The fact that this paper originated in a study' of Or. 34 led 
 naturally to an examination of the other speeches dealing with 
 questions of marine insurance; to these I have added Orr. 40 and 
 46 on account of their close connection with 39 and 45, respect- 
 ively. 
 
 Or. 32. — Sch'afer finds the speech against Zenothemis Demos- 
 thenic neither in composition nor in tone ; Blass rejects it only 
 for faults in method and argument. One of these lies in the fact 
 that the demurrer is argued out in the prooemium ; what has been 
 said above concerning Orr. 36 and 37 shows that this anticipation 
 is not Demosthenean. As the prooemium is faulty in substance, 
 so in form it displays no delicacy of finish ; and the concluding 
 words have a tone not to be paralleled from Demosthenes. The 
 speaker, after making the customary appeal for a fair hearing, 
 says : dxouaea&s yap dvT&pcuTZou roXfiav xat -Ttovrjpiav ov rijv ru^ouffav, 
 avTreo iycb to. -Keitpayiiiv^ avrio Tzpbq 6/id(; TzokXdxtq elnelv dwrif^a>. 
 olfxac di. The power of demonstration is always put by Demos- 
 thenes as a thing to be attempted (7t£cpd<To/j.at dtddffxstv 27. 3, 30. 5, 
 slTtelv TT. 31. 3, 36. 3, 45. 2, TT. del^ai 57. i) and he expresses confi- 
 dence only in the convincing force of facts (29. i ix 8k rouriuv 
 olfiat — soyvwffTov effea^ai ; ib. 5 ourcjq fisydloiq — kXiyy^otq — axrd''' — 
 e'tffeax^ac ; so 30. 5 ; 36. 3 ^^ abrBv rdJv -nsTtpayiiivwv efff£(7f9e ; so 55. 3; 
 54.2 (ruyyv(o/j.7]v e'^er' eu old' ort — kizs-iddv — dxoba-qzs)] nowhere does 
 he permit himself, or his client, such a touch of brusque arrogance 
 as that which here offends good taste and strikes an inartistic note. 
 
 There is a fair proportion of deictic expressions (2. 6); the effec- 
 tive employment of the apostrophe in §28-30 recalls Dem. 37. 57 ; 
 
 * Published in the Johns Hopkins University Circular, No. 109, Feb. 1894. 
 
35 
 
 the denunciatory words Tzovr^pia (§2. 3) and wmidsta (§9) are used 
 with directness. Among- other forms of interrogation the sugges- 
 tion occurs once (§10), the challenge once (§27); but the rhetorical 
 answer, in the vigorous form which sways opinion, is not found. 
 The total absence of repetition seems significant ; still more so the 
 frequency of asyndeton in toneless passages. In §28, indeed, this 
 figure is employed with force ; but there are nine examples (§1. 10 
 eVr. kpy. ii bis. 14. 17 l^ aur. 18 bis. 26) of those asyndetic contin- 
 uations which are altogether infrequent with Demosthenes. In §4 
 and §31 the clause in asyndeton stands in appositional relation to 
 the preceding, as in Dem. 29.3; but the short asyndetic sentences 
 which break the direct quotations in §15 are as unlike Demos- 
 thenes as is that manner of narration (cf Hug, cited by Blass, III 
 438). This lavish use of the unemphatic asyndeton suggests a 
 study of Lysias and an exaggeration of one of the devices by 
 which he achieved simplicity and avoided the appearance of 
 rhetorical artifice: and the faint touches of irony in §12 and §27 
 might be copied from Lys. 32. 22. Neither in those two passages 
 nor in §24 {too Gotpoo) do we find anything resembling the ironic 
 power of Demosthenes ; and this fact, the weakness of the pro- 
 oemium, the lack of repetition, and the dominant quality of the 
 asyndeton seem to tell with conclusive weight against the genu- 
 ineness of the speech, although at some points its style approaches 
 the Demosthenic type. 
 
 Or. 33. — The well-knit and lucid speech against Apaturius is 
 held together by an abundance of deictic words and phrases 
 (3. i), but exhibits otherwise none of the features which serve to 
 mark the power and art of Demosthenes. There is a good deal 
 of interrogation, but it is all assertive or argumentative; the sug- 
 gestion is wanting, and the challenging tone is only slightly felt 
 in §23 and §25 ; there is no rhetorical answer. The denunciatory 
 phrase dq touto duaideiat; directed at the adversary in §22, at his 
 confederate in §19, lacks sharp utterance, as, indeed, the qualities 
 of sharpness and strenuousness are generally wanting in this pleas- 
 antly smooth and persuasive composition. The single instance 
 of repetition lies in the sortof antistrophe at the close — a position 
 which this figure nowhere has in any Demosthenean oration. Of 
 irony in the Demosthenic sense there is none, and only an isolated 
 touch of energetic reprobation in §37 (ro pfffzou x.r.i.'). Asyndeton 
 occurs only in a few passages, chiefly with weak tone : after testi- 
 
36 
 
 mony (§9. 16), in indistinct apposition (§32-3), in a question (§37), 
 at the beginning of the short epilogue (§38). It is worth while to 
 compare Or. 55, which contains only seven examples of asyndeton 
 (§13 bis. 15. 24 bis. 25. 31), by far the smallest number to be found 
 in any of the fourteen speeches, but these almost wholly in warm 
 or emphatic passages. These particulars only confirm the obser- 
 vation of Blass (III 515), that we miss here the life and power of 
 Demosthenes ; and in the prooemium we may note, not only the 
 colorless and impersonal character on which Blass remarks, but 
 also the strong contrast with the genuine prooemia ; their tone is 
 always intensely personal, save in Or. 57, where the generaliza- 
 tions are justified by the general movement of which Euxitheus 
 finds himself unwillingly a part. Of the delicate workmanship, 
 the fine threads of suggestion linking this part to the whole, such 
 as are seen in the maturer speeches of Demosthenes, there is here 
 no trace. As to the manner of introducing the demurrer in the 
 prooemium and having the law at once read, this is at any rate 
 more smoothly managed than the similar arrangement in Or. 38. 
 But that speech, with all its imperfection, has the high artistic 
 qualities of vividness and passion ; this, which in its uniform, tame 
 correctness, has all 'the necessary and none of the superfluous 
 virtues, is stamped with a spiritual ixzrpioxric, possible to the art of 
 Lysias, but not to the fiery temperament of Demosthenes. 
 
 Or. 34. — The speech against the merchant Phormio, condemned 
 in brief terms alike by Schafer and Blass as not of Demosthenic 
 type, exhibits only characteristics confirmatory of their judgment. 
 The prooemium is lacking as well in finish and suggestiveness as 
 in the clearness and point that appear even in the lengthiest and 
 least forcible of the genuine prooemia, that of Or. 29 ; the grounds 
 for the demurrer are urged in §4, essential portions of the narra- 
 tive are briefly recited in §2 and §5, and as a result of this antici- 
 pation the point at issue is loosely and diflfusely stated (§5). A 
 corresponding looseness in the construction of the whole is marked 
 by the very small number of deictic expressions. The particles 
 Toivw and ixh oov are indeed used with sufficient frequency, the 
 former eight, the latter seven times ; of monitory verbs or demon- 
 stratives there are only some ten, and these are nowhere used 
 with the accumulation characteristic of Demosthenes. The pro- 
 portion, then, is about 1.7, equal to that of the passionate deuter- 
 ology against Aphobus which stands lowest in this respect among 
 
37 
 
 the genuine speeches. But Or. 34 is not at all passionate ; the 
 tone is argumentative throughout, and for argument Demosthenes, 
 as we have seen, employs these turns of phrase lavishly and often 
 in mass. In consequence of this weakness we find transitions 
 which are very slightly marked, in §22 only by Sij, in §46 by fxsv 
 oov ; in the former passage the writer proceeds with no sensible 
 demarcation from narrative to argument, in the latter there is 
 almost an absolute severance of connection. Repetition does not 
 occur ; the suggestive question and the challenge are alike absent, 
 as is the rhetorical answer, save in the weak form of appeal (§49 
 fifjdaixoiq u) a. d.). Asyndeton is very infrequent and without force 
 (§2. 4. 16. 17. 50) ; even the asyndetic sixoTwq (§51), following not 
 on a statement of fact but on an assumption, fails of the ringing 
 effect which it has in Dem. 30. 37, 36. 25. 30, 57. 4 ; in a like case to 
 this Demosthenes (57. 33) uses a connective, and the same distinc- 
 tion is made by Lysias (contrast Lys. 25. 27 with 16. 16, 26. 17). 
 There is no irony, or at least that discovered by Blass in §35 is 
 very faint and resides rather in the contrasted facts than in the 
 colorless expression ; a comparison with Lys. 12. 86 shows how a 
 pointed neatness of phrase serves to bring out the irony of con- 
 trast, which is here obscured by diffuseness of utterance. The 
 absence of this figure is the more striking as the case offered 
 much opportunity for its use, and as apostrophe, which with 
 Demosthenes is often ironical, is freely employed in long passages, 
 §26-8 and §30-3. It is to be observed that the main arguments 
 are brought forward in these passages, in the first of which apos- 
 trophe is doubled throughout with interrogation ; Demosthenes 
 is not accustomed to burden either of these lively figures with any 
 weight of argument, and this large employment of both in such a 
 use shows misapplication of rhetorical passion. The brief address 
 to the judges in §32 and §33 might remind us of Dem. 36. 
 51 and 45. 80. 82 ; but there the speaker, having been as it were 
 swept away in the torrent of apostrophic denunciation, recalls his 
 real audience, turns to it, and seems under the compelling influence 
 of passion to return again to his enemy ; here, no such artistic effect 
 is produced, because the fault in art which lies in arguing with the 
 adversary is only felt the more upon renewal ; the short, sharp 
 turns of Demosthenes, such as we see in 36. 20, are not from, but 
 to, the opponent. The effect of ra;rc£vonyc, which these different 
 phenomena produce, is heightened by the manner in which denun- 
 
38 
 
 ciatory words are employed. Here a certain indirectness is 
 apparent. Thus y.a/.obpyriij.a (§29) stands in an appeal (and con- 
 trast the reinforcement of xay.oopyia with riyr^ri in 45. 39) ; adUriiia 
 (§7) is introduced without emphasis, as may be seen by compar- 
 ison with the vigorous use of adr/.uq in the Demosthenean passages 
 cited above ; Tzovrjpoq (§20) is, so to speak, quoted as a finding of the 
 court, and avatff'/uvrax; (§19) has only a general application. On 
 the other hand, as the final word before the formal epilogue we 
 find i^ptcov, a harsh epithet not used by Demosthenes, at least in 
 any private oration ; this, coming in at the last like a forcible- 
 feeble splutter of wrath, is roughly destructive of the dignity which 
 should belong to this part of the speech and which is always to be 
 felt in the close of a Demosthenic oration. 
 
 Or. 35. — The speech against Lacritus contains most of the 
 features which I have taken as tests of Demosthenic composition, 
 and some of these do not altogether lack Demosthenic tone. 
 Thus, in interrogation we meet with one example of the sugges- 
 tion (§22), two of the challenge (§45. 49) ; the short apostrophic 
 turns in §45. 46. 47. 49 have much the air of those noticed in the 
 genuine orations. Asyndeton is freely employed, sometimes with 
 force, though the cumulative form, found in all of the fourteen 
 speeches excepting 31, is missing. Of repetition we have epana- 
 diplosis in §16 (ourofft — ooroq'), where the punctuation of Bekker 
 is, I think, to be preferred to that of Dindorf and Blass ; there is 
 no pause, but a quick recovery of the dropped thread of speech. 
 In §54 {rraiq oux aduelffff-s — tzux; oux ddixel) a CUrious anacoluthic 
 anaphora is to be noticed, which finds parallels in Isae. 2. 42-3 
 (^8stvdv TO Tzpdyp.a — izajq oux av d. r. tt.), ib. 43 (raDr' iffr). rd Troiooura — 
 T, i, Tct XutlOovto) J 9. 15 (tw oov otv 0/jLaJv ^avsoy TiiffTov — TTOJq rourov 
 TtiffTou), and in Lys. 12. 36 (owz o2>v deivov — oux apa xpt])i but not in 
 Demosthenes, to whom anacoluthon seems to have been in general 
 repugnant. The style of Isaeus is also recalled by the inartistic 
 repetition of yiypanrat raora (§19. 22. 2^)/Ai^rjva^e Tzapi^etv aviizaipa 
 (§37. 39), ^tv^oq ehai (§41). The proportion of deictic expressions 
 (2.08 per page) is lower than in Or. 39, which does not deal with 
 legal points, and which moreover, in the passionate suppositions 
 that take the place of argument, supplies in some degree the want 
 of ordinary transitional formulas by such interjectional substitutes 
 as elev (§13. 18. 30), xaXwq (§15). Further the particles rotvov and 
 fxh oov appear rarely, the second three times (§3. 21. 55), the first, 
 
39 
 
 which is by far the favorite with Demosthenes, only once. The 
 rhetorical answer occurs (§26), not however in the true Demos- 
 thenic form of curt affirmation or denial, but overloaded with angry 
 denunciation. This overloading is observable throughout in a 
 tone which Blass calls witzelnd, but which seems to me rather to 
 denote unbridled indignation ; the opening words {ov8ev xatvov 
 X. r. L) have no coloring of ridicule or bitter jest, but are mere 
 vehement abuse, and this recurs again and again to the end, and 
 is especially marked in the irony, which is not cutting, like that of 
 Demosthenes, but heavy and rough ;'cf §16 {iJ-iya Tzpayixa), 40. 
 41. 43 ((Toc'wraroy), 49 {jxo^mvj dixaiov'). The vocabulary of invective 
 is, as Blass remarks, lavish and coarse ; there are as many utter- 
 ances of this sort as in the earliest of the genuine speeches, 27, 
 and the abusive effect is heightened by a reinforcement of one 
 epithet with another which passes beyond the bounds of Demos- 
 thenic force into sheer violence. Compare, in addition to the 
 instances cited by Blass, §12 {jzovrjporaroi xat adixairarot), 32 (^^deXu- 
 ptav xai (I'sodoXoyiav^^ 39 (xaxaupyoi <jo<pt.ffrai xai TZ(r^-qpo\ av-&pu)-oi). 
 The failure in good taste and artistic reserve is strongly brought 
 out by a comparison of this speech with 37 or 45. The opponent 
 of Pantaenetus is also hotly indignant at the impudence of his 
 adversary ; as for Apollodorus, his anger, inflamed by personal 
 hatred as well as by pecuniary losses, repels us by its implacable 
 bitterness; but in each case the expression which Demosthenes 
 lends to indignation gives it power and weight, and the blending 
 of a fine and keen irony with an assumption of loftiness exalts 
 the character of his client and humbles the adversary. The pro- 
 oemium and epilogue too have the usual dignity of tone, each 
 speech rising gradually into a storm of passion which at the close 
 subsides into appeal. In Or. 35 there is neither superiority of 
 attitude nor refinement of tone, and the virulence of the prooe- 
 mium is reflected in the epilogue ; compare the turgid phrases in 
 §55 (j-oXdX^iy — <70(pi'^ou(nv, Tvoi^Tjpww — 7cavoopyou(Ti) with the simple 
 TouTouq rrjq ayav xoXaxeia'Z kTZLff^^yjffsrs, 45. 88, and with the nobly 
 expressed plea for the maintenance of justice in 37. 60. 
 
 Or. 40. — The second speech against Boeotus cannot properly 
 be compared with the first; the latter, turning on a point of senti- 
 ment, owes pardy to this fact its surpassing liveliness and brilliant 
 changefulness ; the former, dealing with a matter of business, 
 would naturally be more quiet and sober in coloring and tone. 
 
40 
 
 Considering, indeed, the relations of the parties to the suit, we 
 might look for some such mixture of strong feeling with close 
 argument as is exhibited in Orr. 36 and 45 ; but the two brothers 
 had perhaps hardly been intimate enough to feel that cordial 
 hatred which distinguishes the quarrel between Phormio and 
 Apollodorus. The speech displays, in fact, neither strength of 
 passion nor marked force of reasoning ; its lax structure is reflected 
 in the comparative weakness of deictic expressions, the propor- 
 tion of which (2.28) is about the same as in Or. 39, The lack of 
 the apostrophe it has in common with Orr. 27 and 30; but how 
 far it is from possessing the compact energy of these speeches 
 appears by the almost complete absence of asyndeton, of which 
 only two feeble examples occur (§21. 47). The want of that 
 dramatic force which this figure often gives is further emphasized 
 by the fact that we find neither the challenge, the suggestion, nor 
 the rhetorical answer ; in short, none of those abrupt and telling 
 checks to the flow of speech by which Demosthenes at once fixes 
 and reposes the attention. The rhetorical value of asyndeton 
 could hardly be better illustrated than from this drowsy stream of 
 constant polysyndeton ; the reluctance to pause, which the per- 
 sistent connectives indicate, gives the impression that the orator 
 is afraid of not keeping the interest of his audience, and thus dulls 
 the interest and fatigues the mind of the reader. This anxiety 
 finds definite expression in the words Sid rd oXiyov ehat txot to ddwp 
 (§38). Now the average length of the Demosthenean private 
 speech is thirteen and a half pages — or, if we omit the twodeuter- 
 ologies, fourteen and a half; this one, with its sixteen and a half, 
 seems quite long enough for an effective development of the case ; 
 compare, at the end of Orr. 36 and 38, the proud i&pa to oSwp, 
 It is true that Or. 41 ends with the words 7:pd<; SXiyov o8wp avay- 
 xa^o/xevoq Xeyecv ; but it is really very short (8i pp.)> and that final 
 phrase at the close of a successfully completed demonstration is 
 merely a dignified note of complaint, while this, occurring in the 
 middle of the speech, produces an inartistic jar by revealing the 
 doubts which beset the speaker's mind. I cannot therefore agree 
 with the remark of Blass (III 454) : " Ueberhaupt ist der Aus- 
 druck . . . rednerisch kraftig"; it has persuasiveness to a degree, 
 but no force. That the writer was a student of Demosthenes is 
 suggested not only by the borrowings from the first speech against 
 Boeotus, but also by the opening words of the prooemium, which 
 
recall those of Or. 55, but lack their neatness and charm ; here 
 the general reflection is laid down in the usual serious way, there 
 the apa turns it into a discovery made by the speaker, and so 
 gives us at once the vision of his wide-eyed innocence. The 
 touches of insinuation in %%X,k7zXrirTiaXsv x.r.k.), 23 (jn — xofxcffdp.evov'), 
 and the air of moral superiority in §12 (^iycb 5' — ineiffr^rjv abrw), 
 48-9 (xdyu) fiev — dyavaxreTv) are sufficiently in the tone of the preced- 
 ing speech to show that this writer wished to preserve to Man- 
 titheus the attitude in which Demosthenes had placed him ; but 
 he lacked the ironic power by which the latter made this reserve 
 appear the restraint imposed by a sense of right and decorum on 
 a proud and energetic temperament. There is a slight touch of 
 irony in §28 {axmsp xX-qrrjpsq) and an easy sneer in §32 (yrj AC x. 
 T. f.) ; but these do not smack strongly of Demosthenes. Denun- 
 ciation is direct enough in §20. 34. 43. 52, though the vocabulary 
 is not altogether Demosthenean : we have xaxoupyoq, xaxoupywv 
 {xaxoupyTjGai Dem. 45. 30), roA/xa, roX[xrip6(:^ iTzi^ouXor: ; the nominal, 
 form in these last gives an aggressive force hardly to be felt in 
 the common use of the corresponding verbs. Repetition is found 
 in two examples of anaphora (§42. 59) and one of the rare epana- 
 diplosis (§53) ; but this last is an isolated instance of unusually 
 vigorous expression, and the representation of this one figure does 
 not make up for the absences and weaknesses which have been 
 noted. 
 
 Or. 46. — The second speech against Stephanus must be set 
 against the other deuterologies, 28 and 31 ; if it were by Demos- 
 thenes, we should expect to find it holding the same relation to 
 Or. 45 that these do to their respective Xoyoi. Now Or. 27 is, as 
 has been said above, mainly concerned with exposition and argu- 
 ment, as is also Or. 30, one of the quietest in tone among the 
 fourteen ; and it is noteworthy that these two alone contain no 
 example of apostrophe, which means that they are directed to the 
 court, not at the adversary. But the very purpose of the second 
 appearance is aggressive ; in coming forward to refute his oppo- 
 nent the speaker enters inevitably upon attack ; and the tone of the 
 Demosthenean deuterologies is in accordance with this necessity 
 of the situation. Apostrophe, irony, energetic asyndeton abound ; 
 the prevailing tone is exclamatory, eager, indignant ; the argu- 
 ments are brief and pointed, clinched by passionate utterance. 
 On the other hand the two speeches against Stephanus show an 
 
42 
 
 entirely different relation to each other. The first is rich in all the 
 figures and devices which can enliven argument and convey feel- 
 ing, while the second is merely an array of arguments ; and this 
 inversion shows a weakness alike in logic and in art wholly incom- 
 patible with any theory of Demosthenean authorship for 46. The 
 other tests point to the same conclusion. The challenging ques- 
 tion, indeed, and the apostrophe are found in combination (§25. 
 28), and there is an effective bit of irony (§19}. But the sugges- 
 tion and the rhetorical answer are wanting, as are too all forms of 
 repetition ; the vituperative word r.avovpyoq is frank enough, but 
 out of place at the very beginning ; and the extremely infrequent 
 use of asyndeton (§5. 14. 20) tells heavily against the speech. The 
 proportion of deictic expressions (4. 8) is much higher than in 
 any genuine oration ; which seems at least to show that the writer 
 recognized their value, perhaps too that he exaggerated their use 
 beyond need. 
 
 Or. 56. — A. Schafer has shown that the speech against Dionys- 
 odorus must have been delivered after the death of Demosthenes. 
 It perhaps comes nearer to the Demosthenic type than any of the 
 orations hitherto examined, containing as it does nearly all of the 
 characteristic features on which I have laid stress. Denunciation 
 is very slight, being in fact confined to the one word avainyovroq 
 (§41); but this is uttered with much sharpness of emphasis. Ana- 
 phora occurs once (§10), epanadiplosis once (§38). Interrogation 
 is abundant, with three instances of the suggestion (§2. 27. 38^ and 
 three of the challenge (§39 bis, 40) ; and there is an example of 
 the rhetorical answer, §28. Asyndeton is quite frequent, and 
 apostrophe is freely and effectively used ; compare the rapid turn- 
 ing from the adversary to the judge and again to the adversary in 
 §25, the argument rising into emphatic assertion, §26-8, and into 
 denunciation, §40-2, the tone of challenge imparted to the argu- 
 ment in §32 and §39, and the vigorous insistence of §38. There 
 are, however, other phenomena which, if the genuineness of the 
 speech had to be decided on stylistic grounds, would tend to cast 
 doubt upon it. The proportion of deictic expressions (2.0) is no 
 higher than in Or. 55, and the preponderance of {xh ow over 
 roivuv (6 : 2) is not Demosthenic. The lengthy prooemium con- 
 tains much general reflection in §1-2 and a long anticipation of the 
 narrative in §3-4 ; in this, as in the whole speech, we miss the 
 compact structure and pointed conciseness of the genuine orations. 
 
43 
 
 Despite the employment of vivid figures, there is rarely any vivid 
 sharpness and curtness ; the livelier forms of question are dulled 
 by length of phrase ; and the asyndeton in §45, which might fairly 
 be called cumulative, lacks, by reason of the same lengthiness, all 
 the rapidity and weight that should belong to this figure. On the 
 whole, asyndeton is employed (§7. 21. 22. 23. 27. 36. 37. 40. 46) 
 rather for deliberate emphasis than in any warm or quick tone, 
 though there is force in the rhetorical answer and in Sedffaff^e, 
 §40. Irony is found in §40 (w ^sXtktts^ and §41 (oSrw? avdpeloq), in 
 the latter case passing immediately into denunciation ; but these 
 are slight instances, and the scornful familiarity of the vocative 
 has less propriety here than in 36. 52, where it is justified by the 
 intimacy of the two enemies and by the tone of lofty rebuke which 
 pervades that passage. In short, the excellences of Or. 56 are not 
 superlative ; the writer is master of his art so far as it was to be 
 learned, while lacking the power and subtlety of expression which 
 only high artistic endowment could give. 
 
 ,^ ■". , THE 
 
 uuivERSi-rv 
 
14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 "3'^ay'59AJ 
 
 
 t f*^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5Feh'65/^^ 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 HtC'D Lt") 
 
 
 AUG 2'65-ioAl 
 
 / 
 
 JUL 18 1978 
 
 
 
 
 «ai C'J. JUL 1 9 • 
 
 ra. 
 
 
 
 
 
 T,-n 91 A !^n«7 Q '(^s General Library