Institutio Oratoria, Book IX
Chapter 3
3 III. Figures of speech have always been liable to change and are continually in process of change in accordance with the variations of usage. Consequently when we compare the language of our ancestors with our own, we find that practically everything we say nowadays is figurative. For example, we say invidere hac re for to grudge a thing, instead of hanc rem, which was the idiom of all the ancients, more especially Cicero, and incumbere illi (to lean upon him) for incumbere in ilium, plenum vino (full of wine) for plenum vini, and huic adulari (to flatter him) for hunc adulari. I might quote a thousand other examples, and only wish I could say that the changes were not often changes for the worse. But to proceed, figures of speech fall into two main classes. One is defined as the form of language, while the other is mainly to be sought in the arrangement of words. Both are equally applicable in oratory, but we may style the former rather more grammatical and the latter more rhetorical. The former originates from the same sources as errors of language. For every figure of this kind would be an error, if it were accidental and not deliberate. But as a rule such figures are defended by authority, age and usage, and not infrequently by some reason as well. Consequently, although they involve a divergence from direct and simple language, they are to be regarded as excellences, provided always that they have some praiseworthy precedent to follow. They have one special merit, that they relieve the tedium of everyday stereotyped speech and save us from commonplace language. If a speaker use them sparingly and only as occasion demands, they will serve as a seasoning to his style and increase its attractions. If, on the other hand, he strains after them overmuch, he will lose that very charm of variety which they confer. Some figures, however, are so generally accepted that they have almost ceased to be regarded as figures: consequently however frequently they may be used, they will make less impression on the ear, just because it has become habituated to them. For abnormal figures lying outside the range of common speech, while they are for that very reason more striking, and stimulate the ear by their novelty, prove cloying if used too lavishly, and make it quite clear that they did not present themselves naturally to the speaker, but were hunted out by him, dragged from obscure corners and artificially piled together. Figures, then, may be found in connexion with the gender of nouns; for we find oculis capti talpale (blind moles) and timidi damae (timid deer) in Virgil;
but there is good reason for this, since in these cases both sexes are covered by a word of one gender, and there is no doubt that there are male moles and deer as well as female. Figures may also affect verbs: for example, we find such phrases as fabricatus est glatdium or inimicum poenitus es. This is the less surprising, since the nature of verbs is such that we often express the active by the passive form, as in the case of arbitror (think) and suspicor (suspect), and the passive by the active, as in the case of vapulo (am beaten). Consequently the interchange of the two forms is of common occurrence, and in many cases either form can be used: for example, we may say luxuriatur or luxuriat (luxuriate), fluctuatur or fluctuat (fluctuate), adsentior or adsentio (agree). Figures also occur in connexion with number, as when the plural follows the singular, as in the phrase gladio pugnacissima gens Romani (the Romans are a nation that fight fiercely with the sword); for gens is a singular noun indicating multitude. Or the singular may follow the plural, as in the following instance, qui non risere parentes nec deus hunc mensa dea nec dignata cubili est, Ecl. iv. 62. where he whom no goddess deems, etc., is included among those who have never smiled, etc. In a satire again we read, nostrum istud vivere triste aspxei, Pers. i. 9. where the infinitive is used as a noun: for the poet by nostrum vivere means nostram vitam. We also at times use the verb for the participle, as in the phrase, magnum dat ferre talentum, Aen. v. 248. where ferre is used for ferendum, or the participle may be used for the verb, as in the phrase volo datum (I wish to give). At times, again, there may be some doubt as to the precise error which a figure resembles. Take, for example, the phrase virtus est vitium fugere, Hor. Ep. I. i. 41. where the writer has either changed the parts of speech (making his phrase a variant for virtus est fuga vitiorum), or the cases (in which case it will be a variant for virtutis est vitium fugere); but whichever be the case, the figure is far more vigorous than either. At times figures are joined, as in Sthenelus sciens pugnae, which is substituted for Sthenelus scilus pugnandi. Tenses too are interchangeable. For example, Timarchides negat esse ei periculum a seuri the present negat is substituted for the past. Or one mood may be used for another, as in the phrase, hoc Ithacus velit.
In fact, to cut a long matter short, there is a figure corresponding to every form of solecism. There is also a figure styled ἑτεροίωσις (i.e. alteration of the normal idiom), which bears a strong resemblance to ἐξαλλαγή. For example, we find in Sallust phrases such as neque ea res failsum me habuit and duci probare. Such figures as a rule aim not merely at novelty, but at conciseness as well. Hence we get further developments, such as non paeniturum for not intending to repent, and visuros for sent to see, both found in the same author. These may have been figures when Sallust made them; but it is a question whether they can now be so considered, since they have met with such general acceptance. For we are in the habit of accepting common parlance as sufficient authority where current phrases are concerned: for example, rebus agentibus in the sense of while this was going on, which Pollio rebukes Labienus for using, has become an accredited idiom, as has contumeliam fecit, which, as is well known, is stigmatised by Cicero: for in his day they said ad fici contumelia. Figures may also be commended by their antiquity, for which Virgil had such a special passion. Compare his vel cum se pavidum contra mea iurgia iactat Aen. xi. 400. or progeniem sed enim Troiano a sanguine duci audierat. An. i. 19. Numerous instances of the same kind might be cited from the old tragic and comic poets. One word of this type has remained in common use, namely enimvero. I might further quote from the same author nam quis te iuvenum confidentissime, Georg. iv. 445. The figure consists in the opening of a speech with nam, or perhaps rather in saying nam quis for quisnam. words which form the beginning of a speech: or tam magis illa tremens et tristibus etffra flammis, quam magis effuso crudescunt sanguine pugnae. Aen. vii. 787. The more the strife with bloodshed rages wild, The more it quivers and with baleful fire Glows fiercer. There the sentence inverts the natural order which may be illustrated by quam magis aerumna urgent, tam magis ad malefaciendumn viget. Old writers are full of such usages. At the beginning of the Eunuchus of Terence we have quid igitur faciam, while another comic poet says ain tandem leno? Catullus in his Epithalamium writes: dum innupta manet, dum cara suis est, Cat. lxii. 45. where the first dum means while, and the second means so long. Sallust, on the other hand, borrows a number of idioms from the Greek, such as vulgus amat fieri: the same is true of Horace, who strongly approves of the practice.
Compare his nec ciceris net longae invidit avenae. Sat. II. vi. 83. The gen. of respect is regarded as a Graecism. Virgil does the same in phrases such as Tyrrhenum navigat aequor or saucius pectus (wounded at heart), an idiom which has now become familiar in the public gazette. Under the same class of figure falls that of addition, which, although the words added may be strictly superfluous, may still be far from inelegant. Take, for example, nam neque Parnasi vobis iuga, nam neque Pindi, Ecl. x. 11: where the second nam might be omitted. And we find in Horace, Fabriciumcque, hunc et intonsis Curium capillis. Similarly, words are omitted, a device which may be either a blemish or a figure, according to the context. The following is an example: accede ad ignen, iam calesces plus satis; Ter. Eun. I. ii. 5. for the full phrase would be plus quam satis. There is, however, another form of omission which requires treatment at greater length. We frequently use the comparative for the positive, as, for example, when a man speaks of himself as being infirmior (rather indisposed). Sometimes we join two comparatives, as in the following passage: si te, Catilina, comprehend, si interfici iussero, credo erit verendum mihi, ne non potius hoc ones boni serius a me qam quisquam crudelius factum esse dicat. There are also figures like the following, which, though far from being solecisms, alter the number and are also usually included among tropes. We may speak of a single thing in the plural, as in the following instance: But we have travelled o'er a boundless space; Or we may speak of the plural in the singular, as in the following case: Like the fierce Roman in his country's arms. There are others which belong to a diflfrent species, but the same genus, such as Nor let thy vineyards slope toward the west, Georg. ii. 298. or In that hour Be it not mine beneath the open sky To court soft sleep nor on the forest ridge Amid the grass to lie. Georg. iii. 435. For in the first of these passages he is not advising some other person, nor exhorting himself in the second, his advice in both passages being meant for all. Sometimes, again, we speak of ourselves as though we were referring to others, as in phrases like, Servius asserts, Tullius denies it. At other times we speak in the first person instead of in another, or substitute one person for another. Both devices are employed together in the pro Caecina, where Cicero, addressing Piso, the counsel for the prosecution, says, You asserted that you reinstated me:
I deny that you did so in accordance with the praetor's edict. The actual truth is that it was Aebutius who asserted that he had reinstated the defendant, and Caecina who denied that he had been restored in accordance with the praetor's edict. We may note also a further figure of speech in the contracted dixti, which has dropped one of its syllables. The following also may be regarded as belonging to the same genus. The first is called interpositio or interclusio by us, and parenthesis or paremptosis by the Greeks, and consists in the interruption of the continuous flow of our language by the insertion of some remark. The following is an example: ego cum te (mecum enim saepissime loquilur) patriae reddidissem. To this they add hyperbaton, which they refuse to include among tropes. A second figure of this kind is one closely resembling the figure of thought known as apostrophe, but differing in this respect, that it changes the form of the language and not the sense. The following will illustrate my meaning: The Decii too, The Marii and Camilli, names of might, The Scipios, stubborn warriors, aye, and thee, Great Caesar. Georg. ii. 169. (Rhoades' translation). There is a still more striking example in the passage describing the death of Polydorus: All faith he brake and Polydorus slew Seizing his gold by force. Curst greed of gold, To what wilt thou not drive the hearts of men? 'Those terminologists who delight in subtle distinctions call the last figure μετάβασις (transition), and hold that it may be employed in yet another way, as in Dido's What do I say? Where am I? Aen. iv. 595. Virgil has combined apostrollphe and parenthesis in the well-known passage: Next Mettus the swift cars asunder tore, (Better, false Alban, hadst thou kept thy troth!) And Tullus dragged the traitors' mangled limbs. . . These figures and the like, which consist in change, addition, omission, and the order of words, serve to attract the attention of the audience and do not allow it to flag, rousing it from time to time by some specially striking figure, while they derive something of their charm from their very resemblance to blemishes, just as a trace of bitterness in food will sometimes tickle the palate. But this result will only be obtained if figures are not excessive in number nor all of the same type or combined or closely packed, since economy in their use, no less than variety, will prevent the hearer being surfeited.
There is a more striking class of figure, which does not merely depend on the form of the language for its effect, but lends both charm and force to the thought as well. The first figure of this class which calls for notice is that which is produced by addition. Of this there are various kinds. Words, for instance, may be doubled with a view to amplification, as in I have slain, I have slain, not Spurius Maelius (where the first I have slain states what has been done, while the second emphasises it), or to excite pity, as in Ah! Corydon, Corydon. Ecl. ii. 69. The same figure may also sometimes be employed ironically, with a view to disparagement. Similar to such doubling of words is repetition following a parenthesis, but the effect is stronger. I have seen the property alas! (for though all my tears are shed, my grief still clings to me deep-rooted in my heart), the property, I say, of Gnaeus Pompeius put up for sale by the cruel voice of the public crier. You still live, and live not to abate your audacity, but to increase it. Again, a number of clauses may begin with the same word for the sake of force and emphasis. Were you unmoved by the guard set each night upon the Palatine, unmoved by the patrolling of the city, unmoved by the terror of the people, unmoved by the unanimity of all good citizens, unmoved by the choice of so strongly fortified a spot for the assembly of the senate, unmoved by the looks and faces of those here present to-day? Or they may end with the same words. Who demanded them? Appius. Who produced them? Appius. This last instance, however, comes under the head of another figure as well, where both opening and concluding words are identical, since the sentences open with who and end with Appius. Here is another example. Who are they who have so often broken treaties? The Carthaginians. Who are they who have waged war with such atrocious cruelty? The Carthaginians. Who are they who have laid Italy waste? The Carthaginians. Who are they who pray for pardon? The Carthaginians. Again, in antitheses and comparisons the first words of alternate phrases are frequently repeated to produce correspondence, which was my reason for saying a little while back that this device came under the present topic rather than that which I was then discussing. You pass wakeful nights that you may be able to reply to your clients; he that he and his army may arrive betimes at their destination. You are roused by cockcrow, he by the bugle's reveillé.
You draw up your legal pleas, he sets the battle in array. You are on the watch that your clients be not taken at a disadvantage, he that cities or camps be not so taken. But the orator is not content with producing this effect, but proceeds to reverse the figure. He knows and understands how to keep off the forces of the enemy, you how to keep off the rainwater; he is skilled to extend boundaries, you to delimit them. A similar correspondence may be produced between the middle and the opening of a sentence, as in the line: te nemus Angitiae, vitrea te Fucinus unda. Aen. vii. 759 Or the middle may correspond to the end, as in the following sentence: This ship, laden with the spoil of Sicily, while it was itself a portion of the spoil. Nor will it be questioned that a like effect may be produced by the repetition of the middle of both clauses. Again, the end may correspond with the beginning. Many grievous afflictions were devised for parents and for kinsfolk many. There is also another form of repetition which simultaneously reiterates things that have already been said, and draws distinctions between them. Iphitus too with me and Pelias came, Iphitus bowed with age and Pelias Slow-limping with the wound Ulysses gave. Aen. ii. 435. This is styled ἐπάνοδος by the Greeks and regression by Roman writers. Nor are words only repeated to reaffirm the same meaning, but the repetition may serve to mark a contrast, as in the following sentence. The reputation of the leaders was approximately equal, but that of their followers perhaps not so equal. At times the cases and genders of the words repeated may be varied, as in Great is the toil of speaking, and great the task, etc. ; a similar instance is found in Rutilius, but in a long period. I therefore merely cite the beginnings of the clauses. Pater hic tuus? patrem nunc appellas? patris tui filius es? This figure may also be effected solely by change of cases, a proceeding which the Greeks call πολύπτωτον It may also be produced in other ways, as in the pro Cluentio: Quod autem tempus veneni dandi? illo die? illa frequentia? per quem porro datum? unde sumptum? quae porro interceptio poculi? cur non de integro autem datum? The combination of different details is called μεταβολὴν by Caecilius, and may be exemplified by the following passage directed against Oppianicus in the pro Cluentio: The local senate were unanimously of opinion that he had falsified the public registers at Larinum;
no one would have any business dealings or make any contract with him, no one out of all his numerous relations and kinsfolk ever appointed him as guardian to his children, with much more to the same effect. In this case the details are massed together, but they may equally be distributed or dissipated, as I think Cicero says. For example: Here corn, there grapes, elsewhere the growth of trees More freely rises, Georg. i. 54. with the remainder of the passage. A wonderful mixture of figures may be found in Cicero in the following passage, where the first word is repeated last after a long interval, while the middle corresponds with the beginning, and the concluding words with the middle. Yours is the work which we find here, conscript fathers, not mine, a fine piece of work too, but, as I have said, not mine, but yours. This frequent repetition, which, as I have said, is produced by a mixture of figures, is called πλοκὴ by the Greeks: a letter of Cicero to Brutus will provide a further example. When I had made my peace with Appius Claudius and made it through the agency of Gnaeus Pompeius, when then I had made my peace, etc. The like effect may be produced in the same sentence by repeating the same words in different forms, as in Persius: Is then to know in thee Nothing unless another know thou knowest? i. 26. The translation is Watson's. and in Cicero, where he says, For it was impossible for the judges as well to be condemned by their own judgement. Whole sentences again end with the phrase with which they began. Take an example. He came from Asia. What a strange thing. A tribune of the people came from Asia. Nay, the first word of this same period is actually repeated at its close, thus making its third appearance: for to the words just quoted the orator adds, Still for all that he came. Sometimes a whole clause is repeated, although the order of the words is altered, as, for example, Quid Cleomenes facere potuit non enin possum quemquam insimulare falso, quid, inquam, magno opere potuit Cleomenes facere? The first word of one clause is also frequently the same as the last of the preceding, a figure common in poetry. And ye, Pierian Muses, shall enhance their worth For Gallus; Gallus, he for whom each hour My love burns stronger. Cat. I. i. 2. But it is not uncommon even in the orators. For example: Yet this man lives. Lives? Why he even came into the senate house.
Sometimes, as I remarked in connexion with the doubling of words, the beginnings and the conclusions of sentences are made to correspond by the use of other words with the same meaning. Here is an example of correspondence between the beginnings: I would have faced every kind of danger; I would have exposed myself to treacherous attacks; I would have delivered myself over to public hatred. An example of the correspondence of conclusions is provided by another passage in the same speech which follows close on that just cited: For you have decided; you have passed sentence; you have given judgment. Some call this synonzmy, others disjunction: both terms, despite their difference, are correct. For the words are differentiated, but their meaning is identical. Sometimes, again, words of the same meaning are grouped together. For instance, Since this is so, Catiline, proceed on the path which you have entered; depart from the city, it is high time. The gates are open, get you forth. Or take this example from another book of the orations against Catiline, He departed, he went hence; he burst forth, he was gone. This is regarded as a case of pleonasm by Caecilius, that is to say, as language fuller than is absolutely required, like the phrase: Myself before my very eyes I saw: Aen. xii. 638. for myself is already implied by I saw. But when such language is over weighted by some purely superfluous addition, it is, as I have also pointed out elsewhere, a fault; whereas when, as in this case, it serves to make the sense stronger and more obvious, it is a merit. I saw, myself, before my very eyes, are so many appeals to the emotion. I cannot therefore see why Caecilius should have stigmatised these words by such a name, since the doubling and repetition of words and all forms of addition may likewise be regarded as pleonasms. And it is not merely words that are thus grouped together. The same device may be applied to thoughts of similar content. The wild confusion of his thoughts, the thick darkness shed upon his soul by his crimes and the burning torches of the furies all drove him on. Words of different meaning may likewise be grouped together, as for instance, The woman, the savage cruelty of the tyrant, love for his father, anger beyond control, the madness of blind daring; or again, as in the following passage from Ovid, But the dread Nereids' power, But horned Ammon, but that wild sea-beast To feed upon my vitals that must come. I have found some who call this also by the name of πλοκή:
but I do not agree, as only one figure is involved. We may also find a mixture of words, some identical and others different in meaning; of this figure, which the Greeks style διαλλαγή, the following will provide an example: I ask my enemies whether these plots were investigated, discovered and laid bare, overthrown, crushed and destroyed by me. In this sentence investigated, discovered and laid bare are different in meaning, while overthrown, crushed and destroyed are similar in meaning to each other, but different from the three previous. But both the last example and the last but one involve a different figure as well, which, owing to the absence of connecting particles, is called dissolution (asyndeton), and is useful when we are speaking with special vigour: for it at once impresses the details on the mind and makes them seem more numerous than they really are. Consequently, we apply this figure not merely to single words, but to whole sentences, as, for instance, is done by Cicero in his reply to the speech which Metellus made to the public assembly: I ordered those against whom information was laid, to be summoned, guarded, brought before the senate: they were led into the senate, while the rest of the passage is constructed on similar lines. This kind of figure is also called brachylogy, which may be regarded as detachment without loss of connexion. The opposite of this figure of asyndeton is polyxyndeton, which is characterised by the number of connecting particles employed. In this figure we may repeat the same connecting particle a number of times, as in the following instance: His house and home and arms And Amyclean hound and Cretan quiver; Georg. iii. 344. or they may be different, as in the case of arma virumque followed by multum ille et terris and multa quoque. Adverbs and pronouns also may be varied, as in the following instance: lic ilium vidi iunvenem followed by bis senos cui nostra dies and hic mihi responsum primus dedit ille petenti. But both these cases involve the massing together of words and phrases either in asyndeton or polysyndeton. Writers have given special names to all the different forms, but the names vary with the caprice of the inventor. The origin of these figures is one and the same, namely that they make our utterances more vigorous and emphatic and produce animpression of vehemence such as might spring from repeated outbursts of emotion. Gradation, which the Greeks call climax, necessitates a more obvious and less natural application of art and should therefore be more sparingly employed.
Moreover, it involves addition, since it repeats what has already been said and, before passing to a new point, dwells on those which precede. I will translate a very famous instance from the Greek. I did not say this, without making a formal proposal to that effect, I did not make that proposal without undertaking the embassy, nor undertake the embassy without persuading the Thebans. There are, however, examples of the same thing in Latin authors. It was the energy of Africanus that gave him his peculiar excellence, his excellence that gave him glory, his glory that gave him rivals. Calvus again writes, Consequently this means the abolition of trials for treason no less than for extortion, for offences covered by the Plautian law no less than for treason, for bribery no less than for those offences, and for all breaches of every law no less than for bribery, etc. It is also to be found in poets, as in the passage in Homer describing the sceptre which he traces from the hands of Jupiter down to those of Agamemnon, and in the following from one of our own tragedians: From Jove, so runs the tale, was Tantalus sprung, From Tantalus Pelops, and of Pelops' seed Sprang Atreus, who is sire of all our line. As regards the figures produced by omission, they rely for their charm in the main on conciseness and novelty. There is one of these which I mentioned in the last book with reference to synecdoche, and postponed discussing until such time as I came to deal with figures: it occurs when the word omitted may be clearly gathered from the context: an example may be found in Caelius' denunciation of Antony: stupere gaudio Graecus: for we must clearly supply coepit. Or take the following passage from a letter of Cicero to Brutus: Serno nullus scilicet nisi de te: quid enim potius? turn Flavius, cras, inquit, tabellarii, et ego ibidem has inter cenum exaravi. Of a similar kind, at any rate in my opinion, are those passages in which words are decently omitted to spare our modesty. You—while the goats looked goatish-we know who, And in what chapel—(but the kind Nymphs laughed). Ecl. iii. 8. Some regard this as an aposiopesis, but wrongly. For in aposiopesis it is either uncertain or at least requires an explanation of some length to show what is suppressed, whereas in the present case only one word, and that of an obvious character, is missing. If this, then, is an aposiopesis, all omissions will have a claim to the title.
I would not even allow the name of aposiopesis to all cases where what is omitted is left to be understood, as for example the following phrase from Cicero's letters, Data Lupercalibus quo die Antonius Caesari: for there, there is no real suppression: the omission is merely playful, for there is but one way of completing the sentence, namely with the words diadema imposuit. Another figure produced by omission is that of which I have just spoken, when the connecting particles are omitted. A third is the figure known as ἐπεζευγμένον in which a number of clauses are all completed by the same verb, which would be required by each singly if they stood alone. In such cases the verb to which the rest of the sentence refers may come first, as in the following instance: Vicit pudorem lilido, timiorem audacia, rationem amentia. Or it may come last, closing a number of clauses, as in the following: Neque enim is es, Catilina, ut te aut pudor unquam a turpitudine ant meites a periculo aut ratio a furore revocaverit. The verb may even be placed in the middle so as to serve both what precedes and what follows. The same figure may join different sexes, as for example when we speak of a male and female child under the comprehensive term of sons; or it may interchange singular and plural. But these devices are so common that they can scarcely lay claim to involve the art essential to figures. On the other hand it is quite obviously figure, when two different constructions are combined as in the following case: Sociis tunc arma capessant Edico et dira bellum cum gene gerendumn. Aen. iii. 234; participio = gerundive (gerendum). (I bid my comrades straight to seize their arms And war be waged against a savage race.) For although the portion of the sentence following bellum ends with a participle, both clauses of the sentence are correctly governed by edico. Another form of connexion, which does not necessarily involve omission, is called συνοικείωσις, because it connects two different things, for example: The miser lacks That which he has no less than what he has not. Syrus 486 (Ribbeck). To this figure is opposed distinction, which they call παραδιαστολή, by which we distinguish between similar things, as in this sentence: When you call yourself wise instead of astute, brave instead of rash, economical instead of mean. But this is entirely dependent on definition, and therefore I have my doubts whether it can be called a figure. Its opposite occurs when we pass at a bound from one thing to something different, as though from like to like; for example:
I labour to be brief, I turn obscure, Hor A.P. 25. with what follows. There is a third class of figures which attracts the ear of the audience and excites their attention by some resemblance, equality or contrast of words. To this class belongs paronomasia, which we call adnominatio. This may be effected in different ways. It may depend on the resemblance of one word to another which has preceded, although the words are in different cases. Take the following passage from Domitius Afer's defence of Cloatilla: Mulier omnium rerum imiperita, in omnnibus rebus infelix. Or the same word may be repeated with greater meaning, as quando homo, hostis homno. But although I have used these examples to illustrate something quite different, one of them involves both emphasis and reiteration. The opposite of parononasia occurs when one word is proved to be false by repetition; for instance, This law did not seem to be a law to private individuals. Akin to this is that syled ἀντανάκλασις, where the same word is used in two different meanings. When Proculeius reproached his son with waiting for his death, and the son replied that he was not waiting for it, the former retorted, Well then, I ask you to wait for it. Sometimes such difference in meaning is obtained not by using the same word, but one like it, as for example by saying that a man whom you think dignus supplicatione (worthy of supplication) is supplicio adficiendus. There are also other ways in which the same words may be used in different senses or altered by the lengthening or shortening of a syllable: this is a poor trick even when employed in jest, and I am surprised that it should be included in the text-books: the instances which I quote are therefore given as examples for avoidance, not for imitation. Here they are: Amari iucundum est, si curetur ne quid insit amari, and Avium dulcedo ad avium ducit; and again this jest from Ovid, Cur ego non dicam, Furia, te furiam? Cornificius calls this traductio, that is the transference of the meaning of one word to another. It has, however, greater elegance when it is employed to distinguish the exact meanings of things, as in the following example: This curse to the state could be repressed for a time, but not suppressed for ever; the same is true when the meaning of verbs is reversed by a change in the preposition with which they are compounded: for example, Non emissus ex urbe, sed immissus in urbem esse videatur.
The effect is better still and more emphatic when our pleasure is derived both from the figurative form and the excellence of the sense, as in the following instance: emit morte immortalitatem. A more trivial effect is produced by the following: Non Pisonum, sed pistorum, and Ex oratore arator, while phrases such as Ne patres conscripti videantur circumscripti, or raro evenit, sed vehenenter venit, are the worst of all. It does, however, sometimes happen that a bold and vigorous conception may derive a certain charm from the contrast between two words not dissimilar in sound. I do not know that there is any reason why modesty should prevent me from illustrating this point from my own family. My father, in the course of a declamation against a man who had said he would die on his embassy and then returned after a few days' absence without accomplishing anything, said, non exigo ut immoriaris legationi: immorare. For the sense is forcible and the sound of the two words, which are so very different in meaning, is pleasant, more especially since the assonance is not far fetched, but presents itself quite naturally, one word being of the speaker's own selection, while the other is supplied by his opponent. The old orators were at great pains to achieve elegance in the use of words similar or opposite in sound. Gorgias carried the practice to an extravagant pitch, while Isocrates, at any rate in his early days, was much addicted to it. Even Cicero delighted in it, but showed some restraint in the employment of a device which is not unattractive save when carried to excess, and, further, by the weight of his thought lent dignity to what would otherwise have been mere trivialities. For in itself this artifice is a flat and foolish affectation, but when it goes hand in hand with vigour of thought, it gives the impression of natural charm, which the speaker has not had to go far to find. There are some four different forms of play upon verbal resemblances. The first occurs when we select some word which is not very unlike another, as in the line of Virgil vuppesque tuae pubesque tuorum, Aen. i. 399. or, sic in hac calamitosa fama quasi in aliqua perniciosissim flamma, and non enim tarn spes laudanda quam res est. Or at any rate the words selected will be of equal length and will have similar terminations, as in non verbis, sed armis. A good effect may also be produced by an artifice such as the following, so long as the thought which it expresses be vigorous: quantum possis, in eo semper experire ut prosis.
The name commonly applied to this is πάροσον though the Stoic Theon thinks that in cases of πάρισον the correspondence between the clauses must be exact. The second form occurs when clauses conclude alike, the same syllables being placed at the end of each; this correspondence in the ending of two or more sentences is called homoeoteleuton. Here is an example: Non modo ad salutem eius exstinguendam sed etiam gloriam per tales viros infringendam. This figure is usually, though not invariably, found in the groups of three clauses, styled τρίκωλα, of which the following may be cited as an illustration: vicit pudorem libido, timorem audacia, rationed amentia. But the device may be applied to four clauses or more. The effect may even be produced by single words; for example, Hecuba hoc dolet, pudet, piget, or abiit, excessit, erupit, evasit. In the third form the correspondence is produced by the use of similar cases; it is known as ὁμοιόπτωτον But this name, though it implies a certain similarity, does not necessarily involve identity in termination, since it means no more than similarity of case, irrespective of the fact that words may be differently declined, and does not always occur at the end of a sentence; the correspondence may occur at the beginning, middle or end of clauses, or may be varied so that the middle of one clause corresponds with the beginning of another and the end with the middle: in fact, any arrangement of correspondences is permissible. Nor need the words which correspond consist of the same number of syllables. For example, we find the following sentence in Domitius Afer: Amisso nuper infelicis aulae, si non praesidio inter pericula, tamen solacio inter adversa. The best form of this figure is that in which the beginnings and ends of the clauses correspond (as in this case praesidio corresponds with solacio and pericula with adversa), in such a way that there is a close resemblance between the words, while cadence and termination are virtually identical. It is also desirable that the clauses should be of equal length, although as a matter of fact this forms the fourth figure of this class, and is known as ἰσόκωλον The following will serve as an example, being both ἰσόκωλον and ὁμοιόπτωτον: Si, quantum in agro locisque desertis audacia potest, tantum in foro atque iudiciis impudentia valeret; continuing, it combines ἰσόκωλον, ὁμοιόπτωτον, and ὁμοιοτέλευτον. :—non minus nunc in causa cederet Aulus Caecina Sexti Aebutii imnpudentiae, quam turn in vi facienda cessit audaciae.
This passage derives an additional elegance from the figure which I mentioned above as consisting in the repetition of words with an alteration of case, tense, mood, etc., to be found in this instance in the words non minus cederet quam cessit. The following, on the other hand, combines homoeoteleuton and paronomasia: Neminem alteri posse dare in matrinonium, nisi penes quem sit patrimonium. Antithesis, which Roman writers call either contrapositum or contentio, may be effected in more than one way. Single words may be contrasted with single, as in the passage recently quoted, Vicit pudorem libido, timorem audacia, or the contrast may be between pairs of words, as in non nostri ingenii, vestri auxilii est, or sentence may be contrasted with sentence, as in dominetur in contionibus, iaceat in iudiciis. Next to this another form may appropriately be placed, namely that which we have styled distinction and of which the following is an example: Odit populus Romanus privaiam luxuriam, publicam magoificentiam diligit. The same is true of the figure by which words of similar termination, but of different meaning are placed at the end of corresponding clauses, as in ut quod in tempore mali fuit, nihil obsit, quod in causa boni fruit, prosit. Nor is the contrasted phrase always placed immediately after that to which it is opposed, as it is in the following instance: est igitur haec, indices, non scripta, sed nala lex: but, as Cicero says, we may have correspondence between subsequent particulars and others previously mentioned, as in the passage which immediately follows that just quoted: quam non didicimus, accepimus, leginmus, verum ex natura ipsa arrptluimus, hauusimus, epressimus. Again the contrast is not always expressed antithetically, as is shown by the following passage from Rutilius: nobis primis dii immortales fruges dedelunt, nos, quod soli accepimus, in omnes terras distribuimus. Antithesis may also be effected by employing that figure, known as ἀντιμεταβολή by which words are repeated in different cases, tenses, moods, etc., as for instance when we say, non ut edam, vivo, sed ut vivam, edo (I do not live to eat, but eat to live). There is an instance of this in Cicero, where he has managed, while changing the case, to secure similarity of termination: ut et sine inridia culpa plectatur et sine culpa invidia ponatur. Again the clauses may end with the same word, as when Cicero says of Sextus Roscius: etenim cum artifex eiusmodi est ut solus videatur dignus qui in scena spectetur, turn vir eiusmodi est ut solus dignus esse videatur qui eo non accedat. There is also a special elegance which may be secured by placing names in antithesis, as in the following instance, Si consul Antonius, Brutus hostis;
si conservator rei publicae Brutus, hostis Antonius. I have already said more than was necessary on the subject of figures. But there will still be some who think that the following (which they call ἀνθυποφορὰ is a figure: Incredibile est, quod dico, sed verum: they say the same of Aliquis hoc semel tubit, neno bis, ego ter (which they style διέξοδος), and of Longius evects sum, sed redeo ad propositumr, which they call ἄφοδος. There are some figures of speech which differ little from figures of thought, as for example that of hesitation. For when we hesitate over a thing, it belongs to the former class, whereas when we hesitate over a word, it must be assigned to the latter, as for instance if we say, I do not know whether to call this wickedness or folly. The same consideration applies to correction. For correction emends, where hesitation expresses a doubt. Some have even held that it applies to personification as well; they think, for example, that Avarice is the mother of cruelly, Sallust's O Romulus of Arpinum in his speech against Cicero, and the Thriasian Oedipus of Menander are figures of speech. All these points have been discussed in full detail by those who have not given this subject merely incidental treatment as a portion of a larger theme, but have devoted whole books to the discussion of the topic: I allude to writers such as Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius and not a few others, although there are living authors who will be no less famous than they. Now though I am ready to admit that more figures of speech may perhaps be discovered by certain writers, I cannot agree that such figures are better than those which have been laid down by high authorities. Above all I would point out that Cicero has included a number of figures in the third book of the de Oratore, which in his later work, the Orator, he has omitted, thereby seeming to indicate that he condemned them. Some of these are figures of thought rather than of speech, such as meiosis, the introduction of the unexpected, imagery, answering our own questions, digression, permission, arguments drawn from opposites (for I suppose that by contrarium he means what is elsewhere styled ἐναντιότης), and proof borrowed from an opponent. There are some again which are not figures at all, such as arrangement, distinction by headings, and circumscription, whether this latter term be intended to signify the concise expression of thought or definition, which is actually regarded by Cornificius and Rutilius as a figure of speech.
With regard to the elegant transposition of words, that is, hyperbaton, which Caecilius also thinks is a figure, I have included it among tropes. As for mutation of the kind which Rutilius calls ἀλλοίωσις its function is to point out the differences between men, things and deeds: if it is used on an extended scale, it is not a figure, if on a narrower scale, it is mere antithesis, while if it is intended to mean hypallage, enough has already been said on the subject. Again what sort of a figure is this addition of a reason, for what is advanced, which Rutilius calls αἰτιολογία ? It may also be doubted whether the assignment of a reason for each distinct statement, with which Rutilius opens his discussion of figures, is really a figure. He calls it προσαπόδοσις and states that strictly it applies to a number of propositions, since the reason is either attached to each proposition separately, as in the following passage from Gaius Antonius: But I do not fear him as an accuser, for I am innocent; I do not dread him as a rival candidate, for I am Antonius; I do not expect to see him consul, for he is Cicero; or, after two or three propositions have been stated, the reasons for them may be given continuously in the same order, as for example in the words that Brutus uses of Gnaeus Pompeius: For it is better to rule no man than to be the slave to any man: since one may live with honour without ruling, whereas life is no life for the slave. But a number of reasons may also be assigned for one statement, as in the lines of Virgil: Whether that earth there from some hidden strength And fattening food derives, or that the tire Bakes every blemish out, etc. Or that the heat unlocks new passages. . . . Or that it hardens more, etc. As to what Cicero means by reference, I am in the dark: if he means ἀνάκλασις or ἐπάνοδος or ἀντιμεταβολή, I have already discussed them. But whatever its meaning may be, he does not mention it in the Orator any more than the other terms I have just mentioned. The only figure of speech mentioned in that work, which I should prefer to regard as a figure of thought owing to its emotional character, is exclamation. I agree with him about all the rest. To these Caecilius adds periphrasis, of which I have already spoken,5 while Cornificius adds interrogation, reasoning, suggestion, transition, concealment, and further, sentence, clause, isolated words, interpretation and conclusion. Of these the first (down to and including concealment)
are figures of thought, while the remainder are not figures at all. Rutilius also in addition to the figures found in other authors adds, παρομολογία ἀναγκαῖον ἠθοποιΐα δικαιολογία, πρόληψις, χαρακτηρισμός βραχυλογία, παρασιώπησις παῤῥησία of which I say the same. I will pass by those authors who set no limit to their craze for inventing technical terms and even include among figures what really comes under the head of arguments. With regard to genuine figures, I would briefly add that, while, suitably placed, they are a real ornament to style, they become perfectly fatuous when sought after overmuch. There are some who pay no consideration to the weight of their matter or the force of their thoughts and think themselves supreme artists, if only they succeed in forcing even the emptiest of words into figurative form, with the result that they are never tired of stringing figures together, despite the fact that it is as ridiculous to hunt for figures without reference to the matter as it is to discuss dress and gesture without reference to the body. But even perfectly correct figures must not be packed too closely together. Changes of facial expression and glances of the eyes are most effective in pleading, but if the orator never ceases to distort his face with affected grimaces or to wag his head and roll his eyes, he becomes a laughing-stock. So too oratory possesses a natural mien, which while it is far from demanding a stolid and immovable rigidity should as far as possible restrict itself to the expression with which it is endowed by nature. But it is of the first importance that we should know what are the requirements of time, place and character on each occasion of speaking. For the majority of these figures aim at delighting the hearer. But when terror, hatred and pity are the weapons called for in the fray, who will endure the orator who expresses his anger, his sorrow or his entreaties in neat antitheses, balanced cadences and exact correspondences? Too much care for our words under such circumstances weakens the impression of emotional sincerity, and wherever the orator displays his art unveiled, the hearer says, The truth is not in him.
1 Figures of speech have always been liable to change and are continually in process of change in accordance with the variations of usage. Consequently when we compare the language of our ancestors with our own, we find that practically everything we say nowadays is figurative. For example, we say invidere hac re for to grudge a thing, instead of hanc rem, which was the idiom of all the ancients, more especially Cicero, and incumbere illi (to lean upon him) for incumbere in ilium, plenum vino (full of wine) for plenum vini, and huic adulari (to flatter him) for hunc adulari. I might quote a thousand other examples, and only wish I could say that the changes were not often changes for the worse.
2 But to proceed, figures of speech fall into two main classes. One is defined as the form of language, while the other is mainly to be sought in the arrangement of words. Both are equally applicable in oratory, but we may style the former rather more grammatical and the latter more rhetorical. The former originates from the same sources as errors of language. For every figure of this kind would be an error, if it were accidental and not deliberate.
3 But as a rule such figures are defended by authority, age and usage, and not infrequently by some reason as well. Consequently, although they involve a divergence from direct and simple language, they are to be regarded as excellences, provided always that they have some praiseworthy precedent to follow. They have one special merit, that they relieve the tedium of everyday stereotyped speech and save us from commonplace language.
4 If a speaker use them sparingly and only as occasion demands, they will serve as a seasoning to his style and increase its attractions. If, on the other hand, he strains after them overmuch, he will lose that very charm of variety which they confer. Some figures, however, are so generally accepted that they have almost ceased to be regarded as figures: consequently however frequently they may be used, they will make less impression on the ear, just because it has become habituated to them.
5 For abnormal figures lying outside the range of common speech, while they are for that very reason more striking, and stimulate the ear by their novelty, prove cloying if used too lavishly, and make it quite clear that they did not present themselves naturally to the speaker, but were hunted out by him, dragged from obscure corners and artificially piled together. Figures, then,
6 may be found in connexion with the gender of nouns; for we find oculis capti talpae (blind moles) and timidi damae (timid deer) in Virgil; but there is good reason for this, since in these cases both sexes are covered by a word of one gender, and there is no doubt that there are male moles and deer as well as female. Figures may also affect verbs: for example, we find such phrases as fabricatus est gladium or inimicum poenitus es.
7 This is the less surprising, since the nature of verbs is such that we often express the active by the passive form, as in the case of arbitror (think) and suspicor (suspect), and the passive by the active, as in the case of vapulo (am beaten). Consequently the interchange of the two forms is of common occurrence, and in many cases either form can be used: for example, we may say luxuriatur or luxuriat (luxuriate), fluctuatur or fluctuat (fluctuate), adsentior or adsentio (agree). Figures also occur in connexion with number,
8 as when the plural follows the singular, as in the phrase gladio pugnacissima gens Romani (the Romans are a nation that fight fiercely with the sword); for gens is a singular noun indicating multitude. Or the singular may follow the plural, as in the following instance, qui non risere parentes nec deus hunc mensa dea nec dignata cubili est, Ecl. iv. 62. where he whom no goddess deems, etc., is included among those who have never smiled, etc.
9 In a satire again we read, nostrum istud vivere triste aspexi, Pers. i. 9. where the infinitive is used as a noun: for the poet by nostrum vivere means nostram vitam. We also at times use the verb for the participle, as in the phrase, magnum dat ferre talentum, Aen. v. 248. where ferre is used for ferendum, or the participle may be used for the verb, as in the phrase volo datum (I wish to give).
10 At times, again, there may be some doubt as to the precise error which a figure resembles. Take, for example, the phrase virtus est vitium fugere, Hor. Ep. I. i. 41. where the writer has either changed the parts of speech (making his phrase a variant for virtus est fuga vitiorum), or the cases (in which case it will be a variant for virtutis est vitium fugere); but whichever be the case, the figure is far more vigorous than either. At times figures are joined, as in Sthenelus sciens pugnae, which is substituted for Sthenelus scitus pugnandi. Tenses too are interchangeable.
11 For example, Timarchides negat esse ei periculum a seuri the present negat is substituted for the past. Or one mood may be used for another, as in the phrase, hoc Ithacus velit. In fact, to cut a long matter short, there is a figure corresponding to every form of solecism.
12 There is also a figure styled ἑτεροίωσις (i.e. alteration of the normal idiom), which bears a strong resemblance to ἐξαλλαγή. For example, we find in Sallust phrases such as neque ea res failsum me habuit and duci probare. Such figures as a rule aim not merely at novelty, but at conciseness as well. Hence we get further developments, such as non paeniturum for not intending to repent, and visuros for sent to see, both found in the same author.
13 These may have been figures when Sallust made them; but it is a question whether they can now be so considered, since they have met with such general acceptance. For we are in the habit of accepting common parlance as sufficient authority where current phrases are concerned: for example, rebus agentibus in the sense of while this was going on, which Pollio rebukes Labienus for using, has become an accredited idiom, as has contumeliam fecit, which, as is well known, is stigmatised by Cicero: for in his day they said adfici contumelia.
14 Figures may also be commended by their antiquity, for which Virgil had such a special passion. Compare his vel cum se pavidum contra mea iurgia iactat Aen. xi. 400. or progeniem sed enim Troiano a sanguine duci audierat. An. i. 19. Numerous instances of the same kind might be cited from the old tragic and comic poets.
15 One word of this type has remained in common use, namely enimvero. I might further quote from the same author nam quis te iuvenum confidentissime, Georg. iv. 445. The figure consists in the opening of a speech with nam, or perhaps rather in saying nam quis for quisnam. words which form the beginning of a speech: or tam magis illa tremens et tristibus etffra flammis, quam magis effuso crudescunt sanguine pugnae. Aen. vii. 787. The more the strife with bloodshed rages wild, The more it quivers and with baleful fire Glows fiercer. There the sentence inverts the natural order which may be illustrated by quam magis aerumna urgent, tam magis ad malefaciendum viget.
16 Old writers are full of such usages. At the beginning of the Eunuchus of Terence we have quid igitur faciam, while another comic poet says ain tandem leno? Catullus in his Epithalamium writes: dum innupta manet, dum cara suis est, Cat. lxii. 45. where the first dum means while, and the second means so long.
17 Sallust, on the other hand, borrows a number of idioms from the Greek, such as vulgus amat fieri: the same is true of Horace, who strongly approves of the practice. Compare his nec ciceris net longae invidit avenae. Sat. II. vi. 83. The gen. of respect is regarded as a Graecism. Virgil does the same in phrases such as Tyrrhenum navigat aequor or saucius pectus (wounded at heart), an idiom which has now become familiar in the public gazette.
18 Under the same class of figure falls that of addition, which, although the words added may be strictly superfluous, may still be far from inelegant. Take, for example, nam neque Parnasi vobis iuga, nam neque Pindi, Ecl. x. 11: where the second nam might be omitted. And we find in Horace, Fabriciumcque, hunc et intonsis Curium capillis. Similarly, words are omitted, a device which may be either a blemish or a figure, according to the context. The following is an example: accede ad ignen, iam calesces plus satis; Ter. Eun. I. ii. 5. for the full phrase would be plus quam satis. There is, however, another form of omission which requires treatment at greater length.
19 We frequently use the comparative for the positive, as, for example, when a man speaks of himself as being infirmior (rather indisposed). Sometimes we join two comparatives, as in the following passage: si te, Catilina, comprehendi, si interfici iussero, credo erit verendum mihi, ne non potius hoc ones boni serius a me qam quisquam crudelius factum esse dicat.
20 There are also figures like the following, which, though far from being solecisms, alter the number and are also usually included among tropes. We may speak of a single thing in the plural, as in the following instance: But we have travelled o'er a boundless space; Or we may speak of the plural in the singular, as in the following case: Like the fierce Roman in his country's arms.
21 There are others which belong to a different species, but the same genus, such as Nor let thy vineyards slope toward the west, Georg. ii. 298. or In that hour Be it not mine beneath the open sky To court soft sleep nor on the forest ridge Amid the grass to lie. Georg. iii. 435. For in the first of these passages he is not advising some other person, nor exhorting himself in the second, his advice in both passages being meant for all. Sometimes, again, we speak of ourselves as though we were referring to others, as in phrases like, Servius asserts, Tullius denies it.
22 At other times we speak in the first person instead of in another, or substitute one person for another. Both devices are employed together in the pro Caecina, where Cicero, addressing Piso, the counsel for the prosecution, says, You asserted that you reinstated me: I deny that you did so in accordance with the praetor's edict. The actual truth is that it was Aebutius who asserted that he had reinstated the defendant, and Caecina who denied that he had been restored in accordance with the praetor's edict. We may note also a further figure of speech in the contracted dixti, which has dropped one of its syllables.
23 The following also may be regarded as belonging to the same genus. The first is called interpositio or interclusio by us, and parenthesis or paremptosis by the Greeks, and consists in the interruption of the continuous flow of our language by the insertion of some remark. The following is an example: ego cum te (mecum enim saepissime loquitur) patriae reddidissem.
24 To this they add hyperbaton, which they refuse to include among tropes. A second figure of this kind is one closely resembling the figure of thought known as apostrophe, but differing in this respect, that it changes the form of the language and not the sense. The following will illustrate my meaning: The Decii too, The Marii and Camilli, names of might, The Scipios, stubborn warriors, aye, and thee, Great Caesar. Georg. ii. 169. (Rhoades' translation).
25 There is a still more striking example in the passage describing the death of Polydorus: All faith he brake and Polydorus slew Seizing his gold by force. Curst greed of gold, To what wilt thou not drive the hearts of men? 'Those terminologists who delight in subtle distinctions call the last figure μετάβασις (transition), and hold that it may be employed in yet another way, as in Dido's What do I say? Where am I? Aen. iv. 595.
26 Virgil has combined apostrophe and parenthesis in the well-known passage: Next Mettus the swift cars asunder tore, (Better, false Alban, hadst thou kept thy troth!) And Tullus dragged the traitors' mangled limbs. . . These figures and the like, which consist in change,
27 addition, omission, and the order of words, serve to attract the attention of the audience and do not allow it to flag, rousing it from time to time by some specially striking figure, while they derive something of their charm from their very resemblance to blemishes, just as a trace of bitterness in food will sometimes tickle the palate. But this result will only be obtained if figures are not excessive in number nor all of the same type or combined or closely packed, since economy in their use, no less than variety, will prevent the hearer being surfeited.
28 There is a more striking class of figure, which does not merely depend on the form of the language for its effect, but lends both charm and force to the thought as well. The first figure of this class which calls for notice is that which is produced by addition. Of this there are various kinds. Words, for instance, may be doubled with a view to amplification, as in I have slain, I have slain, not Spurius Maelius (where the first I have slain states what has been done, while the second emphasises it), or to excite pity, as in Ah! Corydon, Corydon. Ecl. ii. 69.
29 The same figure may also sometimes be employed ironically, with a view to disparagement. Similar to such doubling of words is repetition following a parenthesis, but the effect is stronger. I have seen the property alas! (for though all my tears are shed, my grief still clings to me deep-rooted in my heart), the property, I say, of Gnaeus Pompeius put up for sale by the cruel voice of the public crier. You still live, and live not to abate your audacity, but to increase it.
30 Again, a number of clauses may begin with the same word for the sake of force and emphasis. Were you unmoved by the guard set each night upon the Palatine, unmoved by the patrolling of the city, unmoved by the terror of the people, unmoved by the unanimity of all good citizens, unmoved by the choice of so strongly fortified a spot for the assembly of the senate, unmoved by the looks and faces of those here present to-day? Or they may end with the same words. Who demanded them? Appius. Who produced them? Appius.
31 This last instance, however, comes under the head of another figure as well, where both opening and concluding words are identical, since the sentences open with who and end with Appius. Here is another example. Who are they who have so often broken treaties? The Carthaginians. Who are they who have waged war with such atrocious cruelty? The Carthaginians. Who are they who have laid Italy waste? The Carthaginians. Who are they who pray for pardon? The Carthaginians.
32 Again, in antitheses and comparisons the first words of alternate phrases are frequently repeated to produce correspondence, which was my reason for saying a little while back that this device came under the present topic rather than that which I was then discussing. You pass wakeful nights that you may be able to reply to your clients; he that he and his army may arrive betimes at their destination. You are roused by cockcrow, he by the bugle's reveillé. You draw up your legal pleas, he sets the battle in array. You are on the watch that your clients be not taken at a disadvantage, he that cities or camps be not so taken.
33 But the orator is not content with producing this effect, but proceeds to reverse the figure. He knows and understands how to keep off the forces of the enemy, you how to keep off the rainwater; he is skilled to extend boundaries, you to delimit them.
34 A similar correspondence may be produced between the middle and the opening of a sentence, as in the line: te nemus Angitiae, vitrea te Fucinus unda. Aen. vii. 759 Or the middle may correspond to the end, as in the following sentence: This ship, laden with the spoil of Sicily, while it was itself a portion of the spoil. Nor will it be questioned that a like effect may be produced by the repetition of the middle of both clauses. Again, the end may correspond with the beginning. Many grievous afflictions were devised for parents and for kinsfolk many.
35 There is also another form of repetition which simultaneously reiterates things that have already been said, and draws distinctions between them. Iphitus too with me and Pelias came, Iphitus bowed with age and Pelias Slow-limping with the wound Ulysses gave. Aen. ii. 435. This is styled ἐπάνοδος by the Greeks and regression by Roman writers.
36 Nor are words only repeated to reaffirm the same meaning, but the repetition may serve to mark a contrast, as in the following sentence. The reputation of the leaders was approximately equal, but that of their followers perhaps not so equal. At times the cases and genders of the words repeated may be varied, as in Great is the toil of speaking, and great the task, etc. ; a similar instance is found in Rutilius, but in a long period. I therefore merely cite the beginnings of the clauses. Pater hic tuus? patrem nunc appellas? patris tui filius es?
37 This figure may also be effected solely by change of cases, a proceeding which the Greeks call πολύπτωτον It may also be produced in other ways, as in the pro Cluentio: Quod autem tempus veneni dandi? illo die? illa frequentia? per quem porro datum? unde sumptum? quae porro interceptio poculi? cur non de integro autem datum?
38 The combination of different details is called μεταβολὴν by Caecilius, and may be exemplified by the following passage directed against Oppianicus in the pro Cluentio: The local senate were unanimously of opinion that he had falsified the public registers at Larinum; no one would have any business dealings or make any contract with him, no one out of all his numerous relations and kinsfolk ever appointed him as guardian to his children, with much more to the same effect.
39 In this case the details are massed together, but they may equally be distributed or dissipated, as I think Cicero says. For example: Here corn, there grapes, elsewhere the growth of trees More freely rises, Georg. i. 54. with the remainder of the passage.
40 A wonderful mixture of figures may be found in Cicero in the following passage, where the first word is repeated last after a long interval, while the middle corresponds with the beginning, and the concluding words with the middle. Yours is the work which we find here, conscript fathers, not mine, a fine piece of work too, but, as I have said, not mine, but yours. This frequent repetition, which,
41 as I have said, is produced by a mixture of figures, is called πλοκὴ by the Greeks: a letter of Cicero to Brutus will provide a further example. When I had made my peace with Appius Claudius and made it through the agency of Gnaeus Pompeius, when then I had made my peace, etc.
42 The like effect may be produced in the same sentence by repeating the same words in different forms, as in Persius: Is then to know in thee Nothing unless another know thou knowest? i. 26. The translation is Watson's. and in Cicero, where he says, For it was impossible for the judges as well to be condemned by their own judgement.
43 Whole sentences again end with the phrase with which they began. Take an example. He came from Asia. What a strange thing. A tribune of the people came from Asia. Nay, the first word of this same period is actually repeated at its close, thus making its third appearance: for to the words just quoted the orator adds, Still for all that he came. Sometimes a whole clause is repeated, although the order of the words is altered, as, for example, Quid Cleomenes facere potuit non enim possum quemquam insimulare falso, quid, inquam, magno opere potuit Cleomenes facere?
44 The first word of one clause is also frequently the same as the last of the preceding, a figure common in poetry. And ye, Pierian Muses, shall enhance their worth For Gallus; Gallus, he for whom each hour My love burns stronger. Cat. I. i. 2. But it is not uncommon even in the orators. For example: Yet this man lives. Lives? Why he even came into the senate house.
45 Sometimes, as I remarked in connexion with the doubling of words, the beginnings and the conclusions of sentences are made to correspond by the use of other words with the same meaning. Here is an example of correspondence between the beginnings: I would have faced every kind of danger; I would have exposed myself to treacherous attacks; I would have delivered myself over to public hatred. An example of the correspondence of conclusions is provided by another passage in the same speech which follows close on that just cited: For you have decided; you have passed sentence; you have given judgment. Some call this synonzmy, others disjunction: both terms, despite their difference, are correct. For the words are differentiated, but their meaning is identical. Sometimes, again, words of the same meaning are grouped together. For instance, Since this is so, Catiline, proceed on the path which you have entered; depart from the city, it is high time. The gates are open, get you forth.
46 Or take this example from another book of the orations against Catiline, He departed, he went hence; he burst forth, he was gone. This is regarded as a case of pleonasm by Caecilius, that is to say, as language fuller than is absolutely required, like the phrase: Myself before my very eyes I saw: Aen. xii. 638. for myself is already implied by I saw. But when such language is over weighted by some purely superfluous addition, it is, as I have also pointed out elsewhere, a fault; whereas when, as in this case, it serves to make the sense stronger and more obvious, it is a merit. I saw, myself, before my very eyes, are so many appeals to the emotion.
47 I cannot therefore see why Caecilius should have stigmatised these words by such a name, since the doubling and repetition of words and all forms of addition may likewise be regarded as pleonasms. And it is not merely words that are thus grouped together. The same device may be applied to thoughts of similar content. The wild confusion of his thoughts, the thick darkness shed upon his soul by his crimes and the burning torches of the furies all drove him on.
48 Words of different meaning may likewise be grouped together, as for instance, The woman, the savage cruelty of the tyrant, love for his father, anger beyond control, the madness of blind daring; or again, as in the following passage from Ovid, But the dread Nereids' power, But horned Ammon, but that wild sea-beast To feed upon my vitals that must come.
49 I have found some who call this also by the name of πλοκή: but I do not agree, as only one figure is involved. We may also find a mixture of words, some identical and others different in meaning; of this figure, which the Greeks style διαλλαγή, the following will provide an example: I ask my enemies whether these plots were investigated, discovered and laid bare, overthrown, crushed and destroyed by me. In this sentence investigated, discovered and laid bare are different in meaning, while overthrown, crushed and destroyed are similar in meaning to each other, but different from the three previous.
50 But both the last example and the last but one involve a different figure as well, which, owing to the absence of connecting particles, is called dissolution (asyndeton), and is useful when we are speaking with special vigour: for it at once impresses the details on the mind and makes them seem more numerous than they really are. Consequently, we apply this figure not merely to single words, but to whole sentences, as, for instance, is done by Cicero in his reply to the speech which Metellus made to the public assembly: I ordered those against whom information was laid, to be summoned, guarded, brought before the senate: they were led into the senate, while the rest of the passage is constructed on similar lines. This kind of figure is also called brachylogy, which may be regarded as detachment without loss of connexion. The opposite of this figure of asyndeton is polysyndeton, which is characterised by the number of connecting particles employed.
51 In this figure we may repeat the same connecting particle a number of times, as in the following instance: His house and home and arms And Amyclean hound and Cretan quiver; Georg. iii. 344. or they may be different,
52 as in the case of arma virumque followed by multum ille et terris and multa quoque.
53 Adverbs and pronouns also may be varied, as in the following instance: hic illum vidi iuvenem followed by bis senos cui nostra dies and hic mihi responsum primus dedit ille petenti. But both these cases involve the massing together of words and phrases either in asyndeton or polysyndeton.
54 Writers have given special names to all the different forms, but the names vary with the caprice of the inventor. The origin of these figures is one and the same, namely that they make our utterances more vigorous and emphatic and produce animpression of vehemence such as might spring from repeated outbursts of emotion. Gradation, which the Greeks call climax, necessitates a more obvious and less natural application of art and should therefore be more sparingly employed. Moreover, it involves addition,
55 since it repeats what has already been said and, before passing to a new point, dwells on those which precede. I will translate a very famous instance from the Greek. I did not say this, without making a formal proposal to that effect, I did not make that proposal without undertaking the embassy, nor undertake the embassy without persuading the Thebans.
56 There are, however, examples of the same thing in Latin authors. It was the energy of Africanus that gave him his peculiar excellence, his excellence that gave him glory, his glory that gave him rivals. Calvus again writes, Consequently this means the abolition of trials for treason no less than for extortion, for offences covered by the Plautian law no less than for treason, for bribery no less than for those offences, and for all breaches of every law no less than for bribery, etc.
57 It is also to be found in poets, as in the passage in Homer describing the sceptre which he traces from the hands of Jupiter down to those of Agamemnon, and in the following from one of our own tragedians: From Jove, so runs the tale, was Tantalus sprung, From Tantalus Pelops, and of Pelops' seed Sprang Atreus, who is sire of all our line.
58 As regards the figures produced by omission, they rely for their charm in the main on conciseness and novelty. There is one of these which I mentioned in the last book with reference to synecdoche, and postponed discussing until such time as I came to deal with figures: it occurs when the word omitted may be clearly gathered from the context: an example may be found in Caelius' denunciation of Antony: stupere gaudio Graecus: for we must clearly supply coepit. Or take the following passage from a letter of Cicero to Brutus: Sermo nullus scilicet nisi de te: quid enim potius? turn Flavius, cras, inquit, tabellarii, et ego ibidem has inter cenum exaravi.
59 Of a similar kind, at any rate in my opinion, are those passages in which words are decently omitted to spare our modesty. You—while the goats looked goatish-we know who, And in what chapel—(but the kind Nymphs laughed). Ecl. iii. 8. Some regard this as an aposiopesis, but wrongly.
60 For in aposiopesis it is either uncertain or at least requires an explanation of some length to show what is suppressed, whereas in the present case only one word, and that of an obvious character, is missing. If this, then, is an aposiopesis, all omissions will have a claim to the title.
61 I would not even allow the name of aposiopesis to all cases where what is omitted is left to be understood, as for example the following phrase from Cicero's letters, Data Lupercalibus quo die Antonius Caesari: for there, there is no real suppression: the omission is merely playful, for there is but one way of completing the sentence, namely with the words diadema imposuit.
62 Another figure produced by omission is that of which I have just spoken, when the connecting particles are omitted. A third is the figure known as ἐπεζευγμένον in which a number of clauses are all completed by the same verb, which would be required by each singly if they stood alone. In such cases the verb to which the rest of the sentence refers may come first, as in the following instance: Vicit pudorem lilido, timiorem audacia, rationem amentia. Or it may come last, closing a number of clauses, as in the following: Neque enim is es, Catilina, ut te aut pudor unquam a turpitudine aut metus a periculo aut ratio a furore revocaverit.
63 The verb may even be placed in the middle so as to serve both what precedes and what follows. The same figure may join different sexes, as for example when we speak of a male and female child under the comprehensive term of sons; or it may interchange singular and plural.
64 But these devices are so common that they can scarcely lay claim to involve the art essential to figures. On the other hand it is quite obviously figure, when two different constructions are combined as in the following case: Sociis tunc arma capessant Edico et dira bellum cum gene gerendumn. Aen. iii. 234; participio = gerundive (gerendum). (I bid my comrades straight to seize their arms And war be waged against a savage race.) For although the portion of the sentence following bellum ends with a participle, both clauses of the sentence are correctly governed by edico. Another form of connexion, which does not necessarily involve omission, is called συνοικείωσις, because it connects two different things, for example: The miser lacks That which he has no less than what he has not. Syrus 486 (Ribbeck).
65 To this figure is opposed distinction, which they call παραδιαστολή, by which we distinguish between similar things, as in this sentence: When you call yourself wise instead of astute, brave instead of rash, economical instead of mean. But this is entirely dependent on definition, and therefore I have my doubts whether it can be called a figure. Its opposite occurs when we pass at a bound from one thing to something different, as though from like to like; for example: I labour to be brief, I turn obscure, Hor A.P. 25. with what follows.
66 There is a third class of figures which attracts the ear of the audience and excites their attention by some resemblance, equality or contrast of words. To this class belongs paronomasia, which we call adnominatio. This may be effected in different ways. It may depend on the resemblance of one word to another which has preceded, although the words are in different cases. Take the following passage from Domitius Afer's defence of Cloatilla: Mulier omnium rerum imperita, in omnibus rebus infelix.
67 Or the same word may be repeated with greater meaning, as quando homo, hostis homno. But although I have used these examples to illustrate something quite different, one of them involves both emphasis and reiteration. The opposite of parononasia occurs when one word is proved to be false by repetition; for instance, This law did not seem to be a law to private individuals. Akin to this is that styled ἀντανάκλασις,
68 where the same word is used in two different meanings. When Proculeius reproached his son with waiting for his death, and the son replied that he was not waiting for it, the former retorted, Well then, I ask you to wait for it. Sometimes such difference in meaning is obtained not by using the same word, but one like it, as for example by saying that a man whom you think dignus supplicatione (worthy of supplication) is supplicio adficiendus.
69 There are also other ways in which the same words may be used in different senses or altered by the lengthening or shortening of a syllable: this is a poor trick even when employed in jest, and I am surprised that it should be included in the text-books: the instances which I quote are therefore given as examples for avoidance, not for imitation. Here they are:
70 Amari iucundum est, si curetur ne quid insit amari, and Avium dulcedo ad avium ducit; and again this jest from Ovid, Cur ego non dicam, Furia, te furiam? Cornificius calls this traductio,
71 that is the transference of the meaning of one word to another. It has, however, greater elegance when it is employed to distinguish the exact meanings of things, as in the following example: This curse to the state could be repressed for a time, but not suppressed for ever; the same is true when the meaning of verbs is reversed by a change in the preposition with which they are compounded: for example, Non emissus ex urbe, sed immissus in urbem esse videatur. The effect is better still and more emphatic when our pleasure is derived both from the figurative form and the excellence of the sense, as in the following instance: emit morte immortalitatem.
72 A more trivial effect is produced by the following: Non Pisonum, sed pistorum, and Ex oratore arator, while phrases such as Ne patres conscripti videantur circumscripti, or raro evenit, sed vehenenter venit, are the worst of all. It does, however, sometimes happen that a bold and vigorous conception may derive a certain charm from the contrast between two words not dissimilar in sound.
73 I do not know that there is any reason why modesty should prevent me from illustrating this point from my own family. My father, in the course of a declamation against a man who had said he would die on his embassy and then returned after a few days' absence without accomplishing anything, said, non exigo ut immoriaris legationi: immorare. For the sense is forcible and the sound of the two words, which are so very different in meaning, is pleasant, more especially since the assonance is not far fetched, but presents itself quite naturally, one word being of the speaker's own selection, while the other is supplied by his opponent.
74 The old orators were at great pains to achieve elegance in the use of words similar or opposite in sound. Gorgias carried the practice to an extravagant pitch, while Isocrates, at any rate in his early days, was much addicted to it. Even Cicero delighted in it, but showed some restraint in the employment of a device which is not unattractive save when carried to excess, and, further, by the weight of his thought lent dignity to what would otherwise have been mere trivialities. For in itself this artifice is a flat and foolish affectation, but when it goes hand in hand with vigour of thought, it gives the impression of natural charm, which the speaker has not had to go far to find.
75 There are some four different forms of play upon verbal resemblances. The first occurs when we select some word which is not very unlike another, as in the line of Virgil vuppesque tuae pubesque tuorum, Aen. i. 399. or, sic in hac calamitosa fama quasi in aliqua perniciosissim flamma, and non enim tam spes laudanda quam res est. Or at any rate the words selected will be of equal length and will have similar terminations, as in non verbis, sed armis.
76 A good effect may also be produced by an artifice such as the following, so long as the thought which it expresses be vigorous: quantum possis, in eo semper experire ut prosis. The name commonly applied to this is πάρισον though the Stoic Theon thinks that in cases of πάρισον the correspondence between the clauses must be exact.
77 The second form occurs when clauses conclude alike, the same syllables being placed at the end of each; this correspondence in the ending of two or more sentences is called homoeoteleuton. Here is an example: Non modo ad salutem eius exstinguendam sed etiam gloriam per tales viros infringendam. This figure is usually, though not invariably, found in the groups of three clauses, styled τρίκωλα, of which the following may be cited as an illustration: vicit pudorem libido, timorem audacia, rationed amentia. But the device may be applied to four clauses or more. The effect may even be produced by single words; for example, Hecuba hoc dolet, pudet, piget, or abiit, excessit, erupit, evasit.
78 In the third form the correspondence is produced by the use of similar cases; it is known as ὁμοιόπτωτον But this name, though it implies a certain similarity, does not necessarily involve identity in termination, since it means no more than similarity of case, irrespective of the fact that words may be differently declined, and does not always occur at the end of a sentence; the correspondence may occur at the beginning, middle or end of clauses, or may be varied so that the middle of one clause corresponds with the beginning of another and the end with the middle: in fact, any arrangement of correspondences is permissible.
79 Nor need the words which correspond consist of the same number of syllables. For example, we find the following sentence in Domitius Afer: Amisso nuper infelicis aulae, si non praesidio inter pericula, tamen solacio inter adversa. The best form of this figure is that in which the beginnings and ends of the clauses correspond (as in this case praesidio corresponds with solacio and pericula with adversa), in such a way that there is a close resemblance between the words, while cadence and termination are virtually identical.
80 It is also desirable that the clauses should be of equal length, although as a matter of fact this forms the fourth figure of this class, and is known as ἰσόκωλον The following will serve as an example, being both ἰσόκωλον and ὁμοιόπτωτον: Si, quantum in agro locisque desertis audacia potest, tantum in foro atque iudiciis impudentia valeret; continuing, it combines ἰσόκωλον, ὁμοιόπτωτον, and ὁμοιοτέλευτον. :—non minus nunc in causa cederet Aulus Caecina Sexti Aebutii imnpudentiae, quam turn in vi facienda cessit audaciae. This passage derives an additional elegance from the figure which I mentioned above as consisting in the repetition of words with an alteration of case, tense, mood, etc., to be found in this instance in the words non minus cederet quam cessit. The following, on the other hand, combines homoeoteleuton and paronomasia: Neminem alteri posse dare in matrimonium, nisi penes quem sit patrimonium.
81 Antithesis, which Roman writers call either contrapositum or contentio, may be effected in more than one way. Single words may be contrasted with single, as in the passage recently quoted, Vicit pudorem libido, timorem audacia, or the contrast may be between pairs of words, as in non nostri ingenii, vestri auxilii est, or sentence may be contrasted with sentence, as in dominetur in contionibus, iaceat in iudiciis.
82 Next to this another form may appropriately be placed, namely that which we have styled distinction and of which the following is an example: Odit populus Romanus privaiam luxuriam, publicam magoificentiam diligit. The same is true of the figure by which words of similar termination, but of different meaning are placed at the end of corresponding clauses, as in ut quod in tempore mali fuit, nihil obsit, quod in causa boni fuit, prosit.
83 Nor is the contrasted phrase always placed immediately after that to which it is opposed, as it is in the following instance: est igitur haec, indices, non scripta, sed nala lex: but, as Cicero says, we may have correspondence between subsequent particulars and others previously mentioned, as in the passage which immediately follows that just quoted: quam non didicimus, accepimus, legimus, verum ex natura ipsa arripuimus, hausimus, expressimus.
84 Again the contrast is not always expressed antithetically, as is shown by the following passage from Rutilius: nobis primis dii immortales fruges dedelunt, nos, quod soli accepimus, in omnes terras distribuimus.
85 Antithesis may also be effected by employing that figure, known as ἀντιμεταβολή by which words are repeated in different cases, tenses, moods, etc., as for instance when we say, non ut edam, vivo, sed ut vivam, edo (I do not live to eat, but eat to live). There is an instance of this in Cicero, where he has managed, while changing the case, to secure similarity of termination: ut et sine invidia culpa plectatur et sine culpa invidia ponatur.
86 Again the clauses may end with the same word, as when Cicero says of Sextus Roscius: etenim cum artifex eiusmodi est ut solus videatur dignus qui in scena spectetur, turn vir eiusmodi est ut solus dignus esse videatur qui eo non accedat. There is also a special elegance which may be secured by placing names in antithesis, as in the following instance, Si consul Antonius, Brutus hostis; si conservator rei publicae Brutus, hostis Antonius.
87 I have already said more than was necessary on the subject of figures. But there will still be some who think that the following (which they call ἀνθυποφορὰ is a figure: Incredibile est, quod dico, sed verum: they say the same of Aliquis hoc semel tulit, nemo bis, ego ter (which they style διέξοδος), and of Longius evects sum, sed redeo ad propositumr, which they call ἄφοδος.
88 There are some figures of speech which differ little from figures of thought, as for example that of hesitation. For when we hesitate over a thing, it belongs to the former class, whereas when we hesitate over a word, it must be assigned to the latter, as for instance if we say, I do not know whether to call this wickedness or folly.
89 The same consideration applies to correction. For correction emends, where hesitation expresses a doubt. Some have even held that it applies to personification as well; they think, for example, that Avarice is the mother of cruelly, Sallust's O Romulus of Arpinum in his speech against Cicero, and the Thriasian Oedipus of Menander are figures of speech. All these points have been discussed in full detail by those who have not given this subject merely incidental treatment as a portion of a larger theme, but have devoted whole books to the discussion of the topic: I allude to writers such as Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius and not a few others, although there are living authors who will be no less famous than they.
90 Now though I am ready to admit that more figures of speech may perhaps be discovered by certain writers, I cannot agree that such figures are better than those which have been laid down by high authorities. Above all I would point out that Cicero has included a number of figures in the third book of the de Oratore, which in his later work, the Orator, he has omitted, thereby seeming to indicate that he condemned them. Some of these are figures of thought rather than of speech, such as meiosis, the introduction of the unexpected, imagery, answering our own questions, digression, permission, arguments drawn from opposites (for I suppose that by contrarium he means what is elsewhere styled ἐναντιότης), and proof borrowed from an opponent. There are some again which are not figures at all,
91 such as arrangement, distinction by headings, and circumscription, whether this latter term be intended to signify the concise expression of thought or definition, which is actually regarded by Cornificius and Rutilius as a figure of speech. With regard to the elegant transposition of words, that is, hyperbaton, which Caecilius also thinks is a figure, I have included it among tropes. As for mutation
92 of the kind which Rutilius calls ἀλλοίωσις its function is to point out the differences between men, things and deeds: if it is used on an extended scale, it is not a figure, if on a narrower scale, it is mere antithesis, while if it is intended to mean hypallage, enough has already been said on the subject.
93 Again what sort of a figure is this addition of a reason, for what is advanced, which Rutilius calls αἰτιολογία ? It may also be doubted whether the assignment of a reason for each distinct statement, with which Rutilius opens his discussion of figures, is really a figure.
94 He calls it προσαπόδοσις and states that strictly it applies to a number of propositions, since the reason is either attached to each proposition separately, as in the following passage from Gaius Antonius: But I do not fear him as an accuser, for I am innocent; I do not dread him as a rival candidate, for I am Antonius; I do not expect to see him consul, for he is Cicero;
95 or, after two or three propositions have been stated, the reasons for them may be given continuously in the same order, as for example in the words that Brutus uses of Gnaeus Pompeius: For it is better to rule no man than to be the slave to any man: since one may live with honour without ruling, whereas life is no life for the slave.
96 But a number of reasons may also be assigned for one statement, as in the lines of Virgil: Whether that earth there from some hidden strength And fattening food derives, or that the fire Bakes every blemish out, etc. Or that the heat unlocks new passages. . . . Or that it hardens more, etc. As to what Cicero means by reference,
97 I am in the dark: if he means ἀνάκλασις or ἐπάνοδος or ἀντιμεταβολή, I have already discussed them. But whatever its meaning may be, he does not mention it in the Orator any more than the other terms I have just mentioned. The only figure of speech mentioned in that work, which I should prefer to regard as a figure of thought owing to its emotional character, is exclamation. I agree with him about all the rest. To these Caecilius adds periphrasis,
98 of which I have already spoken, while Cornificius adds interrogation, reasoning, suggestion, transition, concealment, and further, sentence, clause, isolated words, interpretation and conclusion. Of these the first (down to and including concealment) are figures of thought, while the remainder are not figures at all.
99 Rutilius also in addition to the figures found in other authors adds, παρομολογία ἀναγκαῖον ἠθοποιΐα δικαιολογία, πρόληψις, χαρακτηρισμός βραχυλογία, παρασιώπησις παῤῥησία of which I say the same. I will pass by those authors who set no limit to their craze for inventing technical terms and even include among figures what really comes under the head of arguments.
100 With regard to genuine figures, I would briefly add that, while, suitably placed, they are a real ornament to style, they become perfectly fatuous when sought after overmuch. There are some who pay no consideration to the weight of their matter or the force of their thoughts and think themselves supreme artists, if only they succeed in forcing even the emptiest of words into figurative form, with the result that they are never tired of stringing figures together, despite the fact that it is as ridiculous to hunt for figures without reference to the matter as it is to discuss dress and gesture without reference to the body.
101 But even perfectly correct figures must not be packed too closely together. Changes of facial expression and glances of the eyes are most effective in pleading, but if the orator never ceases to distort his face with affected grimaces or to wag his head and roll his eyes, he becomes a laughing-stock. So too oratory possesses a natural mien, which while it is far from demanding a stolid and immovable rigidity should as far as possible restrict itself to the expression with which it is endowed by nature.
102 But it is of the first importance that we should know what are the requirements of time, place and character on each occasion of speaking. For the majority of these figures aim at delighting the hearer. But when terror, hatred and pity are the weapons called for in the fray, who will endure the orator who expresses his anger, his sorrow or his entreaties in neat antitheses, balanced cadences and exact correspondences? Too much care for our words under such circumstances weakens the impression of emotional sincerity, and wherever the orator displays his art unveiled, the hearer says, The truth is not in him.