Institutio Oratoria |
Translator: Harold Edgeworth Butler
|
|
| 3687 |
Quapropter milii falli multum videntur , qui solos esse Atticos credunt tenues et lucidos et significantes sed quadam eloquentiae frugalitate contentos ac semper manum intra pallium continentes . Nam quis erit hic Atticus ? Sit Lysias ; hunc enim amplectuntur amatores istius nominis modum . Non igitur iam usque ad Coccum et Andocidem remittemur . Interrogare tamen velim , an Isocrates Attice dixerit .
|
Consequently I regard those critics as committing a serious error who regard only those authors as Attic who, while they are simple, lucid and expressive, are none the less content with a certain frugality of eloquence, and keep their hands modestly within the folds of their cloaks. For what author is there who answers to this conception? I am prepared to grant that there is Lysias, since he is the favourite model of the admirers of this school, and such an admission will save us from being referred to Coccus and Andocides. |
| 3688 |
Nihil enim tam est Lysiae diversum . Negabunt . At eius schola principes oratorum dedit . Quaeratur similius aliquid . Hyperides Atticus ? Certe , at plus indulsit voluptati . Transeo plurimos , Lycurgum , Aristogitona et his priores Isaeum , Antiphonta ; quos ut homines inter se genere similes , differentes dixeris specie . Quid ille , cuius modo fecimus mentionem , Aeschines ?
|
But I should like to ask whether Isocrates spoke in the Attic style. For there is no author less like Lysias. They will answer in the negative. And yet it is to the school of Isocrates that we owe the greatest orators. Let us look for something closer. Is Hyperides Attic? Yes, they reply, but of an over-sensuous character. I pass by a number of orators, such as Lyucrgus and Aristogeiton and their predecessors Isaeus and Antiphon; for though they have a certain generic resemblance, they may be said to differ in species. |
| 3689 |
nonne his latior et audentior et excelsior ? Quid denique Demosthenes ? non cunctos illos tenues et circumspectos vi , sublimitate , impetu , cultu , conpositione superavit ? non insurgit locis ? non figuris gaudet ? non translationibus nitet ? non oratione ficta dat tacentibus vocem ?
|
But what of Aesehines, whom I mentioned just now? Is not his style ampler and holder and more lofty than theirs? And what of Demosthenes himself? Did not he surpass all those simple and circumspect orators in force, loftiness, energy, polish and rhythm? Does he not rise to great heights in his commonplaces Does he not rejoice in the employment of figures? Does he not make brilliant use of metaphor? Does he not lend a voice, a fictitious utterance to speechless things? |
| 3690 |
non illud iusiurandum per caesos in Marathone ac Salamine propugnatores rei publicae satis manifesto docet praeceptorem eius Platonem fuisse ? quem ipsum num Asianum appellabimus plerumque instinctis divino spiritu vatibus comparandum ? Quid Periclea ? similemne credemus Lysiacae gracilitati , quem fulminibus et caelesti fragori comparant comici , dum illi conviciantur ? Quid est igitur ,
|
Does not his famous oath by the warriors who fell fighting for their country at Salamis and Marathon show that Plato was his master? And shall we call Plato an Asiatic, Plato who as a rule deserves comparison with poets instinct with the divine fire of inspiration? What of Pericles? Can we believe that his style was like the slender stream of Lysias' eloquence, when the comedians, even while they revile him, compare his oratory to the bolts and thunder of the skies? |
| 3691 |
cur in iis demum , qui tenui venula per calculos fluunt , Atticum saporem putent , ibi demum thymum redolere dicant ? Quos ego existimo , si quod in iis finibus uberius invenerint solum fertilioremve segetem , negaturos Atticam esse , quod plus , quam acceperit , seminis reddat , quia hanc eius terrae fidem Menander eludit .
|
What is the reason, then, why these critics regard that style which flows in a slender trickle and babbles among the pebbles as having the true Attic flavour and the true scent of Attic thyme? I really think that, if they were to discover a soil of exceptional richness and a crop of unusual abundance within the boundaries of Attica, they would deny it to be Attic, on the ground that it has produced more seed than it received: for you will remember the mocking comments passed by Menander on the exact fidelity with which the soil of Attica repays its deposits. |
| 3692 |
Ita nunc , si quis ad eas Demosthenis virtutes , quas ille summus orator habuit , tamen quae defuisse ei sive ipsius natura seu lege civitatis videntur , adiecerit , ut adfectus concitatius moveat , audiam dicentem , Non fecit hoc Demosthenes ? et si quid numeris exierit aptius ( fortasse non possit , sed tamen si quid exierit ) non erit Atticum ? Melius de hoc nomine sentiant credantque Attice dicere esse optime dicere .
|
Well, then, if any man should, in addition to the actual virtues which the great orator Demosthenes possessed, show himself to be the possessor of others, that either owing to his own temperament or the laws of Athens Demosthenes is thought to have lacked, and should reveal in himself the power of strongly stirring the emotions, shall I hear one of these critics protesting that Demosthenes never did this? And if he produces something rhythmically superior (an impossible feat, perhaps, but let us assume it to be so), are we to be told that it is not Attic? These critics would show finer feeling and better judgement, if they took the view that Attic eloquence meant perfect eloquence. |
| 3693 |
Atque in hac tamen opinione perseverantes Graecos magis tulerim . Latina mihi facundia , ut inventione , dispositione , consilio , ceteris huius generis artibus similis Graecae ac prorsus discipula eius videtur , ita circa rationem eloquendi vix habere imitationis locum . Namque est ipsis statim sonis durior , quando et iucundissimas ex Graecis litteras non habemus , vocalem alteram , alteram consonantem , quibus nullae apud eos dulcius spirant ; quas mutuari solemus , quotiens illorum nominibus utimur .
|
Still I should find this attitude less intolerable if it were only the Greeks that insisted on it. For Latin eloquence, although in my opinion it closely resembles the Greek as far as invention, arrangement, judgement and the like are concerned, and may indeed be regarded as its disciple, cannot aspire to imitate it in point of elocution. For, in the first place, it is harsher in sound, since our alphabet does not contain the most euphonious of the Greek letters, one a vowel and the other a consonant, than which there are none that fall more sweetly on the ear, and which we are forced to borrow whenever we use Greek words. |
| 3694 |
Quod cum contingit , nescio quomodo hilarior protinus renidet oratio , ut in Zephyris et Zopyris . Quae si nostris litteris scribantur , surdum quiddam et barbarum efficient , et velut in locum earum succedunt tristes et horridae , quibus Graecia caret .
|
The result of such borrowing is, for some reason or other, the immediate accession to our language of a certain liveliness and charm. Take, for example, words such as sephyri and zophori: if they were spelt according to the Latin alphabet, they would produce a heavy and barbarous sound. For we replace these letters by others of a harsh and unpleasant character, from which Greece is happily immune. |
| 3695 |
Nam et illa , quae est sexta nostrarum , paene non humana voce vel omnino non voce potius inter discrimina dentium efflanda est ; quae , etiam cum vocalem proxima accipit , quassa quodammodo , utique quotiens aliquam consonantium frangit , it in hoc ipso frangit , multo fit horridior . Aeolicae quoque litterae , qua servum ceruumque dicimus , etiamsi forma a nobis repudiata est , vis tamen nos ipsa persequitur .
|
For the sixth letter in our alphabet is represented by a sound which can scarcely be called human or even articulate, being produced by forcing the air through the interstices of the teeth. Such a sound, even when followed by a vowel, is harsh enough and, as often as it clashes ( frangit ) with a consonant, as it does in this very word frangit, becomes harsher still. Then there is the Aeolic digamma whose sound occurs in words such as our servus and cervus; for even though we have rejected the actual form of the letter, we cannot get rid of that which it represents. |
| 3696 |
Duras et illa syllabus facit , quae ad coniungendas demum subiectas sibi uocalis est utilis , alias supervacua , ut equos hac et aequum scribimus ; cum etiam ipsae hae vocales duae efficiant sonum , qualis apud Graecos nullus est , ideoque scribi illorum litteris non potest .
|
Similarly the letter Q, which is superfluous and useless save for the purpose of attaching to itself the vowels by which it is followed, results in the formation of harsh syllables, as, for example, when we write equos and aequum, more especially since these two vowels together produce a sound for which Greek has no equivalent and which cannot therefore be expressed in Greek letters. |
| 3697 |
Quid ? quod pleraque nos illa quasi mugiente M littera cludimus in quam nullum Graece verbum cadit : at illi ny iucundam et in fine praecipue quasi tinnientem illius loco ponunt , quae est apud nos rarissima in clausulis .
|
Again, we have a number of words which end with M, a letter which suggests the mooing of a cow, and is never the final letter in any Greek word: for in its place they use the letters nu, the sound of which is naturally pleasant and produces a ringing tone when it occurs at the end of' a word, whereas in Latin this termination is scarcely ever found. |
| 3698 |
Quid ? quod syllabae nostrae in B litteram et D innituntur adeo aspere , ut plerique non antiquissimorum quidem , sed tamen veterum mollire temptaverint non solum aversa pro abversis dicendo , sed et in praepositione B litterae absonam et ipsam S subiciendo .
|
Again, we have syllables which produce such a harsh effect by ending in B and D, that many, not, it is true, of our most ancient writers, but still writers of considerable antiquity, have attempted to mitigate the harshness not merely by saying aversa for abversa, but by adding an S to the preposition ab, although S is an ugly letter |
| 3699 |
Sed accentus quoque , cum rigore quodam , tum similitudine ipsa , minus suaves habemus , quia ultima syllaba nec acuta unquam excitatur nec flexa circumducitur , sed in gravem vel duas graves cadit semper . Itaque tanto est sermo Graecus Latino iucundior , ut nostri poetae , quotiens dulce carmen esse voluerint , illorum id nominibus exornent .
|
in itself Our accents also are less agreeable than those of the Greeks. This is due to a certain rigidity and monotony of pronunciation, since the final syllable is never marked by the rise of the acute accent nor by the rise and fill of the circumflex, but one or even two grave accents are regularly to be found at the end. Consequently the Greek language is so much more agreeable in sound than the Latin, that our poets, whenever they wish their verse to be especially harmonious, adorn it with Greek words. |
| 3700 |
His ilia potentiora , quod res plurimae carent appellationibus , ut eas necesse sit transferre aut circumire ; etiam in iis , quae denominata sunt , summa paupertas in eadem nos frequentissime revolvit ; at illis non verborum modo , sed linguarum etiam inter se differentium copia est .
|
A still stronger indication of the inferiority of Latin is to be found in the fact that there are many things which have no Latin names, so that it is necessary to express them by metaphor or periphrasis, while even in the case of things which have names, the extreme poverty of the language leads us to resort to the same practice. On the other hand, the Greeks have not merely abundance of words, but they have also a number of different dialects. |
| 3701 |
Quare qui a Latinis exiget illam gratiam sermonis Attici , det mihi in eloquendo eandem iucunditatem et parem copiam . Quod si negatum est , sententias aptabimus iis vocibus quas habemus , nec rerum nimiam tenuitatem , ut non dicam pinguioribus , fortioribus certe verbis miscebimus , ne virtus utraque pereat ipsa confusione .
|
Consequently he who demands from Latin the grace of Attic Greek, must first provide a like charm of tone and equal richness of vocabulary. If this advantage is denied us, we must adapt our thoughts to suit the words we have and, where our matter is unusually slight and delicate, must avoid expressing it in words which are, I will not say too gross, but at any rate too strong for it, for fear that the combination should result in the destruction both of delicacy and force. |
| 3702 |
Nam quo minus adiuvat sermo , rerum inventione pugnandum est . Sensus sublimes variique eruantur . Permovendi omnes adfectus erunt , oratio translationum nitore illuminanda . Non possumus esse tam graciles : simus fortiores . Subtilitate vincimur : valeamus pondere . Proprietas penes illos est certior : copia vincamus .
|
For the less help we get from the language, the more must we rely on inventiveness of thought to bring us through the conflict. We must discover sentiments full of loftiness and variety, must stir all the emotions and illumine our style by brilliance of metaphor. Since we cannot be so delicate, let us be stronger. If they beat us for subtlety, let us prevail by weight, and if they have greater precision, let us outdo them in fullness of expression. |
| 3703 |
Ingenia Graecorum etiam minora suos portus habent : nos plerumque maioribus velis mouemur , validior spiritus nostros sinus tendat ; non tamen alto semper feremur , nam et litora interim sequenda sunt . Illis facilis per quaelibet vada accessus ; ego aliquid , non multo tamen , altius , in quo mea cumba non sidat , inveniam .
|
Even the lesser orators of Greece have their own havens where they may ride in safety, while we as a rule carry more sail. Let stronger gales fill our canvas, and yet let us not always keep the high seas; for at times we must cling to shore. The Greeks can easily traverse any shallows; I must find a deeper, though not much deeper, channel, that my bark may not run aground. |
| 3704 |
Neque enim , si tenuiora haec ac pressiora Graeci melius , in eoque vincimur solo et ideo in comoediis non contendimus , prorsus tamen omittenda pars haec orationis , sed exigenda ut optime possumus ; possumus autem rerum et modo et iudicio esse similes , verborum gratia , quam in ipsis non habemus , extrinsecus condienda est .
|
For even though the Greeks surpass us where circumstances call for delicacy and restraint, though we acknowledge their superiority in this respect alone, and therefore do not claim to rival them in comedy, that is no justification for our abandonment of this department of oratory, but rather a reason why we should handle it as best we can. Now we can at any rate resemble the Greeks in the method and judgement with which we treat our matter, although that grace of language, which our words cannot provide, must be secured by the admixture of foreign condiments. |
| 3705 |
An non in privatis et acutus et indistinctus et non super modum elatus M . Tullius ? non in M . Calidio insignis haec virtus ? non Scipio , Laelius , Cato in eloquendo uelut Attici Romanorum fuerunt ? Cui porro non satis est , quo nihil esse melius potest ?
|
For example, is not Cicero shrewd, simple and not unduly exalted in tone, when he deals with private eases? Is not Calidius also distinguished for the same virtue? Were not Scipio, Laelius and Cato the Attic orators of Rome? Surely we ought to be satisfied with them, since nothing can be better. |
| 3706 |
Adhuc quidam nullam esse naturalem putant eloquentiam , nisi quae sit cotidiano sermoni simillima , quo cum amicis , coniugibus , liberis , servis loquamur , contento promere animi voluntatem nihilque arcessiti et elaborati requirente ; quidquid huc sit adiectum , id esse adfectationis et ambitiosae in loquendo iactantiae , remotum a veritate fictumque ipsorum gratia verborum , quibus solum natura sit officium attributum , servire sensibus :
|
There are still some critics who deny that any form of eloquence is purely natural, except that which closely resembles the ordinary speech of everyday life, which we use to our friends, our wives, our children and our slaves, a language, that is to say, which contents itself with expressing the purpose of the mind without seeking to discover anything in the way of elaborate and far-fetched phraseology. And they hold that whatever is added to this simplicity lays the speaker open to the charge of affectation and pretentious ostentation of speech, void of all sincerity and elaborated merely for the sake of the words, although the sole duty assigned to words by nature is to be the servants of thought. |
| 3707 |
sicut athletarum corpora , etiamsi validiora fiant exercitatione et lege quadam ciborum , non tamen esse naturalia atque ab illa specie , quae sit concessa hominibus , abhorrere . Quid enim , inquiunt , attinet circuitu res ostendere et translationibus , id est aut pluribus aut alienis verbis , cum sua cuique sint adsignata nomina ?
|
Such language may be compared to the bodies of athletes, which although they develop their strength by exercise and diet, are of unnatural growth and abnormal in appearance. For what, say these critics, is the good of expressing a thing by periphrasis or metaphor (that is, either by a number of words or by words which have no connexion with the thing), when everything has been allotted a name of its own? |
| 3708 |
Denique antiquissimum quemque maxime secundum naturam dixisse contendunt : mox poetis similiores exstitisse , etiamsi parcius , simili tamen ratione , falsa et impropria virtutes ducentes . Qua in disputatione nonnihil veri est , ideoque non tam procul , quam fit a quibusdam , recedendum a propriis atque communibus .
|
Finally, they urge that all the earliest orators spoke according to the dictates of nature, but that subsequently there arose a class of speakers resembling poets rather than orators, who regarded false and artificial methods of expression as positive merits; they were, it is true, more sparing than the poets in their use of such expressions, but none the less worked on similar lines. There is some truth in this contention, and we should therefore be careful not to depart from the more exact usage of ordinary speech to the extent that is done by certain orators. |
| 3709 |
Si quis tamen , ut in loco dixi compositionis , ad necessaria , quibus nihil minus est , aliquid melius adiecerit , non erit hac calumnia reprehendendus . Nam mihi aliam quandam videtur habere naturam sermo vulgaris , aliam viri eloquentis oratio ; cui si res modo indicare satis esset , nihil ultra verborum proprietatem elaboraret ; sed cum debeat delectare , movere , in plurimas animum audientis species impellere , utetur his quoque adiutoriis , quae sunt ab eadem nobis concessa natura .
|
On the other hand, that is no reason for thus calumniating the man who, as I said in dealing with the subject of artistic structure, succeeds in improving upon the bare necessaries of style. For the common language of every day seems to me to be of a different character from the style of an eloquent speaker. If all that was required of the latter was merely to indicate the facts, he might rest content with literalness of language, without further elaboration. But since it is his duty to delight and move his audience and to play upon the various feelings, it becomes necessary for him to employ those additional aids which are granted to us by that same nature which gave us speech. |
| 3710 |
Nam et lacertos exercitatione constringere et augere vires et colorem trahere naturale est . Ideoque in omnibus gentibus alius alio facundior habetur et eloquendo dulcis magis ( quod si non eveniret , omnes pares essent ) ; at idem homines aliter de re alia loquuntur et servant personarum discrimina . Ita , quo quisque plus efficit dicendo , hoc magis secundum naturam eloquentiae dicit .
|
It is, in fact, as natural to do this as to harden the muscles, increase our strength and improve our complexion by means of exercise. It is for this reason that among all nations one man is regarded as more eloquent and more attractive in his style than another (since if this were not the case, all speakers would be equal); but the same men speak differently on different subjects and observe distinctions of character. Consequently the more effective a man's speaking, the more in accordance with the nature of eloquence will it be. |
| 3711 |
Quapropter ne illis quidem nimium repugno , qui dandum putant nonnihil etiam temporibus atque auribus nitidius aliquid atque adfectius postulantibus . Itaque non solum ad priores Catone Gracchisque , sed ne ad hos quidem ipsos oratorem adligandum puto . Atque id fecisse M . Tullium video , ut cum plurimum utilitati , tum partem quandam delectationi daret ; cum et suam se rem agere diceret , ageret autem maxime litigatoris .
|
I have, therefore, no strong objection even to the views expressed by those who think that some concession should be made to the circumstances under which we speak and to the ears of the audience which require something more polished and emotional than ordinary speech. For this reason I consider that it would be absurd to restrict an orator to the style of the predecessors of Cato and the Gracchi, or even of those orators themselves. And I note that it was the practice of Cicero, while devoting himself in the main to the interests of his case, to take into account the delectation of his audience as well, since, as he pointed out, his own interests were concerned as well as those of his client, although of course the latter were of paramount importance. For his very charm was a valuable asset. |
| 3712 |
Nam hoc ipso proderat , quod placet . Ad cuius voluptates nihil equidem quod addi possit invenio , nisi ut sensus nos quidem dicamus plures . Neque enim non fieri potest salva tractatione causae et dicendi auctoritate , si non crebra hac lumina et continua fuerint et invicem offecerint . Sed me hactenus cedentem nemo insequatur ultra .
|
I do not know what can be added by way of improvement to the charms of his style, except perhaps the introduction of something more in the way of brilliant reflexions to suit the taste of our own times. For this can be done without injury to the treatment of our case or inpairing the authority of our language, provided that such embellishments are not too frequent or continuous, and do not mutually destroy the effects which they were designed to produce. |
| 3713 |
Do tempori , ne hirta toga sit , non ut serica ; ne intonsum caput , non ut in gradus atque anulos comptum , cum eo quod , si non ad luxuriam ac libidinem referas , eadem speciosiora quoque sint , quae honestiora .
|
I am ready to go so far along the path of concession, but let no man press me further. I concur in the fashion of the day to the extent of agreeing that the toga should not be long in the nap, but not to the extent of insisting that it should be of silk: I agree that the hair should be cut, but not that it should be dressed in tiers and ringlets, since we must always remember that ornaments, unless they be judged from the standpoint of the fop and the debauchee, are always effective in proportion to their seemliness. |
| 3714 |
Ceterum hoc , quod vulgo sententias vocamus , quod veteribus praecipueque Graecis in usu non fuit ( apud Ciceronem enim invenio ) , dum rem contineant et copia non redundent et ad victoriam spectent , quis utile neget ? Feriunt animum et uno ictu frequenter impellunt et ipsa brevitate magis haerent et delectatione persuadent .
|
But with regard to those passages to which we give the name of reflexions, a form of ornament which was not employed by the ancients and, above all, not by the Greeks, although I do find it in Cicero, who can deny their usefulness, provided they are relevant to the case, are not too diffuse and contribute to our success? For they strike the mind and often produce a decisive effect by one single blow, while their very brevity makes them cling to the memory, and the pleasure which they produce has the force of persuasion. |
| 3715 |
At sunt qui haec excitatiora lumina , etiamsi dicere permittant , a componendis tamen orationibus excludenda arbitrentur . Quocirca mihi ne Hic quidem locus intactus est omittendus ; nam plurimi eruditorum aliam esse dicendi rationem , aliam scribendi putaverunt ; ideoque in agendo clarissimos quosdam nihil posteritati mansurisque mox litteris reliquisse , ut Periclem , ut Demaden ; rursus alios ad componendum optimos actionibus idoneos non fuisse , ut Isocraten ;
|
There are, however, some who, while allowing the actual delivery of such specially brilliant forms of ornament, think that they should be excluded from the written speech. Consequently I must not dismiss even this topic without a word of discussion. For a number of learned authorities have held that the written and the spoken speech stand on different footings, and that consequently some of the most eloquent of speakers have left nothing for posterity to read in durable literary form, as, for example, is the case with Pericles and Decades Again, they urge that there have been authors, like Isocrates, who, while admirable writers, were not well-fitted for actual speaking; |
| 3716 |
praeterea in agendo plus impetus plerumque et petitas vel paulo licentius voluptates , commovendos enim esse ducendosque animos imperitorum ; at quod libris dedicatum in exemplum edatur , id tersum ac limatum et ad legem ac regulam conpositum esse oportere , quia veniat in manus doctorum et iudices artis habeat artifices .
|
and, further, that actual pleading is characterised by a greater energy and by the employment, almost verging on license, of every artifice designed to please, since the minds of an uneducated audience require to be moved and led. On the other hand, the written speech with is published as a model of style must be polished and filed and brought into conformity with the accepted rules and standards of artistic construction, since it will come into the hands of learned men and its art will be judged by artists. |
| 3717 |
Quin illi subtiles ( ut sibimet ac multis persuaserunt ) magistri παράδειγμα dicendo , ἐνθύμημα scribendo esse aptius tradiderunt . Mihi unum atque idem videtur bene dicere ac bene scribere , neque aliud esse oratio scripta quam monumentum actionis habitae . Itaque nullas non , ut opinor , debet habere virtutes , virtutes dico , non vitia . Nam imperitis placere aliquando quae vitiosa sint , scio .
|
These subtle teachers (for such they have persuaded themselves and others that they are) have laid it down that the παράδειγμα is best suited for actual speech and the ἐνθύμημα for writing. My own view is that there is absolutely no difference between writing well and speaking well, and that a written speech is merely a record of one that has actually been delivered. Consequently it must in my opinion possess every kind of merit, and note that I say merit, not fault. For I know that faults do sometimes meet with the approval of the uneducated. |
| 3718 |
Quo different igitur ? Quodsi mihi des consilium iudicum sapientium , perquam multa recidam ex orationibus non Ciceronis modo , sed etiam eius , qui est strictior multo , Demosthenis . Neque enim adfectus omnino movendi erunt , nec aures delectatione mulcendae , cum etiam prooemia supervacua esse apud tales Aristoteles existimet ; non enim trahentur his illi sapientes ; proprie et significanter rem indicare , probationes colligere satis est .
|
What, then, will be the difference between what is written and what is spoken? If I were given a jury of wise men, I should cut down a large number of passages from the speeches not only of Cicero, but even of Demosthenes, who is much more concise. For with such a jury there would be no need to appeal to the emotions nor to charm and soothe the ears, since according to Aristotle even exordia are superfluous, if addressed to such persons, as they will have no influence upon judges who are truly wise: it will be sufficient to state the facts with precision and significance and to marshal our array of proofs. |
| 3719 |
Cum vero iudex detur aut populus aut ex populo , laturique sint sententiam indocti saepius atque interim rustici , omnia quae ad obtinendum , quod intendimus , prodesse credemus adhibenda sunt ; eaque et cum dicimus promenda et cum scribimus ostendenda sunt , si modo ideo scribimus , ut doceamus quomodo dici oporteat .
|
Since, however, our judges are the people, or drawn from the people, and since those who are appointed to give sentence are frequently ill-educated and sometimes mere rustics, it becomes necessary to employ every method that we think likely to assist our case, and these artifices must not merely be produced in speech, but exhibited in the written version as well, at least if in writing it our design is to show how it should be spoken. |
| 3720 |
An Demosthenes male sic egisset , ut scripsit , aut Cicero ? aut eos praestantissimos oratores alia re quam scriptis cognoscimus ? Melius egerunt igitur an peius ? Nam si peius , sic potius oportuit dici , ut scripserunt ; si melius , sic potius oportuit scribi , ut dixerunt .
|
If Demosthenes or Cicero had spoken the words as they wrote them, would either have spoken ill And is our acquaintance with either of those two great orators based on anything save their writings? Did they speak better, then, or worse than they wrote? If they spoke worse, all that can be said is that they should have spoken as they wrote, while, if they spoke better, they should have written as they spoke. |
| 3721 |
Quid ergo ? Semper sic aget orator , ut scribet ? Si licebit , semper . Si vero quando impediant brevitate tempora a iudice data , multum ex eo , quod oportuit dici , recidetur ; editio habebit omnia . Quae tamen secundum naturam iudicantium dicta sunt , non ita posteris tradentur , ne videantur propositi fuisse , non temporis .
|
Well, you ask, is an orator then always to speak as he writes? If possible, always. If, however, the time allowed by the judge is too short for this to be possible, he will have to cut out much that he should have said, but the published speech will contain the omitted passages. On the other hand, such passages as were uttered merely to suit the character of the judges will not be published for the benefit of posterity, for fear that they should seem to indicate the author's deliberate judgement instead of being a mere concession to the needs of the moment. |
| 3722 |
Nam id quoque plurimum refert , quomodo audire iudex velit , atque eius vultus saepe ipse rector est dicentis , ut Cicero praecipit . Ideoque instandum iis quae placere intellexeris , resiliendum ab iis quae non recipientur . Sermo ipse , qui facillime iudicem doceat , aptandus . Nec id mirum sit , cum etiam testium personis aliqua mutentur .
|
For it is most important that we should know how the judge is disposed to listen, and his face will often (as Cicero reminds us) serve as a guide to the speaker. Consequently we must press the points that we see commend themselves to him, and draw back from those which are ill-received, while our actual language must be so modified that he will find our arguments as intelligible as possible. That this should be necessary is scarcely surprising, when we consider the alterations that are frequently necessary to suit the characters of the different witnesses. |
| 3723 |
Prudenter enim , qui cum interrogasset rusticum testem , an Amphionem nosset , negante eo , detraxit aspirationem breviavitque secundam eius nominis syllabam , et ille eum sic optime norat . Huiusmodi casus efficient , ut aliquando dicatur liter quam scribitur , cum dicere , quomodo scribendum est , non licet .
|
He was a shrewd man who, when he asked a rustic witness whether he knew Amphion, and the witness replied that he did not, dropped the aspirate and shortened the second syllable, whereupon the witness recognised him at once. Such situations, when it is impossible to speak as we write, will sometimes make it necessary to speak in language other than that which we use in writing. |
| 3724 |
Altera est divisio , quae in tres partes et ipsa discedit , qua discerni posse etiam recte dicendi genera inter se videntur . Namque unum subtile , quod ἰσχνόν vocant , alterum grande atque robustum , quod ἁδρόν dicunt , constituunt ; tertium alii , medium ex duobus , alii floridum ( namque id ἀνθηρόν appellant ) addiderunt .
|
There is another threefold division, whereby, it is held, we may differentiate three styles of speaking, all of them correct. The first is termed the plain (or ἰσχνόν ), the second grand and forcible (or ἁδρόν ), and the third either intermediate or florid, the latter being a translation of ἀνθηρόν. |