This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
‘And those whose praises and panegyrics are pronounced either by poets or speech-writers’ (i.e. especially, writers of panegyrical speeches). On the distinction of ἔπαινος and ἐγκώμιον see Introd., Appendix B, to Bk. I. c. 9, p. 212 seq. λογογράφοι. This word is used in two distinct senses. In its earlier signification it is applied to the Chroniclers, the earliest historians and prose writers, predecessors and contemporaries of Herodotus; of whom an account may be found in Müller, Hist. Gr. Lit. c. XVIII, and Mure, Hist. of Gk. Lit. Bk. IV. ch. 2, 3, Vol. IV, and Dahlmann, Life of Herodotus, Ch. VI. sect. 2, and foll. In this sense it occurs in Thuc. I 21, upon which Poppo has this note: “Aut solutae orationis scriptores universi, aut historici vel etiam μυθογράφοι” (this early history was often of a mythical and legendary character), “denique orationum panegyricarum auctores hoc ambiguo vocabulo significantur.” (The later, and most usual, meaning of the word is here omitted.) As this was for some time the only prose literature in existence, the λογογράφοι might well be contrasted with the poets, so as to signify ‘prose writers’ in general. And this, according to Ernesti, Lex. Technologiae Graecae s. v., is the sense that it bears here, Dichter und prosaische Schriftsteller. Isocrates also, Phil. § 109, has the same contrast, οὔτε τῶν ποιητῶν οὔτε τῶν λογοποιῶν. The later and commoner signification, which appears so frequently in the Orators (see examples in Shilleto's note on Dem. de F. L. § 274), dates from the time of Antiphon, who commenced the practice, which became common, and was pursued for instance by Isocrates and Demosthenes, of writing speeches, for which he received remuneration, for the use of parties in the law-courts. Public feeling at Athens was very much against this supposed prostitution of a man's talents and special knowledge (which may be compared with Plato's horror, expressed in the Phaedrus, of making a trade of teaching), and λογογράφος became a term of reproach. Perhaps the earliest example of this application is the passage of the Phaedrus, 257 C, where Lysias is said to have been taunted with it by a political opponent, διὰ πάσης τῆς λοιδορίας ἐκάλει λογογράφον. Aeschines applied it very freely to his rival Demosthenes. On this import of the word Gaisford (ad hunc locum) quotes Schol. Plat. p. 63, λογογράφους ἐκάλουν οἱ παλαιοὶ τοὺς ἐπὶ μισθῷ λόγους γράφοντας, καὶ πιπράσκοντας αὐτοὺς εἰς δικαστήρια: ῥήτορας δὲ τοὺς δἰ ἑαυτῶν λέγοντας. But besides this special sense, λογογραφία and λογογράφος are said of speech-writing and speech-writers in general (so Pl. Phaedr. 257 E, 258 B), and especially of panegyrical speeches, like those of Isocrates, and of speeches written to be read in the closet, and not orally delivered in the law-court or public assembly: and as this is the most appropriate to the present passage of Aristotle, who is speaking of eulogies in poetry and prose; and is likewise the sense in which it is used in two other passages of the Rhetoric, III 7. 7, 12.2, I have little doubt that it is to be so understood here. Hermogenes περὶ ἰδεῶν, β, chap. 10, περὶ τοῦ πολιτικοῦ λόγου, Rhetores Graeci, Vol. II. p. 405, 6, and again chap. 12, περὶ τοῦ ἁπλῶς πανηγυρικοῦ, ib. p. 417, in treating of the πανηγυρικὸς λόγος, the name by which he designates Aristotle's ἐπιδεικτικὸν γένος, seems to divide all literature into three branches, poetry, spoken and written speeches; distinguishing ῥήτορες and λογογράφοι, and both of them from ποιηταί; ἄριστος οὖν κατὰ πάντων λόγων εἴδη καὶ ποιητῶν ἁπάντων καὶ ῥητόρων καὶ λογογράφων Ὅμηρος (p. 406, 9, and elsewhere). And (in the second passage above referred to) he includes ἱστορία under the general head of λογογραφία, οὐδὲ μὴν ἡ λογογραφία ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ ἱστορία, p. 417, and still more expressly ἱστορίας τε καὶ τῆς ἄλλης λογογραφίας, p. 418. Rhetoric, when treated as the art of composition, λέξις, may no doubt be considered to embrace all prose literature, which will so fall into two divisions (1) public and forensic speeches, orally delivered, and (2) all written compositions. [“The relation between ancient oratory and ancient prose, philosophical, historical or literary, is necessarily of the closest kind.” Jebb's Attic Orators I. p. lxxi.] In Rhet. III 12. 2, the written style, λέξις γραφική, is opposed to the ἀγωνιστική, which has to be employed in actual encounter, spoken and acted, not (necessarily) written; and the συμβουλευτική and δικανική to the ἐπιδεικτική. The art of composition therefore, and prose composition in general, may properly be referred to this third branch of Rhetoric, the declamatory or panegyrical, as Hermogenes expressly, and Aristotle tacitly, do refer it: and so λογογράφος may mean either a speechwriter (as opposed to ῥήτωρ), or a writer of prose (as opposed to poetry). ‘The opposites of all these (the foregoing classes of persons) are objects of contempt: for contempt is the opposite of emulation, and the notion of the one to the notion of the other’ (the substantive in -ις denotes the process, or operation of the feeling; the infin. with τό the abstract conception of it). ‘And those who are so constituted as to emulate others, or themselves to be the objects of emulation, must necessarily be inclined to feel contempt for all such persons—and on such occasions (an unnecessary parenthetical note, which interrupts the construction)—as lie under the defects and disadvantages opposite to the good things which are the objects of emulation. Hence contempt is often felt for the fortunate, when their luck comes to them without those good things which are really valuable (i.e. which depend in some degree upon merit for their acquisition)’. ‘Here ends the account of the means (lit. channels, media) by which the several emotions are engendered and dissolved, (furnishing topics or premisses) from which the arguments (modes of persuasion) that belong to them may be derived’. διαλύεται] is here applied to the dissolution, breaking up, and so bringing to an end, of the πάθη themselves. In a former passage on a similar subject, c. 4 § 32, it seems rather to have its logical sense of breaking up, or refuting an argument. εἴρηται] it has been stated, and is now over [Vol. I. p. 225, note].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.