E. M. Cope, Commentary on the Rhetoric of Aristotle

---

---

Things which are, at first sight, or can be shewn to be, greater than others which are universally acknowledged to be great or are manifestly so, are seen to be so at once and without reflexion, present themselves at once as such, φαινόμενα. A conspicuous instance of this common sense of φαινόμενος, apparent, manifest to the eye, occurs Rhet. II 2, 1 (see note) in the definition of ὀργή. Comp. I 9. 32, 8. 6; III 2. 9.

καὶ διαιρούμενα κ.τ.λ.] This and the following are purely rhetorical topics, and belong rather to the third book, On style. One mode of exaggerating the importance of anything, of making it assume a magnitude which it does not really possess, is in the way of description, to break up into parts or describe in detail what might be stated summarily as a whole. ‘The same facts or events’, when thus individually represented, will ‘seem greater’ than if they were all summed up together in one statement; because in the former case the excess or superiority, in point of importance and interest, of the facts exhibited in detail over the summary statement, will seem to be shewn ‘in more points’, which are all brought severally into view. πλειόνων ὑπερέχειν is ‘to exceed in a greater number of points’, whether we understand the genitive as one of quantity ‘in more things’, which is probably right, or as the comparative genitive after ὑπερέχειν, ‘to surpass more things’, by which the meaning is not so distinctly expressed: in either case it is the number of things detailed that makes the superior impression. The use of this topic is well illustrated by Quintilian, Inst. Or. VIII 3. 61 sq., who however refers the strong impression produced by this detail to the ἐνέργεια or vividness of the picture. § 67, sic urbium captarum crescit miseratio. Sine dubio enim qui dicit expugnatam esse civitatem complectitur omnia quaecunque talis fortuna recipit; sed in affectus minus penetrat brevis hic velut nuncius. At si aperias haec, et cet. [then follows the description]. Majoragius refers to Cicero's description of Pompey's military experience in the speech pro lege Manilia, and Gaisford to Harris, Philol. Inquiries, p. 58 [on p. 62, this passage of the Rhet. is quoted]. He assigns this to ‘accumulation’ and ‘concatenation’. Shakespeare, in the Tempest, will supply us with a brilliant example: The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, the solemn temples, &c. [IV. i. 152]. Comp. Acts of the Apostles, ii. 9 seq., where the wonder of the gift of tongues is heightened by the enumeration in detail of all the different nations whose language was spoken; ‘Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites.’ Bacon's Colours of Good and Evil (Vol. VII p. 81, Ellis and Sped. ed.), No. 5, is a good commentary on this topic in its most general application.

λέγουσαν] is omitted in MS A^{c}., and consequently put in brackets by Buhle and Spengel. The latter adds, Praef. ad Rhet. Gr. p. vi, ‘aliud excidisse videtur, v. c. παράκοιτιν.’ [‘Intellige τὴν γυναῖκα, quo aegre cares’. Spengel, ed. 1867. S.] ‘Deest λέγουσαν in Cod. antiquissimo Victorii, et videtur sane illud interpolatum esse. Uncinos applicavi’. Buhle.

ὁ ποιητής φησι] Homer to wit, Il. IX 592. The reading of the Vulg. is κήδἐ ὅσ᾽ ἀνθρώποισι πέλει τῶν ἄστυ ἁλώη:ι ἄνδρας μὲν κτείνουσι, and the rest as quoted by Ar. This example is the same as that given by Quintilian. Victorius thinks that he borrowed it from Aristotle. Spalding, ad Quint. VIII 3. 67, quotes the following Schol. on Il. XV 496, referring to the other passage of Homer: ῥητορικῶς τὸ ἓν πρᾶγμα, τὴν πόρθησιν, εἰς πολλὰ κατεμέρισεν.

τὸ συντιθέναι καὶ ἐποικοδομεῖν] are added to the preceding topic of ‘detail’ as closely akin to it. That the first at all events is so, may be inferred from the identification of ‘detail’ with ‘accumulation’ by Harris, p. 58, above quoted. The two figures are ‘accumulation’ and ‘climax’. ἐποικοδόμησις is the building up of one phrase upon (ἐπί) another, one rising above another step by step, like the rounds of ‘a ladder’ (κλίμαξ), or the stages of a building. Rhet. ad Alex. 3 (4). 9, ἐποικοδομοῦντα τὸ ἕτερον ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ ἕτερον αὔξειν τρόπῳ τοιῷδε, which is then illustrated. Arist. de Gen. An. I 18, 34, 724 a 28, ἔτι δὲ παρὰ ταῦτα ὡς Ἐπίχαρμος ποιεῖ τὴν ἐποικοδόμησιν, ἐκ τῆς διαβολῆς ἡ λοιδορία, ἐκ δὲ ταύτης ἡ μάχη, ταῦτα δὲ παντα ἔκ τινος ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κινήσεως. Eustath. ad Hom. Il. B, p. 181, τὸ δὲ σχῆμα τοῦ ῥηθέντος χωρίου (verse 101) κλίμακα καὶ κλιμακωτὸν λέγουσιν οἱ παλαιοί, ἕτεροι δὲ ἐποικοδόμησιν. γίνεται δὲ σχῆμα κλιμακωτὸν ὅταν τὸ λῆγον τῆς φθασάσης ἐννοίας ἀρχὴ γένηται τῆς ἐφεξῆς, οἷον ὡς εἴ τις εἴπῃ, ὁ βασιλεὺς ἀγαθός, ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἀγαθὰ ποιεῖ, ὁ ἀγαθὰ ποιῶν εὐεργετεῖ, ὁ εὐεργετῶν θεὸν μιμεῖται, κ.τ.λ. Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας § 270 (III 320, Rhet. Gr. Spengel) λαμβάνοιτ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἡ κλῖμαξ (sic) καλουμένη, ὡς παρὰ Δημοσθένει, τὸ (de Cor. § 179, p. 288) οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα δέ: οὐδ᾽ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ ἐπρέσβευσα δέ: οὐδ̓ ἐπρέσβευσα μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ τοὺς Θηβαίους: σχεδὸν γὰρ ἐπαναβαίνοντι (mounting a staircase or a hill, from higher to higher) ὁ λόγος ἔοικεν ἐπὶ μείζονα. This figure by the Latin Rhetoricians is called gradatio, Cic. de Or. III 54. 207, Quint. IX 3. 54—7, where it is explained and illustrated by the same passage of Demosth. and from Latin authors. In Auct. ad Heren. IV 25, it is thus defined: Gradatio est, in qua non ante ad consequens verbum descenditur quam ad superius conscensum est, and then illustrated. See Aquila Romanus, cited by Ernesti, Lex. Tech. Gr. et Lat. sub vv. κλίμαξ, et gradatio, and at length by Schäfer, App. Crit. ad Demosth. p. 288, 8, Vol. II p. 250. Aquila calls it ascensus.

ὥσπερ Ἐπίχαρμος] Besides the illustration of the figure climax from Epicharmus quoted above from the de Gen. Anim., there is another and a more complete one in Athen. II 36 C. D, indicated by Schrader, ἐκ μὲν θυσίας θοίνη, ἐκ δὲ θοίνης πόσις ἐγένετο, ἐκ δὲ πόσιος κῶμος, ἐκ κώμου δ᾽ ἐγένετο θυανία, ἐκ δὲ θυανίας δίκη, ἐκ δίκης δὲ καταδίκη, ἐκ δὲ καταδίκης πέδαι τε καὶ σφάκελος καὶ ζημία¹.

διά τε τὸ αὐτὸ τῇ διαιρέσει] Two reasons are now given for the impression that these two figures make upon the hearer: the first, the same as that which accounts for it in the case of διαίρεσις; the accumulation of particulars, and the rising by steps to a climax, have the same effect as the division or detail, in increasing the number of effective strokes, and so producing the impression of superiority, ἡ γὰρ σύνθεσις ὑπεροχὴν δείκνυσι πολλήν: and secondly, you make that which you are endeavouring to magnify appear to be the cause and origin of a number of important effects, which you seem to multiply by detailing them. The following passage of the Rhet. ad Alex. c. 3 (4), §§ 10, 11, will serve as a commentary on this and the entire section: συλλήβδην δὲ, ἐὰν πολλῶν αἴτιον ἀποφαίνῃς, ἐάν τε ἀγαθῶν ἐάν τε κακῶν, μέγαλα φανεῖται. σκοπεῖν δὲ καὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα ὁποῖον φανεῖται κατὰ μέρη διαιρούμενον ἢ καθόλου λεγόμενον, καὶ ὁποτέρως ἂν μεῖζον ᾖ, τόνδε τὸν τρόπον αὐτὸ λέγειν. τὰς μὲν οὖν αὐξήσεις οὕτω μετιὼν πλείστας ποιήσεις καὶ μεγίστας, ταπεινώσεις δὲ τοῖς λόγοις καὶ τὰ ἀγαθὰ καὶ τὰ κακὰ τὸν ἐναντίον τρόπον μετιὼν, ὡς εἰρήκαμεν ἐπὶ τῶν μεγάλων, καὶ μάλιστα μὲν ἂν μηδενὸς αἴτιον ἐπιδεικνύης, εἰ δὲ μὴ ὡς ἐλαχίστων καὶ σμικροτάτων.