Sir Richard C. Jebb The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos 2.14.10

View: By Chapter

The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos. Sir Richard C. Jebb. London. 1876.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by National Endowment for the Humanities.

Current edition Perseus

The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos (English) (The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos. Jebb, Richard Claverhouse, author. London: Macmillan, 1876.)

Notes on the current edition

The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos

1. περὶ ἰδ. β’ c. 11, Sp. II. 412.
2. De Isocr. c. 4—where πολιτικὴ δύναμις denotes the complete faculty of being a citizen as distinguished from the power of civil rhetoric.
3. Quint. X. 1 § 79.
4. ἀναγνώστου παιδὸς φωνήν, Hierônymos ap. Dionys. Isocr. c. 13.In Phil. [V] § 26 he complains of one who reads him μηδὲν ἦθος ἐνσημαινόμενος: in Panath. [XII] § 17 of those who read him διαιροῦντες οὐκ ὀρθῶς, κ.τ.λ.
5. Dionys. Dem. cc. 17—22.
6. His real province.
7. Influence of his work on contemporaries.
8. Cp. Curtius, Hist. Gr. v. p. 228 (Ward).
9. The Isokratic elementin Hypereides is well estimated by Cartelier ( Le Discours d'I. sur lui-même p. lxxviii)—who observes that the younger contemporaries of Isokr., generally, must have owed to him in no small degree their greater abundance of development and richness of phrase (p. lxxvi).
10. Its later influence. Cicero.
11. See especially De Orat. III. 44, § 173. The sweetness which he elsewhere praises ( De Orat. III. 8, § 28) as distinguishing this ‘father of eloquence’ ( ib. II. 3, § 10) means chiefly that same smooth, harmonious rhythm. So Quint. X. 1 § 108 says that Cicero had ‘artistically reproduced ( effinxisse) the force of Demosthenes, the wealth of Plato, the charm of Isokrates.’
12. Ad Att. II. 1,
totum Isocratis μυροθήκιον atque omnes eius discipulorum arculas.
13. In concluding this review of Isokr. under the technical aspects of his style, it may be worth while to quote, for those who care to look at it, the criticism of Hermogenes ( περὶ ἰδ. β/ c. 11, Sp. Rh. Gr. II. 412)—a masterpiece (as usual with him) of compression, in which almost every word is pregnant—or rather overloaded—with technical meaning. I have tried to make this version do the work of a glossary:—‘As regards purity of language and perspicuity of arrangement— those characteristics which make a speech luminous—Isokrates is the greatest master of civil eloquence; but want of moral charm and of a natural simplicity lessen his power of persuading. In finish however, and in ornament, he excels; nor is he less distinguished by elevation, save that his vehemence and his asperity—if indeed he can be said ever to employ these—are deprived of nervous force by his elegance. In words he is not very diffuse; but in developing a thought he amplifies to the uttermost. Of fiery earnestness he has not a trace. Further —though the criticism may seem harsh—he is characterised by a certain languor and slackness, as well as by a pervading elderly sententiousness. Just because he is naturally poor in spontaneous impulse he is over-industrious in artifice, as if bent on the display of ingenuity— often for no practical purpose. This may be seen from cases of contrast between the treatment of an argument by Isokrates and by Demosthenes. Compare (e. g.) the opening of the Fourth Speech Against Philip’ [our First Philippic] ‘with the opening of the Archidamos. The proposition is the same in both places—viz. that young men ought to be heard even though they rise before their elders—but Isokrates has made it a distinct thesis, and has demonstrated it at full length; while Demosthenes has been content to support it by a single observation. At the same time the power of exposition possessed by Isokrates is by no means slight.’