Institutio Oratoria

Consequently after surveying our opponent's proposition, an easy task, we should consider, if possible, what it is most natural to answer first. And, if we imagine the case as being actually pleaded and ourselves as under the necessity of making a reply, that answer will probably suggest itself. On the other hand,

if this is impossible, we should put aside whatever first occurs to us and reason with ourselves as follows:

What if this were not the case?

The rule that we should descend from the common to the particular is much the same, since

He killed a tyrant

A tyrant was killed by his son, by a woman or by his wife

I used also to note down separately whatever was admitted both by my opponent and myself, provided it suited my purpose, and not merely to press any admissions that he might make, but to multiply them by partition, as for example in the following controversial theme:—

A general, who had stood against his father as a candidate and defeated him, was captured: the envoys who went to ransom him met his father returning from the enemy. He said to the envoys, 'You are too late.' They searched the father and found gold in his pockets. They pursued their journey and found the general crucified. He cried to them, ' Beware of the traitor.' The father is accused.

We were told that there had been treason and told it by the general.

You admit that you went to the enemy, that you did so by stealth, that you returned unscathed, that you brought back gold and had it concealed about your person.