Institutio Oratoria

At times we may exaggerate charges against ourselves which we can easily refute or deny; this device is too common to require any illustration. At other times we may by this same method make the charges brought against us seem incredible just because of their gravity: thus Cicero in his defence of Roscius, [*](Roscius of Ameria was accused of parricide.) by the sheer force of his eloquence, exaggerates the horror of parricide, despite the fact that it requires no demonstration.

Aposiopesis, which Cicero [*](See quotation in IX. i. 31.) calls reticentia, Celsus obticentia, and some interruptio, is used to indicate passion or anger, as in the line: [*](Aen. i. 135. Neptune rebukes the winds for raising a storm, but breaks off without actually saying what he would do to them. )

1. Whom I—
2. But better first these billows to assuage.

Would he have dared to mention this law of which Clodius boasts he was the author, while Milo was alive, I will not say was consul? For as regards all of us—I do not dare to complete the sentence.

Again it may be employed as a means of transition, as, for example, [*]( From thepro Cornelio. )

Cominius, however— nay, pardon me, gentlemen.

For as Cicero [*](From the passage quoted IX. i. 28.) says, the shorter form of digression may be effected in a number of different ways. The following passages will, however, suffice as examples:

Then Gaius Varenus, that is, the Varenus who was killed by the slaves of Ancharius:—I beg you, gentlemen, to give careful attention to what I am about to say [*]( From the lost pro Varcno. ) ;

Then he turned on me that glance, which it was his wont to assume, when he threatened all the world with every kind of violence.

There is also another kind of figure, which is not aposiopesis, since that involves leaving a sentence unfinished, but consists in bringing our words to a close before the natural point for their conclusion. The following is an example [*](pro Lig. iii. 9. ) :

I am pressing my point too far; the young man appears to be moved

Why should I say more? you heard the young man tell the story himself.

which is styled ἠθοποιί͂α or, as some prefer μίμησις may be counted among the devices which serve to excite the gentler emotions. For it consists mainly in banter, though it may be concerned either with words or deeds. If concerned with the latter, it closely resembles ὑποτύπωσις while the following passage from Terence [*](Eun. I. ii. 75. ) will illustrate it as applied to words:

I didn't see your drift. 'A little girl was stolen from this place; my mother brought her up as her own daughter. She was known as my sister. I want to get her away to restore her to her relations.'

We may, however, imitate our own words and deeds in a similar fashion by relating some

I said that they had Quintus Caecilius to conduct the prosecution.

Thus we may feign repentance for what we have said, as in the pro Caelio, [*](xv. 35.) where Cicero says,

But why did I introduce so respectable a character?

I didn't mean to say that.

What else is there?

Have I left anything out?

One more charge, too, of this sort still remains for me to deal with,

One thing suggests another.

Such methods will also provide us with elegant transitions, although transition is not itself to be ranked among figures: for example, Cicero, [*](Ve err. IV. xxvi. 57. ) after telling the story of Piso, who ordered a goldsmith to make a ring before him in court, adds, as though this story had suggested it to him,

This ring of Piso's reminds me of something which had entirely slipped my memory. How many gold rings do you think Verres has stripped from the fingers of honourable men?

But who was the sculptor who made those statues? Who

v7-9 p.413

was he? Thank you for prompting me, you are right; they said it was Polyclitus.

This device may serve for other purposes as well. For there are means of this kind whereby we may achieve an end quite other than that at which we appear to be aiming, as, for example, Cicero does in the passage just quoted. For while he taunts Verres with a morbid passion for acquiring statues and pictures, he succeeds in creating the impression that he personally has no interest in such subjects. So, too, when Demosthenes [*](De Coron. 263. He argued that defeat in such a cause could bring no shame. Athens would have been unworthy of the heroes of old had she not fought for freedom. ) swears by those who fell at Marathon and Salamis, his object is to lessen the odium in which he was involved by the disaster at Chaeronea.

We may further lend charm to our speech by deferring the discussion of some points after just mentioning them, thus depositing them in the safe keeping of the judge's memory and afterwards reclaiming our deposit; or we may employ some figure to enable us to repeat certain points (for repetition is not in itself a figure) or may make especial mention of certain things and vary the aspect of our pleading. For eloquence delights in variety, and just as the eye is more strongly attracted by the sight of a number of different things, so oratory supplies a continuous series of novelties to rivet the attention of the mind.

Emphasis may be numbered among figures also, when some hidden meaning is extracted from some phrase, as in the following passage from Virgil:

1. Might I not have lived,
2. From wedlock free, a life without a stain,
3. Happy as beasts are happy?

Aen. iv. 550.

1. O mother, happy in thy spouse!

Met. x. 422.

Similar, if not identical with this figure is another, which is much in vogue at the present time. For I must now proceed to the discussion of a class of figure which is of the commonest occurrence and on which I think I shall be expected to make some comment. It is one whereby we excite some suspicion to indicate that our meaning is other than our words would seem to imply; but our meaning is not in this case contrary to that which we express, as is the case in ironq, but rather a hidden meaning which is left to the hearer to discover. As I have already pointed out, [*](IX. i. 14.) modern rhetoricians practically restrict the name of figure to this device, from the use of which figured controversial themes derive their name.

This class of figure may be employed under three conditions: first, if it is unsafe to speak openly; secondly, if it is unseemly to speak openly; and thirdly, when it is employed solely with a view to the elegance of what we say, and gives greater pleasure by reason of the novelty and variety thus introduced than if our meaning had been expressed in straightforward language.

The first of the three is of common occurrence in the schools, where we imagine conditions laid down by tyrants on abdication and decrees passed by the senate after a civil war, and it is a capital offence to accuse a person with what is past, what is not

And if the danger can be avoided by any ambiguity of expression, tile speaker's cunning will meet with universal approbation. On the other hand, the actual business of the courts has never yet involved such necessity for silence, though at times they require something not unlike it, which is much more embarrassing for the speaker, as, for example, when he is hampered by the existence of powerful personages, whom he must censure if he is to prove his case.

Consequently he must proceed with greater wariness and circumspection; since the actual manner in which offence is given is a matter of indifference, and if a figure is perfectly obvious, it ceases to be a figure. Therefore such devices are absolutely repudiated by some authorities, whether the meaning of the figure be intelligible or not. But it is possible to employ such figuress in moderation, the primary consideration being that they should not be too obvious. And this fault can be avoided, if the figre does not depend on the employment of words of doubtful or double meaning, such, for instance, as the words which occur in the theme of the suspected daughter-in-law: [*](i.e. suspected of an intrigue with her father-in-law. )

I married the wife who pleased my father.

It is important, too, that the figure should

Who dishonoured you?

My father, do you not know?

The facts themselves must be allowed to excite the suspicions of the judge, and we must clear away all other points, leaving nothing save what will suggest the truth. In doing this we shall find emotional appeals, hesitation and words broken by silences most effective. For thus the judge will be led to seek out the secret which he would not perhaps believe if he heard it openly stated, and to believe in that which he thinks he has found out for himself. But however excellent our figures,

they must not be too numerous. For overcrowding will make them obvious, and they will become ineffective without becoming inoffensive, while the fact that we make no open accusation will seem to be due not to modesty, but to lack of confidence in our own cause. In fact, we may sum up the position thus: our figures will have most effect upon the judge when he thinks that we use them with reluctance.