Institutio Oratoria

Antithesis, which Roman writers call either contrapositum or contentio, may be effected in more than one way. Single words may be contrasted with single, as in the passage recently quoted, Vicit pudorem libido, timorem audacia, [*](See § 62.) or the contrast may be between pairs of words, as in non nostri ingenii, vestri auxilii est, [*](pro Cluent. i. 4. This is beyond my power; it is your support that is required. ) or sentence may be contrasted with sentence, as in dominetur in contionibus, iaceat in iudiciis. [*](pro Cluent. ii. 5. See IX. ii. 51. )

Next to this another form may appropriately be placed, namely that which we have styled distinction and of which the following is an example: Odit populus Romanus privaiam luxuriam, publicam magoificentiam diligit. [*](pro Muren. xxxvi. 76. The Roman people hates private luxury, but loves public magnificence. Cp. § 65. ) The same is true of the figure by which words of similar termination, but of different meaning are placed at the end of corresponding clauses, as in ut quod in tempore mali fuit, nihil obsit, quod in causa boni fruit, prosit. [*](pro Cluent. xxix. 80. So that what was unfortunate in the occasion may prove no obstacle, while what was fortunate in the case may prove a positive advantage. )

Nor is the contrasted phrase always placed immediately after that to which it is opposed, as it is in the following instance: est igitur haec, indices, non scripta, sed nala lex: [*](pro Mil. iv. 10. This law then, gentlemen, was not written, but born. It is a law which we have not learned, received from others or read, but which we have derived, absorbed and copied from nature itself. ) but, as Cicero [*](See IX. i. 34.) says, we may have correspondence between subsequent particulars and others previously mentioned, as in the passage which immediately follows that just quoted: quam non didicimus, accepimus, leginmus, verum ex natura ipsa arrptluimus, hauusimus, epressimus.

Again the

Antithesis may also be effected by employing that figure, known as ἀντιμεταβολή by which words are repeated in different cases, tenses, moods, etc., as for instance when we say, non ut edam, vivo, sed ut vivam, edo (I do not live to eat, but eat to live). There is an instance of this in Cicero, [*](pro Cluent. ii. 5. That though there is no prejudice, guilt is punished, and if there is no guilt, prejudice is laid aside. ) where he has managed, while changing the case, to secure similarity of termination: ut et sine inridia culpa plectatur et sine culpa invidia ponatur.

Again the clauses may end with the same word, as when Cicero says of Sextus Roscius: etenim cum artifex eiusmodi est ut solus videatur dignus qui in scena spectetur, turn vir eiusmodi est ut solus dignus esse videatur qui eo non accedat. [*](pro Quintio xxv. 78. For while he is an artist of such talent as to seem the only actor on the stage worth looking at, he is also a man of such character as to seem the only man worthy of being exempted from appearing on the stage. ) There is also a special elegance which may be secured by placing names in antithesis, as in the following instance, Si consul Antonius, Brutus hostis; si conservator rei publicae Brutus, hostis Antonius. [*](Phil. iv. iii. 8. "If Antony is consul, Brutus is an enemy: if Brutus is the saviour of the state, Antony is an enemy. )

I have already said more than was necessary on the subject of figures. But there will still be some who think that the following (which they call ἀνθυποφορὰ is a figure: Incredibile est, quod dico, sed verum: [*](What I say is incredible, but true.ἀνθυποφορὰ = answer to imaginary objection. ) they say the same of Aliquis hoc semel tubit, neno bis, ego ter [*]( Some have endured this once, while no one has endured it twice, but I have endured it thrice. διέξοδος = going through in detail. ) (which they style διέξοδος ), and of Longius evects sum, sed redeo ad propositumr, [*](I have made a long digression, but now return to the point.ἄφοδος strictly = departure, referring to the digression, rather than the return to the point. ) which they call

There are some figures of speech which differ little from figures of thought, as for example that of hesitation. For when we hesitate over a thing, it belongs to the former class, whereas when we hesitate over a word, it must be assigned to the latter, as for instance if we say,

I do not know whether to call this wickedness or folly.

The same consideration applies to correction. For correction emends, where hesitation expresses a doubt. Some have even held that it applies to personification as well; they think, for example, that Avarice is the mother of cruelly, Sallust's O Romulus of Arpinum in his speech against Cicero, and the Thriasian Oedipus [*]( An allusion to some inhabitant of the Athenian village of Thria. ) of Menander are figures of speech. All these points have been discussed in full detail by those who have not given this subject merely incidental treatment as a portion of a larger theme, but have devoted whole books to the discussion of the topic: I allude to writers such as Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius and not a few others, although there are living authors who will be no less famous than they.