743$ 
 
 A 74 I 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 iiiiiiiji 
 
 B M DET 17M 
 
 FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 
 
 Antithesis in the Attic Orators 
 
 from Antiphon to 
 
 Isaeus 
 
 
 
 ■■■ 
 
 i : "'■:::::• 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 ■■' 
 
 
 ,!:!"■ ■ 
 
 
 
 ■' 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND 
 
 LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (DEPARTMENT OF GREEK) 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN EMORY HOLLINGSWORTH 
 
 SEbt Odollxgiaie firrss 
 
 GEORGE BANTA PUBLISHING COMPANY 
 
 MENASHA, WISCONSIN 
 
 1915 
 

Sty? llmtttrmtij of (Efjtrago 
 
 FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 
 
 Antithesis in the Attic Orators 
 
 from Antiphon to 
 
 Isaeus 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRAT'ATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND 
 
 LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (department of greek) 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN EMORY HOLLINGSWORTH 
 
 die CoUtgtaie Jjress 
 
 GEORGE BANTA PUBLISHING COMPANY 
 
 MENASHA, WISCONSIN 
 
 1915 
 

 PREFACE 
 
 The Greeks were the first, so far as we know, to employ antithesis 
 extensively; first to analyze it, and formulate the principles of its usage. 
 Any scientific treatment of the figure must accordingly begin with them. 
 The field of Attic eloquence has been chosen as being the most suitable 
 for the study of the subject. And there is no better standard than 
 antithesis for a comparative study of the rhetorical style of the several 
 orators. 
 
 The investigation led to a survey of the use of the figure in antecedent 
 Greek literature, and to the expositions of the phenomenon by the 
 Greek Rhetoricians. An appendix, giving a brief sketch of antithesis 
 in the Bible and in English Literature, was not thought out of place 
 in view of the fact that so little attention has been given by scholars 
 to this feature of expression in our own language. The theme of inves- 
 tigation was suggested by Professor Paul Shorey, whom I wish to thank 
 for the benefit of his supervision and criticism. I am also indebted to 
 Professor R. J. Bonner for the removal of not a few errors and for valu- 
 able suggestions. 
 
 John Emory Hollings worth. 
 
 Chicago, 1915. 
 
 355369 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 Introductory Remarks VII 
 
 I. Antithesis as Treated by the Greek Rhetoricians 1 
 
 II. Antithesis before the Attic Orators 15 
 
 III. Antithesis in the Attic Orators from Antlphon to 
 
 Isaeus 27 
 
 IV. List of Antithetic Terms 69 
 
 Appendix 
 
 Antithesis in the Bible and in English Literature 80 
 
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS 
 
 A Figure of Speech has been defined as a device for expressing thought 
 in an unusual or indirect way; a turning aside and change from the 
 ordinary channels either to gain beauty of expression or for the sake 
 of greater utility. 1 Of such devices Antithesis is one of the most simple 
 and most effective. "It is a first principle of the human mind that we 
 are affected only by change of impression; as by passing from hot to 
 cold, from hunger to repletion, from sound to silence. This applies to 
 both Feeling and Knowledge." 2 
 
 The invention of such a fundamental mode of expression cannot 
 reasonably be attributed to any one people or geographical section. 
 We should expect to find traces of it in every language that has developed 
 far enough to be artistic, or has produced a literature of its own. 3 Espe- 
 cially shall we look for it in those languages which though "dead" 
 have transmitted world literatures which have inspired idealism in 
 religion and art — the Hebrew and the Greek. 
 
 1 Tiberius (Spengel, Rhetorcs Graeci, III, 59) : tan toLvvv <rxw« to A") Kara <£farw 
 rbv vow kK<f>eptu>, p.rjde err' evdelas, &XX' huTpkirtiv nai on k!-a\aaaeiv ri)v Hiavoiav Koapov 
 rivds 7) xpe^s «Ve«a. Cf. Quintilian (Institutio Orat., IX, 1, 14): ergo figura sit arte 
 aliqua novata forma dicendi; also Bain {Elements of Rhetoric, p. 1): "A Figure of 
 Speech is a deviation from the plain and ordinary mode of speaking, with a view to 
 greater effect"; similarly, Quackenbos, Practical Rhetoric, p. 257. 
 
 2 Bain, Op.Cit., p. 45. Cf. Aristotle, Rhet., Ill, 9, 1410 a: rjdela 5e tanv i) ToiavTt) Xe£is, 
 6n rapavrla yvupipurara Kal irap' aXXijXa p.aX\oi> yvcopip,a, nal oti toiKev avWoyianu)' 
 6 yap ?X«7xos (jwaymyi) rwv kvTiK.up.kvuiv tariv. Aristotle is here explaining antithesis 
 on the principle of his oft-repeated statement that the Knowledge of Contraries is 
 One: see Bonitz, ad Metaph. B 2, 996 a 18, and Cope's note on the passage (Arist. 
 Rhet. [Sandys], Vol. Ill, p. 103). Compare Hill, Science of Rhetoric, p. 238: "Antith- 
 esis is a form of expression which impresses an idea upon the mind by bringing oppo- 
 sites into one conception." 
 
 "It (antithesis) is based on the law of mental association. In thinking of one thing, 
 or class of things, we think of others similar to them, but also of others different from 
 them. Like suggests not only like but unlike." — T. W. Hunt, Principles of Written 
 Discourse, p. 107. 
 
 3 Cf. Marmontel, Elements de Literature, p. 163: "La plupart des grandes pensees 
 prennent le tour de l'antithese, soit pour marquer plus vivement les rapports de differ- 
 ence et d' opposition, soit pour rapprocher les extremes." 
 
VIU ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 We conceive, therefore, that the tendency toward antithetical expres- 
 sion is one of the first efforts of a language to be artistic. A feeling 
 of self-consciousness accompanies this period, and it is natural that 
 after a language has once reached this point in its development it should 
 profit by the advances other languages have made in the same direction. 
 Hence the value of studying this feature of expression in an ancient 
 literature which has directly or indirectly affected the form and struc- 
 ture of so many modern languages. 
 
 Literature on the Subject 
 
 1. Reference is made to the following editions of the Attic Orators: 
 Aeschines, Blass, 1908; Andocides, Blass, 1880; Antiphon, Blass, 1892; 
 Demosthenes, Blass, 1901, 1908; Dinarchus, Blass, 1888; Hypereides, 
 Kenyon, 1906; Isaeus, Thalheim, 1903; Isocrates, Blass-Benseler, 1902- 
 1904; Lycurgus, Blass, 1907; Lysias, Thalheim, 1901; also to Roemer's 
 edition of Aristotle's Rhetoric (1885), and Spengel's Rhetores Graeci 
 (1885). 
 
 2. General works of reference: Blass, Attische Beredsamkeit, 3 Vols., 
 2te Aufl., 1877-1893; Gebauer, De Hypotacticis et Paratadicis Argument! 
 ex Contrario Formis, Zwickau, 1877; Gerber, Die Sprache als Kunst, 
 2 Vols., Berlin, 1885; Jebb, Attic Orators jrom Antiphon to Isaeus, 2 Vols., 
 2d Ed., 1893; Kemmer, Die Polare Ausdrucksweise, Wuerzburg, 1903; 
 Navarre, Rhetorique avant Aristote, Paris, 1900; Norden, Antike Kunst- 
 prosa, 2 Vols., 2te Aufl., Leipzig, 1909; Volkmann, Rhetorik der Griechen 
 und Roemer, 2te Aufl., 1887-1895. 
 
 3. Dissertations and theses: Baden, Principal Figures of Language 
 and Figures of Thought in Isaeus and the Guardian Speeches of Demosthenes, 
 Baltimore, 1906; Barczat, W., De figurarum disciplina atque auctoribus, 
 Goettingen, 1904; Becker, J., De sophislicarum artium vestigiis a pud 
 Thucydidem, Berlin, 1864; Belling, De pcriodorum Antiphontearum sym- 
 metria, Breslau, 1868; Both, P., De Antiphontis et Thucydidis goitre 
 dicendi, Marburg, 1875; Hermanowski, P., De homoeoteleutis quibusdam 
 tragicorum et consonantiis repetitione eiisdcm vocabuli ab Aeschylo effect is, 
 Berlin, 1881; Kingsbury, S. A., A Rhetorical Study of the Style of Ando- 
 cides, Baltimore, 1899; Lincke, E. M., De elocutione Isaei, Leipzig, 1884; 
 Nieschke, A., De Thucydide A?itiphonlos disci pulo et Homeri imitatorc, 
 Muenchen, 1885; Nieschke, A., De figurarum quae vocantur axwo- T o- 
 Vopyitla a pud Herodotum usu, Muenchen, 1891; Robertson, C. A., 
 
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS IX 
 
 Tropes and Figures in Isaeus, Princeton, 1901; Stein, F., De figurarum 
 apud Thucydidem usu, Koeln, 1881; Steinburg, H., Beitrage zur Wuer- 
 digung der thucydideischen Reden, 1870; Straub, P. J., De tropis et figuris 
 in orationibus Demosthenis et Ciceronis, Aschaffenburg, 1883; Vogel, P. J., 
 In Dinarchum curae grammaticae criticae rhetoricae, Leipzig, 1877. 
 
 Only a general summary of the dissertations need be given here 
 since they will necessarily be touched upon later in connection with 
 their special fields of investigation. In many of them antithesis is 
 treated incidentally as a secondary feature of the author's rhetorical 
 style. In any discussion of the "Gorgianic" figures, however, an- 
 tithesis naturally assumes the foremost place; and in respect of these 
 Nieschke has made a thorough investigation of Homer and Herodotus, 
 Stein of Thucydides, and Belling of Antiphon. 4 Gorgias's claim to be 
 the inventor of the figures called by his name has been weighed; 5 Anti- 
 phon's style has been compared with that of Thucydides; 6 and the debt 
 of each of these authors to Gorgias and to their Hellenic precursers 
 estimated. 7 In the present instance it is proposed to trace briefly the 
 historical development of antithesis as a mode of literary expression 
 among the Greeks, and to analyse the antithetical style of the earlier 
 Attic orators. To this end the statements of the Greek rhetoricians 
 regarding the figure will be examined, the use of the figure traced in the 
 literary forerunners of the Attic Orators, and especial study made of 
 the antithetic feature of style in Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates 
 and Isaeus. The evolution of the figure in Greek Literature will thus 
 be presented. 8 Before the time of Demosthenes, great master of the 
 cxwo-Ta 8iavoLas, a decline in the use of antithesis had set in. 
 
 4 Belling's object is to study Antiphon's periodology. 
 
 6 Becker, Nieschke, Robertson. 
 
 • Both, Becker, Nieschke, (De Thucy.). 
 
 7 Becker, and especially Nieschke. 
 
 8 Hermogenes remarks (Spengel, Rhetores Graeci, II, 236) that there was no more 
 powerful or useful figure in antiquity than antithesis : ovre iaxvporepov ovre avaynaio- 
 rtpov tvpiffKerai axvi 1 "- T °v o-VTidtrov Trapa rols dpxaiois pablics ovbtv. Cf. Shorey, 
 in the Columbia University Lectures on Greek Literature, p. 11: "Montaigne said, 
 'distinguo is the first word in my philosophy.' It was the first and last in the 
 philosophy of the Greeks. Distinction, antithesis, meditation and fluent coordina- 
 tion, we could follow them all together with the development of abstraction in 
 poetry, architecture, philosophy, oratory, and rhetoric, till rhetoric and dialectic 
 swallowed them all." 
 
I. ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY THE GREEK RHETORI- 
 
 CIANS 
 
 The substance of what the rhetoricians have to say about the figure 
 may be considered under two heads: a. Classification of the varieties 
 of antithesis, with illustrative examples; b. Remarks as to the value, 
 function and abuse of the figure. The latter will be taken up first. 
 
 Aristotle associates antithesis with the principle that the knowledge 
 of contraries is one. Contraries, he says, are best recognized when 
 placed in juxtaposition; the antithetic mode of writing is pleasant because 
 it resembles a syllogism. 1 The fact that it gave symmetry of form, 
 and was a means of uniting jointed, disconnected sentences, was thought 
 by him and by other writers to be the chief function of the figure. 2 By 
 others it was held to be a means of embellishing discourse 3 and was 
 considered particularly appropriate for the orator's proemium. 4 On the 
 whole, the value of antithesis as estimated by the ancients may be 
 summed in the words of Cornificius (IV, 15) : hoc genere si distinguemus 
 orationem, et graves et omati esse poterimus. 
 
 The characteristic defects of antithesis, the danger of its indiscrimi- 
 nate and excessive employment, were early pointed out. "Such devices 
 do not contribute to vigor of style," remarks Demetrius, criticizing a 
 passage in Theopompus, " they are inappropriate to outbursts of passion, 
 or to the delineation of character. Simplicity and naturalness is the 
 mark alike of passion and of character-drawing." 5 Dionysius brands 
 the studied symmetry and cadence of such figures as 7rcu5ico5es nai 
 Kadairepd Troirifxa. 6 
 
 1 Arist. Rhet. Ill, 9, 1410 a; cf. above, p. VII, note 2. 
 
 2 Demet. irepl kp^vdas 22 ff. Hermogenes II, 256 (in Spengel's Rhetores Graeci). 
 
 3 Cf. Isoc. XII, 2. Augustine {De Civ. XI, 18) speaks of antitheta quae appellantur 
 in ornamentis elocutionis sunt decentissima. 
 
 * Hermogenes (Spengel) II, 236. 
 
 5 Trept epix. 27 (Robert's Translation). 
 
 6 De Lys. c. 14; he is criticizing the style of Thucydides. Similarly, in Ad. Am. 
 
 II, 17, he remarks that the figures which Gorgias and his followers used to excess ill 
 become the austere style of the historian. 
 
 Bishop Westcott remarks of Macaulay's antithetical style that it "bears much 
 the same relation to prose that prose-rhyme does to verse; it is a help towards attain- 
 ment of a second order; but to supreme excellence, it is a hindrance " (Cited by Roberts, 
 Op. Cit., p. 267). Cf. Hunt, Principles of Written Discourse, p. 80. 
 
2 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 An attempt to classify the varieties of antithesis {avTiKaixtv-q \4£is) 
 is made by Aristotle in the following vexed passage (Rhet. Ill, 9, 1410 a): 
 avTLKt.ip.kvri 8e kv 77 inarkpco tCo kojXw f) irpos evavr'uo evavrlov cruyKeircu fj 
 Tavro eirk^evKTai toIs evavrloLs, olov. (I append the first two examples) 
 ap4>OTkpovs 5' &vqaav, Kai tovs virofj.eLpa.VTas Kai tovs aKoKovdr] a avr as' tols 
 ph yap 7rXeta> ttjs o'Uol TrpoaeKTrjaavTO, reus 5' Uavqv rrjv o'Lkol KaTeXiirov. 7 
 kvavTia viropovq aKoXovOrjais, inavbv -irXeiov. ware Kai rots xpyphruv ^ eo ~ 
 pkvois Kai rois airdXawai fiovXopkvois . s airoXavais ktt]<tu 9 d^rt/ceirai. 
 There follow eight other illustrative quotations, all of them except the 
 last being taken from Isocrates's Panegyricus. 
 
 What did Aristotle really mean to say in this passage? Spengel 
 explains: "aut duo sunt contraria in utroque colo, ut in exemplo quod 
 sequitur, vel ut nal tovs (ppovipovs arvx^v Kai tovs a<ppovas Karopdovv, in 
 quibus irpbs kvavTia> evavriov avyneiTai, aut contrariis idem verbum est com- 
 mune, ut in secundo exemplo. 10 Cope, 11 apparently following Spengel, 
 translates: "Either by balancing opposite by opposite in the two con- 
 trasted members, or by uniting the two opposites, as it were, under the 
 vinculum of a single word" (Italics mine). Jebb and Welldon translate 
 the passage similarly, and the interpretation is followed by Belling. 12 
 The endeavor to correlate Aristotle's illustrative examples with the state- 
 ment, thus interpreted, has not been equally uniform nor adequately 
 successful. Belling, Cope, and Welldon 13 deviate from Spengel when 
 they explain both varieties of antithesis mentioned in the statement by 
 Aristotle's first illustrative quotation, taking tivrjaav of the first part as 
 the word (ravTo) which is attached to the contraries, thus it corresponds 
 
 7 Isoc. IV, 35-36, with slight alterations. 
 
 8 Isoc. IV, 41 ; Aristotle strangely omits the word apixdrreiv from this quotation. 
 It is a matter of small importance, however, that Aristotle does not quote verbatim 
 in many of the examples. The quotations are substantially correct, the slight altera- 
 tions or omissions not changing the meaning of Isocrates or affecting the value of Aris- 
 totle's illustrations. 
 
 ' As against Cope's emendation of Krriaei to defiati (Arist. Rhet. [Sandys] Vol. 
 Ill p. 101), cf. Isoc. VII, 35: al flip y&p ktt)<jw d<x$aXm fiaav, olairep (card rb bUcuov 
 iiirfipxov, at 5i xPV^t^ Koivai iraffi rots Seo/ievois tu>v woXituv, where XP^*'* cor- 
 responds to d7r6Xawris in the above example. 
 
 10 Arist. Ars. Rhet. II, p. 398. 
 
 11 Introd. Arist. Rhet., p. 314; see also his note on the passage in the Rhetoric [Sandys] 
 III, p. 101. 
 
 13 De pcriodorum Antipliontearum symmrtria, p. 28. 
 " Trans. Arist. Rhet., p. 258, note. 3. 
 
ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 3 
 
 to the second variety; the second part of the quotation (rois pkv — rols 
 8e) is used to illustrate the first variety, where opposite is balanced by 
 opposite in the contrasted members. 
 
 Volkmann thinks that Aristotle, led by study of the period, probably 
 meant to differentiate between antitheses whose two members are paral- 
 lel independent sentences — as wore tovs 4>povLp,ovs arvxtiv nai tovs acppovas 
 KdTopdovv — and those whose members, expanding by virtue of a common 
 element previously (or subsequently) pointed out, together form one 
 complete sentence, as after uvrjaav in Aristotle's first example. 14 
 
 These explanations do not merely fail to adequately correlate the 
 text as interpreted with the illustrative examples. Aristotle is made to 
 confuse rather than to clarify, as is his wont, our idea of a rhetorical 
 figure. The first is the only apposite example illustrating the feature 
 of expansion mentioned by Volkmann, and it should normally explain 
 the first rather than the second part of the definition. Moreover, 
 Aristotle's specific designation of the kvavrla in the first two examples, 
 and his mention of them at the close of the list {ravavrla yvuipLndoTara) 
 seem to argue a different emphasis. Again (cf. Belling, Cope, Welldon), 
 it is assumed that Aristotle was so unscientific as to differentiate the two 
 varieties of antithesis mentioned in this important definition by com- 
 bining the examples without warning in the first illustrative quotation, 
 and thereby also reversing the natural order of illustration. Observe 
 that two serious objections preclude the alternative of dividing Aris- 
 totle's first example to meet the requirements of the definition: 1. The 
 words following and directly governed by kv-qcav constitute only one 
 kuAop: all the other examples contain the two which are required by the 
 definition; 2. There is no adequate reason for supposing that Aristotle 
 deviated from the natural and logical order of illustration. On the 
 contrary, he obviously intended the first quotation as a whole to illus- 
 trate the first variety of antithesis — kv fj inarkpu) rw kcSKw rpos evavrlu kvav- 
 r'uov ovyneiTai.. After each of the first two quotations following the 
 definition the opposites are designated: those illustrative of the first 
 mentioned form of the figure, and found in the first example, are four: 
 viro/jLovr], a.Ko\oWr]<ns, Uavov, irXtlov. Clearly, then, the example proper be- 
 gins with rols iitv (virop.dva.ai), kt\., and the previous clause (ap.<f>oTepovs 
 tivriaav, kt\) was added merely to give the antithetic significance of 
 
 14 Rhetorik, p. 485 f. 
 
4 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 tois \xi.v — toIs 8k. lb Every alternate example similarly contains four 
 evavTia, corresponding to this interpretation. Thus far we are following 
 Spengel where succeeding commentators have explained differently, and, 
 we believe, erroneously. 
 
 It is the second part of the definition which has caused the main 
 difficulty: ev jj tclvto kire^.vKTaL tols evavrLoLs. Here ravro has been 
 universally translated "the same word." Aristotle is thus made to 
 present a non-inclusive, inadequately illustrated type of antithesis, very 
 unlike the first variety, which he so carefully explains with copious 
 illustration. The disparity of the illustrative examples on this inter- 
 pretation is baffling to the extreme. The fallacy of dividing the first 
 example and taking &vt]oav as the word (tclvto) has been pointed out. 
 Only one of Aristotle's ten illustrative quotations can be cited in favor 
 of this interpretation, which is based on the narrower meaning of to.vto 
 (idem verbum). Now a very satisfactory interpretation results when 
 TO.VTO is employed in its broader and more flexible meaning — "The 
 same thing." This meaning is more truly Aristotelian. Examples 
 could be multiplied showing that the author of the Rhetoric meant by 
 tclvto "the same thing"; he constantly employs the word in referring 
 not merely to single words, but to expressions or statements which convey 
 the same or virtually the same thought. 16 
 
 14 The terms of an antithesis are not infrequently thus introduced in a preliminary 
 statement; cf. Isoc. IV, 82: 6p.bicos yap hart. xa^e""°" tTrat.i>eli> tovs i/irepPepXriKOTas ras 
 twv a\\u>v aptras wcrirep tovs p\r)bkv ayaQbv ireTroi.7]KbTas' rols p.kv yap o\j\ inreicrt 7rpd£«s, 
 7rp6s be rovs ow tiaiv apuoTTovrts \6yoi. Cf. also Isoc. I, 1; Ant. IV, 5 8; V, 73. 
 
 " Spengel fails to designate the word in the second example which gives the key to 
 his interpretation; presumably it was the omitted word app-oTreiv, or the synonymous 
 Seonkuois — j3ov\ofj.tvois. In either case (whether the meaning be limited to a single 
 word or extended to include a pair of synonymous words) the example is not paralleled 
 by another of Aristotle's illustrations of the figure. 
 
 When Aristotle uses ravrb in referring to a single word, bvona is unmistakably 
 understood; cf. vruffeis ravTov (Rhet. 1410 a) which is both preceded and followed 
 by t6 avro 6vop.a. And, indeed, the more usual, broader meaning of the term is found 
 in this same section: lariv 81 ana navTa <fx«" ravrb, koi avrlBiotv tlvai t6 aiirb xal 
 irapiaov Kal bp.oiovTt\tvTov . 
 
 The following passages, gleaned from the Rhetoric in close proximity to the passage 
 in question, illustrate Aristotle's use of the word. In view of tin- broad and flexible 
 meaning which he attached to the word, the correlation of the examples with the defini- 
 tion (see note 17) does not appear strained; cf. 1410 b: iroiovaiv p.li> olv *ai oi toiv 
 TroirjTwv tliiovts t6 avrb. 
 
ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 5 
 
 This meaning of the word applied to the passage in hand makes 
 Aristotle's meaning clear, and admirably correlates the examples. An- 
 tithesis arises when " in each of the clauses opposite is juxtaposed to oppo- 
 site or the same idea is attached to opposites." The four evavrla of 
 the first variety bear the relation arb-a^b 1 . The two clauses of the 
 second variety contain each a single evavHov, bearing the relation 
 a:x::a J :x — x representing common clausal elements, which are either 
 verbal synonyms or expressions of similar import. The first two ex- 
 amples, then, in which the author takes the pains to point out the opposite 
 concepts, respectively explain the twofold species of antithesis specified 
 in the definition. In the list of examples which follows (/ecu en) it is 
 not, of course, necessary that Aristotle should have adhered throughout 
 to a regular alternating order of illustration. Such would, however, be 
 the natural and logical order, and it should be in the main assumed 
 unless the contrary fact can be clearly demonstrated. It is an obvious 
 fact that, beginning with the first, every second example contains four 
 definite havria, corresponding to the first mentioned variety of an- 
 tithesis. The presumption is accordingly in favor of taking the alternate 
 examples as illustrative of the second variety. Excepting the last 
 example, this is in fact the case. These quotations contain but two oppo- 
 sites, one in each clause, the other clausal elements being common 
 and expressing the same or similar ideas. Now the last example 
 is the only quotation from a source outside Isocrates: /ecu o els Hudohabv 
 Tts elirev /cat AvKO(f)pova kv tu SiKaaTTjpla), ovtoi 8' v/itis ot/cot \xh> ovres 
 eirooXovv, eXdovres 8' cos vpas k&m\vrox. The opposites are staying, going, 
 buying, selling. This, therefore, which should normally explain the 
 second variety illustrates the first. The breaking of the regular alter- 
 
 1412 a: ioairep 'Apxvras t<t>r] tclvtov elvcu dLatTrjTTjv nai Poofiof kir ap.4>u> y&p t6 
 abiKovpevov Karafavyei. ff et tis $01177 aynvpav /ecu Kpep.ix.9pav to clvto eivat.' apfyw yap 
 Tavro ti, dXXd 5ia<f>tpei tw avwdev nai Karaidev. 
 
 1412 b: to ai)To /cat to ' A.pa$ai>5pl8ov to kiraivovp.evov, ko.\6v y airodavelv irpiv 
 OavaTov dpav a^Lov," ravro yap iffTi rw tlireiv d^toj' y' airodaveZv /tr) cWa a^iof 
 aTrodaveZv, ktX. 
 
 1418 a: nai 6 ekeyev Topylas, ort ovx fliro\e£ir« avTov 6 \6yos, Taxnb 'eaTiv. Cf. also 
 1362 b fin: ovbtv yap /ccoXuei kvloTt touto ovp.<t>kpet.v toZs kvavTiois. 
 
6 ANTITHESIS IX ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 nation may be accounted for by Aristotle's desire to include this well- 
 known quotation among his illustrations of antithesis. 17 
 
 This interpretation of Aristotle's language and meaning is strikingly 
 corroborated by a comparison of the remarks of his successors, who 
 use the same terms in speaking of similar phenomena, to clvto yap etp-qrai 
 nai av8tv ivavriov is Demetrius's remark (irepi <p/x. 24) about the identical 
 
 false antithesis (tokcl p.kv ro/ca b't) cited by Aristotle. Theophras- 
 
 tus (preserved by Diony. De Lys. 14) says that antithesis arises orav tw 
 airco to. kvavrla, t) ru> kvavrlco ra avra fj tois kvavrlois kvavrla wpoaKar- 
 riyop-qdfi '. rovavravxw yo.p kyxupel av^evxdr)va.i. The statement is iden- 
 tical with that of his predecessor, except that orav ru> avrip to. kvavrla 
 presents an additional species of antithesis — an expansion of Aristotle's 
 second variety. Theophrastus's meaning would be unintelligible were 
 
 17 There can be no doubt, I think, regarding the quotations which explain the 
 first variety. I take up the alternate examples, beginning with the second, which 
 seem to me to explain the second variety of antithesis (adding in parenthesis the 
 original of Isocrates where it differs from the quotation). Cf. note 16. 
 
 (1) wort koX rols XPyn<*- T wv beop-kvois nai rols curoXavcrai. fiovXofikvois (Isoc. IV, 41: 
 wart koI rols XPVI X °- T0)V btop.ivois nai rols biroXavaai rcbv iiirapxbvTUP kiri6vp.ovaiv afufortp- 
 ow apubrTtiv). The opposites, according to Aristotle, are the ideas of enjoyment and 
 of acquirement (airbXavais, ktjjo-is); the common element (rabrb) is, possibly, the 
 idea of wanting, which is contained in both members (btop.a'ot.s, 0ov\op.kvois [kiriBvp.ovai,v\) ; 
 cf. Isoc. VII, 25: wore xo.\rn<x>rtpov rp> iv tKtivois rols xpovois tvptlv rovs j3ov\op.tvovs 
 apxtiv V MW rovs prjbiv beop.kvovs. 
 
 An alternative explanation is to regard the omitted word apubrTeiv as the common 
 element; this was probably what Spengel meant by idem verbum (although he, like 
 Aristotle, failed to designate the word). One is loth to beUeve Aristotle would have 
 omitted a word so important to his main illustration. 
 
 (2) tbdvs nlv tuv apiOTticjv ri^io^^aav, ob iro\v be iartpov rrjv &pxV v T V* OaXarrris 
 l\a0ov (Isoc. IV, 72). The opposites are (Mw and vartpov; the other clausal elements 
 are rabrb. The context makes it clear that Isocrates is trying to show that similar 
 and undisputed honor was conferred upon the Athenian forebears in earlier and later 
 times. 
 
 (3) {rfyovptvoi btivbv) <£i>cr*i iroXiras 5vras vbptj ttjs wb\tox artptlaBat (Isoc. IV, 
 105). The common idea is that of citizenship {iroXiras, irbXtws). For the <pbais — 
 vbpos antithesis cf. Lys. XXXI, 6; Isoc. IX, 54. 
 
 (4) {aiaxpbv b.^tovv) ibia. p.tv tois 0a.pfia.pois oinirais xPV a ^ al > koivt) 8k iroWoi'S 
 rCiv avufiaxuv irtpiopav (abrols) bovXtbovras (Isoc. IV, 181). By the use of ibios — 
 koiuos, Isocrates shows the discrepancy between the attitude of the Athenians 
 toward the barbarians in private affairs and that in public: "We use the barbarians 
 as servants in private; in public we allow our allies to be in a state of servitude to 
 them." The idea of serving is common to both members of the antithesis. For the 
 antithesis with wtpiopav, cf. Andoc. I, 53. 
 
ANITTHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 7 
 
 tc3 avT<2 here taken in the narrower sense (idem verbum). Again, in 
 rj tw kvavTico to. aurd Aristotle's second variety (h 77 f/carepaj to> kwXoj 
 ravTo e7ref eu/crat rots ivavrlois) is undoubtedly reflected. Here, too, to. airrd 
 can only mean "similar statements." Theophrastus says that an- 
 tithesis arises whenever opposite things are predicated about that which 
 is of the same character (synonyms or similar things), 18 or similar things 
 about that which is of an opposite character (antonyms or opposite 
 things), or when opposite things are predicated about opposite things. 
 
 Aristotle concludes his treatment of antithesis and the kindred 
 figures 19 with a significant allusion to False Antithesis (Rhet. Ill, 9, 
 1410 b): eialv oe /cat \pev8els avTLdeaas, olov /cat 'E7rtxappos e-rroiei 'ro/ca 
 nev kv T7]vuv kydiv -qv, toko. Se irapa tt]vols kywv' . Demetrius explains more 
 fully (jrtpl ep/ji. 24) : "Ecrrt 8e /cd>Xa, d /xij avriKeineva epeWm Tiva avrl- 
 deaiv 6td to tw <TXW aTL OLVTiQeTois yeypacpdat, Kadairep to Tap' 'E7rtxdp/xco 
 Tip TTOLTjTfj Trewaiynevov, oti ' ro/ca jj.kv kv Trfvois kydiv fjv, ro/ca o« irapa. 
 tt]vols ky&v'. to avTO fitv yap etpryrat /cat ovoev kvavTiov. Whether or not 
 the Epicharmus passage is in fact a false antithesis is perhaps an open 
 question. 20 At any rate Aristotle and Demetrius took it for such, and 
 in the light of their remarks we infer that a false antithesis is an appar- 
 ent opposition of words, which does not express a real opposition of 
 thought. 21 
 
 18 Cf . Isoc. I, 43 : to fxb> yap TeXeuTTJcrcu ■kovtuv 17 irtirpuixkvr) tcareKpive, to Si 
 /caXtos airodaveiv 'Ibiov rois awov8aloi.s 17 4>vcns aweveifxev (an implied 15ios-kolv6s an- 
 tithesis); also, Ant. IV, 7 4: "Ecrrt 8e 17 ph> arvxla tov waTa^avTos, rj be avp.<popa Ton 
 iradovros. 
 
 19 The order of figures discussed is Antithesis, Parison, Paromoion, False Antithesis, 
 He adduces no common name for the group; it is a significant fact that Gorgias's name 
 is not mentioned. Barczat says apropos the arrangement (p. 14) : Quod dispositions 
 vitium cum ne redactor quidem neglecturus fuerit, quo modo res explicanda sit, non 
 video, nisi haec singula addimenta paulatim ex adnotionibus adjuncta esse dicamus. 
 
 20 Epicharmus, Frag. 124 (147 Kaibel). Blass {Ait. Bered. I, 18), following Ahrens 
 (Dial. Aeol., pp. 268, 271) maintains that Aristotle and Demetrius misunderstood the 
 passage; that kv ri)vois — irapa r^vois is not a false antithesis because the pronouns 
 refer to different parties ("dieser-jener"). Lorenz (Epicharm., p. 273) supports the 
 ancient view. 
 
 21 "False" antithesis is used by writers in one or more of the following senses: to 
 indicate those cases 1. Where words of similar meaning but different form in corres- 
 ponding clausal positions imply an antithesis of thought which they do not really 
 express, as kv Trjvots — irapa rr^vois in the above example (according to Aristotle and 
 Demetrius); cf. -qyovvro — kiroiovvTo (Lys. XII, 7); after this manner Robertson (p. 15) 
 cites Herodot. VII, 8: ovre Ttva ttoKiv avdpcbv ov8ep.iav ovre Wvos ovhev avdpuirwv 
 
8 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Anaximenes defines antithesis as follows (I. 212) r 2223 'AvtWctov pev 
 ovv eoTiv to evavHav tt\v bvopaaiav apa Kal ttjv bvvapiv to'ls avTiKetpevois 
 e\ov, t} to erepov tovtcoV to'ls pev ovv bvbpaaiv eir) av evavAov apa Kal ttj 
 bvvapet robe' *oi> yap binaiov tovtov pev to. epa exovra TrXovrelv, epk 
 be tcl ovto. it po'iepevov ovtco ■KTWx tvtlv -' T0L ^ °" bvbpaai pbvois' '5i56ru> 
 yap 6 7r\oucrios Kal evbalpoiv tCo irevr)TL /ecu evbeei . ttj be bvvapec "eycc 
 pev tovtov voaovvTa edepairevcra, ovtos 5' epol peylcrTcov KaKccv curios yeyovev'- 
 evTavda pev yap to. bvbpara ovk kvavTia, al be irpa^eis evavTlai. k6l\- 
 \iotov pev ovv etr) av to Kar' ap(poTepa avTideTOV Kal Kara tt\v bvvapiv koX 
 /caret tt]v bvopaaiav. eari be Kal ra \onra bito avTidera. 
 
 This threefold division of antithesis into that of Word (Kar ovopa), 
 Thought (/card bvvapiv), and that combining both word and thought (/car' 
 ap4>0Tepa) which makes its initial appearance here, finds expression in the 
 later rhetoricians, and is taken by modern writers as the typical ancient 
 classification. The merits of such a classification can best be dis- 
 cussed when the statements of the other rhetoricians have been exam- 
 ined. It is to be noticed that Anaximenes while indicating the existence 
 
 viro\elirecr6a.i as an example of false antithesis (but is there not clearly a real distinc- 
 tion intended between the terms used here?); 2. Where the words are antithetic in 
 form (and hence, of course, in meaning), but the context does not admit of the corre- 
 sponding antithesis of thought, as that between ipyu — \6yw in Thucy. VII, 69, 2: 
 ( — vofiiaas) trixvTa. ?pycj) en cr<t>'taiv b/bta. tlvai Kal Xoyu avrols outtco inava. eiprjadai ] cf. 
 Mueller, O., Gr. Lit. IP, (2nd Ed., Vol. II., p. 170, note); 3. Where the phenomena 
 contrasted do not admit of antithesis (cf. Wyse on Isaeus II, 24, etc.). 
 
 Although noting instances falling under (1), I have restricted my use of the term 
 "false" antithesis to the second meaning. Here we may assume that propriety 
 suggested the use of one of a common pair of antithetic terms and the other followed 
 by the law of association. Instances of this character seem less questionable than 
 those under (1), where the writer may have intended to make the distinction suggested 
 by the word forms, or have purposely varied them to avoid repetition, or to form homo- 
 eoteleuton; cf. note. 48, p. 39. Certainly, instances in Isocrates which might be classed 
 under (1) are not false antitheses, else the author made a virtue of writing such 
 (cf. note 97, p. 56). 
 
 Cases falling under (3) I have mentioned under Artificial or Defective antitheses. 
 
 52 Roman numerals are used after the names of the Greek Rhetoricians to refer to 
 the volumes of Spengel's Rhctorcs Graeci without further designation. 
 
 23 The order of precedence between Aristotle and Anaximenes has been a disputed 
 question. I am inclined to believe with Barczat (p. 22) that Anaximenes brought out 
 his Rhetoric independently of Aristotle, at about the same time (cir. 340 B. C), or a 
 little later. It is likely that both had recourse to the same source, which was probably 
 the lost rkxvri of Isocrates. See Barczat, pp. 18, 19. 
 
ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 9 
 
 of the other types gives preference to that which combines both word 
 and thought. Indeed, so far as Anaximenes is concerned, it seems 
 probable that his terminology has been pressed by later writers at the 
 expense of the meaning he intended to convey. The examples he ad- 
 duces are thoroughly representative of the main types of antithesis in the 
 Attic Orators. If we take these as authoritative, and assume that he 
 employed a faulty terminology, Anaximenes meant to distinguish 
 between more or less definite clausal antitheses (i. e., those where the 
 members have distinct clausal form) and those occurring between words 
 which lie within a single clause. So comprehensive a category would 
 be most nearly adequate for the varieties of antithesis found in the 
 orators and elsewhere. 
 
 Demetrius, second successor of Aristotle in the Academy, adopts 
 many of the examples cited by his great predecessor, but uses the ter- 
 minology of Anaximenes. Like Aristotle, he discusses the figure under 
 the head of periodology: Tlvovrai 8£ /cat e£ avTiKeip'evuv kCSKwv irepiodot,, 
 avTineipevoiv oe t\toi rots irpaypaaiv, olov VXecov pev 5td rrjs rjireipov, rre^evcov 
 8e otd ttjs daXdaarjs' [Isoc. IV, 89] r) apcpOTepois, rjj re Xe£et /cat reus irpay- 
 paaw, &<nrep 17 aiirf} Ttplo8os &8e exei (7rept epp. 22); he continues (23): 
 /caret 8e bvbpaTa pbvov dvTLKelp.ev a /cciXa TOiaSe eariv, olov cos 6 tt\v 'EXevrjv 
 TrapafiaXwv too 'Hpa/cXet <pr}<riv, otl 'ra> pev 'eiriirovov /cat toXvkLv8vvov tov 
 P'lov eiroirjcrev, ttjs 8e TepLfiXeTrTov /cat irepipaxnTov tt\v 4>vgiv Ko.^eo^Tr\aev , 
 [Isoc. X, 17], dvrt/cetrat yap apdpov apdpcp, /cat avvSeapos avvbeapw, opoia 
 bpoiots, /cat T&XXa 8e Kara tov clvtov rpoirov, tu> pev 'eTOLrjo-ev' to 'KaTeaTrjcrev' 
 tco 8e 1 to\vkLv8wov' to 'wepLpaxyTov' /cat oXcos ev irpbs ev, opoiov Trap' opoiov, 
 17 avTawoSoats. He then enlarges upon the false antithesis mentioned 
 by Aristotle. 
 
 Demetrius thus endeavors to revise Aristotle's treatment of the figure 
 in the light of Anaximenes' doctrine of a Word and Thought antithesis. 
 The terminology is altered enough to show the model clearly :rots irpay- 
 paaiv is substituted for rfj Svvdpet, (Cf. Anaximenes's use of 7rpd£ets), 
 and the terms tt} Xe£et and /car' ovofia (Cf. Tiberius, III, 67) are identi- 
 fied. It is a significant fact that he fails to produce distinct examples 
 for antithesis rots irpaypaaiv and that tt) Xe£et /cat toIs irpaypaaiv. The 
 antithesis in Word Only is clearly defined, but poorly illustrated, the 
 opposed terms in the example being contrasted without being properly 
 antithetical. 
 
10 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Of the later rhetoricians, Alexander Numenius is thought to be the 
 foremost: to him Tiberius had recourse, and from him most of the 
 others copied their rhetorical statements more or less directly. 24 Alex- 
 ander (III, 36) specifies three kinds of antithesis: the first corresponding 
 to the Kar' ovopa variety of Anaximenes, the two latter being varieties 
 of the antithesis of Thought. They occur 1. Whenever words of oppo- 
 site import are employed (orav ra avTineipeva bvbpaTa ava\ap@avupev) , 
 as 'paKhov yfrp ripcccnv at iroXeis rCiV d5tKcos ttXovtovvtojv tous Sikcuws irev- 
 opevovs', and 'eiriXovovcriv ev deppols v8acn xf/vxpom avSpas.' 2. Whenever 
 the same terms are employed (negatively) in the second member of a 
 clausal antithesis (orav avra aTp'e$y\Tai to. bvbpaTa), as Vu pev yap eXa/3«, 
 cb Ar]pa8ri, 8ccpa irapa 4>ikLinrov, ey<h 8e ovk ekafiov, nal irpoeirtves aurcjj 
 Kara ttjs 7r6Xea)s tbuxovp.tvos, ey<b 8' ov ovveinvov '. 3. Whenever we speak 
 of opposite or different things in terms that are not explicitly antithetic 
 (oral' prj iravTcos to'ls avTiKeipevots bvbpacnv 4>pa$uspev, avTiK.eLiJ.ev a p'evTOi rj 
 8ia4>'epovra wpa.yp.aTa \apf3avcopev) , as 'tcnoacr/ces ypa.pp.aTa, t7cb 8e 'ecfroiTOW 
 treXeis, eyo> 8e eTeXovprjv' erpiTcrywncrTeis, eyu> 8' edewpovv eyypapaTeves, 
 kyoi 5' eKKX-qaia^ov k^einirTes, ey<b 8' eavpiTTOv' (Demosth. De Cor., 
 XVIII, 265.) 
 
 The second variety seems to be original with Alexander, but is re- 
 flected by other rhetoricians of the same group. Zonaius (III, 169), 
 Anonymous (III, 186), and Herodian (III, 96) employ the same ex- 
 amples for the first two varieties mentioned by Alexander; the second 
 variety is more accurately designated by them as an antithesis of Affir- 
 mation and Denial (orav avTL8iaaTeXKriTai Kard0aais a7roc/>dcr€i). No third 
 form of antithesis is mentioned. 
 
 Tiberius (III, 67 and 78) speaks of two kinds of antithesis: to /card 
 8iavoiav and to tt?s Xe£ecos. The first type is not explained except to say 
 that it is common in Demosthenes, and was inveighed against by Aes- 
 chines. 25 
 
 24 Cf. Barczat, p. 34. 
 
 25 LwiPtfiovXtvukvois nal KaKorjdeo-i Tobrots avrtdtTois (Acschin. II, 4), on which the 
 Scholiast remarks toZs «£ avritceintvois Xtyonivoir avrldtTa yap Xiyovffi to kv irtpibbi? 
 8nr\fi t£ avTiKtinkvwv, olov 'tous <t>L\ovs ixkv \vttHiv, tovs 5 kxdpovs tvtpytruv ' Ioti yap 
 tovto 61koi\ov avTiKtlfxtvov r)bovi)v 5' l\a. t6 avriderov a\r\p\a, olov (quoting the familiar 
 passage of Demosthenes: oi> nkv yap i\ajl(s, etc.). This type of antithesis seems 
 to correspond closely to the Kara \t£iv variety mentioned in III, 78, and to the last 
 mentioned variety of Alexander (III, 36). Cf. Aeschin. Ill, 168, 253. 
 
ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 1 1 
 
 Of the second variety he says (III, 78) : to 8e tt)s Xe£ea>s 8lxus ylveTat, 
 r) /card kcoXov, r] Kara Xe^cv. /card kwXov ptv, Vapd rds rdv xopr)yuv 
 8aTravas piupbv ijpepas pepos r) xap<s T0L ^ Oeupevois earl, rrapa oe rds eis 
 tov irbXepov irapaaKevcov acfrdovias iravra tov xp ovov V wnjpia iraan T V 
 7r6Xet' dvrketrat 7ap rots kcoXols r) epprjvela. to 8e kclto. Xe£iv 'e8l8aaKes 
 ypappara, €70; 6" I0otrcov, ktX' (Dem. De Cor. 265). The chief feature 
 of this classification is the Kara nibXov variety — a distinct advance in 
 terminology. The Kara Xe|tv reflects the third type mentioned by Alex- 
 ander. For the terms the writer is probably indebted to Aristotle and 
 Demetrius. 
 
 The last Greek rhetorician to be considered is Hermogenes. In his 
 principal statement (II, 236) this writer defines antithesis as a o-xvpa 
 Xoyov 8LirXacrLa£ov tov inroKtlpevov vovv. 26 This doubling of the expression 
 is brought about by contrasting the actual with the hypothetical form: 
 the first member of the antithesis being a present contrary to fact con- 
 dition, the second being introduced by kwd 8k. The antithetical form 
 of e7T€i5?7 r)pkpa ecrri, Set -KOi^oai To8e is this : ei pev yap pr) r)v vpepa, dXXd 
 vv%, taws txPW pr) iroieiv, eird 8e eoTiv r)pepa, -woi-qaai TpoarfKev. He adduces 
 several examples to show the unique power of the figure in condensing 
 disconnected sentences into a periodic whole. 27 At the close he warns 
 us that he is speaking of rhetorical antithesis (repi prjTopinov avTid'eTov), 
 kird oi <f>iX6o~o4>OL kvavTiov kox avrWeTOV oil StatpoDat, Trap' r)plv8l to avTiBtTov 
 axVP-u tffTL tov Xoyov to 8e kvavriov 8pLpvTrjs vor/paTOs airb ttjs kpyacrias 
 Xap(3avopkvr] olov 'ou 8r) davpacrrbv ktTTiv, et crrpaTevopevos eKeivos Kal Tapuv 
 k<f>' CLTaaL Kal pt]8kva icaipbv pr\8' copav TapaXelirwv r)puv peXXbvTiov Kal 
 \J/r]4>L£opkv(>)v Kal Tvvdavopevuv irtpiylyveTai [Demosth. II, 23]. The sen- 
 tence is then recast in the antithetical form previously indicated : 'ei pev 
 yap prjTt irovihv pr\Te irapoiv rots irpaypaat. TrepieylveTO r)pCiv, davpaaTov r)v,' 
 and he remarks that whereas antithesis takes the form of a contrary 
 to fact condition (et pev yap eyiveTO, 6 eylyveTo), to 8e evavrlov avaarpefai 
 to iv pay pa airo tu>v iraaxbvTwv ets rovs <5pd>vras. This feature of expression 
 is not rhetorical antithesis then, we infer, because in it the thought (to 
 irpaypa) is transferred from the subject to the object (d7ro tuv Trao-xbvT^v 
 ets rous 8pcbvTas), and hence does not come within what he conceives to 
 be the conventional mode for the figure. 28 
 
 28 Adopting Belling's suggested emendation (p. 30) for <rxvi*a ^oyos dnrXaaiafav. 
 
 27 Cf. similarly Anonymous (III, 12). The form of expression is common in the 
 orators; see below, note 27, page 32. 
 
 28 t6 kvavrlop seems to be merely another form of intra-clausal antithesis; see 
 below, p. 30. 
 
12 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 In conclusion, we notice that the later rhetoricians were able, by 
 resorting directly to the orators, particularly Demosthenes, to produce 
 certain new forms of antithesis. Aristotle, Anaximenes, Demetrius and 
 Theophrastus confined the figure within the limits of a single clause, or 
 of two mutually antithetic \xkv — hi clauses. With the later rhetoricians 
 the old forms were recognized, but the conception of antithesis had grown 
 to include various forms of extended clausal contrast (with or without 
 antithetic words), and the balanced periodic writing so common in 
 Aeschines and Demosthenes. The development of this latter type of 
 antithesis among the rhetoricians may not improbably have been the 
 outgrowth of Anaximenes's antithesis of Thought Only. The incubus 
 of a Word and Thought classification was not to be entirely discarded. 
 Or perhaps the latter nomenclature was an effort to revise and improve 
 that of Anaximenes to meet the demands of an enlarged conception of 
 the figure, as Theophrastus and Demetrius had revised that of Aristotle. 
 There were only two basic and radically different classifications in anti- 
 quity: that of Aristotle and Theophrastus, and that of Anaximenes. 
 The trend of the one was toward a structural analysis of what may be 
 termed the duplex-clausal antithesis; the other, under the misleading 
 terminology of the Word and Thought category, attempted to dis- 
 tinguish between clausal and intra-clausal antithesis, and added the 
 antithesis of Thought Only. 
 
 The inadequacy of Anaximenes's category of Word, Word and 
 Thought, and Thought Only, to express real distinctions was observed 
 both in Anaximenes and in Demetrius. Difficulty will always be met 
 in the attempt to use it with discrimination. 29 The whole force of a 
 clausal antithesis often lies in a single altered word of otherwise corre- 
 sponding clauses. Two such clauses are antithetical in thought (how 
 can we say otherwise?); yet they are so by dint of only a single pair 
 of antithetic words. 30 If these be classified as antitheses in Word Only, 
 at what point by the addition of antithetic words in the respective clauses 
 
 29 Jebb (Attic Orators, II, p. 81) speaking of antithesis in Isocrates, follows Anaxime- 
 nes directly; cf. Belling, p. 28, Vogel, In Dinarchum, p. 59 ff., and Lincke, Dc Eiocut. 
 Isaci, p. 50 ff. Volkmann, after discussing the various classifications of the Greek 
 and Roman writers, concludes with the statement that as a real rhetorical figure only 
 those antitheses can be considered which combine an opposition of both word and 
 thought (p. 487). Compare Robertson, p. 14. 
 
 30 This is the very common type of antithesis specified in the second part of Aris- 
 totle's definition of the figure; see the illustrative examples (note 17). 
 
ANTITHESIS AS TREATED BY GREEK RHETORICIANS 13 
 
 do they pass into the category of Word and Thought? The underlying 
 fallacy is evident. There is no distinction between word and thought: 
 a word is the embodiment and expression of thought. 31 Nor can we 
 with impunity dissociate the thought element as expressed in verb, 
 noun, or attributive, and classify an antithesis as one of Word or of 
 Thought. In "Let the rich give to the poor," there is not only a real 
 opposition of thought between rich and poor but the idea of giving on 
 the part of the rich necessarily implies its mental counterpart — that of 
 receiving on the part of the poor. It is thus a virtual active-passive 
 antithesis (Cf. dpaco— waaxw) so inseparably in all such cases are words 
 and ideas bound up together. Again, any contrast deserving the name 
 of antithesis contains either a direct or implied opposition of words. 
 In the sentence of Anaximenes, 'eyu fiiv tovtov voaovvra edepairevaa, ovtos 
 5' e/jLol iJceyLtTTcov kclkoiv cutios 75701^, there lies the implied verbal contrast: 
 "I did him good, but he did me evil." The antithesis remains the same 
 whether it is merely implied in the structure of the sentence or stated 
 explicitly. Every case of real antithesis, resolved into its elements, 
 contains an opposition of both word and thought. 32 
 
 We revert to Aristotle's classification (adopting the amendment of 
 Theophrastus). It is decidedly superior to that of Anaximenes in that 
 it obviates the error of the arbitrary terminology of the latter. In so 
 far as it classifies antitheses by the number of kvavria or opposite words 
 
 31 Two antithetic words which fail to convey the corresponding antithetic thought 
 constitute a false antithesis. See above, note 21. Cf. Thorndyke, The Elements of 
 Rhetoric and Composition, p. 267: Antithesis is "the setting over against each other 
 of contrasted ideas by means of contrasted words." 
 
 32 My contention is that behind really antithetic thought there always lurk explic- 
 itly antithetic words. In such cases as the above example, it is hard to draw the line 
 between a mere contrast, and the rhetorical figure antithesis. I should be inclined 
 to reject the example cited by Anaximenes as antithesis on the ground that it fails to 
 show the rhetorical design requisite for a figure of speech (cf. the definitions given by 
 Quintilian and Tiberius, above, p. 1, note 1. In selecting antitheses from the orators, 
 I have almost invariably required as evidence of the figure the presence in the same 
 period of at least a single pair of explicitly antithetic words — the only exceptions being 
 when, in a formal contrast, one of a common pair of antithetic terms is found and 
 the other implied (as l5ios — kolvo% in Ant. V, 79, and Isoc. I, 43). When certain 
 parts of an antithesis are stated only by implication, I have called it Partly Implied 
 (see instances below). 
 
 Cf. Genung, Working Principles of Rhetoric, p. 272: "The various phases under 
 which it (antithesis) appears rise largely from the varying proportions in which the 
 more inner contrast of thought or emotion supplant the outward expression." 
 
14 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 which they contain, it can be little improved upon. In one respect it 
 fails to meet the requirements: it includes only those antitheses wherein 
 the antithetic words occur in separate clauses. Neither Aristotle nor 
 Theophrastus seems to give place for an intra-clausal antithesis such as 
 Anaximenes erroneously termed kclt ovona. That this large class of 
 antitheses in Isocrates and, in fact, in all the orators is designedly anti- 
 thetical cannot be doubted. 
 
 A figure of speech so common and multiform as antithesis must needs 
 have its forms to a certain extent classified. In view of the above facts 
 it is proposed to discuss Antithesis in the Attic Orators broadly under 
 two heads: Clausal and Intra-clausal — endeavoring to express dis- 
 tinctions solely in grammatical terms and terms of structural relations. 
 It is not the purpose to present or follow an exhaustive category of classi- 
 fication. The object is rather to study antithesis in relation to, and as a 
 feature of, the author's literary style as a whole. 
 
 So much for the contributions of the Greek rhetoricians to the sub- 
 ject, and our own method of procedure. Before entering upon the main 
 field of study, a brief historical resume of the figure will be given, and 
 instances of its occurrence in literature before the Attic Orators. 
 
II. ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 
 
 Invention of the "Gorgianic" figures. In an earlier chapter we referred 
 to the antithetic feature in Hebrew literature, and indicated the grounds 
 of our belief that antithesis marks a state of linguistic development, the 
 origin of which cannot be reasonably attributed to any one person or 
 geographical section. In Greek literature Gorgias's name has been so 
 intimately connected with the figures of parallelism that he has sometimes 
 been called their inventor. This opinion rests on more or less vague 
 general statements of Diodorus (XII, 53, 2), Suidas, Cicero, 1 and Dio- 
 nysius of Halicarnassus. 2 The remarks of Diodorus (irpcbTos — exp^caro), 
 and Cicero (primus invenit), are found in close proximity to statements 
 regarding the excessive use which Gorgias made of antithesis and the 
 kindred figures, and we may assume with reason that their chief signi- 
 ficance is that Gorgias was the first to employ these figures extensively, 
 and possibly the first to give a treatment of them in his rex^. 3 Cer- 
 tainly, he did not do more than formulate principles for the use of a 
 feature of expression which was already current. This would account 
 for the figures being called "Gorgianic" (rds tov Topylov, axw aTa 
 Topyiela). Dionysius acknowledges Timaeus as the authority 
 for his statements, and it is likely that Diodorus followed the same 
 source. Now, Suidas says that Philiscus, pupil of Isocrates, was the 
 tutor of Timaeus; and Isocrates's intimate relations with Gorgias are 
 well known. The tradition of the so-called "Gorgianic" figures is thus 
 probably accounted for in large measure. 4 It is significant that Aris- 
 
 1 Cic. Orat. LII, 175: Nam, ut paulo ante dixi, paria paribus adjuncta et similiter 
 definita itemque contrariis relata contraria. Gorgias primus invenit, sed eis est usus 
 intemperantius. Quintilian follows this (DC, 3, 74). 
 
 2 Dionysius speaks with indignant criticism of Thucydides' use of antitheses, 
 parisa, homoeoteleuta, b> ah kirXeovaae Topyias 6 Aeovrlvos Kai ol irepi IlwXof Kai KvKvp.vi.ov 
 Kai iroWol dXXoi twv holt avrov aKpaaavruv (Ep. II, ad Am. 2). Cf. De Lys. 3, p. 458 
 fin., De Thucy. 24, p. 869. 
 
 3 Cf. Suidas (s. v. Gorgias): oCtos Trpwros tco 'prjropiKui eZ5ei ttjs iraideias ovvap.lv 
 re <ppa<7TiKT]v Kai rkxvr\v eSw/ce, rpoirals re Kai p.eTa<t>opals Kai aWrjyopiais Kai inraWayals 
 »cai Karaxprjatcn. Kai vwepfiaaeai Kai avaSiirXoiaeffi Kai eiravaXri^&n Kai aTroarpcxfrals 
 Kai 7rapiowe<ne kxpyiaaro, who mentions a number of figures without making Gorgias 
 responsible for their invention per se. 
 
 4 For an account of the tradition of the Gorgianic figures and the ancient sources, 
 see Barczat, pp. 1-12, whom I have followed. Cf. also Nieschke, De Thucy., p. 32. 
 
16 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 totle, who several times makes mention of Gorgias, nowhere connects 
 his name with the invention of these figures. 
 
 Certain it is that antithesis was used in poetry before the time of 
 Gorgias. Nor is evidence lacking that it was employed in prose. The 
 feature of style occurs in Herodotus. Whether or not Antiphon's 
 Tetralogies antedate Gorgias's visit to Athens, at any rate so close a 
 contemporary as Antiphon would not be likely to be indebted to Gorgias 
 for so well-developed a feature of his style. 5 Diels 6 finds unmistakable 
 traces of antithesis in Empedocles, while Norden 7 traces its origin to 
 Heraclitus. These writers undoubtedly employed the figure ; that either 
 of them was the inventor of antithesis seems improbable and destitute 
 of proof. 8 Nieschke has conclusively shown traces of antithesis in 
 Homer, Hesiod, and in Herodotus. 9 It is known that Gorgias and 
 Herodotus were both debtors to the prolific source and fount of inspira- 
 tion with which Greek education and letters were so thoroughly satur- 
 ated — Homer. 
 
 That antithesis was one of the earliest modes of expressing thought; 
 that it was indigenous among Attic writers; that it remained an effective 
 form of literary expression throughout the best period of Greek litera- 
 ture; but that in the hands of artificial writers it was abused, and among 
 later writers was partly abandoned in favor of the more subtle Figures 
 
 5 Cf. Becker, p. 10, followed by Belling, p. 62. 
 
 8 "Gorgias und Empedocles" in Sits. d. Bed. Ak., 1884, p. 343. Cf. Blass, Att. 
 Bered. I, 17, 2; 66, 5. 
 
 7 Kunstprosa I, p. 18 ff . Cf . Emped. 67 f. : oXXore p.ti> </>iX6r7jri awtpx6p.tv tis 
 tv airavra aWoTt 5' au 5ix' (naara 4>optvp.tva Netxeox ?x^« (61 f.) rdrt nlv yap Iv 
 fiv^Orj \xbvov iivai « irXtdvwv r6re 5' av 5u<j>v irXewa e£ hos elvai. See also Heraclitus, 
 irepi 4>v<t. (Bywater), (68): tov /3£ou ovvop.a /3Ios, ipyov Bavaroz. (39): rd 4>v\pa 
 Oiptrai, Otppx>v xj/vxtrai.' vypov abalvtraL, Kap4>o.\<tov vorl^eraL. (Ill) : xoXXoi Hanoi, 
 6X1701 di ayaddi. 
 
 8 Barczat (p. 10) cites C. I. A. 1 (456 B. C. according to Kirchoff): rd p.b> a/cowia 
 iirXfi — rd 5* ixobaia 5iir\ij. 
 
 9 De Thucy. Homeri Imitatore et Anliphontos Disci pulo, p. 68: Haec (schemata) 
 de industria quaesita poetac quidem elegiaci ut Solon et Theognis Homeri et Hesiodi 
 ingenium secuti praecipue in gnomis sive sententiis videntur adhibuisse, in quibus 
 hanc dicendi formam quasi nasci coepisse aut interavisse equidem puto. 
 
I, 
 
 137: 
 
 I, 
 
 395 
 
 III, 
 
 208 
 
 
 210-211 
 
 ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 17 
 
 of Thought, are facts which I believe a survey of the use of antithesis 
 prior to and including the Attic Orators will make clear. 10 
 Specimens of Antithesis in Greek literature prior to the Attic Orators} 1 
 
 Homer 
 II. I, 137: el 8'e Ke /jlt] buwoiv, kyu 8e Kelt avrbs eXa>pcu. 
 
 77 €7rei &vi]cras Kpa8lr]v Atos i\k kolI epyu. 
 a.p,d)OTepcov 81 d)vrjv k8ar)v nal fxrj8ea ttvkvcl. 
 oravTwv fxev Meve\aos virelpextv evpeas &p.ovs a/i0« 
 5' e%op.'evw, yepapkrepos rjev '08vaaevs. 
 IV, 197: rcjj p,ev fcXeos, appi 8e irevOos. 
 
 424 f . : ttovtw p.ev ra irpuTa Kopvaaerai, avrap eireira X^P^V 
 
 ' 'prffvbfievov p.eya\a flpefxet. 
 442 f . : ("Epis) 777-' 6X1777 p.ev xpwra KopvaaeTCU, avrap eireira 
 oiipavco ecrrripL^e napr] nal eirl x^ 0UL fiaivei. 
 IX, 367 f.: 7epas 8e p.01, oairep e8ooKev axms e<t>v(3plfav eXero 
 
 upelwv ' Ay ap.eiJ.vuv . 
 450: tt]v avrbs <$>CkeeoKev , aTipafecr/ce 5 clkoltlv. 
 XVIII, 252: dXX' 6 p,ev ap p.vdoiaiv, 6 8e eyxt'i iroWbu ev'iKa. 
 
 499 f : 6 p.ev evxeTO iravr airo8ovvai, 
 6 5' avalvero p.r]8ev eKeadai. 
 XX, 250: oiriroiov k elTryada tiros, rolov k eiraKovaais. 
 
 Od. Ill, 82: irpfos 8' 1j8' 181-q, ov Stj/uos (Cf. Od. IV, 314). 
 
 IV, 818: ovt€ irovuv ev el8<hs ovt ayopdwv. 
 
 VI, 149-153: el nev debs ea<n, tol ovpavbv evpvv exovaiv. 
 
 el 8e t'ls eaat (3poTcov,ol eirl x^ 0VL vaieTaovaiv. 
 
 10 Cf. Nieschke, De Figurarum quae ax^aTo Topyieia vocantur apud Herodotum, 
 p. 21: Nam multo ante Gorgias aetatem ve teres poetae Graeci illis ornamentis 
 universi non minus libenter et saepe, quam Empedoclem, usi sunt, neque ab Homero 
 usque ad Empedoclem facile ullus poeta qui eis careat, reperiri potest. Qua in re 
 non multum interest inter varia poesis genera, sed aeque omnes fere poetae elegiaci, 
 lyrici, tragici, comici idque saepe de industria mihi quidem videntur. 
 
 11 The following selections from the forerunners of the orators, though not exhaustive 
 are believed to be fairly representative of antithesis in antecedent Greek literature. 
 Reference is made to the following editions: Homer (Iliad), Monro, 1897; (Odyssey), 
 Merry, 1888; Hesiod, A. Rzach, 1902; Pindar, Christ, 1896; Simonides, Bergk, Poetae 
 Lyrici Graeci, Vol. Ill; Aeschylus, Weil, 1907; Sophocles, Dindorf, 1896; Euripides, 
 Nauck, 1901; Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, Nauck; Gorgias, Baiter-Sauppe, II, 
 p. 129; Herodotus, Kallenberg, 1901; Thucydides, Hude, 1901. 
 
 Besides reverting to the originals, I have drawn freely upon Nieschke, Stein, and 
 Robertson; for the Tragedians I am partly indebted to Hermanowski (pp. 10-12). 
 
18 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 VII, 60: 6 jiev wXecre \abi> — coXero 5' avros. 
 
 XIII, 297: av p.ev kaat. fiporwv ox' apiaTos airavroiv 
 
 — jSouXjy Kal fj.vdot.aiv. 
 299: eyoj 8' ev iraat. Oeolaiv p.t)t' t« kXco/xcu Kal akpftecnv. 
 There are doubtless unintentional antitheses in Homer, as in all 
 literature, and there is unintentional contrast. 12 Those cited, many of 
 them combining homoeoteleuton, indicate a decided antithetic turn. 
 We find here in Homer the first appearance of many of the most common 
 antitheses found in the Attic Orators: that between Word and Deed 
 (II. I, 395, XVIII, 252), Private-Public (Od. Ill, 82), Active-Passive 
 (H. XX, 250, Od. VII, 60); and that between Saying and Hearing, which 
 is frequent in the tragedians. There are also those between Good 
 and Bad, Give and Take, Mortal and Immortal. In view of these it 
 were idle to neglect this early source of antithesis. Homer's antitheses, 
 like his similes and his characters, were the common property of all suc- 
 ceeding writers. 
 
 Hesiod 
 
 Owing to the didactic character of the "Works and Days," antithesis 
 is for it a natural means of expression. There is seen in the following 
 selections a formal balancing of opposites — secured, as sometimes in 
 Homer, by repetition (101). The positive-negative type of antithesis 
 is particularly frequent in Hesiod (311), as are opposite terms formed 
 by a-privative ('ipyov — aepyirj, avoXfi'ui — 5X/3os, 319, etc.). 
 
 101: TrXeir) p.ev yap yala nanuv, irXdr} 8t doikaaaa. 
 287-291: tt)v p.kv tol KaKorrfra Kal lXa86v lariv eXkadai. 'prjidioos' Xeirj fiev 
 686s, paXa 6' kyyiidt. vain tt)s 8' aper^s tSpcira 8eol irpoirapoidev 
 Wr)Kav adavaroi. 
 311: epyov 8' ov8iv 6vti8os, depylr] r ovu8os. 
 342: tov (pLXeovr' kirl 8alra KaXelv, tov 8' kxQpov 'eaaai. 
 700-702: Ob p.tv yap tl yvvaiKOs avr/p X^'ifer' ap.€ivov tt)s ayadris' tt)s 5 
 avre Kauris oil 'plyiov aXXo, SeiTvoXoxys . 
 721: tl 8t KaKOV elirois, raxa k avros p.el£ov aKovaais. 13 
 
 " Cf. Benn, Early Greek Philosophers, p 12.. 
 
 "Other instances from the "Works and Days" (cited by Nieschke, De Thucy., 
 p. 67) are lines 5-7; 182-184; 213-244; 354-356; 365-369; 715-716; 726; 761-762. 
 
ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 19 
 
 SlMONIDES 
 tCov kv depp.oirv'kais davbvToiv 
 tvtckerjs fxh a rvxo., kolKos 8' 6 ttot/xos, 
 /3up6s <5' 6 racfros, irpb ybwv 8k uvacrTis, 6 8' 
 
 oIktos eircuvos' 
 
 kVTa(f>LOV 8k TOIOVTOV Ol!T kvpLOS 
 
 ovd' 6 wav8ap.aTwp ap.avpdoau xpbvos (Fr. 4). 
 
 TCLVTCL TOL KaXa, TOL(TL T alffXP a P-V pk/XlKTai (F f - 5). 
 
 XaXeirov 
 <f>ar' kadXbv enpevai. 
 debs av fibvos tovt 1 exot ykpas' &v8pa 8 ovk eari p.r) ov 
 
 Kaabv e/jLp.eva.1, 
 8v apiaxavos avp.(f)opa nadehy 
 irpa^ais yap ev xds avrjp ayaQbs, 
 kclkos 5', el nanus (ri) (Fr. 5). 
 MvpiacTLV 7tot€ rjj5e TpictKocricus kp.axovro 
 €K UeXoTOVpaaov x^XidSes rkropes (91). 
 Ov 8k redvacn davbvres, kwei o<$> aperr} icadvirepdev 
 Kv8aivova kvb.yzi Swparos e£ 'Ai'Sew (99). 
 p,vrip,a 5' airodtpevoiai warrip MeyapiaTos Wr)Ktv 
 adavarov dvqrols 7rcucu x<*pif6p€VOS (123). 
 ovtos 6 tov Keioio 2ipam5eco earl aacoT-qp, 
 os Kal Tedvrjus £covti irapkaxe X&P I - V (129). 
 
 Pindar 
 
 0. II, 17-19: tuiv 8k ireirpaynkvuv 
 
 kv 8Lkcl tc /cat 7rapd 8Lnav airolr]TOV ov8 av 
 Xpbvos b iravrcov iraTrjp 8bvaiT0 dep.ev epyuv reXos. 14 
 26: fcoet p.kv kv 'OXu/x7rtois airodavolaa fipbfico Kepavvov. 
 0. VIII, 19: r/v 8' kaopav na\bs, epyo? t' ov Kara fel8os ekkyxuv. 
 
 O. X, 22: di^p deov avv iraXapa. 
 
 63: ayuvtov kv 8b£a 0'ep.evos evxos, epyw nadeXdov. 
 O. XIII, 49: kyw 8k flbios en noivcp crraXets. 
 
 N. IV, 32: errel 'pk^ovra tl Tadelv eowev. 
 
 Isth. Ill, 71: p-opcpav jSpaxus yj/vxo-v 5' anaixirTOs. 
 
 VII, 43 f.: rd ixaxpa 8' el tls irairTalvei., ppaxvs k^iKecrOai x<*X- 
 
 Koire8ov deihv e8pav. lh 
 
 14 "Time, the producer of all things, is able to destroy nothing"— Seymour. 
 
 15 An approximation to antithesis is seen in the "Pindaric approach by parallels," 
 O.I, 1; III, 42; XI, 1; P. X, 11-12. 
 
20 antithesis in attic orators, antiphon to isaeus 
 
 Aeschylus 
 
 Pers. 93: 8o\6pr]Tiv 5' airarav deov rts dvrjp OvaTOs dXi>£tt ) 
 
 763: ev' av8p' airacris 'AchSos prjXoT pocpov rayelv. 
 813: tol yap /ca/ccos 8pa<xavTas ovk eXacraova iraaxovai. 
 Prom. 336: tpyo? k ov Xoyco TtKp.alpop.aL. 
 
 888 f.: irpoiTOs ev yvaipa t68' efiao~Taae 
 
 /cat yXccaaa 8itpvdoX6yr]o~€v. 
 927: {padrjcreTai) oaov to t apxtw Kal to SovXeveiv 8ixo- 
 1030 f. : cos 65' ov Tre-rrXao-pevos 6 /cojuxos, dXXd Kal Xiav eiprjpkvos. 
 1080 f . : /cat prjv epyco, /cowcert pvdeo. 
 Agam. 750-762: 7raXdtc/>aTos 5' ev fipoTols yepoov Xoyos 
 
 TiTVKTaL, peyav TeXeadevra 0cot6s oXfiov 
 TtKvovcQai pr)8' a7rat5a Qvr\aKeiv, 
 e/c 5' a7a0ds Ti>xas y'evei « 
 
 (5XaaTavei.v a.Kopeo~TOV o't£vv. 
 8ix& 8' dXXcov pov64>pot)v ei- 
 pl. to cWcre/Ses yap epyov 
 peTa pev irXeiova rucret. 
 a4>€Tepa 8' ei/cora Yei^a. 
 OLKdv 5' dp' ebdv8iKwv 
 KaWLiraLS iroTpos del. 
 1527: d£ta Spaaas, d£ta iraax^v. 
 1564: iradelv tov ep^avra (Cf. Choeph. 1016 ff). 
 Choeph. 520: rd iravra yap tis e/cx«as avd' alparos evbs. 16 
 
 906 f.: tovt(jo davovaa avyKadev8' , eirel c/JtXets tov dv8pa tovtov, ov 
 °' tXPW 4> L Xelv crriryets. 
 
 Sophocles 
 
 Antig. 14: pta davovTuv ypepa 5t7rXj/ x*Pt- 17 
 
 88: 6eppi]v eirl xf/vxpolcrt Kap8lav exeis. 1% 
 272 f. : t)v 6 pvdos cbs avoioT'eov . cot Tovpyov etrj tovto kovtI 
 
 KpOVTTTtOV. 
 
 713 f.: /cXwi'as cos e/cacbfcrai to 5' dvrtrcti'Oi'r' avTOirpep diroX- 
 Xurat. 
 
 18 Cf. Septem 1050: dXX' eU airavTas cufi' ivbs t68' Ipyov f)t>. 
 
 17 The antithesis is strained: 6i7rXjj being used in the sense of "reciprocal." 
 
 18 Cf. O. C. 621 f; also Vergil, Aen. IX, 414: Volvitur Me women* calidum de pettorc 
 flumen Frigidus. See also Hor. 'Ars. Pod. 465: ardentem frigidus\Aetnam insiluit. 
 
ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 21 
 
 744 f. : Kp : ap.apTa.voi yap rds euds dpxds erenow; At: ov yap 
 
 ae/3ets, rt/uds ye tcls deoiv iraT&v. 
 757: fioifkei. XeyeLV tl nal Xkyuv p.r]bev icXveiv ; 19 
 766 f.: av-qp, ava%, fikdrjKev e£ bpyfjs raxvs' voiis 5' karl ttjXlkovtos 
 aXyijaas (3apv<;. 
 Philoct. 555 f.: kov p.bvov fiovXevpaTa, dXX' epya bpcopev' , oiker' e^apy- 
 
 ovp.eva. 
 0. R. 524: bpyfi (SiacrOev paXXov fj yvcopy cfrpevuv.™ 
 600: ovk av ykvoiTO vovs Kaws koXuis 4>povwv. 
 614 f.: (kirtl) xPopos binaiov 'dvbpa beUvvaLv pbvos nanbv be kolv 
 kv rjp'epa yvoir]s pta. 
 Ajax 1085 f. : xai p.i] boKupev bpuvres av fibcopeda ovk avTnioeiv aidis 
 
 dv Xvircopeda. 
 El. 59 f. : t'l yap pe Xvnel rovd' , orav Xoycc davwv epyoiai acodu) 
 
 Ka^evkyK<jop.aL /ca/cov. 21 
 O. C. 306 f . : cocrre net fipabvs ov Set, kXvoov gov bevp' d0i£eTat raxvs. 
 
 Euripides 
 
 Med. 17 f.: irpobovs yap avrov reava becnroTiv t ep.rp) ydp.OLs 'laacov 
 /3acrtXt/cots ewdfeTat. 22 
 473 f. : kyu re yap Xk^acra Kov4>Lcrdr](TopaL \pvxw Ka/cws ce /cat av 
 XvirrjaeL kXvuv. 
 Ale. 339: \6yto yap -qcrav ov epyco (frLXoL. 23 
 
 Hec. 289 f . : as to irpwrov ovk eKTeivare fiu/A&v airoaTrauavTes, dXX 
 ci/cretpare. 
 904 ff. : xdert 7ap kolvov robe 
 
 ibia 8' eKaoTLO Kal xoXet, tov pev KaKOV 
 KaKov tl TaaxeLP, tov be x9W rov evrvxelv. 24 
 
 19 Cf. Alcaeus, Frag. 63: at €171-775 ra diXeis, avros avKovcrais *ce re k ov 6k\eis. 
 "The hearing ear is always found close to the speaking tongue" — Emerson, English 
 Traits. 
 
 20 For the terms, cf. Thucy. II, 22; Ant. V, 72. 
 
 21 For other Myos— tpyov antitheses, cf. El. 557 f.; 624 f.; O. C. 782, 873. 
 
 22 The emphatic words avrov and tpr\v suggest a false antithesis. 
 
 23 For other \6yos — Ipyov antitheses in Euripides, cf. I. A. 1115; Orest. 287. 
 Phoen. 526; El. 893. See also Phoen. 359 f. (\6yos—vovs) ; Heracl. 542 (\6yoi— tvxv). 
 
 24 rov 5e xpt)<jrbv evTvxtlv is added merely for the sake of the antithesis to 
 tov — 7rao-x«n', and is not appropriate to the context, for all that Agamemnon is 
 insisting upon is the punishment of the wicked — Heberden. 
 
22 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 I. A. 554-557: e'Lrj 8k p.oi p-erpia pev xdpts, irodot 8' ouioi, 
 
 Kai perkxoipt- ras A</>po5iTas TroXXau 8 cnrodelpav. 
 957: os 6X17' aXrjdfj, iroWa 8e \pev8ij XeY€i 
 990: d\X' ev p.ev apxos eliras, ev 8k nal rkXrj. 
 El. 371 f.: (r/Sr? yap eldov) 
 
 \1p6v t' ev av8pos irXovolov (ppovrjpaTi, 
 
 yvwprjv 8k peyakqv kv irkvr\Ti crcbpari. (cf. Hel. 160, 161). 
 1044 f . : elra tov p.kv oil Oavelv 
 
 KTt'ivovTa XPV P T dp j 'M* ft* irpbs nelvov iraBelv 
 Or. 743: wov 'ariv 7) Tr\eio~TOVs 'Axoluv Cikeoev yvvrj p.iaf 5 
 
 Hel. 922 f.: aioxpbv rd pkv ae dela -navr e£ei8kvai 
 
 to. t ovra Kal JL117, ra 8k 81x0.1.0. pij el8kvai. 
 Tr. 637: tov lr\v 8k Xvirpibs Kpeloabv eon Karadavelv. 26 
 
 It is clear from the above examples that antithesis was a well-known 
 and favorite feature of expression among the early poets and the trage- 
 dians. End-rhyme (homoeoteleuton), whether by chance or design is 
 often associated with it. Without repeating the quotations, we may note 
 the fact that the principal forms of antithetical construction followed 
 by the Attic Orators were anticipated by the poets who preceded them. 
 There is intra-clausal antithesis by means of paXXov ri (Soph. 0. R. 
 524), and by ovk— dXXd (Aesch. Prom. 336, 1080, Eur. Ale. 339), and 
 that which is secured by normal case relations within the sentence 
 (Aesch. Prom. 763, Soph. Antig. 88, Eur. Ale. 743). 27 In the antithesis 
 of coordinate clauses, the most common form is that where a single 
 kvavTiov occurs in each clause. Examples of two opposites in each 
 clause are not wanting (Soph. O. R. 614, Eur. El. 371, 1. A. 554). Length- 
 ier antitheses with a more complicated arrangement of terms occur 
 in Homer, Ody. VI, 149-153; XIII, 297-299; Eur. Hec. 904 ff. One 
 of the clauses is subordinate in Homer II. I, 137, IX, 367, 
 Hesiod 101, 342, 700, 721, Pindar N. IV, 32, Simonides Fr. 129, Aesch. 
 Pers. 813, Soph. O. R. 600, O. C. 306, Eur. Hec. 289, 1. A. 957. 
 
 24 Euripides is fond of the numerical antithesis. Cf. Orest. 7, 1244; Hipp. 1403; 
 Heracl. Fur. 1139, 1391; Andr. 1116; I. A. 1358, 1390, 1394. 
 
 M This antithesis, in almost the identical form, occurs Aesch. Frag. 401; Soph. 
 Ajax 479, Frag. 448; Eur. I. A. 1252, Frag. 596; and throughout the orators, especially 
 Isocrates; see List of Antithetic Terms, p. 69. 
 
 27 Antithesis between prepositions occurs Pindar O. II, 17-20 (h — irapA); by means 
 of prepositions, Find. O. XIII, 49, (Wios i« koivCo), Aesch. Choeph. 520 {irhvra 6.vd' hds). 
 
ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 23 
 
 Some of the antitheses seem artificial; e. g., Aesch. Choeph. 906 f. (c/>iXeis 
 — arvyels), Soph. Antig. 744 (aeffcov — ttcltuv), Eur. Hec. 904; and some 
 are strained (Soph. Antig. 14, Eur. Med. 17). In fact, antithesis since 
 Homer seems to have passed through the various stages of rare, moder- 
 ate, and intemperate usage to be noted in prose. By Pindar and Simon- 
 ides it is used occasionally and with sententious effect; in Aeschylus 
 and Sophocles, more extensively; in Euripides, we find its frequent 
 abuse, and its artificiality shown in the more frequent homoeoteleuta. 28 
 It is a short step between poetry and early prose. 29 Bearing in mind 
 that antithesis was by no means a new phenomenon in Greek literature 
 before the advent of prose, but a well-developed rhetorical device, we 
 shall, even at the risk of some chronological discrepancy, consider 
 Gorgias first, then Herodotus and Thucydides, before speaking of Anti- 
 phon and the succeeding orators. 
 
 Gorgias 
 The following selections are from the Epitaphios, and, indeed, con- 
 stitute the greater part of the remains of his masterpiece; they are the 
 main criterion for judging the character of his style. 
 
 OepairovTes p.ev twv abUiOs bvvTvxovvTWV , 
 KoXaaral be rdv abUccs evrvxovvTcov. 
 
 /xaprupia be tovtuv rpoirata earr/aavTO twv iroXefxlwv , 
 
 Aids p.ev aycLK/iara avT&v be avadr]p.a.Ta. 
 
 tL yap airr/v toIs avbpaai. tovtols oiv bel avbpaat irpoaelvai ', 
 
 tL be /cat irpoa-qv wv ov del Tpoaelvai ', 
 
 TOiyapovv avribv airodavovTwv 6 toOos ov aw aired avev, 
 
 dXX' adavaros ev aawfxaroLs awp.aoi $r) ov £6)vtoqv. 
 
 dinaioi p.ev irpbs tovs aarovs T(j> i'crco, evoefiels be irpos 
 
 tovs (plXovs rfi TrlcTTei 
 
 aeixvol p.ev rrpos tovs Qeovs rc3 chkcuco ocnoi be wpos 
 
 tovs TOKeas Trj depawela. 
 
 ovtol yap eu'eKTUVTO evOeov fiev ttjv apeTrjv, avdpwirivov be to dvrfTov. 
 
 \a6(j)v p.ev T-qv deiav vep.eo~iv, 4>vy<hv be tov avdpcowLvov <f>66vov. 
 
 to. p.ev /card tuv j3ap(3apo)v Tpoirata vp.vovs airanel, to. 
 
 be twv *Kk\r]v<j)v dp-qvovs. 
 
 28 As regards the antithetic terms used we may note the extensive use of the 
 A670S — epyov antithesis, also of ISios — /cotws, Space — wacrxu, dv-qros — deos, Xeycti-aKovu, 
 and antitheses in 4>vais and yv6ip.r\. These are noted under the proper head at the 
 beginning of the antithetic word lists of the orators. '.S\ 
 
 29 Cf. Arist. Rhet. Ill, 1, 1404 a: eirel 8' 61 7ronjTai \iyoures eirrjO-q 5td rr\v Xe£if edoKovv 
 ■KoplaauBai Tt)v5e S6£av, 5id tovto Troi^TLKrj irpuTTj eytvero Xefts, olov 17 Topyiov. 
 
24 ANTITHESIS IX ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPIION TO ISAEUS 
 
 Gorgias's prose bears striking resemblance to poetry and it is not un- 
 likely that he had made careful study of Homer and had read the trage- 
 dies of Aeschylus and Sophocles before his initial appearance at Athens 
 (427 B. C.). The immoderate use of the figures of parallelism was cen- 
 sured by Dionysius as peipaiacbdes nai Kadairepd irolrjpa {De Lys. 14). 30 
 The jingle, the straining of meaning to obtain antithetical effect, and" 
 the excessive use of these figures were characteristic features of the Gor- 
 gianic prose. 31 Connoisseur in antithetic writing that he was, he startled 
 and fascinated the Athenians and bid for the name of evper-qs. We cannot 
 assume that he originated the art in the highly developed stage which 
 his prose represents, or that the feature of expression was unknown or 
 unpractised by the Athenians. While the excessive use of these figures 
 in prose was perhaps unusual, the Athenians had met. them to a moderate 
 extent in the narrative of Herodotus. 
 
 Herodotus 
 
 We are not surprised to find in Herodotus's prose the basic contrasts 
 of Greek-Barbarian, Free-Slave. The following passages from the 
 speeches and narrative portions of the History show that he not infre- 
 quently accentuated his contrasts designedly by the opposition of par- 
 ticular words. We observe the use of the \670s — epyov, and other 
 antithetic terms common in later prose. avTiperafioXr) (inversion of the 
 order of terms in the second member of an antithesis) occurs III, 72. 
 Nieschke thinks it very unlikely that Herodotus followed Protagoras 
 Empedocles, or Gorgias as regards this kind of writing; he notes the 
 Pindaric influence in his prose, and shows the similarity of Herodotus's 
 narrative with certain portions of the Homeric poems. 32 
 I, 5: rd pev to ttclXcu peyaXa rjp, to. iroWa avrdv (jpiKpa. ykyove, 
 
 tol 8e €7r' kfxev r\v peyaXa, Tporepov -qv apiKpa. 
 I, 126: ttjv pev yap irporepriv -fjpkprjv -rravra a<f>i /ccucd extiv, tt)v 8e totc 
 
 irapeovoav irhvTa ayada. 
 
 30 Cicero (Oral. LII, 175) speaks of the cadence which the balanced clauses lend 
 the speaker's periods: (contraria) quae sua sponlc etiam si id nan agOS codunt plcrumquc 
 numerose. 
 
 31 Ci. Robertson, p. 31. See also the Platonic parody of Gorgias, Gorg. +4S c, and 
 ci. Phaedr. 267 a. 
 
 For the so-called " Gorgianic " Helen, sec below, p. 63 ff. 
 
 w De fi^urtirum quae axw^ra Topyula. vocanlur aplld Hcrodoium ttsu, pp. 14-17; 
 20-23. 
 
ANTITHESIS BEFORE THE ATTIC ORATORS 25 
 
 I, 133: (tItolctl 8k okiyoLGi xptwvrai., kirt.(f)opr}pao~i 8k iroWolai. 
 
 I, 210: os 6.VTL pkv 8ov\uv eiroirjcras eXevdepovs Hkpaas elvai, avrl 8k 
 
 apXtaOai vtt' aWoiv apx^-v airavTO>v. 
 11,33: rpecpeiv tovs TOKkas rolcn pkv iraial ovSepla avaynr] pr\ (3ov\opevoicn, 
 Tflal 8k dvyarpacn iraaa avaynr) Kal pi] ftovXopkvycri. 
 
 II, 68: t6 iroXXbv rrjs ijpkpas 5iarpi3ei kv rci £r7pw, rr\v 8k vvkto. irdaav 
 kv rc3 iroTapu). 
 
 III, 32: tov pkv Kap(3vaea rjSeadai decopevov, tt\v 5k Wappkvqv 8aKpbeiv. 
 Ill, 53: ttoWoI 8k r\8ri ra p,7]Tp(j0La 8i^rjpevoi ra xaTpoaa dirkSaXov. 
 
 Ill, 72: 7roXXd kern to. Xbyco pkv ovk old re SrjXcbaai, epyco 8k' dXXa 5 
 earl ra Xbyui pkv old re, epyov 8k ov8kv air' avrwv Xapirpbv yiyveraL. 
 (For X670S — epyov, cf. also IV, 8, VI, 38). 
 
 Ill, 72: bpoicos av 6 re dXr}Qi$bpevos \pev8rjs e'ir) Kal b \pev8bpevos dXrjOrjs. 
 
 Ill, 80: <$>Qqv'eei yap rolai dptcrrotcrt — x a tpa 8k rolai KanlcrTOicri rcov 
 kardv. 
 
 VI, 41 : kirolrjae Kanov pkv ov8kv lA-qrloxov ay add 8k avxva. 
 
 VI, 56: arparevopkvwv 8k rcpwrovs Ikvai rovs /3a<nXeas, vardrovs 8k dirikvau 
 
 VII, 11: dXXd -KOikeiv 77 iradelv -wpooKeerai aywv, 'iva r) rd8e irdvra virb 
 "EXXrjcrt 7) kneiva irdvra vwb Ukparjai ykvqrai. 
 
 VII, 38: to aol pkv kXa<ppbv rvyxb-vei kbv virovpyrjaai, kfjiol 8k pkya ye.vbp.evov. 
 VII, 47: p.t]8k KaKwv pepvewpeda, xP r ?o" r d exovres kv x e P°^- 
 VII, 50: Kpkaaov 8k irdvra dapakovra TJpicrv rcov 8eivdv irdax^v pdXXov 
 f) ttolv XPV/J-O- irpo8eipalvovra prj8apa pt]8kv iraOelv. 
 
 Thucydides 
 
 Thucydides was not a forerunner of all the orators: he was a dis- 
 ciple of Antiphon. A historical resume would hardly be complete 
 without mentioning his highly antithetic style. This characteristic 
 feature of his writing has been carefully studied by various scholars 
 (See Stein, pp. 5-6). I shall, therefore, refer to these more exhaustive 
 studies, and give only a few typical examples from the many and elabor- 
 ate antitheses, which sometimes merely adorn, but for the most part 
 vitalize the narrative and intrench his arguments. 
 
 II, 48, 3: d kirMxrapevos tu> pkv epyco en kir' dp(pbrepa ex^v Kal 8ia<JKOir&v 
 avelxt, Tcjj 5' kp4>avel Tore Xbyco ovk ecfrr] dira^eLV rr\v arparidv? 3 
 VII, 34, 7: diroirXevadvrcov 8k rcov ' Adrjvaicov es r-qv NaviraKrov ol Kopivdioi 
 eWiis rpoiralov earrjaav cos viKcovres, otl irXelovs tuv evavriuv vavs airXovs 
 eTroirjaav Kal vopiaavres 6V avrb ovx rjaaaadai 8l' oirep ov8' ol erepoi vlkclv. ol 
 
 33 The X670S — epyov antithesis occurs about fifty times in Thucydides (Marchant). 
 
26 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, AXTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 re yap Kopivdiot rjyrjaavTO uparelv, el pi) iroXv enparovvTO, ol re 'AdrjvaZoi 
 
 evbpi^ov -qaadadaL, el p?) tto\v evlnuiv. 
 
 II, 11, 5: XPV 8e a ' Ui & tji iro\ep,la rjj p.ev yvwp.fl dapaa\eovs arpaTeveiv, 
 
 tu> be epyui bebtbras irapaaneva^eadat.. 5 * 
 
 IV, 61, fin: ol t eir'iKKrjTOL einr peircos Sl8lkol ekObvres evXbyccs airpaKroi. 
 
 II, 60, 2: e7o> yap riyovp.ai ttoXlv irXeloo %vp.Taoav bpdovp.'evr)v &(j>e\eiv 
 
 tovs Ibturas ft Ka8' enaGTOV tccv ttoKltuv evirpayovaav, adpbav be a4>a\\ofxevriv. 
 
 II, 62, 5: kcu rrjv rb\piav airo ttJs opoias rvxys -q %vvecris eK tov i)irep<j)povos 
 
 exvpwTepav irapextTai, eh-wlbi re r\oaov iriaTevei, rjs ev tcc airbpco 17 Icrxvs, 
 
 yvup-ii be airb tCop virapxbvTwv, 77s /3e/3atOTtpa 17 irpbvoLa. 
 
 I, 70, 6: rols p.ev o~wp.aaiv aXXorpiwrarois xmep Tqs irbXeus xPwvtcu, 
 
 rfi yvcop.ji be oiKeioraTfl es to irpaooeiv ti inrep au-njs. 35 
 
 Most scholars agree, I think, with Croiset, that there is a constant 
 dual opposition of ideas: "Le moule de la phrase rend sensible cette 
 perpetuelle opposition." 36 Moreover, the grave historian is sometimes 
 led astray through imitation of Gorgias, and the precision of his care- 
 fully formed antitheses is often only apparent. Stein, however, defends 
 Thucydides's style against the aspersions of Dionysius and the criticisms 
 of modern interpreters. He selects as a typical example the famous 
 passage in I, 70, 8, where the Athenians and Spartans are compared, 
 pointing out the pleasing and unaffected symmetry of the antitheses. 37 
 The most elaborate antitheses are found in the speeches, from which 
 illustrative examples are usually taken. Similar phenomena, in a slightly 
 less degree, characterize the narrative portions. They all reveal him 
 a consummate master of rhetorical devices. 
 
 34 "The antithesis is only partial: yv&py 6apoa\kovs answers to ?P7V 5t6i6ras, 
 but not (TTpartOtiv to irapaoKevatecrdai, except in SO far as aTpaTtveiv, which refers 
 to the whole enterprise, is opposed to vapaaKeva^eadat, implying the details of 
 preparation " — Jowett. 
 
 Figures in yvo>p.ai. are common throughout Thucydides; cf. II, 87: von'iaai Si rati 
 p.iv T&xais kvdixtoQa-t- cr<t>aK\ta9ai tovs avdpwirovs, rals Si yvo>p.ais roi'S avrovs altl opdoin 
 tlvai. Compare I, 144, 4. ■yuoifir] — tv\v is a common antithesis in Antiphon (V, 5, 72, 
 92). See also wapeaKtvrt—rOxv VI, 23, 3; VII, 67, 4. 
 
 36 Jowett improves the strained antithesis between dXXoTpwordrots and oiKeiordTp: 
 "Their bodies they devote to their country as if they belonged to other men; their 
 true self is their mind, which is most truly their own when employed in her service." 
 Compare Isoc. IV, 86; Lys. [II, 24]. See also Thucy. II, 44: ko2 oh ivivSainovriaai rtd 
 film 6polun Kal ivTtXtvTTJaai {w</i«t pt)0r), where the word ivTtXtvrriaai (requiring kv 
 avrib to complete it) is a Strained parallel to ivtv8aip.oi>rjoai. A false antithesis^oc- 
 curs VII, 69, 2. 
 
 * Croiset, Thucydide, Intr. p. 115 ff. Cf. Blass, I, 217 ff. 
 
 37 Stein, p. 7 ff., and p. 14. 
 
III. ANTITHESIS IN THE ATTIC ORATORS FROM ANTIPHON 
 
 TO ISAEUS 
 
 From the foregoing survey we observe that antithetical writing was 
 not confined to any particular epoch, or to any special branch of litera- 
 ture. Its origin is as inconspicuous and evasive as the first efforts of a 
 language to be artistic. A feature common to all language growth, it 
 had its origin from within; impetus towards a greater developement 
 was gained from foreign as well as domestic sources. 
 
 The Attic Orators consequently found at their disposal a fairly well- 
 developed figure of speech, and one particularly adapted for the exigen- 
 cies of forensic speaking, where thought must have the strength of 
 persuasion, and where there was a premium on artistic expression. 
 In studying a figure in this domain of literature, due allowance must be 
 made for individual bent of genius. Writers of the same period are not 
 equally committed to antithetic writing. The decline in the use of 
 antithesis noticeable in Isaeus is observed in succeeding orators also and 
 hence marks this as an important stage in the development of the figure. 
 Formal antithesis had reached the limit of its growth, and gradually 
 yielded ascendency to the subtler Figures of Thought. 
 
 As previously stated, the subject will be considered broadly under 
 the heads of Clausal and Intra-clausal antithesis. The forms of Clausal 
 antithesis will be studied by authors in order to better observe individ- 
 ual traits of antithetical writing. The varieties of Intra-clausal antith- 
 esis, being more uniform, will first be severally taken up. 
 
 Intra-clausal Antithesis. There is frequent and intentional contrast 
 in the orators within the limits of a single clause. It assumes a variety 
 of forms, some of them so common and uniform as to be regarded as 
 stereotyped formulas of contrast (ovk — dXXa, fxaWop 77). Andocides 
 employed certain forms of it because they were simple and effective; 
 Antiphon and Isocrates studied thereby to heighten the effect of their 
 antithetical periods. Generally in Lysias, always in Isaeus, this method 
 of contrast directly strengthens the argument. Isocrates, most an- 
 tithetical of the orators, employs the forms most frequently. 
 
 Mention should first be made of a cognate form of intra-clausal 
 contrast, which is not, strictly speaking, antithesis — the so-called "Polare 
 Ausdrucksweise," or mannerism of mentioning a concept not as a whole, 
 but by dividing it into opposite component parts, in order to express it 
 
28 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 the more fully. 1 In place of saying 7repi ttclvtuv tvopoderricrev, Isocrates 
 says (XV, 255) : ovtos yap irepl rdv binaiuv Kai rdv abinoiv nal tccv kclKccv kcu 
 twv aiaxpuv kvopoderrjaev. See also Ant. VI, 22. 2 The most common 
 antithetical terms — \6yos-epyov, l8ios-kolvos, ^kvos-iroKiTris (Lysias), 
 *EXXr;res-/3dp/3apoi (Isocrates) — are found in this universal form of expres- 
 sion. The linked words are ordinarily nouns, but prepositional phrases 
 are frequent, particularly in Isocrates. 3 It is copiously employed by 
 Isocrates, especially in orations IV, XII, and XV; oration VIII, one 
 of the most highly antithetic, is noticeably devoid of it. The other 
 orators use the form sparingly. 
 
 The two most common and effective forms of brief antithesis are 
 those by means of ovk — dXXd and paXKov ^. 4 <rxw a KaT ' apaiv Kai Bkoiv 
 is the name given by rhetoricians to the method of strengthening an 
 assertion by juxtaposing the denial of its opposite (by ovk — dXXd, /cat ov). h 
 Only those forms are considered here which are antithetical, and are 
 intra-clausal. The form is used to contrast 1. nouns: these are for 
 the most part objects of verbs, 6 or datives (mostly of specification); 7 
 
 1 For the psychological motive of this kind of writing, and instances of it in Homer, 
 the tragedians, and all Greek literature, see Kemmer, Polare Ausdrucksweise. 
 
 2 Other instances noted are Ant. IV, 5 5; Andoc. Ill, 17; Lys. XII, 35, 78; XY1II, 
 13; XXI, 18; Isoc. IV, 27, 78, 108; V, 53; VI, 53; VII, 4; VIII, 33; IX, 59; XII, 57, 222, 
 224; XV, 180; Isae. II, 32 bis; VIII, 12. 
 
 3 Cf. locos— koivos in IV, 78; VIII, 55; XII, 222; XV, 180, 262; XVII, 54. Kai 
 Kara yijv Kai Kara ddXaTrav occurs V, 47, 63; VI, 53, 74; VII, 7; VIII, 68; IX 54; 
 XVI, 18. 
 
 4 While by strict grammatical construction the word contrasts with ovk — dXXd and 
 naWov fi may be regarded as clausal, yet, certainly, such expressions as epyy Kai ov \6yiji 
 (Isae. II, 38) and tvxv h&Wov fi yvtonv (Andoc. I, 140) were felt as belonging to the 
 same verb, and considered intra-clausal. Where single concepts are thus contrasted, 
 I have treated them as intra-clausal — including the combination of infinitive or noun 
 with adverb or prepositional phrase (e. g., Isoc. II, 36: aipov rtSvavai Ka\w naWov rj 
 £rii> aioxpus); where the contrast is more extended, or the second verb or verbal 
 clearly expressed, the phenomenon has been considered under clausal antithesis. 
 
 6 See Hermogenes (II, 328), Anon. (Ill, 29), Yolkmann, p. 560. 
 
 •Ant. Ill, 7 1 1 ; V, 6; Lys. XXIV, 16; XXVII, 13; Isoc. 1,27; II. 22, 2>- Y. 113; 
 VI, 98; IX, 77; XV, 292; Isae. V, 30; VII, 35 bis. 
 
 7 Ant. II, 5 8; III, y 1, 3; IV, y 3; Lys. [XX, 1); Isoc. Ill, 47; IY, 132; VI, <*); 
 Isae. II, 38, 45. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC OKATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 29 
 
 2. attributives; 8 3. infinitives; 9 4. prepositional phrases (particu- 
 larly in Lysias and Isocrates) ; 10 5. adverbs (in Isocrates). 11 12 
 
 A parallel method of contrast, occurring with hardly less frequency 
 in the same orations, is that by means of comparison. Simple com- 
 parison (the second word often being immediately juxtaposed in the 
 genitive case) is frequent in Lysias and Isocrates. 13 A more common 
 form is the contrast of opposite words or phrases by /jlclWov rj. The 
 use is restricted to nouns and infinitive phrases (attributives not being 
 thus contrasted as in the previous form). The nouns, again, are generally 
 objects of verbs 14 or of prepositions, 15 datives, 16 or possessive genitives. 17 
 A frequent and distinctive use is that with infinitive phrases — used 
 either as subject or object. These often show striking uniformity. 
 Isocrates says [IV, 95] : alperurepov eari kclXojs airodavelv r) £r/v cucrxpws ', 
 the same or similar terms occur in almost the identical form in Andoc. 
 I, 57, Isoc. II, 36, IV, 77, V, 47, VI, 8, 89. Similarly, Lys. XIX, 54: 
 fiovXeade r)p,as SiKaicos ooioai /j,a\\ov rj adUcos d7roXecrat. See also Andoc. 
 [IV, 25]; Lys. XXX, 33; Isoc. XVII, 54. 18 The infinitives, as the 
 
 8 Qualifying the subject: Lys. XVIII, 2; XXIV, 18; Isoc. IV, 80; VIII, 21; X, 
 37; XV, 54; Isae. V, 29; VII, 34. 
 
 Qualifying the object: Isoc. VIII, 39; XII, 72; Ep. LX, 7. 
 Adjectival clauses occur Lys. [XX, 13]; Isoc. VIII, 70. 
 
 9 Lys. XII, 1, 60; XXVI, 1, 9; Isoc. IV, 80; IX, 28; XVIII, 40. 
 
 10 Ant. II, 5 8, 10; III, 8 4; Lys. I, 47; XII, 51, 78; XVIII, 1; XIX, 61; XXXI, 26; 
 Isoc. I, 43; IV, 91, 132, 154; V, 29, 86, 115, 119; VI, 36, 104; LX, 45, 55, 60. 
 
 11 Isoc. IV, 104; V, 142; VIII, 134; LX, 23, 44; XII, 72; XV, 10; Ep. V, 2. Cf. 
 Ant. II, 5 10. 
 
 12 Cf. ol'x oirws, Isoc. XI, 41; Isae. V, 24; VIII, 25. This form is found more fre- 
 quently with clausal construction; see note 35. 
 
 13 Ant. VI, 25; Lys. VII, 30; XII, 86; XXXIII, 8; XXXIV, 5 bis; [II, 33]; Isoc. 
 1, 10 ter; VIII, 13 bis, 26, 58; XII, 121, 263; Ep. VII, 2. Cf. also Andoc. I, 57; [IV, 15]; 
 Isae. I, 29; III, 66. 
 
 14 Ant. I, 25; Lys. XII, 80; XLX, 61; XXIV, 14; [II, 62]; Isoc. I, 38; IV, 50, 81, 
 111, 151; VI, 67; VII, 62; VIII, 39, 93, 120, 128; X, 65; XII, 174; Ep. II, 1; Isae. I, 34. 
 
 15 Ant. V, 6; Isoc. IV, 77, 168; VII, 11, 33; VIII, 93; LX, 3; XII, 240; XV, 158; XX, 
 19. 
 
 16 Ant. V, 5; VI, 1; Andoc. I, 140; Isoc. II, 33; III, 61; V, 110; XVIII, 10. 
 
 17 Ant. II, 5 7; Isoc. I, 6, 22; II, 36; Ep. VI, 11. See also Isoc. VIII, 93, 106. 
 
 18 Cf . Aeschy. Frag. 401 : 
 
 fwijs Trovr)pas 9a.va.Tos alpercbrepos" 
 to p.17 yevtcrdai 5' kaTiv fj ire<pvKei>ai 
 Kptlaaov KaKihs ira.ax 0VTa - 
 See also Eur. Tr. 637 : tov £rji> oe Xu7rpd>s Kpelcraov ecrri ko,t ad avelv. Cf. Eur. I, 
 A. 1252, Frag. 596, and Soph. Frag. 448. 
 
 For the thought, cf. Herodot. VII, 46: ovtu 6 nip davaros, n°xQvpys eovarjs rijs 
 f6ijs, KaTacjjvyr) aipercoTOTTj t£ avOpuivii) ytyove. 
 
30 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 examples show, are usually found in conjunction with antithetical 
 adverbs or prepositional phrases. 19 
 
 The frequency of these two forms of contrast (ovk — dXXd and paWov 77) 
 indicates a high or low tension of the antithetic style. In Isocrates, 
 words thus connected are more numerous and more closely joined than 
 in other authors. Stereotyped phrases (epyw nai ov Xiryo;, oi% L8'ia dXXd 
 or]fxoaiq., tvxv pa-Wov r? yvcoprj) are frequently and effectively employed 
 by all orators, especially Antiphon and Isaeus. The forms are found 
 more frequently in those orations which are otherwise most highly 
 antithetic— Ant. V; Andoc. [IV]; Lys. XII; Isoc. IV and VIII; Isae. I 
 and V. Most of the nouns thus contrasted are added epexegetically, 
 as are also the large number of participial attributives. The data are, 
 therefore, significant as showing the extent to which this kind of writing 
 was employed by the early orators. 20 
 
 A related but less common form of contrasting two words or expres- 
 sions is that by means of prepositions, particularly avri and k; e. g., 
 
 (Lys. XXV, 30) : e/c irevijrcov 7rXou<7ioi yeykvrjvrai. avri 
 
 peu dpovoias viro\J/Lav irpbs dXX^Xous TeiroLrjKaatv. Frequent in Andocides 
 and Lysias, and occasionally employed by Isocrates, the form is seldom 
 observed in Antiphon or Isaeus. 21 
 
 Lastly, there is the variety of intra-clausal antithesis typified by 
 Anaximenes's illustration of antithesis /car' opopta — 8l86toj yap 6 irXovcnos 
 kcu ev8a.Lp.wv tu -Kkvt\ri koX ivSeei" and reflected in the to evavriov type, 
 which Hermogenes (II, 236) specifies in order to reject. The antithesis 
 is obtained by way of the normal structural relations of the sentence as 
 a whole, i. e., when the subject, be it one word or several, is antithetic 
 to the object or words within the predicate. Isocrates says (V, 37): 
 at yap kp to'ls irapovoi KcupoZs evepyeaiat \rjdr]V kp.iroi.dvcn. tup irpbrepov €is 
 
 18 Infinitives in clausal comparison occur: Ant. V, 73; Lys. XII, 89; [II, 41, 62]; 
 Isoc. I, 22; VII, 52; X, 5 bis; XIV, 22; XX, 12; Isae. I, 6; II, 15; X, 1. 
 
 20 This is particularly noticeable in Isocrates: see p. 62. The large number of 
 antitheses in yap clauses in all the orators points to the same fact. 
 
 21 LvtI occurs five times in Andoc. Ill, 30; see also Lys. XXV, 30; XXVI. 15; 
 XXX, 27 ter; [II, 63 bis; XX, 35); Isoc. VI, 109; IX, 3, 68; X, 62; XII. 118; cf. also 
 Dinarch. I, 111; II, 18; U: Ant. II, 5 9; Lys. I, 4; XIX. 61; XXYII, 9; Isoc. I, 
 34; VIII, 124, 125; IX, 66 ter. Cf. arro Andoc. [IV, 11]; rp6s Lys. [II, 24]; Isoc. 
 IX, 32 bis; i>wi P , Isoc. IV, 99. 
 
 For hvH see also Herodot. I, 210; Aeschylus Choeph. 520, Eur. Hel. 311, 1029. 
 For U, cf. Pind. O. XIII, 49 (Wio* fa kou-v), and Eur. Hel. 102. For antithesis 
 between prepositions, see below, note 98, p. 56. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 31 
 
 ciXAtjXous TeirXriiJLixeXriiJLhoov. Cf. Ant. Ill, 7 9; Lys. XXXIII, 7, [II, 78]; 
 Isoc. II, 14; IV, 50, 63 bis; VI, 99; IX, 7; XIV, 34; XVI, 3. As varieties 
 of this general type, we may specify those instances where antithesis 
 results 1. By means of a prepositional phrase in the predicate, as 
 e'Lirep XPV T °vs e v ireirovddras irepl twv ev TreiroirjKOTUV evx^crdcn rrjv xj/rjcpov 
 <t>kpeiv (Lys. XXI, 22) ; similarly, Ant. II, 5 4; V, 48; Lys. XIV, 32; [II, 3, 
 54]; Isoc. I, 35; IV, 189; VII, 28; VIII, 92, 127; LX, 68; XII, 140 f 2. By 
 the use of a dative of means: d be bel ra pLeWovra rols yeyevripevots reKfxai- 
 peadai (Isoc. IV, 141; cf. Isoc. I, 35, VI, 59; Dinarch. I, 33); cf. also Ant. 
 Ill, 5 8; Lys. XII, 52; XXIV, 3; Isoc. VI, 59; XII, 24; 3. By predicate 
 attributives or appositives, as tovs aripovs eirLripovs eTOL-qaare (Andoc. I, 
 80, 107, 109); likewise, Ant. Ill, y 3; Andoc. [IV, 40]; Lys. XXV, 27; 
 Isoc. V, 73; VI, 75. 
 
 Clausal Antithesis and Related forms of Contrast. Antithesis is usu- 
 ally treated by both ancient and modern writers along with parison, 
 paromoion, and paronomasia — the so-called Figures of Parallelism, of 
 which antithesis is in most cases the concomitant, and is considered the 
 chief. A separate discussion of these would lead beyond the limits 
 of this paper, and is unnecessary in view of those already existing. 23 
 Antiphon, Lysias, and Isocrates more frequently than not elaborate 
 their antitheses by one or more of these devices. There are, apart from 
 these, certain forms of antithetical writing, which, though related to 
 antithesis, cannot be classed as such in the usual restricted sense of the 
 term. 
 
 The most common of these forms is that known under the inclusive 
 term of Argumentum ex Contrario — a device, according to Gebauer, 24 
 by means of which two thoughts are brought into such a relation with 
 each other by comparison that to act in a certain way under given cir- 
 cumstances (or to fail to act), is represented as absurd or disgraceful, 
 A passive form of it represents the speaker as wretched and unworthy 
 
 22 Complementary antithetic prepositions (i. e., governing opposite objects in the 
 same clause) occur as follows: he — els: Andoc. I, 144; Dinarch. I, 93; irpbs — inrkp: 
 [Lys. II, 20]; Lycurg. 42. Compare the use of avri (above, n. 21), and the similar 
 use of prepositions in clausal antithesis (note 98, p.56). 
 
 23 Cf. Cope on the "Sophistic Rhetoric" in the Journal of Classical and Sacred 
 Philology, III, p. 69 ff.; Volkmann, p. 16; Robertson, Robinson (p. 19), etc. Aristotle, 
 though adducing no common name for the group, treated them collectively under 
 avTiKtinkv-r) Xe£is. 
 
 24 De Hypotacticis et Paratacticls Argumenti ex Contrario Formis, Intr., p. 26. 
 
32 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 under certain conditions assumed as being present, to suffer any reverse 
 or contumely (8eiva av iradolpinv el, etc.)- Antiphon says (VI, 32): oirov 
 yap tpov edeXovTOs eXeyx^dai irepl up rjTiwvTO ovtol pi) iqQthov eKeyxtw 
 d tl -qdiKOvvTO, kpe ph Srjirov aireXvov, avrol Kara acpibv clvtCiv paprvpts 
 kykvovro, on ovStv 8LKa.Lov ov8' a\r)9es ^rtdjfro. 25 In one form or another of 
 its manifold phases this form of writing abounds in all animated classical 
 prose. Among the orators it is particularly common in Lysias and 
 Isaeus, owing to the private and controversial character of their speeches. 
 Ant. V, Isoc. IV and VIII also contain numerous instances. 
 
 A doubling of the expression is secured by contrasting what did hap- 
 pen or has happened with what might or should have happened (d pkv 
 — €7T€t5i7 8e, or vvv 8k). This kind of parallelism, characterized by the 
 Contrary to Fact form of the first clause, is the form of antithesis favored 
 by Hermogenes (II, 236; cf. Anon., Ill, 112). 26 It is common with 
 the orators, and is especially noticeable in Isocrates's later orations 
 (XII and XV). 27 
 
 A quasi-antithetical expression results from an orator's effort to 
 distinguish between words of similar meaning. The Greek name is 
 ■wapaSiaaTokr]. 2 * Quintilian (Inst. Or. IX, 3, 82) calls the feature of 
 style "distinctio," speaking of it as a fourth kind of antithesis — adding, 
 however, that antithesis is not always subjoined. Thus Isocrates dis- 
 tinguished between </>iX6k<xXos and KaXKooTnaT-qs : eli>cu fioi>\ov to. irepl ttjv 
 eadriTo. 4>l\6ko\os, dXXd pi] KaXKiioincrTrjs' ecrri 5e </>iXoKaXos ptv to ptyaXoir- 
 peires, KaXKoincjTOv 8e to irepUpyov (I, 27). Similarly, Andoc. Ill, 11 
 
 25 The forms of the Argument from Contraries are so numerous and subtle that 
 extended references have been omitted: see Gebauer, op. (it. 
 
 20 Compare the form of antithesis in Aeschin. Ill, 188: d tout' ?x« KaXa-s, tKtlvo 
 aiffxpws" ei (Kflvoi. tear d£tae eTifj.i]driaav, ovtos dedijtos &v crrt^avovTai. Cf. also LyS. 
 XII, 57. 
 
 Conditional sentences (not hypothetical) are included among the regular forms of 
 subordinate clausal antithesis noted below in the several orators. 
 
 " kirti5r)8i in the second member occurs Ant. V, 55; Lys. Ill, 21; XII, 26; XXXIII. 
 4; Isoc. XIV, 3; etc. vvv 5k, Ant. V, 1, 38, 69; Lys. Ill, 31; VII, 12, 15; XXII. 17: 
 XXIV, 8; XXV, 5, 19; XXX, 8; Isoc. VII, 58; VIII, 36; X, 2, 10, 21: XII. 85, 14'). 
 207, 245; XV, 1, 15, 17, 55, 87, 92, 146, 153, 176, 231, 241; Isae, I. 30; II, 42; IV. 1 J, 
 30; VI, 2; VIII, 20; X, 1; XI, 5, 6; XII, 8. 
 
 " Rutilius Lupus (Halm, Rhelores Latini, p. 5) thus defines it: Hoc schema plures 
 res aut duo, quae videntur unatn vim habere distinguii el quantum disUt docet, suam 
 cuique propriam scnlcntiam SubjUHgettdo. Quintilian (IX. 3, 65) mentions the Greek 
 name and adds: Quod Mum pendet exfimtion m figura Jubito. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 33 
 
 (kprjvq — (Tirovbai); Isoc. I, 20 ((f>i\cnrpocrriyopia — evTrpocrrjyopia), 28 (xP^Mara 
 -KT-f]fj,aTa) ; IV, 130 (KaTrjyoptlv — vovderelv); VIII, 91 (apxtiJ' — Tvpavveiv); 
 X, 15 (a-jroKoytZaOcLL — eirat-Ptlp). 29 
 
 Another form of balanced clause is avTiperaPoXri — a using of the 
 same terms in the second member of a parallelism with their relative 
 syntactical order inverted. 30 The terms may or may not be antithetical. 
 Antiphon says (V, 84 — VI, 47) : nal ol fxeu aXXoi 'avQpwiroi rols epyots rovs 
 Xoyovs ekkyxovaiv, ovtol 5e rols Xoyots ra epya ^tjtovglv ainaTa KaOiGTavai. 
 Similarly, Isoc. 1,32: 86£ri p.h xPW ara KT-qra, 56£a 8e xpwk™" °^ K 
 6)vr]T7]. Other instances are Ant. V, 14 — VI, 2 (vbpoi — \6yoi); Andoc. 
 Ill, 35, 36 {dp-qvn} — 7r6Xe/uos); Lys. XXV, 27 (oXiyapx't-a — dypoKparia); 
 [XX, 10] (Trovqpoi-xpV^Tol). Virtual avTiperafioXr] occurs Lys. XIII, 
 96; Isoc. I, 47; VIII, 108; IX, 45, 65. 31 
 
 A few varieties of clausal antithesis may be specified on the ground 
 that they are slightly abnormal. avTL/j,eral3o\rj (when the terms are 
 antithetical) is one. Another is that in which the second member of an 
 antithesis states the contrast in a continuative form (being joined to 
 the first by nal or ovre), instead of the more usual adversative (fxev — 5c), 
 as cocrre rovs cf>povipovs arvx^lv nal rovs avorjrovs naropdovv (Isoc. IV, 48) , 32 or 
 Ant. V, 5 : ov yap 8'lko.lov ovt' epyw apLapTovra 8ta prjpara croodrjvaL, ovt 
 epyas opdws irpa^avra 8ia prjpara airoXkadaL. This type of antithesis is 
 frequently met with in the orators. 33 
 
 29 Words of similar meaning are sometimes contrasted by p.a\\ov fi; cf. Kaivbrara 
 IxaWov j] Ka.Kovpy6ra.Ta (Ant. V, 5), also Ant. VI, 1; Isoc. VI, 24. ovk — dXXA is 
 similarly used, Ant. IV, 2; Isoc. I, 5; XI, 44. 
 
 30 OTav h> t w TrpwTW ttjs irepibdov rols avrols bvbp.acn xpijccbpe^a, to. h> apxy riOkvra 
 hri rafiTTjs airo\lTrcop.ev, ais IcrwKpaTTjs : 'ols p.tv yap eyu btivbs ovx b Trapasp /ccupos, ois 5 
 6 vvv Kaipbs, ovk ky<h beivbs' (Alexander, III, 37). 
 
 31 Cf. Agathon (Frag. 6) : rix"V tvxv ecrrep^e «at tvxv Ttx v V v - See also Herodotus 
 I, 5 (p.eya.Xa-0-iJ.iKpa), III, 72 (Xbyos-epyov). 
 
 "You sought the new world in the old, 
 I found the old world in the new." 
 
 — Lowell, An Invitation. 
 
 32 This is one of several such examples found among Aristotle's illustrations of an- 
 tithesis; for the identical form, cf. Andoc. [IV, 5]; Isae. V, 4. The force of pkv — Se is 
 often virtually continuative, as in Ant. II, 7 11; V, 5; Andoc. I, 144-145; Lys. XVI, 
 18; XXXIII, 6; Isoc. IV, 89; etc. 
 
 33 Cf. Ant. II, 1; III, 6, 7 7; IV, 5 6; Andoc. [IV, 5, 12, 35, 41]; Lys. VII, 18 
 XII, 54; XXI, 19; XXII, 20; XXV, 6; XXIX, 11; XXXI 30; [II, 69, 77; IX, 14] 
 Isoc. I, 31, 42, 44; III, 7 bis; VII, 30; IX, 32; XV, 255 bis, 256; Isae. II, 10; V, 21 
 VII, 30; VIII, 1. 
 
34 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Again, there is that variety wherein the objects contrasted (i. e., the 
 main terms of the antithesis, the grammatical subjects of the opposed 
 clauses) are not themselves inherently antithetical, but serve as a nucleus 
 for antithetical statements, as ovtol /xev yap ev tw woXenco en TtvrjTuv 
 irXovaioi ytybvacnv en tu>v ufierepoov, vfxeis 8e 8ia tovtovs irevrjTes (Lys. XXV II, 
 9). Whereas, normally, the objects of contrast are antonyms (tfuXoi- 
 kxOpoi, yrj-da\a.TTa, etc.), ovtos \xkv and vjuelsSe are here made antithetical 
 only by the phenomena of contrast {rikovoioi, irevr)Tes) . The main 
 terms in this type of antithesis are proper nouns, or personal or demon- 
 strative pronouns. 34 It is a species of the same variety where the sub- 
 jects of the two antithetic clauses are identical. 35 
 
 The evolution of the forms of clausal antithesis from the plane of 
 mere contrast probably began with the negative form: kcll 6 txkv kan 
 4>avep6s tafias kn tov tXoLov /cat ovk elafias iraMv eyco 8e to irapdirav ovk 
 k&firjv e/c tov ttXo'lov ttjs vvktos kneivr]s (Ant. V, 23). The contrast of anto- 
 nyms: rd ptv aKovaa row d/xaprr/^drcoi' exei o~vyyv(j)p.rjv, to. oe eKovaia 
 ovk exet (Ant. V, 92), 36 and the eliminating of the negative, as eu p.ev yap 
 
 34 Cf. Ant. I, 21, 23, 26; III, y 3; IV, 7 3, 4, 5 6, 8; V, 23, 51, 59, 74; Andoc. I, 6; 
 II, 8; Lys. Ill, 5; X, 11; XXV, 25; XXX, 25; [II, 14, 51, 59, 67; VI, 17 bis; XX, 10]; 
 Isoc. I, 19, 50; VIII, 42; IX, 36, 54, 65; XI, 8, 32; XII, 8; XIV, 54; XXI, 12; Isae. 
 V, 39; VII, 12; VIII, 39; X, 1. 
 
 A special variety are the 01 iikv dXXot — ovtos di (vfxeis 5e) antitheses: Ant. V, 
 88 (VI, 47); Andoc. Ill, 23; Lys. Ill, 39; XIV, 46; Isoc. XII, 214; XVIII, 66; XX, 9; 
 for the form, see also Ant. V, 34, 38; Lys. XXX, 5; Isoc. IX, 13; XV, 16; Isae. II, 21. 
 
 35 Such antitheses are common in Isocrates, and are occasionally found in the 
 other orators. 
 
 The following special forms may be noted: (1) those in which the first member 
 contains irpoo-iroito) (KtXevu or (fani): Ant. VI, 7; Andoc. Ill, 27; Lys. XIII, 28; 
 Isoc. VIII, 121; X, 4; XII, 141; XIII, 1, 7-8; XIX, 33; (2) the ovk— &\\a clausal 
 antitheses: Ant. I, 22; III, 5 9; V, 14 (VI, 2), 94; Andoc. [IV] 36; Lys. I, 21, 29, 47; 
 XII, 1, 93; XIV, 10, 33; XVI, 19; XVIII, 19 bis; XXIV, 16 ter; XXV, 13 bis; XXVI, 
 3; XXVII, 11; XXIX, 4; XXX, 24; XXXIII, 8; [II, 8, 56, 64, 67; VI, 13; XX, 1, 
 13, 15]; Isoc. I, 39; II, 25, 39; IV, 76; VI, 15, 104; VII, 22; VIII, 23; IX, 7, 23, 45, 60; 
 X, 13, 36; XII, 72, 246; Isae. I, 15; II, 45; III, 64; VII, 34, 35, 37; VIII, 4; XI, 21 ; ov X 
 67TOK—&W6.: Lys. XXX, 26; Isoc. VIII, 45; XIV, 5; for the form, cf. Lys. XIX, 31; 
 Isoc. VII, 32; XI, 5; XII, 270; XIV, 27; Isae. VI, 21. (3) the Temporal antitheses, 
 and those in \6yy — Zpyy, and i8Lq.-Koii>fi (for references, see List of Antithetic Terms). 
 
 38 Other instances of the icaTa<t>aau-6.iro4>a.(ret. antithesis are Ant. I, 6, 8; IV, 
 5 7; V, 51; Andoc. Ill, 12; Lys. XVIII, 12; XXIX, 9; Isoc. IV, 131; VI, 93; VIII, 4; 
 Isae. Ill, 68; V, 39. 
 
 The direct juxtaposition of a denial of the opposite by ovk — dXXd is characteristic 
 of the sophistic rhetoric, and is probably a later form of antithesis. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 35 
 
 ■KOLelv ev ene'ivcp tu XP° v V X a ^' !rov r\v, e^afxapraveLV 8e to> (5ov\o/jLevix) 'pq.8i.ov 
 (Lys. XXV, 16), mark successive stages in the development of an- 
 tithetical expression. As antithetic writing became more systematic, 
 it was natural that every word be made to count either for symmetry 
 or cogency of expression, or should be made as unobtrusive as possible. 
 Hence arose parison, paronomasia, homoeoteleuton, etc. Repetition 
 and the use of synonyms aided the process, synonymous expression 
 marking a more highly developed and artistic form of antithetical 
 writing. By these means the coordinate clauses were elaborated to 
 the utmost degree of artistic symmetry and pleasing euphony. An 
 alternative process was to subordinate one of the antithetical clauses: 
 rats xf/vxa-LS VLKccvres toIs awnaaiv aTtlirov (Isoc. IV, 92). 37 The possi- 
 bilities of artistic elaboration here were hardly fewer than with the 
 coordinate clauses, particularly with Lysias and Isocrates. Finally, 
 there is the skilful combining of antitheses in one or more of these forms 
 into an elaborate period, the effect to be enhanced by the devices of 
 intra-clausal antithesis. Antiphon, Lysias, and Isocrates thus developed, 
 distinct types of extended antithetic periods. 
 
 The field for the exercise of an author's ingenuity was alluring, and 
 it is little wonder that the formal feature of antithesis was overdeveloped. 
 Artificial and defective antitheses are not uncommon in authors fond of 
 this kind of writing. 38 The abuse led to the reaction noticeable in 
 Isocrates's later orations and in Isaeus. 
 
 The varieties of clausal antithesis just noticed — Coordinate, Sub- 
 ordinate, Extended antitheses or Periodology, and Artificial or Defective 
 antithesis, — are constant and convenient tottol under which to discuss 
 distinctive features in the antithetic style of the several orators. 
 
 Antiphon 
 
 Antiphon is important in a study of antithesis because he is the first 
 
 of the Attic Orators and among the earliest writers of artistic prose, 
 
 and because his part in the development of the figure is unique. As 
 
 compared with Gorgias, he employs antithesis more judiciously. His 
 
 37 Cf. Lycurg. 48. See also Aeschin. Ill, 218: <rv 5k olfj-ai \aj3a}i> fiiv aeaLyTjKas, 
 d^aXcbo-as 5e KeKpayas ; and Cic. Cat. 1, 8: De te aiUem, cum quiescunt, probanl — cum 
 tacent, clamant. Cf. Andoc. Ill, 35. 
 
 38 "A perfect antithesis requires that the objects belong to the same generic class, 
 though they must be the most widely different of that class." — D. J. Hill, Op. Cit. 
 p. 238. Cf. note 21, p. 7. 
 
36 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTTPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 antitheses are more extended, show sharper contrasts, and are more 
 clearly designed as an integral part of a well-defined system of writing. 
 Linguistic adornment finds place in his writings, 39 but on the whole his 
 contrasted ideas are invented rather with a view to bringing out the 
 argument more forcibly. "On the Choregus" contains fewer and simpler 
 antitheses than the other orations: indeed, as if the orator had been 
 content with his previous attainments in that direction, certain an- 
 titheses have here been bodily transferred from the "Murder of 
 Herodes." 40 
 
 The antitheses are characteristic of Antiphon's style in two particulars. 
 First, they show a clever use of words in their exact (and sometimes 
 arbitrarily limited) meaning, 41 as in I, 4: ovs yap kxpyv *"4> p.ev TtdveuTi 
 TLfxcopovs yevkadai, kp.61 be fiorjdovs, ovtol redveooTOs 4>ovr)% yeyevr)vrai, epol 
 8' avTidiKOt KadeaTaai (Cf . ripcopia — dpaprta /cat aaefieia, V, 88); similarly, 
 en irpo(iov\r)s — ex irpovoias, I, 5 (Cf. tvxv — irpovoia, V, 6, Herodotus VIII, 
 87); imepopu-oppodu, III, y 4 (Cf. deduhs-TricrTevoiv, II, 5 1), yvioptt] — opyrj 
 (V, 69; cf. V, 12, and a\r)9ua-6pyr), Lycurg. 116). Words of similar 
 sound are opposed in order to show their contrasted meaning: vvv fxev 
 ovv yvuipiaTai ylyveade rrjs Sucrjs, Tore 8e 8u<ao~Tal twv piapTVpwV vvv p.tv 
 bo^acTal, tot€ 8e /cptrat toov aXrjdwv (V, 94) ; in like manner, dpapria — 
 arvx'ta (IV, y 4), 8vvap.evov — fiov\6iJLtvov (V, 73), etc. A form distinctly 
 Antiphontean is the contrast of two words by the use of eifxi and the 
 predicate genitive: to p\lv yap aKovcnov dpdprTypa d> avdpes ttjs rvxys kffH, 
 to oe iKoboiov tt)s yvufxris (V, 92); cf. Ill, 2; IV, y 4; V, 5, 94. 42 
 
 Again, Antiphon's antitheses characterize his style by their periodic 
 formation. 43 A veritable architect in this particular, he fashioned a 
 more symmetrical and coherent period than that of Gorgias, and set a 
 mark for Lysias and Isocrates. Two types may be distinguished. 
 
 39 Noticeable in the Tetralogies, particularly in III, y 3-4, and in the proemium 
 to the "Murder of Herodes." 
 
 " Compare V, 14 with VI, 2; V, 84 with VI, 28, 47; V, 88-89 with VI, 6. 
 
 u Cf. Mueller, Hist. Gr. Lit. IP, 133 ff., Blass, Alt. Bered. II, p. 141. 
 
 42 Blass remarks (I, 140) that Isocrates would have developed the symmetry of 
 these clauses more fully. 
 
 The concepts arvxla, adida, aXrjdeta, yvwur), rvxn, are a kind of stock in trade 
 for Antiphon in his contrasts. 
 
 There i^- a noticeable juggling with the meaning of aKoiiatos in III, 8 8: 6p6Cis yap Kal 
 oiKaitos tow aKovaicos air oktiLv auras anovaiois waOijuacn KoXAfei, and the same in III, y 7. 
 
 «Cf. Belling 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 37 
 
 Of the one, the framework is a single contrast (ovtos pev — ovtos 8'e, or the 
 like); each part of the contrast is made to yield as many antitheses as 
 possible. The following is one of Antiphon's most elaborate (III, 7 3) : 
 tooovtov 8e irpoextov ev toIs Xbyocs r]pcov, en 8e ev ols eirpao~o~e iroXXairXdcna 
 tovtcov, ovtos p.ev ovx offices SelraL vpcov avxvcos ttjv diroXoylav diro8ex^cr9aL 
 ai'TOv' eyco 8e 8pdo~as pev oi'Sev kolkov, iradcov 8e ddXca Kal 8eivd, Kal vvv ert 
 beivbrepa tovtcov epyco, Kal ov Xbyco els top bp.eTf.pov eXeov KaTairecbevycos 8eopai 
 vpcov, co dv8pes dvoalcov epycov Ttpcopol, baicov 8e 81a.yvcop.oves, prj epya cbavepd 
 virb irovrjpds Xbycov aKpifieias irecadevras, \pev8r) ttjv dX^decav tcov irpaxvzvTcov 
 rjy-qaao-dat. It will be noticed that the subjects and objects of the 
 
 members are mutually antithetical (ovtos p.ev 'eyco 8e) 
 
 likewise the modifiers of the subjects, and those of the verb. Moreover, 
 the modifiers of the subject, verb, and object of the second member are 
 doubly antithetical (i. e., within themselves, by means of minor contrasts 
 and antithetical terms). There is abundant triple paronomasia, chiefly 
 in v and s : toIs — Xbyois— ols ', irpo'exwv — tovtcov — vp.cov ; adXia — 8eivd — 
 8eivoTepa ', irovripds — dicpifieLas — TreccrdevTas ', Xeycov — tcov — irpaxdevTcov. Of 
 similar construction, and breaking up characteristically into four members, 
 is the antithesis in I, 23: 8er)aeTai 5' vpcov ovtos p.ev virep ttjs prjTpbs tt\s 
 avTov £cotrr]s, ttjs enelvov 8caxpf]cra.p'evr]s dj3ovXcos re Kal ddecos, oircos 8Lkt]v 
 pi) 8co, dv vpds TeWri, cov rj8lnr]Ke' eyco 8' vpds virep iraTpbs t' ovpov redvecoTOS 
 aiTovpai, oircos itclvtI Tpbirco 8cp. The principal antithesis lies in the par- 
 ticiples and in the subordinate clauses. Parison is carefully maintained 
 in minor clause and in prepositional phrase, and the alternate par- 
 onomasia adds to the effect of the studied symmetry. Other periods 
 of the same general construction occur II, 5 9; IV, 7 2; V, 2. 
 
 Another and probably later type of period is that where the thought 
 is elaborated by a progressive series of clever antitheses, as in V, 73: 
 Eu 8e tore otl eXeijOiivac vcb' vpcov a£i6s eipi pdXXov fj 81ktjv 8ovvaC 8'iktiv 
 pev yap einbs ecrt 8c8bvat tovs dbiKOvvTas, eXeeladac 8e tovs d8'iKcos mv8vvevov- 
 Tas. Kpelaaov 8e XPV yiyvecrdai del to vperepov Svvdpevov epe 8ikolIcos 
 ccb^ecv, fj to tcov kxQpiov fiovXbpevov dbiKcos pe diroXXvvat. ev pev yap 
 tco ewLLTXtlv kaTL rd 8ecvd Tama Troirjaai a ovtol KeXevovacv' ev 8e tco 
 irapaxpypa ovk eaTiv dpxhv bpBcos fiovXeveudat.. We have first the pdXXov f] 
 statement introducing the second antithesis; lastly, the concluding 
 yap antithesis. A similar type of period occurs IV, 5 6; V, 5, 91. 
 
 Turning more specifically to characteristics of the individual antith- 
 eses, we find that Antiphon employed a number of antitheses in which 
 
38 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 each clause contains three words opposed to as many in the other: cf. 
 I, 5; 111,7 4; IV, 7 2; V, 3, 73. Over twice as many contain two opposed 
 words in each clause: II, 7 11. 11; III, /3 2,8,7 11; V, 5, 13,48,86,89,91, 
 94 bis; the number of those containing a single evavriov in each clause 
 is proportionately larger. The ratio throughout is not markedly differ- 
 ent from that which obtains in the clausal antitheses of Lysias and Isoc- 
 rates. The antithesis is sometimes partly implied, hence the number of 
 explicitly antithetic words in each clause would not accurately gauge 
 the antithetic value or intensity: rols pev paprvpovcnv awio-relv vpds 
 KekevovcTL, toIs be Xoyots ovs avroi \eyovo~i tnaTeveLv 4>a<ri xPV vaL ^V, 84 — VI, 
 28; cf. Lys. VII, 33, and paprvpovaL pdWov i) Kar-qyopols, Isae. XII, 8). M 
 These range from those instances where in one of the clauses the corre- 
 sponding antonym is paraphrased (as in the above example, or opdus 
 yvure-^evcrdriTt, V, 46) to those in which two corresponding members 
 of the antithesis express opposite thought without trace of antonyms 
 (e. g., V, 35). Partly implied antitheses occur I, 26; IV, a 1, 7 3, 4; 
 V, 5, 49, 75. 
 
 The breaking up of an antithesis into a certain number of principal 
 and subordinate clauses, correspondingly antithetical, is characteristic 
 of Antiphon, and is seldom noticed in other orators; cf. V, 2: ov pev yap pe 
 ebet. nanoiradelv tw crtb/xart pera. ttjs curias tt)s ov it poo-qKOvaris , evravdol ovbev 
 pe ucf>e\r]crev rj ep.Tret.pLa. ov be pe bel aoid-qvai. pera ttjs a\r]6eias eiirovra 
 to. yevbpeva, ev tovtlo pe /3Xa7rrei r) rov Xeyeiv dbvvapla. 45 See also I, 23; III, 
 7 4, 11; IV, 7 3, 4, 5 6; V, 3, 5, 7, 46. While Antiphon confined himself 
 mainly to the opposition of coordinate clauses, one clause of an antith- 
 esis is not infrequently subordinated. The subordinate clause may be 
 1. Relative: a pev ovv perd ttjs irbXeus 6Xt7s dvayKji pdXXov r\ yvupj] 
 ewpa^e, tovtuv ov bUaibs eanv 6 epos 7rar?)p ibla 5ikttj> bibovai (V, 79) ^ cf. I, 
 4; V, 13,94; VI, 7,47; 2. Participial: Tapaivcbvplv, pijTbv avaiTiov KaraX- 
 a06i>Tas tov c'Ltlov acfreivat. (II, 5 11), also III, 7 9; IV, 7 1;V, 17; 3. Com- 
 parative: ttoXXo) &i> vpels biKaibrepov eKp'iveade i) €70; vvv 4>evyu ucV vpuv 
 d$ua>s (V, 48), and I, 27; III, 5 5; V, 3, 18, 73. A direct antithesis of 
 
 " One word is often balanced against two; see I, 27; II, 5 1, 9; III, /3 8; Y, 3; VI, 8. 
 
 46 The use of the negative antonym (oi>8lt> w<f>e\7ioti>) suggests a false antithesis 
 to 0X<X7rrei. Cf. Lys. XXX, 16 (tirjdtfxiav Tifiwplav TroirjaaoOt), Isoc. XII, 31 ^17 Xtav 
 Tjrro/xtxous), Demosth. XXIII, 193 (m>? iradtlp). 
 
 « Cf. Wios — ir6Xis, II, 5 11, and Lys. XXXI, 10; also, r6 Kotvdv—tSios (V. 13 
 See lSl<f.-Koivy Andoc. Ill, 27; these are the only instances of the I5ios — koivos 
 antithesis in the orators before Lysias and Isocrates (excepting those in Andoc. IV). 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 39 
 
 two subordinate clauses (mainly participial) is not uncommon: ovre /caracr- 
 Xovres els to xupiov tovto clto irapao-Kevijs ov8ep.las, dXX' avaynrj xPV^b.p.evoL 
 (V, 22); similarly, I, 5; II, 8 1; III, 08, 7 3 bis 5 9; V, 84 (—VI, 28). 
 Artificial or defective antithesis. This kind of writing is not so exten- 
 sive or so noticeable in Antiphon as in Gorgias. Words are sometimes 
 added for the sake of symmetry, as in IV, 7 2: tovs fxev yap rj re p.eya\o- 
 4>poavvr] tov yevovs 77 re d/cp?) tt\s pcbprjs 77 re airetpLa tt]s p.edr\s eiraipei tw 
 dviico xapirea0at, tovs 8e t\ re ep.TreipLa tuv Trapoivovp.evtov 77 re dadeveia 
 tov y-qpus 77 re 8vvap.ts t&v vewv (pofiovaa aw4>povl^eL, where Swapis 
 etc., is added merely to balance p.eya\o4>poavvr) — the chiasm, antithesis, 
 and alternate paronomasia between the other terms not appearing in 
 these; similarly, arpe/ufew, in II, 5 9. In V, 59, the antithesis between 
 4>avepav and afyavel is strained: eych p.ev yap aov (pavepav tt\v irpbvoiav 
 els ej.ce airobe'uivvixi, av 8' epe ev acpavel X67W f^rels a-jroXeaai. Similarly, 
 kolvov — I8la, in V, 13, and anovaios — enovaios in I, 26 and II, 7 1; 
 IV, 5 8 (cf. Ill, 7 7, 5 8). The \byos— epyov antithesis in III, 7 3 seems 
 strained when, speaking of the length of his opponent's speech, he says 
 tovovtov 8e irpo'exwv ev tols \6701s rip.cbv, in 8e ev ols eirpacrcre TroXXaxXdcria 
 tovtcov. Again, the antithesis implied by the terms (X670S — epyov) 
 is nil in III, 5 5: deXu 8e pi) -rrporepov eir' dXXov \byov bpixr\aai, 77 to epyov 
 Itl 4>avep&Tepov /caTao-njcrcu, biroTepov avTccv ecrTL. i7 The terms tvxv — 
 a-Tvyja convey a false antithesis in IV, 5 8:6 ixev yap d/cotxHws iravTa 8paaas 
 nai iradthv dXXorpia tvxv /cexp^Taf 6 8e eKOVcricos iravTa Spatras, he tu>v 
 avTov epycov tt\v tvx^v irpoo-ayaybp.evos, 177 avTOv aTvxlo- Jypapraj'. 48 
 
 47 Cf. Thucy. II, 40, 2 : p.i] irpoSt.daxQ'nvai M&XXcw Xoyq irporepov fj kwl a 5el Ipyu e\delv. 
 Similarly, Lys. I, 21: ey<h yap ovdkv 5kop.ai \67coe, dXXd to epyov (pavepov yevkaQai, kt\. 
 For the transition antithesis, cf. Ant. V, 25: rd plv yevop.eva tout 'vjt'w Ik SI tovtuv 
 77677 aKOirelre to. elKora. 
 
 48 If the mere corresponding position of two words in antithetic clauses be taken 
 as an indication of false antithesis, we should have one between d<re/3eZ and avyxel 
 in IV, a 2 : aatfiel p.ev irepl tovs Oeobs, avyxel 51 to. vo/xt-na twv avdpioirwv. But this is 
 not always a sure indication; cf. IV, 7 4: 6 p.tv yap l£ uv eSpaaev knelvos 8i.a4>dapels, ov 
 tt) eavTov anapTia dXXd rfj tov irara^avTos xPV (T °-l JieV0S awtdavev 6 8e p.ei£u &v f/deXe 
 irpaeas, t% eavTov aTVxia ov ovk r\8e\iv aireKTeLvev: apapTia — a.TVX<-a is not a false 
 antithesis here because the speaker has just pointed out the distinction between 
 aTvxia and ovp.4>opa ; rjj eavrov aixapTla is here obviously a variant for <rvn4>opa ; 
 hence, there is a real distinction meant between drux'a and dp-apHa. Similarly, in 
 the above example, dcrej3eZ and o-vyx^ are merely the appropriate terms for 0eoiis and 
 v6p.L/ia. See above note 21, p. 7. 
 
40 antithesis in attic orators, antiphon to isaeus 
 
 Andocides 
 
 The paratactic sentence-structure of Andocides, and the ever recur- 
 ring parentheses are ill-adapted for the studied artifices of the sophistic 
 rhetoric. Formal antitheses are rare in the first two orations. Rhetor- 
 ical design is doubtful. The contrasts express little more than what is 
 naturally inherent in the language. Parallelism is secured by contrast- 
 ing an imaginary but impossible course of action with the actual and 
 only possible course, by opposing past to present, and by comparing the 
 ostensible motives of the accusers with the real ones. This is to employ 
 the type of antithesis mentioned by Hermogenes (Spengel II, 236). 
 Antiphon first brought rhetoric from theory into practice; Andocides 
 was untainted by the sophistic rhetoric, unaffected by theories of style. 
 If he used antithetical expressions, it was the natural result of an effort 
 to express himself forcibly. The loose sentence-structure of the first 
 two orations becomes more consecutive and periodic in the third. In the 
 latter oration, accordingly, we find better formed antitheses. Less 
 rigid than Antiphon's, they are better adapted for popular discourse; 
 although few in number, they are effectively used, and foreshadow later 
 types of construction. 
 
 Typical of Andocides's early style is the effort at antithetical phrase- 
 ology in De Myst. 57-59, where the orator is trying to justify his con- 
 duct as an informant in the Hermae matter: tL av vpuv 'hacrros ewolrjcrev ; 
 el pev yap r\v bvolv to eTepov eXeadat, rj KaXcos airoXeadcu fj alaxP&s ffcodrivai, 
 €X°<- & v Tts tlireiv Kaniav elvai. to. yevbpeva. A parenthesis follows: Kairoi 
 ttoKXol av Kal tovto e'CKovro, to £fjv irepl ir\elovos iroirjo-apevoi tov Ka\ocs 
 airodavelv. The previous design is then resumed in oirov be tovtoiv to 
 kvavTiuTaTOV j}v, oicoir-qo-avTL pev ai)TU re a'lo~x<-o~ TO - airoXeadai pt]bev aae^-q- 
 cavTi thus breaking up into a second antithesis, the thought of which 
 is spun out for eight or ten lines until the sentence looses its original 
 structure. It is again resumed in 59 and carried through: raDra pev 
 ovv qv epov pi] elirovTOS' elirwv be to. ovra avTos Te eaco^oprjv Kal tov iraT'epa 
 eo~w£ov Kal tovs aXKovs avyyevels, Kal tt)v ttoXiv eK <£6/3ou Kal KaK&v to>v 
 
 p.eyl(TTUV OLTT-qWaTTOV. 
 
 More successful is the effort in I, 144-145: elbora pev olov eoTi 7ro\etos 
 TOiavTTjs tto\It7]v elvai, elbora be olov 'eoTi £evov elvai Kal p'eTOiKOV ev TJ) 
 Tdv ir\r]o~lov, eiuoTapevov be olov to cruxfrpovelv Kal 6p9u$ fiov\eveadai, 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 41 
 
 kiruiTa.n&>ov 8' olov to a/iapTovTa 7rpd£cu Kcuccis, etc. 49 Again, in 1, 6, he says 
 ol pev yap en toXXov XP 0V0V eTr<-Pov\evo~avTes /cat avvdevres, olvtol avev 
 KLvdvvuu ovres, tt)v Kar-qyopiav kiroi-qcravTO' kyu be pera 8eovs nai Kivbvvov 
 nai diafiokris tt)s pty'icTqs rr\v airo\oyiav iroiovpaL. 50 
 
 The au>pa — yvwji-q antithesis in II, 24 is one of Andocides's best: d yap 
 6aa ol 'avdpoiiroL rfj yvcoprj apapTavovai, to adpa avroov pi} a'nibv kaTLV, 
 epov to pev aibpa Tvyxb-vu TavTOV ert 6v, oirep ttjs cuTias airriWaKTai, 17 8e 
 yvcofxr] avrl ttjs wporepas tTkpa vvvl irapeaT^Kev. 51 
 
 Antithetic periods, or a succession of antitheses around a single 
 theme, are more common in Andocides than single instances, as in III, 28: 
 ky<h pev obv enelvo SedotKa pdXicrra, co 'Adrjvaloi, to dQiapkvov Kanbv, oti 
 tovs KpelTTovs <pL\ovs acptevres ael tovs tjttovs alpovpedaf 2 nai ir&Kepjov 
 iroiovpeda 8l erepovs, k^ov 8l' rjpas avTovs tlpr\vr]V a/yei^. Similarly, III, 
 12, 30. 53 
 
 The fourth oration is much more highly antithetic than the genuine 
 speeches of Andocides. 54 While it has about the same number of 1) (1 an- 
 
 49 A feature of expression peculiarly Andocidean in its pathos is that where the 
 fourth member of a parallelism designedly repeats and emphasizes the thought of 
 the second: nai ojucos to ye dvcrrvxeaTaros elvai av9puirwi> ovdaufi bctpevyw, ore 8r) irpoayo- 
 fievrjs p.ev rijs iroXecos eiri ravras rds ovjufropas ovSels e/xov r^pxero yiyveadai dvadai/ioveare- 
 pos, p.edi.<TTa.p.kvr)s 5e tv6.\iv els to &cr0a\« airai>Tui> eyo) adXiuraros (II, 9). Cf. II, 
 16, and Ant. V, 2; Lys. XIII, 2; XVIII, 8; Isoc. IV, 124; V, 68; VI, 5; XVII, 10. 
 
 60 Almost the identical antithesis occurs Lys. XIX, 3. Cf. Ant. VI, 7; Hyperid. 
 Avko4>. 8, etc. 
 
 Dryden, in his postscript to his Translations of Vergil, says: "What Virgil wrote in 
 the vigor of his age, in plenty and at ease, I have undertaken to translate in my de- 
 clining years; struggling with wants, oppreased with sickness, curbed in my genius, 
 liable to be misunderstood in all I write." 
 
 51 Cf. Isoc. XVI, 50 {ravavTia — tj\v ol\)tt)v). Other antitheses with two words 
 in each member opposed are I, 6, 53, 145; III, 1, 17, 28 bis. 
 
 62 For the terms of the antithesis, cf. Ill, 23; also, Ant. II, j3 11; IV, a 1; Isoc. 
 IV, 53. See also Isoc. VI, 64. 
 
 53 III, 30 is a succession of antitheses formed by means of avH) cf. I, 93: avri p.iv 
 4>vyd5os :roXiT7js, 6.vrl be drtjuou avKocpavrris See also e« — els, I, 144. 
 
 64 In dealing with spurious orations I have endeavored to give any indications as to 
 authorship which the antitheses seem to show, and to point out antithetic peculiari- 
 ties which the orations in general possess. 
 
 References to spurious orations, when given among other data, are enclosed in 
 square brackets []. In the following pages two numbers juxtaposed in half-brackets, 
 as 1) (1, 2) (2, 3) (3, etc., indicate the number of opposed words in each member of 
 the antithesis. 
 
42 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 titheses as Andoc. Ill, it has as many 2) (2 antitheses as are found in 
 the three Andocidean orations together (Cf. IV, 4, 5, 9, 16, 21, 27 bis, 
 36, 41). The direct antithesis of two subordinate (participial) clauses of 
 equal rank, as tov pev bvbparos (ppovTt^ovTas, tov be rrpaypaTos apeXovvTas 
 (IV, 27), occurs frequently in this oration (16, 21, 27 bis, 36); common 
 in Lysias and Isocrates, the form occurs but once in Andocides (III, 6). 
 Synonyms are freely used in order to gain symmetry of expression in 
 the members. There is hardly one of the antitheses in this oration in 
 which homoeoteleuton, parison or paronomasia are not one or all to be 
 observed. 55 These features are foreign to Andocides's style, and, together 
 with the treatment of special topics in the discourse, indicate a late 
 sophist as the author. 56 Many resemblances point to Lysias as the model. 
 
 The speech opens with an ovk — dXXd expression (cf. also IV, 36, 
 42), which is rarely met with in Andocides. The speaker then con- 
 tinues (IV, 1): itoKLtov be ayadov vopi^oo TrpoKivbvvebeiv e8e\eiv tov ir\r]6ovs, 
 Kal pi] Karabdaavra tcls exdpas Tas Ibias virep tuv bripoaiuv ex^v rjavxlav 
 bia be pev tovs tuv iblwv eiripe\ovp'evovs ovbev at irb\ets pei^ovs KadiaravTai, 
 oid be tovs twv koivwv peyakai. Kal eXevdepai ylyvovTai.. 57 The homoeoteleu- 
 ton (nadio-TavTaL — ylyvovTai-) and paronomasia (peyaXai Kal e\evdepai, 
 btipoa'iwv — Lbluv — kolpuv) are conspicuous; similarly, in IV, 2: Trpodvpuv 
 p,ev Kal d7a0d>i' avbpuv vpuv rvyxd-vcov, oV oirep aai^opai, TrXeiaTOis be Kal 
 beivoTCLTOis exdpols xp^mcws, b<i> 3>v biafiaWopai (Cf. Ant. V, 46). 
 
 coare ov irepl tuv Trape\r]\vdbTi>)v abiKripaTwv avTbv Tipwpovvrai, dXX 
 virlp tuv peKhbvTwv (froffovvTai (IV, 36) resembles Lys. XV, 9: ev eibbres 
 on virep tcov irape\r}\vdbTU)v ohiyovs TipwprjadpevoL iroXKovs iroLrjaere koo- 
 p.iot3Tepovs. bi 
 
 Lysias 
 In contrast with that of Antiphon, it was seen that Andocides's 
 use of antithesis was dictated by natural impulse rather than by a pre- 
 
 M Cf. IV, 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 16, 21, 27, 36. 
 
 M Cf. Blass, I, p. 338. 
 
 " The tiios— koivSs antithesis (cf. IV, 1, 4, 11, 18, 42) is found but once in Ando- 
 cides (III, 27); it is common in Lysias (cf. t5ios — 5r)n6<nos, XXI, 15, 19; XXV, 25), 
 and in Isocrates. 
 
 " Cf. Lysias XXII, 20; XXXI, 24; XXXIII, 6. 
 
 Willi IV, 5: oljucu 8i (ecu tovs (f>i\ows vpLiv tv ravrfi naXiara rfi fi/iipa \wtladai Kal 
 tovs ixOpovs HtbtaOai, cf. Lys. XIV, 42: (cua xwto-6 'ai — <j>i\oTintlaOai.); and Isoc. IX, >J 
 (i\0povs — 0tXou). With t\\tlTrtii> — vireppaWtii/ (IV, 4), cf. 8ia<t>iptiv — t\\iiirtii>, Lys. 
 [II, 4]. For TToXtnlovi— avwaxovs (IV, 41), cf. Lys. [II, 10], Isoc. IV, 152. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 43 
 
 conceived theory (</>ixrei fxaWov rj vo/xio, as Isocrates would express it). 
 Lysias holds a middle ground. The characteristic simplicity of his 
 style, and the habitual avoidance of figures yield to his love of antithesis 
 and parallelism. 59 His style is not fundamentally antithetic like that of 
 Antiphon or Isocrates. He systematically employed synonyms in devel- 
 oping a regular symmetry in the members of his antitheses; in this he 
 resembled Gorgias. And Gorgianic embellishment is not lacking; it is 
 only a secondary feature of his style however. The antitheses often 
 further the argument and pleasantly relieve the ordinary plainness of 
 his writing. The following examples, grouped as far as possible accord- 
 ing to the structural form, are intended to give a concrete idea of his 
 antithetic style. 
 
 Antitheses with clauses coordinate: o'i tw p.ev \6yco tu> S^/iw iroXe/uowri, 
 raj 8e epycp twv v/jLerepwu 'eiudvp.ovcnv (XXXIV, 5); 60 r& fxev -jroppu viro 
 AaKedaL/iovlccv ere/jLvero, to. 5' 67711s vto tccv cplXccv bL-qpira^ ero (VII, 6); 
 beivov yap ep.oiye bonel elvcu, el e£ oov p.ev 77617 r)p.b.pTT]Ke jx-qbeiroTe Ti/icopr/^cre- 
 rai, e£ oiv be fxeXKei ev iroL-qcreiv ijbri TeTip.i\aeTa.i (XXXI, 24; one of Lysias S 
 most complete antitheses). 
 
 Antitheses with one clause subordinate: in these the clause is 1. Parti- 
 cipial (the participle being itself antithetic to the main verb, or the clause 
 containing words antithetic to those in the main, or both) : Hoar eiri tovtois 
 earl -komto. to. koko. elpyaafxevoLs ttjv tto\lv iravTa rdyada irepl avTwv \eyeiv 
 (XII, 33); cf. Ill, 3; XII, 45, 88, 91; XV, 9; XXV, 23; XXXI, 6; XXXIII, 
 6, 8; XXXIV, 9; 2. Relative, final, etc.: ovyapbr) xa.pi-vyevp.lv airobooaei. 
 tt) \pr)4>ui Kpvfibrjv ev irad&p, os tuv (piKuv tovs (pavepais avrbv ev woirjcravTas 
 
 59 Cf. Photius: iSlcop-a Xvaiov Kal to tcls ivridecreis irpoayetv. Jebb remarks that his 
 love of antithesis is the one thing that mars the ethos in Lysias {Alt. Or. I, 167). 
 
 80 The dative of specification is frequent in \6yos — epyov and tdios — kolvSs 
 antitheses; cf. Andoc. Ill, 1, 27; Lys. XIII, 28 (where irpouiroul is substituted); 
 XXI, 16; Isoc. IV, 181; V, 74; XII, 142; Aeschin. Ill, 89, 102; Demosth. XXX, 25; 
 [XL, 1]. 
 
 Notice that rro\ep.ovai — kwidvuovai. are balanced, but not really antithetic; for 
 similar instances, cf. the above from Lysias, and Lys. XII, 7 {airoKTwvwai. — Xaju;3d^eiJ'); 
 26 (avreXeyes — auvekafifSaves) ; 80 (kirij3ov\d)€Te — d<^^re); XVI, 19 (<}>i\eiv — (Tuoirelv) 
 XXIV, 17 (kty&vovvTCLi — avayKa.% ovrai) ; XXXI, 4 {aireiplav — Kanlav). Cf. below, 
 note 67. 
 
 81 For other 2) (2 coordinate antitheses, cf. Ill, 47; VII, 26, 33; XII, 2, 89, 92; 
 XIV, 30, 33, 42; XV, 7; XVI, 18; XVIII, 2, 15; XXIV, 18; XXV, 16; XXVII, 10; 
 XXX, 26; XXXI, 30; XXXIII, 6. 
 
44 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 kokS* TTOiel (XV, 10) ; 62 cf. XII, 39 bis, 91; XVIII, 25; XXIV, 7 bis, 
 22 bis; XXIX, 1; XXXI, 10; 3. Comparative: eXdrrw yap ovalav Karthnre 
 toIs iraialv fj clvtos ivapa tup evLTpoirevaavTUv Trapthafitv (XIX, 52); cf. XII, 
 80, 86, 89; XIII, 92; XVII, 9; XVIII, 9; XIX, 37, 61; XXI, 15; XXIII, 
 12; XXV, 32. 63 
 
 Mutually antithetic subordinate clauses {mainly participial): ka-Kip 
 iroWcbv ayadtiv alriov dXX' ou peyaXoov kclkwv yeyevrjpevov (XII, 64); 
 tuv ph vapoPTiov KaTa4>povccv twv 5e airovTuv k-mdvpSiv (XII, 78); cf. XII, 
 54, 59; XIII, 15; XV, 12; XVI, 13; XVIII, 19 bis. 
 
 Partly implied antitheses: 1. The corresponding antonym para- 
 phrased: \pevay 5e pr]8ep, dXXd iravTa r aXrjdrj^eye (I, 18; t ak-qdiq Xeyco = 
 aXedeva)) ; similarly, VII, 26 (piKpas — tovs irepl tov oupaTos) ; XII, 63 
 (clkovtcov — k^awaT-qaas tovs iro\epiovs) ; XII, 90 (bpyi^bptvoL — eindv- 
 prjTai oVres); XVIII, 9 (oopy'i^ero — xb-P LV fi^ei); XIX, 60; XXIV, 
 16 bis; XXVII, 11; 2. Antithetic thought in two corresponding mem- 
 bers, but no explicit antonyms: irpa^avTts pep oop kcpiePTai Tvpavvoi T7js 
 ■Kokews eaovrat, 8vaTvxw aVTes 5e to laov vp.lv e^ovenv (XII, 35; cf. Ant. Ill, 
 6; Isoc. V, 68); similarly, XII, 47; XIV, 46; XVIII, 25; XXV, 29. M 
 
 Extended antithetic writing. In order to enliven the discourse or 
 press a particular contention, Lysias often follows up one antithesis 
 directly with another, as in XVIII, 15: ova ovp aiaxpbp, d d p.ep Aa«e5ai- 
 povLois avvkdeade /3e/3atcbaeTe, a 8e avTols e\f/T](f)iaaa&e ovtw 'pa8Lus StaXucrere, 
 Kal rds pep irpos eKelpovs avpdi)Kas KvpLas -KOL^aeTe, ras 8e irpbs avToi>s anvpovs f 5 
 similarly, in XXIV, 22; XXV, 30; XXXI, 6; XXXIII, 6, 8; XXXIV, 
 5; or he groups several such around a single theme, as in XXIV, 16, 
 where the speaker contends that it is the men of affluence and strength 
 who are prone to be insolent: ov yap tovs -rrepopepovs Kal \iav avopus 
 8iaKtLptvovs v@pL£eip eUos, dXXd tovs 7roXXw 7rXeiw tup avayKaiuv KeKT-qpe- 
 
 82 For the terms, cf. XII, 91, and Xadpa-Qavepibs : Andoc. [IV, 21]; Isoc. VII, 58; 
 Other antithetic adverbs in Lysias occur VII, 38; XIII, 2; XIX, 54; XXIV, 7; XXXI, 
 4. 
 
 83 2) (2 subordinate antitheses occur III, 3; XII, 89; XV, 9; XXI, 15; XXIV, 7; 
 3) (3: XII, 33; XV, 10; XXIV, 7, 22. 
 
 84 Cf. Ill, 5: Kal kyw pkv tv iroiwv avrbv t\£Lovv ilval poi 4>l\ov, clvtos 51 v(3pl£cov Kal 
 ■xapavopuv (Zero avayKaoeiv avrdv iroitlv &ti fiovXoiro. Other examples of two terms VS. 
 one are XII, 24 (A(r</3« — 6oiov Kal tvotfiks); XIX, 2 (irapaaK(vi)v Kal irpodvplav — airup- 
 lav); XXV, 6; XXIX, 4. Negative antithesis is secured in III, 37; X, 11; XIII, 
 96; XXV, 26; XXXIV, 11. 
 
 » For the form and thought, cf. XII, 47; Isoc. IV, 176; XVIII, 24, 68. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 45 
 
 vow oi»5e tovs advvcLTovs rots awpaGiv ovras, dXXd tovs p-dXtcrTa TnarevovTas 
 rats avTuiv ' paipais' ov8l tovs 77677 TrpoaPefirjKOTas rr\ TjXt/cta, dXXd tovs 
 en vkovs /cat vkacs rats otavotats XP W M^°W- cf. also VII, 38; XII, 26, 
 39-40, 79-80; XXIV, 7. 66 
 
 Artificial and defective antitheses. The impulse to write for show 
 (eTideiKTLKos) sometimes gained the upper hand with Lysias. A 
 Gorgianic touch is seen in the measured symmetry and end-rhyme of 
 such couplets as war' ewi pev toIs /caXots aiaxvveaBai., ewl 8e toIs kclkoIs 
 c/uXortpetcrflat (XIV, 42); ware I8ia pev £ccv cpel8opaL, drj/jioaia 8e XrjTOvpyuv 
 jjoopat (XXI, 16) ; 67 or in XXXIII, 6: ware d£tov tov ptv irpbs dXXrjXous 
 irbXepov KCLTadeadai., ty) 8' avrfi yvdopTj xpw/xei'oi's rrjs awrriptas avrextc^at 
 /cat 7T€pt 8e tuv irapeKriXvdoTccv atcrx^ecflat, rrepl 8e t&v peXKbvTuv eatadaL 
 5e5iei>at, /cat irpbs tovs ivpoybvovs apuWdadcu, ot tovs pev /3ap/3dpous eiroLrjcrav 
 ttjs dXXorptas ktnQvpovvTas tt\s acpeTepas avT&v aTepeladcu, tovs 8e Tvpavvovs 
 k^eXaa avres Koivqv airaai tt\v ekevOepiav KareaTrjaav, where we have three 
 consecutive antitheses with homoeoteleuton and paronomasia in — cr0ai 
 in the first two, and, in the third, alternate paronomasia in /3ap/3dpous — 
 Tvpavvovs, ewoiTjaap — KaTeaTrjcrav ; similarly in XII, 7, 7rept oi'8evbs rjyovvTO 
 is altered merely to secure parison and rhyme: aironTLvvvvai pev yap avdpu- 
 irovs 7rept oi'devbs rjyovvTO, \apj3aveiv 8e xPW aTa irepi ttoXXou kiroiovvTO ; 
 cf . XVI, 19; XIX, 37 ; XXI, 15 ; XXXI, 4. 68 
 
 Uncertain or Spurious orations of Lysias. The Eroticus (Plato, 
 Phaedrus, 228-234) is either a genuine Lysianic oration or an exceedingly 
 clever imitation. 69 ■ The author is prodigal of linguistic adornment, but 
 no more so than would be natural for the author of the Olympiacus or 
 the Eratosthenes in a speech which was probably designed merely for 
 the pleasure of the hearers. The whole is of an antithetical character, 
 being a setting forth of the relative advantages of the non-lover over the 
 lover. The comparison between ot pev epwvTes and ot 8e prj kpuvTts oc- 
 curs seven times in the short speech. 
 
 M Cf. Andoc. Ill, 12, 30. 
 
 67 Cf. Lys. XIII, 15; XXXIV, 5; also Aeschin. Ill, 126: einrpeirus yi 6v6i*a.Ti, aXXd 
 rq> 8' epyui aicrxP&s- 
 
 69 For false antithesis, cf. \6yos-epyov in I, 21 (cf. Ant. Ill, 5 5); ov5eiJ.ias-&wafft. 
 in VII, 17: ■Kpod&jy.Las 5e ovb'tp.ias oDcrijs tw klv5vv($ toIs tipy a.o p.tvot.s a7ra(7i rd 
 xuiplov bpo'uos wpocrfiKov elvai adv tov ar]Kov. The combination of words may have been 
 accidental; yet it seems probable that, having used the one word of the pair, the other 
 naturally followed by association. 
 
 69 Regarded by Jebb (I, 301), and Blass (I, 423 ff.) as genuine. 
 
46 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, AXTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Bearing in mind the quotations from Lysias above given, cf. Phacdr. 
 233 C: ov8( 5td. ap.iKpa i<rx v P°- v tX^paf avaipovpevos, dXXd 5id peyaXa. 
 /3paoea>s okiyt]v bpyqv iroLOvpevos ; again, 234 A: oii5t ol diair pa^aptvoi irpbs 
 tovs dXXoi's 4>L~KoTLiJ.r]aouTaL, dXX' o'irives a.lax vv ^i x ^ V0{ - Kpbs aTvavras cnwirrjaov- 
 rai (cf. Lys. XIV, 42); and with XXXIII, 6, cf. Phaedr. 232 B: kav 8' epoi 
 ire'idy, irpuTOV p\kv ov rr)v irapovaav rjhovriv depairevuv avv'toopai ooi, dXXd 
 /cat 777^ p'tWovaav Cxfreheiav eaeadai, ovx vir' epuros r/rrcbjueyos, dXXd epavrov 
 KpaTwv, etc. 70 
 
 In orations VI, IX, and XX, the general characteristics of Lysias's 
 antithetical writing are lacking. 71 The antitheses are more formal. 
 There is a careful avoidance of Lysianic excess of adornment — no super- 
 fluous words or strained antitheses. 72 The antitheses of VI are short, 
 but not uniform, or in such numbers as in the Epitaphios; they reflect 
 Antiphon 73 quite as much as Lysias or Isocrates. In the repeated ora- 
 tions (XI, XV) the antitheses are relatively few, and these for the most 
 part repeated, or faint imitations of those in the preceding speech. 74 75 
 
 70 See also 232 D : r)yoiip.evoi vir' bctLvuv nev inrepopaaOai, viro toiv crvvovraiv 8e ux/>eXtI<r0ai, 
 osart ttoKv irXeioiv kXwis <pt.\Lav aureus hi tov irpaynaros r\ exQpw yevfio-ecrdai ; for the 
 i^7oi)M€wt-clause, cf. Lys. XVIII, 25; XXII, 19; XXV, 22; for the paronomasia in 
 -<70ai, cf. Lys. XXXIII, 6. 
 
 71 Cf. VI, 13 bis, 17 bis, 31, 32, 36, 43, 44, 55; IX, 14, 16, 21; XX, 1, 7, 10 bis, 13, 
 15 bis, 17. 
 
 72 Cf. IX, 21: \6yc? fikv ovv irtpl rr)s airoy pa<f>7js ayuvl^onai, tpyi? 5t irtpl 7roXtT«as 
 (similarly VI, 17); for Lysias the epyq> — Xotij) antithesis would have sufficed; the cor- 
 responding clauses would have been ornate parallelisms. Cf. Lys. XIII, 15; XXI, 
 16; XXXIV, 5. 
 
 73 Cf. VI, 18: to p.iv yap oxxirtp aWorpLOv ianv anapTTjua t6 5' oineioi> with Ant. V, 
 91 and 92; VI, 13 (apvowrai — d^oXoyd) with Ant. V, 49. 
 
 71 The following antitheses occur, the parallel sections being indicated by italics: 
 X, 11, 28, 29, 31; [XI, 10, 12}; XIV, 10, 13, 19, 23, 30, 33, 42, 46; [XV, 7, 9, 10, 12]. 
 For TrapeXTjXitfoTw— MeXXoim (XV, 9), cf. Lys. XXII, 20; XXXIII, 6; XXXI, 24; 
 for Kpvpo-nv—<t>a.vtpw (XV, 10), cf. XII, 91. 
 
 The large number of homoeteleuta in XIV, 42 are cited by Blass (I, 422-493) 
 as evidence of the spuriousness of the oration. These seem little in excess of XIII, 
 45, or XXXIII, 6, or of Eroticus (Plato, Phaedr. 233 E), which Blass accepts as genu- 
 ine (see I. P. 425, 426, 430). 
 
 76 Lys. XXVI has been declared spurious by Leisi (Die Rede gegen Evandros, von 
 Dr. E. Leisi, Druck von Huber & Co., Frauenfield, 1912). The antithetical style 
 would seem to support such a conclusion. Considering its length and argumentative 
 character, the oration contains fewer antitheses than any other of the generally ac- 
 cepted genuine orations (cf. sections 17, 20, 22); these antitheses, like those of VI 
 and IX, fail to exhibit the more common characteristics of Lysias's antithetical writing. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 47 
 
 Decidedly un-Lysianic is the Epitaphios, 76 with its ill-arranged topics 
 loose periods, and numerous concatenated antitheses. Lysias used 
 antithesis sparingly, adapting it to the particular matter in hand. Here 
 parisonic antitheses run by the series, attention having been fixed upon 
 the technique of balanced writing. Lysias interspersed brisk, rhyming 
 antithetic couplets, or enlivened the discourse by an occasional cluster 
 of antithetic statements. Here we have monotonous succession. In 
 vocabulary and composition the style bears a much closer resemblance 
 to that of Isocrates. Mutually antithetic participial clauses are extremely 
 common. This form, comparatively rare in Lysias, is very frequent in 
 Isocrates, particularly in orations IV and VI. 77 There are also similar 
 antithetic totol, 7S and a like extensive use of abstracts. 79 
 
 This general resemblance between the Epitaphios and the writings 
 of Isocrates is reflected more specifically in the respective antitheses. 
 We must infer either that the author of the Epitaphios borrowed from 
 Isocrates, or that the reverse was the case. A comparative study of 
 the antitheses will be made in the effort to throw light on one side or 
 the other of this vexed question. The passages in the Epitaphios, with 
 their antithetic parallels in Isocrates and the other orators, are as follows: 
 
 76 Jebb regards the oration as the work of a late sophist; Blass thinks it spurious, 
 and that it was composed prior to the Panegyricus of Isocrates. Wolff thinks it was 
 composed subsequently to the Panegyricus, and in imitation of Isocrates. See on the 
 subject, Blass I, 442-446; Jebb I, 203 ff.; L. Le Beau: Lysias' s Epitaphios als echt 
 erwiesen, Stuttgart, 1863; H. Eckert: De Epitaphio Lysias fatso tributo, Berl. 1868; 
 E. Wolff: Quae ratio intercedat inter Lysiae epitaphium et Isocratis panegyricum, Berlin, 
 1895. 
 
 77 1) (1 antitheses of this type occur: Epitaph. 5, 8, 10, 14, 32, 37, 56 bis, 62, 68, 
 (cf. 46, 51, 61, 67); Lys. XII, 64; XIII, 15 (cf. XII, 59, 78; XVI, 13; XVIII, 19 bis); 
 Isoc. IV, 68, 80, (cf. 27, 34, 71, 81, 90, 128, 132, 151 bis, 152); Isoc. VI, 15, 42, 49, 104, 
 (cf. 36, 58, 87 bis). 
 
 78 dripla-avOpuTToi (Epitaph. 19) occurs Isoc. XII, 121; XV, 214. 
 vonos-\6yos (Ibid.) occurs Isoc. XII, 174; XV, 82. 
 &perri-ir\ridos (Epitaph. 23) occurs Isoc. IV, 71; VI, 60. 
 <pv<TLS-v6iJ.os (Epitaph. 61) occurs Isoc. I, 10; IV, 105; IX, 54. 
 
 79 See Epitaph. 19, 33, 64, 67, 69, 76; for Isocrates, see below, p. 62. 
 
48 
 
 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Epitaphios 
 
 6 T-qabe pev iroXews bia tt)v apeTr)v 
 adavaTOV tt)v pvqprjv eiroirjaav, 
 tt)v be eavTuv iraTplba bia tt)v 
 kvB6.be avpcpopav avcovvp.ov Karea- 
 Tr\aav. 
 81 eireibr) dvrjTdv acopaTwv ervxov, 
 aQavarov pvr)pr)v bia tt)v aperrjv 
 
 avruv KaTthlTVOV. 
 
 6 'eKelvai p,ev ovv tt)s dXXorpias 
 ab'iKUis eTidvp.r)aao~ai ttjv eavTuv 
 bwaLus aircoXeaav. 
 
 12 Kal f)^lovv virep twv aadeveare- 
 poiv juerd tov binaiov biapaxccr- 
 8aL paWov fj tois bvvap'evois 
 XQ-P^bpevoi tovs vir' eKelvwv 
 abiKovpkvovs kubovvaL. 
 
 16 6 pev [Heracles] yap, KaLirep 
 &v ayaOibv ttoWlcv curios ixiraaiv 
 avdponrois, eirlirovov Kal cpiXovi- 
 kov Kal (ptKoTtpov airy naraa- 
 Tr)o~as tov (3'lov tovs pev aWovs 
 abiKoi'VTas eKo\aaev. 
 
 17 ov yap (hantp iroWol, wavTaxo- 
 6ev ovveCKey p'tvoi Kal erepovs 
 
 Isocrales 
 
 I, 50 
 
 tov pev bia ttjv aperr)v 
 adavaTOV eirolrjo'e, tov be 
 5id ttjv Kaniav reus peyia- 
 rats Tipwplais eKoKaaev. 
 
 IV, 84 
 
 kcu yap eneivwv Ta pev 
 crebjuara rats ttjs epveews 
 avayi<r]s aireboaav, ttjs b' 
 dperrjs adavaTOV tt)v 
 /JLVrjfjLTjv eiroiqaav. 
 
 IX, 71 OvrjTos yevbpevos adava- 
 
 rov tt)v irepl avToi) pvr)pr]v 
 KareXtTre. 
 
 XIV, 25 dXXd iroWol be rrjs 
 dXXorpias dSiKoos eindv- 
 pr)aavTes irepl ttjs avTdv 
 biKalms els tovs peyiarovs 
 Kivbvvovs naTe<JT7)o~av. 
 
 V, 60 ireiadevTes yap iV avTOv 
 
 ttjs Kara OakaTTav bvva- 
 pecos eiridvprjaaL Kal ttjv 
 Kara yr)v rjyepoviav 
 aircoXeaav. 
 
 IV, 53 kK TU>V TOLOVTOOV OpOiS 
 
 fipovpeOa tols aadeveoT'ep- 
 ois Kal irapa to aiip 
 (pepov fiorjdelv paWov fj 
 to'ls Kpe'iTToai TOV 
 \vo-LTe\ovvTos eveKa ovva- 
 biKelv. 
 
 X, 17 rod pev [Heracles] eir'nro- 
 
 vov Kal <piKoKivbvvov tov 
 filov KaTeaTTjcre, tt)s be 
 TreplflXeiTTOV Kal irept- 
 pax^TOV tt)v (pvaiv eiroir)- 
 aev. 
 IV, 24 TavTTjv yap oUovpev or\ 
 
 erepovs eKpaXovres ovb' 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 49 
 
 €KJ3a\6vTes TTJP aXKoTplav 
 toKrjaav, dXX' ai)ToxOoves ovtcs 
 ttjv ai<Tr)v eKeKTrjPTO prjTepa /ecu 
 Trarpida. 
 
 20 fiovot yap virep airaar]s Trjs IV, 86 
 'EXXd5os irpbs iroXXas pvpia8as 
 toiv fiapfiapwv bieKLvbvvevaav. 
 
 24 ravra pig. yvdopr) iravTes airr)v- 
 TOiv 6X1701 irpbs iroWovs evopt^ov 
 yap rets pev \f/vxos aWoTpias 
 8ia tov davarov KeKTrjaOai, tt)v 
 8' en TOiv Kivbbvwv fj.vrnj.rjv l8Lav 
 KaTa\ei\f/eLV. 
 
 epf)pr)v KaTakafiovres, oi>8' 
 eK iroXXibv edvcov pLya8es 
 avWeyevTes dXX' outco 
 KaXws Kai yvrjalws yeyova- 
 pev, &o~t' ck rjairep ecpvpev, 
 ravrrjv exovres aivavra 
 tov XP 0V0V 8iaTt\ovp.€v, 
 avTOxdoves, ovres kt\. 
 
 TOV KOLVOV TToXe/JLOV 18lOV 
 
 TOLrjaapevot. irpbs tovs 
 airaarjs Trjs 'EXXd5os /cara- 
 cf>povr)o~avTas air-qvTcov tt\v 
 oUeiav 8vvap.'.v exovres 
 6X1701 irpbs iroWas pvpia- 
 8as, wairep ev dXXorpicus 
 \pvxcls peXkovTes kiv8vv- 
 
 Epitaphios 
 
 Isocrates 
 
 Other Orators 
 
 23 oi'K e4>o(3r)dr]aav to IV, 71 tuv ptv iro\e- Lycurg. 108 
 
 7rXr/0os twv kvavTiuv 
 dXXd tt) avTOiv aptTr\ 
 paWov eirLo~Tevo~av. 80 
 
 pcoiv avvirocr- 
 TaTOv oioptvwv 
 elvai 8ia to 
 ir\r)dos, twv 
 8e avppaxo^v 
 avvirepfiXeir- 
 tov r)yovpkvo)v 
 'ix^v Tr)v ape- 
 Tr)v. 
 
 KamaTa- 
 (pavr) 
 eiroirjaav 
 ttjv av8- 
 peiav tov 
 ttXovtov 
 Kai Tr)v 
 b.ptTr\v 
 
 TOV 
 
 w\f)9ovs 
 
 Tepiyty' 
 
 vopkvrjv. 
 
 80 Cf. Andoc. I, 107: vofiicravres rfjv (Ttperkpav avribv aptrty tlvat tu> irXiidei tw 
 txilvwv 6.vTiTa£acrdai. 
 
50 
 
 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 29 686v p.ev oid ttjs 
 OakaTTTjs eiroLTjaaTO, 
 ir\ovv 5e 5id rrjs 777s 
 ■qvayKacre yeveadai, 
 fci>£as p.iv tov 'EX- 
 \r)airovTOV, Siopv£as 
 tov "A6oj. 
 
 31 ol'x riTTrjdePTes tuv 
 evavTuov dXX' cnroda- 
 v6pt€s oinrep erdx - 
 0r)(jap fiaxccrdai. 
 
 VI, 60 (olSe) 06 to) 
 
 Hypereides 
 
 Tr\v dpe- 
 
 ir\i]deL TOiV 
 
 Epitaph. 
 
 19 
 
 TT)P L(TX VV 
 
 aXkcov irtpiyiy- 
 
 
 
 Kal rrjv 
 
 vopevovs dXXd 
 
 
 
 avbpdav 
 
 rats dperals 
 
 
 
 TrXijdos, 
 
 Tats inr' ep.ov 
 
 
 
 dXX' oi) 
 
 TpoeLprmtvais. 
 
 
 
 TOV 
 TToXvV 
 
 apidp.bv 
 
 TCOV 
 
 acopaTUV 
 
 tlvai 
 
 KplvovTes. 
 
 IV, 89 \avPt]PayKaatp) 
 
 Aeschines III, 
 
 , ovx pev 
 
 cbare riJo arpa- 
 
 132 
 
 
 TUV 
 
 roiredu) ir\evaai 
 
 
 
 Hepffibv 
 
 fxev otd T?js 
 
 
 
 /3aatXeus, 
 
 rjTTUpOV, 
 
 
 
 6 TOV 
 
 ■jre^evaat 5e 5td 
 
 
 
 "A0a> 
 
 T7JS dakb.TT7]S, 
 
 
 
 6<.op6£as, 
 
 tov (xtv 'EXX170-- 
 
 
 
 6 TOV 
 
 ttovtov feu£as, 
 
 
 
 'E\\i)<T- 
 
 roc 0' "A0W 
 
 
 
 TTOVTOV 
 
 oiopu£as. 
 
 
 
 fcu£as. 
 
 VI, 100 oi)8' r}TTt]dr)(ra.v, 
 
 Lycurg. 
 
 48 
 
 oi'X V T ~ 
 
 dXX' evTavda 
 
 
 
 T-qOePTes, 
 
 rdv (3iov 
 
 
 
 dXX' awo- 
 
 treKevTrjaav, 
 
 
 
 daPOPTes 
 
 ovTep 
 
 
 
 tpOairep 
 
 kraxOv°' av - 
 
 
 
 eTaxOrf- 
 aap virtp 
 tt)s ekev- 
 depias 
 apvpov- 
 
 TCS. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 51 
 
 44 rfi I8ia apery Koivqv 
 rrjv eXev6eplav nal 
 tols aXXois kKT-qoav- 
 
 TO. 
 
 Lycurg. 104 rols idiots 
 KivSbvois 
 
 KOLVT]V 
 
 adeiav 
 tols "EX- 
 Xtjcu 
 
 KTWptVOL. 
 
 Hypereides 5id tt\v 
 Epitaph. 24 idlav 
 apeT-qv 
 tt\v KOivifV 
 eXeufcp- 
 
 62 rals avTcbv \pvxo.ls 
 
 KOLvty T7\V TToXlV KO.I 
 
 rols aXXots Krr\ab- 
 fxevoi. 
 53 TpbiraLov 5e OT-qoav- 
 
 TtS KO.WlGTOV fiev 
 
 aureus, alaxio~TOV 81 
 ■jroXepioLs. 
 
 "EXhrjcrtv 
 €/3c/3atco- 
 
 «■«,. 81 
 
 Aeschin. Ill, 93 koKKLct- 
 
 TOLS 
 
 opofxaaiv 
 aio~xi(T- 
 
 TCLS 
 
 Tph&LS 
 
 ypcufruv 
 
 &OTt rd 
 
 KaXXto - - 
 
 TOV TOiV 
 
 epywv 
 Tpbs t6v 
 
 cucrx tcr ~ 
 tov avp.- 
 (3a\eZv 
 i]£Lwo~e. 
 
 Lycurg. 68 
 
 62 davarov per' eXeu- 
 depias alpovpevot fj 
 fiiop perd 5ov\elas. 
 
 33 rjjrjadpevoL upeiTTOv 
 elvai p.tr' dperTJs nal 
 §1 Cf. pseudo-Demades 
 
 VIII, 93 itpoaipovp.kv(j)V 
 yitTpiov filov 
 p.€Ta 5i/ccuo- 
 avvr\s pdXXoi/ 7) 
 /xeyav ttKovtov 
 4: KTriaaadai yap Oavary dqnoaiav tvvoiav Ka\6v. 
 
52 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 irevLas nal (pvyrjs per' aSucias. 
 e\evdepiav t) per' 
 
 6vel5ovs nai tt\ovtov TV, 95 dXX' clvtol fxiv 
 
 8ov\eiav tyjs tcltp'l- virep T-qs eXevde- 
 
 dos. pias TroXepelv 
 
 64 /cat ovTt ai'Tol ir\eov irape<TKeva£- 
 
 eX etv febfitpoi rrjs p.tv ovto, toZs 5' 
 
 avrijsv eXevdep'tas kcu aXXois ttju 
 
 tois (3ovXop.evois dov- 5ov\tiav aipov- 
 
 Xevtiv utrkboaav ttjs pevots crvyyv- 
 
 5' (.Kelvwv 8ov\eias cop.r]v elxop. 
 aiiTol peTexew ovk 
 ■q^iooaav. 
 
 The largest number of parallel passages are found in the Panegyricus , 
 while others, none the less closely related, appear in other orations of 
 Isocrates. 82 This is what we should expect to notice in an author who 
 borrows from Isocrates. Again, it will be observed that the Epitaphios 
 passages, while showing no improvement over Isocrates, display an almost 
 equal amount of artistic elaboration, and the antithesis in no case appears 
 weakened. Isocrates, we may safely assume, would not have borrowed 
 except to sharpen the antithesis or expand it into the form of his charac- 
 teristic periods. 83 
 
 Furthermore, Isocrates's preeminence in the art of antithetic writing 
 should, I think, exonerate him from the charge of such extensive bor- 
 rowing as that above indicated. 
 
 The Epitaphios (Arist. Rhet. Ill, 10, 1411 a) was doubtless highly 
 esteemed in antiquity. Aeschin. Ill, 132 and Lycurg. 48 reflect the 
 corresponding Epitaphios passages quite as clearly as they do those in 
 Isocrates, and it is reasonable to suppose they were written in view of 
 both. 84 Lycurg. 104 and Hyperid. Epitaph. 29 may reflect the corre- 
 sponding Epitaphios passage. Elsewhere in the Attic Orators we fail 
 
 85 If the passages indicated were borrowed from Isocrates, the Epitaphios must 
 have been written later, at least, than Isoc. XIV, 25; X, 17; or VI, 100. 
 
 83 The instances elsewhere of Isocrates borrowing are few, and rather uncertain. 
 Compare Andoc. I, 107 with Isoc. IV, 71 and VI, 60; Andoc. II, 9 with Isoc. XVI, 40; 
 see especially Isoc. IV, 158 and V, 148 and the Gorgianic passage, in view of which 
 these were almost certainly written (quoted below p. 89). Cf. also Lys. XXXI, 6 
 and Isoc. IX, 54; Lys. XIV, 30 and Isoc. V, 115. 
 
 84 Arist. Rhet. Ill, 9, 1410 a (quoted above, p. 9) quotes Isoc. IV, 89 rather than 
 Epitaph. 29, each of these being reflected in Aeschin. Ill, 132. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 53 
 
 to find traces of antithetic borrowing from the Epitaphios. The case 
 is otherwise with Isocrates. In the above mentioned orators the traces 
 of such borrowing from him are more definite and more numerous. 
 The following passages illustrate: 
 Isocrates 
 IV, 92 
 
 Teas 8e ras ToXpas 
 ivapaaxovres ovx bpolais 
 
 IV, 92 Kal reus \pvxo-ls viKtcvres Lycurg. 
 rols accpaaLv airelirov. 
 
 Lycurg. 108 reus pev tvx°-^ ovx 
 
 bpolais expycrcivTO, 
 
 rfi 8' av8pela ttoXv 
 
 tclvtuv 8ir)veyKav. 
 
 48 el 8e del irapabo^b- 
 
 To.rov pev elirelv, 
 
 aXr]0es be, enelvoi 
 
 VLKuvres airkdavov. 
 
 VI, 36 (6pu>) oXojs 8e tou @lov rbv Aeschin. Ill, (7r6Aii> ecopaKa) vwo 
 
 TUiv avdpcowoiv 8ia pev 130 p,ev twv deccv crco^o- 
 
 KaKiav airoXXvpevov, ota P^rjv, virb t&v 
 
 aperrjv aoo^bpevov. 85 'prjTopuv evluv airoX- 
 
 Xvpevqv. 
 42 ToaavTfl 8' r) irbXts 
 eKexpyTO peTafiohfi, 
 ihare irpbrepov pev 
 virep ttjs tup aXXccv 
 'EXX-qvuv eXevdepias 
 ayoovl^eadai, ev 8e 
 rots rbre XP 0V0L ^ 
 ayawav, eav virlp 
 tt)s avTcbv crwTTjpias 
 ao~4>a\u)S bvvqrai 
 Hypereides 8iaKiv8vvevo~ai. 
 Epitaph. 24 otTives Ovtjtov crajjua- 
 tos adavarov 8b£av 
 eKT-qaavTO. 
 Dinarch. I, 110 vpels els to ttjs 
 iroXem cihpa airo- 
 (SXbpavTes Kal rr)v 
 ■jcpoTepov 8b£av virap- 
 Xovaav avTy, clvt'l- 
 6eTe. 
 85 Cf. Andoc. I, 139: el roiis v4> kavruv crw£onepovs vw avdp&iruv airoWvpevovs bp$&>. 
 
 VI, 83 iravToiv 8' av 8eivoTaTOv Lycurg. 
 Toiriaa.ip.ev el avveiboTes 
 'Xdrjvalois eKXiirovcri tt)v 
 avT(hv x&pav vivep tt)s twv 
 aXXuiv eXevdepias, r)pels prjb' 
 virep ttjs rjpeTepas avTcbv 
 GUTYiplas acfieadai tt)s itoX- 
 eo)s ToXprjaacpev. 
 
 VI, 109 evdvprjOevres otl koXXlov 
 
 eoTiv clvtI dvrjToii croopaTos 
 adavaTOv 8b£av avTLKaraX- 
 Xa^aadai. 
 
54 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 ISOCRATES 
 
 Formal antithesis reached the climax of its development in Isocrates. 
 That the orator was a pupil of Gorgias is well known, and it is likely 
 that he is indebted to him for some of the chief stylistic traits. 86 Antith- 
 eses are, as Cicero says, naturally rhythmical. 87 To his short antitheses 
 — constructed with a view to the sound rather than the sense of the 
 opposed members — Gorgias is said to have applied the principles of 
 verse rhythm (although he was not the inventor of this idea). 88 Isocrates 
 developed a distinct prose rhythm, at the same time amplifying the period 
 and giving it a "long stately flow." 89 
 
 Isocrates developed a looser and more flexible period than Antiphon. 
 He cared less for the assonances of individual words, and more for the 
 rhythm of whole sentences. Lysias and Isocrates differ not so much 
 in their language as in their manner of composing. Both use antithesis 
 extensively, but with Lysias it is the handmaid of his style ; with Isocrates 
 as with Antiphon, it is the warp and woof of his composition. 90 Lysias 
 displayed a stiff regularity in his rhyming couplets, but, as Jebb remarks, 
 he knew how to brace and relax the framework of his writing. 91 Isoc- 
 
 86 The lost rk\v t] of Isocrates is thought to have contained many principles common 
 to the Gorgianic rhetoric. Cf. Barczat, p. 12. 
 
 87 Cicero, Oral. LII, 175. 
 
 88 Jebb, II, p. 56 ff. For the rhythm of Isocrates's periods, see Blass, II, pp. 163- 
 169. 
 
 89 Compare Gorgias: to. p.tv Kara twc Papftapaip Tpoiraia vp.vovs d;r cure! rd 5i kotA 
 tuv 'EWrjvwv Oprjvovs (Epitaphios, Frag.) with Isoc. IV, 158: tvpoi d'av t« ex p.tv rov 
 -iroXip-ov rod wpos tovs Papfiapovs vpvovs -KiTzoi^p-'tvovs, €K hk tov irpbs tov% "EXX^as Oprjvovs 
 fip.lv ytyevq/ikvovs, kcu tovs pev iv Tals koprah q.5opkvovs, roiis 5 tiri rah avp-cpopals 
 17/ids p.tp.vi)p.ivovs, and V, 148: /cat to rpoiraiov to p.tv kclt eKtivwv viro tuv fiapfiapuv 
 ffTaOev aycnroxri Kai daopovai, to. 5' ii7rd XaKtSaipovioJi' Kara to)v aXXwr ovk tiraivovaiv 
 dXX' a-qdccs bpwaiv rffovvTat. yap to p.tv dper^s elvat. or]p.elov, to. 6t TrXtove^ias . 
 
 90 " One uniform type of structure may be recognized in all the best discourses of 
 Isocrates. There is a leading idea — generally some large proposition about the affairs 
 of Athens or Greece — which is worked out on the principle of antithesis. Every 
 contrast which it can yield is developed; but through all divisions and subdivisions the 
 dominant idea is kept before the mind; and, at the close, the simplicity of the original 
 proposition emerges from these intricate, yet never confused, antitheses in the sim- 
 plicity of the conclusion." — Jebb, II, p. 65; cf. Mueller, Gr. Lit. II-. p. L84. 
 
 91 See above, p. 42, and Jebb, II, p. 59. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 55 
 
 rates's besetting sins were his scrupulous exactness and the unvarying 
 monotony of his rounded periods. 92 
 
 The necessity which Isocrates felt of speaking €7rtxaptTa>s /cat (iovcjikus 
 /cat 8iaTreTropr)iJLtvus (Ep. VI, 6), caused him to give greater artistic 
 finish to his periods. Hence, not only the modified verse rhythm, but 
 also parison, paronomasia, and homoeoteleuton are the almost constant 
 accompaniments of antithesis. This is done, however, by amplifying 
 the thought rather than by unnecessarily multiplying words, as often 
 with Lysias. He believed that language could be both serious and 
 artistic, choosing to write on large themes, which tovs re Xeyovras /xaXtcrr' 
 kivibe).Kvvovai /cat tovs lxkovovt as xXelar' uxfrekovaiv (IV, 4). We may say, 
 in conclusion, that he employed antithesis in a twofold manner: first, 
 for ornament; 93 second, as an aid in the discrimination and comparison 
 of ideas. But the two uses were never entirely distinct in his mind. 
 In the later orations the figure is not so extensively employed. It is 
 noticeably missing in Or. V. 94 This seems rather a concession to the 
 weakness of old age than a disavowal of his former principles of compo- 
 sition. 95 
 
 Antitheses, clausal and intra-clausal, of every form and degree 
 of intensity noticed in the preceding authors, occur with greater fre- 
 quency in Isocrates. A very substantial aid in the process of antitheti- 
 cal construction was his large command of synonyms. Lysias was the 
 first to employ synonyms extensively and systematically in this way; 
 with him the subjects of the clauses were opposite, and the verbs repeated 
 or synonymous. In Isocrates there is also a considerable number of 
 
 92 Dionysius (De Isoc. 13, 561) censures the orator's constant use of antitheses, 
 parisoses, and paromoioses (they are usually found in conjunction) as puerile, and con- 
 tinues: /cat ou to yevos p.ep.4>op.ai. twv oxWo-twv (iroWol yap avrols txpwavTo /cat 
 avyypa4>els /cat p-qropes, avQlaai l3ov\6p.evoi tt)v Xe£tp) aXXa tov Tr\eovaap.6v. Cf. also 
 c. 2, 539, and De Demosth., c. 20. See also Hermog. irepl 18. c. 11 (Spengel, II, 402). 
 
 93 Cf. XII, 2, where he speaks of avTideaewv /cat trapurwaewv /cat twv aXAaw iSeaiv 
 twv kv rals pTjropetats 5ta\a/i7roucra>j' (cat tovs clkovovtcls t-Ki<yr\uioXvi.aBai /cat dopvftelv 
 avayKa^ovaibv. 
 
 94 Cf. V, 27: ovde yap rals irepl Tr\v \e£iv tvpvdn'iais /cat 7rot/ctXtats zce/coa ix-qxapitv 
 avrov, als awos Tt vewrepos &v kxp&HW /cat tois dXXots inreSetija, 5t uv tovs \6yovs ridiovs 
 av ap.a /cat TnaroTepovs ■Koioltv, etc. 
 
 96 Cf. V, 28: oiv ovbtv «ti 5wa/tat 5ta tt\v i{Kidav, also XII, 3: riyov/iat yap oi>x 
 apporreiv rols treat., etc. 
 
56 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 antitheses in which the subjects of the clauses remain the same while 
 the verbs are opposite. 96 
 
 Antitheses with clauses coordinate: XPV ^ nar-qyopciv p.iv -qyeiadai 
 tovs eiri /3Xd/3j7 \0180povvTas, vovdereiv 8e tovs ex' oxpeXeiq. TOiavra Xeyovras 
 (IV, 130; Cf. VIII, 72) ; 97 anapai 5' otl ae rvyxavu TrapaKaXwv, e£ &v 
 iroirjaei tcls arparelas ov juerd tup fiapfiapwv eft ovs ov diKcuoveaTiv, dXXd ,uerd 
 TOiV 'EXXi7J>coj> eivl tovtovs, irpos ovs irpoai]KH tovs aft 'HpanXeovs yeyovoTas 
 ■KoXefxelv (V, 1 15) ; 98 \avdave p.'ev, Tjv eiri T(!o aoi ovp.^j\ twv <f>av\uv xo-'t-ptw, 
 evde'iKvvco 8e irepl rd n'eyioTa <xirov8a£cov (II, 30, cf. Ill, 52). 99 
 
 Antitheses with one clause subordinate. In these the subordinate 
 clause is 1. Participial (the participle being itself antithetic to the main 
 verb, as in IV, 92; V, 6; XII, 52, or the clause containing words antitheti- 
 
 96 Cf. I, 6: 'p^M 7 ? Se juerct p.ev eppovqereus wcptXrjcrev, avev 8k Ta6r7js TrXetco tovs exovras 
 eflXaxpe. These antitheses generally have other corresponding parts antithetical also 
 (i. e., objects, prepositional phrases, etc.); cf. I, 9; II, 30, 46; IV, 76, 125; V, 148; VI, 36, 
 37, 87; VII, 60; VIII, 23, 49, 102; X, 36; XVIII, 24; XX, 4; XXI, 17, Ep. VI, 13. 
 
 Comparatively few antitheses in Lysias and Isocrates do not contain synonyms 
 (i. e., have full and distinct verbal expression in the clauses); cf. Lys. XXXI, 24; 
 Isoc. I, 19; IV, 83, 132; V, 116, 131; VI, 102; VII, 41; X, 13; XII, 87. 
 
 07 For the irapa8iacrTo\r) (KaT-qyopeiv-vovOeTelv), cf. above, p. 33. Notice that 
 \oi8opovvras-\eyovTas are balanced, but not antithetical, thus forming a partial 
 antithesis; cf. I, 7: «ai top p.ev okvov \poyov, tov be ttovov eiraivov ijyovp.evr]. That Isocra- 
 tes felt that balanced words within an antithesis did not vitiate it appears from such 
 passages as III, 7, and XV, 255-256. Cf. also I, 9, 34, 40, 47; III, 46; IV, 160; VI, 109; 
 VII, 24; VIII, 87; IX, 60; X, 44; XII, 86, 124, 142; XIV, 54; XV, 24, 131. 
 
 98 For nera — eiri, cf. Lys. XIV, 30; for a similar double grouping of prepositions in 
 clausal antithesis, cf. « — eiri, Isoc. VII, 5; in — wpds, Isoc. IV, 158; Kara — viro, Isoc. 
 V, 148. On complementary prepositions in intra-clausal antithesis, see note 22, p. 31. 
 
 Prepositional phrases, the same or similar prepositions governing opposite objects, 
 occur in opposed clauses: Ant. I, 21-22, 23; Andoc. [IV, 1, 36]; Lys. VII, 6; XXV. 27; 
 XXXI, 24; XXXIII, 6; Isoc. I, 50; II, 30, 39; TV, 89, 130; VI, 83; XVIII, 56; Demosth. 
 XXIII, 193. Antithetic prepositions, with objects of similar meaning to each other, 
 occur in clausal antithesis as follows: avev — nera: Andoc. I, 6; Lys. XIX, 3; Isoc. 
 I, 6; Isae. Ill, 68; ev — avev. Ant. V, 7; kv — eis: Lycurg. 131; kv — k: [Lys. VI, 
 31]; e'w — evbov. Isoc. VII, 33; Kara — wapa: Aeschin. I, 185; Hyperid. II, 4; irapa — 
 evena: Isoc. IV, 53; iroppw — €77115: Isoc. V, 5; Ep. V, 14; irpb — p.erd: [Demosth. 
 X, 30]. 
 
 99 3) (3 coordinate antitheses occur elsewhere in Isocrates: I, 1; V, 131; VI, 97; 
 VII, 41; XII, 36; XVIII, 46. 2) (2 coordinate antitheses, I, 1, 6 bis, 9, 12, 17, 30, 
 33, 34, 39, 42; II, 36, 46; III, 1, 50; IV, 48, 76 bis, 89, 95, 125. 150, 158; V 16, 80, 
 139; VI, 37, 92; VII, 5, 51, 69; VIII, 84, L08, 134; IX. 32; X, 30; XII, 183; XIV, 1'); 
 XV, 36, 82; XIV, 42, 50; XVIII, 68; Ep. VI, 14. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 57 
 
 cal to those in the main), as diroXeaavres yap avraiv tovs jSeXrtcrrous eiri rols 
 Xetptorots tuv toXltccv yeyovacnv (VI, 64); similarly, IV, 92, 99 bis, 105; 
 V, 6, 60; VI, 43; VII, 28; VIII, 4, 117; IX, 67; X, 16, 18; XII, 52; XIV, 25, 
 62; XV, 233; XX, 18; 2. Relative, in which the subordinate clause 
 follows the main, as irws 8e XPV tovtco TLcrrevetv virep clvtov Xeyovri, os 
 virep erepcov einopKwv e^eXeyx^ai', (XVIII, 56), and VII, 14; VIII, 52, 
 91; IX, 73; X, 48; XI, 46; XII, 104; XVI, 22, 49 bis, or precedes the 
 main clause, ar &ad' a irapd tcov dXXccv ev Tap' eKaarcov x^exbv ecrrt 
 Xaftelv, ravd' diravra Tap' avrr)s 'pdSiov elvai iropLaacrdai (IV, 42), also 
 I, 33, VI, 12, 57, 69; VIII, 53; XII, 104, 219, 226; 3. Temporal, final, 
 conditional, etc., as 717x1/(1^ aeavrbv ttovols eKovcrlois, otws dv 8vvr} nal 
 tovs OLKOvaiovs viropevecv (I, 21), and teal yap Trjs vyieias irXelar-qv 
 einp'eXeLav exopev, orav rets Xviras rds e/c T7?s dpptoarias dvapvrjadwpev (I, 
 35); cf. also II, 38; IV, 19, 116, 186; VI, 91; VIII, 46, 80, 92; X, 8; XI, 28; 
 XV, 210, 215; Ep. II, 15; 4. Comparative, as dXX' fihov 8ovXevopev rots 
 tolovtols t/ tcov dXXwv dpxopev (X, 57), irXeiovs 8e cpevyovat vvv en pias irbXetos 
 rj irpbrepov e£ divderrjs Trjs HeXoirovvrjcrov (VI, 68); similarly, I, 22, 26, 33, 
 36, 38, 47; III, 34; IV, 21, 50, 53, 77; VI, 8, 87, 89; VII, 52; X, 5 bis, 53; 
 XII, 117 bis, 174; XIV, 22, 55; XV, 72, 214, 225; XVI, 47; XX, 12; Ep. 
 VII, 9; Ep. IX, 6, 12. 100 
 
 Mutually antithetic subordinate clauses (mainly participial) : Exopev 
 avppdxovs) ov8' ev rals pev dcr</>aXetcus <5id ttjv 8vvap.LV ijpds viro8exopevovs, ev 
 8e rols klv8vvols diro<7T7]o~op'evovs (VIII, 21) 7roXXd p.ev rdv xP^P-tv^v V TT( ^~ 
 pevos, airavra 8e tcov exdpcov Treptyiyvb pevos (IX, 44); similarly, 1,31,42; III, 
 24, 46; IV, 68, 71, 80, 99, 151 bis, 152; V, 5; VI, 15, 36, 42, 49, 58, 104; 
 VII, 14, 22; VIII, 23, 87, 119; IX, 23, 43, 44 bis, 45, 60; X, 18; XII, 8, 
 48, 72, 118, 246; XIV, 30; XV, 84, 94, 215; XVII, 10, 15. 
 
 Partly implied antitheses: 1. Where a corresponding antonym is 
 paraphrased, as to. pev yap raxews d7roXenrei, rd 8e Tavra tov xpbvov 
 irapap'evei (I, 19, cf. IV, 46), where ivdvra tov xpbvov is the equivalent 
 of Ppa8etos; similarly, err] Sena-oX'tyco xpbvoo in IV, 83: ol tocxovtov p,ev 
 rCiv eirl Tpolav arparevaapevuv 8ir)veynav, ocrov ol pev irepl piav 
 itoXlv trrj 8exa 8ieTpi\pav, ol 8e rr)v e£ dirdcrqs tt)s A.crias 8bvap.1v ev 6X170? 
 Xpovcp KareiroXeprjaav (Cf. IV, 186; IX, 65) ; 101 see also II, 25 ((rvp^epovrcos 
 — perd fiXd(3ris); III, 33 (8ir}XXaypevov — rpaxecos exovros); IV, 122 
 100 2) 2 subordinate antitheses occur I, 22, 26, 30, 33, 36; IV, 42, 92; V, 6; VI, 43, 
 68, 69, 89; VIII, 52; IX, 67; X, 5, 16; XII, 226; XIV, 22, 25; XV, 214, 225; XVI, 47; 
 Ep. II, 15; Ep. VII, 9; Ep. IX, 6; 3) (3 antitheses: IV, 53; X, 5; XV, 72. 
 
 101 Similarly, cf. Isoc. IV, 181, and Hyperid. 'Ettito^. 35-36. 
 
58 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 (tXevdep&aovTts — €k56toi>s k-woi-qcfav) ; and IV, 124; VI, 12, 87, 102; 
 IX, 44; XII, 72, 87, 223; XIV, 20, 62; XV, 15, 84; XVI, 49; XXI, 17; 
 
 Ep. IX, 12; 2. Where opposite thought obtains between parts of 
 an antithesis without the use of explicit antonyms at all, as in I, 50, 
 where the reward of virtue and punishment of viciousness is thus stated: 
 top pep 8ia ttjv aperqv adavarov eiroL-qae, top 8e 8ia tt\v ko.kio.v reus peyiaTaLS 
 Ti/ucopicus enokaatv. Other instances are III, 14; IV, 27, 84, 128, 132, 151; 
 VIII, 39, 123; X, 12; XVI, 42; XVIII, 24; XX, 4. 102 
 
 Consecutive and extended antitheses. 103 Two or three consecutive 
 antitheses on the same theme are not uncommon with Isocrates: irepl 
 ir\eLopos ttolov 86^au KaX-qp fj -kKovtop p'eyap toIs 7rcutu naT aKtirelp' 6 pep 
 yap dvrjTOS, i] 5' dfldi'dros, koX 86£y pep xp-qpara KT-qra, 5o£a 8e xP*?M<*tcov 
 oiiK uvrjTfi, Kal to. pep Kal (pai/Xots irapaylypeTai, ttjp tV oi'X olbv r dXX' fj roiis 
 Sievey Korea KTrjaaadai (II, 32). 104 The regular quadruple division of an 
 antithesis noticed in Antiphon seldom occurs in Isocrates. Instead, the 
 thought in the last member of a preceding antithesis, or of a word just 
 used, expands naturally into a new antithesis, as in I, 9: ov yap ohiywpuv 
 dpeTijs oi)8e 'padvpwv StereXece rdv P'loi>, dXXd to ph aupa rols ttovois 
 eyvpva^ev, tjj 8e ^vxv tovs kivSvvovs virkpevev, where the thought expressed 
 negatively in the two related participles (ov — ov8e) is stated positively 
 in the aibpa — ipwh antithesis; again, oil yap &\iy upovv tup koivwv, ov8' 
 aireXavov pep ws 18Lup, ripekovp 8' cos aXXorpicov, dXX' eKi]8oPTO pep cos oineLwp, 
 
 102 Two terms are often balanced against one, as (TroXtnot) e£ &v tovs ixiv oiiceoT&Tovs 
 els \viras Kai <j>povTi5as KaTaarrjcreis, tovs 5' ex^povs kv eXirtcrt /ze-yaXcus iroiijatis (Ep. II, 
 11). Cf. also -ttkttoi nal bUaioi. — Hanoi (III, 57), padvu'iai — ~koyi.o-p.ov Kal <f>i\oao<t>ias 
 (V, 29); also VI, 57; VII, 76; VIII, 51, 102, 119; EX, 36, 73; X, 8; XII, 48; XV, 
 246; Ep. VI, 13. 
 
 Negative antithesis between terms or members is secured in III, 38; VI, 7, 8, 9, 54, 
 93; VIII, 4, 12; XIII, 7. 
 
 103 The sequence and grouping of antitheses may be seen from the following list in 
 the more highly antithetic orations: I, 1 bis, 6 bis, 7, 9 bis, 12, 16, 17, 19, 21 ter, 22, 
 26, 30 bis, 31, 32, 33 ter, 34 bis, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43 bis, 44, 47 bis, 50; IV, 9, 19, 
 21, 27, 34, 42, 46, 48, 50, 53, 68, 71, 74, 76, 77, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 89, 90, 92, 95, 99 ter, 
 105, 116, 122, 124, 125, 128, 130, 131, 132, 143, 150, 151 bis, 152, 158, 160, 168, 180, 
 181, 181-182, 182, 186; VI, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 15, 36, 37, 42, 43, 47, 49, 50, 54, 57, 58, 64, 
 68, 69, 87 bis, 89, 91, 92, 93, 97, 102, 104, 109; VIII, 4, 12, 13, 21, 23, 39, 42, 45, 46, 
 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 72 bis, 79, 80, 84, 87, 91, 92, 96, 102, 108, 117, 119 bis, 121, 123, 134 
 bis, 136. 
 
 Antiphon V and pseudo-Lys. II compare favorably with these orations in number 
 and sequence of antitheses. 
 ,M Cf. Demosth. XXII, 75. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 59 
 
 a.TT(ixovTo o' coawep XPV tuv pt]8ev irpoarjKovTwv (IV, 76); here the thought 
 in uXiycopovv is repeated and emphasized by a 2) (2 ovk — dXXd an- 
 tithesis, the terms of which are chiastically arranged (ab : : b 1 a 1 ). 
 Compare VI, 109: evdvprjdevTes on kclXKlov eaTiv avrl Ovqrov aupaTos 
 aQa.va.Tov bb^av avTiKaTaWa^aadat, Kai i/a'X 7 ?^ V v 0V X e&pev bXiyuv eruv, 
 Tpiaadat TOLavTrjv eikXeiai>, r) iravra top aiwva tols e^ -qpoiv yevop'evois 
 irapapevei, toXv paXXov t) ptKpov XP 0V0V yXtxopevovs peyaXaLs aloxvvais 
 ■qpas ai'Tovs TepifiaXelv, 105 where the mutually antithetic ewpa — \[/vxy serve 
 respectively as the nucleus for two parallel antitheses, the antithesis 
 in each case lying in the attributives rather than in the main terms; 
 the second antithesis is twice the length of the first — a feature noticed 
 in Antiphon (III, y 3); the orator here juggles with antithetic terms 
 much as with i'5tos — kolvos in IV, 76 (cf. 'av8pa — Saipova, Becbv — avdpwirwv 
 IV, 151); the thought is simply the familiar aipeTccTepbv tort. koXus 
 airodaveiv 77 £rjv cucxpws (IV, 95). 106 
 
 Sometimes the antithetic terms are so arranged ac to bind together 
 the thought of the expansive period: al p,ev yap irpa^eis at irpoyeyev- 
 ripevai KOLval iraaiv rjp.lv KaTeXei<p9r](rav, to 8' ev naipw tciutcus KaTaxPV (Ta(J ~ 
 dai Kai to. TpoarjuovTa irepi eKdarris evOvp-qdrjvai Kai toIs bvbpacnv ev 81a- 
 deadat, tuv ev<ppovovvTcov 18lov kvTiv (IV, 9); tov pev yap yev'eadai irpo'ex- 
 ovTa tuv aXXcoi^ fj irepi tovs Xbyovs fj irepi tcls 7rpd£eis eiKorcos av tls tvxv v 
 atTtdcatro, tov 8e KaXoos Kai /xerptajs Kexp^oOai. tt\ 4>vaet <5ikcucos av airavTes 
 tov Tpb-Kov tov epjbv kiraiv'eoeiav (XV, 36; cf. XII, 87) ; 107 similarly, see IV, 
 27, 50; VI, 5; VIII, 119, etc. 
 
 Artificial and defective antitheses. Considering the large number of 
 antitheses in the orations of Isocrates, there are comparatively few 
 faulty ones. An artificial symmetry, like that in Gorgias and Lysias, 
 is at times apparent, as in VII, 33: dXX' bpbiws edappow irepi tcov e£co 
 8e8op'ev(x>v &airep irepi tccv ev8ov airoKeipevoiv, or XX, 12 : Kai tovovtu) 
 p.aXXov tovs eiri8b$;ovs yevqaecrdai. irovr/pois t&v irpoTepov i]papTr]KbTU)V, ocrcc 
 irep KpeiTTOv eoTi t<s>v peXXbvTWV ko.kcov airoT poirijv evpeiv 77 tuv r)8r] yeyevT}- 
 p'evwv 8'lktiv Xa^elv. The effort to obtain a rounded period now and then 
 results in an artificial antithesis, as in VI, 98: pt]8ev ovv ev8upev tolovtov 
 
 105 For the thought, cf. Hyperid. 'ErriTa^. 24; Dinarch. I, 110; also Thucy. VII, 
 71, 3 (fin). 
 
 108 For other extended antitheses, cf. I, 33, 38, 47; IV, 168; V, 116; X, 36; XV, 84. 
 
 107 For the thought, cf. Aeschin. II, 118 (rvxy — h">); also the pseudo-Demades 
 AasbeKarlas, 8 (rpoiros — tvxv)- 
 
60 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 toIs eWtafxevoLs tj/jlcls KaKoXoyelv, dXXd tovs \byovs avTcov k!;e\l:yi;ai wet.padccp.ev, 
 6/jLOLOL yevbpevoi rots tlov irpoybvtov epyois, or in IX 44, : oi'8e irpbs 
 ev lxtclktccs ov8' dwipdXcos dtaKel/xevos dXX bpoiccs rds ev rots epyois bpo\oylas 
 (bcnrep rds 'ev rots Xo70ts 8ia4>v\aTToov. The tStos — kolvos antithesis in X 
 41 seems overworked, where, in speaking of Helen's suitors, he says 
 r7js pev ovv Ldias eX7rt5os ttXtjv eras av8pds airavTes exf/evadrjaav, T-qs 8e kolvos 
 8b£rjs rjs 'ia\ov irepl eKelvyjs oi'bels ai'Tcov 8Lr)p\apTev. Similarly, cf, 1,47; IV, 
 151; VI, 89; XII, 86. 
 
 A disparity of antonym is seen in IV, 34: bpcoaa tovs p.eu fiapfiapovs ttjv 
 TrXeiarrjp rijs x&P -* KaTexovTas, tovs 8' "EXX^^s ets pLKpbv totvov /cara/ceK- 
 Xetjuevois. Cf. p.kyi(XT-p.LKpa. (IV, 74), xXetcrroi'-eXarroi' (IV, 99), 
 7rapa.7rX?7<Ttois-ej>aj>rtarrdras (VIII, 72), otKetorara-dXXorptcos (XII, 48). 108 109 
 
 General characteristics of Isocrates's antithetical writing. Broadly 
 speaking, most of Isocrates's antitheses may be grouped around three 
 centers: 1. The superiority of the elder democracy and its ideals; 
 2. His Theory of Culture — including his opposition to the sophists 
 and to dialectic, and the distinctive features of his own training; 3. Pro- 
 treptic utterances. This is only to repeat what was previously stated 
 that he chose large themes, and employed antithesis as the most effective 
 weapon with which to enforce his ideas. Most common and useful 
 instruments were the X670S — epyov, i'Stos — kolvos, acbpa — ^XVy £v v — 
 aTrodvfi<jKeLv and the Temporal and Numerical antitheses. 110 
 
 His treatment of the X670S — ^70^ antithesis is not unlike that 
 found in Antiphon, Lysias and other authors. It is employed in both 
 a literal and a typical sense, the two uses shading into each other, and 
 often not to be distinguished. It is hard, Isocrates says, to praise men 
 of excessive virtue, as it is those who have done no good at all, rots pev yap 
 ovx virtiai 7rpd£ets, 7rp6s 8e tovs ovk elaiv appoTTOvres X6701 (IV, 82). m 
 Again, (VI, 15): ob8e TrcoiroTe 8e \byovs ay air?) eras, dXX' det vopl^ccv tovs 
 
 108 In place of evunaxovs — «x0p°ls (VIII, 46) we should expect avu/iaxoi — iroXtniot 
 (cf. IV, 71, 152) or <t>i\oi—k x 0poL (IX, 32, etc.). 
 
 109 Besides balancing non-antithetic words within his antitheses (see above, note 
 97), Isocrates sometimes altered words for the sake of variety or symmetry; cf. 
 TtXtvrijaai — airoOavtiv (I, 43), i]TT<l)nei>os — irepiyiyvdnevos (IX, 44), fjyovntvos — olbntvos 
 (XVII, 15; cf. IV, 81 and Lys. XVI, 13), also II, 25, 46; VII, 33; XII, 73. 
 
 110 For specific references to the group-subjects, see the List of Antithetic Terms, 
 p. 69 ff. 
 
 111 Cf. Aeschin. II, 118: 17 n'tv tv\V nai <£iXi7T7ros r\a<xv tuii> Ipyuiv Kvpioi, iyu 51 rrjs 
 «ls u/ids twolas xal twv \6yojv. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 61 
 
 7rept tovto biaTpifiovT as apyorepovs elvai irpos rds 7rpd£ets. Likewise 
 V, 151; VIII, 72; XII, 86. Its later typical use is to contrast the 
 real with the ostensible motive of an action, profession-practice, etc; 
 this use (like the similar use of idta — noivfi) is seen in those instances 
 where the terms in the dative characterize the opposition specified in 
 the clauses in which they stand, as \6yu> iro.po.8ovs rr\v x^>P°- v V^w Tabr-qv 
 avTos epyco KpaT^aets aurrjs (V, 6). The common usage of these terms 
 often results in strained or artificial antitheses. 
 
 The totos — kolvos antithesis is effectively used to contrast the elder 
 democracy and its ideals with that of his own day. The solicitude with 
 which our ancestors discharged public duties was equalled only by that 
 with which they cared for their own domestic affairs; they were more 
 ashamed of errors in public matters than people now are in matters of 
 private import (IV, 76, 77); cf. IV, 81, 181. "We disdain our own 
 private allies and levy taxes in order to pay those who are the enemies 
 in general of all men" (VIII, 46), thus supporting his principle of employ- 
 ing a citizen soldiery as of old. He also inveighs against those who 
 attend to public matters with avidity, but neglect their own affairs 
 (VIII, 84, 127; XV, 24, 94); or who engage in public affairs with a view 
 to their own selfish aggrandizement en 6e t&v kolvuv rats tStats aTopiais 
 fio-qdelv t;r)TovvTwv (XII, 140). His own idea is presented in XX, 18: 
 €<ttl rcbv buia<jT&v vovv kxovroiv irepi 7W aXKorpiuv to. SUata }pr}4>t^Gp.evovs 
 dpa /cat to, a^erep 7 olvtwv ev rideadat. The correlation of men's public and 
 private conduct thus becomes a criterion for judging the character of 
 individuals and cities. Cf. II, 46; IV, 81, 181; VIII, 4, 52, 119. The 
 antithesis occurs most frequently in orations IV, VIII and XV. 
 
 Around the acipa — ipvxv antithesis Isocrates centers some of his most 
 vital messages and distinctive ideas. His protreptic discourses vibrate 
 with one form or another of the idea 7retpci tu cwpart pih elvai <t>i\6-Kovos, 
 tt) 5e ^XXI </>tX6o"o</)os, "ivo. tw \xh> eTrtreXelv 8vvri to. bo^avra, rfj oe irpoopav 
 kit'icTt) to. avp.(j)epovTa (I, 40; cf. II, 35). The perfect man (or people) 
 is one who exercises the body by toils, and inures the soul to danger 
 (I, 9). He disdains those who would rather suffer ill in the body than 
 toil with the soul (II, 46) ; who would nurse their body and soul in luxury 
 and ease (IV, 151). He praises those who rats \pvxa.ls vinwvTes rots 
 <j<!op.a<jiv aireiTov (IV, 92); cf. II, 25; VI, 9. The training of the body and 
 soul should be properly correlated. 112 rd <rco{j.a.Ta rots au/iperpots tvopols, 
 
 112 His formal statement of the relation between the body and soul is given XV, 180. 
 Cf. Cic. Be Sencc. XI, 36. 
 
62 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 r) 5e ipvxv to'ls airovdaioLs X6701S av&adai, Trk(j)VKe (I, 12); cf. VIII, 39; IX, 
 73. The body should be exercised with self-imposed toils in order that 
 it may withstand those which are thrust upon it (I, 21). He feels it his 
 main duty to uphold the training of the soul. It is strange, he thinks, 
 that people admit that the soul is of greater importance than the body, 
 yet show by the institution of public gymnastic contests that they place 
 greater stress on healthy bodily condition (IV, 1; XV, 210, 250). Bodily 
 strength with wisdom benefits the possessor, but without it, harms him 
 (I, 6). Strive to leave enduring monuments of the intellect rather than 
 of the body (VI, 109; IX, 73, et passim). On the other hand, he disap- 
 proves of dialectic and the sophistical training of the time : aocfrovs vopi^t 
 p.f] tovs d/cpij8cos irepl piupcbv kpi^ovras dXXd tovs ev irepl twv peyahwv 
 \kyovTas' pr]de tovs to'ls dXXots ebbaipoviav virLax vov f JL ^ vovs > avrovs 5' ev 
 woWals aTrop'iaLS ovtols, dXXd tovs p'eTpia irepl avT&v \eyovTas, 6pi\elv oe 
 nal toIs irpaypaai teal to'ls avdpdoirois bvvap'evovs (II, 39); cf. X, 5, 13 bis; 
 XIII, 7; XII, 36; XV, 36. 
 
 Lastly, mention should be made of the antitheses between Living 
 and Dying (^fjv — airodvrio-Ktiv). This antithesis is found in slightly 
 different terms in all the orators, and is remarkably uniform. It is 
 fully stated in VI, 89: to\v yap Kpe'mov ev tcus S6£cus als exopev reXei'TTJcrai 
 paWov f) £fjv ev rats drtpiats as \r]\pope6a iroLrjaavTes, a. irpoaTaTTOvaiv fjp.lv. 
 Cf. VI, 8; X, 53. The shorter form is TeQvavai /caXws — £fjv aiaxpus 
 (II, 36; IV, 95, etc.). to /caXws airodavelv is urged as a laudable ambition 
 for every man (1, 43; II, 46; cf. above, p. 29, note 18). 
 
 Two features of Isocrates's style — his use of abstracts, and the use 
 of participial attributives — are noticeable in the antitheses. The one is, 
 perhaps, the natural outcome of the other. Plural abstracts are not 
 uncommon: at pev yap evTvxlo.L ko-1 rots 4>av\oLs tuv avdpwiruv tols 
 naKias avyupviTTOvaiv, at 8e bvo-irpa^iai raxecos naTacpavels iroiovcriv, oitoloL 
 TLves enacToi TvyxavovcLv ovTts (VI, 102); similarly, cf. I, 26; IV, 125; V, 
 29, 116; VII, 35, 60; VIII, 21, 51; IX, 45; XII, 31, 214; Ep. II, 11. The 
 same tendency to the use of abstracts is indicated by the following list 
 of antithetic terms: 
 
 aptTf, :—KaKia, I, 50; VI, 36; VII, 76; VIII, 119; Ep. VII, 9;—ir\f,6os, 
 IV, 71;— awpa, IV, 84. 
 
 biavoio. — avoia, XV, 72; — X670S VIII, 136; — tvxv> VI, 92; dwaioavvr} 
 — d5i/aa: I, 36; III, 34. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 63 
 
 8 6£a : — aripla, VI, 89; — e\7rts, X, 41; — eirie~Tr)pr), XIII, 8; — 7tXoutos, II, 
 32. 
 
 €lprjpr]—7r6\eixos : VI, 50, 87, 104; VIII, 12. 
 e\€vdepia— 8ov\eia : IV, 95, 124; XIV, 5. 
 eiraivos '. — KarriyopLa VII, 76; — xf/oyos I, 7, 33. 
 evfiov'KLa : — anaipia XII, 86; — evTvx't-a. I, 34. 
 6\Lyapx't-a- — 87ip.0Kpa.TLa : VII, 60, XX, 4. 
 4> v a l s :—popos IV, 105; IX, 54; — vraiSeims IV, 50. 113 
 
 Now, in order to specify the exact nature of these large concepts, 
 Isocrates often resorted to the use of participial attributives. He thus 
 describes his favorite form of government : KaTearrjo-avTo yap 8-qpoKpaTiav ov 
 rr\v elKrj iro\LTevopevr]v kclI vopi^ovaav tt\v pev aKoi\aaiav ekevdep'iav elvai 
 rr)v 8' e£ovo~Lap otl (iovherai tls iroielv evbaipoviav , dXXd rr)p tols tolovtois 
 pev eirLTLpibo-av apLO-TOKparla 8e xp°>ptvri v (XII, 131). The main idea 
 (8r]poKpaTla) is described by the cxvpo- Kar' apaiv koI Q'eaiv ; four at- 
 tributive participles are used, and five abstract nouns. The parti- 
 ciples, except one, and the nouns, except one exhibit uniform parono- 
 masia, and are all carefully balanced. The ideal city is similarly des- 
 cribed in VIII, 89. This extensive use of attributive participles is one of 
 the most distinctive characteristics of Isocrates's style. 114 
 
 The two Helens. Is the so-called Gorgianic Helen the one referred 
 to by Isocrates; 115 and is it really a work of Gorgias? An affirmative to 
 the first question does not necessarily imply the same answer to the 
 second. The authenticity of the piece must, it seems to me, be deter- 
 
 113 Cf. also I, 33, 35, 36; II, 39; IV, 27; VII, 84; VIII, 102, 117, 119; XIII, 1; XIV, 
 22. 
 
 114 For the large number of antitheses containing participial clauses, and between 
 two participial clauses, see above, p. 56 and 57. The same feature of style is indicated 
 also by the number of antitheses occurring wholly within participial and relative clauses. 
 Participles governing antitheses in indirect discourse occur IV, 132; V, 131; VT, 109; 
 VIII, 133, 134; X, 5, 44; XII, 86; after ^yabit&ot: I, 7; X, 53; XI, 28; XVII, 15; 
 Ep. VII, 9; antitheses within relative clauses: IV, 83; V, 68; VI, 5, 42, 58, 69; VIII, 
 53, 119; XIII, 1; XIV, 20; XV, 246; XVIII, 38; Ep. II, 11. 
 
 For a similar style, cf. Lowell, L' Envoi: 
 
 " For he who settles Freedom's principles 
 Writes the death-warrant of all tyranny; 
 Who speaks the truth stabs Falsehood to the heart, 
 And his mere word makes despots tremble more 
 Than ever Brutus with his dagger could." 
 
 115 Isoc. X, 14, 15. 
 
64 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 mined on grounds of general probability rather than by any exact cor- 
 respondence to a known Gorgianic model or style of composition. We 
 may assume with considerable certainty, I think, that the qualities in 
 Gorgias most admired by Isocrates were the tendency to use antithesis 
 systematically as a mode of composition, and the discussion of large 
 political themes. 
 
 Now the proemium to Isocrates's Helen is a clearly written diatribe 
 against the methods of the later so-called sophists (X, 1; cf. 17 irepi ras 
 tpioas 4>i\oao(pLa, 6). These men, while posing as instructors in public 
 speaking and political wisdom, train youths to cavil on petty themes, 
 and make displays among their willing dupes instead of entering into 
 competition with their peers in the higher arena of open and candid 
 discussion of the large questions of the day (9, 10). In following up this 
 subject, Isocrates represents a distinct cleavage between the older and 
 the later sophists. He would not be surprised, he says (X, 2), had he 
 noticed that this tendency to refinement in speech (irepLtyiav h to'ls \6yois) 
 was only a recent development (veuarl tyytytvriixkvriv). Do these pre- 
 tenders not know that Protagoras and his following, and Gorgias, 
 Zeno, and Melissus left unparalleled contributions in this field (3)? 
 Yet, although those men clearly demonstrated that it is an easy matter 
 to devise a if/evdij \6yov on any theme proposed, men still continue along 
 the same line (en irepl tov rpowov tovtov dLarpi^ovcnv). 
 
 After thus making honorable mention of Gorgias among the older 
 sophists, and contrasting them with the later pretenders, how could 
 Isocrates, with propriety, take up a composition of his master and 
 criticize it? It is much more probable that he is censuring one of the 
 later authors against whom he has been speaking, similarly as he did 
 Polycrates in the Busiris. m He would correct present-day errors by 
 criticizing present-day compositions. 
 
 That Isocrates had the " Gorgianic " Helen in mind when he composed 
 his own seems evident from a comparison of the two speeches. 117 He 
 
 '"This is virtually the position of Spengel, Ars. Script., p. 73 ff., and of Jebb 
 (Alt. Or. II, 97); similarly, cf. Wilamowitz (Aristotlcs uml Athens, p. 172>, Theo. 
 Gomperz {Apologie der Heilkuttst, p. 17.? IT.). Blass (Alt. Bcrcd., p. 75) is in doubt 
 regarding the authenticity, but thinks it probably genuine (Op. (.';'■'. 11. 243). 
 
 Defending the authenticity of the work arc Maass (Hermes, XXII 1 (1887), pp. 566. 
 581; G. Thiele (Hermes XXXVI) (1901), pp. 218-271; W. Suess, Ethos, p. 64; H- 
 Gomperz (Sopjtistik und Rhetorik, pp. 3-6). 
 
 '"Sec Jebb, il, 97. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 65 
 
 says that the writer of the other Helen composed an awoXoyia rather than 
 an kyuwixiov, which he set out to do (X, 14) ; also, that he will endeavor 
 to write on the same theme without treating the topics mentioned by 
 the others (15). These points of difference are amply illustrated in the 
 speeches. The points of similarity are hardly less noticeable. These 
 are seen 1. In a like heaping together and grouping of balanced terms 
 in either speech, particularly in the triple-pair term combination. The 
 example par excellence of term cumulation occurs in the opening of the 
 first Helen: noafxos iroXei. p.ep evavdp'ia, aw/xciTi 8e naXKos, xpvxfl 3e crocfrLa, 
 Trpay/JLtxTL 8e aperi], \6yco 8e a\i]d6ux' to. 8' epapria tovtoip aKoapia. ap8pa 8e 
 Kai yvpaiKa nal \6yop nal epyop nal toXlp kclI irpayp.a XPV to p.ep cl^lop kiralpov 
 eiraipco Tipap, too 8e apa^ico iJ.ccp.op eiriTidkpac Four successive pairs of terms 
 are found in (8): cfiofiop iravaai — \inrr]v acfrekelp — xo-P av epepxo.tr aadaL — 
 ekeop eirav^riaaL, and in (19): rvxys aypebpacn — ypcop-qs fiovXevpaat. — 
 epooTos apayKcus — rexvrjs wapaaKevals. The most frequent combina- 
 tion is that of three consecutive word-pairs, as paraiois topois — 8ei.pa.is 
 voaoLs — 8v<jia.TOLs paplais (17); one series is sometimes followed up by 
 another, as Tvx"qs ^ovXrjpacn — deoop fiovXevpacrt. — avayK-qs iprj4>Lapaaip 
 (6), followed by /3ia apiraadelcra — \6yoLs Tveiadeiaa— epcon akovaa (cf. also 
 7, ll). 118 
 
 Now a similar, though less extensive, or closely formed grouping of 
 terms, not noticeable elsewhere in Isocrates, is found in his Helen: cf. 
 y'epei — /cdAXei — 86^y (14); rdx^t — 'p^MT? — roXp.37 (26), followed by 
 ewopdovp — i]peWop — r)irei\ovp ; again (49) : p.eyedei rrjs opyf/s — prjKei rod 
 XPopov — Tr\r]dei tccp irapaGKevibp, and in 54, o-ep.POTO.TOP — tlp.iloto.top — 
 deLOTdTOP is followed by ap8pias — croc/nas — Slkoloo-vptis. 119 
 
 2. In a certain identity of expression. These parallel passages are, 
 as we should expect, few, but they seem none the less certainly formed 
 in view of one another. Aside from the references noticed in Isocrates 
 to the writer of the other Helen, the following verbal parallels occur: 
 
 118 Cf. (frpUri 7repi0o/3os — eheos iroKv5aKpvs — irodos <£iXo7rej'0J7s (9), and evyevelas 
 waKaias evdo^iav — ciXk^s olKelas eve^iav — <io<pias eiriKTrjTov bvvaniv (4). Other triple 
 groups occur in 10, 14, 20. 
 
 119 For like features, cf. Isoc. X, 31, 38, 67. The pseudo-Demades AcoSe/caerias 
 contains similar phenomena. 
 
66 
 
 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 [rop7ioi'] 'lle\kvr) 
 
 3. xarpos 8e tov piv y e v p k v v 18. 
 
 6eov, \tyopkvov 8e dvqrov 
 6. Tec})VK€ yap ov to k p tl o~ a o v 47. 
 virb tov rjaaovos ko)\v e o~ 6 at, 
 dXXd to rjcraov virb tov Kpelaaov- 
 os 
 dpxeaflcu /cat ayeadac 
 
 Beds 8' avd pooirov Kpelaaov 
 
 Kal fila Kal aocpla Kal rots aXXots. 
 
 13. kv oh els X670S ttoXvp ox^ov 59. 
 
 eT€p\pe Kal tireLcre r e x v V 
 
 ypa<f>els, ovk aXrjdeia \exdeis. 
 
 Isoc. X 
 6 \eyop.evos piv 'At7ea;s, 
 yevbpevos 8' e/< rioaetScoi/os. 
 KaKccs pev yap -rradelv vwb tuv 
 KpeiTTovuv ov8ev KtoXuet Kal 
 tovs prjOtv e^-qpaprriKOT as. tol- 
 aurrjs 8e Tip-qs Tvxtlv ware 
 dvr)Toi> bvTa 8 e a> v yevkadai 
 KpLT-qv, oi'x olbv re pi] ov tov 
 tto\v tti yvcopri oiafykpovTa. 
 det 8e perd r e x v V s aXX' ou 
 perd /3tas dripcopevos 4>aiveTai 
 
 TT)V 4>V(TLV TOLaVT7)V. 
 
 14. rdi> ai'TOJ/ 8e \byov exet ?7re Isoc. VIII, 39 : (xPV yi.y vucfkuv) 
 
 \b y v Svvapis xpos tt\v rijs 
 ^vxv^ tcl^lv fj re raw <pappa- 
 kcop rd£ts irpbs rqv auparwv 
 
 4>VO~LV. 
 
 otl raw pev 7rept to awpa voarjpaToov, 
 xoXXat depairelai Kal iravTo8airal rots 
 tarpots evprjvrai, rah oe \p v x a <■ s 
 rats ayvoovcrais Kal yepovaais ttovtjo- 
 cbv kindvpLwv ov8kv eaTiv dXXo </> a p- 
 paKov -wK-qv X670S 6 roXpdw, etc. 120 
 
 These points of similarity in form and expression emphasize the points 
 of difference which Isocrates set out to illustrate (X, 15), and increase 
 the probability that it is not a composition of his esteemed master 
 which he has presumed to improve. 
 
 Isaeus 
 
 Isaeus is considered as marking the transition between ancient 
 oratory, as shown in Lysias, and the modern type found in Demosthenes. 
 He may be said to combine Antiphon's shrewdness of argument, the 
 plainness of Lysias's diction, and Isocrates's ingenious arrangement. 
 In one important respect he differs from his three great predecessors: 
 his sparing use of antithesis. The fact that he was concerned with 
 private cases, making utterance on no great public themes, may partly 
 account for this. But the more sparing use noticed in Isocrates's later 
 orations may have been in part a sign of the times. 121 Isaeus did not 
 
 120 Cf. [Demosth.] XXVI, 26. 
 
 151 Cf. Dionysius, Dc Isoc. c. 14: 01 p.'ti>To<. iwl reXtuTfj tov fiiov ypa<t>itvTt% \6yoi ffrrov 
 tlal /jeipcuau>5*is, ws av ol/iai. rt\tlat> 6.irti\rj<t>6Tt% ri^c <frpbvr\<yi.v irapa tov xpdvov. 
 
ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 67 
 
 indeed, relinquish the use of the figure entirely. It was a useful instru- 
 ment for sharpening contrasts, for drawing subtle distinctions between 
 technical legal terms, and for rendering the sting of his irony more 
 poignant. 
 
 The antitheses are, as we should expect, of simple design, and are 
 adapted to the demands of the argument. The most common ones 
 are iras-ov8eis (I, 42; III, 59, 63; V, 38; VII, 15; VIII, 39; X, 3) 
 and tijv — h.iroBvg<TKevu i etc. (I, 1, 46; II, 10, 15, 37; V, 4). Con- 
 secutive antithetic writing does not occur to an appreciable extent. 
 Hence, we fail to find the formal period of Antiphon and Isocrates or 
 the enlivening clusters noticed in Lysias. As a conscious element of 
 style, they are superseded in Isaeus by the subtler Figures of Thought. 
 
 Antitheses with clauses coordinate: (8(.adr)Kai) as 'enelvos <5ie0ero ph ovx 
 ■quip eynaXicv aW opyiadeis twv bineioiv tlvI rdv -qperepcov, ekvae 8e wpb 
 tov davarov, etc., (I, 3; cf. I, 43); ravra toiv vbpcov KeKevbvroiv 6 
 jj.ev avrjp &v ov8e tov pepovs e'CKrjx^, oi 5' VTep raurrys rrjs yvvainbs 
 airavrwv (VII, 23). 122 
 
 Antitheses with one clause subordinate: kclLtoi 7ra>s a&ov davpa^eiv, w 
 av8pes, el epe e^jiiraTriaev eva ovra, 6s vpds airavras 'dpa avveCkey p'evovs ev 
 rr\ eKKKr\ala roiavra eirolqae (V, 38); 'TZ@ov\bpr]v pev, co av8pes, wairep 
 'Eevalveros ovroal bvvarai \pev8r) \eyeiv dappaXeus, ovtoj Kayo: Ta\t}dy] irpbs 
 vpds irepl cov ap.(j)iafir]TOvpev elirelv dvvrjdrivai. (X, l). 123 
 
 Antitheses between two mutually subordinate clauses: IV a pr\8ev dyvoqa- 
 avres twv yeyeyevqp'evuv dXXd aacfius elbbres irepl avriov, ovtus ev'eyicqTe 
 rijv \f/TJ4>ov (VIII, 4; cf. VII, 34); <£iXtas aiirols ToXkfjs iiirapxovaris, exQpos 
 8' ov8ep.Las Twirore yevopevqs (VII, 43). Cf. I, 15; II, 45; VII, 15, 34,43; 
 X, 16. 
 
 Partly implied antitheses. The antonym of opyiadeis is not ex- 
 pressed by a single word in I, 43: irpos 8e tovtols evdvpridr]Te otl avrds 
 ekvae pev KXeuvvpios ev cppoviov, diedero 8e opyiadeis kcu ovk bpdus fiovhevbp.evos ; 
 cf. 8ia<popos &v — xP^M €I/0 s (I) 20); irepl ir\eiovos iroieladai — nanus 
 iroielv (I, 33).™ 
 
 122 1) (1 coordinate antitheses occur I, 1, 3, 15, 42 bis, 46; II, 10, 26, 37, 59; III, 
 59, 61; IV, 22; V, 4, 17; VI, 15, 59; VII, 8, 30, 37; VIII, 1, 39; X, 3; 2) (2: V, 21, 44; 
 VII, 23. 
 
 123 1) (1 subordinate antitheses occur I, 6; V, 38; X, 1, 6; 2) (2: II, 15. 
 For axrirep — ovtw, cf. Lys. XII, 86; Lycurg. Ill; Aeschin. Ill, 195. 
 
 124 Two terms are opposed to one in I, 33; II, 15 (weideLv — v^pi^tiv ko1 Qeppow), 
 II, 45 (X67C0 ov8t 5tadT]Kfl — epyw). 
 
 Antithesis is secured by means of a negative in V, 25; VI, 6; X, 2, 22. 
 
68 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Defective and false antitheses. Instances of this character arise not 
 so much from the effort to obtain symmetry as from a desire to present 
 strong argument by means of contrast, pwpbv — peyaXy displays a 
 false antithesis in VI, 59: ecu; tovto pep n-qo' kyxti-pv&y iirideiKvvvai 
 77 Kal Kara piupbv tl eTnpvricrdfi, r\plv be \oibopriar]TaL peya\rj ttj 4>wvji nai 
 \eyn cos elalv o'ibe pev irXovaiot., etc., similarly, eva — ttoXXcoi' in X, 6: ov8e 
 Kad eva vbpov, co avbpes, cbs eyu en iroWibv TeKprjpicov vp.lv ewibeLfa ; cf. also 
 dXXorpicoi' — a^erepots avrcbv in VIII, l. 125 
 
 Except for purposes of comparison in particular instances, it would 
 add little to the value of our study to trace the use of antithesis in the 
 remaining Attic Orators. 126 The form of extended contrast, recorded 
 by Alexander Numenius and others after him brav pi) iravrus rots avTinei- 
 p'evots bvbpaaiv <f>pafapev, avrLneipeva pevroL t? bta^epovra Tpaypara — 
 is particularly common in Demosthenes (from whom it was illustrated), 
 and in Aeschines, although these orators also employed the conventional 
 modes of antithetic writing unstintingly. 127 Formal antithesis, which 
 was the ascendant feature of style in Antiphon, Lysias, and Isocrates, 
 was far from being discarded in the succeeding and later orators: it merely 
 assumed its rightful secondary position. 
 
 125 For defective contrasts (not strictly speaking antitheses), see Wyss on Isae. 
 I, 19, also IX, 19 {roii yap — yev6p.eva). 
 
 126 Cf. Lycurgus, Kara A.«o/c. 10, 48, 60, 65, 71, 74, 91, 146. Hypereides, Kara 
 <t».\nr. 3. 4; Kar' 'A0 V voy. 16, 35; 'EiriTa<*>ios 5, 13, 19, 21, 24, 35, 36, 42. 
 
 Dinarchus, I, 20, 24, 27, 48, 55, 65, 76; II, 22. 
 
 127 Cf. Aeschin. II, 4, and the use of av7-ir£%u in III, 168, 253. The conventional 
 form of the figure is to be noticed particularly in Aeschines's extensive use of the 
 X670S— ipyov (6fop.a—ipyov) antithesis; cf. I, 55; II, 118; III, 89, 102, 126, 141, 142, 
 152, 174, 248, 251. Other instances of antithesis are I, 5, 109, 174, 185; III, 57, 75, 
 79, 99, 130, 143, 157, 226, 231, 245. 
 
 For Demosthenes's use of the figure, see Rhedantz, Naic Pkilipische Redcn, Index, 
 s. v. Antithese; Straub, De tropis apud Demosthmem ct Ciceronem, p. 142; Baden, 
 p. 24-25. Instances of formal antithesis (such as we have been considering) are not 
 infrequent in Demosthenes; cf. X670S {6vop.a) — ipyov. XXI, 78; XXX, 25, etc.; 
 IbuK—Koivbz (5 V p.6<nos): XVIII, 210; XX. 24; XXI, 45; XXVII, 23; ira<T X o>— 
 bpau {iroiku): XXI, 43; XXIII, 193; irape\r)\vd6s—pi\\ovTa: IV, 2; XVIII, 192. 
 See also XVIII, 162 ({uvrts — re^ewres); XXV, 7 (affdtvris— iaxvpbs), 15, 16 (<*>6<m 
 — polios); [XXVI] 10 (irtpLtlvai — iiTTaadai), 13 (l<rov — aviaov), 26 (ouLia — ^v\v); 
 XXVII, 29 (Qavepa— a<t>avi)). 
 
IV. LIST OF ANTITHETIC TERMS 
 
 The foregoing discussion has been mainly a study of the formal 
 expression of antithesis, the real contrasts being referred to only inci- 
 dentally. These may, perhaps, be indicated most accurately by listing 
 the more common antithetic terms. The antitheses between Word- 
 Deed, Private-Public, Living-Dying, and the numerical and temporal 
 antitheses appear to a greater or lesser extent in all the orators; they are 
 employed as general modes of contrast, the usage of which was already 
 established in Greek Literature prior to the time of the orators. Again, 
 certain contrasts, by reason of their repeated and persistent employ- 
 ment by an author, become characteristic of the writer's style. Thus, in 
 Antiphon, airoKTelvoo-airodvriaKco and £kovo-los-o.k6vo-los are the most com- 
 mon; in Andocides (III), elpr]vri-Tr6Xefj.os is naturally quite frequent; 
 in Lysias, <Ta)£o)-a,ir6X\vp.i and oki'yapxia-brip.oKpaTia. The o-(b/xa-\f/vxv 
 antithesis is found almost exclusively in Isocrates, as also "EXKr]ves- 
 (3a.pj3a.poL. With Isaeus, ovoeis-airavTes is the most common form of 
 contrast. The distinctive feature of these antitheses is doubtless due 
 in part to the author's natural bent, partly to the character of the sub- 
 jects with which he is dealing. 
 
 (I) Word-Deed l 2 
 
 1. \6yos-epyov: Ant. Ill, 5 5; V, 3, 47, 75, 84; VI, 47; Andoc. 
 [IV, 27]; Lys. I, 21; XIX, 61; XXV, 13; XXXIV, 5; [II, 5, 19; VI, 17; 
 
 1 The main references are given to the word-combinations in clausal antithesis; 
 references for comparison, unless otherwise indicated, are to the same words in intra- 
 clausal antithesis. The more common pairs are given first; others are given in groups 
 which seem to be fairly distinct. Instances of the commoner antitheses in the poetic 
 forerunners of the Attic Orators have been added in the notes (the list is not meant to 
 be exhaustive), showing the extent to which they were already current. 
 
 2 Cf. Aesch. Prom. 336; Soph. El. 59, 557, 624; O. C. 782, 873; Eur. Ale. 339; Or. 
 287; Phoen. 526; El. 893. Cf. tiros— epyov, Horn. II. I, 395; pvdos— ey X os, Ibid. 
 XVIII, 252; see also Odyssey IV, 818. 
 
 For variants, cf. Horn. II. XX, 250; Od. XIII, 297-299; Hesiod, W. and D., 311; 
 Pindar, O. VIII, 19; X, 69; Aesch. Prom. 1080; Soph. Antig. 757; Philoct. 555 f.; 
 Eur. I. A. 1115; Med. 473; Phoen. 359; Heracl. 542. 
 
 In prose, cf. Xoyos, epyov crwd, Democr. ap. Philon. I, 615; ovop.a — epyov, Heraclit. 
 Utpl <}>vs. 66; see also Herodotus III, 72; IV, 8; VI, 38, and elsewhere, \6yos — epyov 
 is very common in Thucydides. Similarly, Cicero says, Specie quidem Wanda, sed 
 reapse multis locis repudianda (Am. XIV, 47); cf. rerum-verborum De Or. Ill, 125. 
 
70 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 IX, 21]; Isoc I, 33; V, 6, 74; VI, 98; VIII, 134; IX, 44; X, 4; XII, 36, 
 142; XIII, 7; XX, 3; Ep. II, 15; cf. Lys. VII, 30; Isoc. Ill, 61. 
 
 a. Datives: Lys. XXXIV, 5; [II, 5, 19; VI, 17; IX, 21]; Isoc. V, 
 74; VIII, 134; XII, 142; XX, 3; Demosth. XXX, 25; cf. Ant. Ill, y 1, 3; 
 Isae. II, 38, 44; see also 6v6p.a.T(.-epyu, Andoc. Ill, 1; Lys. XIII, 15; 
 [XX, 1, 17]; Demosth. [XL] 1. 
 
 2. XoTos-Trpd^s: Isoc. IV, 82; V, 151; VI, 15; XII, 86; XV, 36. 
 
 3. Xe7co (etiroo) — irpaTTU (iroikco, 5pdw:) Ant. Ill, /3 2; IV, 7I; V, 75; 
 Lys. XII, 33; [II, 46]; Isoc. Ill, 1, 46; V, 131; XII, 87; XV, 215; Isae. 
 II, 26; V, 39; cf. Ant. IV, 7 7. 
 
 4. Variations, \6yos — aXr)6eia, Ant. V, 3; Isoc. Ill, 33; — popos, 
 Ant. V, 14; (VI, 2); Lys. [II, 19]; Isoc. XII, 174; XV, 72; — tovos, 
 Isoc. I, 12; VI, 57; for other variants with X670S, cf. Ant. V, 35; Isoc. IV. 
 81; VIII, 72. See also paprvpeu — Kar^yopeo), Lys. VII, 33; cf, 
 Isae. XII, 8;— Xe7co, Ant. V, 89; (VI, 28). Cf. 6<pda\poL-\6yoL, Lys. 
 
 XXIV, 14; 6vop.a— epyov, Andoc. Ill, 1; Lys. XIII, 15; [XX, 1, 17]; 
 Aeschin. Ill, 126, 141; for other variants, cf. Ant. Ill, j3 8; V, 5; Lys. 
 XVI, 19. ovop.a with a variant occurs Andoc. IV, 27; Isae. Ill, 64; 
 
 V, 34; VI, 15; Aeschin. Ill, 99. 3 
 
 (II) Private — Public 
 
 1. 18los— koivos: 4 Ant. V, 13; Andoc. Ill, 27; [IV, 1, 35]; Lys. 
 I, 47; XIII, 2; XVI, 11; XXXI, 6; [II 44]; Isoc. IV, 9, 76, 77, 81, 99 
 
 VI, 93; VII, 52; VIII, 4, 46, 52, 96, 119; X, 36, 41; XII, 12; XV, 188 
 cf. Andoc. [IV, 11, 42]; Isoc. IV, 86; V, 73; VIII, 13, 93, 127; XII, 140 
 XV, 158; XVI, 3. 
 
 a. Datives: Andoc. Ill, 27; cf. idig. — h-qpooiq., Isoc. XVIII, 24; 
 Isae. VII, 30. 
 
 2. Wios— 8r,p.6(nos : Andoc. [IV, 4]; Lys. XVII, 9; XXI, 16, 19; 
 
 XXV, 25; XXVII, 12; Isoc. IV, 181; XVIII, 24; Isae. VII, 30. 
 
 4. t5toj— TroXts: Ant. II, 5 11; V, 79; Lys. XXX, 8; XXXI, 10; 
 Isoc. XVI, 2; XVIII, 24; cf. Isoc. VIII, 120. 
 
 5. Variations. dXXos — avros — (avros): Ant. V, 13; Lys. XII, 24; 
 
 3 Cf. Thucy. Ill, 38, 4: (io^dart Otaral nlv toiv \6yojv > iff tad ai, aKpoaral 5t twv 
 tpyuv, and also Aeschin. Ill, 253: o« Xijctt^ TrpaynaTwv, in bvondruv 5id rijs iroXirttos 
 irXiovra. 
 
 * Cf. Horn. Ody. Ill, 82 (see also II, 32; IV, 314); Findar, O. XIII, 49, N. VI, 
 55; Eur. Hec. 904. 
 
LIST OF ANTITHETIC TERMS 71 
 
 XVIII, 19; XXIX, 5; XXXIV, 11; [VI, 13]; Isoc. II, 39; III, 38; IV, 95; 
 VI, 43; VIII, 49, 92; X, 36; XI, 46; XII, 48, 226; XIV, 19, 24; XV, 72, 
 84, 225 ; XVI, 47 ; XVIII, 56 ; Cf . Isoc. IV, 99 ; VI, 83. 
 
 dXXorptos— ai'Tos (avrds): Ant. IV, 8 8; Lys. XXXIII, 6; [II, 6, 
 56; VI, 17]; Isoc. IV, 182; VI, 54; XIV, 25, 54; XVIII, 56; XX, 18; 
 XXI, 12; Isae. VIII, 1; X, 2, 22; cf. Isae. Ill, 66; — oUelos: Lys. 
 [VI, 17]; Isoc. IV, 76; V, 80; VII, 24; VIII, 84; XII, 48; XIV, 51; cf. 
 Andoc [IV, 15]; Lys. I, 33; XXXIII, 8; Isoc: I, 35; IV, 86; V, 113; 
 IX, IV—lhos: Lys. [II, 24]; Isoc. II, 46; XV, 24, 94. 
 
 (Ill) Living-Dying 
 
 1. fdw — aTodvfi<TK.w. b Ant. I, 23; II, /3 1; V, 35; Andoc. I, 53; Lys. 
 XII, 99; XIX, 49; [II, 8]; Isoc. VI, 8; X, 48, 53; XI, 8; XIV, 55; XVI, 22; 
 Ep. VII, 9; Isae. I, 1, 46; V, 4. Cf. Ant. IV, 8 1; Andoc. I, 57; Isoc. 
 V,47,55;LX,3;X,27. 
 
 2. fdco— reXeurdw. Isoc. I, 38; II, 36; VI, 89; Isae. II, 10, 15, 37. 
 
 3. airoKTe'ivoo — cnrodvfiGKco: Ant. I, 5, 21, 22, 26; II, y 11; IV, 7 3, 
 4;V,67. 
 
 4. (Totfco— dTroXXuMt: Ant. V, 46, 73; Andoc. [IV, 9]; Lys. XII, 68, 
 86, 89; XIV, 23; XIX, 54; XXIV, 7; Isoc. IV, 149; VI, 36. 
 
 a. Infinitive phrases: crcofeif (o-cocat) 5uccua;s — airoXkvv at douaos : 
 Ant. V, 73; Lys. XLX, 54; XXIV, 7; cf. Andoc. I, 57. See also redvavai 
 /caXws — $r)v aiaxpus : Isoc. II, 36; IV, 77, 95; similarly, Isoc. I, 43; VI, 
 89; LX, 3. 
 
 (IV) Body-Soul 6 
 
 <ru(ia — $vxn: Lys. X, 29; Isoc. I, 6, 9, 12, 40; II, 46; IV, 1, 92, 151; 
 VI, 9, 109; VII, 14; VIII, 39; XV, 210; cf. Lys. XXIV, 3; Isoc. XV, 250. 
 
 Variants, aibtxa — apery, Isoc. IV, 84; cf. II, 36. For other variants 
 witho-d^a, see Ant. V, 35; Andoc. II, 24; Lys. XXIX, 11; [VI, 31]; 
 
 6 Cf. Soph. Ajax. 479 f.; Eur. I. A. 1252; Troiades 637. See also Simonides (Bergk) 
 99, 129; Pindar O. II, 26; and above, p. 29 note 18. 
 
 6 Cf. Pindar, Isth. Ill, 71: fxop<pdv ppaxvs, \pvxav 5' aKa/jLTrros ', Agathon, Frag. 14: 
 yvvri tol (tcohcltos 5t dpylav, ■•pvxfjs 4>povri<jiv turds ovk apybv 4>opti. 
 
 See also 4>povr\p.aTi — aw/ian, Eur. Elec. 371 f; cf. Hel. 160, 161. The o-w/xa — \pvxv 
 antithesis is frequently found in Hippocrates; cf. De Daiaet. Ill, 71 (Littre, VI, p. 
 610) : oKola iraaxet- to a<j}p.a, roiavra bpf) 17 \pvxv- 
 
72 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Isoc. VI, 109; IX, 73; XIV, 15; Aeschin. Ill, 99, 157; Hyperid. VI, 24; 
 Dinarch. I, 110. 7 
 
 (V) Temporal Antitheses 8 
 
 1. Past-Future, a. yeyevr]p.ha — p.e\\opra: Lys. XXV, 23; Isoc. 
 IV, 181; VI, 47; IX, 60; XX, 12; Ep. IX, 6. Cf. Andoc. Ill, 2; Lys. 
 XXXIV, 5; Isoc. IV, 141; VI, 59. 
 
 b. irapt\r)\vd6Ta — fxeWopra: Andoc. [IV, 36]; Lys. XV, 9; XXII, 
 20; XXXIII, 6, 7; Isoc. II, 35; Demosth. IV, 2; XVIII, 192. 
 
 2. Present-Future (irapovra — p.e\\ovra): Andoc. [IV, 12]; Lys. XII, 
 45 ; Isoc. I, 44; VIII, 121 ; XIII, 7. Cf . Ant. VI, 25. 
 
 3. Present-Past (irapovra — irapeXdovra, etc.): Lys. [II, 67]; Isoc. 
 IV, 160; VIII, 80. 
 
 4. Temporal adverbs, Tore — vvv: Ant. V, 94 bis; Andoc. Ill, 12; 
 Lys. [XX, 17]; Isoc. VI, 54; VIII, 48; XVIII, 46; Isae. I, 20, 30. irporepov- 
 vvv: Lys. VII, 1; XII, 2; XVIII, 19; XXVII, 3; Isoc. VI, 7, 97. 
 irpbrtpov — varepov: Ant. V, 71; Isoc. I, 47. irapaxp-qpa (etc.) — varepov: 
 varepov. Ant. IV, /3 3; Lys. Ill, 39; Isoc. I, 17. For other adverbs, 
 cf. Lys. XVII, 9; Isoc. XIV, 30. 
 
 (VI) Numerical Antitheses 9 
 
 1. 7T a s ( a ir a s ): —els Lys. XXIV, 22; XXXI, 31; Isoc. 
 
 IV, 42, 68, 83, 180, 181, 186; VI, 68;VIII, 134; IX, 65; Isae. V, 38; X, 3; 
 
 cf. Lys. [II, 54]; Isoc. XII, 72; — eWros: Andoc. [IV, 16]; Lys. XIII, 
 
 92; Isoc. IV, 128, VI, 54; VII, 22; VIII, 134; — dMyor. Isoc. I, 1; 
 
 7 E. D. Burton (Am. Journ. Theol., Vol. 17, p. 598) observes that in Classical 
 writers there is no real antithesis between irveiifia — <rdp£ or \pvxv — <r°-P$, but "The two 
 terms aCi^a and \pvxv frequently stand in antithesis from Herodotus down, and very 
 frequently in Plato. Plato is the first writer who suggests the idea that the au^a is 
 injurious to the ipvxv [in the sense that by its sensations and appetites it breaks in 
 upon the tranquility of the soul and interferes with its clear vision of the truth, and 
 by causing excessive pain or pleasure tends to corrupt it against its will]. In Aristotle 
 the two terms — are rather correlates than antitheses." 
 
 8 Cf. [Gorgias] Helen 11 : d p.tv iravres wept iravruv tlxov T <*>" re ^apoixonkvuv p^Ml" 
 twv rt wapbvTwv Ivvoiav rdv re fieWdvTwu irpbvoi.av, oi)K &i> dfiolcos 6p.oios wf 6 \6>os 
 ^7rdTo. 
 
 For the terms, sec also Soph. Antig. 611 ; Eur. Ion. 7; I. T. 1264. 
 
 Cf. also Arist. Rhcl. B 13, 1390 a: roii nh yap plov r6 nls> XoithJp 6\lyov rd 5k 
 rapeXrjXi^os rrohv, Ioti 5t jj nkis eXxis tov neWovros 19 5k m^MI ' t ^ lv irapoi.x ^ 1 ''^''- 
 
 • Cf. Simonides (Bergk) 91, 101; Aesch. Pers. 763, Choeph. 520, Sept. 1050; Soph. 
 Antig. 14; Eur. Or. 7, 743, 1244, Hippol. 1403, Heracl. Fur. 1139, 1391, Andr. 1116, 
 I. A. 957, 1358, 1390, 1394. 
 
LIST OP ANTITHETIC TERMS 73 
 
 VI, 87; — xASels: Lys. I, 18; III, 3; VII, 18; Isoc. IV, 150; VIII, 52; 
 X, 12; XII, 87; Isae. I, 42; III, 59, 61; VII, 15; VIII, 39; — ttoXXoI: 
 Isoc. IV, 46; V, 131; IX, 44. 
 
 2. TroXXot — els: Lys. VII, 26; Isoc. Ill, 24; Isae. X, 6 
 cf. Isoc. VI, 99; —oXlyoi: Andoc. [IV, 41]; Lys. XV, 9; XIX, 21 
 XXXIV, 9; [II, 37, 41]; Isoc. VI, 43; VII, 72; XV, 233; Ep. VIII, 3 
 cf. Isoc. IV, 86; IX, 45; — ovdeis: Lys. Ill, 47; VII, 26, 38; XII, 7 
 XXVI, 20; XXIX, 1; Isoc. Ep. II, 15; Isae. VII, 43; cf. Trds— ttoXXch 
 
 3. Variations, fxopos — aXXos: Ant. V, 17; Lys. [II, 76]; Isoc. I, 33 
 — &7ras (71-as): Lys. VII, 33; XXII, 16; Isoc. IX, 65. eXacrcrcov-TrXeioov 
 Ant. II, 7 11; V, 91; cf. Lys. [XX, 13]. 6\os—p.epos: Isoc. VII, 28 
 XX, 9. 
 
 (VII) Transgress-Observe; Condemn- Acquit 
 
 1. Verbs (cf. crch^co — airoWv/jLi). 
 
 aToKvw—KaTaXaiifiavw (or other variant): Ant. Ill, /3 8, 11, 7 11, 5 9. 
 
 airo\f/T]4)l^o: — Kara^rj0tfco (or other variant): Lys. XII, 90, 91; XIII, 
 96; Lycurg. 149. 
 
 acfrLrj/ju — alpeco (or other variant): Ant. II, /3 11, 8 11; Andoc. Ill, 
 23, 28; Lys. XII, 80; XXV, 26; Isoc. XV, 94. 
 
 kixfxho) — Tvapafiaivw. Isoc. VII, 41; cf. dia/xevct) — kcltclXvco: Isoc. VIII, 
 51. 
 
 Kar?77opeco— airoXoytu (4>evyco): Lys. [VI, 13]; XII, 2. 
 
 Xro — biaTid-qyn: Isae. I, 3, 43; cf. StaXuco — /3e/3cu6co: Lys. XIII, 15. 
 
 Tifiwpkw — /3o?j0eco (or other variant): Ant. I, 2; II, 7 11; III, /3 8; 
 V, 79; Andoc. I, 31; [IV, 36]; Lys. XIV, 19; XV, 12; XXXI, 24; [IX, 14]; 
 Isoc. IX, 32. 
 
 4>tvyw — 8i6jku (or other variant): Ant. IV, 5 9; V, 80; Andoc. [IV, 
 36] ; Lys. Ill, 36 ; X, 1 1 , 3 1 ; [II, 4]. 
 
 2. Adjectives. 
 
 curios — ava'iTios: Ant. II, j8 11, 5 11. 
 
 Kadapos — evoxos: Ant. IV, a 1; — virairios: Ant. Ill, 7 1. 
 Kvpios— ixKvpos'. Andoc. [IV, 9]; Lys. XVIII, 15; Isoc. XVIII, 68; 
 Isae. II, 26. 
 
 3. Nouns. 
 
 Kart]yopla — aroXoyla: Ant. VI, 7; Andoc. I, 6; — 8Lkt]: Isoc. XVI, 2. 
 
74 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 (VIII) Active-Passive 
 
 at pew (cHpaipeu, etc.) — a7ro/3dXXw : Andoc. Ill, 29; — a7roXei7ru>: Lys. 
 [II, 4J; — 5t5a> M i (irapa5L8wp.i, etc.): Lys. XXIV, 7; XXX, 26; Isoc. XII, 
 52. 
 
 a ir o k t e Lv v. — a.ivoQvr\oK.<x>: (see above); biafyddpw. Ant. Ill, 7 7. 
 
 airoaTtpkoi: — oi5w/u: Lys. XXIV, 7; — nopifa: Isoc. XVII, 10. 
 
 r}TTaop.at — naropdou: Isoc. IV, 124; XII, 183; — Kparku Isoc. X, 
 18; XII, 31; — vucixa: Andoc. Ill, 26; Lys. XII, 92; [II, 24]; Isae. V, 
 21; XI, 21; — wepiflyvopcu,: Isoc. II, 25; IX, 44. 
 
 KaTopdou — ap.apTa.vu: Isoc. V, 68; VI, 5; VII, 72; XVII, 15; Isae. 
 IV, 22; — arvxtu: Isoc. Ill, 24; IV, 48. 
 
 \ap.pavu-6L8upu 10 : Lys. XII, 39; XXVII, 10; Isoc. XV, 225; 
 XVI, 49; XVIII, 66; Isae. VII, 12. 
 
 Trdo-xw — iroikw (opdoo) 11 : Ant. Ill, j3 7, 7 3 bis; IV, 5 5, 6, 8; Andoc. 
 Ill, 6; Lys. XII, 89; XV, 10; Isoc. II, 46; VIII, 91; XII, 117; XVIII, 40; 
 Isae. I, 6. Cf. Lys. XXI, 22; Isoc. IV, 63. See also iraax^ — iraTaoau: 
 Ant. IV, 7 4; — <r<tfw: Ant. V, 2; Lys. [XX, 30]. 
 
 (IX) Opposite States of Mind 
 
 1. Envy, Censure, Hatred, Grief, Pain, Evil Intent, and their 
 opposites. 
 
 k\tku>—<t>6ov'&a: Lys. XXI, 15; [II, 67; XX, 15]. 
 
 tiraivos (eiraivew) — e7rmpda>: Isoc. VII, 60; Ep. IX, 12; — \poyos 
 fytyw): Isoc. I, 7, 33; III, 1; XII, 15, 118, 223; cf. Isoc. XII, 240; 
 with other variants: Isoc. VII, 76; VIII, 72. 
 
 i x 6pa (e X dpbs) — t^iXio (</>£Xos): 12 Andoc. [IV, 5]; Lys. XIV, 19; XV, 
 12; [II, 67; IX, 14]; Isoc. I, 26, 33; IX, 32, 44; Isae. I, 33; VII, 8, 43; 
 cf. niak^iXeo). Lys. XII, 54; Isoc. XII, 141. 
 
 ridopat — Xv7T€co 13 (or other variant): Ant. Ill, /S 8; Andoc. [IV, 5]; 
 Isoc. I, 47 bis; V, 131; VIII, 87; X, 36; XII, 131; cf. eXvris — Xi/ttt? : Isoc. 
 VI, 47; Ep. 11,11. 
 
 10 Cf. Horn. II. I, 137; IX, 367; XVIII, 499 f. 
 
 11 Cf. Pindar, N. IV, 32; Aesch. Pers. 813, Agam. 1527, 1565. 
 
 18 Cf. rdv <t>t.\ioi>Ta — ix9p6i>: Hesiod, W. and D. 342, and <£i\«Is — arvytls : 
 Aesch. Choeph. 906. 
 
 11 Cf. Horn. II. IV, 197: K-Xtos — irivdos, and riScontOa — Xvirw/itda : Soph. Ajax 
 1085 f. See also Aeschin. Ill, 207: outoj k\6lh 'p<j.ov fj fiXXoi ytXwot. 
 
LIST OF ANTITHETIC TERMS 75 
 
 ovubos — Tifj.r) (or other variant) : Lys. XII, 93; XIV, 33; XXV, 6; 
 cf. Lys. XXVII, 16; [II, 33]. 
 
 t lc redo) (inaTos) — aTuoTeco (aiuaTOs): Ant. Ill, y 4; V, 3, 
 84; (VI, 28); VI, 29; Isoc. I, 22; — 5e£5co : Ant. II, 5 1; Lys. XXIX, 12; 
 —4>opepbs\ Isoc. V, 80; VII, 51. 
 
 xatpco — ayavaKTeu: Isoc. VIII, 45,49; — cr7rou5dfco: Isoc. I, 31; 
 II, 30; for the variants, cf. Isoc. I, 42; IV, 168. 
 
 Xaptfo/xai — airexQa-vo/jiai: Isoc. 1,30; Ep. IX, 12; — \v7rea; 
 Isoc. XII, 263. 
 
 cb^eXew — j8Xd7TTw(j8Xo^):— Lys. XII, 24; XVI, 18; [IX, 16]; 
 Isoc. I, 6; IV, 130; V, 76; VIII, 72; XII, 219, 224, 246;— ft/udtt: Lys. 
 XXIX, 4;Isae. V, 21; X, 16. 
 
 2. Agreement-Difference, etc. 
 
 aKovcFLos — howios: Ant. I, 5, 26, 27; II, y 1; IH> fi 6; IV, 8 8; 
 V, 92 bis; Isoc. I, 21; cf. Ant. Ill, y 6, 7. 
 
 clkoop— Ik&v: Lys. XIII, 28; XXX, 16; cf. Isae. V, 29. 
 
 aiJ.(f)L(x^rjr€0j — 6p.o\oyeco: Lys. I, 29; Isoc. IV, 19; VI, 37; XV, 84, 
 215; Isae. I, 42; cf. Isoc. VI, 24. 
 
 5 i d </> o p o s — xpup-evos: Isae. I, 20, 30, 33; — ojioios Isoc. XVIII, 38. 
 
 kv avrlos — 6 avros : Isoc. XVI, 50 ; — irapawX^o-Los : Isoc. VIII, 
 72. 
 
 erepos — 6 avros : Andoc. II, 24. For other variants, cf . Andoc. [IV, 
 7J; Lys. XVIII, 8. 
 
 (X) Opposite Conditions — Personal 
 
 1. Good-Bad. 
 c. Adjectives 14 and adverbs. 
 
 ay ados — Karis: Lys. Ill, 47; XII, 33, 47, 64; XIII, 47; XVIII, 
 2; XXV, 6, 13; XXXI, 30; [VI, 36]; Isoc. I, 16; III, 7; VI, 64; VII, 5; 
 IX, 6; XII, 225; cf. Isoc. IV, 168; VIII, 106; — roi>r, P 6s: Lys. [II, 77]; 
 Isoc. VIII, 79; XII, 214. 
 
 SUcavos— &8wcos: Ant. II, 7 10; V, 73; Andoc. I, 53; Lys. XIX, 54; 
 XXIV, 7; [II, 6, 46; VI, 55]; Isoc. I, 38; XIV, 25. 
 
 naKos — Succuos: Isoc. II, 57; — xptjcttos: Ant. Ill, y 9; Isoc. I, 
 22; III, 52. 
 
 na\6s — alaxpos: Andoc. I, 57; Lys. [II, 53]; cf. Isoc. II, 36; IV, 
 77, 95; — KaKbs: Lys. XIV, 42; Isoc. VII, 14; cf. Isoc. I, 35. 
 
 14 Cf. Horn. II. II 365; Hesiod, W. and D. 700ff.; Simonides, Fr. 5; Eur. Hec. 
 904; cf. also Eur. Frag. 244, 356, 366. 
 
76 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 <f>av\os — ayados : Isoc. I, 30; VII, 5; XVI, 23; — crirovdalos: Isoc. 
 I, 1, 43; with other variants: Isoc. II, 10, 32. 
 b. Nouns. 
 
 a p e t ■?) — nania: Lys. X, 28; Isoc. I, 50; VI, 36; Ep. VII, 9; cf. 
 Lys. XIV, 32; Isoc. VIII, 35; and Kada — h-Kiipia Lys. XXXI, 4 (cf. 
 Ant. V, 5); — ttX^os: Lys. [II, 33]; Isoc. IV, 71; VI, 60; cf. Andoc. I, 107; 
 Lycurg, 108; Hyperid. VI, 19;— tv X V. cf. Isoc. VII, 11; IV, 91. 
 
 8 ik aio avvr) — adiKia: Isoc. I, 39; cf. Isoc. VIII, 93; — KaxLa: Isoc. 
 Ill, 34. 
 
 2. Young-Old; Strong- Weak; Rich-Poor. 15 
 
 Kpeirrovs — aodevkoTtpoi: Isoc. IV, 53; XIV, 20; — tjttovs: Andoc. 
 Ill, 28; Lys. XII, 79; Isoc. VIII, 134; cf. &<xdepr,s—l(rxvp6s: Lys. XXIV, 
 18; [II, 56]; Demosth. XXV, 7. 
 
 veurepos —irpeapvTepos: Ant. IV, 7 2; V, 74; Lys. XXIV, 7, 17; [II, 
 51]; Isoc. VI, 1; XI, 37. 
 
 irhrjs— ttXo^uos: Lys. XXI, 15; XXIV, 17; XXVII, 9; Isae. VI, 
 59. Cf . Andoc. I, 141 ; Lys. XXV, 30; Isoc. VIII, 124. 
 
 t\ovtos — Tvevia: Lys. [II, 33}; cf. Isoc. I, 38; — airopa: Isae. XI, 
 37; for other nouns, cf. Isoc. II, 39; IV, 132. 
 
 (XI) Opposite Conditions-Political 
 
 1. Freedom-Slavery. (eXevdepia, etc. — 8ov\ela, etc.): Ant. V, 49; 
 Lys. [II, 33, 41, 64]; Isoc. IV, 95, 124; VIII, 42; XII, 104; XIV, 5; 
 Cf. Ant. V, 48; Lys. [II, 62]. 
 
 2. Peace- War, etc. 
 
 eiptjvr] — iro\epos: Andoc. Ill, 17, 28, 35 bis; Lys. XXVI, 22; Isoc. 
 VI, 50, 87, 104; VIII, 12. Cf. Andoc. Ill, 30 bis; Lys. XXV, 30; Isoc. 
 V, 73. 
 
 dprjvLKos — 7roXe/u/<6s : Isoc. II, 24; VIII, 136. 
 
 TroXe/xtot — ttoXZtcu (ttoXis): Lys. XII, 39; XVIII, 2; XXV, 
 23; Isoc. VII, 69; cf. Isoc. VI, 61—avp.p.axoi: Ant. V, 86; Andoc. [IV, 41]; 
 Lys. XIV, 13; [II, 10, 62]; Isoc. IV, 71, 152; VIII, 46. 
 
 3. Safety-Danger, etc. 
 
 da</>dXtia — k'lvSvvoi : Lys. XVI, 13; Isoc. VIII, 21 — 7r6Xe^os : Isoc. 
 VIII, 51. 
 
 <r u) t r) p L a — SouXaa (kLvSvvos, or other variant): Lys, XXXIII, 
 6; [VI, 43]; Isoc. XIV, 19. Cf. Lys. XXV, 23, 24; Isoc. VIII, 144. 
 
 •• Cf. dLvoXplrr— SX/3a: Hesiod, W. and D. 319; Eur. Frag. 366, 641. 
 
LIST OF ANTITHETIC TERMS ' ' 
 
 4. Citizen-Metic, etc. 
 
 ttoXIttjs— fxkroLKos : Andoc. I, 144; cf. oUtlv— peToi/celv : Isoc. XVI, 47; 
 ttoXittjs— &vos : Andoc. I, 144; Isoc. VIII, 48. 
 
 5. Democracy-Oligarchy, etc. 
 
 h-nixonpari a—oKiyapxia. : Andoc. I, 99; Lys. XVIII, 8, 25; XXV, 
 17, 27; XXVI, 17; Isoc. VII, 60; XX, 4— juwapxia: Isoc. I, 36; cf. Isoc. 
 X, 36. TroXtreia (ttoXis) with a variant: Lys. XII, 59; Isoc. IV, 125. 
 
 (XII) Large-Small; Difficult-Easy; Open-Secret 
 
 1. jufcyas— /hk P 6s: 16 Andoc. [IV, 4]; Lys. XXV, 32; Isoc. II, 39; 
 IV, 74, 143; VI, 109; X, 5; XXI, 17; Isae. VI, 59; Cf. Lys. [II, 63]; 
 Isoc. IV, 189; IX, 45; Isae. VII, 35. 
 
 2. xaXeTros— 'paSios: 17 Lys. XXV, 16; Isoc. IV, 42; V, 139; X, 13; 
 XII, 36, 246; Ep. II, 11. 
 
 3. 4>ave P 6s (cos) — &<pa^s : Ant. V, 59; cf. Isoc. VII, 58; 
 —KpWdriv: Lys. XII, 91; XV, 10; Lycurg. 146; -Xdflpa: Andoc [IV, 
 
 21]; Lys. [VIII, 21]. 
 
 Verbs denoting secrecy-publicity occur Lys. [XX, 7]; Isoc. I, 17, 
 
 II, 30. 18 
 
 (XIII) Fortune-Misfortune, Etc. 
 d T „ x i a—eimrxia : Ant. II, 5 9; —e^ovUa: Ant. IV, 6; cf. evrvxia 
 — eu/3oi'Xia: Isoc. I. 34. 
 
 8v<TTvxvs (ko) — eurvx^s (eco) i Ant. II, 5 9; Lys. [II, 60]; Isoc. I, 
 42; VI, 102; with other variants: Lys. XII, 35; Isoc. XVIII, 46. 
 
 rbxri — (aTvxio., yvuM, 8tavoia, exipiXeia, etc.): Isoc. VI, 92; 
 IX, 36, 45; XV, 36, 292; Lycurg, 108; with other variants (intra- 
 clausal): Ant. VI, 1; Andoc. I, 140; Lys. XXI, 10; Isoc. Ill, 47; IV, 132; 
 XVIII, 10. 
 
 (XIV) Temperance-Intemperance; Persuasion-Force 
 & K o X a a i a —Kaprepia : Isoc. VIII, 102; —a^poavvrj: Isoc. VIII, 
 119. 
 
 19 Cf. Theognis I, 14: aol nkv tovto, flea, ay-upov, efiol de /xeya. See also Cic. 
 N. D. IV, 21, 580: magna di curant, parva negligunt; Hor. carm. 1, 6, 9: conamur 
 tenues gratidia; 3, 3, 72: magna modis tenuare parvis. 
 
 17 Cf. Hesiod, W. and D. 287. 
 
 " Cf. Soph. Antig. 272 f. 
 
/8 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Pia—vonos: Lys. XXIII, 12; [II, 19]. 19 
 
 e^apKovvTus — vTrepfiaWovTus: Isoc. XII, 8; similarly, cf. Isoc. I, 27; II, 
 33; IX, 23; XII, 72; XV, 10. 
 
 iv eld co — avayKafa: Lys. [II, 61]; Isoc. XIV, 22; — /3idi"o/icu : Lys. I, 
 33; Isoc. V, 16; cf. VIII, 21; — vPplfa: Isae. II, 15. Cf. ayayKr)-j3ov\Ti(TLs 
 Thucy. VII, 57, 7. 
 
 cro}(f>povkoi — (apaprapco, irapoiveco, vfipifa, etc.): Ant. IV, 8 2; 
 Andoc. I, 145; Isoc. VIII, 58. Cf. eiraipu — auxfrpovlfa : Ant. IV, y 2. 
 
 (XV) Truth-Intelligence-Opinion 
 
 a\rid ei a —5 10,80X77 : Ant. II, 5 1; V, 86; — \6yos: Isoc. Ill, 33 
 cf. Ant. V, 3; -^Ped8os : Ant. V, 18, 35, 84; (VI, 28); Isoc. XIII, 1; XV 
 15; Isae. X, 1; cf. Ant. Ill, y 3; with other variants: Ant. V, 2, 5. 20 
 
 avfrqTos — 4>p6vLfxos : Isoc. Ill, 7; IV, 48; XV, 255; cf. Isoc. II, 14 
 see also ayvou — ei5co: Isae. VII, 34; VIII, 4. 
 
 yvup.ri — tvxv '■ Ant. V, 92; cf. Andoc. I, 140; Isoc. Ill, 47 
 — (avaynri, yXuaaa, 8ia(36Xr), opyrj): Ant. II, 8 1; V, 5, 72, 79. 21 
 
 diavoia — avoid : Isoc. II, 14; XV, 72; — ovaia: Isoc. I, 19, 42 
 with other variants: Isoc. IV, 50; VI, 10, 92. 
 
 8 6 % a — <rco M a: Isoc. VI, 109; Hyperid. VI, 24; Dinarch I, 110 
 — XPW a '■ Isoc. II, 32; cf. Lys. XIX, 61; — with (dXi7#eia, arista, kiriGT-qp.ri 
 etc.): Ant. Ill, /3 2; Isoc. II, 38; VI, 89; X, 17; XIII, 8. 
 
 e'i8oi (eirL<TTap.a.i.) — <5o£df co : Isoc. X, 5; cf. Isoc. XII, 9; XV, 54 
 XVII, 54; Aeschin. Ill, 160. 22 
 
 (XVI) God-Man-Nature 
 
 avdpuiros —Beds-? 3 Ant. IV, a 2; Andoc. I, 139; Isoc. IV, 151; 
 XI, 28; XII, 124; cf. Isoc. V, 116; XVI, 23; —dypiov: Lys. [II, 19]; 
 
 19 Cf. irpds 0lav — iKovat: Eur. Hel. 395. Cf. Livy XXI, 31, 6: hire minus, W plus 
 poterat. 
 
 20 Cf. t\i)0tia — 86kti<tis: Thucy. II, 35, 2; — wpS^aaiy. Aeschin. II, 40. 
 
 21 Similar variants (■yXuxraa, 6pyf), tvxv) occur with 71/01^ in Aesch. Prom. 888, 
 Frag. 389; Soph. O. R. 524; Eur. Frag. 226; cf. Agathon, Frag. 14: yvuprj 81 uptioobv 
 'tariv rj 'puiptri \epcov. 
 
 22 Cf. Agam. 1369: t6 yap Toira^eiv tov <ra<f>' tiSivai. 5l\a. 
 
 "What's Knowledge, with her stocks and lands, 
 To gay Conjecture's yellow strands?" 
 — Lowell, A Familiar Epistle to a Friend. 
 
 23 Cf. Horn. Ody. VI, 149; XIII, 297; Simonides, Frag. 5; Pindar, O. X, 21; Aesch. 
 Pers. 93. See also Verg. Aen. IV, 95. 
 
LIST OF ANTITHETIC TERMS 79 
 
 Isoc. XII, 121; XV, 214; (cf. Bebs—Bvplov. Isoc. XI, 32); —ywv: 
 Lys. [II, 4]; Isae. VII, 23; — (irpdytia, xpwo.): Isoc. XII, 7; XV, 31, 
 
 142. 
 
 ev71 r6s—adavaros I Lys. [II, 80, 81]; Isoc. 1, 9, 32; II, 32; cf. VI, 109. 
 
 4>v<jls— ifxirtipia: Lys. [II, 51]; Isoc. XV, 188; (cf. kixTeipla— 
 Mwania: Ant. V, 2); — v6/zos : Lys. [II, 61]; Isoc. IV, 105; IX, 54; 
 Demosth. XXV, 15, 16; cf. Isoc. I, 10; — (avaynr], aperi,, yv&nri, etc.): 
 Lys. XXXI, 6; [II, 4, 80]; Isoc. IV, 50; VII, 49. 2 * 
 
 (XVII) Miscellaneous 
 kpxi] _ Thrift.. Andoc. [IV, 4]; Isoc. I, 47; IV, 122; cf. Isoc. XII, 24. 
 PapPapoL— "EXX^es : Isoc. IV, 34, 128, 158; V, 16, 80, 115, 148; 
 
 VII, 51. 
 
 8 v v a m 1 s {dwafxevos) — advvafxia (advvaros) : Ant. V, 2; Lys. XXIV, 
 13; XXX, 24; —irovvpia: Lys. XIV, 37; XXV, 22; —tfovUiuvov, #>s): 
 Ant. V, 73; Isoc. XV, 122. 
 
 6 I k 6 s (eiKOTus) —aKoyws : Isoc. IV, 150; —yevbpxva: Ant. V, 25; 
 — (epyov, torus): 26 cf. Ant. II, 8 8, 10, bis. 
 
 OaXarra ■— y? 7 Isoc. IV, 21; V, 60; VIII, 102; -^Tmpos : 
 Isoc. IV, 89 (cf. Isoc. LX, 55); cf. r/Treipos— prjaos: Isoc. IV, 132; XI, 14. 
 
 KepSaluu— fr/Mtoco : Isoc. I, 33, 39; cf . nepdos— frfiia : Isoc. Ill, 50. 
 
 H&xopai-ihfflonai: Lys. XII, 79; Isoc. XX, 20; cf. Ant. V, 92. 
 
 irapcop — airwv : Lys. XII, 78, 80; Isoc. I, 1. 
 
 ir ap a<r ntv r\ — avayKq : Ant. V, 22; — aireipia \ Lys. XIX, 2. 
 
 ^vyo^-Kar'epxo^i: Lys. XXV, 29; XXX, 16; XXXIV, 11; Isoc. 
 
 XVI, 42. 
 
 \l/ri<pos (ifa<pi£onai) —evxeaQai: Aeschin. I, 133; — 6r\a : Aeschin, 
 II, 114;— xpafcs, Dinarch. I, 86; cf. Lycurg. 127; d. arm a— consilium 
 Cit. De Of, I, 76. 
 
 24 Cf. <j>v-nv—firiSia, Horn. H. Ill, 208. 
 
 26 Cf. Herodot. VII, 51: to m ana apxfl ™ v T « Xos Kara^alvtadai. See also 
 Euripides, I. A. 990. 
 
 26 From Plato, Phaedr. 267 a, we learn that this was a common antithesis with 
 Tisias and Gorgias. 
 
 « Cf. Hesiod, W. and D. 101, and ttootco— x«p<«s>, Horn. II. 424-426. 
 
APPENDIX 
 Antithesis in the Bible and in English Literature. 
 
 The Bible and the Greek classics must be taken together as the chief 
 external influences in the development of the antithetic feature of style 
 in our own literature, as perhaps in that of other modern nations also. 1 
 The oldest and best known example of antithetic writing is that found 
 in the tenth to the fifteenth chapters of the Book of Proverbs. 2 " A wise 
 man rejoiceth his father, but a foolish son is a grief to his mother" 
 (X, 1); "The lip of truth shall be established forever, but a lying tongue 
 is but for a moment" (XII, 19); "The law of the wise is a fountain of 
 life, that one may depart from the snare of sin and death" (XIII, 14). 
 Elsewhere in the Old Testament the figure is sparingly employed. " They 
 are bowed down and fallen, but we are risen and stand upright" (Psalms 
 XX, 5); "Behold my servants shall eat, but ye shall be hungry; behold 
 my servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed; behold my servants 
 shall sing for joy of heart, but ye shall cry for sorrow of heart" (Isa. 
 LXV, 13, 14); "Be not a terror unto me: thou art my hope in the day 
 of evil" (Jer. XVII, 17). 3 
 
 Stripped of antitheses the New Testament would lose many of its 
 most effective teachings. "He that cometh after me is preferred before 
 me" (John I, 15). "For there is nothing covered that shall not be 
 revealed, and nothing hid that shall not be known. What I tell you 
 in darkness, speak ye in the light; and what ye hear in the ear proclaim 
 upon the housetop" (Matt. X, 26, 27). 4 
 
 1 Cf. C. J. Child, John Lyly and Euphuism, p. 113. "Antithesis is said to be a more 
 common feature in French than in English; in German, with some exceptions, it is 
 conspicuous by its absence" — Encycl. Brit., s. v. Antithesis. 
 
 2 "Antithesis is the very life blood of the proverb" — Moulton, "Modern Readers 
 Bible," Proverbs, Intr., p. XVI. For the "Antithetic" distich as a species of the 
 Mashal or technical poetry among the Hebrews, see J. P. Lange, Commentary on 
 Proverbs, p. 31. 
 
 3 For other examples of antithesis in the Old Testament, see Psalms XXVIII, 
 3, CVII, 33-35; Eccl. X, 6, 7; Isa. XXIX, 13; LI, 3. 
 
 4 Cf. Matt. XV, 8, 11; XXII, 4; Luke VII, 46; X, 16; XVI, 12; John I, 30; III, 
 12, 30; VII, 4. 
 
 For (LVTiniTaiioki), (the use of the same terms in the second member of an antith- 
 esis with their order inverted), see Matt. X, 39; Mark. II, 27; John XV, 16; Gal. V, 17. 
 
APPENDIX 81 
 
 St. Augustine noticed the striking use of antithesis in the Pauline 
 epistles. 5 "Therefore as by one trespass the judgment came unto all 
 men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the 
 free gift came unto all men to justification of life" (Rom. V, 18); "Who 
 changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the 
 creature rather than the Creator" (Rom. I, 25). 6 Norden remarks that 
 in view of the universal trend of the Greek mind toward antithetic 
 thought it is little wonder that the great apostle employed antithesis 
 as one of the most effective weapons for enforcing his new ideas. 
 
 To attempt an exhaustive treatment of Antithesis in English Litera- 
 ture, would be out of place here. Only a brief and comprehensive account 
 can be given, and the endeavor made, in the light of the previous discus- 
 sion of the figure in Greek Literature, to point out certain analogies. 7 
 Among English, as among the Greek rhetoricians, the term is employed 
 in a broader and a narrower sense. "The term (antithesis) is applied 
 to a sentence in which the corresponding words, phrases or clauses are 
 set over against one another in such a way as to make contrasting ideas 
 conspicuous. The term is also used of contrasting sentences, or even of 
 contrasting paragraphs." 8 It is antithesis in the narrower sense of 
 which we shall speak. 9 
 
 8 De Civ. Dei, XI, 16 — cited by Norden, Antike Kunstprosa, p. 507. 
 
 6 An effective extended antithesis occurs II, Cor. VI, 8-10. For other instances 
 in the Epistles, see Rom. V, 19; VI, 23; VII, 14; VIII, 1, 2, 6; XI, 15; XII, 9; I, Cor. I, 
 18, 25, 27; IV, 10; XIV, 20; XV, 22, 42, 49, 54; II, Cor. IV, 12; VIII, 9; X, 1; XI, 19; 
 Gal. VI, 8; Eph. IV, 10; I, Thes. V, 3; Titus I, 16. 
 
 7 My indebtedness to Handbooks of Rhetoric, both old and new, is indicated at 
 almost every point; to many other writers, not definitely mentioned below, I am 
 indebted for helpful suggestions, and for aid in selecting illustrative quotations. 
 
 8 Scott and Denney, New Composition-Rhetoric, p. 448. 
 
 9 "Antithesis, properly so called, consists in the explicit statement of the contrast 
 implied in the meaning of any term or description." — Bain, Elements of Rhetoric and 
 Composition, p. 46. 
 
 A naive but very accurate and adequate account of antithesis is given by the 
 anonymous author of the Lady's Rhetoric (Containing Rules for Speaking and Writing 
 Elegantly — Enrich'd with many delightful remarks, witty Repartees, and pleasant 
 Stories, both Ancient and Modern. Done from the French, with some improve- 
 ments. London, 1707.) See p. 126 ff, "On the Antithesis." He says in part, "This 
 sparkling and delightful Figure consists in an Opposition of Words and Sayings con- 
 trary to one another in the same Period. Therefore Quintilian names it a Contention, 
 and Cicero a Combat of Words. 'Tis a notable Embellishment to a Discourse, for 
 its apparent Opposition renders the Stile more pleasant, more florid and adorn'd. 
 Such opposite Words are like the Diamonds fix'd together, the Lustre of the one in- 
 creases the Splendor of the other"; then follow illustrations, serious and witty, ancient 
 and modern, and warnings against the too frequent use. 
 
82 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 The earliest instance of the extended use of antithesis in English, 
 and the most conspicuous example of its abuse, is found in the prose of 
 John Lyly's Euphues. 10 Antithesis, parallelism, and repetition are basic 
 elements of the Euphuistic rhetoric. 11 
 
 "The acquirement on the part of a people of its rhetorical forms 
 might well be made a subject of inquiry. Clearly with the Euphuists 
 arose the constant understanding and use of antithesis and parallelism. 
 
 Before their time, there is no marked indication of a persistent 
 tendency to the use of these devices in prose; prose literature consisted 
 either of simple narrative, or works of polity, theology, instruction, 
 made up substantially of straightforward assertions with occasional 
 arguments from example and analogy." 12 
 
 Euphuism prevailed in England approximately from 1557 to 1590. 
 It was formerly thought to have risen spontaneously with the appearance 
 of Lyly's Euphnes. Landmann showed the fallacy of such a view and 
 pointed out striking resemblances between Lyly's novel and the "alto 
 estilo" of the Spanish Guevara, whose "Marco Aurelio" had previously 
 been faithfully translated by Sir Thomas North. Lord Berners, North, 
 and George Pettie preceded Lyly in adapting the "high style" of Guevara 
 to the English-reading public. The repeated demands for new editions 
 of these translations argue "the existence in that country (England), 
 previous to the introduction of the author, of an atmosphere (or more 
 concretely a public) favourable to the distinguishing characteristics of 
 the author introduced. And so it now appears that Guevara found favor 
 in England because his style, or something very like it, was already 
 known there." 13 
 
 10 Almost every line in the Euphues contains a complete antithesis or a part of 
 one: "Such sweete meate, such soure sauce; such fayre words, such faynte promises: 
 such hot love, such cold desire, such certaine hope, such sodeine chaunge" (p. 80); 
 "And canst thou wretch be false to him that has been faithful to thee? Wilt thou 
 violate the league of faith to inherite the land of folly? Shall affection be of more 
 force than friendship, hate than love, lust than loyaltie?" (p. 62). Transverse allit- 
 eration is a characteristic feature: (Philautus to Euphues, p. 40) "Although hitherto, 
 Euphues. I have shrined thee in my heart for a trustie friende, I will shunne thee 
 hereafter as a trothlesse foe." 
 
 11 For an analysis and discussion of the Euphuistic style, see Landmann, Euphues, 
 Intr. p. XV, and Child, op. cit., p. 40 fl. 
 
 12 C. J. Child, John Lyly and Euphuism, p. 113. 
 " J. D. Wilson, John Lyly, p. 35. 
 
APPENDIX 83 
 
 French translations of Guevara's works were extant before the ad- 
 vent of the English. The influence of the Renaissance was doubtless 
 being felt in England, as well as in the other countries of Europe, 14 
 and we may safely conclude (with Wilson, p. 42) that the Spanish inter- 
 vention "confirmed and hastened a development already at work, of 
 which the original impulse was English." 
 
 The Euphuistic style was employed by Robert Green in his Mena- 
 phon, and Euphues's Censure to Philautus; by Thomas Nash in his 
 earlier works, and by Thomas Lodge in Euphues's Shadow, and to a 
 certain extent in his Rosalind. Green employed a purer style in his 
 later works, and the decline of Euphuism is usually dated from that time 
 (1590). Simultaneously appeared Sidney's Arcadia, which employed a 
 style fundamentally different, and enjoyed a popularity so great as to 
 almost entirely supplant the style of its great predecessor, the Euphues. 15 
 Shakespeare saw the rise and fall of Euphuism, but does not employ 
 it, except in parody. 16 
 
 The use of antithesis as a mode of literary expression did not cease 
 when Euphuism was abandoned. It is found throughout the whole 
 range of English literature — sometimes only as a "corrective spice," 
 as in Bacon and Burke, sometimes as a basic element of style, as in 
 Pope, Johnson, Gibbon, Macaulay, and G. K. Chesterton. That the 
 figure may be used to excess has always been recognized; the efficiency 
 and charm of a moderate use cannot be questioned. 17 
 
 14 Sir Thomas North was the translator of Plutarch's Lives; the novel "Sinorix 
 and Camma," the first of the tales in Pettie's Petite Palace, is found in Guevara's book, 
 who took it from Plutarch. See Landmann, Euphues, Intr., pp. XVII and XXI. 
 Cf. Child, op. cit., p. 113: "The classics taught Guevara and were teaching England, 
 and doubtless the Bible with its wonderful oriental use of these forms would have 
 lent its aid." 
 
 16 In regard to the Euphuistic writers, and traces of Euphuism in English, I have 
 followed Landmann closely. 
 
 16 See Landmann, "Shakespeare and Euphuism," in Trans. New. Shak. Soc., 
 p. 250 ff. 
 
 The style is parodied in the character of Sir Piercie Shafton in Scott's Monastery, 
 and by a character in Charles Kingsly's Westward Ho. See also Johnson's Every Man 
 out of his Humour. 
 
 17 See Demet. wepi kpjj.., 28; Diony. Halic, Ad. Am. II, 2. 
 
 Cf. Hill, Science of Rhetoric, p. 240: "The nature of antithesis renders easy the de- 
 duction of two laws: (1) since the balanced form displays the contrast most clearly, 
 interpreting power is economized by uniformity in the length and structure of the 
 contrasted members; and (2) since the antithetic form becomes monotonous from 
 this uniformity, antithesis should not be very frequent." 
 
84 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Instances of pungent antithetic expression in Shakespeare are not 
 hard to find. "With a proud heart he wore his humble weeds" (Cor- 
 iolanus II, 3); "Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome 
 more. Had you rather that Caesar were living, and die all slaves than 
 that Caesar were dead, to live all free men?" (Julius Caesar, III, 2); 
 "I am the last of noble Edward's sons, of whom thy father, prince of 
 Wales, was first. In war, was never lion raged more fierce; in peace, 
 was never gentle lamb more mild" (Richard the Second, II, 1, 171). 18 
 
 Bacon's terse antitheses have contributed largely to the proverbial 
 character of many of his sayings. The Essay on Studies (one of the 
 earlier ones) is unusually balanced. The "Examples of Antithesis" 
 (Advancement of Learning, Bk. VI, Chap. Ill) 19 contains many admirable 
 specimens: "A healthy body is the soul's host, a sick body her gaoler"; 
 "Great persons had need to borrow the opinions of the vulgar to think 
 themselves happy." The triple term-combination (e. g., Reading, 
 Writing, Speaking) is common: "The lowest virtues are praised by the 
 common people, the middle are admired; but of the highest they have no 
 sense or perception." 
 
 Cowley and Young 20 display a conceited antithesis. The figure 
 was employed more temperately, and with greater point and effect, 
 by Sir William Temple. Dryden 21 employed the figure extensively, 
 
 18 Cf. Merchant of Venice III, 5: "Why if two gods should play some heav'nly 
 match and on the wager lay two earthly women," etc.; "A light wife doth make a 
 heavy husband" (Ibid. V, 1); "He hath cooled my friends and heated my enemies" 
 (Ibid. Ill, 1); " But, oh what damned minutes tells he o'er, Who dotes, yet doubts; 
 suspects, yet strongly loves" {Othello III, 3, 70). 
 
 19 "These 'Examples of Antithesis,'" Bacon says, "were collected during my 
 youth, and are really seeds, not flowers — so many clues, which may occasionally be 
 wound off into larger discourses." 
 
 20 In "Estimate of Human Life" whole passages are found like this: "The peasant 
 complains; the courtier repines. In want, what distress? in affluence, what satiety? — 
 The great are under as much difficulty to expend with pleasure as the mean to labour 
 with success. The ignorant through ill-grounded hope are disappointed; the knowing 
 through knowledge despond. Ignorance occasions mistake; mistake disappointment; 
 and disappointment is misery." 
 
 21 Cf. "He raised a mortal to the skies; She drew an angel down" {Alexander's 
 Feast); "In peace the thoughts of war he could remove" {Ahsolcm and Areitophel); 
 "Cool was his kitchen, though his brains were hot" (Ibid.); "With weak defense 
 against so strong a charge" {Hind and Panllicr); "her new-made union with her 
 ancient foes" (Ibid.). 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 85 
 
 and Pope was "All arm'd with points, antitheses, and puns" {Dune. 
 
 I, 254) P 
 
 Johnson's fondness for antithesis is evident in all his writings. The 
 continual succession of balanced clauses renders his style somewhat 
 cumbersome and monotonous. The form is especially useful to him in 
 delineating an author's character or style. Of Goldsmith he says: 
 he is "a man who had the art of being minute without tediousness, 
 and general without confusion; whose language was copious without 
 exuberance, exact without constraint, and easy without weakness." 23 
 
 A critic says of Burke's antitheses that they are "peculiarly valuable 
 as examples, because they are real antitheses corresponding to a real 
 opposition of ideas, and because they are not so frequent or so protracted 
 as to become monotonous— excellencies which cannot be fully appreci- 
 ated without a thorough study of one of Burke's speeches as a whole. 
 In striking contrast with this great writer's temperate use of antithesis 
 are the excesses into which Dr. Johnson, Gibbon, Junius, and Macaulay 
 fall." 24 M 
 
 22 See the opening lines on the Essay on Criticism. Cf. Essay on Man, 1, 54 ff. 
 "Two principles in human nature reign; Self-love to urge and Reason to restrain 
 Nor this a good, nor that a bad we call, Each works its end, to move or govern all 
 And to their proper operation still, Ascribe all good; to their improper, IU." 
 
 Blair remarks that Pope excelled in another kind of antithesis, the beauty of which 
 consists in surprising us by the unexpected contrast of the things brought together; 
 see Rhetoric, p. 188. 
 
 23 "Johnson wrote a kind of rhyming prose, in which he was as much compelled 
 to finish the different clauses of his sentences and to balance one period against another, 
 as the writer of heroic verse is to keep to lines of ten syllables with similar terminations. 
 He no sooner acknowledges the merits of his author"— he is speaking of Johnson's 
 criticism of Shakespeare— "in one line, than the periodic revolution of his style car- 
 ries the weight of his opinion completely over to the side of objection, thus keeping 
 up a perpetual alternation of perfections and absurdities." Hazlitt, in preface to 
 Characters of Shakespeare's Plays. 
 
 24 Hill, Op. Cit., p. 191. 
 
 25 Cf. the following passage from Burke's Reflections on the French Revolution: 
 "Humanity and compassion are ridiculed as the fruits of superstition and ignorance. 
 Tenderness to individuals is considered as treason to the public. Liberty is always 
 to be estimated perfect as property is rendered insecure. Amidst assassination, 
 massacre, and confiscation, perpetrated or meditated, they are forming plans for the 
 good order of future society," etc. Compare Thucydides III, 82, 4: " Reckless danng 
 was esteemed loyal courage— prudent delay, specious cowardice;^ temperance seemed 
 a cloak for pusillanimity; comprehensive sagacity was called universal indifference." 
 
86 ANTITHESIS IN ATTIC ORATORS, ANTIPHON TO ISAEUS 
 
 Goldsmith, says Minto, 26 "was taken with the charm of rhetorical 
 antithesis, and laboured to deliver his sayings in an antithetical form. 
 In his Polite Learning we can read but few sentences without encounter- 
 ing a formal point; and here and there we find this general sparkle 
 condensed into the brilliancy of an epigram." 27 
 
 The well-known feature of Macaulay's style — his inveterate ten- 
 dency toward antithetical expression — was, no doubt, partly induced 
 by study of the classics, for which he cherished great admiration. " Ma- 
 caulay had an excessive fondness for contrast of every kind — contrasted 
 thought, paragraphs, sentences, words. There is no variety of contrast 
 which is not to be found in the History. Sometimes they occur in a 
 strong passage, adding strength to strength; sometimes in the events 
 of a dreary debate, giving animation to what might be dull paragraphs. 
 They are always sudden, always astonishing, always awakening, — never 
 the same in form." 28 It is only natural that we should now and then be 
 led to distrust the statements of this trenchant writer, owing to his 
 proneness to use antithetical expression. 29 The same tendency occa- 
 sionally led Thucydides astray, and marred the ethos of Lysias's orations. 
 
 From the foregoing survey it appears that antithesis has been a 
 more or less noticeable feature throughout the whole range of English 
 Literature. We must assume that there was a predisposition to employ 
 the figure before the abuse in Euphuism developed. Closer contact, 
 directly or indirectly, with the classic Greek models gave immense 
 impetus to that stilted form of antithetic writing. The tendency per- 
 sisted after the abuse ended, and continues still. Based, as it is, on 
 
 28 Manual of English Prose Literature, p. 487. 
 
 "Speaking of Gray's Odes, Goldsmith remarks, "We cannot without regret 
 behold talents so capable of giving pleasure to all, exerted in efforts that at least 
 can amuse only the few." Again, he says, "We see more of the world by travel, 
 more of human nature by remaining at home." 
 
 Antitheses are frequent in his poem, Retaliation. 
 
 58 Hughs, Macaulay the Rhetorician, p. 171. For a similar criticism see Jebb, 
 Macajtlay, p. 52 f. Minto criticizes this feature of Macaulay's style adversely (p. 101). 
 
 " Cf. "If they were unacquainted with the works of philosophers, they were deeply 
 read in the oracles of God." "The Puritans hated bear-baiting, not because it gave 
 pain to the bear, hut because it gave pleasure to the spectators" (///.</.. Ch. II). 
 
 For a thorough analysis of Macaulay's antithetical style, with illustrations, see 
 D. A. Hughs, Thomas Babington Macaulay: the Rhetorician, p. 171, and compare 
 Minto, Manual of English Prose Literature, p. 99 IT. 
 
APPENDIX 87 
 
 elemental psychological principles, antithesis, with reasonable limita- 
 tions, must ever remain a prime factor in forceful, artistic expression. 30 
 Without pressing the analogy too closely, we may compare the 
 Euphuistic period of English literature to the advent of the Gorgianic 
 prose and the development of sophistic writing in Greece. In either 
 case, the tendency toward antithetical writing sprang from an original 
 native impulse, was fostered and accelerated by outside influences, 
 and the abuse developed. In English as in Greek the figure, though 
 misappropriated by less careful writers, always remained an effective 
 and useful instrument with the masters of style. 
 
 80 "The popularity of the figure, and its value as an aid to memory, may be inferred 
 from the fact that many of our old Saxon proverbs are antithetical in form; as 'Waste 
 not, want not,' — 'Meddle and muddle,' — 'Harm watch, harm catch,' — 'Fore- 
 warned, forearmed." — Quackenbos, Practical Rhetoric, p. 296. 
 
LY 
 
 HOME USE 
 
 CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 
 
 MAIN LIBRARY 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below. 
 1-month loans may be renewed by calling 642-3405. ow. 
 
 6-month loans may be recharged by bringing books 
 
 to Circulation Desk. 
 
 Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days prior 
 
 to due date. 
 
 ALL BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO RECALL 7 DAYS 
 
 AFTER DATE CHECKED OUT. 
 
 nee. o i r. — m 2 3 
 
 
 SF 
 
 T> ' 
 
 tJl^lB^ 78 
 
 ffine* w 
 
 AUG 81986 • 
 
 A<^ 1 
 
 $ 
 
 # 
 
 A* 
 
 
 AUTO. DISC. 
 
 AUG 2 7 1986 
 
 I.DJl A-Hlm-l'J 7 1 
 
 (827001,) 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
GENERAL LIBRARY - U.C. BERKELEY 
 
 B0DDfl7SDS5 
 
I ' i