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