320 Harry M. Hubbell, Ph.D., 



verse from the Philoctetes ; alaxpo" o-ioiTrdf. ' laoKpdTTjv 6' ^dv X^yeiv, by 

 which Aristotle justified his excursion into rhetoric. It resolves itself 

 into a comparison of philosophy and rhetoric, and a vilification of Aris- 

 totle for choosing the low^er of the two professions. This polemic like 

 the preceding is part of the inheritance of the Epicurean School; Epi- 

 curus, we know, was particularly bitter against Aristotle.^ Perhaps the 

 most rerharkable part is his exaltation of Isocrates ; "while Aristotle 

 descended from philosophy to rhetoric, Isocrates rose from rhetoric to 

 philosophy." This passage must rest on a misinterpretation of Isocrates' 

 use of <pi\o(ro(pia, a misinterpretation which must be deliberate on the part 

 of Philodemus, and not due to any love of Isocrates, but to a desire to 

 take a fling at Aristotle. Beside the general criticism of rhetoric which 

 forms the bulk of the passage, Philodemus gives three reasons alleged by 

 Aristotle for the study of rhetoric and politics : it wins friends, it helps 

 produce a stable government which is favorable to philosophy, the present 

 evil conditions in politics demand the help of the philosopher. The first 

 two are answered and the third is under discussion when the fragment 

 ends.* 



I, 270. Of fragments I-XVII the only parts that give even a gleam of meaning 



are fr. XI and XII. Here from the contrast of Sia\^y€ff6ai and \i>yov 

 iKTeivai it appears that the discussion is turning on the relative merits of 

 rhetoric and dialectic, which we found discussed at some length in Book V 

 {ireka-yl^eiv, kt\. I, 239) and which appears below, col. XLIII. A little 

 light breaks through in fr. XVIII. This is the end of a paragraph. 



I, 276. Philodemus sums up with There is no art which treats of forensic 



eloquence, corresponding to the art of music. (From here to 

 fr. XXX nothing consecutive can be made out.) 



I, 283, It is evident that he'* used the word 'rhetoric' with reference 



either to sophistic or to political rhetoric, or to the power to 

 decide on an advantageous course of action. Grant that as many 

 erroneously think, rhetoric is the ability to select an advantageous 

 course of action. . . . 



' Cic, De Nat. Deor. I, 33, 93 : Cum Epicurus Aristotelem vexarit con- 

 tumeliossime. 



" For details v. Sudhaus, Aristoteles in der Beurtheilung des Epikur und 

 Philodem, Rhein. Mus. XLVIII (1893) pp. 552-564. Gomperz, Zeit. f. d. 

 ost. Gymn. XXIII (1872) p. 31, holds that Philodemus may have had 

 before him Aristotle's dialogue, Politicus. Philodemus also criticizes 

 Aristotle in the ITepi ■n-oiriiJ.dTwi', on which v. Gomperz in Wiener Eranos 

 (1909) 1-8. 



^Sudhaus, Rhein. Mus. XLVIII (1893) p. 334, thinks that Philodemus is 

 quoting from Aletrodorus Ilpbs tovs awb (pvcnoXoyias X^yovras ayaOovs eJvai 

 fn/jTopas. 



col. II. 



