TJic RJictorica of Philodemus. 353 



narrower sense of the word among the ancients by which every- 

 one who spoke before the people was called a rhetor. Each of 

 these topics we shall try to explain more fully. 



Now it is made clear by Epicurus in many passages in his book 

 Ilept prjropLKrj'i written with reference to those who are able to 

 persuade, and by Metrodorus in the first book Ilepi -n-oLrjfjidTwv 

 that by rhetor the masters of the Epicurean schooP^ understand 

 a person possessing technical training who has political expe- 

 rience, and is able to discover what is of advantage to states. 

 But we are content with the passage quoted just above (i. e. 

 in the gap coll. XXV.-XXXI) against Nausiphanes, in which 

 to a certain extent the word is used in accordance with accepted 

 usage. For he divided the term rhetoric, and made it refer to n, 242, col. 

 panegyric, and to the faculty, "by which from experience and ^^I. 

 investigation of political events one could perceive well what 

 is advantageous to the multitude." . . . the phrase "as such" 

 is added, and besides the phrase "there is no need of much 

 afgument." . . . We shall prove that if by rhetor he con- 

 sidered one who has political experience, if he adds the sophist's 

 art to his equipment, it is plain from mere examination that 

 rhetoric possesses something over and above politics, and the 

 rhetor something over and above the statesman — namely effec- 

 tiveness of speech ; he certainly possesses experience in politics. 



According to Greek usage one does not call Demosthenes and II. 244, col. 



XLII 

 Callistratus and the like statesmen more than rhetors, and in 



that they are called rhetors they are called statesmen ; but those 



who deliver epideictic orations and speeches more charming than 



theirs are not called rhetors in the same sense that these are 



called rhetors, or if they are so called it is because one speaks 



after a common form of concept. Consequently why is it not 



possible to call all rhetoric politics, in so far as it is rhetoric, and 



to call the rhetor a statesman? Why not call a rhetor qua 



rhetor a ^-qix-qyopo^;. For the phase "in short he is a Brjfxrjyopo^" 



means in so far as he is called 8r}fjir]y6po<;, and not differently from 



the rhetor, in as much as the Sr^/Ar/yopo? is also called rhetor. 



Therefore ]\Ietrodorus says that Callistratus and Demosthenes, n, 245, col. 



in so far as they possessed rhetoric were Srj/xrjyopoL ; but in the first XLIII. 



" By Toi>s &v5pas 1. i8 he means the great Epicurean authorities particu- 

 larly Epicurus, Hermarchus and Metrodorus. 



