The RJietorica of Philodemus. 287 



"The technical element they [i. e. rhetoricians] borrow from 

 other arts e. g. from dialectic, and adorn themselves with bor- 

 rowed plumage." But [the philosopher] borrows from many 

 sources, for according to Euripides one can get his proofs out 

 of the air without toil. 



It is absurd to agree with Diogenes that rhetoric is not an art, 

 and unworthy of a freeman. On this principle he would have 

 to exclude many arts.^^ 



. . . proves that politics and sophistic are the same. He il, 70, fr, 

 may have proved that politics and sophistic do not produce states- ^■^^• 

 men, but he does not realize that sophistic is not practice, but 

 that every artist has his theoretical principles. 



Some speak without having had the benefit of instruction, but 

 this does not prove that rhetoric is not an art. 



He^*' says clearly that Demades did not study rhetoric, and II, 93, fr. 

 the same applies to Aeschines. All of Demosthenes' opponents "^^^^• 

 claim that he was an artist and Critolaus does not deny it. In II, 97, fr. 

 addition to this, our statement that they gained little from the ^^l^- 

 art supports [the theory]. For hit-or-miss methods succeed only 

 rarely ; no one will say that the continued success of Aeschines 

 and Demades is a proof that there is an art of rhetoric. 



If he instances Aeschines and Demades as good orators, this 

 does not prove that sophistic is not a science. 



"Rhetoric is not an art, for every art aims at a correct (or n, 69, fr. V. 

 successful) procedure; now hit-or-miss methods do not produce 

 correct results, but we know that rhetors have been successful n, 71, fr. 

 without instruction."-' VIII. 



II, 6s, fr. I II, y6, fr. I II, 96, fr. VI II, 117, fr. XIII 



65, fr. Ill • 76, fr. II 98, fr. IX I2i, fr. II 



66, fr. V 76, fr. Ill 99, fr. X 122, fr. Ill 



66, fr. VI 84, fr. VIII 99, fr. XI 126, fr. X 



67, fr. I 86, fr. XII 99, fr. I 128, fr. XIV 

 67, fr. II 87, fr. XIII 99, fr. II 128, fr. XV 



72, fr. IX 91, fr. XIX^ 104, fr. X 129, fr. XVI 

 72,, fr. X'-i 93, fr. I 108, fr. XVII 



73. fr. XiJ 96, fr. V'l 117, fr. XI 

 73, fr. XI 96, fr. V^ 117, fr. XII 



'' Cf. II, 95, fr. IV. 



^° This is aimed at Critolaus or Charmadas ; v. Excursus, p. 371. 



" This argument is like that which proves that there is no art of 



