AiKaviKO'i Ao'709 m Etu'ipides. 7 



In Andr. 234, it is used even after both pr/Vet?, in the 

 spirited debate which follows : 



ri aeixvofJbvdel<i Kel<i a<yoiV ep-^ei \6ycov. 



The TTpooifiiov can be clearly discerned in nearly all the 

 longer rhetorical py]aei<i. Sometimes, however, it is hardly 

 worthy of the name when the first few lines of the leading 

 pr](TL<i are an answer to the previous words of the opponent. 

 In a few passages it is omitted altogether, as, for example, 

 Hek. 251, 1132; Her. Main. 170, 1313. The irpooiixiov may 

 be general or particular. There is no regular form or phrase 

 used to introduce it, but in two pt]aei<i we find the word itself 

 used. Elek. 1060 : 



\eyoLfji av ' ap')(r] 8' rjhe fioo TrpooipbLov^ 



Hekabe 1 195 : 



Kai /xot TO fiev aov o)he ^poL/J,iOL<; €^€l. 



The irpoOeai'i is generally found in the first prjo-i^ of a pair 

 or series of speeches, but is omitted in Hek. 251, Elek. 1017, 

 Ion 589, Orest. 495, Troad. 918. Sometimes it is scattered 

 through the Tr/crret?, as in Alkest. 633 fg., Andr. 154 fg. In 

 many p/^aei^ it is somewhat argumentative, and extends into 

 the 'jTiareLi; even where the division has been made. In such 

 cases it is impossible to determine exactly the dividing line. 

 On the other hand, it is regularly omitted in the second 

 pri(n<i, for either the first speaker has already stated the case, 

 or the audience is acquainted with the facts from the preced- 

 ing part of the drama. In this Euripides follows the custom 

 of the orators, for with them the second speech on the same 

 case has no ■n-poOeat';. 



The TTt'o-ret? form the most important part of the discussion, 

 and therefore regularly extend through the greater part of 

 the prjai^. This part is omitted but once,^ Phoin. 493. 



1 Nauck brands the word wpooLixlov as " absurdum." 



2 The speech in Hiket. 857-917 is a funeral oration, and hence contains no 

 iriffTcis. 



373 



