« PreviousContinue »
« discourse? Will you, says he, running about “ the city, ask one another, What's the news?
Why, what fresher news than that a Macedo“ nian makes war upon Greece? Is Philip “ dead ? No, by heaven but he is sick. But “ what benefit is this to you? If PHILIP « should die, you will soon conjure up another c. Philip in his room. And again the same « Orator says, Let us fail into Macedonia. But “ where shall we land? Why the war itself will « fhew us where PHILIP is weakest. But all “ this, if it had been plainly spoken, would “ have been far beneath the subject; but the
spirit and rapidity of the question and answer, 6 and the Orator's replying upon himself, as if “ he was answering another, not only ennoble “ his oration, but give it an air of probability. “ The pathetic is then in its glory, when the
speaker does not appear to have studied his
Figures, but when the very occasion seenis to “ have produced them. Now this way of in“ terrogating and answering one's self well re“ presents such an occasion : for as they who « are demanded by others, instantly rouse them“ selves with eagerness to make a reply; so this
Figure of question and answer leads the hearer “ into a persuasion, that what is the effect of “ study is conceived and uttered without any “ premeditation *.”
Τ. δ' εκεινα φωμεν, τας πευσεις και ερωτησεις ; αρα εκ μυταις ταις των χηματων ειδοποιιαις παραπολυ εμπρακλοτερα
To the observations of QUINTILIAN and LONGINUS, let me add the sentiments of the celebrated Dr Young on this Figure. « This fpeech ss of the Almighty,” says he, in the notes he has added to his Paraphrase on Part of the Book of JOB, “ is made up of Interrogations. Interroga« tion feems indeed the proper stile of majesty * incensed: it differs from other manner of re«« proof, as bidding a perfon execute himfelf, 4. does from a common execution; for he that «« alks the guilty perfon a queftion, makes him, « in effect, pafs fentence
$ 5. Let us only, for a conclusion of our discourse on this Figure, try by two or three exam
ples και σοβαρώτερα συνλεινει τα λεγομενα ; “ Η βελειθε, ειπε μου σεριιονιες αλληλων συνθανεοθαι, λεγεται το καινον και το γαρ αν γενοι1ο (Tale) καινοθερον, η Μακεδων ανηρ καταπολεμων την Ελ. λαδα και τεθνηκε ΦιλιππG- ; ε μα Δι', αλλ' αθενει' τι δ' διαφερει και και γαρ αν ου1%- τι παθη, ταχεως υμεις ετερον Φιλιπ. πον ποιησείο.” Και σαλι», Πλεωμεν επι Μακεδονιαν, φησι" οι δη προσορμιάμεθα και ηρετο τις ευρησει τα σαθρα των Φλιππε πραγματων αυθο- ο πολεμο-.” Ην δε, απλως ρηθεν, το πραγμα των πανε καλαδεςερον νυνι δε το ενθαν και οξυρροπος της πευσεως και αποκρισεως, και το σεξ εαυλον ως προς ετερο» ανθυπανlαν, και μονον υψηλοτερον εποιησε τω χηματισμω το ρηθεν, αλλα και σιγοτερον. Αγει γαρ τα παθητικα τοτε μαλλον, ΦΙαν αυλα φαινηθαι μη επιτηδευειν αυθG- ο λεγων, αλλα γενναν ο καιρG- η δε ερωτησεις η εις εαυιον, και αποκρισις μιμείται τα παθες το επικαιρον. Σχεδον γαρ, ως οι υφ' ετερων ερωτωμενοι, σαν οξυγοντες εκ τ8 παραχρημα, πρG- το λεχθεν εναγωνίως και απ' αυτης αληθειας ανθυπανωσιν: ε1ω το χώμα της πευσεως και αποκρισεως, εις το δοκειν εκατον των εσκεμμενων εξ υπογυιε κεκινηθα. τε και λεγεθαι. LONGINUS de Sublimitate, 18.
ples its excellence and power, by obferving how the very fame ideas thrown into a simple and plain form, immediately become flat and languid, or at least lose much of their force. . TIBERIUS, in his discourse concerning the Figures used by DEMOSTHENES, obferves, « that “ the Interrogation is serviceable for reprehen“sion,” and gives us the following instance from that great Orator : “ In doing these things, “ did he act unjustly, violate his league, and “ break the peace, did he, of did he not? “. Did it become any Grecian to step forth to c.controll this conduct, or did it not?” Only let it be faid, that the enemy acted unjustly, violated his league, and broke the peace, and that it became every Grecian to make head against him, and the spirit of the Orator is evaporated; whereas by the repeated Interrogation, as TIBERIUS observes, DEMOSTHENES exposes the unbounded infolence of the enemy'ti í . What a divine grandeur and energy are there in the following passage in BALAAM's, speech! Numb. xxiii. 19. GOD is not a man that he ss should lie; neither the son of man that he * should repent. Hath he said it, and shall not ss he do it? or hath he spoken, and shall not he ss make it good ? Throw out the Interroga
* Πατερον ταυλα ποιων ηδικεί και παρέσπονδει και ελνε την Đi vì, a 8; vải colegos pay vãi
Ελληνων τον ταυλα κα. . Ιαλυσονία σοιειν εχρην, η μη ;- τω συνεχεια της ερωτησεως το απυρον της απενθησεως εξιλεχει. TIBERIUs, $ 12.
tions, and reduce the words to a plain affirma=-* tion, and the life and force instantly vanish, or are greatly weakened, as will be evident upon the trial : “God is not a man that he should lie, “ neither the son of man that he should repent ; « what he has said he will do, and what he hath
spoken he will make good.”
Might I not in the fame view mention Job xi. 7 ? Canft thou by searching find out God?
Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfecss tion? It is high as heaven, what canft thou $5. do ? deeper than hell, what canst thou know?ss Where would be the vigour and vehemence of this passage, if once divested of the Interrogations ? and it should be said, Thou canst not by fearching find out God; thou canst not find him out to perfection: it is as high as heaven, and thou canst do nothing; and it is as deep as hell, and thou canst know nothing.
How does St Paul, says the ingenious Mr SMITH; in his translation of Longinus, in Afts xxvi. transfer his discourse from Festus to AGRIPPA? In verse 26. he speaks of him in the third person : « The King, says he, knows s of these things, before whom also I fpeak
freely." Then, in the following, he turns fhort upon him : ss King AGRIPPA, believest ss thou the Prophets ? ss and immediately anfwers his own question, " I know that thou bess lieveit.ss
“ The smoothest eloquence,” adds Mr SMITH, “ the most insinuating complai
« fance, could never have made such an im
pression upon AGRIPPA, as this unexpected “ and pathetic address t."
+ Smith's Longinus, page 93.
The PROLEPSIS considered.
$ 1. The definition of the Prolepsis. § 2. Exam
ples of it from JuvenAL and CICERO. $ 3. Instances from Scripture. 4. The various advantages of this Figure.
$1. P Rolepfis
* is a Figure by which a
speaker suggests an objection against what he is advancing, and returns an answer to it: or it is a Figure by which a speaker, more especially at the entrance upon his discourse, removes any sort of obstruction that he forefees may be likely to prevent the success of his cause.
§ 2. We have an instance of this kind in the following lines of Juvenal:
And Ihall we then no kind of with allow?
Leave * From wordeu Carw, I anticipate, or prevent.