<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:6.5.1-6.5.11</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:6.5.1-6.5.11</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2" type="translation" xml:lang="eng"><div n="6" type="textpart" subtype="book"><div n="5" type="textpart" subtype="section"><div n="1" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p>V. Having
                            dealt with these points to the best of my ability, I should have had no
                            hesitation in proceeding to discuss arrangement, which is logically the
                            next consideration, did I not fear that, since there are some who
                            include judgment <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">See III. iii.
                                5 and 6.</note> under the head of invention, they might think that I
                            had deliberately omitted all discussion of judgment, although personally
                            I regard it as so inextricably blent with and involved in every portion
                            of this work, that its influence extends even to single sentences or
                            words, and it is no more possible to teach it than it is to instruct the
                            powers of taste and smell. </p></div><div n="2" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Consequently, all I can do is now and hereafter to show what should be
                            done or avoided in each particular case, with a view thereby to guide
                            the judgment. What use then is it for me to lay down general rules to
                            the effect that we should not attempt impossibilities, that we should
                            avoid whatever contradicts our case or is common to both, and shun all
                            incorrectness or obscurity of style? In all these cases it is common
                            sense that must decide, and common sense cannot be taught. </p></div><div n="3" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> There is no great difference, in my opinion, between judgment and
                            sagacity, except that the former deals with evident facts, while the
                            latter is concerned with hidden facts or such as have not yet been
                            discovered or still remain in doubt. Again judgment is more often than
                            not a matter of <pb n="v4-6 p.517"/> certainty, while sagacity is a form
                            of reasoning from deep-lying premises, which generally weighs and
                            compares a number of arguments and in itself involves both invention and
                            judgment. </p></div><div n="4" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But here again you must not expect me to lay down any general rules. For
                            sagacity depends on circumstances and will often find its scope in
                            something preceding the pleading of the cause. For instance in the
                            prosecution of Verres Cicero seems to have shown the highest sagacity in
                            preferring to cut down the time available for his speech rather than
                            allow the trial to be postponed to the following year when Quintus
                            Hortensius was to be consul. </p></div><div n="5" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> And again in the actual pleading sagacity holds the first and most
                            important place. For it is the duty of sagacity to decide what we should
                            say and what we should pass by in silence or postpone; whether it is
                            better to deny an act or to defend it, when we should employ an exordium
                            and on what lines it should be designed, whether we should make a
                            statement of facts and if so, how, whether we should base our plea on
                            law or equity and what is the best order to adopt, while it must also
                            decide on all the nuances of style, and settle whether it is expedient
                            to speak harshly, gently or even with humility. </p></div><div n="6" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But I have already given advice on all these points as far as each
                            occasion permitted, and I shall continue to do the same in the
                            subsequent portions of this work. In the meantime, however, I will give
                            a few instances to make my meaning clearer, since it is not possible, in
                            my opinion, to do so by laying down general rules. </p></div><div n="7" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> We praise Demosthenes <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">Phil.</hi> i. 2. </note> for his sagacity because
                            when he urged a policy of war upon the Athenians after they had met with
                            a series of reverses, he <pb n="v4-6 p.519"/> pointed out that so far
                            their action had been entirely irrational. For they might still make
                            amends for their negligence, whereas, if they had made no mistakes, they
                            would have had no ground for hopes of better success in the future.
                            Again, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">Phil.</hi> i. 1. </note>
                     </p></div><div n="8" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> since he feared to give offence if he taxed the people with lack of
                            energy in defending the liberties of their country, he preferred to
                            praise their ancestors for their courageous policy. Thus lie gained a
                            ready hearing, with the natural result that the pride which they felt in
                            the heroic past made them repent of their own degenerate behaviour. </p></div><div n="9" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> If we turn to Cicero, we shall find that one speech alone, the <hi rend="italic">pro Cluenltio,</hi> will suffice to provide a number
                            of examples. The difficulty is to know what special exhibition of
                            sagacity to admire most in this speech. His opening statement of the
                            case, by which he discredited the mother whose authority pressed so
                            hardly on her son? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">vi.
                                17.</note> The fact that he preferred to throw the charge of having
                            bribed the jury back upon his opponents rather than deny it on account
                            of what he calls the notorious infamy of the verdict? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">i 4.</note> Or his recourse,
                            last of all, to the support of the law in spite of the odious nature of
                            the affair, a method by which lie would have set the judges against him
                            but for the fact that he had already softened their feelings towards
                            him? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> lii. 143 <hi rend="italic">sqq.</hi>
                        </note> Or the skill which lie shows in
                            stating that he has adopted this course in spite of the protests of his
                            client? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">lii. 114, 148,
                                149.</note>
                     </p></div><div n="10" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> What again am I to select as an outstanding instance of his sagacity in
                            the <hi rend="italic">pro Milone?</hi> The fact that he refrains from
                            proceeding to his statement of facts until he has cleared the ground by
                            disposing of the previous verdicts against the accused? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">cp.</hi>
                                Quint. III. vi. 93. </note> The manner in which he turns the <pb n="v4-6 p.521"/> odium of the attempted ambush against Clodius,
                            although as a matter of fact the encounter was a pure chance? The way in
                            which he at one and the same time praised the actual deed and showed
                            that it was forced upon his client? Or the skill with which he avoided
                            making Milo plead for consideration and undertook the role of suppliant
                            himself? <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">See above i. 25 and
                                27.</note> It would be an endless task to quote all the instances of
                            his sagacity, how he discredited Cotta, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">cp.</hi> above v. xiii. 30.
                                The reference is to the <hi rend="italic">pro Oppio.</hi>
                        </note> how
                            he put forward his own case in defence of Ligarius <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">See above v. x. 93.</note> and saved Cornelius
                                <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">See above v. xiii. 18 and
                                26.</note> by his bold admission of the facts. It is enough, I
                            think, </p></div><div n="11" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> to say that there is nothing not merely in oratory, but in all the tasks
                            of life that is more important than sagacity and that without it all
                            formal instruction is given in vain, while prudence unsupported by
                            learning will accomplish more than learning unsupported by prudence. It
                            is sagacity again that teaches us to adapt our speech to circumstances
                            of time and place and to the persons with whom we are concerned. But
                            since this topic covers a wide field and is intimately connected with
                            eloquence itself, I shall reserve my treatment of it till I come to give
                            instructions on the subject of appropriateness in speaking. <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> In XI. i. <hi rend="italic">cp.</hi> I. v. 1. </note>
                     </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>