<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:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:H.hermagoras_1</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:H.hermagoras_1</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="H"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="hermagoras-bio-1" n="hermagoras_1"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Herma'goras</surname></persName></head><p>(<persName xml:lang="grc"><surname full="yes">Ἑρμαγόρας</surname></persName>.)</p><p>1. Of Temnos, a distinguished Greek rhetorician of the time of Pompey and Cicero. He
      belonged to the Rhodian school of oratory, and appears to have tried to excel as an orator (or
      rather declaimer) as well as a teacher of rhetoric. (<bibl n="Quint. Inst. 5.3.59">Quint.
       Inst. 5.3.59</bibl>, viii. pr. § 3; Suid. <hi rend="ital">s. v.</hi>
      <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἑρμαγόρας</foreign>.) But it is especially as a teacher of
      rhetoric that he is known to us. He devoted particular attention to what is called the <hi rend="ital">invention,</hi> and made a peculiar division of the parts of an oration, which
      differed from that adopted by other rhetoricians. (<bibl n="Quint. Inst. 3.1.16">Quint. Inst.
       3.1.16</bibl>.) Cicero (<hi rend="ital">de Invent.</hi> 1.6) opposes his system, but
      Quintilian defends it (3.3.9, 5. §§ 4, 16, &amp;c., 6.56), though in some parts the
      latter censures what Cicero approves of. (Cic. <hi rend="ital">de Invent.</hi> 1.11; <bibl n="Quint. Inst. 3.6.60">Quint. Inst. 3.6.60</bibl>, &amp;c.) But in his eagerness to
      systematise the parts of an oration, he entirely lost sight of the practical point of view
      from which oratory must be regarded. (<bibl n="Quint. Inst. 3.11.22">Quint. Inst.
       3.11.22</bibl>; Tacit. <hi rend="ital">de Orat.</hi> 19.) He appears to have been the author
      of several works which are lost; Suidas mentions <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ῥητορικαί</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ ἐζεργασίας</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ φράσεως</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ
       σχηνάτων</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ πρέποντος</foreign>. (See the passages
      in which Cicero discusses the views of Hermagoras in Orelli's <hi rend="ital">Onom. Tull. s.
       v.;</hi> comp. Westermann, <hi rend="ital">Gesch. d. Griech. Beredtsamk.</hi> § 81. note
      11.83. notes 11-13; C. G. Piderit, <hi rend="ital">de Hermagora Rhetore Commentatio,</hi>
      Hersfeld, 1839, 4to.)</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>