<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-eng2:3.8.9-3.8.16</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:3.8.9-3.8.16</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="3" type="textpart" subtype="book"><div n="8" type="textpart" subtype="section"><div n="9" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> since it is sometimes drawn from irrelevant material, as for example in
                            Isocrates' Praise of Helen, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">
                                The speech opens with a disquisition on the absurd and trivial
                                nature of much that is contained in the speeches of sophists and
                                rhetoricians. </note> or from something akin to the subject, as for
                            instance in the <hi rend="italic">Panegyricus</hi> of the same author,
                            when he complains that more honour is given to physical than to moral
                            excellence, or as Gorgias in his speech delivered at the Olympic games
                            praises the founders of the great national games. Sallust seems <pb n="v1-3 p.485"/> to have imitated these authors in his <hi rend="italic">Jugurthine War</hi> and in the introduction to his <hi rend="italic">Catiline,</hi> which has no connection with his
                            narrative. </p></div><div n="10" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But it is time for me to return to <hi rend="italic">deliberative</hi>
                            oratory in which, even when we introduce an <hi rend="italic">exordium,</hi> we must content ourselves with a brief prelude,
                            which may amount to no more than a mere heading. As regards the <hi rend="italic">statement of facts,</hi> this is never required in
                            speeches on private subjects, at least as regards the subject on which
                            an opinion has to be given, because everyone is acquainted with the
                            question at issue. </p></div><div n="11" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Statements as to external matters which are relevant to the discussion
                            may however frequently be introduced. In addressing public assemblies it
                            will often be necessary to set forth the order of the points which have
                            to be treated. </p></div><div n="12" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> As regards appeals to the emotions, these are especially necessary in
                                <hi rend="italic">deliberative</hi> oratory. Anger has frequently to
                            be excited or assuaged and the minds of the audience have to be swayed
                            to fear, ambition, hatred, reconciliation. At times again it is
                            necessary to awaken pity, whether it is required, for instance, to urge
                            that relief should be sent to a besieged city, or we are engaged in
                            deploring the overthrow of an allied state. But what really carries
                            greatest weight in <hi rend="italic">deliberative</hi> speeches is the
                            authority of the speaker. </p></div><div n="13" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> For he, who would have all men trust his judgment as to what is
                            expedient and honourable, should both possess and be regarded as
                            possessing genuine wisdom and excellence of character. In <hi rend="italic">forensic</hi> speeches the orator may, according to
                            the generally received opinion, indulge his passion to some extent. But
                            all will agree that the advice given by a speaker should be in keeping
                            with his moral character. <pb n="v1-3 p.487"/> The majority of Greek
                            writers have held that this kind of oratory is entirely concerned with
                            addressing public assemblies and have restricted it to politics. </p></div><div n="14" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Even Cicero <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">de Orat.</hi> ii. 82. </note> himself deals chiefly with this
                            department. Consequently those who propose to offer advice upon peace,
                            war, troops, public works or revenue must thoroughly acquaint themselves
                            with two things, the resources of the state and the character of its
                            people, so that the method employed in tendering their advice may be
                            based at once on political realities and the nature of their hearers.
                        </p></div><div n="15" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> This type of oratory seems to me to offer a more varied field for
                            eloquence, since both those who ask for advice and the answers given to
                            them may easily present the greatest diversity. Consequently there are
                            three points which must be specially borne in mind in advice or
                            dissuasion: first the nature of the subject under discussion, secondly
                            the nature of those who are engaged in the discussion, and thirdly the
                            nature of the speaker who offers them advice. </p></div><div n="16" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> As to the subject under discussion its practicability is either certain
                            or uncertain. In the latter case this will be the chief, if not the only
                            point for consideration; for it will often happen that we shall assert
                            first that something ought not to be done, even if it can be done, and
                            secondly, that it cannot be done. Now when the question turns on such
                            points as to whether the Isthmus can be cut through, the Pontine Marshes
                            drained, or a harbour constructed at Ostia, or whether Alexander is
                            likely to find land beyond the Ocean, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> the theme of a <hi rend="italic">suasoria</hi>
                                of the elder Seneca ( <hi rend="italic">Suas.</hi> i.).
                                    <quote>Alexander deliberates whether to sail forth into the
                                    ocean.</quote>
                        </note> we make use of <hi rend="italic">conjecture.</hi>
                     </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>