<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-eng2:4.1.25-4.1.42</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:4.1.25-4.1.42</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="4" type="textpart" subtype="book"><div n="1" type="textpart" subtype="section"><div n="25" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> the case is somewhat difficult, surely we should seek to win the
                            good-will of the judge by other portions of our speech sooner than
                            thrust the main questions upon him in all their naked harshness before
                            we have done anything to secure his favour. If the main questions ought
                            always to be treated at the beginning of a speech, we might dispense
                            with the <hi rend="italic">exordium.</hi>
                     </p></div><div n="26" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> We shall then occasionally introduce certain points from the main
                            questions into the <hi rend="italic">exordium,</hi> which will exercise
                            a valuable influence in winning the judge to regard us with favour. It
                            is not necessary to enumerate <pb n="v4-6 p.21"/> the points which are
                            likely to gain us such favour, because they will be obvious as soon as
                            we have acquainted ourselves with the circumstances of each dispute,
                            while in view of the infinite variety presented by cases it is out of
                            the question to specify them here. </p></div><div n="27" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Just, however, as it is in the interest of our case to note and amplify
                            these points, so it is also to rebut or at any rate lessen the force of
                            anything that is damaging to our case. Again our case may justify an
                            appeal to compassion with regard to what we have suffered in the past or
                            are likely to suffer. </p></div><div n="28" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> For I do not share the opinion held by some, that the <hi rend="italic">exordium</hi> and the <hi rend="italic">peroration</hi> are to be
                            distinguished by the fact that the latter deals with the past, the
                            former with the future. Rather I hold that the difference between them
                            is this: in our opening any preliminary appeal to the compassion of the
                            judge must be made sparingly and with restraint, while in the peroration
                            we may give full rein to our emotions, place fictitious speeches in the
                            mouths of our characters, call the dead to life, and produce the wife or
                            children of the accused in court, practices which are less usual in <hi rend="italic">exordia.</hi>
                     </p></div><div n="29" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But it is the function of the <hi rend="italic">exordium</hi> not merely
                            to excite the feelings to which I have alluded, but to do all that is
                            possible to show that our opponent's case is not deserving of them. It
                            is advantageous to create the impression not merely that our fate will
                            be deserving of pity, if we lose, but that our adversary will be swollen
                            with outrageous insolence if he prove successful. </p></div><div n="30" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But exordia are often drawn from matters which do not, strictly
                            speaking, concern either cases or the persons involved, though not
                            unrelated to either. <pb n="v4-6 p.23"/> In such relation to persons
                            stand not only wives and children of whom I have just spoken, but also
                            relations, friends, and at times districts and states together with
                            anything else that is like to suffer injury from the fall of the client
                            whom we defend. </p></div><div n="31" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> As regards external circumstances <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> In the <hi rend="italic">pro Caelio</hi> (c. 1)
                                Cicero calls attention to the fact that the trial is taking place
                                during a festival, all other legal business being suspended. In the
                                    <hi rend="italic">pro Deiotaro</hi> (c. 2) he calls attention to
                                the unusual surroundings, the speech being delivered in a private
                                house. For the <hi rend="italic">pro Milone</hi> see § <milestone n="20" unit="section"/> of this chapter. In the first <hi rend="italic">Verrme</hi> (c. 1) he remarks that it is generally
                                believed that the corruption of the courts is such that it is
                                practically impossible to secure the condemnation of a wealthy man.
                            </note> which have a bearing on the case, I may mention time, which is
                            introduced in the exordium of the <hi rend="italic">pro Caelio,</hi>
                            place (in the <hi rend="italic">pro Deiotaro</hi> ),the appearance of
                            the court (in the <hi rend="italic">pro Milone</hi> ),public opinion (in
                            the <hi rend="italic">Verrines</hi> ),and finally, as I cannot mention
                            all, the ill-repute of the law courts and the popular expectation
                            excited by the case. None of these actually belong to the case, but all
                            have some bearing on it. </p></div><div n="32" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Theophrastus adds that the <hi rend="italic">exordium</hi> may be drawn
                            from the speech of one's opponent, as that of the <hi rend="italic">pro
                                Ctesiphonte</hi> of Demosthenes appears to be, where he asks that he
                            may be allowed to speak as he pleases and not to be restricted to the
                            form laid down by the accuser in his speech. </p></div><div n="33" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Confidence often labours under the disadvantage of being regarded as
                            arrogance. But there are certain tricks for acquiring good-will, which
                            though almost universal, are by no means to be neglected, if only to
                            prevent their being first employed against ourselves. I refer to
                            rhetorical expressions of wishing, detestation, entreaty, or anxiety.
                            For it keeps the judge's attention on the alert, if he is led to think
                            the case novel, important, scandalous, or likely to set a precedent,
                            still more if he is excited by concern for himself or the common weal,
                            when <pb n="v4-6 p.25"/> his mind must be stirred by hope, fear,
                            admonition, entreaty and even by falsehood, if it seems to us that it is
                            likely to advance our case. </p></div><div n="34" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> We shall also find it a useful device for wakening the attention of our
                            audience to create the impression that we shall not keep them long and
                            intend to stick closely to the point. The mere fact of such attention
                            undoubtedly makes the judge ready to receive instruction from us, but we
                            shall contribute still more to this effect if we give a brief and lucid
                            summary of the case which he has to try; in so doing we shall be
                            following the method adopted by Homer and Virgil at the beginning of
                            their poems. </p></div><div n="35" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> For as regards the length of the <hi rend="italic">exordium,</hi> it
                            should propound rather than expound, and should not describe how each
                            thing occurred, but simply indicate the points on which the orator
                            proposes to speak. I do not think a better example of this can be found
                            than the <hi rend="italic">exordium</hi> to the <hi rend="italic">pro
                                Cluentio</hi> of Cicero. </p></div><div n="36" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p><quote> I have noted, judges, that the speech for the prosecution was
                                divided into two parts: of these, the first seemed to rest and in
                                the main to rely on the odium, now inveterate, arising from the
                                trial before Junius, while the other appeared to touch, merely as a
                                matter of form, and with a certain timidity and diffidence, on the
                                question of the charge of poisoning, though it is to try this point
                                that the present court has been constituted in accordance with the
                                law. </quote> All this, however, is easier for the defender than the
                            prosecutor, since the latter has merely to remind the judge, while the
                            former has to instruct him. </p></div><div n="37" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Nor shall any authority, however great, induce me to abandon my opinion
                            that it is always desirable to render the judge attentive and ready to
                            receive <pb n="v4-6 p.27"/> instruction. I am well aware that those who
                            disagree with me urge that it is to the advantage of a bad case that its
                            nature should not be understood; but such lack of understanding arises
                            not from inattention on the part of the judge, but from his being
                            deceived. </p></div><div n="38" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Our opponent has spoken and perhaps convinced him; we must alter his
                            opinion, and this we cannot do unless we render him attentive to what we
                            have to say and ready to be instructed. What are we to do then? I agree
                            to the view that we should cut down, depreciate and deride some of our
                            opponent's arguments with a view to lessening the attention shown him by
                            the judge, as Cicero did in the <hi rend="italic">pro Ligario.</hi>
                     </p></div><div n="39" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> For what was the purpose of Cicero's irony save that Caesar should be
                            induced to regard the case as presenting only old familiar features and
                            consequently to give it less attention? What was his purpose in the <hi rend="italic">pro Caelio</hi>
                        <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">pro Cael.</hi> 31. </note>
                            save to make the case seem far more trivial than had been anticipated?
                            It is, however, obvious that of the rules which I have laid down, some
                            will be applicable to one case and some to another. </p></div><div n="40" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> The majority of writers consider that there are five kinds of causes,
                            the <hi rend="italic">honourable, the</hi>
                        <hi rend="italic">mean,</hi>
                            the <hi rend="italic">doubtful</hi> or <hi rend="italic">ambiguous,</hi>
                            the <hi rend="italic">extraordinary</hi> and the <hi rend="italic">obscure,</hi> or as they are called in Greek, <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἔνδοξον, ἄδοξον, ἀμφίδοξον, παράδοξον</foreign> and
                                <foreign xml:lang="grc">δυσπαρακολούθητον.</foreign> To these some
                            would add a sixth, the <hi rend="italic">scandalous,</hi> which some
                            again include under the heading of the <hi rend="italic">mean,</hi>
                            others under the <hi rend="italic">extraordinary.</hi>
                     </p></div><div n="41" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> The latter name is given to cases which are contrary to ordinary
                            expectation. In <hi rend="italic">ambiguous</hi> cases it is specially
                            important to secure the good-will of the judge, in the <hi rend="italic">obscure</hi> to render him ready to receive <pb n="v4-6 p.29"/>
                            instruction, in the <hi rend="italic">mean</hi> to excite his attention.
                            As regards the <hi rend="italic">honourable</hi> the very nature of the
                            case is sufficient to win the approval of the judge; in the <hi rend="italic">scandalous</hi> and <hi rend="italic">extraordinary</hi> some kind of palliation is required. </p></div><div n="42" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Some therefore divide the <hi rend="italic">exordium</hi> into two
                            parts, the <hi rend="italic">introduction</hi> and the <hi rend="italic">insinuation,</hi> making the former contain a direct appeal to the
                            good-will and attention of the judge. But as this is impossible in
                            scandalous cases, they would have the orator on such occasions insinuate
                            himself little by little into the minds of his judges, especially when
                            the features of the case which meet the eye are discreditable, or
                            because the subject is disgraceful or such as to meet with popular
                            disapproval, or again if the outward circumstances of the case are such
                            as to handicap it or excite odium (as for instance when a patron appears
                            against a client or a father against a son), or pity (as when our
                            opponent is an old or blind man or a child). </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>