[Ancient Rhetoric: an Introduction]
[Note: These are my own, rather makeshift translations.]
(1) One man praises Isocrates for the speeches in which he honoured good men; another for the deliberative speeches, in which he showed the utmost intelligence; another for the legal speeches, in which he showed himself second to none. Some are catpivated by the beauty of his diction, some by the beauty of his rhythms. (2) And I see that some are moved to admiration by his refusal to enter public life; for they consider that had he been one of those who took the speakers' rostrum he would have betsowed on the city of Athens one orator alone - himself; but by posting himself as a teacher and a guide in the art of speech he made many in place of one during his life.
(3) Now I too praise these things - I would be very foolish if I refused to do so. But I have no less admiration for the wise maxims, which all who have heeded have found profitable in their affairs. Some of these maxims he put into writing; others, which he imparted by word of mouth to his companions, he left behind in memory. (4) Of those preserved in memory one may examine many, but scarcely all. So for the present I will make use of one, which he spoke about education. For it would be fitting for one who tries to teach to honour this before the rest. (5) For when he saw young people fleeing for fear of toil and reckoning up the sweated labour in the beginning while taking no account of the profit that comes from them, what did he do? Setting the end alongside the first stages and the pleasure alongside the pain, he made them stronger through the one than they were despondent through the other. "For education," he says, "has a root, and has fruit; and bitterness is in the one, but to the other the utmost pleasure is joined."
(6) Who would not admire before all else the truth of this? Let us examine both times, that of the beginning, which he calls the root, and that of the end, to which he applies the name of fruit. We will find that the one is worn out by unpleasantness, the other delightful beyond measure.
(7) For consider: the teacher is seated on some high place, as judges are, formidable, frowning, making his anger plain, giving no sign of contentment. The youth must approach him in fear and trembling to make a varied display of what he has invented, what he has composed, of his memory also. And if these things are poorly prepared - complaints, insults, blows, threats for the future. But if it all seems practised to perfection and there is not the least opening for criticism, his gain is to suffer no punishment, and instructions to do no worse the next time. Indeed there is hardship in store for those who have fulfilled every requirement: once it is decided they have spoken faultlessly, they have to submit to a greater burden; for it is thought they will soon be equal to greater demands.
(8) So much for the teacher. But the attendant slave - good god! More oppressive than despots, he is always on hand, not far short of attached to the youth, constantly urging him on, rebuking him at every turn, giving no praise for what he does well, but punishing trivial faults extravagantly, an armed pursuer, one might almost say, displaying the stick or the thong in his right hand.
(9) "But parents are kind to their children." In fact they are no milder than those I have mentioned, but rather far harsher. There is a second contest at home no less serious than that in the school-room. Before he can touch his supper, "What have you done? What progress have you made? How has your rhetoric improved?" That's from the father. Add to that what comes from the mother, to whom the young man has to render account. (10) And if there is some cause of forgetfulness, the beatings are scarcely worth mentioning: he must be denied his food as well. And when evening comes - which for some brings release but to others brings an extension of toil and craft - night, which is given as a time of rest, for them is a time of work and heavy rebukes if they do not keep sleep at bay until they are finished. (11) Neither when they go out nor when they stay at home, neither with teachers nor with their parents, neither by night nor by day is there any leisure for rest, but through everything their labours go on. They do not have the chance to enjoy even peaceful dreams, but these too are usually prophecies of suffering to come.
(12) Does anyone think that Isocrates mistook the root of education? Do you see its harshness, its bitterness, its burden of care? "But," he says, "the matter does not rest there. Harshness is not the boundary of learning; look to the fruit and set it alongside the root, and you will soon find that the pleasure balances the pain." (13) What is there that is glorious, what that in any way is good, in which education has no share? When the young man has completed his education he is summoned to the council chamber, he is summoned to the assembly, the whole people looks to his judgement, they defer to his proposals as if they were oracles. So much greater with regard to pleasure is the city-hall than the school-room with regard to pain, so much greater than beatings the crown. The herald's voice surpasses the unpleasantness of tutors, when he stands beside and in a glorious proclamation bears witness to one's goodwill. (14) And then there is the rest of the fruit. The time has come for an embassy: at once the vote is for the educated man. Some benefit comes to the homeland through him: he is renowned both among those who sent him, and those to whom he went as ambassador. (15) There arises some dispute with a neighbouring city, and this must be resolved: it is not the strong man, not the rich man, not the man who excels in beauty, but the man who excels in education who is elected before all others. (16) In general the greatest things come to a city from the orators, and the orators are drawn from those who are educated. The propose laws, they propose decrees, by which in the nature of things the commonwealth is maintained. And the reputation of providing the greatest benefits brings more pleasure to those who provide than to those who receive them; for good offices supply the needs of those who receive help, but to those who bestow it they bring the renown of virtue.
(17) This too is clear, that the greatest thing of all to avenge yourself on those who have caused you pain and to avoid harm at the hands of one's enemies. Both these are in the power of the educated. The indict those who have wronged them, they lay charges, they bring them to court, they hand them over to the laws. And if some informer attacks them, they have no fear; their eloquence suffices to protect them. (18) Who would not pray to be allied to the educated man by marriage, to become part of his family, to be called his friend? For they are not a defence for themselves alone; for their associates too like a safe haven they stand guard, a presence in time of need, in time of trouble an ally, a source of encouragement and aid. (19) How gloriously they are escorted to the rostrum, and how much more gloriously from it when they have found favour. And if a desire for material goods comes upon them, wealth is to hand - wealth justly gained from their skill. In public gatherings they are longed for when absent, relied on when present. They preside over peace and war, they bring honour to their parents, they bequeathe fame to their children. The respect paid to old age is doubled in their case by their education. When they die their statues in the market-place preserve their memory for all time.
(20) Do you see how the fruit is opposed to the root? Do you see how the joys of education exceed the toil? Do you see how that grim exterior brings with it the most delightful things of all? And in my view this as one would expect. Let us consider whether education is a small and trivial matter, such as one might easily unfold; or, on the contrary, whether it is great and admirable, advantageous to the man who has acquired and envied by those who have not. (21) Indeed, what we have just now recounted shows that it is not rightly placed in the lowest rank. For it was seen to bring everything, applause, praise, prosperity, crowns, honours to living and dead. So it has near at hand the reason why one must toil to acquire it. (22) For the fact of the matter is this. Some things are worthless, some worth much. The former are acquired with ease, but toil attends one's progress to the latter. Nature has not yoked sweated labour to trivial things, nor ease to those of great importance; in each case the prologue is suited to the end, there self-indulgence, but endurance of hardship here. (23) One must choose: either one must say that education is trivial, or denying this one must accept toil. For if Isocrates had been talking of ignorance or some lowly thing, and said that toil is present in the beginnings of things of that kind, I would certainly have criticised him, for their roots are full of pleasure; but since he was making a statement about a matter, the gift of which is worthy to be ascribed to the gods, when he said that the beginnings are unpleasant while the end is joy, then the very magnitude of the matter fights alongside his claim.
(24) The affairs of merchants are of the same sort. It is not to those who sleep on both sides, nor to those who sit at home without action, that wealth comes.
(1) Begging Homer's pardon, I shall attempt to praise a man of whom he wished to speak ill - I mean, Thersites. I shall attempt to speak briefly about him, citing Homer himself as witness to some points.
(2) First of all, he was not of lowly or nameless ancestry - unless anyone thinks that Agrius and his father and his father before him were lowly: but no sensible person could think that. So if Thersites had wished to inflate his reputation among the Greeks because of hi forebears, as his kinsman Diomedes did, he would have had no problem; he too could have said "to Portheus were born three blameless sons". But as it was, not even when he was wronged by Odysseus did he make mention of his forefathers, like a man who thinks himself worthy to be honoured among his peers for his own deeds.
(3) Brought up as is proper for one of such lineage, and able to share in deeds fit for heroes, he went against the Boar when Meleager gathered together all the rest of the bravest against that destroyer of his country. But when he departed thence he fell ill, and disease wasted his body. (4) Yet it did not corrupt his spirit, nor drive out of it courage and the longing for glory. There is proof of this: when the sons of Atreus were gathering together the fleet against the barbarians, he had in his physical misfortune a plausible excuse had he wished to be at ease; but he could not bear to sit at home and hear of others' exploits. Though free of that necessity under oath which made the rest embark, he sailed as if bound by every oath, enraged against wrongdoers though lame and halt. He considered that war needs a spirit acquainted with daring; and it is my belief that the man who contributed a body such as his to the Trojan War made the others too more eager to put to sea. (5) For which of them would not have been ashamed to seek exemption from service when Thersites was in love with spears and wounds?
Hearing (one may suppose) that Odysseus and the handsome son of Peleus were shamefully trying to steal themselves away from the struggle, one disguising himself as a girl, the other as a madman, he mocked them and spoke words befitting such cowardice. It was not that he begrudged the one his intellect nor the other his prowess; had he done so, he would have borne a grudge equally against Ajax, son of Telamon, and Nestor, sweeter than honey. (6) But in my opinion he could not refrain from speaking ill of ill deeds. So he did not oppose Achilles when he called the assembly during the plague, nor did he stand against him when he was deprived of his honour - on the contrary, he was indignant on his behalf; nor when Odysseus led the mission to Chryses did he criticise the choice. But when things were done improperly he was moved to speak and to cast blame on those who were at fault, without fear or favour: he did not flatter the powerful, nor was he harsh to ordinary people, treating those weaker than himself with contempt and violence. (7) He knew that their simple life sufficed to keep them within bounds; but those who have power and laden tables and wealth need someone wise and duly plain-spoken who would take heed of their errors, chastise and cry out against them, preventing some and correcting others, fearing nothing - not sceptre, not eloquence, not numerous friends, nor their censure. (8) In later times in Athens Demosthenes was of like mind. He put the common advantage before his own profit, and chose to distress the people with speeches he knew would cause them pain, rather than to indulge them basely. (9) Thersites stationed himself in that same post. Many assemblies, I am sure, heard many fine addresses from an orator who did not speak briefly about matters of weight, but who proportioned his words to the need. And this is much to be admired, since it was found worthy of mention even by Homer. (10) He saw that a man who thought himself worthy to rule others was a slave to captive women: now for Chryseis' sake bringing a plague on the camp, now depriving the army of Achilles for the sake of Briseis. This man's one aim was the enjoyment of physical beauty; he was heedless of the damage he did thereby to the Greek cause; he spoke openly of flight while covertly preparing to stay; he said one thing, but did something else by means of his henchmen; his deeds were unworthy of a king, and even of an honest commoner. Seeing this, Thersites came forward and spoke as befitted his ancestry. His first reproach was greed; Achilles, too, had spoken of this before - and would it not be strange if this should be sensible when Achilles said it, but senseless when another did? (11) Thersites' integrity is proved by the truth of his accusation; his concern for the common good is proved by his anger at Achilles' defection from the alliance; his courage is proved by the fearlessness with which he found fault with the king and told him that the man he had injured was his better. (12) That he had stormed cities and taken captives is clear from what he says about himself. For he would not have bragged so shamelessly among people who knew otherwise; he spoke these proud words in the assembly with good reason, because the facts bore him witness - unless anyone thinks he was mad. But that is not what Homer said. Homer says that his head was malformed, his hair scanty, his speeches long-winded, and things of that kind; but he did not add that he was mad. What is possible for a madman could never happen to a sane man. Thersites, then, was one of those who brought terror to the foe, if indeed he took their sons captive. (13) And if that were not the case, and he had been wholly useless, Diomedes would never have allowed him to come in the beginning; or, if that too had been overlooked, he would not have permitted him to be a nuisance in assemblies or to speak his own unmerited praise. For Diomedes would have known that he would incur a portion of the shame himself. Come then: how in this speech was he inferior to Nestor? Indeed, did he not excel him? (14) For Nestor spoke gently to them both, the offender and the injured alike; he was well aware of the facts but did not dare to speak his mind sincerely. But Thersites, without concealment, placed virtue before fortune. (15) He said this not because he envied Agamemnon Briseis but because he foresaw the results if Achilles did not fight alongside them - the results which Homer himself narrates. So greater freedom of speech is to be seen on Thersites' part than on Nestor's, though the latter had been king for three generations. (16) He had no particular hostility towards Achilles, but - reasonably enough - he criticised his arrogance, though he took offence with others on his behalf when the time came, seeking, so far as he was able, to prevent anyone being wronged by anyone else. (17) That he was held in high esteem as a speaker is attested by the Greeks, who did not say that he should have been ejected before he had finished his speech, or that he should have been punished for what he said - as if (as I believe) he had spoken the truth. But there was someone who resorted to violence, someone who wanted to be an orator, someone who was incensed by the flow of Thersites' eloquence and who abused his skill. (18) But Thersites had two witnesses to testify to the justice of what he had said: the man who struck him, and Agamemnon - the latter testifying by his silence, the former by the very blow he struck. For this was a confession that there was no way to refute him; it is a reproach not to the victim, but to the man who did it. (19) The blame for physical ailments would reasonably be borne by fate; the blame for aggression lies with the man who breaks the laws against assault. And here too Thersites is to be admired: though he was wronged, he knew how to bear it; he did not defect to the enemy, though he could have lifted up their spirits and made them bold by telling them all the secrets of the Greeks.