A Function of the Classical Exordium

Author(s): Francis P. Donnelly

Source: The Classical Weekly, Vol. 5, No. 26 (May 11, 1912), pp. 204-207
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4386587
Accessed: 06-12-2019 15:10 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Classical Weekly

This content downloaded from 180.191.193.65 on Fri, 06 Dec 2019 15:10:20 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 204 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY

A FUNCTION OF THE CLASSICAL called this function the most necessary of the three
EXORDIUM
and the only essential one (see below, page 205).
The exordium of the classical speech, which called Unfortunately, some modern rhetoricians have given
for separate and full treatment in the ancient rhetori- to the term meanings it never had, and some com-
cians, is passed over practically without comment mentators on Aristotle, because of a false interpre-
in modern books of rhetoric. At first rhetoric tation of a niot very clear sentence, have made a
treated exclusively of the spoken word; now it is further mystery of a simple term. These are the
confined almost wholly to the written word, except reasons which justify a fairly complete statement of
in the case of those books that still continue the the history of the terms docilitas and docilis. In
traditions of the art of eloquence. Students of the our discussion the Latin term has usually been kept
Classics, however, cannot well afford to ignore the because of the ambiguity of the English word
old rhetoric and its precepts, and it is a pleasing docile.
feature of most of the recent editions of Cicero's Blair, in Lecture 3I of his Rhetoric, speaking of
Orations that the general outlines of each speech, as the ends or purposes of an introduction or exordium,
laid down in rhetoric, have been embodied in the says: "The third end is to render the hearers docile,
introductions or the notes. The present paper, which or open to persuasion, for which end we must be-
attempts to clarify the functions of the exordium, gin by studying to remove any particular prepos-
may help on this good cause. sessions they may have contracted against the cause
The exordium from time immemorial had a triple or side of the argument which we espouse".
function to perform: reddere auditores benevolos, This statement has been embodied in other books
attentos, dociles, as the Latins put it. The first two of rhetoric and is responsible in a great measure for
functions, gaining the goodwill of the audience and a misconception of the original meaning of this well-
winning its attention, by removing prejudices against known rhetorical term (a recent rhetorician renders
the speaker or his cause and by dwelling on the it by the English word 'submissive'). Originally
importance or the advantages or the novelty of his docilis referred, to a purely intellectual preparation
topic, have been pretty well understood, but the of the audience, had none of the associations of our
third function, which has been styled making the English word docile, which describes in most of its
hearers docile, has not been as clearly grasped. For uses a moral quality of the will, and had nothing
this fact there are two main reasons. First, the to do with "particular prepossessions contracted
English word docile has taken on associations which against the cause".
were not in the Latin word docilis; much less were What is the evidence to show that Blair misses
they contained in the Greek original. In the second the correct meaning of the term? It may be
place, the meaning of docilis is so obvious and so grouped under three heads: (i) the Greek rhetori-
simple, and this function of the exordium is so cians, (2) the Latin rhetoricians, and (3) the more
plainly taken for granted that it wouild almost seem recent rhetoricians.
unnecessary to notice it. Why mention the obvious (i) The Greek Rhetoricians.-The triple function
fact that a man should say what he is talking about, of the exordium antedates Aristotle. The original
or why give any precepts about it? Yet the prin- inventor of the term is not known (see Navarre:
cipal thing an orator does when he makes his Essai sur la Rhetorique Grecque avant Aristote,
hearers dociles is to tell them the topic of his dis- 213). The Greek term for docilis is Edlacf and
course. means, according to Navarre, to be in a condition
Anaximenes, if he is the author of the Rhetorica to understand, that is, to follow the explanation of
ad Alexandrum, is one of the first to mention the the case. He says Latin renders the idea poorly by
three functions distinctly; he states that the orator docilis and that French renders it worse by docile.
performs the duty of making his hearers dociles, The English docile, it might be added, is equally as
if he simply says, 'I arise for the purpose of ad- bad, unless to it be given in this use a strictly tech-
vising that we should wage war in behalf of the nical sense.
Syracusans', or 'I arise in order to show that we The first author cited for the term is the writer
ought not to send aid to the Syracusans' (Chapter of the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum (already quoted
29). This is indeed a very simple case, and in con- above on this page), ascribed by some to Anaximenes
nection with it the intellectual preparation of the (it is printed among Aristotle's works). In Chapter
audience did not call for much elaboration. But as 29 this writer says that docilitas is obtained by the
a rule the function in question did not involve much 'clear and summary statement of the subject to
more than the brief and clear statement of the sub- those not acquainted with it, that they may know
ject to be discussed, with an indication perhaps of what the speech is about and may follow the ques-
the parts into which the discussion was to be divi- tion' (see Spengel, Rhetores Graeci 12I4).
ded and a hint at the way the topic was to be Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Lysias, Chapter 24),
handled. It will be evident, therefore, why Aristotle writes concerning the same function that, according

This content downloaded from 180.191.193.65 on Fri, 06 Dec 2019 15:10:20 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 205

to the rhetoricians, 'the speakers should state their The first lines of the Iliad and the Odyssey are
case concisely, that the judges may not be ignorant cited as examples.
of the question and of what is to be said'. In the Aristotle does not call this a species of exordium,
same chapter he explains the other functions of the but rather lavayKaL6Tarov epyov ToO irpoo(doUv "most
exordium. necessary function" (Cope) ; "essential task" (Jebb).
An anonymous writer in Walz, Rhetores Graeci 7. This work done by the exordium is admitted to be
66, gives the following method of obtaining docili- and evidently is wholly intellectual.
tas: yliera- eb&dcOea 6 rac obaLCs YrapLorw,ueP rO 7rpa7y4a How can it be shown that Aristotle is referring
irepl ou' AuXXopxep 7roLecraaL7 Ti' X6yov , i. e. 'docilitas
to docilitas in 5-6?
is produced whenever we clearly state the subject (a) By terminology. Practically the same terms
about which we are going to make our speech'. are employed by Aristotle here that are used by
Longinus, in Walz 9. 557, says: Kal KcTarapXAs pvAnaximenes and Dionysius where they treat of
Ira,yetyv a EXcLp Kal ,ueptapo TwZV KecaXaclwv Tr irpoolpIov docilitas. I subjoin the pertinent passages from the
Ka T*V rhy j rayyeXtav iXer T? cs alro8elews r6v Ui three writers':
,epwa,ubv e6'aOEcfas vexa, 'At the beginning the exor-
Aristotle (Rhet. 3. 14.5) : Bedyuia ToO \&yov Y'a 7rpol-
dium has an announcement and a division of the 8wo-t repl od j o6 X6yos--rotei dKoXovOe?v T1 X6OyW-6Xicrat
topics; it has the announcement for the sake of the od tJ'EKa o X6yos.
proof and the division for the sake of docilitas'. Anaximenes (Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, Chapter
Compare also an anonymous writer in Spengel, 29 TOV^ orp&y/wrTos ?v Ke4aXaa(y (cf. Aristotle, Rhet.
Rhetores Graeci I. 428: ed6ares ty&p ol aKoiovres 7repl 3.14.9) 41r e6oat 8oXwoats *'ca -yL'y1J'K0TL 7repl w O6 X6-yos,
io'; ol X6-yoL eb/AaOiTepoc -yeiroorTat. evi)AdOetav U 7rotEZ 1rapaK0LXov&(Or Te Tr uroOieL.
7rpOiKOeOLs ai'alcwaos ALepwSs X 'Those who know Dionysius (Lysias, Chapter 24) : ed fye 76 e4,6a0evi
what the speeches treat of are more dociles. Propo- ,obs dKpoaaTas rotXa=, KEXe6o0VnT avorTp!/avTas tireZv TO
sition, review, division produce docilitas'. The 7rpadyp.t, Yva /h ad'yvo(Zo-t. T7)v r6Weo-tp ol &OKcTal -cTTtyaa
author goes on to define and illustrate the terms, TOD irpcty,4atros.

giving an example of proposition and of division. (b) By testimony. Quintilian (4. 1.34), explain-
The term review is strange in this connection, es- ing how to obtain docilitas, gives as an example the
pecially as the writer states that the proposition and
opening lines of Homer, the very example that
the division belong in the beginning of the speech, Aristotle uses in 5-6. Since Quintilian wrote with
but not the review, 'for there is no review (refresh-
this chapter of Aristotle before him (he criticises
ing of the memory) of what has not been previously some of Aristotle's statements), it would seem he
stated'. An obvious fact to be sure! understood Aristotle to be speaking of docilitas.
The Opinion of Aristotle.-It has not been gen- (c) By exclusion. There were before Aristotle's
erally recognized where Aristotle treats of docilitas.
time three functions of the exordium. If the pro-
Cope, as will be seen presently, thinks Aristotle duction of docilitas is not the "necessary task" dis-
treats of it in a single sentence in his Rhetoric, cussed in 5-6, there must be a fourth function not
in the middle of a discussion on attenttio; he seemsheard of before or since. The gaining of benevolen-
to overlook the fact that Aristotle treats exclusively
tia and the winning of attentio belong to the re-
of this function through two sections (3. 14. 5-6). medial tasks of the exordium, because not to have
Aristotle treats of the exordium in Rhetoric 3. 14. these qualities would constitute a defect in a judge.
He divides the chapter into three parts: the exord- Every judge has the obligation to be unprejudiced
ium in demonstrative or epideictic oratory, 1-4, in and to be willing to attend to the evidence. He can-
judicial oratory, 5-II, in deliberative oratory, 12. not, however, be expected to know the precise point
He treats of the three well known functions of the or the division of the prosecution or of the defence.
exordium under judicial oratory. In 5-6 he discusses Hence to convey such information is in Aristotle's
docilitas, in 7-II the other functions'. The following view essential; to produce the other qualities of
is Jebb's translation of the principal portion of 5-6: benevolentia and attentio is not essential to the
"The introduction is an indication of the subject, in speech but arises from the defects of the hearers,
order that the hearers may know it beforehand, and as Aristotle explains in the chapter.
that their thoughts may not be in suspense;-for the (d) By the meaning of ebAdOeta elsewhere. In
indefinite bewilders, so that he who puts the open- Aristotle Rhet. I. 6. 15 the term denotes a wholly
ing, as it were, into the hand of the listener, makes intellectual quality in a place where the author is
it immediately easy for him to follow the story". distinguishing moral, physical and intellectual quali-
ties. In Moralia Magna I. 5 the term is purely in-
1 Aristotle approaches these three functions in the sametellectual and is distinguished expressly from moral
spirit in which, in the preceding chapter (3. 13), he treated
qualities.
of the traditional parts of the speech. These were divided
into essential (necessary) and non-essential. In the same The constituent elements of e6,dOeta are all intel-
way here, he divides the three traditional functions of the
exordium into the essential or necessary one, docilitas, and lectual as given in Walz, Rhetores Graeci 7. 696:
the non-essential or remedial functions, benevolentia and
attentio.
'All three have been cited above in translations.

This content downloaded from 180.191.193.65 on Fri, 06 Dec 2019 15:10:20 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 206 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY

M4pnq dAa6eas 7 pta, the preceding sentence /vh1q7,

adyXivotaa, would in that case be lost
46trjs. M
O@V kf71 T?pS)S dV f.a64 TLS 6f6T7S e X TcLVT7S r1 sight of, and other violence would be done to the
o&avoias- diytXvota o 7 f et iv 4laG4 TtLS 1 tJ context.
4LaOe rhe question Aristotle is considering is
O-qpe6Etv
Aristotle does not, it is true, make use of the whether attentio in as far as it is derived from the
stereotyped technical term in 5-6. There can, how- person of the hearer can be dispensed with. 'Many',
ever, hardly be any doubt of his meaning. The he says, 'strive to provoke people to a laugh in order
Rhetorica ad Alexandrum (Anax. l.c.) also omits to make them inattentive'. 'No', replies Aristotle,
the term, but since both authors mention the other 'don't distract your audience by a joke but bring
two functions immediately and since the three func- them back to a full grasp of the subject and to an
tions were well known, the mere omission of the appreciation of your personal worth, and you will
technical term does not affect our conclusion. rather have their attention'. The emphatic position
Had Cope (Aristotle's Rhetoric, 3. p. I7I; Intro- of evI/A[eLav delicately suggests the contrast with
duction, p. 340) noted that Aristotle was giving his TyXwTa, and the AaXXov in the last clause of the sen-
doctrine on docilitas in 5-6, he would not have tence enforces it. This last clause, 'for they pay
said that Aristotle includcs docilitas under attentio. attention rather to these', shows that Aristotle is
The two functions are connected, as will be seen still treating of attentio as a principal topic. Cope
presently, but they are distinct. What led Cope says the meaning is, "docilitas need not be made a
astray is a sentence in 7, a sentence to which Jebb separate topic". In that case Aristotle would have
has given a new version that keeps Aristotle con- said: 'Employ such and such means, for thus
sistent with himself and at one with all other you will have docilitas'. But, on the contrary, he
rhetoricians. Cope indeed gives what has been the says employ such and such means and thus you will
traditional version of the sentence in question, but have attentio. This would seem to prove that the
Jebb's rendering is correct. meaning, therefore, is rather that attentio from the
person of the hearer need not be made a separate
Here is the sentence: eis o evlAascetav WnravTa diafEL,
topic. This harmonizes with what follows, where
eavP T7-S fO6X-qTa KOal T7J 7rtetKX qbalveoOat. rpooJIxovoL yap
/uiXov ro6TOLS. Aristotle explains how attentio may be drawn from
Cope, Rhetoric 3. p. I72, translates thus: "(elb6d- the importance, utility, novelty, and attractiveness ofs
Octa, docilitas, need not be made a separate topic, be- the subject matter.
cause) any speaker may refer to this (carry back, Cope makes ravrca the cause of et/dOeta, but, as
i. e. apply) anything he pleases (any of the topicshas been shown, 'anything' is rather the effect, as in
Jebb's version, where the words mean: 'by making
of the 7rpoolLLoV ), even the appearance of respecta-
bility and worth; for to these ( TOLS T7rLELKI0L ) your
the hearers dociles and by seeming worthy you
audience is always more inclined to attend'. do everything-to these two causes you may refer
Jebb, Rhetoric of Aristotle, p. 183, renders as the whole effect called for here'.
follows: "The whole art of the proem may be summedGrammatically, again, Jebb's version is sound.
up in this, if you like, making the hearers The articular infinitive, which in: Cope's translation
docile and making yourself seem estimable, for is put in the same construction with t7rarTa, is in
esti-
mable people are heard with more attention". Jebb's version put in the same construction with
Cope's interpretation supposes docilitas in the ev,ua'Oeiav and made dependent upon els. There is
passage to be an effect; whereas it is rather a cause no solid reasoning against such a course, and
of which attentio is the effect. The phrase dvdyeLP Jebb's version has the merit of avoiding all the
els is used often by Aristotle to refer back to a difficulties urged against Cope's, while it keeps Aris-
cause. In the Rhetoric (I. 4. 3) we have the phrase, totle consistent with himself and all other rhetori-
and this is the way Cope interprets it: "But it is cians.

plain that advice is confined to those things which (2) The Latin Rhetoricians.-Cicero gives the
we deliberate about; and these are all such as may fullest explanation of doci1ftas in Orat.
be referred to ourselves as authors or agents ( cav- Part. 8. The functions of the exordium, he says, are
d-yeoaOat el, r1Aas) or of which the origin of generation three: ut amice, ut intellegenter, ut attentte audia-
(i.e. of bringing about or effecting) is in our own niur. Here Cicero avoids the word docilis, and
power" (Introd. to Aristotle's Rhetoric, p. I73). uses intellegenter. Amice corresponds to benevo-
Other instances of the Same phrase, always with lenttia, and attente to attentio. After explaining how
the same meaning 'to refer back to as to a cause', the first end, good will, is obtained, especially by
may be found in Nic. Eth. 3. 3. I7; 3. 5. 6; 3. 9. 71good character, he continues: intellegenter autem
In this particular passage there is a contrast with ut audiamur et attente a rebus ipsis ordiendum est.
the sentence preceding, where we have ets 'yAXwra Sed facillime auditor discit et quid agatur intelle-
rpod&yev. As dva is contrasted here with 7rp6, itsgit si complectare a prinicipio genus naturamque
meaning would naturally be 'back to'. Now we causae, si definias, si dividas, si neque prudentiam
would not say 'refer back to an effect'. The pre- eius impedias confusione partium nec memoriam
ceding sentence denotes motion forward to an effect multitudine; quaeque mox de narratione dilucida di-
and so this sentence by contrast will denote motion centur, eadem etiam huc poterunt recte referri.
back to a cause. Further, Cope's interpretation im- Note that facilliine discit is a close rendering of the
plies that Aristotle is in this sentence taking docili- Greek term, and mark the means made use of, all
tas for seParate discussion. but the nara1lelikm with'intellectual.

This content downloaded from 180.191.193.65 on Fri, 06 Dec 2019 15:10:20 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 207

Quintilian speaks of docilitas in 4. I. 34: Docilem one informed of the subject under discussion. Cicero
sine dubio et haec ipsa praestat attentio; sed et expresses the function by the three adverbs amice,
illud, si breviter et dilucide summam rei, de qua attente, inttellcgenter. I may have one without the
cognoscere debeat, iudicaverimus, quod Homerus other two. I may be a friend of an orator without
atque Vergilius operum suorum principiis faciunt. necessarily being interested in his subject or being
Nam is eius rei modus est, ut propositioni similior prepared to follow the discussion of it. I may be
sit quam expositioni; nec quomodo quidque sit actum interested in the subject and not be friendly dis-
sed de quibus dicturus sit ostendat. Nec video, posed to the speaker. Take the subject, Abraham
quod huius rei possit apud oratores reperiri melius Lincoln, to Georgia, and it might not interest, per-
exemplum quiam Ciceronis pro A. Cluentio. He haps not even if H. W. Grady spoke on it. Take
then cites the opening sentence of that speech. the subject to Illinois and let an orator enthusiastic-
The intellectual nature of docilitas in Latin rhet- ally admired speak on it, there will be good will and
oricians is proved (a) from the words used in interest; but let the orator take an obscure propo-
defining it; (b) from the causes which are proposed sition or involved division or a confused or myster-
to obtain it, which are e.g. proposition, definition, ious iaspect of the question and there will be no
docilitas.
division, causes that formally and directly produce
an- effect upon the mind; (c) from the kind of Yet these three functions, though distinct, can and
cases in which docilitas is to be the chief, if not the often do help one another. My interest in a sub-
only, function of the exordium. Cicero De Invent. ject and my understanding of it are conditioned by
I. I5 and Quintilian 4. I. 40 give five kinds of cases; my will to listen. My will to listen may depend upon
Cicero declares that docilitas should be the chief the way the subject is handled and presented to me.
function of the exordium in the genuts obscurumn The astronomers of to-day are most willing to know
in quo tardi auditores sunt aut difficilioribus ad cog- all about Mars and its canals and many are en-
aloscend in negotiis causa irnplicita est. Docilitas, grossed in its contemplation, but, since it is difficult
therefore, is to be produced where there are intel- to get the proper light and distance, they are still
lectual difficulties to be contended with, either on in doubt on the subject. They are benievoli and
the part of the audience or on the part of the sub- attenti. The man who will discover a better tele-
j ect. scope and bring the subject within the field of ac-
curate vision will make them dociles. This appli-
(3) More Recenit Rhetoricians.-Victorinus, in his
cation of the terms to the eyes may help to under-
commentary on Cicero's De Inventione, says of the
stand their application to the mind.
introduction of that work: Hic Cicero fecit dociles
If the mutual dependence and coninection of the
auditores, cum, quid sit eloquentia, ostendit; attentos,
three functions be remembered, it will not be hard
cum dicit se de eloquentia dicturum, re scilicet mag-
to explain why one function helps to produce the
na; benevolos quidem, quia ostendit futurum com-
effect of another function. Aristotle, as has been
modum (Capperonerius, Antiqui Rhetores Latini,
seen, says that attentio may be had under certain
I02). Deinde ostendit quo pacto dociles auditores
circumstances by the help of the other functions.
facere debeanius; si, inquit, in principiis ea quae sunt
Auctor ad Herenn. (I. 4. 7) says attentio helps to
nobis dicenda, ponamus ut nobis iudices ad cogno-
docilitas: docilis est qui attente vult audire. Cicero
scenidum negotiurn comparemus (ibid. p. I45).
(De Inv. I. i5) makes a similar statement. Quin-
Isidorus, De Arte Rhetorica, writes: Benevolum
tilian too (O. I. 34) says, DIocilem sine dubio et
precando, docilem instruendo, attentum excitando haec ipsa praestat attentio. These are all indica-
facimus (ibid. p. 388). Alcuin, be it noted, repeats tions of the close connection of these three func-
Quintilian (ibid. p. 397). Martianus Capella says: tions operating on the same hearer. All these state-
Docilem facimus si de causa aliquid strictum quo ments, however, are, like Aristotle's, incidental re-
in7strua77tus iudicem proferatur (ibid. p. 432). marks because, when these writers explain the func-
Modern rhetoricians in France as well as in tions, the terms they use, the examples they give, the
Italy follow Cicero and Quintilian almost without means they advise all go to show the distinction be-
exception, so far as we have been able to examine. tween the three tasks of the exordiumn and that
They often use Cicero's very words, as De Inventione docilitas denotes a purely intellectual preparation of
I. i6 Dociles auditores faciemus, si aperte et breviter the audience, a mental outlook on the topic of the
summam causae exponemus, hoc est, in quo consistat speech and on its proposed treatment, the furnishing
controversia. Here 'clearness, brevity, exposition of of a traveller's map or brief guide book to those
the point at issue' are all indications that a purely who are to journey with the orator. If, then, with
intellectual effect is aimed at. that the listeners are willing to go along (benevoli)
Relation of the three functions to one another: and are deeply interested in the country promised
With benevolentia a man listens willingly as to a them (attenti), the speaker may hope to be success-
friend; with attentio he listens attentively as one ful in reaching the destined goal, persuasion.
interested; with docilitas he listens intelligently as FRANCIS P. DONNELLY, S. J.
St. Andrew-on-Hudson, Poughkeepsie, N. Y.

This content downloaded from 180.191.193.65 on Fri, 06 Dec 2019 15:10:20 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms