THE RHETORIC OF ARISTOTLE COMMENTARY BY THE LATE EDWARD MEREDITH COPE, M.A. FORMERLY SENIOR FELLOW AND TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE REVISED AND EDITED FOR THE SYNDICS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS JOHN EDWIN SANDYS, M.A. FELLOW AND TUTOR OF ST JOHNS COLLEGE, AND PUBLIC ORATOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. VOLUME I. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. Eontion: CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, 17, PATERNOSTER Row. Cambrfogc: DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. 1877 P/-1 v. i ^ CONTENTS OF VOLUME I. PAGES EDITORS PREPACK vii xi EDWARD MEREDITH COPE, A biographicalnotice by the Rev. H.A. J. Munro . xiii xx TEXT AND COMMENTARY, BOOK I i 291 APPENDIX (A) ON A 11 17, ...... crropyij, tpatf, (j)t\fiv, aymrav 292 296 APPENDIX (B) ON A 12 22, fydovelaOai. On an irregularformation ofthe Greek passive verb . 297 300 APPENDIX ox A (C) [5 23. On (I ov... 301 33 EDITOR S PREFACE. IT is just ten years since the lamented Author of this Com mentary gave to the world of scholars an Introduction to AristotlesRhetoric, containing,amongst other-valuable matter, a general outline of the contents of the treatise and para phrases of the more difficult portions. In the preface to that book, which is an almost indispensable companion to the present edition and renders any special prolegomena to these volumes unnecessary, the Author describes the Introduction as preparatory to the detailed explanation of the work itself in an edition of the Greek text which had been long in preparation and was to appear as soon as it could be got ready. This promise is now at last fulfilled, under circum stances however in which the pathetic interest naturally at tending the publication of any posthumous work like the present, is in this particular instance, if I may judge of the feelings of others by my own, intensified into a sense of more than usually deep regret that the labours of a large portion of an eminent scholars life-time must now see the light without the advantage of his own editorial care. Mr Cope died in the year 1873, but during the last four years ofhis life his workon the Rhetoric, though it had nearly approached completion, unhappily but unavoidably remained untouched. He was actively engaged upon it during the two years that succeeded the publication of the Introduction in 1867 a year that was also marked by the appearance of ; a long-expected edition of the Rhetoric by Spengcl, which, AR. I. / EDITOR S PREFACE. viii by the critical acumen and maturity of judgment generally displayed in its pages, and in particular by its wealth of illustration from the remains of Greek Oratory and the technical treatises of the later Greek rhetoricians, proved the most important aid to the study of the subject that had been published since the time of Victorius. With Spengels earlier contributions to the criticism of his author, as also with those of Brandis and Bonitz and Vahlen and other eminent Aristotelian scholars on the continent, Mr Cope was ofcourse familiar, as the pages of these volumes abundantly testify; but while preparing his own Commentaiy, he ap pears during the last two years of his active work to have only occasionally consulted and quoted Spengels edition, refraining purposely from incurring any such indebtedness as would prevent his own edition remaining a perfectly in dependent work. In June, 1874, the year after Mr Copes death,his brothers took into consideration the desirability ofpublishing his Com mentary; and, acting under the advice of two distinguished members ofhis own College, Mr Munro and Mr Jebb, did me the honour to invite me to undertake its completion and re vision. The manuscript, so far as it was finished, consisted of nearly seven hundred closely written pages requiring a cer tain amount of general revision before they could be sent to press; and, owing to other engagements, I found it impracti cable to arrange for the printing of the work to commence till June, 1875. During the progress of the work through the press in the last two years, my duties as reviser have proved more laborious than I had anticipated as even apart from ; the necessity of reading several times over at various stages of progress not far from a thousand pages of printed matter, I have found it requisite to consult the readers convenience by rearranging many of the paragraphs, by re casting many of the more complicated sentences, and by endeavouring to prevent the sense from being obscured by the partiality for parenthesis, which, in this case, happens to be characteristic of the commentator and his author alike. In a work of this compass, accidental repetitions of nearly identical notes in various parts ofthe Commentary are almost unavoidable, and though I have succeeded in detecting and EDITORS PREFACE. ix striking out some of these repetitions, others still remain unremoved. It will probably occur to some of those who use this book that, in the way of retrenchment of matter and condensation of style, something might without disadvantage have been done by the original writer; but such correction, I may re mark, was the very thing from which he consciously shrank ; and as a mere reviser I felt that I had no right to assume the responsibility of abridging, still less of rejecting, what the writer himselfclearly intended to leave standing. In the case of verbal alterations, however, which I was morally cer tain would not have been disapproved by the original writer, I have used such slight discretion as appeared to fall within my province; this kind of revision cannot of course generally appear on the surface, but wherever it is practicable any additional matter for which I am alone responsible is indi cated by the use of square brackets with or (as the work proceeded) without my initial. Such insertions are generally very brief, and often take the form of simple reference to important works that have appeared since the Commentary was prepared as it seemed only due to the readers of this ; edition and to the writers of the works in question, that I should endeavour to bring it up to date by referring as occasion served to books such as Dr Thompsons edition of the Gorgias of Plato (1871); Cretes Aristotle (1872); Volk- mann, die RJietorik der Griechen nnd Romer, ed. 2, 1874; Blass, die AttiscJie Beredsamkeit, 1868, 74; and Professor Jebbs Attic Orators, 1876. In testing the references to other parts of Aristotle, I have made frequent use of the great Index Aristotelicus of Bonitz, which appeared in 1870, and was therefore not available when Mr Copes notes were written; a fact that only increases ones admiration at the wideand minute acquaintancewith all the Aristotelianwritings which he had acquired by his own independent reading. In any trifling additions of my own, I have seldom gone beyond the briefest annotations, but in the case of the third book, which was left in a less finished state, and on which I had happened to have lectured on several occasions during the last ten years, I felt myselfsomewhat less restricted; and indeed, as Mr Copes manuscript unfortunately comes to an b 2 x EDITOR S PREFACE. abrupt conclusion in the course of Chapter xvn of that book, I was compelled, for the convenience of those who use this edition and in accordance with the wishes of Mr Copes representatives and the Syndics of the University Press, to endeavour to supply the deficiency in the three concluding Chapters by writing the notes that occupy the last twenty pages ofthe Commentary. In so doing, I have tried to follow the general plan of Mr Copes own work, and in particular have paid attention to such slight indications of his intended treatment of that por tion as I could glean from the memoranda in the margin of his own copy of Bekkers Oxford text of 1837. This volume and an interleaved copy of earlier date, and ofsomewhat less value for this purpose, were kindly placed at my disposal by the authorities of Trinity College, and, as they contain part of the first rough material for theCommentary, they have proved ofsome use in verifying doubtful references and also in ascer taining Mr Copes intentions with regard to the text on points ofdetail such as punctuation and various readings. But, hold ing as he did that an editors main duty was explanation in its widest sense and accordingly devoting himself mainly to questions of exegesis, to elucidation of subject matter, to illustration of verbal expression, and to matters ofgrammatical and lexicographical interest, he was content on the whole to accept the text as he found it in the earlier editions with which he was familiar. Under these circumstances, in the absence of any intention on his part to make an independent recension of the text, I have thought it best to adopt as the text of the present Commentary the last reprint (1873) of Bekkers third edition (octavo, 1859); and instead of impair ing the integrity of that text by altering it here and there to suit what I gathered to be Mr Copes intentions, I have briefly indicated the instances in which the evidence of his translation or notes, or again the memoranda in his own copy of the Rhetoric already mentioned, pointed clearly to some other reading as the one which he deliberately pre ferred to that of Bekkers third edition, or in which he was at any rate content to acquiesce. In the margin, beside the references to Book, Chapter and Section at the top of each page, is marked the beginning of each page of Bekkers last EDITOR S PREFACE. xi octavo edition, and also of that published in quarto in 1831: the former will, it is trusted, make this work easy to refer to side by side with the plain text in ordinary use; the latter, though it involves a cumbersome method of notation, is worth recording, as it is the mode of reference adopted in the Index Aristotelicus, in Spengels edition, and often else where. In an Appendix to the third volume, I have added Mr Shilletos Adversaria on the Rhetoric, which I have tran scribed almost exclusively from one of his two copies of the book, lately acquired (with a selection of his other books) by the Syndicate of the University Library. I have also con structed what I hope may be found to be a fairly comprehen sive Greek index to the text and notes and to this I have ; subjoined a supplementary index to the notes and subject matter, including amongst other miscellaneous items, almost all the passages in the rhetorical writings of Cicero and Ouintilian referred to in the Commentary the passages of ; Homer and other authors quoted in the text, and the illus trations from Shakespeare in the notes, and also (under the head of lexicographical notes ) a series of references to Mr Copes incidental contributions to Greek lexicography. In the transcription of both these indexes for the press, I have had much assistance from my brother, James Stuart Sandys, one ofthe undergraduates of St Johns College. I cannot close these few prefatory explanations of what I have attempted to do in discharging however imperfectly the editorial duty with which it has been my privilege to be entrusted, without recording the fact that Mr Cope (as I am assured by his surviving brother) fully intended, had he lived to see his work through the press, to dedicate it to one of his most intimate friends, Mr Munro. The latter, however, has kindly supplied a short biographical notice by which I am glad to feel that he will be as inseparably associated with the crowning work of his friends career as if it had appeared inscribed by that friend himself with the honoured name of the Editor of Lucretius. E. S. J. CA:Ml!RIDGE, 2 July, 1877. CORRIGENDA. (/;/ the notes.) VOL. I. p. 40, line 14, for tliisapeTT;, this special excellence , and on p 49, last line, re.id the ycr this in all three cases, p. 56, line 10, readfirai>6pdu/j.a. p. 76, line 29, rtVtt/ffvtfjLrjfj.^vui. p. 93, line i, _/0;- in read is. p. 105, line 28, mft/d7XI/0a p. 153, line 30, rneaWddXfya/ix as. p. 161, line 23, fortitude. p. 173, line 3i./)/- be ;vWthe. p. 190, belowtext,readpq.0vp.a. p. 239, line 32, insert (3) before 5ia \bywv. VOL. II. p. 56, note i, 1. 3, nvfi/ Gorg. 522 D. VOL. III. p. 12. line 21, rej<f n 4. 9. p. 30. line i.yO;- by ;w</ at. p. 62, line 19, raft/ writings.