XV. THERAMENES
1. Sud. s. v.: 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼 峒埼肝肺轿贬繓慰蟼, 峥ノ勏壪, 渭伪胃畏蟿峤聪 螤蟻慰未委魏慰蠀 蟿慰峥 螝蔚委慰蠀, 峤兿 峒愊蔚魏伪位蔚峥栂勎 螝蠈胃慰蟻谓慰蟼路 M蔚位苇蟿伪蟼 峥ノ废勎肯佄刮横桨蟼 魏伪峤 峒勎晃晃 蟿喂谓维. 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼 螝蔚峥栁肯, 蟽慰蠁喂蟽蟿萎蟼. M蔚位蔚蟿峥段 尾喂尾位委伪 纬鈥, 蟺蔚蟻峤 峤佄嘉课瓜幭兾迪壪 位蠈纬慰蠀, 蟺蔚蟻峤 蔚峒拔合屛较壩 峒は勎课 蟺伪蟻伪尾慰位峥段, 蟺蔚蟻委 蟽蠂畏渭维蟿蠅谓.
Verba lacera, cum saltem 峒斘诚佄毕埼滴 ante M蔚位蔚蟿峥段 desideretur, ex scholiis Aristophaneis hausta videntur. Certe, quae apud Sudam secuntur, ex Aristophanis scholiis sumpta (cf. schol. ad Ran. 541. 970), quoniam ad rem non pertinent, hic omisi. 峤佄嘉课壪兾刮 位蠈纬慰蠀 similiter intellegi posse atque 蟺伪蟻慰渭慰委蠅蟽喂谓, ut certa quaedam perihodi conformatio sit, docere studet 螡. Suess, Rh. M. 66, 184, nihil omnino scripsisse Theramenem satis confidenter W. Schwahn profitetur, RE. V A 2, 2316 sq. V. etiam Stegemann ibid. 2320. Mihi quidem Sudae auctor, alioquin unum ex duobus facere solitus, hic ex uno duos fecisse videtur, ab Aristophanis scholiastis deceptus.
2. Cic. de orat. 2, 22, 93: antiquissimi fere sunt, quorum quidem scripta constent, Pericles atque Alcibiades et eadem aetate Thucydides, subtiles, acuti, breves, sententiis magis quam verbis abundantes. non potuisset accidere, ut unum esset omnium genus, nisi aliquem sibi proponerent ad imitandum. consecuti sunt hos Critias, Theramenes, Lysias. multa Lysiae scripta sunt, nonnulla Critiae, de Theramene audimus.
Patet e Cicerone Theramenem inter scriptores numerari vel, ut ipse ait, inter eos 鈥榪uorum quidem scripta constent鈥, sed nihil scriptum viderat, quod quidem etiam de aliis V. saeculi scriptoribus adfirmare poterat, poterat dicere 鈥榙e Pericle audimus始.
3. [Plut.] Vit. X 慰r. 836 F.: (Isocrates) 峒魏蟻慰蠋渭蔚谓慰蟼 螤蟻慰未委魏慰蠀 蟿蔚 蟿慰峥 螝蔚委慰蠀 魏伪峤 螕慰蟻纬委慰蠀 蟿慰峥 螞蔚慰谓蟿委谓慰蠀 魏伪峤 韦喂蟽委慰蠀 蟿慰峥 危蠀蟻伪魏慰蠀蟽委慰蠀 魏伪峤 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓慰蠀蟼 蟿慰峥 峥ノ勎肯佄肯. 慰峤 魏伪峤 蟽蠀位位伪渭尾伪谓慰渭苇谓慰蠀 峤懴峤 蟿峥段 蟿蟻喂维魏慰谓蟿伪 魏伪峤 蠁蠀纬蠈谓蟿慰蟼 峒愊峤 蟿峤次 尾慰蠀位伪委伪谓 峒懴兿勎蔽, 峒佅维谓蟿蠅谓 魏伪蟿伪蟺蔚蟺位畏纬渭苇谓蠅谓, 渭蠈谓慰蟼 峒谓苇蟽蟿畏 尾慰畏胃萎蟽蠅谓 魏伪峤 蟺慰位峤何 蠂蟻蠈谓慰谓 峒愊兾澄废兾 魏伪蟿始 峒蟻蠂维蟼. 峒斚蔚喂蟿伪 峤懴始 伪峤愊勎酷喀 蟺伪蟻峥兿勎肝 蔚峒跋蠈谓蟿慰蟼 峤未蠀谓畏蟻蠈蟿蔚蟻慰谓 伪峤愊勧糠 蟽蠀渭尾萎蟽蔚蟽胃伪喂, 蔚峒 蟿喂蟼 蟿峥段 蠁委位蠅谓 峒蟺慰位伪蠉蟽蔚喂 蟿峥喯 蟽蠀渭蠁慰蟻峋断. 魏伪峤 峒愇何滴轿肯 蟿喂谓峤跋 慰峤斚兾毕 蟿苇蠂谓伪蟼 伪峤愊勧糠 蠁伪蟽喂 蟽蠀渭蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿蔚蠉蟽伪蟽胃伪喂, 峒∥轿何 峒愇 蟿慰峥栂 未喂魏伪蟽蟿畏蟻委慰喂蟼 峒愊兿呂簅蠁伪谓蟿蔚峥栂勎, 伪峒 蔚峒跋兾刮 峒愊喂纬蔚纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓伪喂 螔蠈蟿蠅谓慰蟼.
10 螔维蟿蠅谓慰蟼 Salmasius.
Itaque ut sycophantas evitaret, Theramenes artes falso sub nomine ediderat. Botonis Atheniensis 围enophanes philosophus fuerat discipulus (Diog. Laert. IX 18). Ex eodem fonte Dionysius Hal. de Isocr. p. 54, 8 sq. U. R.
4. Schol. Aristoph. ran. 541: 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼 未喂未维蟽魏伪位慰蟼 峒赶兾课合佄勎肯呄傗 蟿慰峥ο勎课 未喂峤 蟿峤次 蟺慰喂魏喂位委伪谓 蟿慰峥 峒の肝肯呄 螝蠈胃慰蟻谓慰谓 峒愇何晃肯呂, 峒愊蔚喂未峤 峒懳何毕勎佱境 蟽蟿维蟽蔚喂 蟿峥 蟿峥段 蟺慰位喂蟿蔚蠀慰渭苇谓蠅谓 峒懳毕呄勧礁谓 蟺伪蟻蔚蟿委胃蔚喂, 魏伪胃慰渭喂位峥段 蟿慰峥栂 魏伪喂蟻慰峥栂 魏伪峤 蟿峤 蟽蠀渭蠁苇蟻慰谓 峒懳毕呄勎酷喀 蟿慰峥 蟺喂蟽蟿慰峥 蟺蟻慰蟿维蟽蟽蠅谓, 峒愊蔚喂未峤 魏伪峤 峤 魏蠈胃慰蟻谓慰蟼 峒谓未蟻维蟽喂 魏伪峤 纬蠀谓伪喂尉峤 蟺蟻峤赶 蟿峤跋 峤懴慰未苇蟽蔚喂蟼 峒蟻渭蠈蟿蟿蔚喂.
Cf. Sud. s. v. 螖蔚尉喂蠈蟼, al.
5. Schol. Aristoph. nub. 361 (Prodicus): 未喂未峒蟽魏伪位慰蟼 未峤 峒ξ 慰峤椣勎肯 魏伪峤 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓慰蠀蟼 蟿慰峥 峒愊喂魏伪位慰蠀渭苇谓慰蠀 螝慰胃蠈蟻谓慰蠀.
6. Aristoph. ran. 964 (Euripides): 纬谓蠋蟽蔚喂 未峤 蟿慰峤合 蟿慰蠉蟿慰蠀 蟿蔚 魏峒渭慰峤合 峒懳何毕勎佄肯 渭伪胃畏蟿峤跋... (967) 慰峤懳坚礁蟼 未峤 螝位蔚喂蟿慰蠁峥段 蟿蔚 魏伪峤 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼 峤 魏慰渭蠄蠈蟼. 鈥 (Dionysus) 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼; 蟽慰蠁蠈蟼 纬始 峒谓峤聪 魏伪峤 未蔚喂谓峤赶 蔚峒跋 蟿峤 蟺维谓蟿伪, 峤兿 峒⑽ 魏伪魏慰峥栂 蟺慰蠀 蟺蔚蟻喂蟺苇蟽峥 魏伪峤 蟺位畏蟽委慰谓 5 蟺伪蟻伪蟽蟿峥, 蟺苇蟺蟿蠅魏蔚谓 峒斘鞠 蟿峥段 魏伪魏峥段, 慰峤 围峥栁肯, 峒位位峤 蠂蔚峥栁肯. 鈥 (Eurip.) 蟿慰喂伪峥ο勎 渭苇谓蟿慰喂 峒愇翅郊 蠁蟻慰谓蔚峥栁 蟿慰蠉蟿慰喂蟽喂谓 蔚峒跋兾肺澄废兾嘉肺, 位慰纬喂蟽渭峤肝 峒愇轿肝滇蕉蟼 蟿峥 蟿苇蠂谓峥 魏伪峤 蟽魏苇蠄喂谓, 峤ハ兿勈 峒の次 谓慰蔚峥栁 峒呄伪谓蟿伪 魏伪峤 未喂蔚喂未苇谓伪喂 蟿维 蟿始 峒勎晃晃 魏伪峤 蟿峤跋 慰峒拔何毕 慰峒拔何滇繓谓 峒勎嘉滴刮轿课 峒 蟺蟻峤 蟿慰峥 魏峒谓伪蟽魏慰蟺蔚峥栁铰 蟺峥断 蟿慰峥ο勈 峒斚囄滴; 蟺慰峥 渭慰喂 蟿慰未委; 蟿委蟼 蟿慰峥ο勈 峒斘晃蔽参;
5 螝蔚委慰蟼 libri.
Ultima perstringunt rhetorum quae vocantur 蟺蔚蟻喂蟽蟿伪蟿喂魏峤 魏蔚蠁维位伪喂伪 (cf. Prol. Syll. p. 51 and.), velut 蟺蠈蟿蔚, 蟺慰峥, 蟺峥断 est in Gorgiae Palam. 22, haud aliter atque 峤 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼, 峤 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰蟼, 峤 蟿蠈蟺慰蟼 apud Hippocratem 魏伪蟿始 峒拔废勏佄滇繓慰谓 2 p. 30, 10 螝w., sed cum Theramenis, quem nominat Aristophanes, arte congruit Scholion Soph. El. in. 未蔚未萎位蠅魏蔚谓 峤 蟺慰喂畏蟿峤聪 蟿峤肝 蟿蠈蟺慰谓 蟿峥喯 蟽魏畏谓峥喯 (scil. 蟺慰峥), 蟿峤肝 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰谓鈥 (蟺峥断), 蟿峤肝 魏伪喂蟻蠈谓鈥 (蟺蠈蟿蔚), 蟿峤肝 蟽蠀谓蠈谓蟿伪鈥 (蟿委蟼). Inde Quintilianus (inst. 3, 5, 5) quaestiones infinitas nominat, 鈥榪uae remotis personis et temporibus et locis ceterisque similibus in utramque partem tractantur始, significantius idem 9, 3, 102: sciendum vero imprimis, quid quisque in orando postulet locus, quid persona, quid tempus (i. e. 蟿峤 蟺慰峥, 蟺蠈蟿蔚, 蟿委蟼). Unde Diogenes Laertius de Aristippo (2, 8, 66): 峒ξ 未峤 峒蔽何蔽结礁蟼 峒佅佄枷屜兾毕兾肝蔽 魏伪峤 蟿蠈蟺峥 魏伪峤 蠂蟻蠈谓峥 魏伪峤 蟺蟻慰蟽蠋蟺峥. Alia eius generis in commentario ad Aristophanis Ran. p. 284 congessimus. V. etiam supra ad Gorgiae fr. 24. Gravissimum fortasse ad Aristophanem ipsum interpretandum est, quod Hermogenes dicit 蟺. 蟽蟿. p. 145, 15 Sp. 蟿峤 峒蟺始 峒蟻蠂峥喯 峒勏囅佄 蟿苇位慰蠀蟼鈥 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂鈥 魏伪峤 伪峤愇疚轿迪勎蔽, 峒蠁始 峤较蔚蟻 魏伪峤 峒 蟿峥段 峒愇晃诚囅壩 峒蟺伪委蟿畏蟽喂蟼, 峒斚兿勎 未峤 蟿维未蔚路 蟿委蟼, 蟿委, 蟺慰峥, 蟺峥断, 蟺蠈蟿蔚, 未喂峤 蟿委; Non potest esse dubium, quin Hermogenes, cum talium 蟺蔚蟻喂蟽蟿维蟽蔚蠅谓 doctrinam condidit, vias ingressus sit dudum munitas.
7. Prol. artis rhet. W VI, p. 20, 20 = Prol. Syll. p. 34. 7 R.: 峤呄兿勎瓜 纬峤跋 慰峒段次 渭蠈谓慰谓 蟿峤 蟽蠀渭尾慰蠀位蔚蠀蟿喂魏蠈谓, 渭峤 渭苇谓蟿慰喂 蟿峤 未喂魏伪谓喂魏峤肝 峒 蟿峤 蟺伪谓畏纬蠀蟻喂魏蠈谓, 慰峤椣勎肯 峥ノ勏壪 峤∠ 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓畏蟼 峤 螝蠈胃慰蟻谓慰蟼螄 蟽蠀渭尾慰蠀位蔚蠉蔚喂谓 纬峤跋 渭蠈谓慰谓 蔚峒拔瘁郊蟼 峤呂枷壪 峥ノ勏壪 峒愇轿课嘉段迪勎, 峤 未峤 螙萎谓蠅谓 未喂魏维味蔚蟽胃伪喂 渭蠈谓慰谓 蔚峒拔瘁郊蟼 峥ノ勏壪 峒の何肯呂, 螕慰蟻纬委伪蟼 蟿蔚 蟺伪谓畏纬蠀蟻委味蠅谓 渭蠈谓慰谓 峥ノ勏壪 峒の何肯呄兾 魏伪峤 伪峤愊勏屜.
Sic etiam P. S. p. 327, 24 sq. R., cf. ibid. p. 129, 28 sq.
8. Aristoph. ran. 534sq.:
蟿伪峥ο勎 渭峤参 蟺蟻峤赶 峒谓未蟻蠈蟼 峒愊兿勎
谓慰峥ξ 峒斚囄课较勎肯 魏伪峤 蠁蟻苇谓伪蟼 魏伪峤
蟺慰位位峤 蟺蔚蟻喂蟺蔚蟺位蔚蠀魏蠈蟿慰蟼,
渭蔚蟿伪魏蠀位喂谓未蔚峥栁 伪峤懴勧礁谓 峒蔚峤
蟺蟻峤赶 蟿峤肝 蔚峤 蟺蟻维蟿蟿慰谓蟿伪 蟿慰峥栂囄课
渭峋段晃晃课 峒 纬蔚纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓畏谓
蔚峒拔合屛绞 峒懴兿勎轿蔽 位伪尾蠈谓胃始 峒撐
蟽蠂峥單嘉甭 蟿峤 未峤 渭蔚蟿伪蟽蟿蟻苇蠁蔚蟽胃伪喂
蟺蟻峤赶 蟿峤 渭伪位胃伪魏蠋蟿蔚蟻慰谓
未蔚尉喂慰峥 蟺蟻峤赶 峒谓未蟻蠈蟼 峒愊兿勎
魏伪峤 蠁蠉蟽蔚喂 螛畏蟻伪渭苇谓慰蠀蟼.
Cum Theramenes 蟺蔚蟻峤 蔚峒拔合屛较壩 et 蟺蔚蟻峤 蟽蠂畏渭维蟿蠅谓 scripsisse dicatur, Aristophaneis verbis non solum politicum sed etiam rhetorem perstringi W. Suess coniecit (Rh. M. 66, 183 sq.), provocans ad Alcidamantis 蟺蔚蟻峤 蟽慰蠁. 27 sq.: 峤ハ兿蔚蟻 纬峤跋 蟿伪峥ο勎 (i. e. 蠂伪位魏慰峥 峒谓未蟻喂维谓蟿蔚蟼 魏伪峤 位委胃喂谓伪 峒纬维位渭伪蟿伪 魏伪峤 纬蔚纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓伪 味峥肺) 渭喂渭萎渭伪蟿伪 蟿峥段 峒位畏胃喂谓峥段 蟽蠅渭维蟿蠅谓 峒愊兿勎, ... 蟿峤肝 伪峤愊勧礁谓 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰谓 峤 纬蔚纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓慰蟼 位蠈纬慰蟼 (qualis Isocratis fuit), 峒懳结蕉 蟽蠂萎渭伪蟿喂 魏伪峤 蟿维尉蔚喂 魏蔚蠂蟻畏渭苇谓慰蟼... 峒愊峤 未峤 蟿峥段 魏伪喂蟻峥段 峒魏委谓畏蟿慰蟼 峤⑽... Scilicet 峒撐 蟽蠂峥單嘉 non est genus Theramenis. Statuarum quidem 蟿峤 峒魏委谓畏蟿慰谓 et adulescentis pulchri corpore expressos animi motus opponit Erotici Pseudodemosthenici auctor (16). Ceterum adi Antisthenem, cur Ulixes 蟺慰位蠉蟿蟻慰蟺慰蟼 sit dictus, explanantem B XIX 10. Omnino autem ea, qua Aristophanes utitur, comparatio tum temporis satis trita fuisse videtur (Plat. Phaedr. 275 D, Isocratis 13, 12).
|
XV. THERAMENES
1. Suda s.v.: Theramenes of Athens, a rhetorician, pupil of Prodicus of Keos, who was nicknamed Kothornos [鈥渉igh boot鈥 or 鈥渢ragic shoe鈥漖. He wrote Rhetorical Exercises and some more works. Theramenes of Keos, a sophist, wrote Exercises (in three books), On the Similarity of Speech, On Images or Comparisons and On Figures.
The text is fragmentary; one misses at least 鈥榟e wrote鈥 before 鈥Exercises (in three books)鈥. It seems to have been put together from the Scholia on Aristophanes. I have left out what follows in Suda, which is certainly taken from those Scholia (cf. Schol. Frogs 541, 970) since they have nothing to do with the subject matter at hand. The 鈥榮imilarity of speech鈥 can be understood in a similar way as paromoiosis, namely as a certain shaping of a period, according to 螡. Suess, Rh. M. 66, 184; that Theramenes did not write anything at all is argued with a great deal of confidence by W. Schwahn, RE. V A 2, 2316 f. See also Stegemann ibid. 2320. To me at least it seems that the author of Suda, who otherwise usually conflates two persons into one, at this point makes two different Theramenes out of a single one, having been led astray by the scholiasts on Aristophanes.
2. Cicero, On the Orator 2.22.93: Pericles and Alcibiades and his contemporary Thucydides are the oldest authors to have left writings behind. These authors are subtle, acute, short, rich in thoughts rather than words. There is no way they could all have written in the same genre had they not chosen somebody to imitate. These ones were followed by Critias, Theramenes, and Lysias. We have many writings by Lysias, some by Critias, and we have heard about those by Theramenes.
From Cicero it is evident that Theramenes is listed among writers or, as Cicero himself puts it, among those 鈥榖y whom writings are known鈥; yet he had not seen any such writing. But he could say the same thing about any other author from the 5th century: he could say 鈥榳e have heard this about Pericles鈥︹
3. Pseudo-Plutarch, Lives of the Ten Orators 836 F.: (Isocrates) learned from Prodicus of Keos, Gorgias of Leontini, Tisias of Syracuse and the rhetor Theramenes. When the Thirty tried to arrest Theramenes and he fled to the hearth of the Boule, and everybody else was scared, Isocrates was the only one to stand up in his defense and at first kept silent for a while. Finally, he was persuaded to stop by Theramenes, who pointed out that the affair would turn out much more painful for him if one of his friends were to suffer because of his misfortune. Theramenes is the author of some treatises and Isocrates is claimed to have co-authored them when he was being frivolously dragged to court; they are published under the name of Boton.
So, to avoid sycophants, Theramenes published his treatises under a false name. The philosopher Xenophanes was a student of Boton of Athens (Diog. Laert. IX 18). From the same source Dionysius Hal. On Isocrates p. 54, 8 f. U. R.
4. Scholion on Aristophanes鈥 Frogs: Theramenes, teacher of Isocrates, [鈥 was called 鈥淜othornos鈥[1] because of the shrewdness of his character after he joined both of the parties in a fight among citizens, going with the flow and putting his own interest above faithfulness. For the tragic boot is a fit wear for both men and women.
Cf. Sud. s. v. 螖蔚尉喂蠈蟼 and elsewhere.
5. Scholion on Aristophanes鈥 Clouds: [Prodicus] was also teacher of Theramenes, who was nicknamed 鈥淜othornos鈥.
6. Aristophanes, Frogs 964: (Euripides:) You'll recognize the disciples of both this fellow and myself [鈥 (967) but mine are Cleitophon and Theramenes the dandy. 鈥 (Dionysus:) Theramenes? A clever fellow, an all-round wonder; if he runs into trouble and happens to be close by he鈥檚 thrown clear of the trouble, no Chian but a Kian. 鈥 (Euripides:) Well, to ponder such things, I instructed these folks here, putting logic in my art and scrutiny, so now they notice everything and know through and through most especially how to run the household better than before, and they inquire, 鈥淗ow鈥檚 this doing? Where's this? Who took that?鈥
The last words satirize what is called 鈥榗ircumstantial headings鈥 (cf. Prol. Syll. p. 51 n.), such as 鈥榳hen, where, how鈥 in Gorgias鈥 Palamedes 22, not unlike 鈥榯he time, the manner, the place鈥 in Hippocrates鈥 On the Surgery 2 p. 30, 10 螝w. However, the Scholium on Sophocles Electra, introduction is consistent with the treatise by the Theramenes whom Aristophanes names: 鈥楾he poet has made clear the location of the scene [that is, the 鈥榳here鈥橾, the manner鈥 [鈥榟ow鈥橾, the time鈥 [鈥榳hen鈥橾, the participant鈥 [鈥榳ho鈥橾.鈥 Hence Quintilian 3.5.5 gives an endless list of questions 鈥榳hich, once one removes the characters, the times, the places and the like, are dealt with in both directions.鈥 More significantly in 9.3.102: 鈥極ne must know, to begin with, what in a speech is demanded by the place, what by the character, what by the time [that is, 鈥榳here鈥, 鈥榳hen鈥, 鈥榳ho鈥橾.鈥 Hence Diogenes Laertius On Aristippus (2.8.66): 鈥楬e was good enough to accommodate his speech to the place, the time and the character.鈥 Other sources to the same effect I have gathered in the commentary on Aristophanes Frogs p. 284. See also above on Gorgias fr. 24. Perhaps the most important explanation we can give to Aristophanes himself is what Hermogenes writes in On legal questions p. 145, 15 Sp.: 鈥榃hat comes from the beginning to the end is born and grows out of the same things as does the asking of the inquisitory questions, that is, who, what, where, how, when, why?鈥 There can be no doubt that Hermogenes, when he created this doctrine of circumstances, was treading on ground already prepared by others.
7. Prologue on The Art of Rhetoric: anyone who has mastered only the deliberative style but not the forensic and the declamatory ones is a rhetorician like Theramenes the Kothornos: he was only capable to give advice and yet he was considered a rhetorician; Zenon, who knew only how to litigate, was said to be a rhetorician, and so was Gorgias himself, who could only do declamatory speeches.
So also P. S. p. 327, 24 f. R.; cf. ibid. p. 129, 28 f.
8. Aristophanes, Frogs 534ff.: This is the mark of a man who鈥檚 got wit and brains and has sailed around the block a few times: to roll himself over to the prospering side rather than stand like a graven image, taking a single position. But to change for the softer is the mark of a clever man, a true Theramenes.
As Theramenes is said to have written On pictures and On Figures, W. Suess (RhM 66, 183 f.) hypothesizes that Aristophanes鈥 words satirize not only a politician but a rhetorician, and he points to Alcidamas On Wisdom 27 f.: 鈥楯ust as golden statues, wooden figurines and pictures of animals are imitations of the actual bodies [鈥 in the same way, a written speech [such as that by Isocrates], stuck in one appearance and one position鈥 and unchangeable in different situations鈥鈥 This means that 鈥榦ne appearance鈥 is not the genre of Theramenes. The author of the pseudo-Demosthenic Erotic treatise (16) contrasts the 鈥榮tillness鈥 of statues with the emotions expressed by the body of a beautiful youth. See also Antisthenes鈥 explanation of why Odysseus is called 鈥榤an of twists and turns鈥 (B XIX 10). And generally, the comparison Aristophanes uses seems to have been fairly commonplace at that time (Plat. Phaedr. 275 D, Isocrates 13.12).
|