Rhetoric

The epilogue is composed of four elements: first, making the hearer well-disposed toward oneself and ill-disposed toward the opponent; second, amplification and depreciation; third, putting the hearer into an emotional state; and fourth, refreshing their memory. For it is natural, after proving oneself to be truthful and the opponent to be false, to praise and blame and add the finishing touches in this way. One should aim at one of two things: either that one is good to these people or absolutely so, and that the opponent is bad to these people or absolutely so. The topics from which one must establish these have been stated, namely, whence one should present people as good and bad.

​The next step, once these things have already been demonstrated, is naturally to amplify or to depreciate; for the facts must be admitted if one is going to state the magnitude, just as the growth of bodies is from pre-existing things. The topics from which one must amplify and depreciate have been set out previously.

​After these, when it is clear both what kind of things they are and how great they are, one should lead the hearer into the emotions. These are pity, indignation, anger, hatred, jealousy, envy, and emulation. The topics of these also have been stated previously, ​so that what remains is to refresh the memory concerning what was said before. And it is fitting to do this not in the way they say one should do in the introduction, speaking incorrectly. For in order that the hearer may be quick to learn, they command to speak repeatedly. There, indeed, one must state the subject matter, so that the issue on which judgment is to be passed may not be unnoticed, but here one must state the means through which proof has been given, summarily.

​And the beginning is that one has performed what was promised, so that both what was said and why must be stated. And it is spoken from a comparison with the opponent. One should compare what both said about the same thing, either directly (“But he said these things about this, and I said those, and for these reasons”), or with irony (such as “For he said these things, and I said those,” and “What would he do, if he had proved these things, and not those?”), or from a question (“What then has been proved?” or “What has he proved?”). Either, then, in this way from comparison, or in the natural order in which it was spoken, stating one’s own points, and again, if you wish, separately those of the opponent’s speech.

​And the asyndetic style is fitting for the end of the delivery, so that it may be an epilogue and not a speech: “I have spoken, you have heard, you have the matter, judge.”