[18] For the varying relations of the “second sophistic” to rhetoric on the one hand and to philosophy on the other see the introduction to H. von Arnim’s _Leben und Werke des Dio von Prusa, mit einer Einleitung, Sophistik, Rhetorik, Philosophie in ihrem Kampf um die Jugendbildung_, Berlin, 1898; and, for later periods, A. Boulanger, _Ælius Aristide et la sophistique ... au IIe siècle_, Paris, 1923; W. C. Wright, _Philostratus and Eunapius, the Lives of the Sophists_, London and New York (Loeb Library), 1922, introduction; L. Méridier, _L’influence de la seconde sophistique sur l’œuvre de Grégoire de Nysse_, Paris, 1906, chapter i. Philostratus, _Vit. Soph._ ii (Wright, p. 34), says that Hippias of Elis discoursed (διελέγετο) on painting and sculpture. [19] See page 221. [20] See Chapter V. B. [21] The definitive discussion of Dio is that of H. von Arnim cited above in foot-note 18. The latest complete edition is that of J. de Arnim, Berlin, 1893. A translation by W. E. Waters is announced for the Loeb Classical Library. Meantime Professor Waters’s translation of Oratio XII (discussed below) is printed in Volume XIV (1919-1922) of the _Colonnade_, published by the Andiron Club of New York University, 1922, pages 183-201. The translation below of Oratio LII is my own. [22] H. von Arnim (op. cit. 171) finds manuscript evidence of several such adjustable preludes. Compare those preserved in the _Florida_ of Apuleius, e.g. page 227, above. [23] See the following sections. [24] For the significance of the well-known passage in the _Laokoön_, and of the psychological formulation of Lemaître, see my _College Composition_, page 183. For further discussion of this oration, see Ehemann, _Die XII Rede von Dio Chrysostom_, Kaiserslautern, 1895. See also W. A. Montgomery, _Dio Chrysostom as a Homeric Critic_, Baltimore, 1901 (Johns Hopkins dissertation). [25] Περὶ λόγου ἀσκήσεως, Oratio XVIII, de Arnim, II, page 250. [26] _Quomodo adolescens poetas audire debeat_, in the collection generally entitled _Moralia_. For English translations of the _Morals_ see the preface to F. M. Padelford’s modern translation of this particular essay, _Essays on the Study and Use of Poetry by Plutarch and Basil the Great_, New York, 1902 (Yale Studies in English, XV). Padelford has added a concise and suggestive introduction on Plutarch’s theory of poetry. [27] This bald statement may be confirmed by the more comprehensive histories of Latin literature. [28] G. C. Fiske, _The Plain Style in the Scipionic Circle_, University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature, 3, page 62. [29] See above, page 141. [30] See Nettleship, _Lectures and Essays_, Second Series, page 49 (on Dionysius of Halicarnassus). For the pictorial habit of much ancient description see above, page 217, on Ovid, and compare Croiset, _Hist. de la litt. grecque_, V. pages 771 and following. [31] III, in Padelford’s translation, which is followed in this and the other quotations.