Examples [παραδείγματα, he goes on] are more suited to deliberative oratory; enthymemes, to forensic.[96]... Do not speak in enthymemes seriatim, but mix them in [with other means of persuasion]; or they will impair one another. There is a quantitative limit.... Do not seek an enthymeme for everything; or you will write like some philosophers; ... and do not speak in enthymeme when your immediate aim is emotional ... or ethical. The peroration[97] consists: (1) of disposing the hearer well toward oneself and ill toward one’s adversary; (2) of enhancing and disparaging; (3) of stirring the hearer to emotion; (4) and of recapitulation.... [For this last function] the primary idea is that what was promised has been given in full, so that we must tell both what [we have said] and why. This is told by comparison [of our own case] with our opponent’s.... Asyndeton[98] befits the final words, that they may be peroration, not oration: “I have spoken; you have heard; you have it; judge.” With no less abruptness Aristotle’s _Rhetoric_ stops. It can hardly be said to conclude; and certainly it has no peroration. FOOT-NOTES: [1] _Text_, edited with notes, commentary, and index, COPE, E. M., and SANDYS, J. E., 3 volumes, Cambridge, 1877. _Translations_ (the best recent ones in English), WELLDON, J. E. C., with analysis and critical notes, London, 1886; JEBB, R. C., edited with introduction and supplementary notes by SANDYS, J. E., Cambridge, 1909. Welldon’s tabular view is valuable. Jebb’s rendering of technical terms is generally more discerning. _Criticism._ Aristotle having engaged the attention of nearly every important writer on rhetoric—and of many quite unimportant—for over two thousand years, a list of the commentaries and criticisms would be endless and bewildering. Nor would any addition here to the bibliographies already available be especially suggestive. The history of Aristotle’s _Rhetoric_ will emerge incidentally throughout this work. The best single exegesis in English, especially of the relations of the _Rhetoric_ to the Aristotelian philosophy, remains E. M. Cope’s _Introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric_, London, 1867. [2] Quoted from the author’s article on Aristotle in the _Cyclopedia of Education_. [3] 1354 a. [4] 1355 a. [5] 1355 b. [6] 1355 b τὸ ἐνδεχόμενον πιθανόν, or, as the preceding context puts it, τὰ ὑπάρχοντα πιθανά.