[10] The term _second sophistic_ is generally applied to the Greek rhetoric and oratory of the second, third, and fourth Christian centuries, and is also applicable to the Latin. Already defined as a tendency in the first century (ARP IV. ii), it is reviewed at that point by H. von Arnim in the introduction to _Leben und Werke des Dio von Prusa_, Berlin, 1898. The second century is reviewed more specifically by Boulanger. Wright’s introduction provides the best summary guide and bibliography for English readers. The studies of the influence of the second sophistic on the Christian orators of this period (see the list at the head of this chapter) review and define sophistic more precisely and more significantly than the general works cited in their bibliographies. But E. Norden’s _Die antike Kunstprosa_ and E. Rohde’s _Der griechische Roman_ are still suggestive. [11] Written between 230 and 238. For the dates of the orators celebrated by Philostratus see Wright, xxii-xl. [12] I. 9 (30). Substantially the same things, including the public honors, are recorded of Scopelian, I. 21 (84), and of Polemo, I. 25 (112). [13] See the general histories, Guignet, 85, and Campbell’s summary, pages 7-10. [14] Boulanger, 16, 57; Méridier, 46-47. “By the middle of the first century A. D., Ephesus, Smyrna, Miletus, and Mytilene were become world centers for the instruction of rhetoric.” Campbell, 10. [15] “L’abandon du point de vue historique, qui serait condamnable ailleurs, devient légitime pour la sophistique, puisque toute évolution y est rendue impossible par l’existence d’un canon oratoire réligieusement observé. Libanios s’applique à copier Aristide, qui croit être un imitateur fidèle de Démosthène.” Méridier, page vi. [16] “Un public qui ne se lasse pas de faire éternellement sa classe de rhétorique.” Boulanger, 271. [17] See προγυμνάσματα under section c below, and, in the index to ARP, _declamatio_. [18] The references are to sections and, in parenthesis, to Wright’s pages. [19] Cf. Ælius Aristides XXIX and XXX D, summarized by Boulanger, 275. [20] ARP Chapter IV. ii. 90-93. [21] xxvii, page 12. A; quoted by Guignet, 46. [22] Petit de Julleville, _L’école d’Athènes au quatrième siècle_, 105. Méridier arrives at the same estimate: “Or, dans aucun de ces exercices oratoires, le sophiste n’a à compter avec la réalité.... La question de fond importe peu; elle sert simplement de thème, de point de départ, pour ne pas dire de prétexte.... La grande affaire, c’est de donner au public l’impression d’un tour de force surprenant exécuté sans difficulté apparente. Le sophiste est proprement un virtuose qui est capable de jouer, sur n’importe quel thème, des variations brillantes. Indifférent aux sujets qu’il traite, il s’applique à multiplier les difficultés de la forme.” 9. Pliny’s account of Isæus Rhetor (ARP 95) gives substantially the same impression. [23] I. 9 (32). [24] E.g., _Demonax_, 33, 36; _Rhetorum præceptor_, 17. [25] II. 15 (244).