In the same summary fashion Isidore treats the three fields, _status_, simple or compound proposition, the four parts of a speech, the five sorts of cases, syllogisms, law, apothegm, proof and disproof, the school exercises _prosopopœia_ and _ethopœia_, questions abstract and concrete. The remainder of the section, somewhat more than one third, is devoted to _elocutio_: the three styles, the division into phrase, clause, and period, the typical faults of phrasing, and the figures. As to the last he makes a distinction lost on his later medieval readers. “Of these most have been noted above under _grammatica_ as the _schemata_ of Donatus. Therefore only those should find place here which hardly occur in a poem, but freely in a speech.” II. xxi. “_Dialectica_ is the discipline designed for the discussion of cases (ad disserendas causas). It is that species of philosophy which is called _logica_, i.e., the theory controlling definition, investigation and discussion. For it teaches in many forms of questions how by discussion the true may be distinguished from the false.... Therefore _dialectica_ follows the discipline of _rhetorica_ because they have many things in common.” II. xxii. To distinguish the two, Isidore quotes from Varro a metaphor often quoted from Zeno; _dialectica_ is the closed fist, _rhetorica_ the open hand. The one is the more acute in discussing, the other the more fluent in imparting; the one is of the schools, the other of the forum; the one for scholars, the other for the people. xxiii. A chapter (xxiv) inserted here groups all the seven arts under _philosophia_, which is threefold:[66] (1) _naturalis_ (_physica_), (2) _moralis_ (_ethica_), (3) _rationalis_ (_logica_), “in which is discussed how in the causes of things or in the conduct of life truth itself may be sought.” Isidore does not, however, pursue this larger scope of _logica_. Though he cites additionally Plato’s use of the term to include both _dialectica_ and _rhetorica_, he goes on to enumerate other divisions of philosophy, and then (xxv) to the usual items of _dialectica_ as presented by Boethius: Porphyry’s Introduction, Aristotle’s Categories, interpretation, syllogisms, division and definition, topics. The program for the Trivium keeps in the main the ancient proportions. Some usurpation of composition by _dialectica_, some leaning of _rhetorica_ toward dilation and decoration, may be read into it; but each of the two studies clearly has its own function, and work enough for serious occupation. As in other parts of his aggregation, Isidore makes his summary of the Trivium a list of studies, not a group. He attempts no unified plan. Therefore his putting of _rhetorica_ before instead of after _dialectica_ should hardly be pressed for significance. FOOTNOTES: [1] ARP 90, 94, 96, 101.