The Judgment of Animals in Classical Greece: Animal Sculpture and ...

And I do not think it is right that speeches written down should even be called
speeches, but should be thought of as ei1dwla and sxh&mata and mimh&mata of
speeches, and we could reasonably have the same opinion about them as we have
about bronze a)ndria&ntwn and stone a)galma&twn and gegramme/nwn zw|&wn.
For, just as these are mimh&mata of a)lhqinw~n swma&twn and give delight to the
view, but offer no use in human life, in the same way the written speech, having a
single sxh&mati and ta&cei, produces certain striking effects when it is conned
from the book, but being fixedly unable to respond to critical moments, if of no
use to those who have got hold of it. Just as the real bodies present an appearance
far inferior to that of fine statues but yet as many times more useful for getting
things done, so too the speech spoken straight from the heart on the spur of the
moment has a soul in it and is alive and follows upon events and is like those real
bodies, while the written speech whose nature corresponds to a representation of
the real thing lacks any kind of living power. (Soph. 1.27) [10]
In this passage, Alcidamas argues the importance of improvised speeches by pointing out
the weaknesses of the written ones. He maintains that the latter should be thought of not
as speeches, but as the equivalents of works of art. That he had in mind the context of
visual arts, more precisely, that of sculpture and painting, is evident from his explicit
references to bronze a)ndria&ntwn, stone a)galma&twn, and gegramme/nwn zw|&wn. As
stated earlier, a)ndria&j is a statue of the kouros type, and a1galma an ordinary statue and
also that of a god; also zw|~on in the company of gegramme/non and other derivatives of
the verb gra&fw has been repeatedly seen to carry associations with painting; therefore,
the meaning of gegramme/nwn zw|&wn should here be defined as painted images of some
kind. This definition does not agree with that of “depictions of animals,” which has been
recently suggested. 608 Alcidamas’ reference to statues (a)ndria&ntwn, a)galma&twn) and
paintings is reminiscent of Empedocles’ fragment, which also referred to statues
(a)ga&lmasin) and painted images of some kind (graptoi=j zw|&oisi). 609 Alcidamas’ text
608 J. V. Muir, ed., tr., Alcidamas. The Works and Fragments (Bristol, 2001) 15, 17.
609 That Alcidamas was familiar with the work of Empedocles is a possibility that cannot be ruled out.
According to Muir, Alcidamas. The Works and Fragments vi: “there is an intriguing hint [i.e., Diog. Laert.
8.56] that Alcidamas may have written the lives of some of the Pre-Socratic philosophers, including Zeno
and Empedocles, in a book entitled the Physikon.”
313