Vast, I allow: but vile
Vast,
I allow: but vile
In Brief
Figure of speech. When Professor MacHugh says of
the Romans, "What was their civilisation? Vast, I allow: but
vile," he employs in brief space a device that ancient
rhetoricians called synchoresis, paromologia,
or procatalepsis––raising a possible objection in
order to come back with a stronger counter-argument.
Read More
Synchoresis (sin-ko-REE-sis, from syn- = together +
choreo = give way, withdraw) is a Greek word that can
be translated both as "concession, consenting" and "coming
together, agreeing." By conceding a point, the speaker joins
forces with his audience and then steers them into an
agreement more to his liking. Stuart Gilbert aptly
describes it as "a rhetorical device for enlisting sympathy
before a tirade." Gideon Burton (rhetoric.byu.edu) quotes an
example from Henry Peacham's The Garden of Eloquence
(1577): "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest
well: the devils also believe, and tremble." Belief, in other
words, is necessary but not sufficient.
A near-synonym of this term is paromologia
(PAIR-uh-muh-LO-ghee-a, from para- = alongside + homologia
= agreement): conceding a weaker point to gain a stronger one.
Burton's example: "Yes, I may have been a petty thief, but I
am no felon." Still another such term is procatalepsis
(pro-CAT-uh-LEP-sis), a Greek word that means
"anticipation"––in Seidman's description, "the
anticipation of and response to an opponent's objections."
Burton quotes from Jonathan Swift's Argument against
Abolishing Christianity this anticipated objection to
his argument: "It is again objected as a very absurd
ridiculous Custom, that a Set of Men should be suffered, much
less employed and hired, to bawl one Day in Seven against the
Lawfulness of those Methods most in use towards the Pursuit of
Greatness, Riches and Pleasure, which are the constant
Practice of all Men alive on the other Six."
A remarkable parallel to Joyce's "vast but vile" can be found
in Cicero's denunciation of Greeks as fundamentally dishonest.
In the 4th chapter of his defense of Lucius Valerius Flaccus,
the Roman orator concedes that many of them possess excellent
qualities: "But I say this of the whole race of Greeks; I
allow them learning, I allow them a knowledge of many arts; I
do not deny them wit in conversation, acuteness of talents,
and fluency in speaking; even if they claim praise for other
sorts of ability, I will not make any objection; but a
scrupulous regard to truth in giving their evidence is not a
virtue that that nation has ever cultivated; they are utterly
ignorant what is the meaning of that quality, they know
nothing of its authority or of its weight. Where does that
expression, Give evidence for me, and I will give evidence for
you, come from? Is it supposed to be a phrase of the Gauls, or
of the Spaniards? It belongs wholly to the Greeks....
Therefore, when they give their evidence, remark with what a
countenance, with what confidence they give it... They never
reply precisely to a question" (trans. C. D. Yonge, accessed
on www.chlt.org).
The view that Greeks were highly accomplished people but also
inveterate liars was commonplace among the Romans. The Irish,
MacHugh suggests, should exercise categorical judgment of the
opposite kind, appreciating the brilliance of the Greeks and
scorning the tawdry accomplishments of empire-builders. Roman
civilization was vast but vile: alliteration hammers home the
synchoresis, paromologia, or procatalepsis, whichever it may
be.
