a rule, that, if ever the time itself, or the facts of the case, or the place, or the intervention of any one, or any interruption, or anything which may have been said by the adversary, and especially in his peroration, has given us any opportunity of saying anything well suited to the occasion, we must on no account omit it.  And many of the rules, which we give in their proper place, about amplification, may be transferred here to the consideration of the opening of a speech.

IX. C.  F. What next?  What rules, then, are to be attended to in narration?

C.  P. Since narration is an explanation of facts, and a sort of base and foundation for the establishment of belief, those rules are most especially to be observed in it, which apply also, for the most part, to the other divisions of speaking; part of which are necessary, and part are assumed for the sake of embellishment.  For it is necessary for us to narrate events in a clear and probable manner; but we must also attend to an agreeable style.  Therefore, in order to narrating with clearness, we must go back to those previous rules for explaining and illustrating facts, in which brevity is enjoined and taught.  And brevity is one of the points most frequently praised in narration, and we have already dwelt enough upon it.  Again, our narrative will be probable, if the things which are related are consistent with the character of the persons concerned, with the times and places mentioned,—­if the cause of every fact and event is stated,—­if they appear to be proved by witnesses,—­if they are in accordance with the opinions and authority of men, with law, with custom, and with religion,—­if the honesty of the narrator is established, his candour, his memory, the uniform truth of his conversation, and the integrity of his life.  Again, a narration is agreeable which contains subjects calculated to excite admiration, expectation, unlooked-for results, sudden feelings of the mind, conversations between people, grief, anger, fear, joy, desires.  However, let us proceed to what follows.

C.  F. What follows is, I suppose, what relates to producing belief.

C.  P. Just so; and those topics are divided into confirmation and reprehension.  For in confirmation we seek to establish our own assertion; in reprehension, to invalidate those of our adversaries.  Since, then, everything which is ever the subject of a dispute, is so because the question is raised whether it exists or not, or what it is, or of what character it is, in the first question conjecture has weight, in the second, definition, and in the third, reasoning.

X. C.  F. I understand this division.  At present, I ask, what are the topics of conjecture?