1. Dion. Hal. ad Ammaeum 2, I p. 259, 3 sq. Us.-R.: Κηφισόδωρον enumerat inter aequales Isocratis, Anaximenis, Alcidamantis παραγγελμάτων τεχνικῶν συγγραφεῖς.
2. Dion. Hal. ad Pompeium Geminum 1, II p.226, 9 Us.-R.: τὰ δόγματα διέβαλον αὐτοῦ (Platonis) τινες καὶ τοὺς λόγους ἐμέμψαντο πρῶτον μὲν…, ἔπειτα οἱ περὶ Κηφισόδωρον κτλ.
Euseb. Praep. ev. XIV 3, 9, 732 b: ὃς δὴ ὁ Κηφισόδωρος (sc. ὁ ῥήτωρ quem antea vocaverat), ἐπειδὴ ὑπʼ Ἀριστοτέλους βαλλόμενον ἑαυτῷ τὸν διδάσκαλον Ἰσοκράτην ἑώρα, αὐτοῦ μὲν Ἀριστοτέλους ἦν ἀμαθὴς καὶ ἄπειρος, ὑπὸ δὲ τοῦ καθορᾶν ἔνδοξα τὰ Πλάτωνος ὑπάρχοντα, οἰηθεὶς κατὰ Πλάτωνα τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην φιλοσοφεῖν, ἐπολέμει μὲν Ἀριστοτέλει, ἐβαλλε δὲ Φλάτωνα, καὶ κατηγόρει ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδεῶν, τελευτῶν εἰς τὰ ἄλλα, ἃ οὐδʼ αὐτὸς ᾔδει, ἀλλὰ τὰ νομιζόμενα ἀμφʼ αὐτῶν ἧ λέγεται ὑπονοῶν. Discimus, quo tempore haec scripsit C., Aristotelem nondum ab idearum doctrina Platonis defecisse. Tum temporis Isocratem adgreditur, de rhetorica solum adfectus movente eam, ut videtur, sententiam amplexus, quae in primo libro rhetoricae etiam nunc defenditur. Recte F. Solmsen, Die Entwicklung der aristotel. Logik u. Rhetorik 205.
3. Athenaeus 60 d: Κηφισόδωρος ὁ Ἰσοκράτους μαθητὴς ἐν τοῖς κατὰ Ἀριστοτέλους· τέσσαρα δʼ ἐστὶ ταῦτα βιβλία.
Cf. ibid. 354 c: οὔτε δʼ Εὐβουλίδης, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Κηφισόδωρος τοιοῦτόν τι ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν κατὰ τοῦ Σταγειρίτου, καίτοι καὶ συγγράμματα ἐκδόντες κατὰ τἀνδρός. Eosdem inter Aristotelis inimicos Themistius iungit 286 c.
Isocratis discipulus etiam Athen. 122 b, imitator Dionys. Hal. de Is. 19, p. 122, 12sq. Us.-R.
4. Dion. Hal. de Isοcr. 18, p. 86, 2 Us.-R.: ἱκανὸν δὲ ἡγησάμενος εἶναι τῆς ἀληθείας βεβαιωτὴν τὸν Ἀθηναῖον Κηφισόδωρον, ὃς καὶ συνεβίωσεν Ἰσοκράτει καὶ γνησιώτατος ἀκουστὴς ἐγένετο καὶ τὴν ἀπολογίαν τὴν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τὴν πάνυ θαυμαστὴν ἐν ταῖς πρὸς Ἀριστοτέλην ἀντιγραφαῖς ἐποιήσατο, πιστεύω γεγράφθαι λόγους τινὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς εἰς δικαστήρια, οὐ μέντοι πολλούς.
5. Athen. 122 b: ἐν τῷ τρίτῳ τῶν πρὸς Ἀριστοτέλην λέγει (sc. Κηφισόδωρος), ὅτι εὕροι τις ἂν ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ποιητῶν ἢ καὶ σοφιστῶν ἓν ἢ δύο γοῦν πονηρῶς εἰρημένα, οἷα παρὰ μὲν Ἀρχιλόχῳ τὸ πάντʼ ἄνδρʼ ἀποσκολύπτειν, Θεοδώρῳ δὲ τὸ κελεύειν μὲν πλέον ἔχειν, ἐπαινεῖν δὲ τὸ ἴσον, Εὐριπίδῃ τε τὸ τὴν γλῶτταν ὀμωμοκέναι φάναι καὶ Σοφοκλεῖ τὸ ἐν Αἰθίοψιν εἰρημένον
τοιαῦτά τοί σοι πρὸς χάριν τε κοὐ βίᾳ
λέγω, σὺ δʼ αὐτὸς ὥσπερ οἱ σοφοὶ τὰ μὲν
δίκαιʼ ἐπαίνει, τοῦ δὲ κερδαίνειν ἔχου,
καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ δʼ ὁ αὐτὸς ἔφη μηδὲν εἶναι ῥῆμα σῦν κέρδει κακόν· Ὅμήρῳ δὲ τὸ τὴν Ἥραν ἐπιβουλεῦσαι τῷ Διί, καὶ <τὸ> τὸν Ἄρη μοιχεύειν· ἐφʼ οἷς πάντες κατηγοροῦσιν αὐτοῦ (trad. αὐτῶν).
F. Solmsen l. l. p. 206.
Euseb. Praep. ev. XV 2, 7, 792 a: ἠλίθια δὲ διαβέβληκεν αὐτὸν (sc. Aristotelem) καὶ Κηφισόδωρος ὁ Ἰσοκράτους μαθητής, τρυφερὸν καὶ τένθην καὶ ἄλλα τὰ τοιαῦτα λέγων αὐτὸν εἶναι. Talia spectare videtur Philod. rhet. I 321, 2: καὶ δεινῆς ἐπειρᾶτo (sc. Aristoteles, cf. p. 324 col. LVII 14) νεμ[έσεως] καὶ [δυσμ]ενείας εἴτε τῶν ἀφ’ Ἰσοκράτους εἴτʼ ἐνίων ἄλλων σοφιστῶν.
1. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, To Ammaeus: Cephisodorus was a writer of precepts on the art on a par with Isocrates, Anaximenes, and Alcidamas.
2. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, To Pompeius Geminus: Some slandered [Plato’s] teachings and berated his writings, Cephisodorus among them.
Euseb. Praep. ev. 14.3.9, 732 b: ‘This same Kephisodorus (that is, the rhetorician he has referred to previously), seeing Aristotle attack his teacher Isocrates – being ignorant and inexperienced about Aristotle himself, but noticing, on the other hand, that Plato’s doctrine was well-regarded, he thought that Aristotle had the same philosophy of Plato, and he started fighting against Aristotle while attacking Plato. He put him on trial starting from the theory of the ideas, and ended with other things that he himself did not know but assumed Plato thought about in a certain way.’ From this we learn that at the time C. wrote these things Aristotle had not yet turned his back on Plato’s doctrine of ideas. At that time, he attacks Isocrates, embracing the view on rhetoric only stirring up emotions that is still now defended in the first book of the Rhetoric. Rightly F. Solmsen, Die Entwicklung der aristotel. Logik u. Rhetorik 205.
3. Athenaeus 60d: Cephisodorus, the pupil of Isocrates, in Against Aristotle, which is in four books…
Cf. ibid. 354 c: ‘Not Eubulides, but not even Cephisodorus dared say anything like that against the Stagirite, even though they had published pamphlets against that man.’ Themistius (286 c) lists these same people among Aristotle’s enemies.
He is deemed a student of Isocrates also in Athen. 122 b; an imitator in Dionys. Hal. On Isocrates 19, p. 122, 12 f. Us.-R.
4. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, On Isocrates: I judge the Athenian Cephisodorus to be a good enough warrant of truth, who not only was a contemporary of Isocrates but also became his noblest student and wrote a most remarkable defense speech for him in his counter-pleas against Aristotle; so I trust that Isocrates wrote a couple of speeches, albeit not many, that were destined actually to be read in court.
5. Athenaeus 122b: Cephisodorus writes in the third book of Against Aristotle that one could find one or two things bad sayings by any of the other poets and even sophists; for instance, Archilochus speaks of pulling back every man’s foreskin; Theodorus encourages greed all while praising equality; Euripides says that the tongue swore; and Sophocles writes in Aethiopis:
I am saying this to please you and not under constraint,
But you, just like clever men, praise
Just things, yet hold on to your benefit;
and in other places too he says that there is no word that is bad if it benefits the speaker. Further, in Homer Hera ambushes Zeus and Ares commits adultery. Because of these things all authors berate Homer.
F. Solmsen ibid. p. 206.
Euseb. Praep. ev. 15.2.7, 792 a: ‘Cephisodorus, the student of Isocrates, also threw silly accusations at Aristotle, calling him effeminate, a gourmand, and the like.’ This is the kind of thing Philod. On Rhetoric 1 321, 2 seems to be referring to: ‘And he (that is, Aristotle, cf. p. 324 col. LVII 14) embarked on terrible revenge and enmity against either Isocrates’ school or some other sophists.’