With another abrupt new tack, J. moves on to a different topic of prayer. As part of the jolting effect there is contrast with 130ff., as we are taken from the forge to the battlefield, from peaceful activity to war, from productivity to destruction and from whole objects to smashed ones. However, there are also some links, to ensure that the progression is not too violent: the list of odds and ends at 133ff. parallels that at 131f.; the weapons in line 134 pick up the sword in 131; the chariot yoke at 135 recalls the reins at 128; and the petition for glory in this section has a counterpart in that for fame in the previous one (114ff.).

For variety, this time J. piles up the critical points in a much longer section and a much more comprehensive assault on the object of entreaty. Here there are three exempla (Hannibal, Alexander and Xerxes) rather than two. In contrast to Cicero, none of the examples is Roman; in opposition to Demosthenes, his Macedonian enemy is cited; and Xerxes and especially Hannibal receive more development than the two orators did, so that in this case barbarians predominate. In addition, in this passage there is extended narrative, greater structural complexity (see below) and much more humour and mockery (touches of pathos only at lines 136, 165, 172f. and 185f.).

This is a vigorous and entertaining treatment (J. obviously saw ridicule as an effective way of dealing with the three commanders). The diction is often arresting, and the narrative engages in various ways. In this dense and extensive attack on military glory itself and those who seek at and acquire it, J. is consistently cutting and relentlessly deflating, and his exempla have quite a wide geographical and chronological range. In line with his overall thesis, he portrays the desire for gloria as destructive (to others this time), excessive (in the cases of Hannibal and Alexander) and pointless (nobody actually achieves anything substantial here). In his introduction (133–46) he puts across his main points – that glory in the form of a trophy and triumphal arch is paltry, grotesque and absurd, and in the form of an inscription is transitory, while longing for it (137–42) is hybristic, stupid, mad, destructive and futile.