While George Campbell’s Philosophy of Rhetoric is widely recognized as one of the most influential treatises in the history of rhetoric, little critical attention has been paid to one of his most famous sermons: “The Nature, Extent, and Importance of the Duty of Allegiance. Delivered on December 12, 1776, “being the fast day appointed by the King on account of the rebellion in America,” this sermon exemplifies a key contention in Campbell’s Philosophy of Rhetoric— that the species of rhetoric “calculated to influence the will, and persuade us to a certain conduct” is “that artful mixture” of “the argumentative and the pathetic incorporated together “ (2–4). Taking its cue from the importance of style in Campbell’s conception of rhetoric, this essay examines the significant role played by style in both the argumentative and pathetic dimensions of Campbell’s sermon and reminds us that rhetorical theories have historically been conceived as means of managing social tensions and the uncertainties within which they arise.

Modern scholars have sometimes noticed in the Lysianic speeches some affinities with characters and plots of the (New) Comedy. Through a survey of the corpus, this paper resumes the critical data, adds some new elements of similarity, not only with Comedy, but generally with literature and suggests that Lysias usually worked in this way. If so, it could be preferable to suppose that the logographer took the cue not from comedy, but from everyday life; secondarily, that he sketched characters and plots starting from the particular (his client) to the general; finally, that these artistic elements wrere useful to jury’s persuasion and not added to a following publication.

Reviews 217 signposting and recapitulating his argument as it unfolds. In this and other ways he mirrors the qualities he values in Hume's own writing. Christopher Reid University ofLondon Hock, Ronald F., trans., The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Commentaries on Aphthonins's Progymnasmata, (Society of Biblical Literature, Writ­ ings from the Greco-Roman World 31), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. xii + 345 pp. ISBN 978-1-58983-644-0 This is the third and last volume of a trilogv, all three volumes of which present ancient and Byzantine texts and facing translations, equipped with extensive introductions and commentary, on the chrein, the third of the canon­ ical fourteen progymnasmata, the compositional exercises that began at the intermediate level of the Roman imperial literary-rhetorical education and extended into the advanced level. All three volumes have been published by the Society of Biblical Literature. The first two were co-authored by the late Edward N. O'Neil. O'Neill's scholarly partner Ronald F. Hock has brought the project to its conclusion and benefited from materials pertinent to the third volume that O'Neil left behind. The first volume (1986) presented mainly Roman imperial Greek and Latin discussions of the chreia from an­ cient theoretical works. The second volume (2002) offered ancient and Byzan­ tine classroom exercises in which chreiai were read, copied, declined, and, when the student was ready, elaborated. And now in this final volume Hock gives us the sections of six Byzantine texts that comment on the discussion of the chreia in the Progymnasmata of the late ancient rhetorical theorist Aphthonius , whose work, admitted to the so-called Hermogenic Corpus, became the authority par excellence on these compositional exercises. Hock's Byzantine commentaries on Aphthonius, intended for teachers or students, are by John of Sardis (ninth century), the so-called P-Scholia (ca. 1000), John Doxapatres (eleventh century), the Rhetorica Marciana (twelfth century), Maximus Planudes (thirteenth century), and Matthew Camariotes (fifteenth century). These commentators on Aphthonius, like Aphthonius himself, discussed all fourteen progymnasmata. Hock has excerpted from them only the sections on the chreia. Aphthonius's discussion of the chreia—a saying, an action, or a com­ bination of action and saying, ascribed to a person of note—is only a few pages long. It begins with some brief theoretical remarks. Aphthonius gives a definition and an etymology of the term. He explains the three kinds of chreia. And he lists the eight headings to be used for elaborating a chreia. But the greater part of his discussion is dedicated to the presentation of an elabo­ ration of the chreia "Isocrates said that the root of education is bitter, but the fruits are sweet." Aphthonius's short discussion of the chreia (as well as the 218 RHETORICA rest of his Progymnasmata) generated pages and pages of sequential Byzan­ tine commentaries. One thinks of the similar fate of better known canonized texts: Plato and Aristotle, Hippocrates and Galen. It is something of a déjà lu experience to read commentator after commentator on Aphthonius s spare treatment; indeed, Hock's introductions to each of the commentators, too, inevitably have some repetitiveness to them. Still, one does find peculiarities and idiosyncrasies in the various Byzantine texts, even "some independent analysis" (p. 28). Yet to expect to find much originality in this kind of material is to set oneself up for disappointment; to complain about its pedantry and triviality is to expect a pre-modern scholastic tradition not to be itself (cf. pp. 3, 6). Hock does well in his introductions to keep an eye on the whole work from which the particular chreia section is being excerpted, although his full discussion of Maximus Planudes on the progymnasma speaking-incharacter (pp. 285-92) in his introduction to Planudes on the chreia was perhaps unnecessary there. The commentators clarify, supplement, and illustrate Aphthonius. They have a "penchant... to build on one another" (p. 134). (Matthew Camariotes, though, is in a skimpy class of his own, briefer on the chreia even than Aphthonius.) They bring in material both from the ancient progymnasmatic theoreticians ps.-Hermogenes, Nicolaus of Myra, and Theon (a large portion of the P-Scholia, for example, is simply...

Other| February 01 2015 Addresses of Contributors to This Issue Rhetorica (2015) 33 (1): 108–109. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.108 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Addresses of Contributors to This Issue. Rhetorica 1 February 2015; 33 (1): 108–109. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.108 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This article tackles a significant theme that surfaces occasionally in Stoicism: the claim that “the sage will speak direct words” (euthurrhemonesei). It explores euthurrhemosune as a Cynic and Laconizing topos in Stoicism, probably going back to Zeno himself, but developed by Diogenes of Babylon as something distinctively wholesome—linguistically and ethically—in Stoic style of expression, and then attacked from a Platonic and Academic stance by Cicero, at a time when some among the Stoics themselves began distancing themselves from their Cynic heritage, as notably Panaetius. Finally, the connection between euthurrhemosune and parrhesia on the one hand, suntomia and brachylogia on the other is also examined from an ethical and stylistic point of view.

Recensione del volume di Carlo Fanelli Con la bocca di un'altra persona. Retorica e drammaturgia nel teatro del Rinascimento

Book Review| February 01 2015 Review: L'arte dell'autoelogio. Studio sull'orazione 28 K di Elio Aristide, con testo, traduzione e commento, by Lorenzo Miletti Lorenzo Miletti, L'arte dell'autoelogio. Studio sull'orazione 28 K di Elio Aristide, con testo, traduzione e commento, Pisa: ETS. 238 pp. ISBN 978-88-467-2960-6 Elisabetta Berardi Elisabetta Berardi Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici, Università degli Studi di Torino, via sant'Ottavio 20, 10124 Torino, ITALY. elisabetta.berardi@unito.it Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2015) 33 (1): 97–100. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.97 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Elisabetta Berardi; Review: L'arte dell'autoelogio. Studio sull'orazione 28 K di Elio Aristide, con testo, traduzione e commento, by Lorenzo Miletti. Rhetorica 1 February 2015; 33 (1): 97–100. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.97 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Critics have long considered Rabelais as the “last of the French Erasmians”. However, a rereading of François Béroalde de Verville's Moyen de parvenir (1614–1617) brings to light numerous rhetorical strategies reminiscent of the discourse of morosophy, or foolish-wisdom used by the character of Folly in Erasmus' Encomium Moriae. The identification of these rhetorical devices enable us to retrace the profound and complex influence of the Rotterdam humanist's writings in France at the beginning of the seventeenth century.

Book Review| February 01 2015 Review: Voir la philosophie. Les représentations de la philosophie à Rome. Rhétorique et philosophie de Cicéron à Marc Aurèle (Études anciennes, série latine 71), by Juliette Dross Juliette Dross, Voir la philosophie. Les représentations de la philosophie à Rome. Rhétorique et philosophie de Cicéron à Marc Aurèle (Études anciennes, série latine 71), Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2010. 413 pp., ISBN 978-2-251-32883-6 Sabine Luciani Sabine Luciani Textes et documents de la Méditerranée antique etmédiévale, Aix-Marseille Université, Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l'homme, 5, rue du château de l'horloge, 13100 Aix-en-Provence, FRANCE. sabine.luciani@sfr.fr Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2015) 33 (1): 100–103. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.100 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Sabine Luciani; Review: Voir la philosophie. Les représentations de la philosophie à Rome. Rhétorique et philosophie de Cicéron à Marc Aurèle (Études anciennes, série latine 71), by Juliette Dross. Rhetorica 1 February 2015; 33 (1): 100–103. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.100 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2015 Review: L'image tragique de l'Histoire chez Tacite – Étude des schèmes tragiques dans les Histoires et les, by Fabrice Galtier Fabrice Galtier, L'image tragique de l'Histoire chez Tacite – Étude des schèmes tragiques dans les Histoires et lesAnnales, Bruxelles: Latomus (vol. 333), 2011, 344 pages. ISBN: 978-2-87031-274-2 Paul M. Martin Paul M. Martin Université de Montpellier-III, 34A rue du puits Mariette, 85330 Noirmoutier-en-l'île, FRANCE. paul.martin3@wanadoo.fr Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2015) 33 (1): 103–106. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.103 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Paul M. Martin; Review: L'image tragique de l'Histoire chez Tacite – Étude des schèmes tragiques dans les Histoires et les, by Fabrice Galtier. Rhetorica 1 February 2015; 33 (1): 103–106. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.103 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

106 RHETORICA tuta, l'autre non. Tarquín le Superbe avait eu pour premier peintre Accius; les Princes impériaux ont eu Tacite. Dans les deux cas, la domus, royale ou impériale, est montrée comme le cadre privilégié où se joue le huis clos tragique du pouvoir monarchique. C'est cette réalité théâtrale du pouvoir solitaire—celle des derniers mots prononcés par Auguste mourant—que dépeint Tacite. Tel est à la fois le primum mouens et le sens de l'enquête menée avec brio par F. G. Paul M. Martin Université de Montpellier-III Cario Fanelli, Con la bocea di uríaltra persona. Retorica e drammaturgia nel teatro del Rinascimento, Roma: Bulzoni, 2011. 349 pp. ISBN: 97888 -7870-588-3 II volume di Cario Fanelli, pubblicato nella collana della Biblioteca teatrale dell'editore Bulzoni, é sorretto dall'ambizioso obiettivo di daré forma unitaria alie molteplici intersezioni tra le esperienze teatrali di CinqueSeicento e la retorica classica. II terreno d'indagine é quanto mai complesso, ma il percorso che l'A. si prefigge appare di sicuro interesse. Come rilevato nell'introduzione (pp. 11-14), l'eloquenza assume infatti nella prima meta del sedicesimo secolo un solido modello di riferimento per i letterati del tempo, fino a costituire uno stabile complesso di norme atte ad ispirare la produzione di vari generi letterari. Per questa ragione, il primo capitolo del volume, Antica eloquenza e teatrofra Umanesimo e Rinascimento (pp. 15-73), é volto a riaffermare Tassetto costitutivo del teatro rinascimentale a partiré dalla riscoperta della classicitá. É proprio su questa base che l'A. ribadisce la giusta esigenza di valorizzare l'esperienza della trattatistica propria della retorica antica come canale privilegiato per Taccesso ai precetti della recitazione antica. Fondamentale in questo senso il pensiero di Aristotele, la cui centralita viene ribadita a partiré dalla lettura di alcune pagine della Rhetorica; di grande interesse sono inoltre le considerazioni relativo al De elocutione di Demetrio di Falero, opera pubblicata nel 1508 da Aldo Manuzio e che ebbe un fortunato commento a meta del sedicesimo secolo per opera di Pietro Vettori. II secondo capitolo (pp. 75-153) concentra poi la sua attenzione sulla commedia, genere che trova nella cornice delle feste cortigiane un posto di primo piano. Naturalmente, non sará il modello di Aristofane ad ispirare le scelte dei commediografi del tempo, ma i comici latini, Plauto e, soprattutto, Terenzio, le cui commedie, che avevano giá conosciuto le riprese medievali di Rosvita, sono considérate un compiuto modello di decorum. D'altra parte, anche quando sará il modello di Aristofane a prevalere, come avviene nella fabula Penia di Rinuccio Aretino, si tratterá di attenuare le punte polemiche e le maggiori asperitá linguistiche, in linea con una tendenza ben evidenziata Reviews 107 (Ib Coriolano Martirano, che tradurrà le Nuvole ed il Pinto. Le considerazioni sul linguaggio délia commedia continuarlo inoltre nel successivo capitolo (Il conuco fra cortc e momio, pp. 155-228), in cui è posta al centro dell'indagine la produzione di alcuni autori come Pietro Aretino o Ruzante che, mentre teorizzano uno svincolamento dalle esperienze direttamente derivanti dai modelli classici con esiti che spaziano dalle spinte anticortigiane del primo all'attenzione al mondo rurale per ¡1 secondo, finiscono per non annullare del tutto il contatto con la tradizionale formula di stampo plautino. Il quarto capitolo sposta poi il focus d'indagine dalla commedia alla tragedia (Antinomie del trágico, pp. 229-273). Anche in questo caso l'A. lavora sulla riscoperta dei classici operata nel Quattrocento e sui tentativi volti a ricostruire le forme délia rappresentazione e délia messa in scena a partiré dalle testimonianze degli antichi corne base per la rinascita di un teatro che si elevasse dalla semplice imitazione per produrre nuove forme di spettacolo. Esemplare, sotto questo profilo, Popera di Sulpizio da Veroli che a Roma in ámbito papale curera in prima persona Pallestimento di alcune tragédie senecane nel 1486. Infine, nel corso delPultimo capitolo (Teatro efede nella se­ conda meta del Cinquecento, pp. 275-318, si affronta la questione del dramma di argomento religioso, di cui PA. offre una ragionevole campionatura seguendo le fortune di due testi il Christos Paschon, dramma bizantino attribuito falsamente...

Critics have long considered Rabelais as the “last of the French Erasmians”. However, a rereading of François Béroalde de Verville’s Moyen de parvenir (1614–1617) brings to light numerous rhetorical strategies reminiscent of the discourse of morosophy, or foolish-wisdom used by the character of Folly in Erasmus’ Encomium Moriae. The identification of these rhetorical devices enable us to retrace the profound and complex influence of the Rotterdam humanist’s writings in France at the beginning of the seventeenth century.

This study of the instrumental and constitutive rhetoric of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (1963) and Frederick Douglass’s “Introduction” to The Reason Why the Colored American is not in the World’s Columbian Exposition: The Afro-American’s Contribution to Columbian Literature (1893) explores both the striking similarities between the rhetorical characteristics of the texts and their contrasting receptions. Whereas King’s “Letter” took advantage of the powerful Zeitgeist of the Civil Rights Movement, Douglass’s “Introduction” was stymied by the oppressive climate of the late-nineteenth century, including the conservative self-help movement that dominated African American’s responses to discrimination and opportunity

This article tackles a significant theme that surfaces occasionally in Stoicism: the claim that “the sage will speak direct words” (<i>cuthurrhemonesei</i>). It explores <i>cnthurrhemosune</i> as a Cynic and Laconizing topos in Stoicism, probably going back to Zeno himself, but developed by Diogenes of Babylon as something distinctively wholesome—linguistically and ethically—in Stoic style of expression, and then attacked from a Platonic and Academic stance by Cicero, at a time when some among the Stoics themselves began distancing themselves from their Cynic heritage, as notably Panaetius. Finally, the connection between <i>euthurrhemosune</i> and <i>par- rhesia</i> on the one hand, <i>suntomiu</i> and <i>brachylogia</i> on the other is also examined from an ethical and stylistic point of view.

100 RHETORICA che sarebbe stata attiva presso il santuario di Pergamo (p. 21). Pochi i refusi, in un testo nel complesso ben curato. Elisabetta Berardi Università degli Studi di Torino Juliette Dross, Voir la philosophie. Les représentations de la philosophie à Rome. Rhétorique et philosophie de Cicéron à Marc Aurèle (Études anciennes, série latine 71), Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2010. 413 pp., ISBN 978-2-251-32883-6 Cet ouvrage, version remaniée d'une thèse soutenue en 2004, est consa­ cré aux rapports de la philosophie et de la rhétorique à travers la question de la représentation esthétique:1 il s'agit de montrer comment et surtout pourquoi certains philosophes romains ont mis en image le concept de philosophie. Cette étude, placée sous Yauctoritas de Cicéron, vise à explorer un double paradoxe: 1. De manière générale, l'usage problématique de l'image, en tant qu'artifice de persuasion, dans les écrits de philosophes qui, à la suite de Platon, affichent une certaine méfiance à l'égard de la rhétorique; 2. En ce qui concerne la doctrine stoïcienne en particulier, la contradic­ tion entre rejet de la représentation rhétorique et réhabilitation épistémo­ logique de l'image dans le processus cognitif (p. 13). Les principaux auteurs étudiés (Cicéron, Sénèque, Marc-Aurèle) per­ mettent de couvrir une période de trois siècles mais l'enquête se fonde en réalité sur un corpus qui va d'Homère à Boèce et ne comporte pas moins de 130 œuvres. Le plan adopté évite l'écueil du catalogue et permet de mettre en évidence le double enjeu de ce travail, qui s'attache à analyser, d'une part, le rôle attribué aux représentations par les philosophes eux-mêmes, d'autre part, ce que révèlent ces dernières sur la conception que les philosophes avaient de leur discipline. Après une remarquable introduction, qui expose de façon limpide les enjeux liés à la notion de représentation dans l'histoire de la philosophie romaine (pp. 7-21), la première partie, fondée sur la lecture des rhéteurs antiques, est consacrée à l'étude de la notion de « représentation» rhétorique en relation avec ses fondements théoriques et philosophiques (pp. 25-102). Après une enquête sur la signification et l'évolution des termes repraesentatio, euidentia, enargeia, phantasia, cette partie donne lieu à une définition des tropes (métaphore, synecdoque, métonymie, catachrèse, allégorie, hyperbole) et ^ue l'auteur veuille bien excuser le caractère tardif du présent compte rendu. Le rapporteur, qui a reçu 1 ouvrage en août 2012, tient cependant à préciser que ce retard ne lui est pas entièrement imputable. Reviews 101 des figures (comparaison, éthopée, prosopopée, hypotypose) associés à la représentation (pp. 41-80). Ces deux chapitres assez descriptifs constituent un préalable théorique nécessaire à l'analyse du pouvoir de l'image, qui est menée à partir d'une réflexion sur les relations entre évidence, passion et imagination (pp. 81102 ). Juliette Dross souligne a juste titre le rôle joué par le traité Du sublime et 1 Institution oratoire dans 1 élaboration d'une théorie rhétorique de la phantasin . Elle démontre de façon convaincante que le Ps-Longin tend à rapprocher la phantasia logike des stoïciens, dans laquelle Venargeia constitue un critère de vérité objectif, de la phantasia imaginative des orateurs, fondée sur la mise en forme discursive d'un spectacle fictif. À la différence de Cicéron, qui avait lexicalement distingué l'évidence des philosophes (rendue par euidentia ou perspicuitns) et celle des orateurs (traduite par illustris oratio), Quintilien ac­ centue l'assimilation en usant du même substantif latin euidentia pour évo­ quer ces deux types d'enargeiai. D'où une conclusion partielle qui résume parfaitement la première étape de la démonstration: «On comprend dès lors l'intérêt de l'usage de la représentation rhétorique dans la prose philoso­ phique...

Reviews 103 En conclusion, malgré une légère réserve liée à l'éviction quelque peu cavalière du poème lucrétien, on ne peut que recommander très vivement la lecture de cet ou\ rage, qui, à travers la question de l'image, contribue à préciseï les contouis de la philosophie romaine. Menée à la fois dans la synchronie et dans la diachronie, cette étude, qui se situe au croisement de la littérature et de la philosophie, apporte à l'histoire des idées une contribution originale qui a déjà fait date. Sabine Luciani Aix-Marseille Université Fabrice Galtier, L'image tragique de l'Histoire chez Tacite - Étude des schèmes tragiques dans les Histoires et les Annales, Bruxelles: Latomus (vol. 333), 2011, 344 pages. ISBN: 978-2-87031-274-2 Sans doute n'est-ce pas un hasard si deux sur trois des tragédies«romaines» de Racine sont tirées de Tacite. A le lire comme une «source» historique, on a un peu tendance à oublier que l'écriture de l'histoire dans l'Antiquité—et jusqu'à une époque récente, jusqu'à Michelet—relevait de la littérature. Ce livre vient opportunément le rappeler. Ce serait donc com­ mettre un contresens d'interprétation que de le lire comme s'il s'occupait de Tacite en tant que source d'information pour l'historien d'aujourd'hui. Ce Tacite-là, maints travaux modernes en traitent excellemment. Le dessein de Fabrice Galtier (F. G.) est tout autre: il s'agit pour lui de mettre en évidence Tune des dimensions littéraires des œuvres majeures de Tacite: leur rapport avec l'univers de la tragédie. Son livre est servi par une langue d'une fluidité limpide et par une bibliographie fournie, bien ciblée, à laquelle on peut certes ajouter tel ou tel titre (notamment les travaux de J. Marineóla), mais qui est bien à jour pour l'essentiel. L'entreprise de F. G., pour faire court, revient à réhabiliter le Tacite«peintre des passions» cher aux critiques de jadis, un Tacite que les études modernes négligent un peu trop, peut-être parce qu'elles considèrent une telle approche comme vieillie. F. G. apporte ici la preuve qu'il n'en est rien, que ce Tacite-là est au moins aussi passionnant à étudier et fécond à découvrir—ou à redécouvrir grâce aux apports modernes de la critique rhétorique et théâtrale—que le Tacite maître de l'Histoire auquel la science récente a su si bien rendre justice. Dans cette perspective, peu importe, à la limite, de savoir si la présen­ tation par Tacite de l'événement correspond ou non à la «réalité histo­ rique „—ou à ce qu'on peut en savoir—et si cette présentation est sous-tendue par tel ou tel préjugé idéologique. Du coup, tout spécialiste moderne de Ta­ cite historien sera bien inspiré de lire ce livre: car il est permis de se demander si le choix de telle ou telle version des faits historiques rapportés par Tacite n'a pas été dicté quelquefois par des présupposés littéraires plutôt que par 104 RHETORICA un souci de vérité historique. Le dessein de F. G. n'est pas de trancher cette question, mais de repérer avec acuité et minutie les passages qui laissent planer ce doute. L'ouvrage s'articule en quatre parties. La première replace l'œuvre de Tacite dans la tradition historiographique. Du Cicéron qualifiant l'ouvrage historique d'opus oratorium maxime à l'«éthocentrisme» général de la pro­ duction historique latine, Tacite hérite d'une tradition historiographique qui existait déjà à l'époque hellénistique t qui fait la part belle à la peinture pathétique de l'individu et des mores. Line telle peinture débouchait sur une vision dramatique toujours, tragique souvent, de l'Histoire. Tacite ne fera que—si l'on peut dire—porter à la perfection cette tendance de l'écriture historiographique à Rome. La deuxième partie, est consacrée à l'étude des procédés de mise en scène de l'Histoire par Tacite. F...

Reviews Lorenzo Miletti, L'arte dell'autoelogio. Studio sull'orazione 28 K di Elio Aristide, con testo, traduzione e commento, Pisa: ETS. 238 pp. ISBN 97888 -467-2960-6 II saggio di Lorenzo Miletti è il primo ampio studio dedicato espressamente all'orazione 28 di Elio Aristide, un discorso intéressante sotto molteplici aspetti. Esso offre infatti uno spaccato della vita quotidiana dell'élite greca dell'impero romano nel II sec. d.C. e ci permette di osservare da vicino i vividi toni di una polémica fra intellettuali; inoltre, pariendo da un episodio specifico, affronta un tema di forte impatto retorico e sociale: l'opportunità e le finalité dell'elogio di sé. Apprendiamo Eantefatto dell'orazione, sia pur in modo non chiarissimo, dal testo stesso: durante la declamazione di un inno in onore della dea Atena, di fronte a un pubblico scelto che assisteva gratuitamente alla seduta oratoria, Aristide aveva fatto una aggiunta improvvisata al suo scritto, parlando in modo elogiativo di sé e della sua opera. Questo non era piaciuto a qualcuno, convinto che non fosse conveniente, per un oratore di indiscussa eccellenza corne Aristide, riferirsi a sé in quel contesto e in quel modo. Nell'orazione 28 Aristide replica alla critica, riferitagli da una terza persona: non fa il nome del suo accusatore, forse per sminuirlo consegnandolo alEoblio, o forse perché egli stesso ignora chi sia; cio comunque non ha rilevanza nello sviluppo delEargomentazione. Il testo è al tempo stesso apologia e rivendicazione della nécessité dell'autoelogio; esposizione convinta dell'ispirazione divina della retorica; esaltazione politicamente significativa del phronema greco. Per noi moderni, infine, Eorazione 28 è preziosissima fonte di lacerti di testi del patrimonio classico altrimenti perduti. Aristide compone infatti la propria difesa facendo sfilare in un tribunale ideale autorevolissimi testimoni a favore dell'autoelogio: si appoggia su un dossier di indiscutibili precedenti che dimostrano corne il dire bene di sé sia un tratto connaturato alla fierezza greca, dagli eroi di Omero a Esiodo, dai lirici agli storici, dagli oratori a Socrate, dai discorsi di generali corne Ificrate e Epaminonda, agli epigrammi attribuiti ai pittori Zeusi e Parrasio. Lo studio di Miletti si articola in Introduzione (pp. 11-58); Testo e tradu­ zione (pp. 59-143), Commento (pp. 145-210); chiudono il volume la Bibliografía (pp. 211-25), e un utile Indice dei passi citati (pp. 227-33). NeïVIntroduzione Rhetorica, Vol. XXXIII, Issue 1, pp. 97-109, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2015.33.1.97. 98 RHETORICA Miletti affronta in maniera egregia la presentazione del testo: guida dapprima il lettore nella conoscenza dell'autore, alla luce dei più recenti studi dedicati al fenómeno retorico délia Seconda Sofistica (0. Leggere Aristide oggi). Traccia poi una presentazione délia consistenza del corpus e délia situazione dal punto di vista délia critica testuale (2. L'autore e il complesso dell'opera); Miletti, che collabora al progetto coordinato da Laurent Pernot di pubblicazione degli opera omnia di Elio Aristide per la CUF, segue l'edizione aristidea di Keil 1898, ma si discosta da essa in alcuni punti, per lo più difendendo la lezione tràdita (un elenco dei loci è fornito a p. 58): ogni sua scelta è ben argomentata nel successivo Commento. L'Introduzione si addentra infine nel cuore del saggio: l'analisi del testo (2. L'orazione 28 Keil, “Flepi tou napacpOéYpoiToç" e il problema dell'elogio di sé). Miletti cerca dapprima di precisare i contorni dell'occasione che determinó la genesi dell'or. 28: sulla scia di studi precedenti, e discostandosi in questo da C. A. Behr, propone prudentemente Smirne come luogo délia performance, all'inizio del 153, periodo in cui Aristide possedeva già una solida fama. Miletti analizza poi in maniera convincente i punti-chiave del contenuto: l'orazione 28 è uno scritto polémico che affronta problemi di diversa natura, poiché l'accusa rivolta ad Aristide circa l'elogio di sé coinvolge...

This essay argues that Edmund Spenser's legal poem, the Two Cantos of Mutabilitie, considers how civil conflicts implicitly generate a basis for their own evaluation and resolution. To illustrate this idea, Spenser draws from a tradition of rhetorical argumentation stretching from Aristotle and Cicero to Rudolph Agricola and Philip Sidney. This tradition emphasizes how fictions establish the shared questions that can create a deliberative context for equitable judgment when general law and particular case come into conflict. Dramatizing this rational process through an allegorical legal trial, Spenser illuminates how divergent judgments and actions become ethically legible to one another as parts of the same deliberative whole.

This paper examines Abelard's engagement with disputation (disputatio) from the vantage point of twelfth-century scholasticism. Eschewing the well-worn details of Abelard's personal life and philosophical positions, analysis is instead focused on two parallel dimensions of his career: the manner in which he attempted to face-off with his adversaries through public debate and his underlying theory of disputation. It is argued that Abelard's theory is to be found not in his theological or logical works, but in his polemical letters and his ethical dialogue, the Collationes, which together offer a coherent hermeneutical strategy for discerning truth. Abelard's contribution to the art of disputation needs to be assessed in light of his broader involvement in the scholastic method and contemporary Jewish-Christian relations.

Book Review| November 01 2014 Review: Letters to Power: Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals, Samuel McCormick Samuel McCormick, Letters to Power: Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011. 197 pp. ISBN (Hardcover) 978-0-271-05073-7 Rhetorica (2014) 32 (4): 414–417. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.414 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Letters to Power: Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals, Samuel McCormick. Rhetorica 1 November 2014; 32 (4): 414–417. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.414 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2014 Review: Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic, by Peter White Peter White. Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 256 pp. Hardcover: $60. Paperback: $29.95. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-538851-0. Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2010. Rhetorica (2014) 32 (4): 412–414. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.412 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic, by Peter White. Rhetorica 1 November 2014; 32 (4): 412–414. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.412 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Thomas Hobbes is a severe critic of rhetoric but he is also a careful student and skillful practitioner of the art of persuasion. Many critics have therefore argued that Hobbes's views of rhetoric are both conflicted and inconsistent. In contrast, I argue that Hobbes's conception of rhetoric displays remarkable consistency. While he rejects the abuses of rhetoric abundant in political oratory he nevertheless embraces the power of eloquence. In Leviathan Hobbes reconciles his appreciation of eloquence with his distrust of oratory by refashioning rhetoric into a private, rather than public art, which fulfills many of the traditional duties of rhetoric.

Other| November 01 2014 Addresses of Contributors to This Issue Rhetorica (2014) 32 (4): 429–430. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.429 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Addresses of Contributors to This Issue. Rhetorica 1 November 2014; 32 (4): 429–430. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.429 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Le traité De Principe rédigé par Giovanni Pontano dans la seconde moitié du Quattrocento vise à éduquer le futur souverain, Alphonse II et à lui offrir tous les outils pour conforter sa légitimité contestée par les barons napolitains. La rhétorique de l'éloge, conjuguée au discours didactique, sert ici la construction d'un idéal de souverain, appuyé sur les modèles antiques mais aussi nourri de références contemporaines, l'humaniste proposant une véritable parénèse vers l'accession à la sagesse, qui repose sur l'acquisition d'une solide culture, condition sine qua non pour que se développent les vertus. Mais cet apprentissage demeure incomplet si le prince ne sait pas en outre se doter d'une persona destinée précisément à faire apparaître ses qualités. L'attention portée au souverain en représentation, exposée d'après les modèles de l'orateur et de l'acteur, ouvre la voix à une nouvelle conception de l'exercice du pouvoir.

Other| November 01 2014 Index to Volume 32 (2014) Rhetorica (2014) 32 (4): 424–428. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.424 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Index to Volume 32 (2014). Rhetorica 1 November 2014; 32 (4): 424–428. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.424 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews Peter White. Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Repub­ lic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 256 pp. Hardcover: $60. Paperback: $29.95. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-538851-0. Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2010. Cicero in Letters is a major landmark in the study of Ciceronian letters, and a book that belongs in the personal libraries of all scholars interested in the fields of Cicero and ancient letters. Building on and extending the seminal work of D. R. Shackleton Bailey, Peter White meticulously analyzes the massive corpus of extant Ciceronian letters, focusing on how the letters function as a form of social media, as it were, constructing and maintaining Cicero's personal networks. Although White engages to a certain degree with sociolinguistic method, the general approach of the book is philological, concerned primarily with close reading of individual letters, analysis of the editorial process that gave form to the extant collect, prosopography, and historical reconstruction of letters' functions as part of the reciprocity systems embedded in elite Roman networks of amicitia. Cicero in Letters, available in hardcover, softcover and electronic ver­ sions, consists of a preface, six chapters, an afterword, two appendices, notes, bibliography and indices. The main body of the book is divided into two major parts. "Part I: Reading the Letters from the Outside In" (83 pages) con­ sists of three chapters focusing on the form and context of Cicero's letters, "1. Constraints and Biases in Roman Letter Writing," "2. The Editing of the Collection," and "3. Frames of the Letter." Next is "Part II: Epistolary Preoc­ cupations" (76 pages), comprised of three chapters emphasizing the content of the letters, "4. The Letters and Literature," "5. Giving and Getting Advice by Letter," and "6. Letter Writing and Leadership." The organization of the book is thematic rather than strictly analytical, and the approach, despite meticulous scholarship, more exploratory and essayistic than scientific or argumentative. All Ciceronian passages are quoted both in Latin and in the author's own translations. The translations are generally accurate and read­ able, and the writing style of both White's text and translations is accessible to the non-specialist. The first chapter, "Reading the Letters from the Outside In," sets letter writing within its social and generic context. It exemplifies ways in which Rhetorica, Vol. XXXII, Issue 4, pp. 0-430, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.0. Reviews 413 the study of Latin letters differs radically from that of Greek. Biblical schol­ ars, especially, and a smaller group of rhetorical scholars, have produced exhaustive studies of the form and context of Greek letters, including the lo­ gistics of letter production and delivery and the relationships among letters, letter-theory and rhetorical theory, but as much ancient epistolary scholar­ ship is concerned with the Pauline epistles, less work has been devoted to Latin letters than Greek, and what work does exist is more focused on seeing letters as a lens through which to examine literature, history or politics rather than studying epistolographv for its own sake. White's work, following this general trend, displays particular strengths in analyzing how Cicero's letters responded to the problem of maintaining political influence and networks at a distance. While White's first chapter does a workmanlike job of dis­ cussing issues of letter transmission and production, and such issues as the importance of the presence formula, the discussion is presented somewhat in a vacuum, approaching, for example, the philophronetic nature of an­ cient epistolographv as a point to be proven rather than as position that has been widely accepted in the study in ancient letters since Deissman (1910, 1911) and Koskenniemi (1956). White's treatment of how Cicero in­ flects these common practices is detailed and meticulous, albeit scholars of ancient letter-writing may find frustrating the lack of comparative material or responsiveness to existing scholarship on ancient letters (e...

Reviews 417 many ways, but it confirmed for me the distance between Letters to Power and Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals. To be sure, I want all of what McCormick has to offer: I want the letter to help us rethink rhetorical history, and I want the weapons of the weak to supply learned advocacy. I'm unsure, however, that we need to Hold these projects in tandem. Dave Tell The University of Kansas Ben McCorkle, Rhetorical Delivery as Technological Discourse: A CrossHistorical Study. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois Uni­ versity Press, 2012, xiii, 207 pp.: black and white illustration. $35.00. ISBN 978-0-8093-3067-6 At a time when media platforms for content delivery proliferate so we can stay abreast of the latest iLife gadgetry; many scholars in both rhetorical studies and new media studies have been tracking the resurgence of interest in "delivery"-both in terms of the technical apparatuses that deliver content and in the rhetorical affordances of such platforms. Rhetoricians as diverse as James Porter and Kathleen Welch tout a new era of delivery, even the ascendancy of delivery as the rhetorical canon needing attention and study in the digital age. Such, at least, is the opening premise of rhet/comp and new media scholar Ben McCorkle's first book, Rhetorical Delivery as Technological Dis­ course: A Cross-Historical Study, which takes stock of this "revived" interest in delivery and notes how it has assumed a position as the "central element of the rhetorical process" (xi). But McCorke's interest in delivery is not just to help assert its current eminence; rather, he seeks to examine "the dynamic that has historically existed between rhetorical delivery and...technological shifts in our society" (2). More bluntly, he argues throughout the pages of this ambitious and wide-ranging book that "delivery's status can be read as an indicator of Western culture's attempts to come to terms with newly emerging technics, media forms, and technologies" (2). To demonstrate how delivery has been key to navigating shifts in literacy and the acquisition of new communications tools and platforms, McCorkle takes a broad view, examining over 2500 years of technological innovation in writing and composing across media. We move quickly through the shift from orality to alphabetic literacy in ancient Greece, to the Ramist rhetorics of the latel5th and early 16th centuries and the birth of European printing, to the belletristic and elocutionary movements of the 18th and 19th centuries and the rise in mass printing and literacy, to the advent of mass and digital media in the early and late 20th century respectively. Each historical moment becomes a "case study" of a technological innovation in writing or literacy that McCorkle invites us to re-imagine as an example of how the 418 RHETORICA canon of delivery comes to the fore to help navigate the transition. In the process, McCorke redefines delivery as a "technological discourse" in that "theories of delivery have historically helped to foster the cultural reception of emergent technologies of writing and communication by prescribing rules or by examining and privileging tendencies that cause old and new media forms to resemble one another" (5). Take the emergence of textual literacies in ancient Greece as an exam­ ple. Writing about Plato's dialogues, McCorkle notes how they "are not faithful transcriptions of oral events"; rather, any given dialogue comprises a "conceptual remediation of an oral discursive practice that functions by borrowing the generic conventions of a prior mode of communication, ac­ complishing the dual task of making writing appear more like speech and speech more like writing" (61). While the move to print literacies might have coincided with a declining overt interest in oral delivery, those modes of delivery were nonetheless recaptured in the new technology of writing. In this fashion, McCorkle's analysis avoids technological determinism by emphasizing the interplay of older modes of delivery with newer technolo­ gies. For instance, when analyzing the rise of the elocutionary movement with the spread of mass printing and increasing literacy in the nineteenth century, he describes how oral delivery and printing conventions began to resemble one another: "Yet another mechanism of remediation, the elocu­ tionary movements advocated...

Reviews 419 tional textual forms than they might have appeared when first becoming widely available and used in the 1990s. And yet, the contemporary history narrated here doesn't always seem right. McCorkle acknowledges that many digital rhetoricians often equate delivery with medium. He himself seems to equate them early in his book, in some of its opening sentences: “This book is about the moving parts of the rhetorical process: the raised arm, the clenched fist, the shifting counte­ nance, and (more recently) the array of typefaces, color palettes, graphics, background audio files, and other multimodal content used to help covey a given message to its intended audience" (1). Ultimately, however, the materi­ ality of digital interfaces is not embodiment, even if such interfaces remediate approaches, positions, and stances from embodied rhetorical performances. Late in the book, McCorkle acknowledges this: "In the era of digital writing, rhetoric has disembodied the canon of delivery" (160). Such disembodiment suggests that what is at stake in contemporary delivery is more than just an interplay of older media forms and newer media forms. As he puts it: "expanding the theoretical scope of delivery to include texts not uttered by the speaking body extends the conceptual language of the canon beyond the traditionallv understood constraints of space and time, making it a far richer part of the rhetorical process" (160). Yes, surely he's right. But perhaps digital delivery is not just disembodiment, or portends a new set of relations between communication and bodies? Such a question lies beyond the scope of McCorkle's book, but it's to his credit that his analysis leaves us wondering what new bodies of knowledge our digital technologies might deliver to us. Jonathan Alexander University of California, Irvine Costelloe, Timothy M., ed. The Sublime: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 13 + 304 pp ISBN 978-0-521-14367-7; Eck, Caroline van, Stijn Bussels, Maarten Delbeke, Jurgen Pieters, eds. Translations ofthe Sublime: The Early Modern Recep­ tion and Dissemination of Longinus' Peri Hupsous in Rhetoric, the Visual Arts, Architecture and the Theatre. Leiden: Brill, 2012. xix + 272 pp. ISBN 978-90-04-22955-6 Just as aesthetics is undergoing something of a revival in classical studies, so too is the heritage of the sublime increasingly getting its due again. The two collections under review contribute mightily to both trends. And they do so above all by marshaling a strong army of scholars from a number of disciplines, from Classics and modern literatures to philosophy, geography, architecture and design, art history, theater, and rhetoric. The diversity pays off: the sublime is shown to flourish in each of these areas, 420 RHETORICA often unexpectedly, as if diffusing its radiant light into all conceivable corners of the modern world and into the present. If you had any doubt whether Longinus made an impact on modernity, you need look no further than here. Costelloe's volume, though not explicitly concerned with the reception of Longinus, is nonetheless heavily informed by this agenda. The Introduc­ tion and the first chapter ("Longinus and the Ancient Sublime" by Malcolm Heath) set the tone for the remaining chapters, which quickly rush into the eighteenth century, starting with Burke, Kant, representatives of the Scot­ tish Enlightenment (a refreshing change), French neoclassicists, and then the sublime of Lyotard and company, the most recent French heirs to Boileau and company. These essays constitute the first part of the collection, which offer less of a "Philosophical History of the Sublime" than a drastically fore­ shortened version of that history. The second part spreads out in fascinating ways to look at the sublime in the Netherlands and in America in the 18i/7 and 19f/z centuries, in the fields of the philosophy of nature and the environment, in religion, among British Romantics, and against the background of the fine arts question and in architecture. The most interesting essays are those that broach unfamiliar territory. The associationalism of Gerard, Karnes, Alison, and Stewart reconstructed by Rachel Zuckert and put in relation to the sub­ lime will likely send readers off to the library (or to Google) in search of X these intriguing figures, as will Eva Madeleine...

Thomas Hobbes is a severe critic of rhetoric but he is also a careful student and skillful practitioner of the art of persuasion. Many critics have therefore argued that Hobbes’s views of rhetoric are both conflicted and inconsistent. In contrast, I argue that Hobbes’s conception of rhetoric displays remarkable consistency. While he rejects the abuses of rhetoric abundant in political oratory he nevertheless embraces the power of eloquence. In Leviathan Hobbes reconciles his appreciation of eloquence with his distrust of oratory by refashioning rhetoric into a private, rather than public art, which fulfills many of the traditional duties of rhetoric.

414 RHETORICA The focus of "Chapter 5 Giving and Getting Advice by Letter" is the way advice was offered as a gift to the recipient. This act of advice giving, though, was fraught with many perils. White's analysis of these perils shows encyclopedic knowledge of Cicero's social relationships and sensitive close reading. He shows how the advice giver had to balance the risk of bad advice with the opposite risk that bland generalities would be useless, and the hierarchical problem that while detailed and specific advice was the most useful gift, it could also appear condescending. Furthermore, advice given or received could implicate the interlocutors in each others' actions, leading to credit in the case of good results and discredit otherwise. Finally, "Chapter 6: Letter Writing and Leadership," shows the role of letters in the political events of 44 and 43, showing how letters functioned as part of political persuasion, influence peddling, and strategic communica­ tion. White shows how Cicero's letters help us understand his involvement in these events in a more personal and direct manner than the Philippic Orations and provide for us a rare opportunity to understand the positions, motivations, and maneuvers of the Roman political elite in a time of crisis. Overall, Cicero in Letters is an erudite, readable and original work that promises to be a major landmark in its area. Rhetorical scholars, however, will find frustrating a few significant lacunae in White's approach. The first, and most obvious, is that in explaining Ciceronian persuasion, White does not cite Cicero's rhetorical works at all, apparently thinking that Cicero's books on persuasion are of no use at all in helping us understand his per­ suasive practices. A second issue not addressed by White is the pedagogical circulation of letters. Roland Barthes famously said that "literature is what is taught" (1986). As many letter collections circulated in antiquity as peda­ gogical models, and Cicero's orations also functioned as models for students of rhetoric, it is puzzling that White does not address the possibility of peda­ gogical intentions and uses of the letters. Despite lack of direct interaction with rhetorical scholarship and rhetorical approaches to epistolography and epistolary theory, White's Cicero in Letters lays invaluable groundwork for future rhetorical studies of Ciceronian letters. Carol Poster York University Samuel McCormick, Letters to Power: Public Advocacy Without Pub­ lic Intellectuals. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011.197 pp. ISBN (Hardcover) 978-0-271-05073-7 Samuel McCormick s new volume holds two arguments in equipoise. As its title suggests, the first argument focuses on Letters to Power. It is an investigation of epistolary rhetoric, its form, its audiences, its strategies, and its cunning. Make no mistake, this is not your standard issue ars dictaininis. Reviews 415 Under McCormick s careful hand, the old art of letter writing is invested with a host of pressing lessons: about power, about the professoriate, and about the history of rhetoric. As his subtitle suggests, the second argument is about Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals. Here McCormick's concern is with learned intervention. In an age in which the classic role of the public intellectual is increasingly unavailable, McCormick asks what modes of resistance are available for today's institutionalized academics? The book's conceit, of course, is that these two arguments work in tandem: that the epistolary form provides rhetorical resources for learned advocacy. McCormick's account of epistolary rhetoric is grounded in the letters of Seneca the Younger, Christine de Pizan, Immanuel Kant, and Soren Kierkegaard. He argues that the epistolary form constitutes a "minor rhe­ toric" (13). It is a "minor" rhetoric not because letters are subordinate to treatises, but because the letters harbor the capacity to destabilize the hierar­ chy according to which treatises or tomes are more important than personal letters. Most importantly from my perspective, as a "minor rhetoric" the letter harbors the potential to reshape the history of rhetoric. From the per­ spective of the epistolary form, Seneca, Christine, Kant, and Kierkegaard now fit squarely in rhetorical history. Significantly, their place in such a history requires no recourse to the thematics of their thought; Seneca thematized retirement and Kierkegaard...

This paper examines Abelard’s engagement with disputation <i>(disputatio)</i> from the vantage point of twelfth-century scholasticism. Eschewing the well-worn details of Abelard’s personal life and philosophical positions, analysis is instead focused on two parallel dimensions of his career: the manner in which he attempted to face-off with his adversaries through public debate and his underlying theory of disputation. It is argued that Abelard’s theory is to be found not in his theological or logical works, but in his polemical letters and his ethical dialogue, the <i>Collationes</i>, which together offer a coherent hermeneutical strategy for discerning truth. Abelard’s contribution to the art of disputation needs to be assessed in light of his broader involvement in the scholastic method and contemporary Jewish-Christian relations.

Le traité De Principe rédigé par Giovanni Pontano dans la seconde moitié du Quattrocento vise à éduquer le futur souverain, Alphonse II et à lui offrir tous les outils pour conforter sa légitimité contestée par les barons napolitains. La rhétorique de l’éloge, conjuguée au discours didactique, sert ici la construction d’un idéal de souverain, appuyé sur les modèles antiques mais aussi nourri de références contemporaines, l’humaniste proposant une véritable parénèse vers l’accession à la sagesse, qui repose sur l’acquisition d’une solide culture, condition sine qua non pour que se développent les vertus. Mais cet apprentissage demeure incomplet si le prince ne sait pas en outre se doter d’une persona destinée précisément à faire apparaître ses qualités. L’attention portée au souverain en représentation, exposée d’après les modèles de l’orateur et de l’acteur, ouvre la voix à une nouvelle conception de l’exercice du pouvoir.

This essay argues that Edmund Spenser’s legal poem, the Two Cantos of Mutabilitie, considers how civil conflicts implicitly generate a basis for their own evaluation and resolution. To illustrate this idea, Spenser draws from a tradition of rhetorical argumentation stretching from Aristotle and Cicero to Rudolph Agricola and Philip Sidney This tradition emphasizes how fictions establish the shared questions that can create a deliberative context for equitable judgment when general law and particular case come into conflict. Dramatizing this rational process through an allegorical legal trial, Spenser illuminates how divergent judgments and actions become ethically legible to one another as parts of the same deliberative whole.

This essay takes up a discussion concerning the 1929 debate between the philosophers Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger by reading it as an instatiation of an ongoing dilemma within the field of rhetoric. I argue that the Davos meeting may be productively read through the lens of rhetorical theory and that such a reading can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of this event. The essay concludes by making a case for Cassirer's philosophy of symbolic forms as a normative ground for a rhetorical theory whose central purpose is to construct a decent, cultured, cosmopolitan, critical humanism.

Pro Sulla §§18–19 demonstrates a tactic of self-depiction unique in Cicero's speeches; the orator represents an internal dialogue in which his natural kindness towards the Catilinarian Autronius is overcome by arguments that his audience can recognize as the prosecutor's stock tactics of emotional amplification prescribed in De Inventione. By ostentatiously persuading himself to sternness with the stock appeals designed to persuade a normative audience, the orator can justify his actions against the Catilinarians while asserting that his essential nature is kind and compassionate. This tactic is both essential for Cicero's persuasive strategy and useful for his broader self-depiction for the reading audience of the speech.

Book Review| August 01 2014 Review: A History of Renaissance Rhetoric 1380–1620, by Peter Mack Peter Mack, A History of Renaissance Rhetoric 1380–1620 (Oxford–Warburg Studies), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. 345 pp., ISBN: 978-0-19-959728-4 William P. Weaver William P. Weaver Baylor University, 1 Bear Place #97144, Waco, TX 76798, USA. w_weaver@baylor.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2014) 32 (3): 317–319. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.317 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation William P. Weaver; Review: A History of Renaissance Rhetoric 1380–1620, by Peter Mack. Rhetorica 1 August 2014; 32 (3): 317–319. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.317 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This article argues that, contrary to Marc Fumaroli's claim in his classic work on sixteenth-century eloquence (1980), there does not exist in Spain such a thing as a group called “Borrhomaic Rhetorics”. Judging from Fumaroli's words, one might believe that Cardinal Charles Borromeo planned to produce a series of rhetorics in support of his ideas concerning the necessity of educating skillful preachers ready to spread the ideology of the Counter-Reformation all over Catholic Europe. However, the existence of such a plan cannot be ascertained from the available sources, nor can any clear results of it be established. Therefore, we should no longer talk about such a group.

Book Review| August 01 2014 Review: “Imprison'd Wranglers”: The Rhetorical Culture of the House of Commons, 1760–1800, by Christopher Reid Christopher Reid, “Imprison'd Wranglers”: The Rhetorical Culture of the House of Commons, 1760–1800, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 270 pp., ISBN: 978-0-19-958109-2 Katie S. Homar Katie S. Homar University of Pittsburgh, 526 Cathedral of Learning, 4200 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15260-0001, USA. ksh19@pitt.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2014) 32 (3): 312–314. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.312 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Katie S. Homar; Review: “Imprison'd Wranglers”: The Rhetorical Culture of the House of Commons, 1760–1800, by Christopher Reid. Rhetorica 1 August 2014; 32 (3): 312–314. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.312 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Review of a book in which a selection of rhetorical and philosophical texts of Roman age concerning Alexander the Great is introduced, translated, and commented