This paper analyses Demosthenes’ self-fashioning in the Philippic cycle as rhetorical process, focussing crucially on the role of foresight as constituent of symbouleutic authority and justification for his uncompromising political line. To legitimate his role as adviser, Demosthenes needed continually to proclaim his own competence. In the early days and before Philip was a major issue, Demosthenes constructs his foresight through “entechnic” arguments based on probability. Over time, self-referential passages that invoke his own prior interventions become notable sites of quasi-“atechnic” self-justification. These are further enhanced by a group of mutually reinforcing images that articulate the need for prudent foresight.

444 RHETORICA Linda Ferreira-Buckley and S. Michael Halloran, eds. Hugh Blair, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005). In the "Editors' Introduction" to this new edition of Blair's Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, Linda Ferreira-Buckley and S. Michael Halloran present an impressive overview of Blair's life, work, and legacy. They trace the publication, reception, and influence of the Lectures, providing partic­ ularly insightful discussion of the multitude of abridgements and derivative works that represented Blair's work to so many. They sketch Blair's early education and his university training, then lead readers through his life as a preacher, man of letters, and university lecturer. Finally, they assess Blair's place in the history of eighteenth-century rhetorical theory. The "Introduction" provides an authoritative survey of scholarship on some of the key issues related to Blair's work including Blair's influence on the teaching of writing in universities, on the emerging discipline of literary criticism, and on the continuing shift of the focus of rhetorical theory from oral declamation to written language (especially belles lettres). FerreiraBuckley and Halloran's extensive research in archival materials related to Blair's career and published work allows them to contribute new insights to all of these lines of inquiry. This reader found particularly interesting their reminder that Blair's Lectures not only informed later college curricula but also played a significant role in "schools, in literary societies and clubs, and in home study" (xxi). An annotated copy of the Lectures in St. Andrews University's rare book collection, for instance, provides evidence of the ways that individuals studied and used the Lectures, and I wanted to hear more about that body of evidence. Ferreira-Bucklev and Halloran end their Introduction with an innovative analysis of the curious fact that Blair "makes little mention of the works of any of the great visual artists who were his contemporaries" despite his "heavy reliance on visual metaphors and analogies" (xlvi-xlvii). Similarly, they note that Blair says nothing about contemporary music. Despite repeated references to the connections between poetry and music, Blair never acknowledges work by contemporaries such as Handel and Purcell, both of whom had set English poetry to music. While acknowledging that his inattention to contemporary art and music may simply reflect Blair's "pedagogical purpose," the editors argue that the larger significance of these lacunae may lie in the fact that "the printing press had long since created the conditions for a kind of sedentary cosmopolitanism in the textual realm" (xlviii). In short, Blair did not get out of Scotland much and " 'the age of mechanical reproduction' of visual and musical works would not arrive for another century," leaving his "experience, while rich in the literary arts,... impoverished with respect to other media" (xlviii). Through arguments like these, Ferreira-Buckley and Halloran's Introduction suggests new lines of inquiry into Blair's Lectures. Beyond the "Introduction," this volume consists mostly of an edition of the Lectures based on the 1785 London edition, which contained Blair's Reviews 445 corrections to the 1783 first edition. As a textual edition, the volume is something of a puzzle. To he sure, the text seems trustworthy with regard to what textual editors traditionally termed "substantives"—the words of the chosen copy text—but some of the editorial decisions, and the lack of textual apparatus, leave the goals of the edition unclear. The main goal of the volume is to bring the 1785 edition of Blair's Lectures back into print (it was last published in facsimile by Garland in 1970, five years after Southern Illinois University Press published a facsimile of the 1783 edition). While the 1785 edition is no longer in print, the entire text is currently available online (in a searchable facsimile edition) through Gale's Eighteenth-Centun/ Collections Online. (This new edition is also searchable online via Google Book Search, though one can read only a limited number of sample pages on that site.) The editors argue further that to "truly understand Blair's influence, scholars must begin to study differences among editions and abridgments, because what readers took away from Blair's Lectures...

The forensic oratory of classical Athens exhibits two strategies which markedly display their departure from content-specific commonplaces. The self-conscious “meta-topos” and the elaborative “para-topos” are partly reliant upon the display and appreciation of innovation for their persuasive power. This valorization of creativity can be explained by evidence that rhetorical novelty was sometimes encouraged by teachers of rhetoric and was certainly influenced by the competitive display of verse performance genres. Examples of “meta-topoi” and “para-topoi” are discussed with a view to extending our understanding of originality in Attic oratory and of how we might identify instances of it.

This essay examines linguistic and contextual features to understand Anne Askew’s ironic performances, her positioning in rhetorical history, and her texts’ persuasive power. While Askew’s tactical irony has been studied as silence, resistance, and protest, this essay shows that she uses irony to undermine the communicative event and to initiate discourse without committing to cooperative communication for all audiences involved. I argue that Askew’s performances are best accounted for as relevant-inappropriateness, and that a close examination of embedded features in her discourse helps us view Early Modern women’s performances as inventive and productive rather than patriarchal or anti-patriarchal.

442 RHETORICA Judy Z. Segal, Health and the Rhetoric of Medicine (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005), 208 pp., $50.00 cloth, ISBN 0-8093-2677-9. Humanists who study medical discourse are a diverse crowd. They hail from disciplines ranging from anthropology and bioethics to rhetoric and composition studies. Lacking a lingua franca, these scholars understandably draw from the divergent traditions of their primary fields. What has ar­ guably been missing is a comprehensive account of medical discourse aris­ ing squarely from the rhetorical tradition. University of British Columbia rhetorical theorist Judy Z. Segal's Health and the Rhetoric ofMedicine fills this void. Demonstrating the heuristic potential of rhetorical principles for un­ derstanding health and medicine broadly construed, Segal offers a series of lucidly-rendered case studies investigating the role of persuasion in shaping patients, practitioners, and illnesses alike. Segal insists on the uniqueness of particular medico-historical moments. In “Chapter One: A Kairology of Biomedicine," she advances “a study of historical moments as rhetorical opportunities" (23). To illustrate kairology's application, Segal traces shifting accounts of the patient narrator from the eighteenth century forward. Her emphasis is not medical history per se, but how medical history reveals the types of persuasion enabled by particu­ lar changes in medicine. Kairology thus informs the rhetorically-focused medical histories to come. However, her analyses derive insights from Ken­ neth Burke and an eclectic mix of classical and contemporary rhetorical theory. Segal presents seven analysis chapters flanked by a theoretically-based introduction and conclusion in a compact 158 pages of text. These build on Segal's previous publications including reprinted portions of three essays. After the opening chapter on kairology, "Chapter Two: Patient Audience, The Rhetorical Construction of the Migraineur" examines how physicians' char­ acterizations of headache patients influence the doctor-patient encounter and preferred treatments. Segal tracks the construction of the migraineur in medical writing from 1873 through the twenty-first century wherein the migraine personality has become situated in pharmacological terms. "Chap­ ter Three: The Epideictic Rhetoric of Pathography" analyzes illness narra­ tives, and their study, as value-laden rhetoric of praise and blame. Segal focuses on three complicating narrators: the pro-anorexia internet narrator who interpellates the community, the resistant narrator of Barbara Ehrenreich who challenges the tyranny of cheerfulness in breast cancer narratives, and the commercialized narrator of Carla Cantor whose hypochondria queststory represents the pathologized subject. "Chapter Four: Hypochondria as a Rhetorical Disorder" unpacks the strategic ambiguity of hypochondriacs' discourse recasting the condition from a medical mystery to a mystery of motive with historical and current examples. In "Chapter Five: A Rhetoric of Death and Dying," the book's most haunting and personal chapter, Se­ gal interrogates end-of-life rhetoric by analyzing dialogue surrounding her Reviews 443 mother's death and advanced care planning interviews to argue that in­ stitutionalized end-of-life encounters structurally impede fair deliberation. "Chapter Six: Values, Metaphors, and Health Policy" awakens the "sleeping" metaphors in health-care-policv rhetoric, exposing the values underlying medicine is war, diagnosis is health, and body as machine, for example. "Chapter Seven: The Problem of Patient 'Noncompliance': Paternalism, Expertise, and the Ethos of the Physician" addresses problems of physician authority as embedded in the terms patient non-compliance, adherence, and concordance. In her concluding section, Segal underscores the rhetorical lexicon's utility for comprehending medicine and health. Segal ably mixes insightful application of principles to particular cases with mid-level theorizing about the place of rhetoric in medicine and health. Although she draws from an interdisciplinary reservoir, her core an­ alytic concepts are well known to suasion scholars: kairos, genre, audience, metaphor, narrative, interpellation, and ethos. A second strength is her at­ tention to intersecting interactional, public, and institutional discourses. Her persistent focus on persuasion, clear prose, and accessible explanation of concepts make this volume a solid choice for upper-division undergraduate and graduate courses in rhetoric. It should also be useful for medical human­ ists who want to access rhetorical insights: her book shows how rhetorical thinking can uncover historical particularities while fostering generalized insights. The scope of cases considered is impressive, as are the connections to history of medicine scholarship. One of the...

Reviews Heinrich E Plett, Rhetoric uud Renaissance Culture. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2004. 581pp. scholars. Most of us excel in one or two areas, but he has contributed valuable work in four different fields: historical and theoretical studies of came to general attention with a substantial monograph (based on his 1969 Bonn doctoral dissertation), Rhctorik dcr Affekte. Enylische Vkirkuuysdsthetik im of the importance given to moving the feelings in English Renaissance rhetoric, an understudied topic at that time, remains worth reading and might have become trulv influential had it appeared in English. Professor Plett had already published a student text, Einfidiruug iu die rhetorische Fextanalyse (Hamburg, 1971), which moved from rhetorical criticism into general linguistics, a mo\ e which he consolidated in Textwissenschaft und Textanalyse. Senuotik, Empiustik, Rhctorik (Heidelberg, 1975), subsequently translated into Rumanian (1983). Plett's latest work on rhetorical theory is Systematische Rhctorik: Konzcpt uud Analysen (Munich, 2000), which attempts a svstematization of rhetorical figures using modern linguistic terminology. In 1977 Plett produced the first of several volumes collecting essays bv himself and other scholars, Rhctorik. Kritischc Positional zum Stand dcr Forschuny (Munich). In consecutive vears he published complementary vol­ umes deriv ing from conferences held at the Zentrum fiir Rhetorik- und Renaissance-Studien that he had founded at the University of Essen, each containing 18 essavs in German, French, and English: Renaissance-Rhetorik. Renaissance Rhetoric (Berlin, New York, 1993; see my review in Renais­ sance Quarterly, 49 [1996]: 438-40), and Renaissance-Poetik. Renaissance poetics (Berlin, 1994). Another conference he organized produced a volume called Die Aktualitdt der Rhetorik (Munich, 1996). Having been so active in providing a forum for other scholars' work, it was only fitting that his colleagues re­ paid his good deeds with one of the best Rhetoric Festschriften of recent years, Rhetorica Movet: studies in historical and modern rhetoric in honor ofEieinrich F Plett, ed. P. L. Oesterreicher and T. O. Sloane (Leiden, 1999). Heinrich Plett's work has always been marked by a wide reading and the diligent use of primary and secondary sources, an important compoRhetorica , Vol. XXV, issue 4, pp. 435-448, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . G2007 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.2007.25.4.435. 436 RHETORICA nent of scholarship which resulted in his producing a wide-ranging primary and secondary bibliography, Englische Rhetorik und Poetik 1479-1660. Eine systematische Bibliographie (Opladen, 1985; see my review, Wolfenbütteler Renais­ sance Mitteilungen, 13 [1989]: 75-80). A decade later Plett issued a corrected and enlarged edition, English Renaissance Rhetoric and Poetics. A Systematic Bibliography of Primary and Secondary Sources (Leiden, 1995; see my review, International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 5 [1998]: 260-65). Professor Plett describes the volume under review, Rhetoric and Renais­ sance Culture, as "the result of more than thirty years' work on Renaissance rhetoric" (p. vii). It is systematically organized (the chapters are labelled "AF "), beginning with an overview of the "Scope and Genres of Renaissance Rhetoric" (pp. 11-84). Then comes the longest chapter, “Poetica Rhetorica. Rhetorical Poetics in the Renaissance" (pp. 85-294), divided into the five stages of composition (inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, actio). The survey widens to take in rhetoric's relationship with the visual arts and with music, in a chapter awkwardly titled "Intermedial Rhetoric" (pp. 295-412). Chap­ ter D, “Poeta Orator: Shakespeare as Orator Poet" (pp. 413-498) consists of five parts, four of which the author has translated from essays published in German between 1981 and 1995. Chapter E, "Iconography of Rhetoric and Eloquence" (pp. 499-552), is profusely illustrated (the volume as a whole con­ tains 94 plates), and is followed by two detailed indices, of names and sub­ jects. The volume is handsomely designed and printed, with a commendably high degree of accuracy. Although the over-all structure is clear, there is an unfortunate degree of overlapping between sections, and the same quotations reappear several times over, often with the...

Reviews 439 Those are a few additions to the documentation of Renaissance rhetoric, in the spirit of the open-minded exchange of knowledge which has distin­ guished all of Professor Plett's work. This is not his best book, but it is one which ev ery serious rhetoric library should have, and one from which few readers will fail to profit. Brian Vickers Andrew W. Robertson, The Language ofDemocracy: Political Rhetoric in the United States and Britain, 1790-7900 (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2005) xix 4- 264 pp. This is a reissue in paperback, with a new Preface, of a book originally published by Cornell Univ ersity Press in 1995. Readers who missed it the first time around hav e another opportunity to consider an interesting and well-reasoned argument that has significant implications for the history of 19th century British and American rhetoric. Robertson is concerned with political rhetoric, which he further restricts to campaign discourse, largely as reported in newspapers. This is a narrow, reductionist view of the subject that may limit the generalizability of his findings, but it does not damage his argument on its own terms. He examines how political culture evolved in Britain and the United States during the 19th century (between 1790 and 1900). The overall answer is that the audience for politics widened and political discourse became more vernacular. It shifted from a laudatory discourse deferring to men of distinguished character, to a hortatory discourse seeking support for specific policies. It appealed less to an elite audience and more to a popular audience. These changes effectively dissolved the boundary between deliberative and epideictic. Having identified this important change, Robertson seeks to account for it. He finds a significant relationship between newspaper coverage and political practice. Specifically, the evolution of printing technology and the institution of advertising made it possible to sell low-cost newspapers to a large audience. This capacity, in turn, influenced trends in newspaper content. And an emerging understanding of what would satisfy a mass audience affected the practice of politicians. Their talk became focused more on policy and less on character, more on demands for specific outcomes and less on deference to men of exceptional judgment. It became more tense, more intense, more partisan, and more competitive. In 1790 the 18th century norms of genteel discourse were still dominant; by 1900 the basis of 20th century politics had been established. Interestingly, however, this change came later in Britain than in the United States. There was a gradual shift in what the term "the people" was understood to mean. Originally it referred to the educated elite who were 440 RHETORICA assumed to be in agreement with political leaders; gradually it came to designate a larger, more heterogeneous public among whom disagreement was likely and whose support must be won and not assumed. The American political audience had enlarged and considerably democratized by the 1820s, when Andrew Jackson claimed to embody the public will. Not because of his noble character but because of his platform, was he deserving of public support. In contrast, the British debates on reform during the late 1820s and early 1830s took place without an expanded press or public. They were much less populist in character. Yet by mid-century, British editorial writers fused discussion of leaders and their policies, as in the United States. Robertson credits the transplanted American editor William Cobbett with instigating the use of hortatory rhetoric in Britain. While it might seem that evolutions in discourse reflected merely the impersonal forces of economics and technology, Robertson believes that they were solidified by the rhetorical prowess of Abraham Lincoln in the United States and William Ewart Gladstone in Britain. What both men had in common, he argues, was the ability to deliver to an immediate, elite audience a speech that was also (and perhaps primarily) intended to be read by a large and anonymous national audience. In overhearing messages and easily imagining themselves among the audience, the citizenrv became accustomed to thinking that political discourse really was intended for them. From that point, the distinction between politics and entertainment broke down. The emergence of the popular political cartoon in the 1870s is evidence of...

Actors, who deliver the words of playwrights rather than their own, have largely been disregarded by rhetorical scholars despite the fact that the theatrical stage was one of the first arenas in which women struggled to gain public acceptance. A noteworthy public woman in this regard was Sarah Siddons, the late-eighteenth-century actor whose talent and influence led to her recognition as an exemplar of delivery in such rhetorical manuals as Gilbert Austin’s Chironomia (1806) and Henry Siddons’s Practical Illustrations of Rhetorical Gesture and Action (1807). This article recovers Siddons’s rhetorical legacy by examining her distinctive delivery style, emotional powers, and maternal performance in public spaces.

After the conference at Luca in 56 BC, where Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey renewed their Triumvirate, Cicero was forced to accept a compromise, which appears in the orations that he delivered to defend both the Triumvirs (De prouinciis consularibus) and his own enemies (defence of Vatinius and Gabinius). In a letter to Lentulus Spinther of December 54, Cicero justified his new political attitude toward the popular leaders. Designed as a plea, this letter, one of Cicero's longest, raises the question: “What similarity is there between a letter and a speech in court or at a public meeting?” (Fam.IX, 21, 1). Relying on the intertextuality of the letter to Lentulus with the oration Pro Plancio, delivered four months previously, this paper considers how Cicero adapts appropriateness and decorum to his addressee and displays a rhetoric that is half way between judicial eloquence and epistolary discourse.

Abstract This essay offers a reassessment of the reception history of the Latin translation of Aristotle's Rhetoric in the universities and mendicant studia of the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries. While it accepts James J. Murphy's assertion, originally made in 1969, that Aristotle's Rhetoric was studied as part of moral philosophy, it presents new manuscript and textual evidence of how this work was actually used. It argues for its popularity and importance among later medieval scholastics and suggests we take a more nuanced view of what they understood rhetoric to be.

In his Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, Hugh Blair works within the tradition of Isocrates, Cicero, and Quintilian in presenting rhetoric as a school subject that forms character and educates in citizenship. But by the terms of his title, “Rhetoric” and “Belles Lettres,” Blair signals a commitment to two different ideals of character—the ideal of civic republicanism of Roman rhetoric, on the one hand, and that of a middleclass, polite culture, on the other. As Blair wrestles with the tensions inherent in his program to reconcile the two in lectures 25–34, he inadvertently dramatizes the transformation from a rhetorical culture to a modern, bourgeois one.

Book Review| August 01 2007 Book Review: The Rhetoric of Manhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators, by Joseph Roisman The Rhetoric of Manhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators. by Joseph Roisman. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 283 pp. Rhetorica (2007) 25 (3): 334–335. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.3.334 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Book Review: The Rhetoric of Manhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators, by Joseph Roisman. Rhetorica 1 August 2007; 25 (3): 334–335. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.3.334 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. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric2007 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

In his Lectures on Rhetoric mid Belles Lettres, Hugh Blair works within the tradition of Isocrates, Cicero, and Quintilian in presenting rhetoric as a school subject that forms character and educates in citizenship. But by the terms of his title, “Rhetoric” and “Belles Lettres,” Blair signals a commitment to two different ideals of character - the ideal of civic republicanism of Roman rhetoric, on the one hand, and that of a middleclass, polite culture, on the other. As Blair wrestles with the tensions inherent in his program to reconcile the two in lectures 25–34, he inadvertently dramatizes the transformation from a rhetorical culture to a modern, bourgeois one.

332 RHETORICA Darstellung der Entwicklung des Genres Stâdtebeschreibung bzw. Stâdtelob von der Antike bis in Guicciardinis Zeit. Guicciardinis im Titel der Arbeit genanntes Werk (Descrittione di tutti i Paesi Bassi altrimenti detti Germania inferiore, 1567) wird nicht besprochen; wichtigstes Ergebnis für die Forschung zu dieser Schrift dürfte eine gegen Ende gemachte Feststellung des Autors sein: "No feature which one meets within Guicciardini's Descrittione seems to be without precedent." (S.355, Anm.69) Ein hilfreiches Register (S. 356-373) und ein Nachweis der Erstpublikationen der Beitrâge (S.374) beschliefien den Band. Wer ihn zur Gànze oder auch nur in Ausschnitten liest, wird dem Autor Bewunderung für die Breite seiner Interessen, seine Kenntnis der Primàr- und Sekundàrliteratur und die Detailgenauigkeit seiner Analysen nicht versagen. Dabei kônnte man sich auf Melanchthon berufen, welcher in seiner Rhetorik in einem Abschnitt über das Kommentieren sagt: "[...] qui eo est vel usu vel ingenio, ut in auctoribus videre possit, quur hoc loco, quur sic singula tractentur, ilium vehementer probandum censeo." Auch diese Passage ist Classens Analyse natürlich nicht entgangen (vgl. S.264). Johannes Gôbel Universitat Tubingen Lindal Buchanan, Regendering Delivery: The Fifth Canon and Ante­ bellum Women Rhetors. Studies in Rhetorics and Feminisms Series. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005. 202 pp. With the publication of Lindal Buchanan's Regendering Delivery, South­ ern Illinois University Press's Studies in Rhetorics and Feminisms series has become the national leader in book-length studies of gender and rhetorical performance. While only the seventh in the series, Regendering Delivery is the fourth to deal with this subject (the others are Nan Johnson's Gender and Rhetorical Space in American Life, 1866-1910, Carol Mattingly's Appropriate [ing] Dress: Women's Rhetorical Style in Nineteenth-Century America, and Roxanne Mountford's The Gendered Pulpit: Preaching in American Protestant Spaces'). Building on these works, Buchanan adds to our understanding of antebellum women's opportunities and strategies for speaking in public, par­ ticularly in three areas: elocutionary instruction for girls in public schools, public speaking occasions for young women in private colleges, and delivery styles of antebellum women activists. A central claim of Regendering Delivery is that throughout history, Amer­ ican women have had far greater access to elocutionary instruction than has been commonly thought. In Chapter 1, "Readers and Rhetors: School­ girls' Formal Elocutionary Instruction," Buchanan offers evidence that in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, girls as well as boys were taught elocu­ tion as part of their reading curriculum. Eighteenth-centurv readers such as Reviews 333 Noah Webster s popular American Selection ofLessons in Rending and Speaking included elocutionary instruction (both actio and pronuntiatio) and sample debates and declamations for practice. Textbooks acknowledged schoolgirls as an audience (e.g., through instructions on conduct), making clear that reading and elocution were first thought to be gender-neutral subjects. As Buchanan s analysis shows, it was not until the nineteenth century that sep­ arate readers for girls and hoys were published, with selections from oratory omitted in some hooks for girls. Nevertheless, pronuntiatio continued to be taught, and girls participated in school-sponsored exhibitions in which they spoke before audiences, as Buchanan richly illustrates in Chapter 2. Chapter 2, "Practicing Delivery: Young Ladies on the Academic Plat­ form, ' offers a decisive response to Robert J. Connors's controversial claim that co-education was responsible for the demise of oratory in nineteenthcentury colleges and universities. Buchanan agrees with Connors that there were some changes to the curriculum in the nineteenth century, but disagrees with the reasons Connors offers. Young women spoke before public audi­ ences at school-sponsored events for fifty years prior to 1830, and throughout the nineteenth century women admitted to co-educational institutions such as Oberlin fought for the opportunity to speak in public, sometimes form­ ing their own clubs to practice in private. Weaving together a history from biographies of such famous Oberlin graduates as the Reverend Antoinette Brown, Buchanan establishes that co-education provided women hard won opportunities to develop their oratorical skills, which they later exploited in the fight for women's rights. Chapter 2 includes many interesting glimpses into the compromises forced upon college...

After the conference at Luca in 56 BC, where Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey renewed their Triumvirate, Cicero was forced to accept a compromise, which appears in the orations that he delivered to defend both the Triumvirs (De prouinciis consularibus) and his own enemies (defence of Vatinius and Gabinius). In a letter to Lentulus Spinther of December 54, Cicero justified his new political attitude toward the popular leaders. Designed as a plea, this letter, one of Cicero’s longest, raises the question: “What similarity is there between a letter and a speech in court or at a public meeting?” (Fam. IX, 21 1). Relying on the intertextuality of the letter to Lentulus with the oration Pro Plancio, delivered four months previously, this paper considers how Cicero adapts appropriateness and decorum to his addressee and displays a rhetoric that is half way between judicial eloquence and epistolary discourse.

334 RHETORICA ration" among antebellum women (because Truth's speech was reproduced by Frances Gage). Because Regendering Delivery provides so little analysis of African American women speakers' unique struggles, this relatively uncriti­ cal treatment of white antebellum reformers' relationship to Sojourner Truth is disappointing. Chapter 5 and the conclusion, which would have benefitted from further development, foster confusion over the book's theory of delivery. Nevertheless, this criticism should not deter scholars from picking up this fine book, which makes important contributions to the feminist study of the history of rhetoric. Roxanne Mountford University ofArizona Joseph Roisman, The Rhetoric of Manhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 283 pp. A book entitled The Rhetoric ofManhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators was probably as inevitable as was the study of gender and sexuality in the ancient world. As gender studies matured as an academic discipline, the scholarly examination of masculinity could not remain far behind, despite the expected quip that all previous scholarship was "masculine studies." In fact, men's studies forms an important complement to women's studies and deserves to stand as an important element of rhetorical studies as well. Anyone interested in exploring the overlapping fields of rhetoric, on the one hand, and ideologies and practices of masculinity, on the other, will find The Rhetoric ofManhood: Masculinity in the Attic Orators an important resource for scholars of ancient rhetoric and rhetorical theory more generally despite the fairly narrow focus revealed by the subtitle. As the full title suggests, Roisman has limited his focus to one genre— ancient oratory—which in turn further limits his study to a roughly onehundred year span of Athenian history, from the late fifth century to the 320s bce. In practice, the focus is even narrower, as this study must inevitably rely most heavily on a small handful of orators (chiefly Demosthenes and Lysias) with the largest corpus of orations. However, this tight methodological lens brings its own benefits, and in fact is less restricting than it might at first appear to be. In the first place, as Roisman himself notes (quoting Loraux), the context for ancient oratory—the political life of the city and its citizens— was so thoroughly imbricated with notions of masculinity that "the true name of the citizen is really aner [man], meaning that sexual identity comes first" (1). Thus what it meant to be a virtuous citizen, friend, and speaker, a benefit to friends and a harm to enemies, can be seen as largely co-terminous within the political and legal arena with what it meant to be a virtuous and capable man in general. Reviews 335 Further, though ancient oratory was once suspect as too rhetorical to be reliable as historical evidence, it is now valued as an important resource precisely because it depends for its effectiveness on its believability to its audience. More than any other genre, oratory had to appeal to beliefs that the audience was willing to accept. This does not mean that orations accurately reflect social practices and behaviors, but it does suggest that they remain within the bounds of what politically active Athenian men thought they and their city valued, and how it ought to put those values into practice. This study of ancient orations turns out to be a particularly valuable resource for self-representations of and for Athenian men. The Athenian masculine ideology that Roisman discovers turns out to be quite broad and complex, including standards of behavior in youth (chapter 1); the roles and responsibilities of the adult male as husband, father, kin, friend, and citizen; the role of shame (chapter 3); the relationship between masculinity and social status (chapter 4); military service (chapter 5); the struggle for power (chapter 6); the negotiation of desire and self-control (chapter 7); the mastery of fear (chapter 8); and old age (chapter 9). Of particular interest for historians of rhetoric in this context are sections devoted to the struggle for political power and assertions of manliness be­ tween speakers and audiences. Roisman reveals not only the value of oratory as a source of information about masculine ideology in ancient Greece but shows as well how oratory was...

This study examines the rhetorical practice of James Forten, an African American activist of the early republic. Focusing on four texts written between 1800 and 1832 for white audiences and considering Forten’s efforts to align white readers with the plight of both free and enslaved American blacks, I explore pathos (particularly as conceived by eighteenth-century Scottish rhetoricians), the suppliant ethos, appeals based on Pennsylvania and U.S. legal and political traditions, and arguments addressing the practical concerns of the audience. Through such analysis, I demonstrate Forten’s pioneering role in the development of African American deliberative rhetoric.

This essay offers a reassessment of the reception history of the Latin translation of Aristotle’s Rhetoric in the universities and mendicant studia of the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries. While it accepts James J. Murphy’s assertion, originally made in 1969, that Aristotle’s Rhetoric was studied as part of moral philosophy, it presents new manuscript and textual evidence of how this work was actually used. It argues for its popularity and importance among later medieval scholastics and suggests we take a more nuanced view of what they understood rhetoric to be.

Reviews Carl Joachim Classen, Autike Rhctorik ini Zeitnltcr des Humanismus. Beitràge zur Altertumskunde 182. München/Leipzig: Saur, 2003. IX, 374 S., Register. Bei den in diesem Band gesammelten Studien handelt es sich um (grôRtenteils überarbeitete) Neupublikationen von überwiegend in den neunziger Jahren erscbienenen Aufsâtzen des vielseitigen Forschers Carl Joachim C(lassen). In ihrer Mehrzahl liefern sie neue Beobachtungen zur Rezeption von Ciceros Reden im europâischen Humanismus. Drei thematische Blocke sind unterscheidbar: Neben chronologisch geordneten, detaillierten Aufrissen der Rezeption der Reden Ciceros im wissenschaftlichen Schrifttum einiger westeuropâischer Lander im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert (Cicerokommentare bilden den Schwerpunkt der Betrachtungen) stehen Einzeluntersuchungen zur Wirkung Ciceros auf das Werk von Humanisten wie Georg von Trapezunt oder Johannes Sturm. Am Ende des Bandes finden sich schlieRlich Arbeiten zum rhetorischen Werk einzelner Humanisten (Bcbel, Melanchthon, Guicciardini), bei dessen Untersuchung die Cicero-Rezeption nicht im Vordergrund steht. Da die elf Beitràge weder nach chronologischen noch nach thematischen Gesichtspunkten, sondern eher nach solchen der variatio geordnet zu sein scheinen, seien sie hier in der oben skizzierten Reihenfolge besprochen. In den beiden umfangreichen Arbeiten, die den Band eroffnen ("Cicerostudien in der Romania im fünfzehnten und sechzehnten Jahrhundert", S.l-71; "Das Studium der Reden Ciceros in Spanien im fünfzehnten und sechzehnten Jahrhundert", S. 72-136), sowie in den Kapiteln VI und VII des Bandes ("Cicero inter Germanos redivivus I", S.189-224, und "II", S.225-245), gelingt dem Autor nichts Geringeres als ein repràsentativer Überblick über das Studium von Ciceros Reden im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert in den Lândern Italien, Frankreich, Spanien und Deutschland. Grund für das Entstehen dieser Aufsàtze war, wie der Autor in seinem kurzen Vorwort (S.VII) andeutet, der ursprüngliche Plan, Ciceros Reden für den Catalogus Cornaientariorura et Translationum (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, I960-) zu bearbeiten. Dieser Hintergrund erklàrt, warum gerade die ersten beiden Kapitel oft den Eindruck ausformulierter Lexikonartikel vermitteln und deshalb gut zur ersten Orientierung zu benutzen sind. Der Durchgang durch die Cicerorezeption in Italien (von Petrarca bis Bembo, S.5-20, mit Rhetorica, Vol. XXV, Issue 3, pp. 329-335, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . G2007 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.2007.25.3.329. 330 RHETORICA einem kurzen Ausblick auf das Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts, S.68-71), Frankreich (von Bernard de Chartres bis zum genialen Textkritiker François Hotman , 1524-1590, S.21-68) und Spanien (auf S.81-127 werden mehr als 100 spanische Autoren des 15. und 16. Jh.s kurz vorgestellt) führt C. zu folgenden Thesen (vgl. zusammenfassend S. 190): In Italien münden die vielfâltigen Formen der Cicero-Rezeption im 15. Jahrhundert schlieBlich in ein orthodoxstilistisches Studium Ciceros, welches zur Entwicklung der Nationalsprache beitrâgt. In Frankreich ist das Interesse an antiker Rhetorik ungebrochen, die Universitàten spielen hier aber kaum eine Rolle, sondern es sind oft Autodidakten oder speziell Interessierte (etwa im juristischen Bereich), welche die Cicero-Studien vorantreiben. In Spanien ist das Studium der Antike und speziell Ciceros nie Selbstzweck, sondern steht im Dienste der Erziehung, welche ihrerseits die propagatiofidei zum Ziel hat. Im deutschsprachigen Raum ist die Cicero-Rezeption, wie C.s Untersuchungen zum Umgang mit Cicero bei Humanisten wie P.Luder, R.Agricola, J.Wimpfeling, H.Bebel und J.Locher (Kap.VI) und in Cicero-Kommentaren von B.Latomus, Ph.Melanchthon, J.Sturm, Pde la Ramée und einigen ihrer Nachfolger zeigen (Kap.VII), weniger durch die Debatte um den sogenannten Ciceronianismus als vielmehr durch die Bedürfnisse der Schule geprâgt; diese veranlassen viele Kommentatoren dazu, Ciceros Reden gleichsam als Steinbrüche für stilistisch vorbildliche Phrasen zu gebrauchen. C.s wertvolle Hinweise auf solche "Didaktisierungen" Ciceros machen auf ein weites Forschungsfeld aufmerksam und wàren durch Untersuchungen zum Umgang mit Cicero im deutschen schulischen und universitàren Lehrbetrieb des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts zu ergànzen, welche bislang noch kaum durchgeführt sind. Erg...

Book Review| May 01 2007 Book Review: Rhetoric in Antiquity, trans. W. E. Higgins, by Laurent Pernot Rhetoric in Antiquity, trans. W. E. Higgins a cura di Laurent Pernot. Washington, D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2005. xiv + 269 pp. Rhetorica (2007) 25 (2): 205–209. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.2.205 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Book Review: Rhetoric in Antiquity, trans. W. E. Higgins, by Laurent Pernot. Rhetorica 1 May 2007; 25 (2): 205–209. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.2.205 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. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric2007 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract The celebrated inventor of the “Ocular Harpsichord” is less well known as the author of Mathématique universelle, published in 1728. In this work, the Jesuit teacher develops a cheerful method of instruction in inspired by his desire to popularize a discipline hitherto marked with the seal of austerity. In order to clear away the illusory superiority of professional geometers, Father Castel makes argumentative breaks from tradition, aiming to devalue the ethos of contemporary mathematicians. Through textual analysis of certain rhetorical professions such as candid directness (aretè), ostentatious goodwill (eunoia) and, in a more general sense, the dissociation of appearance from reality, the present study seeks to place in evidence certain ethical concerns which were shaking Jesuite learned world in its confrontation with the new epistemology of the century of the Enlightenment.

This article contributes to the study of medieval poetics and rhetoric by reassessing the Arabic-Aristotelian influence in the Poetria and Testa nucis of Matthew of Linköping (c. 1300–1350). In the Poetria Matthew applied a dichotomy between essential and accidental aspects (essencialia-accidentalia) which provided him with a historical, theoretical, and cultural perspective on conventional poetics. The appeal of the (Parisian teaching of) Arabic-Aristotelian poetics lay not merely in its theoretical ideas, but also in its novel multilingual and cultural aspects that differed from the self-conscious Latin legacy of the older medieval poetics based on Horace and Cicero.

Book Review| May 01 2007 Book Review: Heidegger and Rhetoric, by Daniel M. Gross and Ansgar Kemmann Heidegger and Rhetoric edited by Daniel M. Gross and Ansgar Kemmann. New York: State University of New York Press, 2005. 195 pp. Rhetorica (2007) 25 (2): 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.2.209 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Book Review: Heidegger and Rhetoric, by Daniel M. Gross and Ansgar Kemmann. Rhetorica 1 May 2007; 25 (2): 209–215. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2007.25.2.209 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. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric2007 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews 215 understanding of rhetoric but also an assertion of Heidegger's 'restricted conception of rhetoric." Robert J. Dostal Bryn Mawr College E. Amatoet J. Schamp, eds., ÈTHOPOIIA. La représentation de caractères entrefiction scolaire et réalité vivante à l'époque impériale et tardive, textes édités par E. Amato et J. Schamp, avec une préface de M.-P. Noël, Salerno (Cardo, n° 3), 2005, 231 p. Quels discours pourrait tenir Héraclès pris de folie? la nymphe Écho poursuivie par Pan? un homme du continent voyant la mer pour la première fois? Éros amoureux? un eunuque pris d'un désir soudain? une courtisane rangée? Hector (mort) à Achille qui s'est revêtu de ses armes? Hélène à la vue de Ménélas (son mari) et de Pâris (son amant) s'affrontant en combat singulier? Caïn après avoir tué son frère? Médée avant d'égorger ses en­ fants? Voilà quelques-uns des sujets que les littérateurs et rhéteurs de la fin de l'Antiquité pouvaient s'imposer à eux-mêmes ou soumettre à leurs élèves dans le cadre de l'exercice dit d'éthopée. Que n'a-t-on conservé la totalité des corrigés! La compétence développée -faire parler les personnages en accord avec leur caractère et la situation plus ou moins dramatique ou paradoxale qu'ils sont en train de vivre- est celle des grands poètes, depuis l'aube de la civilisation grecque. Comme technique oratoire, l'éthopée s'est perfec­ tionnée dans l'atelier des logographes (Lysias excellait dans cet art), mais elle doit beaucoup aussi à Aristote, dont elle exploite la «preuve» éthique, première théorie psychologique selon certains, ainsi que la «preuve» émo­ tionnelle (pathos). Codifiée ensuite par les rhéteurs, travaillée par les écoliers dans le cadre des «exercices préparatoires» (progymnasmata), cultivée par les déclamateurs, influencée par les arts plastiques, prenant son autonomie en tant que forme littéraire à part entière d'où un raffinement qui confine parfois au maniérisme, ou encore annexée par l'historien-moraliste, par le philo­ sophe faisant œuvre protreptique, le prêcheur dans son effort apologétique, sinon par chaque individu dans la conversation courante, l'éthopée est un bon témoin de l'évolution de la rhétorique ancienne et de sa transformation en poétique généralisée. C'est donc un plaisir de saluer la parution d'un ouvrage qui propose, sur ce sujet apparemment «pointu», non seulement une somme d informations précises mais aussi une vue d'ensemble capable d'en montrer tout l'intérêt et toute la fraîcheur. Il n'est pas indifférent à cet égard que le recueil paraisse comme troisième numéro de la série Cardo, et s'inscrive parmi les réalisations d'un programme de recherche de l'Université de Fribourg (Suisse) consacré spécifiquement à la culture, notamment rhétorique, de l'antiquité tardive. 216 RHETORICA L'ouvrage, en effet, n'est pas seulement conçu comme un ouvrage érudit ou documentaire. Issu d'un colloque, il tend à répondre à une problématique. Son objectif consiste -dans l'esprit de Peter Brown- à réévaluer la produc­ tion littéraire et théorique d'une période à (re)découvrir, l'antiquité tardive, plus précisément la période qui sépare l'avènement du christianisme de l'extinction du paganisme, période qu'on appelle parfois troisième sophis­ tique. Souvent réduite au psittacisme et à la servilité (voire au ridicule), cette période s'avère à l'examen une période riche, capable de croiser, de déplacer, bref de réinventer les modèles hérités de la Tradition et de leur donner une va­ leur esthétique pleine et nouvelle. Dans l'optique de ce réexamen, Téthopée constituait un «modèle» particulièrement fécond. Outre la Préface et un Avant-propos des éditeurs, l'ouvrage contient onze contributions en cinq langues (allemand, anglais, espagnol, français...

This article contributes to the study of medieval poetics and rhetoric by reassessing the Arabic-Aristotelian influence in the Poetria and Testa nucis of Matthew of Linköping (c. 1300–1350). In the Poctria Matthew applied a dichotomy between essential and accidental aspects (essencialia-accidentalia) which provided him with a historical, theoretical, and cultural perspective on conventional poetics. The appeal of the (Parisian teaching of) Arabic-Aristotelian poetics lay not merely in its theoretical ideas, but also in its novel multilingual and cultural aspects that differed from the self-conscious Latin legacy of the older medieval poetics based on Horace and Cicero.

218 RHETORICA voulu, p. XIII, sou peu, p. XIV n. 3; Fisiognomica, p. 1.... C'est en somme un ouvrage foisonnant, marquant et stimulant, à lire et à conserver. Pierre Chiron Université Paris XII-Val de Marne Michelle Ballif and Michael G. Moran, eds., Classical Rhetorics and Rhetoricians: Critical Studies and Sources. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2005. 402 pp. As programs in rhetorical studies in the U.S. grow, the field has come to acknowledge the need for a fuller complement of reference materials. In their introduction to this collection of short essavs on ancient Greek and J Roman rhetoricians, Michelle Ballif and Michael G. Moran point out the paradox of one of the oldest areas of studies in the humanities discovering in the late twentieth century a dearth of scholarship on its own history. The seemingly tireless efforts of George A. Kennedy and James J. Murphy have been indispensable, but a healthy discipline cannot be sustained on the work of a very few scholars. Over the past decade, rhetoric specialists such as Theresa Enos, James Jasinski, Water Jost and Wendy Olmsted, and Thomas O. Sloane have been moving to fill this gap. With its focus on figures rather than concepts and its concentration on the pre-modern period, the work under consideration here distinguishes itself from other recent publications. Falling between the Speech Association of America's 1968 Biographical Dictionary of ancient rhetoricians (Bryant et al.; now out of print) with its very short entries and the huge, comprehensive Oxford Classical Dictionary, perhaps too expensive and broadly conceived for many rhetoric scholars to justify owning, Ballif and Moran's book is a welcome contribution. The volume includes sixty-one alphabetically arranged entries, most on individuals, with a few on clusters of rhetors (Attic orators, Pythagorean women), anonymous works (Rhetorica ad Herennium), works whose author­ ship is in doubt (Anaximenes' Rhetorica ad Alexandrian, Demetrius' On Style, and Longinus' On the Sublime), and rhetorical practices (dissoi logoi, progymnasmata ). The forty-five contributors come from a range of institutions and disciplines-classics, communication studies, and English. Established schol­ ars in the field of classical rhetoric are well represented, and the contributors include a few writers from outside the U.S., but the project is primarily ori­ ented toward those who work with rhetoric in conjunction with composition or communications, a largely North American phenomenon The volume is distinctive in its resistance to the typically conservative function of reference works, the tendency of which is to consolidate, repro­ duce, and canonize. Ballif and Moran take a revisionary historiographical approach to their task, outlining in the introduction their desire to expand Reviews 219 and realign the historical boundaries of the field in several ways. They take in a broad historical sweep, including Homer and the pre-Socratics at one end and Augustine and Boethius at the other. Further, they work against the male-dominance of ancient rhetoric by including a number of female fig­ ures (e.g., Sappho, Aspasia, Hortensia, and Hypatia). Finally, they heighten the significance of sophistic contributions to the rhetorical tradition. This revisionarv approach is carried into the entries in many cases. Thankfully, the editors did not demand strict adherence to a template, so contributors were able to shape their material to the contours of their widely varied subjects. But there is consistency, so that in each case the reader is offered biographical data, an account of the significant texts, a discussion of rhetor­ ical theory and practice, and a perspective on the legacy of the figure in question. Numerous entries foreground on-going scholarly debates, realiz­ ing the editors' revisionarv commitments. Notable in this regard are Patrick O'Sullivan on Homer, Michael Gagarin on Antiphon, Janet Atwill on Aris­ totle, Takis Poulakos on Isocrates, and Joy Connolly on Quintilian. For the most part, the writers avoid the flattening or deadening effect that seems al­ most inevitable in such works, and figures come across not as clearly drawn monoliths but as sites of contestation. Particularly lively moments come in the entry on Diogenes of Sinope by D. Diane Davis and Victor J. Vitanza, and in Vitanza's characteristically zealous encounter with Favorinus. The quality of scholarship in general is high, as one would expect...

Reviews Lauicnt Pernot, Rhetoric in Antiquity, trans. W. E. Higgins (Washing­ ton, D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2005), pp. xiv + 269, $27.95, paper, ISBN 0-8132-1407-6. Rhetoric in Antiquity is one in a series of volumes that have been pub­ lished or are in preparation that provide an overview or explore important aspects of rhetoric in the Greek and Roman worlds. Translated by W. E. Hig­ gins from the original French version of Laurent Pernot published in 2000 as La Rhétorique dans 1 Antiquité (Paris: Librarie Générale Française, 2000), this book seems designed mainly to sen e as an introduction for general readers and students of rhetorical theory and practice from the Homeric to imperial periods. Pernot's structure is traditional: there are six chronological chapters covering Homeric, sophistic, Athenian, Hellenistic, republican, and imperial rhetoric; these chapters include six excurses that take up issues of particular significance to the author. A short introduction (pp. vii-xiv) stresses Pernot's aim of providing a history of the practice and theory of Greek and Roman rhetoric and contains a synopsis of the different conceptions and definitions of rhetoric; the first excursus considers the utility of rhetoric in modern scholarship as evidenced by the popularity of the phrase "the rhetoric of" in the titles of various studies. Chapters 1 and 2 examine the origins of Greek rhetoric. In chapter 1 ("Rhetoric Before Rhetoric," pp. 1-9) Pernot views the speeches of the Iliad and Odyssey as evidence of an awareness of rhetoric, especially technical terms, although he rightly observes that Homer did not anticipate its rules. The speeches of the characters in Homeric epic define their personalities as well as reveal their oratorical abilities. In his treatment of the centuries following Homer, Pernot emphasizes the links not only between oratory and the Greek polis, especially in the development of Athenian democracy, but also between oratory and literature. Chapter 2 ("Sophistic Revolution," pp. 10-23) explores the "invention" of rhetoric and its attribution to various figures such as Empedokles of Agrigentum, Korax and Tisias. The focus is mainly on the sophists, especially Gorgias, and their role in the development of Greek rhetoric and more generally in Athenian society. An excursus on the word rhetorikê challenges not only Edward Schiappa's view (American Journal of Philology 111 [1990]: 457-70) that it was coined by Plato but also Rhetorica, Vol. XXV, Issue 2, pp. 205-219, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . 02007 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.2007.25.2.205. * /IlL-* * 206 RHETORICA Thomas Cole's thesis (The Origins ofRhetoric in Ancient Greece [1991]) that the discipline of rhetoric itself was invented by Plato and Aristotle. Chapters 3 and 4 address Athenian and Hellenistic rhetoric respectively. In chapter 3 ("The Athenian Movement," pp. 24-56) Pernot covers rhetoric at Athens from the end of the Peloponnesian war to the death of Alexander the Great (404-323 bce). After examining the practice of oratory at Athens in the judicial, political, and ceremonial contexts, Pernot reviews the conditions that made it possible for the different types of speeches to emerge in these different settings, then discusses and compares the careers and works of lsokrates and Demosthenes. One of the more interesting sections, which deals with the reality and image of the practice of oratory, stresses the importance of oratory at Athens even as it draws attention to its limitations. Following M. H. Hansen (The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes [1991]), Pernot suggests that the number of citizens active in the assembly was in the hundreds, while the number of leading orators at any given time probably numbered around twenty; thus the oratorical and public aspects of political life at Athens is generally considerably overvalued in both ancient and modern treatments of rhetoric. In an excursus Pernot outlines the origins and history of the canon of the ten Attic orators; his tendency...

This paper examines how the battle exhortation was analysed in ancient rhetoric. The Thucydidean battle exhortation is the key: by combining different lines of argumentation drawn from the oratorical practices of the late fifth century bce, Thucydides created a new kind of battle speech. The main feature of this speech is its flexibility in reasoning and its ability to fulfil new functions in historiographic works. Those two features explain why that kind of military speech proved so successful with later historians, and they also explain the views of imperial-age rhetoricians in analysing these speeches.

Reviews 209 treatments on the conversion of classical rhetoric in the Christian era, rhetoric from the end of antiquity to the modern age, and Greco-Roman rhetoric in the contemporary world. At the back of the volume there is a thesaurus of concepts and technical terms and a chronological table of important literary and rhetorical events in the Greek and Roman worlds. The bibliography consists of collections of sources; general works; proceedings, melanges, and collections; specialized journals; thematic and diachronic studies; and works relevant to the individual chapters and the conclusion, the references to which are further subdivided into different eras covered. All of these sections are useful in an introductory survey of this type. Relevant passages from the Greek and Latin texts appear only in English translation. Finally, W. E. Higgins' eloquent translation from the French makes Pernot's text comprehensible to the uninformed reader of rhetoric, which is no mean feat given the technical nature of the material discussed. Inevitably, some infelicities and inconsistencies emerge in respect of translation (e.g., "the encomium readies the reception for hard sayings," p. 181) and transliteration (e.g., "Thucydides" but "Kleon," p.18) respectively. How does Rhetoric in Antiquity compare with other books on classical rhetoric intended for a general readership that have been published during the past dozen years? Pernot's volume is generally more accessible and less traditional than George Kennedy's A New History ofClassical Rhetoric (1994); more specifically it offers more information on the historical and cultural background of rhetoric and is less text based. Thomas Habinek's Ancient Rhetoric and Oratory (2005), however, focuses especially on the political, so­ cial, and cultural aspects of rhetoric and avoids the traditional structure of Pernot and Kennedy. A great strength of Pernot as a scholar of rhetoric is his positive approach, as evidenced by his generally favourable view of imperial rhetoric and declamation. Rhetoric in Antiquity is therefore partic­ ularly suitable as an introductory survey text for a postgraduate or senior undergraduate course on rhetoric. William J. Dominik University of Otago Daniel M. Gross and Ansgar Kemmann, eds., Heidegger and Rhetoric. State University of New York Press, 2005. ISBN 10 0-7914-6551-6.195 pp. This volume is a collection of six essays and one interview, each of which addresses the theme of Heidegger and rhetoric. The obvious occasion and motivation for this volume is the recent (2002) publication of Heidegger s lectures on Aristotle in the summer semester of 1924: Grundbegriffe der Aristotelischen Philosophic, Gesamtausgabe, volume 18 (as yet untranslated). One of the foci of these lectures is Aristotle's Rhetoric. One of the peculiarities 210 RHETORICA of the book under review is that a reader unfamiliar with the lectures could come away with the impression that the lectures provide a reading of Aristotle's Rhetoric. There are various references in this collection (and elsewhere in the secondary literature, I should add) to the SS 1924 lectures as lectures on Aristotle's Rhetoric. Nancy Struever, for example, asserts in her essay, "Alltaglichkeit, Timefulness, in the Heideggerian Program'' that "it [these lectures] remains, arguably, the best twentieth-century reading of Aristotle's Rhetoric." This may be so, but the lectures only deal with certain parts of the Rhetoric and spend much time considering sections of Metaphyics, Physics, On the Soul, Nicomachean Ethics, and On the Ports ofAnimals. In short, these lectures by Heidegger concern what the title announces: basic concepts of Aristotle's philosophy including logos, ousia, entelecheia, energeia, phusis, dunamis, telos, praxis, ethos, pathos, nous, hedone among others. Of the concepts just listed Heidegger relies primarily on the Rhetoric only for an explication of pathos. The reason why it makes some sense to highlight Heidegger's concern with the Rhetoric is that the Rhetoric clearly is a central text for him. He even objects to an early editor's placing this work at the end of Aristotle's works. He makes the large claim that the "tradition has long ago lost an under­ standing of rhetoric" and that "Rhetoric is no less than the interpretation (Auslegung) of Dasein in its concreteness, the hermeneutics of Dasein itself." (p. 110). As Theodore Kisiel argues in his essay in this...

Abstract With the notion of homologoumene arete Isocrates shows himself to be an exponent of popular ethics, or “common sense”. Isocrates integrates established concepts of everyday ethics with his idea of education, which at all levels he brings into association with public affirmation. This is not a notion of education concerned only with inner values—Platonic education, viewed from this perspective, has to appear reductionist—but with a conception of homologoumene arete that manifests itself as publicly effective, in the sense of traditional polis-ethics. Isocrates proclaims the unity of appearance and reality and remains, even in the face of failures, such as the case of his pupil Timotheos, an optimist. He justifies aspirations for influence and success, which are a consideration for all mankind, as long as these are aroused within the frame of justice, but unjust Realpolitik can not be absolutely avoided.

Abstract Isocrates uses the word philosophia, which he claims as his own métier, in three distinct ways: (i) practical wisdom common to all men; (ii) all systems of education; (iii) the system of education which he practices, the only true one. He makes use of oppositions among the three to conceal a paradox: that he wishes his own philosophia to be at the same time close to common wisdom, and to be unique in perfection and value. Like the speeches of Thucydides, his written works crystallize the everyday rhetoric of the polis but strip it of its oppositional aspect. They create a unified, harmonious logos politikos, seemly and decorous, but without the resource of his own critical judgement.

Current interpretations of early Greek rhetoric often rely on a distinction between the empirical stage of rhetoric (associated with the sophists) and the theory of rhetoric which was invented by the philosophers Plato and Aristotle. But insofar as the distinction between experience and theory is itself a product of philosophical criticism and reflects the philosophical priorities of the authors who introduced it, its application in the interpretation of pre-Platonic rhetoric is anachronistic. By examining the contexts in which Plato’s and Aristotle’s arguments are cast, I propose to show the ways in which their accounts distort our picture of their predecessors.

After discussing the relationship of courage to justice in modern and ancient political thought, this paper explores the debate between Athenian democratic orators and Plato on the subject of andreia, or "manly courage." While the orators set andreia in a particular relation to justice by embedding andreia within a salyific narrative of the city's history, Plato used the figure of Callicles to draw attention to the democrats' self-serving construal of andreia within their own politics. Plato's arguments suggest that statecraft must begin with a deeper "soulcraft" than Athenian politics is capable of.

According to an argument made by other authors, analytic —the formal logical theory of the categorical syllogism expounded in the Prior Analytics—is a relatively late development in Aristotle’s thinking about argument. As a general theory of validity, it served as the master discipline of argument in Aristotle’s mature thought about the subject. The object of this paper is to explore his early conception of the relations between the argumentative disciplines. Its principal thesis, based chiefly on evidence about the relation between dialectic and rhetoric, is that before the advent of analytic dialectic played a double role. It was both the art or discipline of one practice of argumentation and the master discipline of argument to which other disciplines turned for their understanding of the fundamentals of argument.

The article analyses the relationship between rhetoric and didactic in Plato's theory of legislative preamble in the Laws on the basis of a comparison of three texts, the passages in Books IV (718a6–723b2) and IX (857c1–e7) that explain the function of preambles and the specific preamble of the law against the atheists in Book X. In spite of the correspondence between the free physician who explains the patient's illness on the basis of a quasi-philosophical conversation about the "nature of bodies" (Book IX) and the legislator who explains the origin of bodily movements in a philosophical way (Book X), the former cannot be considered as the direct counterpart of the latter: in the first case, the patient collaborates with the doctor; not so in the case of the atheist in his relationship with the legislator. This dissymmetry also justifies reading the Book IX passage as advocating a "legislative utopia"—one which by definition is not realized within the framework of the Laws, and in particular not in Book X.

Isocrate emploie le mot philosophia en trois sens distincts: (i) la sagesse pratique commune à tous les hommes; (ii) tout système d’éducation; (iii) l’éducation qu’il pratique lui-meme, la seule vraie, Il se sert d’oppositions entre les trois pour cacher un paradoxe: qu’il veut son propre philosophie à la fois près de la sagesse quotidienne, et d’une perfection et valeur unique. Comme les discours chez Thucydide, ses oeuvres écrites crystallisent la rhétorique quotidienne de la polis; mais en lui otant son aspect antilogique, elles créent un logos politikos unifié, harmonieux, bienséant, mais dépourvu des ressources de sa propre critique.

Abstract Altough little known in medieval history, the Breviari d'Amor of Matfre Ermengaud was deeply influenced by medieval preaching. An Occitan encyclopaedia, the Breviari includes a short guide to preaching, entitled “De predicacio et en quel manieira deu hom predicar” which derives from the Cura pastoralis of Gregory the Great. “De predicacio” is no mere translation, but a subtle adaptation: it indicates not only how the Breviari is aimed toward lay education in the popular language, but also to what point it responds to its historic and religious context. This study, therefore, considers the Breviari as a text deeply engaged in the matter of preaching in Languedoc at the end of the thirteenth century.

432 RHETORICA Rhetorica ad Herennium and what are we to make of these differences? How useful pedagogically is Cicero's approach and how innovative is his interest in prose rhythm? Overall, however, F. has provided us with a book likely to prove a turning point in the appreciation of De Oratore by modern Anglophone scholars and students of rhetoric. Armed with this introduction and the translation of May and Wisse, teachers will now be able to incorporate the text into surveys of ancient rhetoric in a convenient and accessible fashion. They will find in the dialogue stimulating views on key rhetorical issues, as well as a number of original contributions to the established tradition. And in F.'s survey they will find a first rate elucidation of them.7 Jon Hall University of Otago, New Zealand J. Axer, ed. Rhetoric of Transformation, Osrodek Badari nad Tradycj$ z Antyczn$ w Polsce i Europie Srodkowo-wschodniej, Studies and Essays 6 (Warsaw 2003). This collection of essays, most of them presented at the 13th Biennial Congress of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric held in Warsaw in 2001, was published by the Centre for Studies on the Classical Tradition in Poland and East-Central Europe, of which Axer, past president of the society, has been director since its inception in 1991. Rhetoric, Axer observes in the book's preface, is emerging as an important element in public life in regions that have been undergoing radical social and political transformations in recent years. Accordingly, several of the essays bear on developments in Poland and Ukraine; and others concern Kenya, South Africa, Spain, and post-unification Germany. There are some additional papers dealing with rhetoric as part of a liberal arts education. All of the papers save one are in English. Poland is the subject of five of the papers. Cezar Ornatowski's "Rhetor­ ical Regime in Crisis: The Rhetoric of Polish Leadership, 1980-1988" (pp. 91-106) traces shifts in the rhetoric of formal public policy speeches ("ex­ 7There are a few minor typographical errors that I list here in case they can be remedied in a paperback version (which, one hopes, will not be long in appearing): p. 110, n. 18: ius needs to be italicised; p. 155: Pro Archia 19 in one line, pro Archie 21 in the next; p. 180: dianoia needs to be italicised; p. 214: 'Cicero s speech much have created a sensation ; p. 227: period needed at the end of the paragraph before the sub-heading "Thanking the People"; p. 265: period needed after "Caesar Strabo (3.146)"; p. 271: bracket after “abasio, 45" not needed; p. 272: period needed after "(3.156-66)". On p. 230, n. 32, the speech delivered Pro Rabirio in 63 was not the Pro Rabirio Postumo but the Pro Rabirio Perduellionis Reo. Reviews 433 poses") by Polish prime ministers from Eduard Babiuch through Jaruzelski (1981) to Rakowski in 1988. What we see there, Ornatowski writes, is disengagement from classic communist discourse and a move toward a more pragmatic, less ideological mode of "democratic" socialism; and Ornatowski show this in his examination of shifts in the controlling pronouns from the ambiguous "we" to the "personal" "I." Jerzy Bartminski, in "Where Are We? A New Linguistic Conceptualization of the National Space in Polish" (pp. 107-13), examines key terms marking a cultural shift in Polish self-perception from an East-orientation to one more distinctly to the West, rehearsing a long debate on what constitutes "Central Europe" and whether to define it as at the periphery of Europe, on the one hand, or of the (former) Soviet Union, on the other. Piotr Urbanski's "blow (Not) to Speak about the End? Rhetoric of Contemporary Polish Eschatological Sermons" (pp. 140-48) calls attention to the rhetorical incompetence of much Polish preaching that betrays poor seminary training and fails to stay in touch with new theological trends. Stanislaw Obirek S.J. explains how deeply held dogmatic beliefs made real communication (dialogue) impossible as they transform theology into ideol­ ogy in "Theology Tempered by Ideology: Peter Skarga S.J. (1536-1612) and Jan Wyszenski (1545-1620)." And Tomasz Tabako attempts to track the develop­ ment...

440 RHETORICA many. Despite his enthusiastic citation of the rhetorically informed critic of eighteenth-century literature Hans-Jurgen Schings, for instance, Zammito leaves out rhetoric from his index altogether and from his list of inquiries that helped crystallize anthropology around the year 1772, namely the medi­ cal model of physiological psychology, the biological model of the animal soul, the pragmatic or conjectural model of cultural-historical theory, the literary-psychological model of the new novel including travel literature, and a philosophical model of rational psychology grounded in the quandaries of substance interaction. Indeed the 1772 date is symptomatic of a justifi­ able but selective philosophical genealogy that would ignore an important element of Odo Marquard's article on "Anthropologie" in the Historisches Wbrterbuch der Philosophic (vol. 1, Stuttgart/Basel: Schwabe, 1971, pp. 362374 ), which significantly credits the first anthropology lecture in Germany to a professional rhetorician, Gottfried Polycarp Muller (delivered in Leipzig, 1719). Meanwhile the 2005 Notre Dame conference included philosophical luminaries such as Charles Taylor and Hubert Dreyfus and a presentation on homo hermeneuticiis, but no experts on the rhetorical tradition and nothing at all on homo rhetoricus. To be fair, I should also point out that none of the essays in the Krause collection cite Zammito published just two years earlier, despite the fact that they might have done so profitably, especially when discussing Kant and Herder. Qualifications aside, I am optimistic about the larger project. If this new German strain of rhetorical anthropology continues to develop its unique focus on eighteenth-century disciplinary history and develops further its rig­ orous historical skepticism inspired by Blumenberg, that influence beyond what are now largely national and disciplinary boundaries will emerge. As the three collections reviewed here demonstrate in concert, our understand­ ing of anthropology will in certain respects remain handicapped until it does so. Finally I should underscore that rhetorical studies emerging out of the German context have long provided a powerful counterbalance to a typi­ cally French or Anglo-American perspective that would force rhetoric into dualistic models of mind/body, logos/pathos, and truth/fabrication. These three recent efforts at rhetorical anthropology must be considered in this important critical tradition. Daniel M. Gross University ofIowa L ultima parola. L analisi dei testi'. teoría e pratiehe nell'ant¡chita ^reca e latina, a cura di Giancarlo Abbamonte, Ferruccio Conti Bizzarro, Luigi Spina (Napoli: Arte Tipográfica Editrice, 2004), pp. 448. Venticinque densi contributi, dedicati alTanalisi testuale nelle teorie e nelle pratiehe antiche, vengono raccolti in un corposo volume bilingue e Reviews 441 posti irónicamente sotto 1 egida di Fuoco Pallido, il romanzo in cui Vladi­ mir Nabokov ritrasse uno zelante commentatore nell'atto d'assolvere - con sentenza quantomai perentoria - l'intera schiera d'interpreti e glossatori dell opera altrui: E probabile che il mió caro poeta non avrebbe condiviso quest affermazione, ma, nel bene come nel male, è il commentatore ad avéré l'ultima parola". Il terzo Colloquio italo-francese, coordinato da Laurent Pernot e Luigi Spina, frutto dell'ormai consolidata collaborazione tra l'Università di Napoli Federico II e l'Université de Strasbourg II Marc Bloch, si vota fin da subito alla pluralità, ail apertura, all'interrogazione spassionata sul difficile mestiere d'esegeta. Non risulta una sorpresa, allora, trovare accanto alla voce di Nabokov quella di Aristotele, alia cui Retorica spetta il compito di dettare gli intenti e i metodi del convegno e del libro che gli fa seguito: irrobustire l'accordo tra gli oratori intervenuti; persuadere il pubblico presente; sviluppare un tema prescelto (un discorso) secondo metodologie e fuochi d'interesse eterogenei (p. 7). L'Introduzione di Luigi Spina s'interroga sull'eredità greco-romana nell' ámbito dell'analisi testuale: una traccia persistente, senza dubbio, rivitalizzata peraltro dalla sempre più stringente richiesta di un "ritorno ai testi". I greci amarono esaminare i testi operando tramite l'atto del krinein e per mezzo delYexegesis. Nel primo caso metaforizzarono l'operazione interpreta­ tiva con il riferimento all'anatomia, all'individuazione delle parti di un corpo armónico; nel secondo si appellarono all'azione di portare qualcosa da una luogo ad un altro (principio fondativo, oltre che dell'esegesi, di ogni pretesa di "traduzione"). Una proposta decisamente...

436 RHETORICA disputation plainly shows. But debate—genuine debate— may seem both alien and undesirable to those whose recent histories have been marked by verbal coercion, deception, confrontation, and the exercise of mute power. "Debate" brings to mind not a means to arrive at consensus, but a zero-sum game with one winner who seeks victory "by any means necessary." That sort of "debate" is empirically real, of course; and not only in a post-dictatorship Europe or Africa. Even when consensus seems to have been attained, it is a fragile thing that more often than not deteriorates and turns into conflict. Think of the aftermath of the selection of Havel; or of the fact that it was not very long ago that the Polish parliament saw fit explicitly to forbid its members to carry firearms in the assembly chamber. I hasten to add that the actual practices of the United States Congress—or, for that matter, the British Parliament—are hardly paragons of the "civility" that is so important a part of civic virtue. So simply extolling "debate" as the preferred method of decision-making and conflict-resolution is not enough. We seem, then, to be brought to the verge of the sort of cynicism (if that is not too strong a word) that Professor Axer and his co-contributors want to purge from contemporary politics—particularly in countries that desire to put dictatorship behind them and foster democracy. We seem also to have stumbled on the old question of whether the humanities can humanize. But the answer to that question can be learned only if all of us, in good faith, do what we can to make sure that they do, even if we suspect that the answer we get may not be the one we wanted. It is to be hoped, then, that Axer and his colleagues will continue to teach and encourage us. Thomas Conley University of Illinois, Urbana JosefKopperschmidt, ed., RhetorischeAnthropologie: Studien zum Homo rhetoricus. München: Fink, 2000. 404 pp. Stefan Metzger and Wolfgang Rapp, eds., Homo inveniens: Heuristik und Anthropologie am Modell der Rhetorik (Literatur und Anthropologie 19), Tübingen: Narr, 2003. 274 pp. Peter D. Krause, ed., Rhetorik und Anthropologie (Rhetorik: Ein inter­ nationales Jahrbuch 23), Tübingen: Niemeyer, 2004. viii + 201 pp. Recent rhetorical anthropology built on the model of philosophical an­ thropology faces an inherent dilemma: what one hand wishes to deliver homo rhetoricus in terms of universal capacities, the other hand snatches away. In fact this tension shapes the three rich collections reviewed here, which in combination mark what editor extraordinaire Josef Kopperschmidt considers the real reason for current interest in rhetoric: namely its anthro­ pology (Kopperschmidt, p. 13), and especially its sophisticated treatments Reviews 437 of the whole man constituted in a culturally situated language and in the interanimation of body and mind (a long-standing strength of German scholarship and popular culture, 1 should add). After ambitiously titling his collection Rhetorische Anthropologie: Studien zum Homo rhetoricus, for instance, Kopperschmidt backpedals from the project's apparent "ontological ambi­ tions" (Kopperschmidt, pp. 22-23). Although, Kopperschmidt protests, the "homo-" formula such as "homo-faber" and "homo-ludens" might imply claims about mankind's essential nature, it does not have to. We should simply consider homo rhetoricus one useful heuristic for characterizing hu­ mankind from a particular, and in this case rhetorical, perspective (p. 22). Metzger and Rapp rightly insist that the rhetorically informed homo inveniens is a modern creature distinguished by a focus on the new and the creative (Metzger/Rapp, pp. 7-9), but they also must struggle against their essentializing rubric, as well as the contribution of someone like Peter L. Oesterreich, who has flatly argued in these two venues ("Homo rhetori­ cus (corruptus): Sieben Gesichtspunkte fundamentalrhetorischer Anthropologie ", Kopperschmidt, pp. 353-70; "Selbsterfindung: Zur rhetorischen Entstehung des Subjektes", Metzger/Rapp, pp. 45-57) and elsewhere that man is a rhetorical being ideally subject to a universal, rhetorical anthropology (Kopperschmidt, p. 355). Then the eclectic and individually interesting articles in Volume 23 of Rhetorik: Ein internationales Jahrbuch collected by Peter D. Krause under the rubric "Rhetoric and Anthropology" introduce questions of appropriate scope. Is the "rhetoric of x...

Reviews Elaine Fantham, The Roman World of Cicero's De Oratore. Pp. 364. Ox­ ford: Oxford University Press, 2004. US$150; £ 63. ISBN: 0199263159. Cicero's De Oratore is one of most significant discussions of rhetoric in the classical corpus. It presents the mature reflections of a master orator on the art he had dominated at Rome for nearly twenty years. For the modern Anglophone student, however, the dialogue has long been rather forbidding and inaccessible. The Loeb translation of Sutton and Rackham is pedestrian at best, misleading at worst; and the archaic flavour of Watson's version does little to capture the imagination.1 The commentary by Wilkins is certainly respectable enough, but its philological focus is potentially intimidating to the reader not familiar with this genre of scholarship.2 And while the masterly multi-volumed commentary initiated in the 1980s by Leeman and Pinkster has advanced scholarly appreciation and understanding of the dialogue immeasurably, it remains inaccessible to the student who does not read German fluently.1 Fortunately in recent years the situation has started to J change. The recent English translation by May and Wisse, with its extensive introduction and explanatory notes, at last provides an excellent and af1E . W. Sutton and H. Rackham, Cicero Dc Oratore Books I, II (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1942) and H. Rackham, Cicero De Oratore Book III Together With De Fato, Paradoxa Stoicorum, De Partitione Oratoria (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1942); J. S. Watson, Cicero on Oratory and Orators (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1848; republished, Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1970 and 1986). 2A. S. Wilkins, M. Tidli Ciceronis De Oratore Libri Tres (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 3rd edition 1895; republished, Amsterdam: Hakkert 1962; Hildesheim: Olms 1965; New York: Arno Press, 1979). 3A. D. Leeman and H. Pinkster, M. Tullius Cicero De oratore libri III. Kommentar. Vol. I (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1981); A. D. Leeman, H. Pinkster and H. L. W. Nelson, M. Tullius Cicero De oratore libri III. Kommentar. Vol. II (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1985); A. D. Leeman, H. Pinkster and E. Rabbie, M. Tullius Cicero De oratore libri III. Kommentar. Vol. Ill (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1989); A. D. Leeman, H. Pinkster and J. Wisse, M. Tullius Cicero De oratore libri III. Kommentar. Vol. IV (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1996). The final volume is in preparation and will be published in English. Rhetorica, Vol. XXIV, Issue 4, pp. 427-447, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . 02006 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 www.ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm. 427 428 RHETORICA fordable entrée to the text.4 Now with the publication of Elaine Fantham's book-length study, the dialogue should finally be able to reach the wider readership in English it deserves. The thirteen chapters are organised thematically and address well the key questions raised by the dialogue. The first three set out the background to the work: first, Cicero's political situation and literary ambitions as he began its composition; next, the oratorical careers of its main interlocutors L. Crassus and M. Antonius; and finally its dialogic form, especially the artistic and intellectual debt owed to Plato. The remaining chapters focus on issues that arise sequentially as one reads through the dialogue's three books. Thus there are discussions of the orator's training and his need for a knowledge of civil law (issues that arise in Book 1); oratory's relationship with poetry and the writing of history (topics mentioned in Books 1 and 2); Cicero's use of Aristotelian sources and the orator's effective deployment of wit and humour (treated in Book 2); the role of oratory in the Roman senate and popular assemblies (a matter relevant to Book 2 but usefully expanded more generally by E); and the various aspects of oratorical style (elocutio), memory, and delivery (the focus of most of Book 3). A final chapter offers some concluding thoughts and includes a brief discussion of Tacitus' Dialogus, a work much influenced by De Oratore. This arrangement...

Peu connu dans l’histoire de la rhétorique médiévale, le Breviari d’Amor de Matfre Ermengaud est pourtant très influencée par la prédication médiévale. Une encyclopédie occitane, le Breviari comprend un court guide de prédication entitulé “De predicacio et en quel manieira deu hom predicar” provenant du Cura pastoralis de Grégoire le Grand. “De predicacio” n’est guère de traduction, mais une adaptation subtile: il indique non seulement comment le Breviari est généralement visé à l’éducation laïque en langue vulgaire, mais aussi à quel point il répond à son contexte historique et réligieux. Cette étude considère le Breviari donc comme un texte profondément engagé dans la prédication au Languedoc à la fin du treizième siècle.

The English poet-critic John Dryden (1631–1700) took a keen interest in refining the mother tongue. As a literary critic, he was particularly concerned with the contrast between the sound of the vernacular and that of Latin. This study establishes a connection between Dryden’s observations on sound and the recommendations concerning elocution found in such seventeenth-century rhetorics as Some Instructions Concerning the Art of Oratory (1659) by Obadiah Walker, in order to appreciate Dryden’s use of sound in his own poems, I argue that one should also take into account the phonetic theory provided by contemporary grammars. The study thus pays tribute to the fact that in the age of Dryden the concerns of rhetoric and grammar were closely interwoven.

Abstract The Life of Attila, composed by the Hungarian patriot and churchman Miklos [Nicolaus] Oláh (1493-1568), includes several speeches by Attila. His style, the most striking character of these harangues, cannot be described better than as “elevated Ciceronian” whence the title Cicero hunnicus. This article establishes the manner in which the rhetoric of Attila serves as a strategy of rehabilitation through the use of which Oláh defends the image of his hero (and that of the Hungarian people). In conclusion, there is outlined a sketch of how, in the XVIth century, an attempt was made to establish the Hungarian national identity on rhetorical foundations.

Beginning with Roland Barthes’ “The Old Rhetoric: an aide-memoire” (1964–65), semioticians have shown a remarkable interest in the history of rhetoric. Writers like Barthes, Tzevtan Todorov, Gérard Genette, and Paul Ricoeur have offered accounts of rhetoric’s past that invariably concluded with rhetoric’s demise and its replacement with semiotics. These writers typically portray rhetoric’s history as one of a brief rise followed by a very long decline, a pattern, says Todorov, of “splendor and misery.” This essay examines the semioticians’ predictions of rhetoric’s demise as well as semiotics’ attempt to claim elements of rhetoric as its own. The essay concludes by considering the present state of semiotics’ aspiration to supersede rhetoric as a theory of language and human affairs.

332 RHETORICA Adriano Pennacini, Forme del pensiero. Studi di retorica classica, a cura di Edoardo Bona e Gian Franco Gianotti (Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso, 2002), 449 pp.«The advent of Christianism in the form of Catholicism, the victory of St. Ambrosius against Symmachus in the battle for the liberty and preservation of paganism and the position of State religion that Christianism acquired in the same years, transformed the status of the Roman citizen by introduc­ ing a basic requirement consisting of being Catholic. Since the fall of the Western Roman Empire until the French and American revolutions, religion remained a decisive element for citizenship. Before the Reformation, only Catholic religion; after the Reformation, cuius regio eius religio. A perverted and perverse use of the locus of quality, completed by the locus of uniqueness and reinforced by the locus of authority, with the premise, often implicit, that Catholic religion is the only true religion, offered the basis for an abnormal developing of ethnic and cultural differences derived and founded upon re­ ligions». Con queste parole, appassionate e amare, si chiude (p. 445) Tultimo saggio contenuto nella raccolta di scritti di Adriano Pennacini, raccolta con la quale i colleghi editori, Gian Franco Gianotti e Edoardo Bona, hanno voluto testimoniare Paffetto ed in qualche modo il dispiacere, ovviamente non solo personale, in occasione delle dimissioni (anticipate) di Pennacini dal servizio attivo di professore nell'universita di Torino (cfr. Prefazione di G.F. Gianotti, Retorica classica e scienzc della eomunicazione, pp. V-IX). Il saggio di cui ho citato la conclusione, Arguments about ethnical and cultural differences in ancient and modern oratory costituiva I'opening address al Symposium on rhetoric: persuasion and power, tenutosi a Cape Town dall'll al 13 luglio 1994. Adriano Pennacini aveva appena portato a termine il biennio di presidenza (1991-1993) della International Societv for the Historv of Rheto­ ric. La raccolta di saggi costituisce, in realta solo una piccola parte del contributo culturale e civile di Pennacini, fatto non solo di studi, ma anche di pratiche, di innovazioni didattiche, di idee generose per svecchiare l'impostazione tradizionale degli studi di antichistica. La bibliografia di Pen­ nacini (pp. XI-XVI), d'altra parte, offre l'eloquente riprova di un'attivita che va dall'organizzazione di convegni e volumi sulla retorica, tra antico e modemo , alia recente traduzione italiana, con testo a fronte, note e aggiornamenti , della Institutio oratoria di Quintiliano, per i tipi di Finaudi, coordinata da Pennacini con numerosi, validi collaborator! (cfr. la recensione di G.B. Conte in «Rhetorica» 22, 2004, pp. 297-300). Il volume Forme del pensiero raccoglie 25 saggi, apparsi tra il 1955 (Cercida e il secondo cinismo, pp. 3-22) e il 1998 (il saggio citato all'inizio, apparso in Studi di retorica oggi in Italia 1997, Bologna 1998), che rappresentano la parte piu consistente degli studi—come suggerisce il sottotitolo del volume—di retorica classica. La dizione 'retorica classica' si offre in realta ad un'interpretazione estensiva. Essa comprende, infatti, sia la teoria e i suoi tecnografi (Cicerone e Quintiliano in primo luogo, ma anche Frontone, accanto all'utilissimo L'arte della parola pp. 345-388, una breve storia della retorica romana), che la rhetorica utens, per cost dire (autori Reviews 333 e generi délia produzione culturale greca e latina: Lucilio, Persio e la satira; Tibullo e l'elegia; il romanzo latino, 1 epistolografia; Bione di Boristene tra retorica e filosofía; Vitruvio tra retorica e scienza). Ma non tralascia, d'altra parte, né 1 analisi particolare délia strumentazione técnica propria délia reto­ rica, in senso direi trasversale (il locus amoenus; figure di pensiero nell'oratoria di Catone Maggiore; strutture retoriche nelle biografié svetoniane; il paté­ tico nella narrazione virgiliana del mito di Orfeo e Puso dell'apostrofe nel discorso di Didone del IV libro delPEnéide), né alcuni problemi di definizione a proposito dei testi antichi, e qui la retorica diviene strumento di comprensione délia fattura di un testo e, per converso, délia sua tradizione in età moderna, anche attraverso il ricorso alla nuova tecnología elettronica (pensó, in particolare, ai contributi Le fragment comme enchatillon, pp. 73-77; Analyse structurale et recherche computationelle, pp...

Recent studies in comparative rhetoric have brought much needed attention to traditions of rhetoric in non-Western cultures, including many in Africa. Yet the exclusive focus on contemporary African cultures limits understanding of the history of rhetoric in Africa. Although extensive data on African antiquity is lacking, we know that early Nubian and Ethiopian cultures were highly civilized, socially and politically. Literacy in the ancient cities of Napata, Meroe, and Axum, and in the medieval city of Timbuktu suggests that black Africa was not exclusively oral and not without recourse to a means of recording its uses of language. This essay adds a historical dimension to comparative studies of rhetoric in Africa, showing the depth and complexity of this little known aspect of African civilizations.

Reviews Jurgen Frohlich: Bernhnrd Hirsclwelders Briefrhetorik (Cgm 3607). Untersuchung und Edition. Deutsche Literatur von den Anfangen bis 1700: 42 (Bern u. a.: Peter Lang, 2003). Als "Bernhard Hirschvelders Briefrhetorik" bezeichnet Jurgen Frohlich in seiner Essener Dissertation eine Sammlung von Texten aus dem Bereich der mittelalterlichen Brieflehre (Ars dictandi / Ars dictaminis) in der Handschrift Cgm 3607 der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek in München. Im einzelnen handelt es sich um eine deutschsprachige Ars dictandi mit dem lateinischen Titel Modus epistolandl (foil. lr-31v), nachgetragene Musterbriefe und -urkunden (foil. 32r-34v), eine deutsche Synonyma-Sammlung (foil. 35r54v ) sowie eine Sammlung von teilweise sehr umfangreichen Briefformeln (foil. 55r-68v). Der in der zweiten Halfte des 15. Jahrhunderts in Straubing, Nordlingen und Niirnberg als deutscher Schulmeister und Schreiber nachweisbare Bernhard Hirschvelder nennt sich in einer Vorrede auf fol. 36r als Urheber des folgenden Traktats (gemeint ist offenbar die SynonymaSammlung ): Obwohl nur ein schlecfit ainfeltiger lay habe er sich vorgenommen , einen prauchlidien und vasst nutzlich kleinen tractatzu componieren ("einen brauchbaren und sehr nutzlichen Traktat zusammenzustellen"). Dais Bernhard Hirschvelder der Autor auch der anderen Texte der Handschrift oder zumindest ihr Schreiber war, laBt sich nicht mit Sicherheit sagen; ob bei den sehr konventionalisierten und in engen Traditionslinien stehenden Texten iiberhaupt von Autorschaft im engeren Sinn die Rede sein kann und mufi, ist ohnehin fraglich. Jurgen Frohlich jedenfalls suggeriert mit seinem Buchtitel die Urheberschaft Hirschvelders, ohne dafiir eine Begriindung liefern zu konnen, die fiber die bisherige Forschungslage hinausgeht. Nicht sehr gliicklich gewahlt ist die Bezeichnung "Bnefrhetorik" im Titel der Arbeit. Zwar werden Brieflehren (Artes dictandi) im Mittelalter als "Rhetoriken " bezeichnet, aber das Spezifische der mittelalterlichen Ars dictaminis wird man weder verstehen, wenn man von der auf die mundliche Rede ausgerichteten antiken Rhetorik her denkt (deren Begriffe und Kategorien die Ars dictaminis freilich adaptierend ubernimmt), noch wenn man einen weiten , modernen Rhetorikbegriff zugrunde legt, der "Rhetorisches" medienunabhangig in jeder auf Wirkung ausgerichteten sprachlichen AuBerung erkennt; auch eine literarische Rhetorik ist nicht gemeint. Insofern sich die Rhetorica, Vol. XXIV, Issue 3, pp. 325-333, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2006 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 www.ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm. 326 RHETORICA mittelalterliche Ars dictaminis mit dem Brief - vor allem mit dem offiziellen Brief als Instrument von Herrschaft und Verwaltung sowie dem Geschaftsbrief - befafit, reflektiert sie Bedingungen, Moglichkeiten und Erfordernisse schriftgebundener Kommunikation an einem Gegenstand, bei dem die Funktion von Schrift als Substitut mundlicher Rede noch mit einiger Deutlichkeit erkennbar ist. Damit versteht sich die Ars dictandi mindestens auch als Lehre von der Ubertragung mundlicher in schriftliche Kommunikation (und unterscheidet sich insofern durch den Aspekt des Medienwechsels grundsatzlich von der antiken Rhetorik, was Frohlich in dem entsprechenden Kapitel allerdings nicht ausreichend reflektiert, S. 23-28). Solche Ubertragungen waren in der von Mundlichkeit gepragten mittelalterlichen Welt brisant und erforderten deshalb verlaBliche Regeln. Nicht umsonst nehmen in mittelalterlichen Artes dictandi Begrufiungsformeln (snlutationes) breiten Raum ein: Es handelt sich dabei um die Versprachlichung \ron Ritualen, in denen ublicherweise soziale Hierarchien verdeutlicht und stabilisiert werden (Kniefall, Verbeugung, Reihenfolge der BegruBung u. a.). In deutschsprachigen Ar­ tes dictandi, die ab dem 15. Jahrhundert aufkommen und denen der Modus epistolandi im Cgm 3607 zuzurechnen ist, nehmen Fragen der sprachlichen und kommunikativen Umsetzung \'on sozialen Hierarchieverhaltnissen den bei weitem breitesten Raum ein. Frohlichs Buch bietet neben einigen einleitenden Kapiteln (S. 15-88) einen weitgehend seitengetreuen Abdruck der 68 Blatter umfassenden Handschrift (S. 97-223) sowie einen Stellenkommentar ("Anmerkungen zum Editionsteil ", S. 227-258), dessen Erklarungsdichte und -tiefe fur den Benutzer jedoch nur schwer nachzuvollziehen sind. Nirgends wird gesagt, was der Leser in diesem Anmerkungsteil erwarten darf und was Frcihlich systema­ tised dokumentieren will. Tatsachlich steht bier in hunter Mischung zusammen , was iiblicherweise auf einen Lesartenapparat, eine editionsgeschichtliche Forschungsdok ' .........................................erten Kommentar verteilt sem soille. Aber in alien drei Bereichen bleiben die Anmerkungen vóllig unzureichend: So werden etwa Personen- oder Geschlechternamen ge- ^ legenthch erlàutert (z. B. S. 231, Anm. 66), in den meisten Fallen aber bleiben sie unkommentiert. Nicht nur fur Datierungsfragen ist es aber unabdingbar, daBjede erwàhnte Person historisch identifiziert und entsprechend...