This essay examines the inconsistencies in the discussion of proofs in Rhetoric 1.1 and 1.2. Recent commentators have attempted to reconcile these inconsistencies by claiming that ethos and pathos are to be understood as rational, inferential, or cognitive aspects of Aristotle’s conception of rhetorical proof, thus linking the proofs in 1.2 to those in 1.1. In sharp contrast, I contend that the rift between the two conceptions of rhetorical proofs is even greater than most commentators acknowledge. I argue that there are two completely different conceptions of rhetorical proofs that cannot be reconciled in these two sections of the Rhetoric, that the inconsistencies are due to the tumultuous transmission and editorial history of the corpus Aristotelicum (and not to any of Aristotle’s developmental views on rhetoric), and that the transmission and editorial history of the text needs to play a much more important role in our interpretation of the Rhetoric than it has hitherto.

404 RHETORICA grado le scarse attestazioni oratorie dal momento che questa pseudoquintilianea é, accanto alia XIII declamazione di Libanio, l'unica che possediamo sull'argomento. Per questo motivo un'importanza preponderante viene assegnata nella declamazione al pathos, al conseguimento del quale concorre un ampio uso del color poeticus: le scelte linguistiche ed espressive richiamano ampiamente Virgilio e Ovidio, un po' meno di frequente Seneca trágico, la cui memoria era tuttavia ineludibile dato il rilievo concesso all'argomento nel Thyestes. Di notazioni di carattere lingüístico e intertestuale (in qualche caso indispensabili a comprendere un testo non privo di oscuritá nella sua paradossalitá: cf., ad es., la n. 46 a proposito di 5, 2) é ricco il commento che tuttavia, come indica lo stesso S., «non si propone come un commento esaustivo , ma come un sussidio per l'intellezione di un testo sempre impegnativo, spesso arduo» (p. 30): rivolto agli studenti oltre che agli studiosi, esso offre perció la traduzione delle citazioni greche e anche di quelle latine che non siano immediatamente comprensibili (come dei titoli stessi delle opere dalle quali sono tratte). II tono del commento, come quello della traduzione, che privilegia uno stile colloquiale, é piano ed esplicativo, con frequenti delucidazioni del senso generale del periodo, il che, al di la dell'informazione, rende il volume chiaro e di piacevole lettura. II testo seguíto, in attesa di quello criticamente riveduto dallo stesso S. di tutte le Declamationes maiores, con traduzione e note, di prossima pubblicazione per i tipi dell'UTET, é quello di Hákanson (1982), seppure con un maggior numero di modifiche rispetto al primo volume della serie; la bibliografía é ampia e aggiornata al 2003. Antonella Borgo Universita Federico II (Napoli) Peter Mack, Elizabethan Rhetoric: Theory and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), xi + 326 pp. Jennifer Richards, Rhetoric and Courtliness in Early Modern Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), vi + 212 pp. When Ben Jonson, then at the height of his reputation, visited William Drummond of Hawthornden in the winter of 1618/19, he was not slow to offer the Scots poet advice. Among his more forceful admonitions we find: "He recommended to my reading Quintilian (who, he said, would tell me all the faults of my verses as if he had lived with me)" and "that Quintilian's 6, 7, 8 books were not only to be read, but altogether digested." The precise resonance of this will be lost on most modern readers, but much of it could readilybe recovered by consulting Peter Mack's excellent Elizabethan Rhetoric. There we find that in the early modern period "University statutes require the study of classical manuals of the whole of rhetoric. At Cambridge where the first of the four years stipulated for the BA was devoted to rhetoric, the set Reviews 405 texts were Quintilian, Hermogenes, or any other book of Cicero's speeches" (p. 51). The name of Quintilian is indeed so familiar that it is unnecessary to spell out that the precise reference is to his Institutio oratoria, second only to books by Cicero (or the pseudo-Ciceronian Rhetorica ad Herrenium) among the libraries of deceased Oxford and Cambridge scholars in the era. If the Institutio was not the prescribed text-book, it seems commonly to have been one of the principal authorities cited to support the one that was (pp. 52-3). Moreover, when we examine the English-language rhetoric manuals of the time, by such as Thomas Wilson, William Fulwood, and Angel Day, we find that they are all ultimately based on the classical Latin style manual, "found principally in Rhetorica ad Herrenium book IV and Quintilian's Institutio oratoria, books VIII and IX" (p. 77). So Jonson was not quite telling his host to go back to his grammar school studies - Quintilian was more advanced than their curriculum. But he was sending him back to one of the fundamental university style manuals of the day - which may not have been entirely tactful of him. Mack explains that his book "aims to contribute to the history of read­ ing and writing by showing how techniques learned in the grammar school and at university (largely through the study of classical literary texts) were used in...

This article argues that contrary to modern assumptions Hermagoras may not have discussed the epicheireme. And if he did, it is further maintained that he must have treated the epicheireme as an amplifying feature of style, as represented in the Rhetorica ad Herenmium, rather than as a syllogistic device, as represented in Cicero's De inventione. Until now scholars have not appreciated that the stylistic view of the epicheireme underlies the discussion of both Ad Hemmiliin and De inventione. They have failed to note that in the latter work Cicero has combined two views of the epicheireme: the original, typically rhetorical, amplifying feature of style, and a secondary argumentative-syllogistic form, which is derived from a philosophical-dialectical source.

The parliamentary diary of Sir Henry Cavendish, probably the most detailed record of speaking practices in the eighteenth- century House of Commons, confirms the claims made, from the beginnings of the rhetorical tradition, for the power of ethos as a means of persuasion. Yet precisely because it is such a valuable rhetorical resource, the parliamentarian’s character inevitably excites contradiction and dissent. Drawing on the debates reported by Cavendish, this article argues that the influence of party divisions in the later eighteenth-century House sharpened these contests for character. It concludes by illustrating the tendency of the speaker’s character, even as it is constructed in parliamentary discourse, to disclose the terms in which it may be challenged or negated.

The Lady’s Rhetorick is a well-developed rhetorical handbook for women that appears in print at a surprising time and place in British rhetorical history, when there were few precedents for rhetorical treatises addressed to women. This rare and relatively unknown handbook includes a feminist argument for the inclusion of women within the realm of rhetoric, through addressing its instruction to women, defining rhetoric in gender-inclusive ways, and including examples of women’s rhetorical practice. It adapts Classical and French rhetorical traditions through strategies that are potentially effective with its female, English audience. Thus its publication was a bold and strategic contribution to women’s and men’s rhetorical culture within the context of contemporary gender ideology and educational change. The handbook’s uniqueness and rarity should be viewed by scholars as the tip of an iceberg, signaling that a significant amount of women’s informal rhetorical practice and education could have been acknowledged in its own time as “rhetorical.”

Reviews L art de parler: Anthologie de manuels d'éloquence, Philippe-Joseph Salazar, ed., Paris, Klincksieck, 2003. xxi+362 pp. In his introduction, Salazar points with envy to the United States for the liveliness of our rhetorical tradition and practice compared with France, especially the continuous place of rhetoric in higher education. Looking with corresponding envy from this side of the Atlantic, one advantage I see in this anthology over comparable American anthologies: greater apparent continu­ ity. Greece and Rome—I was glad to see an excerpt from Tacitus, an unjustly neglected source for the history of rhetoric—lead seamlessly into the Middle Ages; Erasmus and Calvin lead to French renaissance authors such as Ramus and Amyot. We see rhetoric employed in the education of princes (Amyot, la Motte le Vayer), and diplomacy (Lancelot). The rhetoric of the academy (Patru), of lawyers (Dubois de Bretteville), of literary studies (Rollin), of bu­ reaucratic reports (Andrieux), and even how bourgeois mothers should talk and their children listen (Mme. Dufrenoy) all have their place. The continuity of French rhetoric is also nicely emphasized by selections from the rhetoric of preaching not only from medieval and renaissance authors but writers up to the 20th century (Augustine, de Basevorn, Erasmus, Calvin, Maury, Bouchage, Morice). The diversity of places where rhetoric is exercised leads to interesting insights and surprises. For example, the short excerpt from Lancelot's Le Parfait Amassadeur is entitled, "one cannot be a good ambassador without being a good orator," and draws interesting connections between, as Salazar puts it, the art of speaking and the art of speaking in the name of someone. As he says in his introduction, rhetoric from the time of Gorgias has connected the art of speaking with the art of speaking in the name of someone. We only get three pages of Lancelot (1642), and that is a translation of a work of Zuniga (1620), but the treatment of the ambassador as the complete orator is enough to raise stimulating questions about personification, representation, and disguise. It would be worth connecting this handbook for speaking in the name of someone with current rhetorical problems of how to be a representative and how to be an advocate. Similarly, the selection from Olivier Patrus' Discours de reception (1640) introduces the peculiarly French rhetorical genre of the academic oration. Intellectuals occupy a different place in French culture from their role in Rhetorica, Vol. XXII, Issue 4, pp. 401-407, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2004 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. 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. 401 402 RHETORICA Anglophone culture, and proficiency in this genre should be part of the accounting of the difference. Unusually, this anthology does not neglect the last part of rhetoricaction or delivery—and so we see excerpts from texts on pronunciation and self-presentation. This is the first time I have ever found the art of delivery interesting. Instead of looking to politics, where rhetoric should flourish, Salazar wisely looks at where rhetoric has flourished, and produced a fascinating anthology. Some of the selections will be as unfamiliar to French readers as they are to this American one. (The editor reports that the selection from Basevorn is here translated into French for the first time.) This anthology is exciting reading not only for readers interested in learning about rhetoric in a distinct tradition, but for anyone interested in the diversity of appearances that rhetoric has taken over the ages. The theme of his introduction is, I think, at odds with this ecumenical approach to the selections themselves. Rhetoric, Salazar notes, had a demo­ cratic birth. He claims that the persuasive tradition and practical politics of the west are fused with rhetoric, eloquence, the art of speaking, the art of oratory (vii). "Democracy gives each citizen the right to defend himself, by speech, if he sees himself injured, but which imposes on others, between equal citizens, to judge the case....Speech replaces violence" (ix-x). Conse­ quently, Salazar argues, rhetoric is a phenomenon unique...

Reviews 403 of this birth that continued throughout its history, while the connections of rhetoric to democracy seem much more tenuous. Overall, I recommend L'art de parler to a non-French audience, not only because of the intrinsic interest of many of the selections, but because it gives us an opportunity to reflect on canons, their formation and significance. Eugene Garver Saint John's University [Quintiliano], La cittd che si cibo dei suoi cadaveri (Declamazioni maggiori, 12), a cura di Antonio Stramaglia. Cassino : Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 2002. 239 pp. A tre anni di distanza dal primo, dedicato alFottava declamazione, se­ gué ora il secondo volume pubblicato all'interno del progetto internazionale di ricerca sulle Declaniazioni maggiori pseudoquintilianee, promosso dal Di­ partimento di Filología e storia dell'Università di Cassino. Contiene il testo, la traduzione e note di commento alia dodicesima declamazione, una delle più significative délia raccolta per la lunghezza e soprattutto per il tema scottante sul quale è costruita, quello del cannibalismo. Una temática che, come S. nota nella Premessa, se presenta connotati 'estremi', non mancava di una sua tópica in campo oratorio e, prima ancora, di una tradizione in ámbito storiografico (Erodoto) e filosófico, soprattutto stoico, a provocatoria dimostrazione del relativismo delle abitudini e dei costumi umani. Ma nella declamazione la vicenda propone la questione in sede morale più che culturale: infatti gli uomini che, stremati da una grave carestía, giungono a mangiarsi l'un l'altro per il ritardo del legato al quale avevano affidato il compito di rifornirsi di grano, sono vittime del desiderio di guadagno dell'uomo che, pur tornato entro il termine stabilito, ma attardatosi a vendere ad altri il grano raccolto a un prezzo molto conveniente, era dovuto tornare indietro a fare un nuovo rifornimento, perdendo molto tempo utile, se non a evitare, almeno a limitare gli effetti del dramma che la sua città stava vivendo. Un problema simile propone il caso, privo tuttavia di risvolti cosí drammatici, esposto da Cicerone in off. 3, 12, 50-53 (affine, credo, a quelli indicati nella n. 1 come vicini all'episodio in questione) e discusso con argomentazioni contrastanti dagli scolarchi stoici Diogene di Babilonia e Antipatro di Tarso, a proposito del venditore che approfitta del bisogno degli abitanti di Rodi, travagliata anch'essa da una carestía, per vendere il suo carico di frumento a un prezzo elevato tacendo il prossimo arrivo di altre navi cariche di viveri. Ma all'interno della produzione letteraria la presenza del tema nell'opera di Valerio Massimo (7, 6, ext. 2-3), in Petronio (141) e nella sat. XV di Giovenale , ne conferma l'evidente possibilité di sfruttamento in chiave patética e ne suggerisce una probabile, ampia presenza nella tradizione retorica, mal- 404 RHETORICA grado le scarse attestazioni oratorie dal momento che questa pseudoquintilianea é, accanto alia XIII declamazione di Libanio, l'unica che possediamo sull'argomento. Per questo motivo un'importanza preponderante viene assegnata nella declamazione al pathos, al conseguimento del quale concorre un ampio uso del color poeticus: le scelte linguistiche ed espressive richiamano ampiamente Virgilio e Ovidio, un po' meno di frequente Seneca trágico, la cui memoria era tuttavia ineludibile dato il rilievo concesso all'argomento nel Thyestes. Di notazioni di carattere lingüístico e intertestuale (in qualche caso indispensabili a comprendere un testo non privo di oscuritá nella sua paradossalitá: cf., ad es., la n. 46 a proposito di 5, 2) é ricco il commento che tuttavia, come indica lo stesso S., «non si propone come un commento esaustivo , ma come un sussidio per l'intellezione di un testo sempre impegnativo, spesso arduo» (p. 30): rivolto agli studenti oltre che agli studiosi, esso offre perció la traduzione delle citazioni greche e anche di quelle latine che non siano immediatamente comprensibili (come dei titoli stessi delle opere dalle quali sono tratte). II tono del commento, come quello della traduzione, che privilegia uno stile colloquiale, é piano ed esplicativo, con frequenti delucidazioni del senso generale del periodo, il che, al di la dell'informazione, rende il volume chiaro e di piacevole lettura. II testo seguíto, in attesa di quello criticamente riveduto dallo stesso S. di tutte le...

Reviews Quintiliano, Institutio oratoria, edizione con testo a fronte a cura di A. Pennacini, trad, e note di commento di T. Piscitelli, R. Granatelli, A. Pennacini, D. Vottero, V. Viparelli, M. S. Celentano, M. Squillante, F. Parodi Scotti, A. Falco, A. M. Milazzo, M. Vallozza, R. Valenti, voll. I-II (Torino: “Biblioteca della Pléiade" Einaudi, 2001), 1092 + 1096 pp. Lo sforzo di organizzare sistemáticamente il sapere è evidente in tutta la cultura romana del primo Impero e si esprime soprattutto in opere di tipo manualistico. Si allestiscono testi che intendono raccogliere (e insieme consacrare) il meglio delle conoscenze in un certo settore dello scibile o delle arti professionali, alio scopo di fornire al lettore un orientamento accessibile e complessivo. E del tutto ovvio che la destinazione pratica di queste sintesi tenda a indebolire la tensione teórica e lo sperimentalismo autonomo. D'altra parte, l'obiettivo stesso della completezza non favoriva certo lo sviluppo di capacité critiche: queste, anzi, appaiono ai nostri occhi sacrifícate a tutto vantaggio di una sistematizzazione delle nozioni che quasi vorrebbe prospettarsi corne definitiva. I tempi insomma appaiono sempre più maturi per lo sviluppo di summae onnicomprensive, vere e proprie enciclopedie impegnate a stilare 1'"inventario" delle conoscenze acquisite. Ecco che nel giro di un paio di decenni (fra gli ultimi anni 70 e gli ultimi anni 90) vengono pubblicate due monumentali imprese che rispondono a questa ansia di sistemazione culturale : la Naturalis historia di Plinio il Vecchio e E Institutio oratoria di Quintiliano. Ed è un altro segno dei tempi che entrambi gli autori abbiano commilitato nella lunga guerra che da tempo veniva combattuta contro la corruzione dell'eloquenza (quella guerra che qualche anno dopo vedrà schierarsi anche Tácito con il suo Dialogus de oratoribus). Si sa anzi che proprio il prolificissimo Plinio nella sua inesausta attività di oratore e storico ed enciclopedista e polígrafo trovo il tempo per un trattato intitolato Studiosus, in cui probabilmente veniva affrontato un tema non troppo diverso da quello delE Institutio oratoria quintilianea, un trattato insomma che in ultima analisi doveva essere qualcosa di simile a un manuale per studenti di retorica. Il dibattito sulla corruzione dell'eloquenza, corne si è detto, era aperto da tempo, e investiva contemporáneamente questioni morali e gusto letterario: nelle virtù e nei vizi dello stile si vedevano riflessi virtù e vizi del carattere. Rhetorica, Vol. XXII, Issue 3, pp. 297-304, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2004 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. 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. 298 RHETORICA In época flavia era particolarmente acceso il dibattito fra i diversi orientamenti dell'oratoria: l'arcaizzante, il modernizzante, il ciceroniano. Quintiliano scelse di essere il vessillifero di una reazione classicista impegnata contro il Nuovo Stile, vale a dire contro quell'eloquenza "corrotta" di cui Seneca era ai suoi occhi il principale esponente e insieme il maggiore responsabile. Impostato appunto in termini moralistici, il problema délia degenerazione dell'eloquenza si presento come l'altra faccia di quella generale degradazione dei costumi che storici e filosofi andavano da tempo denunciando. Anche il decadimento délia scuola e la vacuità stravagante delle decíamazioni retoriche, ormai entrate nel gusto corrente, costituivano una conseguenza diretta - e per altro verso una causa produttiva - dell'attuale stato di corruzione dell'oratoria. Ma per Quintiliano il rimedio esisteva ed era anche efficace: bisognava solo rinnovare l'insegnamento dell'oratoria e délia retorica. Uomo di larga esperienza scolastica, egli era profondamente (e forse anche un po' troppo ingenuamente) convinto dell'efficacia dell'educazione. Né d'altronde era troppo difficile per lui vincere questa battaglia, giacchè, ridotti ormai in pochi i seguaci del Nuovo Stile senecano, si andava ormai profilando un ritorno al classicismo: a Quintiliano toccava solo di perfezionare il processo di mutazione del gusto e di darne i fondamenti teorici. Forse sopravviveva ancora l'esigenza di condannare alcuni intollerabili residui délia stravaganza modernista (intollerabili agli occhi del vecchio professore di retorica, che pure non fu mai un classicista intransigente, e seppe anzi...

Machiavelli’s advocacy of force and fraud in the conduct of politics is the key teaching that has secured his reputation as “Machiavellian” and that has led to the conception of The Prince as the first document in the Western tradition to lay bare the dark, demonic underside of civic humanism. But this interpretation overlooks the degree to which a politics of intense competition and personal rivalry inhabits the humanist vision from antiquity, producing an ethics of expediency and a rhetoric of imposture that seeks to mask its alertness to advantage behind the guise of integrity and service. This vision is nowhere more apparent than in Cicero’s De Oratore, which exerted a powerful influence on the Italian humanists of the quattrocentro in whose direct descent Machiavelli stands. Deception, to put it simply, is an acknowledged and vital element in civic humanism long before The Prince. The difference is that Cicero typically couches it in a sacrificial rhetoric that is euphemistically inflected while Machiavelli opts for a hard-edged rhetoric of administrative efficiency to make his case. But the stylistic differences, important as they are, should not mask the essential affinity between the Machiavellian doctrine of princely fraud and the Ciceronian ethics of gentlemanly dissimulation.

Reviews 301 Quintilian and the Law: The Art of Persuasion in Law and Politics, ed. Olga Tellegen-Couperus (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2003). While there is some evidence (pp. 1, 191) that the title of this book reflects its original scope (and that of the conference that underlies it), its actual contents range much more widely around the central figure of Quintilian. Many papers are entirely concerned with the history and analysis of rhetorical theory. Nonetheless, the papers concerning law are the most coherent group and, by and large, the most ambitiously argued. After making a few general observations on the whole volume and briefly treating the contents of the twenty-five individual papers, I will turn primarily to two questions regarding the utility of the Institutio Oratoria for lawyers which make up the most sustained topics of discussion. The essays collected here were written by scholars from diverse fields (law, classics, rhetoric, literary theory, comparative literature) and of diverse, mostly European, nationalities (Spain and Holland are particularly well represented). All papers have been rendered into what is for the most part very readable English. Also, despite their origin in a conference in 2001, most of the papers come equipped with the kind of scholarly apparatus one expects in a written work. Nearly all the papers treat a single book (or smaller segment of the text) as their subject, with a few verging on being running commentaries. Jorge Fernández Lopez studies sources of authority, both for texts and for persons. Serena Querzoli views Q.'s education project in the context of concrete evidence for contemporary educational practice. Tomás Albaladejo develops a theoretically informed analysis of the three genera of oratory, tying them to communicative function more than "occasion" (narrowly defined). Olivia Robinson investigates the opportunities and pitfalls of using Q. as a source for Roman law. Ida Mastrorosa argues Q.'s text is substantively shaped by his court-room experience. Giovanni Rossi discusses the reception of classical rhetoric by (mostly) seventeenth century Venetian lawyers (this piece has the least to do with Q. specifically). Belén Saiz Noeda treats the theory of proof within and according to Q., especially with respect to the use of topoi. Andrew Lewis clarifies a usually under-translated phrase at 5.13.7 by reference to the facts of legal procedure. Maria Silvana Celentano demonstrates the value of self-exemplification in book 6. Jeroen Bons and Robert Taylor Lane translate and analyze IO 6.2 from a philosophical point of view. Richard A. Katula discusses the means of exploiting emotion in venues (ancient and modern) in which that practice is normatively disfavored. José-Domingo Rodríguez Martín investigates the relative weight of oratory (especially pathos) and law in the Roman courtroom. (Katula's piece is to some extent "how to"; Rodríguez Martin's is relatively more historical.) David Pujante's discussion of status theory shows that dispositio is not just an afterthought to inventio, but is itself constitutive of interpretation. Maarten Henket advocates the use of Quintilianic strategies to bring more predictability to judicial law-making. Jan Willem Tellegen reinterprets the 302 RHETORICA casua Curiana by reevaluating the Quintilianic evidence. Francisco ChicoRico analyzes the virtues of style and their hidden connections to the other operations of rhetoric. The editor offers two contributions of her own. In one she offers a compelling rereading of a quoted sententia (8.5.19) by consideration of the legal context. In the other she gives a similarly constructed interpretation of a troubled passage at 9.2.65-6. Barend van Heusden gives a cognitive semantic account of the notion of figured discourse. James J. Murphy explains Q.'s plan for adult education. Sanne Taekema focuses more specifically on the motives behind Q.'s choice of canon, by way of a comparison with the goals of the modern Law and Literature movement. Peter Wiilfing gives an account of ancient and modern gestural culture. Esperanza Osaba tries to reconstruct the circumstance ofjudicial appeal alluded to at 11.1.76. Vincenzo Scarano Ussani shows how the Quintilianic perfect orator is fitted to the circumstances of the contemporary (i.e. imperial) community Willem Witteveen argues that Q.'s deep rhetoric...

L’article est partagé en deux parts. Dans la première on considère l’άλλοίωσις comme figure qui dans la poésie correspond au solécisme de la prose ainsi que le métaplasme correspond au barbarisme et on étudie le group des figures qui se rangent autour de l’άλλοίωσις comme <i>hysteron proteron, hyperbaton, hypallagé</i>. Car άλλoίojσtς n’indique pas seulement une figure particulière, mais aussi un group des figures, il s’agit des outilles stylistiques employés comme des étiquettes d’une façon plutôt mécanique pour obtenir des effets spéciaux. Chez les grammariens et les rhéteurs latins l’<i>hyperbaton</i> est devenu une sort de trope général pour indiquer un changement de l’ordre normal des mots. Dans la deuxième part de l’article on examine quelques exemples d’ <i>hyperbaton</i>, en particulier Horace, <i>Epistulae</i> 1, 20,25 <i>me primis urbis belli placuisse domique</i> pour démontrer comment le poète en a obtenu une double référence en faisant ainsi une discrète allusion à son service militaire dans l’armé de Brutus et à son amitié avec Mécène et Auguste.

REVIEW

Abstract The study of theories of actio is a basic part of Rhetoric which ought not to be neglected, especially when one is considering practical rather than literary rhetoric. The present study deals with neo-Latin ecclesiastical rhetoric and points out the differences between protestant and catholic notions about the phenomenon of preaching. The presence or absence of indications of actio permits a clear distinction among tendencies in neo-Latin theory. There is such a thing as actioin the Catholic sense, but not in the Protestant. Among catholic scholars, Fr. Luis de Granada stands out for his doctrinal focus and for the quantity of his reflections on this subject.

Abstract Although there is general consensus that knowledge of Aristotle's intended audience is important for understanding the Rhetoric, there is no consensus about who that audience is. In this essay, four of the most widely accepted theories are investigated: that Aristotle is writing for the legislator of an ideal city; that Aristotle is writing for the Athenian public or an elite subset of that public; that Aristotle is writing for his students; and that the Rhetoric was written for multiple audiences over an extended period of time. Ultimately, the most plausible of these explanations is that he is writing for his students.

Abstract This paper investigates the Exempla concerning ancient Greek history in Byzantine rhetorical and historiographic works of the twelfth century. The paper shows that knowledge of ancient history in this period of Byzantine literature was significant, and it reveals which ancient Greek personalities and events were preferred and which were overlooked. The paper examines the critical and encomiastic purposes of various Byzantine authors with regard to their perception of the past. The paper contributes towards an understanding of Byzantine ideology, with regard to its connections to and differences from ancient Greek culture.

While insults and name-calling are no strangers to scholarly debate, exchanges between Gretser and the elder Junius, Scaliger and Petau, Casaubon and Baronio, and others in the early decades of the seventeenth century exhibit a remarkable level of bitter and insulting vituperation. The present paper presents some examples and suggests some motives for their violent rhetorical behavior.

Although there is general consensus that knowledge of Aristotle’s intended audience is important for understanding the Rhetoric, there is no consensus about who that audience is. In this essay, four of the most widely accepted theories are investigated: that Aristotle is writing for the legislator of an ideal city; that Aristotle is writing for the Athenian public or an elite subset of that public; that Aristotle is writing for his students; and that the Rhetoric was written for multiple audiences over an extended period of time. Ultimately, the most plausible of these explanations is that he is writing for his students.

Reviews Une expérience rhétorique. L'éloquence de la Révolution. Textes réunis par Eric Négrel et Jean-Paul Sermain. Studies on Voltaire, vol. 2. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2002. Pp. 333. Few disciplines in recent decades have grown faster than the study of rhetoric, and few aspects of it have attracted greater attention than the elo­ quence of the French Revolution. This collection of papers, a rich mosaic of findings, impressions, and critical stances, is not, however, narrowly focused in time (the oft favoured period by far seems to be 1789-1794), nor does it privilege the spoken word alone. Gathering together under three rubrics some twenty-one contributions to the debate that it invited, the volume pro­ poses a series of constantly overlapping reflections going from the rhetoric of pre-revolutionary France down to the late nineteenth century. Within these broad parameters, we tend to know generally what developments and what reactions to expect: the men of '89, continuing to have recourse to their own counter-rhetoric of the Enlightenment, stepped up their vehement denun­ ciations of the old orthodox rhetoric as an instrument of oppression and mystification. As the Revolution progressed, and as new actors came centrestage , pleading their causes with a polemical passion and intensity the like of which had never been seen before, so their views on a rhetoric appropriate to the circumstances fragmented even more: should it reflect Atticism or Asianism, rely upon pathos or the more rational ability to docere et probare? In parallel—and the point must not be neglected—this modern eloquence in its various new avatars—was not limited to political interventions alone: it flourished elsewhere, in the theatre, painting, engraving, opera, poetry, song. Events were to dictate, however, that the dominant rhetoric (albeit temporar­ ily) should be the rhetoric of the Jacobins and the Montague, an occurrence which was destined to leave France, for generations to come, with a moral problem that proved to be particularly acute in the domain of education: how could a great nation, originally motivated by the most exhilarating of hu­ man aspirations, end up floundering in gore? was it hence, after Thermidor, even advisable to teach rhetoric / eloquence to the young? When—with few exceptions - critics overwhelmingly concluded that the "Revolution," with its "synthetic" pathos and its murderous rationalism, had abused rhetoric, and prostituted it in a bid to seduce a popular public to the extent that it had become the very perversion of reason itself and the justification for the most abominable crimes, the answer to that question was inevitable. The© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXII, Number 2 (Spring 2004). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 205 206 RHETORICA Idéologues in turn, who were influential in defining the curriculum for the new Écoles centrales, had equally fixed ideas on the matter. And so it also was that, throughout the nineteenth century, the experi­ ence of the First Republic tended almost overwhelmingly to define rhetorical practice and the more temperate use of language (whence the increasing re­ habilitation of the more "classical" rhetoric practised by the Girondins). This was not to say, however, that reference to l'éloquence révolutionnaire of the more "unbridled" sort disappeared: whatever people thought about it, they looked upon it either as a purveyor of "historical" documents, or as an oblig­ atory reference point for authors of treatises on rhetoric and Belles-Lettres. In parallel, however (for the phenomenon goes hand-in-hand with the slow and painful rebirth of the Republican movement), certain critics, scholars, and historians (starting with Charles Nodier)—particularly in the final decades of the nineteenth century—worked much more deliberately for the reappro­ priation of that revolutionary heritage in which eloquence, viewed also as having literary value (despite the ex cathedra pronoucements of a Taine and a Lanson), was an integral part of France's heritage. That, for example, is how—in 1894—Joseph Reinach (Le 'Condones' français. L'Eloquence française depuis la Révolution jusqu'à nos jours), came—albeit timidly—to foreshadow...

Reviews 209 The final contributions (Patrick Brasart, Maïté Bouyssy, Anne Vibert) take the self-same problems a little further on in history. Brasart attends to what Mme. de Staël, who placed political eloquence very high, saw as the "missed opportunity for a meeting between eloquence and the Revolution." What should have been simplicity and nobility became alas! the exact opposite of grandeur, being fated to illustrate that horrible paradox of a Republican language which had no intrinsic literary merit but which was nonetheless to become horribly effective: words (as Michelet was later to repeat) were no longer signs but signals. Bouyssy, exploiting the vast manuscript archive of the Anacréon de la guillotine (who was to be savaged by the historiography of the nineteenth century in general), shows how Bertrand Barère, reduced to silence, continued (with his impossiblefuite dans l'encre) to write incessantly with an eye to a posterity that one day (in a fortunate conjunction of text and reader) might be disposed to understand. Vibert brings the collection to a close with a panoramic, chronological overview of the fortunes (or misfortunes) of revolutionary eloquence in the nineteenth century as it struggled to free itself from the "contaminations" of the past. This engrossing volume, which will surely establish itself in the general bibliography of Revolutionary rhetoric, is remarkable for the consistently high quality of its scholarship and (with one or two exceptions) for the general legibility of its discourses. In an even more important sense, it is an état présent of this area of the discipline and serves to remind the reader that certain problèmes ponctuels need to be re-addressed, while others (identified by Françoise Douay and Jean-Paul Sermain in their lengthy preface) remain to receive that attention which is their due. I cannot recommend this collection highly enough to both specialist and non-specialist alike: both will read it with considerable profit. John Renwick University of Edinburgh Lucia Calboli Montefusco, ed., Papers on Rhetoric, vol. 4. Roma: Her­ der, 2002. Pp. viii + 286 Sous le titre Papers on Rhetorics IV, L. Calboli Montefusco recueille et pu­ blie certaines des communications présentées au congrès de l'International Society for the History of Rhetoric à Varsovie en juillet 2001. L'ouvrage comprend des articles stimulants en anglais, français, italien et allemand, témoignant ainsi de l'intérêt international que suscite l'étude de la rhéto­ rique. Les contributions, toutes suivies d'une bibliographie parfaitement à jour; couvrent un vaste laps de temps et concernent différents aspects de la rhétorique grecque et latine. Un classement chronologique des textes aurait peut-être facilité la lecture du volume. 210 RHETORICA Dans l'article intitulé "Aper's oratory in the Dialogus de oratoribus" (pp. 1-23), G. Calboli maintient que les trois interlocuteurs du dialogue expriment trois niveaux complémentaires de l'interprétation que donne Tacite de la rhétorique de son temps: la rhétorique comme moyen pour accéder à un statut social élevé (Aper), l'aspect moral de la rhétorique et la supériorité des orateurs anciens (Messala), l'explication sociale et historique du déclin actuel de la rhétorique (Maternus). Traitant de “Dionisio a Corinto: laconicità e serio-comico" (pp. 25-39), M. S. Celentano discute les caractéristiques de la parole des Lacédémoniens: l'approche communicative agressive, la concision et la condensation, le discours sentencieux mais toujours vigoureux et efficace. La tension agonistique et l'agressivité du discours laconique conçu en tant que confrontation directe des interlocuteurs se manifestent aussi dans le domaine du sérieux-comique (spoudogeloion), les Lacédémoniens apparaissant capables d'exprimer des contenus sérieux à travers une forme comique et de formuler des phrases ironiques et piquantes, sans jamais en devenir les victimes. A propos de "Lysias démagogue dans le Contre Eratosthène “ (pp· 4159 ), P. Chiron montre comment Lysias, afin de parvenir à la condamnation d'Eratosthène, recourt à la déformation historique, notamment quand il présente les Trente comme un groupe homogène radicalement extérieur à la communauté démocratique et quand il utilise l'antithèse de façon à éliminer...

This paper investigates the Exempla concerning ancient Greek history in Byzantine rhetorical and historiographic works of the twelfth century. The paper shows that knowledge of ancient history in this period of Byzantine literature was significant, and it reveals which ancient Greek personalities and events were preferred and which were overlooked. The paper examines the critical and encomiastic purposes of various Byzantine authors with regard to their perception of the past. The paper contributes towards an understanding of Byzantine ideology, with regard to its connections to and differences from ancient Greek culture.

AbstractDuring the rise and growth of the Greek art of oratory in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. the development of open and systematic techniques for awakening and encouraging a sense of pity can be observed both in rhetoric proper (the ten Attic orators) and in associated literary genres influenced by rhetoric (Historiography and Tragedy). These are classified—most notably by reference to the writings of Plato and Aristotle—in the light of rhetorical theory and significant examples are provided. Three techniques are investigated: (1.) the direct use of instances of pity, without elaboration, (2.) the development of axioms concerning the nature of pity, and (3.) systematic approaches to the awakening of pity.

Abstract Michael Psellos' encomium of his mother, regarded by the twelfth-century scholar Gregory of Corinth as one of the four best speeches ever composed, exemplifies what the Byzantine rhetorical tradition thought “good rhetoric” was made of. The stylistic and aesthetic values usually attributed to Byzantine rhetoric seem insufficient to account for Gregory's opinion. This essay argues that, by offering a “figured” defense of his career as a “Byzantine Sophist,” Psellos' encomium functions as a culturally significant instance of antilogy, and thus reprises not only the forms of late-antique sophistic rhetoric, but also and more importantly its intellectual ideal, within the terms of Byzantine high culture.

AbstractIndirect discourse presents problems in that it is speech that has been altered from the oral strategy that is deployed in direct discourse. Most particularly, references to actio seem to be irrelevant since indirect discourse is not a constituent of the context to which it refers. It appears, nevertheless, to be placed in context by references to words and gestures which are derived directly from actio. The gestures that reinforce speech arise from a veritable rhetoric of seduction, especially in respect of their theatricality, and vocal characteristics can be sensed even at the level of phrasing in indirect discourse. This too, therefore, is part of the rhetoric of speech.

Book Review| January 01 2004 Review of Quintilian and the Law: The Art of Persuasion in Law and Politics, ed. Olga Tellegen-Couperus (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2003). Andrew M. Riggsby Andrew M. Riggsby 1 University Station ##C3400, Austin, TX 78712 USA Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2004) 22 (3): 301–304. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2004.22.3.301 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Andrew M. Riggsby; Review of Quintilian and the Law: The Art of Persuasion in Law and Politics, ed. Olga Tellegen-Couperus (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2003).. Rhetorica 1 January 2004; 22 (3): 301–304. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2004.22.3.301 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 Rhetoric You do not currently have access to this content.

Michael Psellos’ encomium of his mother, regarded by the twelfth-century scholar Gregory of Corinth as one of the four best speeches ever composed, exemplifies what the Byzantine rhetorical tradition thought “good rhetoric” was made of. The stylistic and aesthetic values usually attributed to Byzantine rhetoric seem insufficient to account for Gregory’s opinion. This essay argues that, by offering a “figured” defense of his career as a “Byzantine Sophist,” Psellos’ encomium functions as a culturally significant instance of antilogy, and thus reprises not only the forms of late-antique sophistic rhetoric, but also and more importantly its intellectual ideal, within the terms of Byzantine high culture.

AbstractThis study sets about to analyse the complex relations between rhetoric and reality by examining the use of traditional material, both rhetorical and mythological, in the group of nuptial poems written by Claudian in 398 A.D., and to show across the political and religious dimensions of these poems, how the use of topoi in the representation of the present proves to be both mirror and mask of reality. One finds that, in the political domain, Claudian, in consonance with imperial ideology, holds up a lofty mirror to the court and uses rhetorical topics to hide the shadowy aspects of the situation of the western empire controlled by Stilicho; in the religious domain, the poet ignores completely the Christian aspect of this marriage, unlike certain other late authors of epthalamic works, and anchors his poetry strongly in pagan tradition.

Reviews Lonni Bahmer, ScJiriftlichkeit und Rhetorik: Das Beispiel Griechenland. Ein Beitrag zur historischen Schriftlichkeitsforschung. Hildesheim / Zü­ rich / New York 2000. Die derzeit intensiv betriebene historiscbe Schriftlichkeitsforschung bildet den Rahmen, innerhalb dessen L. Bahmer (im folgenden B.) in ihrem Werk die Frage nach der Beziehung von Schriftlichkeit und Rhetorik stellt, naherhin, nach der Bedeutung der Rhetorik fur die Schriftlichkeit, nach der Rolle der Schrift bei der Herstellung der Rede sowie der Schrift als Medium des Lehrens und Lernens. Die "Arbeit beansprucht, von den Quellen auszugehen " (S. 15); im wesentlichen handelt es sich hierbei um den Anonymus Iamblichi, die Dissoi Logoi und die erste Tétralogie Antiphons. Der Interpretation dieser Texte geht die fast ein Drittel der Arbeit ausmachende Einführung (S. 11-78) voran, in der B. den Forschungsstand sichtet— gelegentlich mit hohlem Pathos (z.B. S. 38) und in oberflâchlich-ambitiôser Polemik. So etwa gegenüber R. Pfeiffer (S. 29f.), dessen Darstellung der Sophistik und ihrer Bedeutung für die Schriftlichkeit und die Entwicklung des Buchwesens (History of Classical Scholarship, Oxford 1968, 16-56), genau besehen, die Antwort auf die von B. gestellten Fragen in wichtigen Punkten vorwegnimmt; ist doch die Sophistik mit der Rhetorik aufs engste verbunden. Da die von B. als Hauptquellen herangezogenen Texte explizit weder auf den Zusammenhang von Rhetorik und Schriftlichkeit noch in ihrer sprachlichen Gestaltung auf schriftliche VerfaBtheit verweisen, bedient sich B. vorwiegend der indirekten Beweisfiihrung. So sucht sie ihre These, der Anom /mus Iamblichi habe seine Ausführungen schriftlich verfaBt, zu beweisen durch die Einreihung dieses Textes unter solche Textsorten, "die von vornherein als Schriftprodukte [...] angesehen werden" kônnen (S. 109). Die in den Dissoi Logoi (5,Ilf.) als ein Beispiel für situativen Relativismus angeführte betonungsbedingte Bedeutungsverànderung von Homographen motiviert B., obwohl das Exempel eher den Rang der Mündlichkeit dokumentiert, zu ausgedehnten Erôrterungen u.a. antiker Schreibkonventionen, des Ineinandergreifens von Musik, Rhythmus, Grammatik, des Elementarunterrichtes—mit dem Ziel, das "SchriftbewuBtsein" des Verfassers (S. 173) herauszustellen. Und schlieBlich: So unzweifelhaft es ist, daB die Tetralogien Antiphons als Musterreden wie andere rhetorische Beispielsammlungen dieser Zeit schrift-© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXII, Number 1 (Winter 2004). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 103 104 RHETORICA lich im Umlauf waren, so wenig tragen B.s Interpretationen (S. 208-236) zur Fundierung dieser Ansicht bei. B.s Arbeit geht, zusammenfassend gesagt, von einem wichtigen Problem aus, behandelt dieses aber in einer methodisch wenig überzeugenden Form. Angesichts der oft weitausholenden, streckenweise in ermüdender Diktion vorgetragenen Darstellung stellt sich die Frage, ob B. ihr Ziel durch eine umfassende Sichtung und Interpretation der in der einschlàgigen Literatur des 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts vorliegenden Aussagen zur Schriftlichkeit nicht besserhàtte erreichen kônnen. Es sei hier nur - ergânzend zu den von B. selbst angeführten "Schrift"-Belegen-u.a. verwiesen auf Sokrates' Schilderung der zeitgenôssischen Rhetorik-Lehrbiicher (Platon, Phaedr. 266c-267d; 271c), auf das bei L. Radermacher (Artium scriptores: Sitzb. Ôsterr. Akad. 227,3, 1951) zu findende Material, auf die Belege bei W. Steidle (Redekunst und Bildung bei Isokrates: Hermes 80, 1952, 271 Anm. 5). Auch im einzelnen bietet die Arbeit manches Inakzeptable, so, wenn B. Platon auf dem Gebiet der Sprachbetrachtung und der formalen Logik zum "Schüler" der Sophisten erklàrt (S. 238), verkennend, daP zum einen Platons epistemologisches Interesse an der Sprache, insbesondere der "Richtigkeit der Wôrter", sich gerade nicht am sophistischen Begriff der formalen Sprachrichtigkeit orientiert, sondern—so im Krati/los—zuriickweist auf die etymologisierende Sprachanalyse des frühen Griechentums, daP zum andern für Platons Logik nicht die von ihm als Antilogike (Eristik) bekampfte sophistische Dialektik grundlegend ist, sondern das sokratische Bemühen um den Begriff. Zwei etwas knapp geratene Register erschliePen das Buch. Druckfehler finden sich selten, doch weisen einige griechische Wôrter falsche Akzente bzw. Spiritus auf (so S. 139; 144; 209 u.ô.). Angesichts der wertvollen Fragestellung des Werkes braucht dessen Besprechung indes nicht im Negativen zu enden. Dieter Lau Universitat Essen 0ivind Andersen, Im Garten der Rhetorik. Die Kunst der Rede in der Antike. Aus dem Norwegischen...

Abstract This article is divided in two parts. In the first, αλλοίωσισ is considered as a figure which in poetry corresponds with solecism in prose just as metaplasm corresponds with barbarism, and the group of figures which is ranged around αλλοίωσισ such as hysteron proteron, hyperbaton, hypallagé is studied. Since αλλοίωσισ means not only a particular figure, but also a group of figures, it is a matter of stylistic tools employed as tags in a more or less mechanical way to achieve special effects. Among Latin grammarians and rhetoricians, hyperbaton became a sort of general trope used to indicate a change in word order. In the second part of the article, some examples ofr hyperbaton are examined, particularly Epistulae 1,20,25 me primis urbis belli placuisse domique to show how the poet has made of this a double reference, making a discreet allusion to his military service in the army of Brutus as well as his friendship with Maecenas and Augustus.

Research Article| January 01 2004 Review of Quintiliano, Institutio oratoria, edizione con testo a fronte a cura di A. Pennacini, trad. e note di commento di T. Piscitelli, R. Granatelli, A. Pennacini, D. Vottero, V. Viparelli, M. S. Celentano, M. Squillante, F. Parodi Scotti, A. Falco, A. M. Milazzo, M. Vallozza, R. Valenti, voll. I-II (Torino: “Biblioteca della Pléiade” Einaudi, 2001), 1092 + 1096 pp. Gian Biagio Conte Gian Biagio Conte Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, piazza dei Cavalieri 7,56126 Pisa ITALY Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2004) 22 (3): 297–300. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2004.22.3.297 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Gian Biagio Conte; Review of Quintiliano, Institutio oratoria, edizione con testo a fronte a cura di A. Pennacini, trad. e note di commento di T. Piscitelli, R. Granatelli, A. Pennacini, D. Vottero, V. Viparelli, M. S. Celentano, M. Squillante, F. Parodi Scotti, A. Falco, A. M. Milazzo, M. Vallozza, R. Valenti, voll. I-II (Torino: “Biblioteca della Pléiade” Einaudi, 2001), 1092 + 1096 pp.. Rhetorica 1 January 2004; 22 (3): 297–300. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2004.22.3.297 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric You do not currently have access to this content.

This essay brings to light a previously untranslated Latin medieval rhetorical treatise from Castile and León—Juan Gil de Zamora’s letter writing manual <i>Dictaminis Epithalamium</i>, or <i>The Marriaga Song of Letter-Writing</i> (c. 1277). Juan Gil (c. 1240-c. 1318) was among the first writers in Castile and León to compose a rhetorical treatise on the technical elements of composition. I outline the theoretical and technical elements of Juan Gil s <i>ars dictaminis</i>. Following an explication of his theory, I historicize the <i>Dictaminis Epithalamium</i> within the western European rhetorical tradition and within the established dictaminal genre. I argue that Juan Gil develops a new rhetoric for letter writing—one incorporating innovations as well as compilations of ideas from the Italian and French schools of letter-writing.

310 RHETORICA especially troubling for colonial discourse analysis, which is given a cursory treatment in Chapter Four but could have been developed in more depth and usefully applied in all of the examples. The last point draws attention to the fact that Schuetz does not develop an overarching thesis for her study in her brief introduction, and offers no separate conclusion. It is thus never clear what might hold these eleven very different chapters together beyond their interest as examples of governmentIndian relations or as examples of the diversity of rhetorical theories. The individual chapters consist mainly of summaries of the relevant history for the particular case study; surprisingly, there is little actual analysis. The conclusions to the individual chapters will likely seem obvious both to scholars actively engaged in American Indian studies and to American Indian peoples who live in the aftermath and ongoing legacies of these histories. The explanatory, theoretical, and activist potential of rhetorical analysis for these cases is left largely untapped. Chadwick Allen Ohio State University Jeffrey M. Suderman, Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001. 293 pages. Readers of Rhetorica are not the audience Jeffrey Suderman targeted in writing Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century. Suderman writes that he was motivated to undertake this study to correct the imbalance of Campbell's modern reputation—as the author of the Philosophy of Rhetoric—and his contemporary reputation, which rested more on his Dissertation on Miracles and on his translation of the Gospels. Furthermore, Suderman claims that historians of the Enlightenment have devoted too much attention to atypical figures, especially skeptics such as Hume, Voltaire, and Gibbon, to the neglect of representative figures, such as Campbell. As a result, today Campbell is known "only to a few specialists" in rhetoric who read the Philosophy ofRhetoric "without a broader appreciation of his life and thought" (4-5). In contrast, Suderman would reconstruct the George Campbell that eighteenth-century audiences knew, and ... find what was representative in his thought" (6). To me, Suderman's seems a wrong-headed approach to Campbell, whose work (except for the Philosophy of Rhetoric) is as unremarkable as it is representative, but his perverse accounting of Campbell's achievement does not much compromise the usefulness of a book that is a model of a scholarship. Suderman divides his book into three parts: a biographical section (968 ); a section on the "Enlightened Campbell," which examines the origins of Campbell's thought in eighteenth century empiricism (69-178); and a section Reviews 311 on the "Religious Campbell," which examines Campbell as a biblical scholar and Christian polemicist. In appendices, Suderman lists all of Campbell's extant letters, each identified by library and manuscript number, and the manuscripts Suderman used in his study, some of which were not previously identified. Future Campbell scholars owe him thanks. The picture of Campbell that emerges from Suderman's biographical chapters is not substantially different from what we could piece together from Lloyd Bitzer's Introduction to his edition of the Philosophy of Rhetoric and from Lewis Ulman's work on the Aberdeen Philosophical Society. But Suderman adds more details to make this the most complete and reliable biography we have. Section II groups together the Philosophy of Rhetoric, the Dissertation on Miracles, and the Lectures on Ecclesiastical History as constituting Campbell's program to establish Christianity on rational grounds. Suderman therefore reads the Philosophy of Rhetoric in order to derive Campbell's philosophy of mind, concluding that Campbell's faculty of psychology and his discussion of evidence support the conclusion that belief in God and Christian morality can be rationally justified on empirical grounds. Scholars of rhetoric will find of particular interest Suderman's analysis of memory and his stress on the importance of the argument from design as the guarantor of the reliability of our reasoned conclusions. In Section III, "Revealed Knowledge: the Religious Campbell," Sud­ erman attempts to delineate Campbell's theology, discusses Campbell's en­ gagement with his Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, and Dissenting critics, and examines his translation of the Gospels. Suderman identifies Campbell's the­ ology as "mitigated" Calvinism (205). My conclusion...

312 RHETORICA for Hume than for his moderate opponents. In his response, consistent with Common Sense philosophy, Campbell argues that the contest is not between two types of experience because our belief in testimony is prior to experience: we naturally accept witnesses' accounts in the absence of evidence that they are deceived or deceiving. As a philosophical point, Campbell's argument deserves the respect it has received. The problem is that Campbell does not consistently advance this view. As Suderman points out, Campbell dismissed Roman Catholic accounts of contemporary miracles—a blatant example, but hardly the only one, of Campbell's sacrificing philosophical consistency to defend his religious positions. I would argue for something closer to the reverse of Suderman's thesis. Campbell was an accomplished scholar, but he took as his mission defending and spreading the Word. As a thinker, he is most interesting when he feels most free of his mission. This explains why his relatively secular Philosophy of Rhetoric—a coherent synthesis of classical rhetoric with eighteenth-century empiricism—is his best and most important work, the one on which is reputation quite properly rests. My dissent does not, however, lessen my respect and gratitude for Sud­ erman's book. Suderman's exhaustive archival research and his intelligent reading of Campbell's works make Orthodoxy and Enlightenment a must read for scholars interested in Campbell. Arthur E. Walzer University ofMinnesota Janet Carey Eldred and Peter Mortensen, Imagining Rhetoric: Com­ posing Women of the Early United States. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2002. xi + 279 pages. Imagining Rhetoric is a welcome addition to the scholarship on Amer­ ican rhetorics. Truly a first, this book provides the only full-length study of early American women's rhetorical education and composition practices. In attempting to "glimpse how composition came to be situated in the lives of the women in the new nation," Eldred and Mortensen achieve two im­ portant tasks: they draw upon a wide range of sources, some rhetorical and pedagogical, others fictional and personal; and they resist a seamless or heroic interpretation of women's use of neoclassical civic rhetoric, al­ lowing instead for the discontinuities and disappointments that accompany liberatory struggles and revisionist historiography. This study focuses on six women, some well known, others more ob­ scure, but all grappled to make liberatory civic rhetoric their own: Han­ nah Webster Foster, Judith Sargent Murray, Mrs. A. J. Graves, Louisa Car­ oline Tuthill, Almira Hart Lincoln Phelps, and Charlotte Forten. Eldred and Mortensen recover an array of these women's "schooling fictions" from the Reviews 313 1790s to the 1860s, including female textbooks, anthologies, theoretical texts, practical writing guides, and syllabi, as well as novels, novellas, diaries, political essays, and reflective narratives. The authors demonstrate that ex­ panding the scope of sources of women's rhetoric is crucial to revising history, and in this particular case they effectively challenge the standard thesis of neoclassical rhetoric's decline. Just as "schooling fictions" imagine the roles of writing in women's post-Revolutionarv lives, Imagining Rhetoric compels readers to contemplate the possibilities of historiography. The introduction outlines the primary argument that liberatory strains of neoclassical civic rhetoric were "indispensable" to these women's visions of female education. The first chapter also raises the book's central question: were these women's uses of this rhetoric liberatory? The following chapters do not answer this question directly but illustrate the complexity of the issue and maintain a productive tension between possible responses. Chapter two discusses how female textbooks and didactic novels, both appearing after the Revolution, conceive of women's education quite differently. Whereas Donald Fraser's schoolbook, The Mental Flower-Garden, dresses up a restric­ tive and superficial education for women in liberatory garb, Foster's The Boarding School imagines an ideal education that teaches women to use liber­ atory rhetoric themselves to shape the new nation. Yet for Murray, the subject of the next chapter, a vision like Foster's is complicated by fears of sophistry, nonstandard English, and poor teachers. To temper the seductive aspects of misguided liberatory rhetoric, Murray develops a classically oriented "com­ monplace rhetoric," a system of instruction based on literary borrowings, which Eldred and Mortensen...

Reviews Janice Schuetz, Episodes z/z the Rhetoric ofGovernment-Indian Relations. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. ISBN 0-275-97613-0. xxii + 316 pages. Relations between the United States government and American Indian nations, tribes, or individuals, in all periods of U.S. history, are notoriously resistant to easy analysis or straightforward conclusions. For one thing, the written record is typically incomplete and often heavily biased, in both form and content, against Indian interests. For another, the U.S. academy has been slow to develop adequate research methodologies or innovative theoretical tools that promote scholarship that will be relevant not only to academics but also to Indian peoples themselves. The interdisciplinary fields of ethno-history and American Indian studies have made important strides in these directions over the past couple decades, but there is still a high level of disagreement over which approaches are most appropriate and productive. A carefully researched and specifically-situated rhetorical analysis of significant texts in the history of U.S.-Indian relations would add an important perspective. Unfortunately, Episodes in the Rhetoric of Government-Indian Relations by Janice Schuetz, Professor of Communication at the University of New Mexico, offers neither ground-breaking archival research nor innovative theory. The book's main appeal is its ambitious scope: each of the eleven chapters analyzes a different "episode" in U.S.-Indian relations, from the mid-nineteenth century through the late twentieth century. Moreover, like an introductory textbook to rhetorical theories, each case study employs a different method of analysis: the dramatistic theories of Kenneth Burke are applied to the Pugent Sound War of 1854-58: genre theory is applied to the so-called Sioux Uprising of 1862; speech act and political spectacle theory is applied to the Sand Creek Massacre of 1864; colonial discourse analysis is applied to the history of the Navajo Long Walk and Internment of 1846-68; Victor Turner's theories of ritual and redress are applied to Zuni Witch Cases of 1880-1900; and theories of lamentation are applied to the Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890. Given the range and diversity of cases, Schuetz's presentation and analysis of individual episodes is necessarily limited. Although the breadth of her reading in Indian history is impressive, it is also highly selective for any particular case and, in general, does not add new evidence or points of view. Furthermore, it is often unclear why individual theories were chosen for, and restricted to, particular cases. This is© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXI, Number 4 (Autumn 2003). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 309 310 RHETORICA especially troubling for colonial discourse analysis, which is given a cursory treatment in Chapter Four but could have been developed in more depth and usefully applied in all of the examples. The last point draws attention to the fact that Schuetz does not develop an overarching thesis for her study in her brief introduction, and offers no separate conclusion. It is thus never clear what might hold these eleven very different chapters together beyond their interest as examples of governmentIndian relations or as examples of the diversity of rhetorical theories. The individual chapters consist mainly of summaries of the relevant history for the particular case study; surprisingly, there is little actual analysis. The conclusions to the individual chapters will likely seem obvious both to scholars actively engaged in American Indian studies and to American Indian peoples who live in the aftermath and ongoing legacies of these histories. The explanatory, theoretical, and activist potential of rhetorical analysis for these cases is left largely untapped. Chadwick Allen Ohio State University Jeffrey M. Suderman, Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001. 293 pages. Readers of Rhetorica are not the audience Jeffrey Suderman targeted in writing Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century. Suderman writes that he was motivated to undertake this study to correct the imbalance of Campbell's modern reputation—as the author of the Philosophy of Rhetoric—and his contemporary reputation, which rested more...

This essay interprets Nietzsche’s statement in Ecce Homo that his is a “most multifarious art of style” as an allusion to Demosthenes’ reputation as the perfect orator. Nietzsche does so as a way of signaling that his own “art of style” positions him as the modern heir to this ideal. Nietzsche’s account of his style has to be read as a polemical and radical intervention in the old battle between philosophy and rhetoric, one that aims to deconstruct the opposition between them rather than to assert the legitimacy of one over the other.

Reviews 199 nitá della sua opera per attribuirla ad Aristotele, affidandogliela come ad un padre adottivo. Ed in realtá, come ben osserva il Velardi, la Rhetorica ad Alexandrum deve non soltanto la sua fama, ma molto probabilmente la sua stessa sopravvivenza fino ai nostri giorni, al fatto di essere stata ritenuta opera aristotélica. Il volume é corredato da una serie di indici: Indice dei luoghi citati, Indice delle cose e della parole notevoli, Indice dei nomi. Ferruccio Conti Bizzarro Universita Federico ÍI, Napoli Nan Johnson, Gender and Rhetorical Space in American Life, 1866-1910, (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2002), pp. 220. Nan Johnson's first book, Nineteenth-Century Rhetoric in North America (1991), has been called "the most comprehensive assessment yet published of the rhetorics that shaped the teaching of English composition and pub­ lic speaking in the nineteenth century" (Miller 1993). It is an admirably well-researched account of how American college and university students were taught the rhetorical skills necessary for careers in the courtroom, leg­ islature, and religious professions, and has proved an invaluable resource for both historians and teachers of rhetoric and composition. However, in Nineteenth-Century Rhetoric in North America, Johnson is silent about women's relationship to this dominant male tradition of rhetorical instruction. It is this relationship which her second book, Gender and Rhetorical Space in American Life, 1866-1910, takes as its focus. Gender and Rhetorical Space in American Life, 1866-1910 is one of three inaugural titles in a new series, Studies in Rhetorics and Feminisms, edited by Cheryl Glenn and Shirley Wilson Logan for Southern Illinois University Press. In part, the book is a project of historical recovery, reconstituting a separate tradition of rhetorical training for women in postbellum American society. In this respect, it fits into a body of feminist scholarship on the history of rhetoric that begins with Doris Yoakum's 1943 article "Women's Introduction to the American Platform" and includes Lillian O'Connor's Pioneer Women Orators: Rhetoric in the Antebellum Reform Movement (1954), Karlyn Kohrs Campbell's two-volume Women Public Speakers in the United States: A Bio-Critical Sourcebook (1993, 1994), Andrea Lunsford's Reclaiming Rhetorica: Women in the Rhetorical Tradition (1995), Shirley Wilson Logan's "We Are Coming: The Persuasive Discourse of Nineteenth-Century Black Women" (1999), and Jacqueline Jones Royster's Traces of a Stream: Literacy and Social Change among African American Women (2000). However, while Johnson praises these texts for carrying out the vital and ongoing work of situating prominent and forgotten women speakers in rhetorical history, 200 RHETORICA she differentiates her own historiographical method from such remapping projects (7). Johnson's purpose is not to redraw the rhetorical map by restoring forgotten contributions to the rhetorical tradition, but to ask why it is that women's contribution had been—until the advent of these projects—so com­ pletely excluded from the twentieth-century canon (10). To answer this ques­ tion, Johnson examines a wide range of nonacademic rhetorical materials, including elocution manuals, conduct books, and letter writing guides, that comprised a late nineteenth-century pedagogy of "parlor rhetoric" (2). Draw­ ing upon terms and concepts established by feminist historians to describe the gendered ideology of nineteenth-century American culture—the "cult of domesticity," the "cult of true womanhood," "Republican motherhood"— Johnson argues that the parlor rhetoric movement, while purporting to offer rhetorical training for both sexes, prescribed separate and unequal roles for both men and women (4). Men were to exercise oratorical power in the political domain, while women were to use their rhetorical skills to exert influence in the domestic sphere. This popular pedagogy defined a very tra­ ditional role for women and effectively guarded "access to public rhetorical space in American life" (16). The history of the erasure of women from the rhetorical canon, Johnson suggests, began in the nineteenth century, since the parlor rhetoric movement's relegation of women to a subordinate rhetorical role legitimized their erasure from twentieth-century histories of rhetoric (10). Johnson's argument seeks to answer why it was that, in spite of their struggle for a greater public role, white middle-class women at the end of the nineteenth century were...

The Mexican diplomat Alfonso Reyes (1889–1959) was notable in the cultural panorama of Spanish America in the first half of the 20th century for his acquaintance with classical rhetoric, a discipline rarely studied at that time in that part of the world. This article distinguishes four aspects of rhetoric throughout Reyes’ oeuvre: (i) a vulgar sense, (ii) an erudite sense, (iii) classical theories, (iv) and modern applications. In his early work, Reyes uses rhetoric in a pejorative and vulgar sense. Around the year 1940, Reyes starts to show a lively interest in rhetoric, opts definitively for an erudite sense of the term, and initiates the study of the classical art of persuasion. In his third phase, Reyes gains deeper knowledge of rhetoric, lectures on the subject, and explains his favorite orators and theorists. Finally, his use of rhetoric reveals a commitment to the reality of Spanish America. Reyes’ rhetoric is an “actualised” and “Americanised” version that shows the possibilities of the classical art of persuasion in Spanish American society.

Reviews Roberto Velardi, Retorica, filosofía, letteratura. Saggi di storia della reto­ rica greca su Gorgia, Platone e Anassimene di Lampsaco (Napoli, 2001) A.I.O.N.: Annali dell'Istituto Universitario Oriéntale di Napoli. Di­ partimento di studi del mondo classico e del Mediterráneo antico: Sezione filologico-letteraria. Quaderni, VI, 2001, pp. 155. L'autore raccoglie in questo volume quattro saggi sulla retorica greca antica, che riguardano un arco di tempo dagli ultimi decenni del V alla meté del IV secolo a. C. L'Encomio di Elena di Gorgia da Leontini costituisce il più antico testo di retorica a noi giunto: ad esso è dedicato il primo saggio "11 logismos di Gorgia". II Velardi osserva (pp. 17s.), che fuñico genere di discorso che sia in grado di rivendicare a giusta ragione la veritá come suo obiettivo, proprio in quanto contrasta la pistis di coloro che prestano ascolto ai poeti, cioé la doxrt-credenza prodotta dalla peitho esercitata dalla tradizione poética, è il discorso di tipo nuovo elaborato in base alie rególe enunciate da Gorgia, del quale VEncomio di Elena costituisce insieme il manifesto programmatico e l'esemplificazione concreta. Lo strumento del quale questo discorso si deve dotare, per poter cogliere la verità, non è né Yapate poética, né Lincantesimo mágico prodotto dalla combinazione con la dccra-funzione, né l'opposizione tra teorie concorrenti come nei discorsi dei fisiologi, né le rególe della techne logografica, né la vélocité dell'intelligenza esibita nei dialoghi filosofici, ma il logismos. Il logismos è Lelemento che caratterizza il logos gorgiano e lo distingue da tutte le altre forme di logos, in versi e in prosa. II Velardi si sofferma in particolare sulle interpretazioni correnti del termine logismos in Gorgia, quindi sulla responsabilité e non responsabilité di Elena nella tradizione épica, infine analizza con particolare acume la sezione introduttiva dell'opera, per definiré in cosa consista il logismos. Allarga la sua indagine terminológica all'opera di Erodoto e osserva quindi che le occorrenze più antiche del sostantivo logismos—in ogni caso non anteriori alla data presumibile di composizione áeWElena—compaiono nei Corpus Hippocraticum. Il secondo capitolo ("Due redazioni áeWEncomio di Elena di Gorgia", testo ampliato di un contributo apparso in Vichiana, s. IV, 2, 2000: 147156 ) costituisce un intelligente saggio di critica testuale su un problemático passo áeWEncomio, par. 12. Per motivi relativi alla struttura il Velardi avanza hipótesi che il nostro testo áeWEncomio sia il frutto della giustapposizione di due redazioni distinte dell'opera: nella prima redazione, che doveva con-© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXI, Number 3 (Summer 2003). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 197 198 RHETORICA cludersi con l'attuale par. 12, le cause del comportamento di Elena prese in esame erano soltanto tre (la divinita, la violenza, la persuasione della parola), perció l'elenco iniziale non comprende l'eros. In un secondo momento venne aggiunta una sezione relativa al logos ed una all'eros. In questa seconda parte, secondo la ricostruzione del Velardi, Eattenzione di Gorgia si concentra sulla peitho (par. 13) ed é possibile che la redazione ampliata rappresenti una fase piü matura della riflessione teórica di Gorgia, con la quale il maestro sici­ liano approfondiva Eindagine sulle dinamiche della persuasione. L'ipotesi del Velardi é che in questa sezione aggiunta Eautore áo\VEncomio fosse stimolato nelEindagine sui generi del discorso dalEincontro con Eeclettico am­ biente ateniese, mentre la riflessione sulEeros gli sarebbe stata suggerita dall'interesse del circolo socrático per questo tema. La discussione sulla natura del dialogo platónico prende le mosse dalla critica della scrittura formulata nel Fedro (il Velardi riproduce nel terzo capitolo il testo di una relazione tenuta al Convegno su "La struttura del dialogo platónico", Napoli 2000): é noto che gli studiosi, che si riconoscono nella 'Scuola di Tubinga', interpretano Eintera opera di Platone come un'introduzione alia vera e propria teoría filosófica, che si troverebbe invece nelle dottrine non scritte, e identificano nei dialoghi un sistema di rimandi al corpus dottrinale órale ed esotérico. II Velardi nella...

The study of rhetoric at Oxford enjoyed a privileged place within the classical curriculum. Yet historical treatments of both Oxford and rhetoric are silent on which texts students read, how reading lists evolved, and how the methods of teaching rhetoric responded to internal and external pressures. By using institutional records and personal papers, this essay pieces together which classical rhetoric texts students read, and how the authorities taught rhetoric during a time when curriculum reform efforts promoted both renewed emphasis on the classics and increased attention to the “new learning” of belletristic rhetoric.

202 RHETORICA insight into how access to public rhetorical space continues to be controlled today. As Johnson asserts, "Only by stepping into the contradictions between 'discipline' and 'possibility' inherent in how rhetorical traditions play out their power can we become more clear in our own minds why even in the new millennium our day-to-day lives remain corrupted by rhetorical theologies that value some voices more than others" (18). Lisa Ganobcsik-Williams University of Warwick Katerina Kostiou, Hè poictikè tes anatropès: Satira Eirôneia Parôidia Humour, Athènes: Néphélè, 2002, pp. 277. Le livre de K. Kostiou, La poétique de la subversion: Satire, Ironie, Parodie, Humour, est une étude originale dans le domaine de la littérature grecque, car il manquait une telle monographie théorique sur des thèmes qui touchent la Grèce moderne. La division de la matière est simple: quatre chapitres, un pour chacun des thèmes indiqués dans le titre. L'auteur présente son sujet de façon systématique et conceptuelle, dialogue avec la bibliographie internationale jusqu'à nos jours, et apporte des exemples tirés de la littérature grecque des deux derniers siècles. Dans une courte Introduction (pp. 21-30), où sont posées les ques­ tions de base et présentées les principales sources bibliographiques (Frye, Muecke, Booth, Rose, Pirandello), Kostiou trace une distinction entre les termes étudiés et le terme général de «comique» et fait référence aux tra­ ditions anglo-saxonne et française sur le sujet. Le premier chapitre est consacré à l'étude de la satire (pp. 31-108). Etant donné la difficulté qu'il y a à définir ce genre, l'auteur commence par un panorama remontant jusqu'à l'antiquité (Satire Ménippée des Grecs, Satura des Romains), puis analyse sa fonction, ses mécanismes, ses techniques. Ce qui sépare la satire de la comédie est le résultat obtenu. La critique du XXe siècle a prêté une grande importance à la dépendance étroite de la satire à l'égard de la rhétorique. Kostiou adopte le vocabulaire de Frye et envisage les six phases de la satire. La satire, dit l'auteur, n'est pas une forme d'écriture; elle est plutôt un ton d'écriture. La satire implique une stratégie, un contrôle et une distance par rapport à ce qu'elle satirise. Le grotesque, le pseudo-réalisme et l'imitation en font également partie. Les techniques de la satire, qui occupent la plus grande partie du chapitre, sont présentées en détail grâce à de nombreux exemples, tirés de la littérature grecque du XIXe siècle: elles comprennent notamment l'hyperbole, la caricature, l'antithèse, le cynisme, le paradoxe, la surprise, l'hypocrisie, le recours à une persona, l'allégorie, etc.—tous éléments regroupés à la fin dans un tableau (p. 102). Reviews 203 Le deuxième chapitre, qui porte sur l'ironie (pp. 109-192), est le plus long et le plus difficile à lire, à cause de son caractère purement théorique. Commençant par la définition de l'ironie et par la relation de celle-ci avec la satire, la comédie et la métaphore, l'auteur décrit l'extension du terme chez les auteurs anglais et allemands qui, au XIXe siècle, ont estimé que la littérature moderne devait être ironique, voire que toute bonne littérature est par définition ironique: «L'ironie moderne est moins satirique et plus subjective, moins rhétorique et plus 'd'atmosphère', moins agressive et plus défensive»(II.A.3). Après quoi Kostiou analyse les différents degrés de l'ironie (ironie verbale ou ironie des situations), puis la dimension philoso­ phique que lui ont donnée les philosophes français (Sartre, Foucault, Lacan, Barthes, Derrida). Les différentes techniques de l'ironie sont présentées, en­ core une fois, sur la base d'exemples tirés de la littérature grecque moderne (voir aussi le tableau p. 179). Le chapitre se termine par l'étude de la dimen­ sion...

This article proposes that we add to the small number of Renaissance works on the art of creating or using facetiae an almost unknown De arte iocandi by an almost unknown Mattheus Delius, who died young. The work is a poem in four books, in Ovidian elegiac couplets, obviously inspired by the De arte bibendi of Vincentius Obsopoeus; both works have been assumed to be paradoxical encomia but are in fact serious albeit playful compendia of rules. Delius is interested not in the rhetorical use of jokes as weapons, but in something very close to Erasmus’s festivitas. The preface by Melanchthon almost qualifies as an independent art of joking, and together they add valuable information to our knowledge of Reformation wit.

Nicolaus Caussin’s Eloquentia sacrae et humaneae parellela (1619) forges a distinctly modern history of rhetoric that ties discourse to culture. What were the conditions that made this new history of rhetoric possible? Marc Fumaroli has argued that political exigency in Cardinal Richelieu’s France demanded a reconciliation of divergent religious and secular forms of eloquence that implicated, in turn, a newly “eclectic” history of rhetoric. But political exigency alone does not account for this nascent pluralism; we also need to look at the internal dynamics of rhetorical theory as it moved across literate cultures in Europe. With this goal in mind, I first demonstrate in this article how textbooks after the heady days of Protestant Reformation in Germany tried in vain to systematize the passions of art, friendship, and politics. Partially in response to this failure, I then argue, there emerged in France a new rhetoric sensitive to the historical contingency of passionate situations. My claim is not simply that rhetoric is bound to be temporal and situational, but more precisely that Caussin initiates historical rhetorics: the capacity to theorize how discourse is bound to culture in its plurality and historical contingency.

Contemporary scholarship on classical imitation tends to analyze the practice by dividing it up based on the subjects and objects of imitation. The result of this common procedure has been an anachronistic solidification of disciplinary lines among rhetoric, philosophy, and poetics. An equally relevant effect has been the polarization of the practices of imitation and those concerned with invention. This paper seeks to elaborate a different taxonomy with which to approach imitation, one that focuses primarily on the encounter between subjects and objects in the actual practice of imitation. By attending to the complex relations of repetition and variation across disciplinary lines, this new taxonomy offers insight into the often overlooked connections between imitation and invention in the intersecting realms of rhetoric, philosophy, and poetics.

Review Isabelle Cogitore et Francis Goyet, eds., Devenir roi. Essais sur la littérature adressée au Prince. Grenoble. ELLUG, 2001. Pp. 282. Longin, Traité du Sublime. Traduction de Boileau, Introduction et notes de Francis Goyet. Paris. Le Livre de Poche, 1995. Pp. 211. Francis Goyet, Le sublime du «lieu commun». L'invention rhétorique dans l'Antiquité et à la Renaissance. Bibliothèque littéraire de la Renaissance, série 3, tome XXXII. Paris. Honoré Champion, 1996. Pp. 778. Francis Goyet montrait dans sa thèse, Le sublime du «lieu commun» consacrée à l'invention dans l'antiquité et à la renaissance, que «le lieu commun [tenait] au XVIe siècle la place du Sublime au XVIIe siècle». Dans le même temps, son introduction au Traité du Sublime traduit par Boileau relativisait l'originalité du propos de Longin, la notion de sublime étant déjà contenue selon lui dans la théorie cicéronienne, par l'attention portée au movere et à la copia. Sa contribution personnelle à l'ouvrage collectif qu'il vient de publier avec Isabelle Cogitore reprend également la notion de sublime. Les articles composant l'ouvrage Devenir roi. Essais sur la littérature adressée au Prince sont le fruit d'un travail collectif mené à l'Université Stend­ hal de Grenoble de 1995 à 1998. La première partie de l'ouvrage traite de la légitimité du pouvoir. Isabelle Cogitore («Du prince à la dynastie: la Consola­ tion à Livie») découvre dans la Consolation à Livie pour la mort de Drusus une réflexion sur le pouvoir impérial romain, au moment décisif de la succes­ sion de l'empereur Auguste. Derrière les portraits d'Auguste et de Livie, de Drusus, émerge la notion de «Maison julio-claudienne». La mort de Drusus, successeur idéal, suscite en effet l'affirmation d'un principe dynastique, la domus julio-claudienne constituant un vivier de successeurs potentiels, issus de la famille de César et Auguste et de celle de Livie. Nicholas Myers («Des Tudors aux Stuarts, ou comment légitimer un changement dynastique») évoque la façon dont une nouvelle dynastie se légitime, lorsque Jacques Ier (Stuart) succède à Elisabeth 1ère d'Angleterre (Tudor). Bacon, dans un ouvrage historique, dresse un parallèle entre le règne d'Henri VII, grandp ère d'Elisabeth, et celui de Jacques Ier. Lors de la fête civique de Londres en 1605, Jacques Ier est présenté comme le monarque attendu pour rétablir la concorde dans le royaume divisé par Brutus, son roi fondateur, tandis que le changement dynastique est symbolisé par le phénix. Ainsi, c'est dans© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXI, Number 2 (Spring 2003). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 133 134 RHETORICA l'imaginaire, par l'histoire, la légende ou la représentation poétique, que se fonde la légitimité du prince. Gérard Luciani («Légitimité de l'usurpation: le Prince de Machiavel traduit par A. de la Houssaye») s'intéresse à la réception du Prince: quand Machiavel préconise le recours à la violence et à la ruse, il pense à la conquête du pouvoir, à l'usurpation, qui lui semble légitime en vue de réaliser l'unité italienne. Mais son traducteur Amelot de la Hous­ saye, sujet de Louis XIV, retient la notion de raison d'Etat, qui s'applique à l'exercice du pouvoir, et convient à la monarchie absolue. Car Amelot lit Machiavel à travers Tacite, qui ne distingue pas nettement la conquête du pouvoir et son exercice. Au XVIIIe siècle, le terme d'usurpation est nettement associé au pouvoir illégitime, si bien que Voltaire et Frédéric II, lecteurs du Prince dans la traduction d'Amelot, récusent aussi bien l'interprétation de ce dernier que le propos de Machiavel. Daniel Sangsue («Le Prince dans La Chartreuse de Parme») fait une lecture politique de La Chartreuse de Parme. Les portraits des princes de Parme, tyrans dont les abus sont intolérables, sont marqués par l'euph...

In Latin rhetorical contexts, color was a well known metaphor, used to refer either to the orator’s stylistic choices or to the general complexion of the whole speech (Cic. De orat. 3.96) or the specific characteristics of each of the three styles (Cic. De orat. 3.199) or even of each part of the speech (Quint. 12.10.71). In the second case, by contrast, color had the peculiar meaning of a possible point of view in the discussion of the case, as appears from its usage in Seneca’s Controversiae. The term ductus was less well known. We meet it for the first time in the handbook of Consultus Fortunatianus (1.6–8, pp. 71 ff. Calb. Mont.) and then again in the book on rhetoric in the encyclopaedia of Martianus Capella (470–72, pp. 165.3ff. Willis). Ductus referred to the speaker’s intention of being open or not in pleading the entire case. Considering the section on ductus in the Five Books on Rhetoric written by George of Trebizond, this article corroborates the parallels between the theory of ductus as treated by Fortunatianus and Martianus Capella, the figuratae controversiae of Quintilian (9.2.65–69), and the ἐσχηματισμένα of Greek authors.

In their Traité de l’argumentation Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca declare themselves to be inspired by Aristotle’s dialectics and, contextually, to exclude Hegel’s dialectics from the horizon of Nouvelle Rhétorique. Yet, while some passages in the Traité account for their choice of Aristotle, the same cannot be said for their attitude towards Hegel, whose dialectics our two authors reject without criticism. Such rejection is actually in contrast with Nouvelle Rhétorique’s methodology, which is open to the examination of new meanings and usages in the philosophical field. In fact, when applied consistently, this methodology can discover similarities between Hegel’s dialectics and New Rhetoric, and remodel Perelman’s questions concerning tautology, analogy, philosophical pluralism, and the sense of audience.

Book Review| January 01 2003 Review of Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century, By Jeffrey M. Suderman Arthur E. Walzer Arthur E. Walzer University of Minnesota Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2003) 21 (4): 310–312. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.310 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 Arthur E. Walzer; Review of Orthodoxy and Enlightenment: George Campbell in the Eighteenth Century, By Jeffrey M. Suderman. Rhetorica 1 January 2003; 21 (4): 310–312. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.310 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 Rhetoric Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| January 01 2003 Review of Imagining Rhetoric: Composing Women of the Early United States, By Janet Carey Eldred and Peter Mortensen Shevaun E. Watson Shevaun E. Watson Miami University Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2003) 21 (4): 312–314. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.312 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 Shevaun E. Watson; Review of Imagining Rhetoric: Composing Women of the Early United States, By Janet Carey Eldred and Peter Mortensen. Rhetorica 1 January 2003; 21 (4): 312–314. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.312 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: This essay brings to light a previously untranslated Latin medieval rhetorical treatise from Castile and León—Juan Gil de Zamora's letter writing manual Dictaminis Epithalamium, or The Marriage Song of Letter-Writing (c. 1277). Juan Gil (c. 1240–c. 1318) was among the first writers in Castile and León to compose a rhetorical treatise on the technical elements of composition. I outline the theoretical and technical elements of Juan Gil's ars dictaminis. Following an explication of his theory, I historicize the Dictaminis Epithalamium within the western European rhetorical tradition and within the established dictaminal genre. I argue that Juan Gil develops a new rhetoric for letter writing—one incorporating innovations as well as compilations of ideas from the Italian and French schools of letter-writing.

Book Review| January 01 2003 Review of Episodes in the Rhetoric of Government-Indian Relations, By Janice Schuetz Chadwick Allen Chadwick Allen Ohio State University Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2003) 21 (4): 309–310. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.309 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 Chadwick Allen; Review of Episodes in the Rhetoric of Government-Indian Relations, By Janice Schuetz. Rhetorica 1 January 2003; 21 (4): 309–310. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2003.21.4.309 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 Rhetoric Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

One tends to take for granted that in women’s monasteries the only voices raised were those of its masculine directors and preachers. However, while sermons by priests were generally reserved for Sundays and feast days, the abbesses addressed their communities several times a week or even daily. Although the Pauline prohibitions restricted women from speaking on religious topics in public or to mixed groups, within the walls of the convent that was assimilated to the private domain of a household, abbesses exhorted, instructed and rebuked their nuns at chapter meetings or during recreation sessions. Many such talks might have been considered a form of preaching if they had been delivered by abbots in a monastery of men. However, because abbesses of the era generally lacked rhetorical and theological training, they had to content themselves with the informal registers of sacred oratory.