It has long been stated that, in Isocrates' Helen, there seems to be an open contradiction between the author's harsh criticism of logoi paradoxoi and the simple fact that his own encomia of Helen and Busiris appear to be specimens of that very genre. Traditionally, this contradiction has been explained by Isocrates' need to distanciate his own work from that of his predecessors. This paper undertakes a different approach. Isocrates' criticism of paradoxographic literature is based upon observations about what is and what is not allowed in moral epideictic discourse. Isocrates' specific instructions about proper and improper moral argumentation can function as hermeneutical tool to analyze Helen and Busiris. Only in Helen does he observe the rules of argumentation formulated in that very discourse. In Busiris, however, Isocrates adopts the typical modes of argumentation in paradoxographic literature as represented in the works of Gorgias or Polycrates. In consequence, his arguments in Busiris prove to be unconvincing when measured by his own standards formulated in the proemium of both Helen and Busiris. Consequently, the discourse ends in an apology of these arguments which is, once again, defective. In his corresponding discourses Helen and Busiris, Isocrates implictly demonstrates the moral and technical defects inherent in paradoxical discourse. He explicitly reflects these defects in the proemia and epilogues of both speeches. Helen and Busiris should, therefore, be understood as Isocrates' manifesto for moral discourse as opposed to paradoxographic showpieces.

It has long been stated that, in Isocrates’ Helen, there seems to be an open contradiction between the author’s harsh criticism of logoi paradoxoi and the simple fact that his own encomia of Helen and Busiris appear to be specimens of that very genre. Traditionally, this contradiction has been explained by Isocrates’ need to distanciate his own work from that of his predecessors.

Reviews 445 Lancelot en pi ose, la polémique est muselée par les stratégies narratives et une volonté d'édification chrétienne : les opposants à la cour d'Arthur ne reçoivent pour seule réponse qu'une fin exemplaire. Pour le cheik Al-Ansari et son admirateur enthousiaste, la vérité révélée n'a rien d'une fiction. Tant que les points de vue avancés admettent la contradiction et que le débat est permis, même dans ses formes les plus agressives, l'analyse rhétorique reste un outil d'interprétation privilégié pour démystifier le discours polémique. Elle permet en outre à certains contributeurs, comme R. Micheli, Th. Her­ man, E. De Jonge, ainsi qu'aux directeurs de l'ouvrage, de proposer des hypothèses nouvelles et pertinentes qui pourront servir de jalons pour de futures recherches dans deux domaines, celui du rhétorique et du polémique, qui sont intimement liés autour du sens du combat. Benoît Sans Université Libre de Bruxelles Graves, Michael. Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric and Religion 9). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2009. 450 pp. ISBN: 9781602582408 Given the challenges of working with early Quaker sermons, it's not surprising that there is relatively little work on Quaker rhetoric. Unlike the Puritans, who seemed to suffer from graphomania, early Quakers believed in impromptu preaching which means that there is a paucity of source mate­ rial for historians of rhetoric. Perhaps more troubling, early Quaker sermons were often printed by non-Quaker publishers and questions about their authenticity often arise. In Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric Graves does an admirable job working with the corpus of seventy-nine surviving Quaker sermons, situating them within a reconstruction of early Quaker theology, rhetorical theory, and die emerging transatlantic printculture . Indeed, this work needs to be read as straddling Quaker studies and the history of rhetoric as Graves speaks to both groups of scholars through­ out. For that effort alone, this work deserves special attention. Despite this achievement or perhaps because of it, this reviewer has some concerns about Graves's otherwise excellent work. Graves has long been immersed in the literature of early Quakerism and, to his credit as a craftsman, this work establishes a mastery of archival material that is rare even in the best scholarship. This study of early Quaker rhetoric fills a number of important gaps in our historical knowledge. For example, in his discussion of Robert Barclay (1648-1690), one of the most important early Quaker intellectuals, Graves claims that Barclay s under­ standing of preaching is derived from a very different model of faculty psychology from both Bacon who preceded him and Campbell who came after, which he claims is closer to modern brain science than either (pp· 446 RHETORICA 115-116). Leaving aside the questionable relationship between early modern homiletic theory and postmodern science, Graves's argument suggests that faculty psychology is far more complex and varied than many traditional his­ tories allow. Furthermore, his reconstruction of Quaker impromptu speaking theory can and should provide a guide for other scholars interested in the impromptu sermon, a genre of considerable importance in America's Great Awakening and subsequent religious revivals. The craftsmanship of this book is impressive. According Graves's on­ line profile, this work is the product of nearly forty years of research and one can detect the expertise that has gone into every footnote. Alongside the twelve analytic chapters and epilogue are the complete texts of four surviv­ ing Quaker sermons, five appendixes which examine the remaining corpus of seventeenth-century Quaker sermons, a very thorough bibliography of Quaker studies and three indices. The book is divided into four sections, each focuses on different levels of analysis and context necessary for under­ standing Quaker rhetoric. It begins with an overview of seventeenth-century rhetoric, continues with an analysis of the evolution of Quaker impromptu preaching theory, and proceeds to an examination of all seventy-nine surviv­ ing Quaker sermons and then ends with an analysis of works by key Quaker figures including Fox, Crisp, Barclay and Penn. Historians of rhetoric will likely...

Reviews 441 plification, a corpus of copiousness, an encomium of invention, a well; it is difficult to read such a long book about excess and extravagance with­ out resorting to the hyperbolic. But, hyperbole aside, this is a remarkable book. It is difficult to imagine that Johnson has left much unsaid about his subject. The display of erudition can be both dazzling and daunting—and occasionally bewildering. Simply surveying the 129 pages of notes can be remarkably instructive. In telling the story of hyperbole he seamlessly inter­ weaves ancient rhetoricians, mannerist poets, Enlightenment philosophers, and post-Modern critics—sometimes in the same sentence. In Hyperboles Johnson makes a compelling, and certainly exhaustive, case that his subject "is more than a figure of style: it is a mode of thought, a way of being" (4). This formerly neglected figure is now elevated to the status of an "liber trope" situated in the very center of human consciousness. Or as Johnson puts it in a probably irresistible paraphrase of Descartes: "I hyperbolize, therefore I am" (376). Don Paul Abbott University of California, Davis L. Albert et L. Nicolas, Polémique et rhétorique de l'Antiquité à nos jours, De Boeck - Duculot, Bruxelles, 2010. ISBN: 9782801116394 La dynamique équipe du GRAL de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles consacre un nouveau volume, fort de vingt-six contributions et d'une abon­ dante bibliographie mise à jour, aux mécanismes de la polémique. L'ouvrage s'ouvre sur une synthèse claire et inspirée de la problématique abordée, qui est signée par les deux co-directeurs. Luce Albert et Loïc Nicolas y précisent d'emblée les objectifs du recueil et justifient l'intérêt d'une ap­ proche rhétorique. Aux antipodes de la vision réductrice d'une parole pure­ ment violente, échappant à tout contrôle, la polémique est ici conçue comme« un duel par les mots » , ce qui la rend disponible pour l'analyse rhétorique et discursive. Dans leur synthèse, les deux auteurs s'attachent à identifier les modalités du polémique au-delà de ses incarnations dans des polémiques par­ ticulières, qui dépassent les frontières des genres qu'elles investissent. Selon eux, la polémique met en scène, sur un terrain commun et fictionnel, deux adversaires irréconciables ainsi qu'un Tiers, qui peut être tantôt 1 arbitre, tantôt l'un des enjeux du duel. Les acteurs du conflit passent entre eux un pacte implicite qui engendre un ensemble d'attentes et d'interdits supposés, crée le cadre d'une fiction régulée et fixe les limites de violence verbale. La polémique correspond donc à une forme de rituel qui fait peser des contraintes sur les participants, mais cette ritualisation n est pas déterminée à l'avance et les contraintes sont propres à chaque polémique. Les contra­ dicteurs construisent ensemble et tentent d accaparer à tour de role le lieu de la lutte qui n'existe que comme espace d'échange. Ils entrent ainsi dans 442 RHETORICA une dynamique de surenchère qui, dans une quête perpétuelle de 1 argument décisif, les incite sans cesse à repousser les limites et à renégocier les rapports de forces établis. Dans le dialogisme à trois termes qui se met ainsi progres­ sivement en place et évolue au fil des échanges, la critique, voire 1 injure, de l'un attend la riposte de l'autre comme un besoin vital et une opposition nécessaire : il faut accepter la coexistence de l'erreur et de la vérité pour rendre possible l'entreprise d'authentification qui fera triompher la cause pour laquelle on livre ainsi bataille. Les rapports de places fonctionnent en miroir : chacun devient à tour de rôle attaquant et défenseur, doit redéfinir sa position tout en récusant celle de l'autre. Pour vaincre, il faut anticiper et pénétrer la pensée de l'adversaire afin d'en trouver les failles. Le com­ bat se déroule généralement entre deux personnages très proches sous bien des rapports, qui se reconnaissent les capacités nécessaires...

Reviews 451 Nancy Worman, Abusive Mouths in Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 2008. 385 + xii pp. ISBN 9780521857871. Insult and character assassination have a long and entertaining history in the annals of rhetoric. Not only do they generate theoretical meditation but they can provide scholars and amateurs alike with the guilty (and for Aristotle, vulgar) pleasures of nicely turned invective. Nancy Worman's fascinating study allows classicists and those with more general interests in ancient rhetorical forms to follow patterns of defamation from Homer and the beginnings of preserved Greek literature to Aristotle and Theophrastus at the end of the fourth century B.C.E. Of the two possibilities adumbrated above, her work facilitates the austere rewards of the theoretical rather than enjoy­ able indulgence in multiple examples of splenetic venting. For the latter one might settle down with Thomas Conley's Toward a Rhetoric ofInsult (Chicago 2010), which, in addition to quotation of virtuosic and delectable passages of invective (starting with Cicero and proceeding through the Flugschriften of the Reformation to end with Monty Python and modern political cartoons), does a useful job in sketching multiple patterns of defamatory language and specifying the factors that constrain their operation. Conley surveys how slurs connected with social status, gender, ethnicity, sexual habits, and the practices of eating and drinking (among others) recur in multiple cultures. He is interested in how invective can be used to create group identity through assertion of communal values, but also in the use of insult to interrogate per­ ceived hierarchies. This generalist orientation makes the book a valuable introduction to the invective mode, and thus, coincidentally, an interest­ ing counterpart to Worman's specialist study. W. carefully maps out how a discourse of abuse developed around public and professional speakers in Classical Greece. This discourse was rooted in practices of commensality associated with banquet and symposium, and was further extended in drama, until it became part of the rhetorical arsenal in the public oratory of Demosthenes and Aeschines. W.'s narrative of a gradual elaboration of a critique of public speaking and the move of this critique into ancient oratory make this an important book. The body of the book is divided into six chapters, charting the devel­ opment of an iambic discourse ranging over a variety of genres. W. uses the ideas of Bourdieu, Bakhtin, and Barthes to trace the operations of social performance and figuration in invective, relying in particular on a central notion of metonymy, so that the mouth acts as an emblem (Barthes' "blazon") of behavioral excess. After a scene-setting introduction, Chapter 1 looks at iambic literature in Archaic Greek epic, lyric, and Classical tragedy, where the language of invective is deployed to regulate excess and is regularly as­ sociated with ravenous mouths and dangerous types of consumption. Thus we encounter rapacious and aggressive kings (Agamemnon in Homer is a people-eating king," 29), harsh talk connected with (potentially cannibal­ istic) battlefield savagery, and clever speaking conceived as a trade-off for food. Greed leads both to uncontrolled aggressive speech and sly rhetorical 452 RHETORICA manipulation. These two possibilities will crystallize throughout the course of the book into two broad and recurring types: on the one hand the braggart and voracious politician characterized by crude consumption, and on the other the decadent and manipulative sophist. Chapter 2 explicitly juxtaposes these two types: voracious demagogues are set against glib, effete, and decadent sophists in the comedies of Aristo­ phanes, where "male protagonists engage the culinary as the primary metaphorical register in relation to the regulation of the appetites" (81). No accident, then, that the figure of the comic butcher or cook (mageiros) also becomes prominent. Whether effete or a braggart, an excessive speaker can be imagined as one who cooks up feasts of (deceptive) speech. Yet Worman also complicates (fruitfully) her model by considering how her types are measured against female appetites. In Greek comedy, women are cautionary models for men in their desires for sex, food, and wine; thus the prattling and decadent speaker is also feminized. Sexual appetite becomes an impor­ tant factor in the figuration of public speaking, not only in terms of female desire, but also...

454 RHETORICA speakers moved (along with a comic lexicon of abuse) from drama to oratory, surfacing also in the Platonic dialogue (although ignored for the most part by Aristotle) and proliferating in Theophrastus. Although for the sake of clarity I have focused in this review on the central opposition between the aggressive versus and the weak and decadent speaker, W. is clear that these two types exist at opposite ends of a continuum and that characteristics of one type can slide into another. Particularly welcome is her insistence that the iambic mode transcends genre. This enables her to make wideranging and successful connections between comedy, satyr play, tragedy, philosophy, and forensic rhetoric. One of the pleasures of the book is to trace the various instantiations of the paradoxical figure of Socrates from Aristophanes to Plato and Theophrastus. Socrates does not occur explicitly in the last of these, but the cumulative force of W.'s analysis compels the reader to give serious consideration to her suggestion that he is a shadowy presence in several of Theophrastus7 caricatures, the product of "a tradition of characterization that wittily assimilates to intemperate types a teacher who used his famous recalcitrance to disparage and tease haughty, boastful elites" (317). Individual readers will, of course, find places where they could desire reformulation or areas where further questions arise. I, for example, am not entirely comfortable with the contention (22) that Plato adopted the language of insult from dramatic genres—this seems to me to be perhaps an overly reductive way of formulating a process that was surely more complex. This leads in turn to problems about how informal practices of insult bleed into and from the rhetoricized versions we find in our literary texts (a reading of the treatment of invective found in Plato's Laws 934-936 would be useful here). Yet it is no insult to suggest that the book presents opportunities for future reflection; some discomfort is a small price to pay for such thoughtful and productive work. Kathryn A. Morgan University of California at Los Angeles Sergey Dolgopolski. What is Talmud? The Art of Disagreement. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009. xii + 333 pp. ISBN: 9780823229345 This book joins an increasing body of work devoted to the study of Jewish discourse. The study of Jewish rhetoric has found a place in the work of rhetoric and composition scholars who are turning their attention to the subject of non-Western or alternative rhetorics (Carol Lipson and Roberta Binkley's Ancient Non-Greek Rhetorics), as well as scholars who imagine that the conceptual integrity of the notion "Jewish perspectives" can be coherently expressed as a book (Andrea Greenbaum and Deborah Holstein's Jewish Perspectives in Rhetoric and Composition). What is Talmud? Reviews 455 also shares a concern with work in Jewish studies devoted to pedagogy (Simcha Assaf), rabbinic literary activity (Daniel Boyarin, Jeffrey Rubenstein, David Stern), historiography (Ismar Schorsch), systematic Hebrew rhetorics (Isaac Rabinowitz, Arthur Lesley) and the hermeneutical activity of textbased communities (Moshe Halbertal). While there are resources enough from which to construct a course on "Jewish discourse," the idea of teaching and studying "Jewish rhetorics" is still problematic inasmuch as there is a sense that organizing the considerable scholarly activity devoted to "Jewish discourse" under the phrase "Jewish rhetorics" is at best an anachronistic projection and, at worst, an act of violent appropriation. One way to avoid the charges of appropriation or anachronism would be to treat "rhetoric" as a set of methodologies that could be productively applied to any "text." The problem with this approach is that often the methodologies that fall under the heading of rhetoric were produced in support of philosophical or historical investigations. For this reason, others have chosen to treat rhetoric as a set of concerns, or even a predisposition to ask certain kinds of questions. The idea of "Jewish rhetorics" might, in that instance as well, avoid the violence of appropriation, but "rhetoric," then runs the risk of simply being another name for something that is being productively and more accurately examined as "discourse" or "literary activity." The concept of "Jewish rhetorics" may encounter some resistance because, in avoiding the charges of anachronism or violence, "Jewish...

As rhetoricians turn increasingly to study non-Western rhetorics, they rely on postcolonial scholarship but sometimes encounter difficulties adapting its key methods—in particular, hybridity. While it is quite clearly a necessary concept for transnational rhetorics, nevertheless its literariness, ubiquity, and vagueness about agency limit its utility In this paper I draw from relevant work in genre studies, sociolinguistics, and social constructivism to propose a new version of hybridity that can take account of hybrid rhetorical forms, account for their agency with audiences, and be accountable to stakeholders in transnational settings where rhetoricians work. I finish by applying this new method to a protestant sermon preached in Mali and noting both the successes and challenges of engaging an accountable notion of hybridity.

434 RHETORICA svista, se ho ben rilevato, alia nota 62, p. 173, dove luserit Asopida di Ovidio, Metamorfosi, 6,113 va corretto in Asopida luserit. Un contributo dotto e laborioso, dunque, questo della L.: destinato a imporsi, al pari di quelli che lo hanno preceduto nella medesima collana, come strumento irrinunciabile di consultazione per l'intelligenza dei due testi scolastici e come punto di partenza di qualsiasi ulteriore contributo all'interpretazione di questa ancora misconosciuta ma straordinariamente affascinante produzione letteraria. Mario Lentano University di Siena She René Nimlist, The Ancient Critic at Work. Terms and Concepts of Literary Criticism in Greek Scholia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. ix + 447 pp. ISBN 1107403049 This is an exceptionally useful book, one many people have for sev­ eral years wished for so that they could read it. The scholia, the marginal comments in manuscripts of Greek literary texts that encapsulate the com­ mentaries of ancient scholars, are the best source we have for ancient practical criticism. However, scholia are immensely difficult. Their sometimes tech­ nical Greek is difficult, and the difficulties are compounded by the process of amalgamation and abbreviation they have undergone. Often they are corrupt besides. This is the first attempt at a systematic, book-length study of literary criticism in the scholia. Not surprisingly, the scholia to the Iliad predominate, because they are by far the richest extant, but Niinlist uses those on the Odyssey, Hesiod, the dramatists, the orators, and Theocritus too. Niinlist says in the introduction that such a discussion could be orga­ nized in two ways: around Greek terms, and around underlying concepts. He has wisely chosen the second—he is very helpful in pointing out the variability in terminology in the scholia—while providing a handy glossary of literary terms at the back. (One could also conduct a literary study of the scholia to a particular text, but that would not offer the breadth this book does.) The first section considers concepts found in scholia on a vari­ ety of authors and genres, while the second part deals with characteristics that, in the view of ancient critics, were confined to Homer or to drama. The first few chapters are narratological—plot, time, narrative and speech, focalization but the discussion expands to cover a variety of issues, in­ cluding style, characterization, mythology, indirectly conveyed or hidden meanings. For Homer, there are chapters on type scenes, speeches, epithets, gods, similes, and "reverse order," while a long chapter on drama deals with such questions as entrances and exits, costumes and props, and acting. The selection of topics represents issues that are prominent in the scholia. The Reviews 435 book does not look at rhetorical figures, but it frequently refers to the close connection between literary criticism and rhetoric in antiquity It does not usually engage in source-criticism (an obsession of older work on scholia), but occasionally discusses ancient scholarly controversies. This is a learned book, and I have learned an immense amount from it—and it has directed me towards many questions that I hope that I, or my students, may explore further. It is at times more descriptive than profoundly critical. Throughout, although Niinlist is aware of imposing modern cate­ gories on ancient critics, he is biased in favor of seeing similarities rather than differences. His ancient critics are foreshadowers of Genette as students of narrative, of Arendt in understanding type-scenes, of Parry on epithets. I am not entirely easy about equating focalization with the ancient solution "from the character," because structuralist narratology offers a precise definition of "focalization," and the ancient critics are not so clear about exactly what they mean. Perhaps because of this slant towards modern questions, the book does not treat "appropriateness" except in passing, though it argues (p. 250 n. 46) that "appropriateness is not exclusively a moral category." It com­ ments on the chauvinism of the Homeric scholia (the critics are pro-Greek and typically try to understand Homer as pro-Greek, too), but has little to say about the problem of Homer's cultural authority. Scholia often praise Homer for opposite practices in different passages— here for being brief, but there for being expansive. This is unlikely to be...

206 RHETORICA côté du marchand, du ménestrel, ou du pèlerin reste toujours l'impécunieux poète. Ainsi, de la vantardise des troubadours belligérants aux monologues des valets à louer, MJ tisse un réseau de significations, où la liste n est plus tant un trope qu'un outil conceptuel qui permet de renouveler la connais­ sance de ces poètes. Le lecteur peut regretter la place un peu trop grande que prend la figure du poète devant la question plus proprement rhétorique ou poétique du fonctionnement de la liste; il peut regretter la composition mo­ nographique des derniers chapitres et les choix qu'elle conditionne (corpus des fabliaux très rapidement évoqué). Mais, il ne peut, en dernière analyse, que reconnaître la finesse, la pertinence et l'utilité des analyses autant pour le médiéviste que pour celui qui travaille sur d'autres époques. Catherine Nicolas Université Paul-Valéry (Montpellier III) Srividya Swaminathan, Debating the Slave Trade: Rhetoric of British National Identity, 1759-1815. Farnham: Ashgate, 2009. xiii + 245pp. ISBN 9780754667674 The proliferation of scholarship on the multi-national and multi-era debate over slavery, on the part of scholars from multiple disciplines, has created an embarrassment of riches; because there is so much scholarship, work tends to specialize by country, era, genre, method, and topos. That is, with the exception of David Brion Davis' extraordinary work, scholars gener­ ally write about the debate over the slave trade or the abolition of slavery, and almost always within a single nation. And they generally further specialize by focusing on the proslavery or antislavery position, most commonly the latter. Finally, although the slavery debate itself violated generic categories— with poems, plays, sermons, political speeches, paintings, and songs either attacking or defending slavery—scholarship has most commonly accepted a visual versus verbal split, as well as a split within written discourse between literary and political discourse. Thus, somewhat paradoxically, students of the slavery debates are currently well-served in terms of specific studies, but have fewer broad brush treatments. While Srividya Swaminathan's Debating the Slave Trade: Rhetoric ofBritish National Identity, 1759—1815 can hardly be called broad brush—one of its many virtues is the grounding of her arguments in close textual analysis— it does transcend many of the boundaries that unhappily limit the area. A study of the debate within Britain, the book places that debate within the larger context of the debate within and from the colonies, as well as the burgeoning anti-slavery movement in the United States. As well as polemical pamphlets, slave narratives, speeches, and sermons, Swaminathan considers Reviews 207 literary texts such as Mary Birkett's A Poem oil the African Slave Trade, James Boswell's No Abolition of Slavery, and the collection Poems on the abolition of the slave trade. Briefly, Swaminathan s book has two significant points for scholars of the history of rhetoric. First, her work nicelv complicates the pro- and antislavery dichotomy. She is very persuasive that there was, after a certain point, very little true "proslavery" rhetoric in the British debate, and that, therefore, the term "regulationist" is a much more accurate one. That is, defenders of the slave trade initially tried to denv the brutality of the conditions in which slaves were transported, but quickly abandoned that approach. They moved to the argument that there were flaws in current practices, but that they could be ameliorated, that better regulation would sufficiently improve conditions. In effect, they tried to coopt the language of reform—the very discourse on which abolitionists relied so heavily—by arguing for reforming rather than abolishing the slave trade. Second, she argues that, while the abolitionists were politically success­ ful in achieving the abolition of the slave trade and then the abolition of slavery within Britain, to describe the end result of the debate in purely po­ litical terms, or to attribute causality solely to the abolitionists, is to miss the larger cultural consequences of the arguments made by both sides. Instead, Swaminathan argues, the slavery debate was framed as an issue about the identity of the British and the nature of their empire: "The dialogue...

198 RHETORICA discussion in these essays, Stowers' A Rereading of Romans, Justice, Jews, and Gentiles provides outstanding examinations of Paul's uses of prosopopoieia, among other oral speech genres familiar to the auditors of the time. Similarly, Antoinette Wire's The Corinthian Women Prophets, a Reconstruction Through Paul's Rhetoric, among its other merits, suggests contextual sources for puns and humor in Paul's references to the veiling of women and to their prophetic speech. Philip Kern's Rhetoric and Galatians, Assessing an Approach to Paul's Epistles provides a good companion to the essays by Black and Watson in this volume in reviewing the numerous approaches to Paul's letters that are increasingly being combined with one another to both reconstruct the contexts and auditors of the New Testament gospels and epistles, and assess the innovations introduced into classical genres and understandings of the meanings they conveyed. Like Richard Burridge's What Are the Gospels?, studies of New Testament innovations and improvisations based upon clas­ sical models are provided in Jo-Ann Brandt's Dialogue and Drama, Elements of Greek Tragedy in the Fourth Gospel and Dennis E. Smith's Prom Symposium to Eucharist, the Banquet in the Early Christian World. These readings continue the examination of literary and rhetorical readings of the New Testament in conversation and sometimes in conflict with one another. Black and Watson have provided an examination of these current critical issues within and alongside reappraisals of Kennedy's work in a manner that does credit to their title: words well spoken. C. Jan Swearingen Texas A&M University Geoffrey D. Dunn, Tertullian's Aduersus Iudaeos: A Rhetorical Analysis. Patristics Monograph Series 19, Washington, DC: The Catholic Uni­ versity of America Press, 2008. xiv + 210 pp. ISBN 978-0-8132-1526-6 The Tertullian authorship of Aduersus Iudaeos has been disputed over the past two centuries. In this book Dunn argues that a rhetorical analysis of Ter­ tullian s Aduersus Iudaeos can resolve the uncertainties respecting its origins. He sets forth in an excellent manner the status of authorship assumptions, provides a detailed rhetorical analysis, and constructs a substantial case for all the parts of the manuscript being authored by Tertullian. He contends that the disputed last part was written before Tertullian's Aduersus Marcionem rather than being copied from it. Furthermore he declares that the Aduersus Iudaeos has been neglected because of doubts regarding its authen­ ticity. He points out that Robert Sider in his Ancient Rhetoric and the Art of Tertullian (1971) did not include the Aduersus Iudaeos nor did he list it in his catalog of Tertullian's writings. Dunn first addresses the differences of opinion regarding the text. He next explores the intended readership, and contends that "pamphlet" is Reviews 199 the best appellation because Tertullian's intent is advocacy (p. 28). Dunn's lhetoiical analysis consists of three aspects located in as many chapters, structure, argumentation, and style. The final chapter is in essence a summary of the arguments in the book. There is an extended bibliography, a general index, and a Scripture citations index. in the first chapter Dunn sets out a history of scholarly reflections on authorship and in the process supplies an important breakdown of those who doubt the integrity and authenticity of the Aduersus Iudaeos and those who support it. Those opposed were Krovmann, Dekkers, Aulisa, Semler, Burkitt, Quispel, Quasten, Neander, Akerman, Labriolle, Efroymson, Crosson, and Ev ans. Those accepting were Noeldechen, Grotemeyer, Harnack, Williams, Saflund, Trankle, Fredouille, Monceaux, Simon, Gager,Aziza, Moreschini, Schreckenberg, Barnes, and Otranto. Dunn along the way sets out the diverse nuances prov ided bv these authorities. Dunn ascertains that the authorship controversy is related to the recent concern ov er the degree of contact between Jews and Christians in early third century Carthage. Contemporary scholars are offering new clues that the contacts between Jews and Christians were considerable. Scholars who so argue include J uster, Simon, Krauss, Williams, Parkes, Blumenkranz, Wilken, Blanchetiere, Hornbury, de Lange, Wilson, and MacLennan. Other scholars, however, have claimed that anti-Jewish polemics were chiefly designed to assist the Christians in establishing "self identity," since Jews and Chris­ tians were going their own separate ways. These include Eiarnack, Barnes...

208 RHETORICA appears to have read every relevant primary and secondary text, so that the book serves as an excellent introduction to the topic. A further virtue of Swaminathan's book is that it elegantly models how rhetorical and literary analysis can be interwoven for a nuanced presentation of the complexities of social change. The puzzle about slavery is, as Swaminathan says, that "Great Britain dismantled this profitable trade, albeit unevenly and in a fraught manner, seemingly for the benefit of principle" (p. 213). It is a striking instance of effective rhetoric. Yet, it was not a case of a single text having done that considerable cultural work. Although some texts might have been more popular, and possibly more effective, than others, the abolitionists were successful because of a long series of arguments and counterarguments. They were successful because various topoi were repeated across genres, and not just in what we traditionally think of as "political" discourse. The book usefully reminds us of the breadth of rhetoric, and, hence, the potential breadth of rhetorical scholarship. Patricia Roberts-Miller University of Texas, Austin Mark Longaker, Rhetoric and the Republic: Politics, Civic Discourse, and Education in Early America. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 2007. xx + 266 pp. ISBN 978-0-8173-1547-4 While in the past five years we have seen a number of books chal­ lenging and diversifying our understanding of rhetorical education in late nineteenth-century United States, including David Gold's Rhetoric at the Mar­ gins: Revising the History ofWriting Instruction in American Colleges, 1873-1947, Jessica Enoch's Refiguring Rhetorical Education: Women Teaching African Amer­ ican, Native American, and Chicano/a Students, 1865—1911, and Brian Fehler's Calvinist Rhetoric in Nineteenth-Century America. The Bartlet Professors of Sa­ cred Rhetoric ofAndover Seminary, relatively little work has examined rhetor­ ical education within colonial America. Indeed, Mark Garrett Longaker's Rhetoric and the Republic is likely the most important work to do so since Thomas P. Miller's The Formation of College English: Rhetoric and Belles Lettres in the British Cultural Provinces. Unlike works bv Gold or Enoch, the primary virtue of Longaker s research does not come from his examining underrep­ resented communities, nor does his work take us to different parts of the university as does Fehler s. Rather, Longaker's work is important because it asks us to fundamentally reexamine our historiography at the same time that it challenges us to think harder about some of our pedagogical practices. Revising accounts by Miller, Halloran, and Clark (Oratorical Culture in Nineteenth-Century America: Transformations in the Theory and Practice of Rhetoric), Longaker argues that "early American republicanism was a con­ tested political terrain" which allowed for a number of conflicting peda­ Reviews 209 gogical ideals and practices to emerge in its name (p. xviii). This historical narrative in turn allows Longaker to demonstrate the anemia of the republi­ can revival which has been championed by both contemporary American academics and politicians alike. Since at least the 1950s, scholars represent­ ing various disciplines have called for a revival of civic republican political discourses as a counterweight to the hegemony of liberal political discourse. Indeed, in the United States, civic republicanism represented something of an academic third way between Soviet-inspired communist totalitarianism and American-inspired liberal capitalism. Whereas liberalism promoted negative liberty, legal proceduralism, and the interest of autonomous individuals, re­ publicanism promoted positive liberty, substantive values, and civic virtue. Finding a way of reviving civic republicanism would help revive active citi­ zenship, or so we believed. But the truth of the matter has always been that the sharp division between republicanism and liberalism was itself a prod­ uct of the Cold War, and one that was unsustainable when examining the eighteen and nineteenth centuries, a point Longaker brings home especially well in his analvsis of John Witherspoon. Oddly enough, Longaker never makes that argument explicitly and in­ stead spends most of his book demonstrating, through the use of Gramscian articulation theory, the various ways early American republican theory lent itself to very different political and economic discourses. So much the better for us, the real value of the book as far as this reader is...

Reviews 203 however, focuses on Imlaga, showing that it can be mapped only partially onto the Aristotelian concept of style, embracing genres like poetry and letter­ writing and emphasizing (to use Austin s terminology) the illocutionary over the perlocutionary. Wolfhart P. Heinrichs traces a chronological progression within balaga, by means of which figures that had originated in ornate prose migrated into poetry, while Lala Behzadi focuses on silence in the work of Amr b. Bahr al-Jahiz to show how rhetorical analysis can lead to epistemological theory. The book concludes with a long essay by Joseph Dichy on commentaries to the Qur'an in the three centuries after the Hegira (622 ce), demonstrating that a recognition of obscurity or equivocation opens up a space for the study of rhetorical features in a text which now has to be considered as more than a simple window through which the truth it carries may be viewed. It is customary to complain that in collections of essays by diverse hands, some contributions are stronger than others. That is true here, however, only to a limited extent. The essays in this collection are consistently excellent, resulting in a volume that can be recommended to anyone with a serious interest in how east meets west in rhetorical history. Craig Kallendorf Texas A&M University Madeleine Jeay, Le Commerce des Mots. L'usage des listes dans la littér­ ature médiévale (XIIe-XVcsiecles). Publications Romanes et Françaises, CCXLI, Genève: Droz, 2006, 552pp. ISBN 2600010653 L'ouvrage de Madeleine Jeay (MJ) se propose d'étudier les traits ca­ ractéristiques de la liste et le rapport que le «plus paradoxal des tropes» (p. 501) entretient avec l'usage qui en est fait dans la littérature médiévale. Corps étranger et inassimilable à l'œuvre, élément qui produit un effet de rupture au moment de son intrusion dans le tissu textuel, la liste se définit par son hétérogénéité et par sa récurrence, étant donné que ce sont toujours les mêmes réalités qui sont énumérées. Cette double définition, ainsi que la pratique régulière de la liste sur une large période allant du XlIIe au XVIe siècle, a permis de définir un corpus de textes à listes et d'en élaborer le répertoire virtuel (http://tapor.mcmaster.ca/~hyperliste/home.htm) qui montre la façon hypertextuelle dont les listes circulent d'une œuvre à l'autre et appellent un mode de lecture spécifique. Prenant appui sur cet outil infor­ matique, l'ouvrage de MJ propose de trouver le principe organisateur de ces listes et d'en définir la valeur littéraire. Plus qu'un simple rehaussement du style, la liste est posée, à partir de là, comme une figure d'amplificatio associée à la représentation de la figure du poète que MJ place au centre de son enquête. Forte de ses balisages théoriques (Ph. Hamon en particulier), elle relève les affinités que l'énumération entre­ 204 RHETORICA tient avec la description: même intention de nommer pour établir une no­ menclature et pour proposer un savoir encyclopédique et didactique sur le monde et les mots qui le disent; même dimension métatextuelle qui débouche sur une situation discursive qui met en jeu l'écrivain dans son activité même; même ambition intertextuelle de type réticulaire qui fait appel à la mémoire. La spécificité poétique de la liste résiderait alors dans son excès de réalité, car en accentuant la «quotidienneté du quotidien», elle le sublimerait et répondrait à la tentation fondatrice de la poésie d'annuler l'opposition entre les mots et les choses. En outre, la liste briserait la linéarité du texte et main­ tiendrait, ce faisant, le lecteur à la surface du texte. Elle imposerait donc une lecture de surface et de réseau et couperait court au processus d'exégèse et à l'approfondissement du sens. L'étude fine des listes et de leurs caractéristiques, leur mise en parallèle«hypertextuelle» et leur constitution en...

Reviews C. Clifton Black and Duane F, Watson, eds., Words well spoken: George Kennedy s Rhetoric of the New Testament (Studies in Rhetoric and Re­ ligion 8). Texas: Baylor University Press, 2008. xiii +253 pp. ISBN 1602580642 George Kennedy's importance to New Testament rhetorical criticism is that of groundbreaker, particularly for rhetorical scholars who are not Biblical scholars. Within the community of Biblical scholars, Kennedy's work introduced methods based upon classical rhetorical models that have been adapted, criticized, and sometimes replaced with alternatives. Duane Watson and Clifton Black's introductory essay provides a lucid guide to the range of rhetorica or the essays and are addressed in different ways by individual authors. An overarching recent debate has been the question of whether New Testament authors, particularly Paul, "knew" or "studied" rhetoric. A related issue has been the problem of identifying rhetorical and literary genres that make an appearance in the Christian scriptures, and related proposals that these categories be dispensed with entirely. To its credit, this collection presents the annoying alongside the enriching episodes in the debates. Following excellent essays on the history of Biblical rhetorical studies by Margaret Zulick and Thomas Olbricht, Duane Watson's "The Influence of George Kennedy on Rhetorical Criticism of the New Testament" explains past and present debates about New Testament epistolary rhetoric and narrative genres. Kennedy was among the first, he notes, to define and explore the difference between "the rhetoric of the historical Jesus and the rhetoric of Jesus as preserved in the Jesus tradition and the gospels." Watson characterizes a more recent formulation of this distinction developed by Gregory Bloomquist: "While historical Jesus research may give us greater critical certainty regarding the words and deeds of the historical Jesus, these words and deeds have to be understood as the picture that the historical Jesus wanted to present. They are a picture of the rhetorical Jesus but not of the historical Jesus" (p. 48). Watson also surveys the debates concerning Paul's rhetorical education that were provoked by Kennedy's New Testament Interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism. To accept that there is no hard evidence that Paul or other authors of the Christian scriptures were educated in rhetorical schools introduces three Rhetorica, Vol. XXIX, Issue 2, pp. 195-231, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2011 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2011.29.2.195. 196 RHETORICA questions at the very least that bear not only upon Biblical studies but on classical and later rhetorical studies as well. First, what counts as evidence? Second, and related to the question of evidence, what is an author? Third, what does "educated" mean? Apart from Plato's representations, we have no evidence of Socrates' words; we must judge them through the lens of Plato's art. And what kind of evidence is the evidence of an artisan? Among New Testament authors, the question of rhetorical education comes up most often regarding Paul because his authorship is least questioned among the Christian scriptures. There seems to have been a person Paul and all the evidence we have suggests that he wrote his own letters. Or rather, according to the customs of the time, he dictated them, as the letters themselves state. Just as an authenticating narrative often appears at the beginning of Plato's dialogues, the scribe who wrote the letter is named in many of Paul's epistles. Words Well Spoken illuminates both the good news and the bad news among the answers to these questions of evidence, authorship, and rhetorical education. Clifton Black's essay on Kennedy's readings of the gospels provides a lucid survey of the major objections to Kennedy's work, particularly those of literary theorists and literary historians. According to these critics, Kennedy seems to want to reduce narrative gospels and speeches alike to, "logos, or logical argument, whereas the gospels tend more obviously towards ethos, the power of Jesus' authority" (p. 71). Essays by Blake Shipp, on...

Reviews 113 Ruth Webb, Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Practice. Surrey, England: Ashgate, 2009. 238 pp. ISBN 9780754661252 The topic of ekphrasis has garnered much attention of late among classi­ cists, literary critics, and visual theorists—so much so that the bibliography on the subject has become unwieldy. Is ekphrasis a humble elementary exer­ cise in description? A w idely encompassing topos for the agon between word and image? An ancient nexus of speculation on the complexities of represen­ tation and the psychology of reception? Bringing together these perspectives and more, Ruth Webb's comprehensive treatment of ekphrasis from a rhetor­ ical point of view will be of interest to historians of ancient Greek and Roman rhetoric but may prove to be less than completely satisfying to those readers who have been following the critical explorations of the term of late. Webb begins with a strong argument: a proper understanding of ekphra­ sis should be grounded in the definition of the term offered in the rhetorical manuals of the imperial period, the 1st to the 5th centuries of the Common Era. Working closely with the Progynmasnmta of Theon, Ps.-Hermogenes, Aphthonios, and Nikolaos, as well as with rich material on the subject in the more advanced treatises by Quintilian, Ps.-Longinus, and Menander Rhetor, Webb insists that ekphrasis be considered in terms of effect rather than sub­ ject matter: it is "a speech that brings the subject matter vividly before the eyes" (Introduction and Chapter 1, "The Contexts of Ekphrasis"). She argues vigorously against a tendency she finds in modern criticism to see ekphraseis as descriptions of art works or as opportunities to explore ideas about the act of viewing in antiquity. Tier careful treatment of the handbook material— usefully presented in Greek and English in two appendices—focuses the reader's attention on enargeia. A vivid impression could be achieved through the detailed description, or narration, of many subjects, including activities such as battles, storms, plagues, earthquakes, and festivals, not only through descriptions of objects such as paintings, sculptures, and architectural won­ ders. Chapter 1 proceeds with historical evidence for a drift in scholarly treatments of ekphrasis away from the ancient rhetorical definition in the writings of nineteenth-century French art historians. A key moment of rupture in the mid-twentieth century for Webb is Leo Spitzer's appropriation of "ekphrasis" to designate a poetic genre. From here, writes Webb, "the rest is history," as ekphrasis is "catapulted" out of "the specialized domain of classical [sic] and archaeology into the world of English and Comparative Literature" (p. 35). The lapsarian tone of the narra­ tive at this point may startle readers who value interdisciplinary approaches to rhetoric and visual theorists who have left new critical poetics behind. The implication that all subsequent treatments of ekphrasis by literary scholars follow Spitzer's new critical lead is inaccurate and unhelpful (see p. 35 n. 63). In the penultimate chapter, Webb acknowledges recent writing on ekphra­ sis from classical scholars working on the ancient Greek novel (by Shadi Bartsch, Jas Eisner, Elelen Morales, Tim Whitmarsh, and others: see p. 178 114 RHETORICA and nn. 27 and 28). Influenced by literary theories such as semiotics, fem­ inism, and post-structuralism, these works, like those of scholars (notably W. J. T. Mitchell) from other humanities disciplines intersect in many ways with the perspectives developed later in Webb's book, but Webb does not pause to consider how they complicate the ancient vs. modern definitional agon driving her argument early on. As she aptly observes, "The connec­ tion between ekphrasis and the idea of visual representation ... runs deep" (p. 53), thus her lack of engagement with scholars exploring that very idea is puzzling. Webb is on firmer ground as she returns to a detailed examination of the treatment of ekphrasis in the handbooks (Chapter 2, "Learning Ekphra­ sis: The Progymnasmata). Emphasizing rhetorical production, she focuses on ekphrasis as "the exercise which taught students how to use vivid evocation and imagery in their speeches" (p. 53) rather than the static reproduction of set passages. Webb here makes an illuminating connection between ekphra­ sis and narrative, citing passages in which the speaker becomes...

Reviews 115 in more advanced rhetorical practice. Webb s contention that the persuasive force of ekphrasis is a matter of the orator eliciting predictable responses from listeners based on widely accepted cultural conventions (pp. 109, 122, and passim) is certainly demonstrable but does not allow much scope for con­ testation. This view has an unfortunate resonance with an assumption Webb seeks to overturn, namely that ekphraseis tend to be predictable set pieces and that epideictic speeches in particular—a fertile ground for ekphrastic rhetoric—are usually "a catalogue of platitudes" (p. 164). On the other hand, her observations about the use of ekphrasis in orations to "cast a particular light (or chroma, 'colour' or 'gloss')" on the case at issue and to turn spectators into witnesses through the artful use of vivid detail (pp. 145-65) contribute to a vision of ekphrasis as far more than "decorative digression" (p. 158). It is difficult to do justice to the wealth of primary and secondary material arrayed in Webb's book on this multi-faceted rhetorical subject. Her impressive learning and obvious passion for the material are on abundant display; particularly notable is her familiarity with French scholarship. But this wide reach can frustrate an interested reader: a great deal of ground is covered here rapidly, with subjects such as "Ekphrasis and Interpretation" (pp. 145-46), "Ekphrasis as Fiction" (pp. 168-69), and "Statues and Signs" (pp. 186-87) treated in one or two paragraphs. The net effect is at times like standing too close to a mosaic: hundreds of tiles spark with color but the pattern is difficult to discern. In her Preface Webb acknowledges the constraints of space which prevented extended analyses of examples (p. xiii). A few such analyses would have been welcome. But the book succeeds in achieving the author's primary goal: elucidating the main sources for ekphrasis and enargeia. Although rhetoric scholars may find some points in this rhetorical treatment of ekphrasis familiar, they will appreciate the close attention paid to rhetorical handbooks and the wealth of material concerning ekphrasis accumulated here. Susan C. Jarratt University of California, Irvine Pernille EEarsting and Jon Viklund, eds., Rhetoric and Literature in Linland and Sweden, 1600-1900 (Nordic Studies in the History of Rhetoric 2), Copenhagen: Nordisk Netvaerk for Rhetorikkens Historie, 2008. ISBN 9788798882923 This is the second collection of studies produced by NNRH. It is not available in bookstores, but is available online at http://www.nnrh.dk. There are eight papers published here, arranged roughly in chronological order, beginning with Mats Malm s Rhetoric, ^/locals, and Patriotism in Early Swedish Literature: Georg Stiernhielm's Hercules (1658)." Here (pp. 126 ), Malm argues that the Hercules by Stiernhielm (1598-1672) is more than 116 RHETORICA just an allegory about the choice between virtue and vice, the traditional interpretation of the Hercules at the crossroads story. It is also an allegory about good style and bad style, and hence should be read as an allegory of importance to the teaching and practice of rhetoric. The second paper is "Apostrophe and Subjectivity in Johan Paulinus Lillienstedt 'sMagnus Principatus Finlandia (1678)" (pp. 27-65), by Tua Korhonen. This Finlandia, a versified oration of 379 verses in Classical Greek hexameters (of which Korhonen provides the first translation into English, pp. 52-61) is a classical epideixis of Finland, but his use of apostrophe and self-referential passages shows that Lillienstedt (1655-1732) transcends the limitations of his classical models, adapting the genre to quite different cultural conditions prevailing in 17th-Century Scandinavia. Hannu K. Riikonen's "Laus urbis in Seventeenth Century Finland: Georg Haveman's Oratio de Wiburgo and Olof Hermelin's Viburgum" (pp. 67-85) is the third paper. Hermelin's Viburgum is one of the elegiac poems describing 101 towns in the Kingdom of Sweden in his Hecatompolis Suiorum (1691 or 1692), seen by many scholars as one of the finest examples of Nordic neo-Latin poetry from the 17th Century. About three years after the publication of Hecatompolis, one of Hermelin's students at the University of Tartu, Georg Haveman, delivered an oration in praise of Vyborg, a town on the Finnish-Russian frontier. Both Hermelin's elegy and Haveman...

232 RHETORICA Christine Mason Sutherland, The Eloquence of Mary Astell, Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2005. xxi + 202pp. ISBN 1552381536; Jen­ nifer Richards and Alison Thorne, eds., Rhetoric, Women and Politics in Early Modern England, London and New York: Routledge, 2007. x + 254pp. ISBN 978-0-415-38527-5; Jennifer Richards, Rhetoric (The New Critical Idiom), London and New York: Routledge, 2008.198pp. ISBN 978-0-415-31436-7 If early modern men were educated to speak, then early modern women were educated (if at all) to be silent, and the three books under review add to the still growing pile in which modern feminist historians—educated, of course, to be highly articulate—try to negotiate this difficult and troubling fact. They do so in various ways. Christine Sutherland, for example, presents the learned and prolific Mary Astell (1666-1731) as a remarkable exception to the rule. As she is the first to admit, even those enlightened humanist figures who had argued for female education in the sixteenth century did not go so far as to allow women to speak in public or to argue in print. Rather, they endorsed a silence that was, in Sutherland's words, "the feminine equivalent of the masculine virtue of eloquence" (p. 18). In spite of this cultural discour­ agement, however, and a class position that offered her no privileges to speak of, Mary Astell devoted her life to writing—and publishing—a series of re­ ligious, philosophical, and political works. Sutherland's main justification in presenting her subject as above all else a "practising rhetorician" (p. 53) is her claim that, in the course of her writing career, Astell moved from the relatively private genre of sermo to the more public genre of contentio, these two literary modes being gendered as "feminine" and "masculine" respec­ tively. In terms of Astell's publications—which range from works published in the letter format (such as her—originally private—correspondence with John Norris, published anonymously as Letters Concerning the Love ofGod, or her Serious Proposal to the Ladies, addressed to high-ranking women) to what were effectively treatises addressed to a wider reading public (such as Some Reflections upon Marriage, The Christian Religion, or her political pamphlets), this is not particularly contentious. There are times, however, when I think Sutherland overstates her case. The fact, for example, that Astell adapts her style and tone according to her destined audience—developing a "tender" and "maternal" voice when addressing a specifically female readership, and a more strident, argumentative one for everyone else—certainly demon­ strates a sensitivity to and understanding of decorum on her part, but is not in itself the major contribution to rhetorical theory that is claimed for it. This book also shows a (sometimes explicit) tendency toward self-reflection: that is to say, what makes Astell so remarkable a figure—and the natural choice of subject for a book of this kind—seems to be precisely the wav in which she comes to exemplify the feminist writer (otherwise so absent from the early modern scene) and to mirror the feminist academic who is writing or reading about her. Thus Astell's correspondence with Norris, for Reviews 233 example, is said to be an experience of further education that we might compare with the modern graduate school" (p. 42), and to have the same qualities as most good tutorial relationships" (p. 48); the letter-writing that she cultivated was the early modern equivalent of publishing in "learned journals (p. xx, citing with approval an article by Judith Rice Henderson). In her political pamphlets Astell emerges as the model scholar who "had read all the relevant books and documents, had studied all the arguments, and above all was thoroughly familiar with the historical background" (p. 117). By the end of the book, Astell is presented as being of "benefit" to "modern feminist scholars" precisely because she is "one of the earliest of their kind" (p. 153). This is not in any way to diminish Astell's achievement, of course, but only to raise the concern that, in situations where the reader is invited to identify with the subject in hand, a degree of critical distance might be...

Résumé Outre exercice rhétorique et genre littéraire en soi, la déclamation a une troisième fonction, que l'on pourrait intituler “situational ethics”: le déclamateur doit se mettre dans la peau d'un caractère et répondre aux problèmes éthiques qui se posent pour ce caractère. Dans cette contribution il est montré, au moyen de la notion pietas, comment ces trois fonctions se présentent ensemble dans les Declamationes maiores.

Zusammenfassung Der rhetorische Fundus eines römischen Schaudeklamators ist, verglichen mit dem eines Gerichtsredners oder Schuldeklamators, um ein effektvolles Instrument reicher: In bewusster Abkehr von der 〟lehrbuchgemäßen” Affektenlehre kann er das Publikum gerade dadurch gewinnen, dass er die Figuren, die er (narrativ und ethopoietisch) in seiner Rede vorstellt, rollenuntypisch 〟agieren” lässt. Das zeigt sich beispielhaft in den pseudo-quintilianischen Declamationes maiores 10, 12, 14 und 15. Das kreative Potential dieses Genres wird insbesondere an Declamatio maior 15 deutlich, in der der Deklamator sogar seine eigene Rolle spielerisch in Frage stellt: Die Rede wird so zum Ein-Mann-Theaterstück, in dem auch die Deklamatorenrolle nur eine unter mehreren personae ist.

Der rhetorische Fundus eines römischen Schaudeklamators ist, verglichen mit dem eines Gerichtsredners oder Schuldeklamators, um ein effektvolles Instrument reicher: In bewusster Abkehr von der „lehrbuchgemäßen” Affektenlehre kann er das Publikum gerade dadurch gewinnen, dass er die Figuren, die er (narrativ und ethopoietisch) in seiner Rede vorstellt, rollenuntypisch „agieren” lässt. Das zeigt sich beispielhaft in den pseudo-quintilianischen Declamationes maiores 10, 12, 14 und 15. Das kreative Potential dieses Genres wird insbesondere an Declamatio maior 15 deutlich, in der der Deklamator sogar seine eigene Rolle spielerisch in Frage stellt: Die Rede wird so zum Ein-Mann-Theaterstück, in dem auch die Deklamatorenrolle nur eine unter mehreren personae ist.

Outre exercice rhétorique et genre littéraire en soi, la déclamation a une troisième fonction, que l’on pourrait intituler "situational ethics": le déclamateur doit se mettre dans la peau d’un caractère et répondre aux problèmes éthiques qui se posent pour ce caractère. Dans cette contribution il est montré, au moyen de la notion pietas, comment ces trois fonctions se présentent ensemble dans les Declamationes maiores.

Abstract Milton's regicide tracts of 1649, The Tenure, Observations, and Eikonoklastes, are recombinations of two of his most familiar compositional modes of the 1640s, the oration and the animadversion, tactics derived ultimately from classical rhetorical theory and Renaissance assimilations of it. Each tract also displays a poeticized rhetoric which represents Milton's signature adaptation of the close relationship between rhetoric and poetic found in classical and Renaissance rhetorical texts. Evidence for these claims can be found in the structures, styles, and aesthetic manifestations of all three pamphlets, particularly the classical low and middle styles, the formulaic mechanism of quotation and reply, and the prose genre of the Character.

Milton’s regicide tracts of 1649, The Tenure, Observations, and Eikonoklastes, are recombinations of two of his most familiar compositional modes of the 1640s, the oration and the animadversion, tactics derived ultimately from classical rhetorical theory and Renaissance assimilations of it. Each tract also displays a poeticized rhetoric which represents Milton’s signature adaptation of the close relationship between rhetoric and poetic found in classical and Renaissance rhetorical texts. Evidence for these claims can be found in the structures, styles, and aesthetic manifestations of all three pamphlets, particularly the classical low and middle styles, the formulaic mechanism of quotation and reply, and the prose genre of the Character.

Reviews 233 allows for a comparison so general, one might doubt its usefulness. “Painting is really like poetry/' van Eck writes, “because both arts are inventions that make appear things that do not exist" (p. 68). Yet the point of van Eek's book is not to show how painting and architecture are the same as rhetoric, but how a culture saturated with the lessons of classical rhetoric influenced the creation and reception of visual art. In fact, rather than primarily focusing on works of visual art and architecture, the book is actually more concerned with the way early modern artists, architects, and spectators spoke and wrote about the visual arts. This is the book's strength, as example after example reveals that classical rhetorical theory provided a rich mine for both artists seeking to describe their method and spectators accounting for their reaction to the artwork. The discussion (in chapter fixe) of poetic responses to the discovery of the Lnocoon statue in 1506 is particularly interesting in this regard. The responses laud the power of the statue to move the viewer while drawing on the language of classical rhetorical theorv. As a whole van Eek's studv is a compelling and welcome contribution to the growing body of work on earlv modern visual culture, broadly defined. Through careful readings of a v ariety of early modern texts about art and architecture from England and Italy, she is able to show how rhetoric influ­ enced the theory, practice and reception of the visual arts. The book serves as a correctiv e to art historical approaches based on theories of aesthetics and style after Kant that downplay the instrumental character of much early modern art. To accomplish this, though, the variety of rhetorical theory is necessarily placed in the background to allow for the common threads that tie rhetoric to the v isual arts in van Eek's account to come into relief. For those interested in early modern European visual culture this will seem a small price to pay. James A. Knapp Eastern Michigan University Susan Miller, Trust in Texts: A Different History ofRhetoric. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2008. xiv + 224 pp. This is an astute, ingenious, and inclusive survey of the contemporary Anglophone discussion that centers on what Miller considers the rhetorical core: that is, pedagogy, training for discursive performance—either in civil affairs or in "self-fashioning," techniques of representation of the practi­ tioner for both public and private motives. That is, both teaching-practice and practice-practice. Tier vital distinction is the prefix meta . rhetoric engages "multiple metadiscourses derived from ritual, imaginative, affil iative practices" (p. 1). Rhetoric as pedagogy is obviously meta-discourse, discourse about discourse; it can, or should, invest in meta-discursive 234 RHETORICA controlling, important—discourses that form and are formed by vital, specific life-interests. On the one hand, the multiple metadiscourses are practices 1) "that we trust for their well-supported and reasoned statements", or 2) "for their participation in infrastructures of trustworthiness," products of "special plane[s] of understanding, and [their] consequences" (p. 2). But, on the other hand, pedagogy, as schooling in the conditions of trust, deals also with trust, not in reason and the shared infrastructure, but with uncertainty, bad faith; it functions "symbolically and charismatically" (p. 3), it can be a "retreat to the orphic" (p. 147). Still, it is always creating "contexts for choice" in an "emergent present" (p. 3) responding—she cites John O. Ward—to "distinct market niches" (p. 4), or, preferably to universal/human, national, global niches. Thus, rhetoric is hegemonous: powerful in its contribution to "productivity and stature of the present [whatever] age," or to "the circulation of contemporary values" (p. 37). As hegemonous, omnicompetent: the study considers political ideolo­ gies, literary aspirations, social ambitions, power contests, gender definings, genre strategies. Rhetoric can be reformulated as concerned with "ad hoc, class-based, experiential, and especially educational bonds that enable per­ suasion" (p. 53). Anything, in short, "crucial to monitoring, reprocessing, and delivering the limits of trust" (p. 5). There is, as well, a very strong emphasis on the pertinent contributions of emotional as well as cognitive capacities. Indeed, a large...

The present contribution to the analysis of the rhetorical genre of eulogy and blame proposes to approach this oratorical undertaking from the point of view of its performative action on praxis. The question is to clarify the conditions of the possibility of this eminently ritual exercise of qualification of the world that attempts, by emphasizing the value of a figure that is rather singular, that of the "hero," to express the present of a community and to program passing to the act. The goal of our reflection consists in showing how the epideictic genre, by the confirmation of a meaning actualized by the speech act, strives to establish and fix the properties of things and consecrate the symbolic forms that can present themselves as justification of a collective action.

106 RHETORICA by Malalas to enhance his account of the rebellion of Vitalian in 515. But I can think of no comment by Fatouros that would explain the inclusion of Gernot Krapinger's "Die Bienen des armen Mannes in Antike und Mittelalter" (pp. 189—201), in which he traces the theme of a poem by Bernard Silvestrus (late 12th century) to a declamation attributed to Quintilian; or the paper by Tilman Krischer arguing that Byzantine explorers went as far as East Africa in search of gold, "Die materiellen Voraussetzungen des geistigen Lebens in Byzanz—Handelskontakte mit Ostafrika, ihre Vorgeschichte und ihre Nachwirkung" (pp. 203-09). All of the papers in this volume are in any event well worth reading; and we should be particularly grateful to Efthymiadis and Featherstone, to Kotzabassi, and to Krapinger for prov iding us with some relatively inacces­ sible texts. The volume itself is handsomely produced, though I note a few editorial blemishes: e.g., "critized" (p. 242), ώεΗ (p. 435), "looses" (p. 436), "prosopoiia" (p. 444), μεγζ.λυτέρου (p. 445); and the Index locorum contains two separate entries for Manuel Holobolus and for Menander Rhetor, the latter of which is incomplete. With the exception of the last, I don't think Grunbart should be held responsible for any of these. His was, after all, an immense task. Thomas M. Conley University ofIllinois at Urbana-Champaign Carol Poster et Linda C. Mitchell, eds., Letter-Writing Manuals and Instruction from Antiquity to the Present: Historical and Bibliographic Studies (Studies in Rhetoric/ Communication), Columbia (South Ca­ rolina); University of South Carolina Press, 2007. 346 pp. Après une préface qui précise le sujet de chacun des chapitres et une introduction générale de Carol Poster, cet ouvrage est divisé en onze cha­ pitres disposés chronologiquement, de l'Antiquité grecque à notre époque. Suivent 91 pages de bibliographie, en sept sections, une pour l'Antiquité, une pour le Moyen-Âge latin, deux pour la période 1500-1700, une pour le XVIIIe siècle en Angleterre, deux pour les XIXe et XXe siècles. Robert G. Sullivan («Classical Epistolary Theory and the Letters of Isocrates »), constatant qu'on ne peut analyser les lettres d'époque classique à la lumière des manuels subsistants, qui sont beaucoup plus tardifs, s intéresse à ce que nous disent elles-mêmes les lettres d'Isocrate sur la conception que se fait cet auteur du genre épistolaire, classant sa production en lettres de recommandation («letters of patronage»), lettres de conseil («counsel or advice») et lettres mixtes remplissant plusieurs fonctions à la fois. R. S. tire de son étude quelques règles principales (p. 11), tout en notant qu'Isocrate tend fréquemment à ne pas les respecter. Il passe ensuite en revue toutes les œuvres de cet auteur qui relèvent de manière plus ou moins directe du Reviews 107 genre épistolaire et en tire la conclusion que la lettre n'est pas pour Isocrate un genre spécifique, mais un type formel, un vaisseau qui porte des compositions relevant de différents genres rhétoriques. La contribution de Carol Poster, «A Conversation Halved» présente un tableau général de ce que nous savons de la théorie épistolaire dans l'Antiquité. Elle évoque le cas des manuels grammaticaux, des papyrus sco­ laires, des lettres littéraires et de la fiction épistolaire, et esquisse une judi­ cieuse étude de la place que pouvait tenir l'épistolaire chez les théoriciens de la rhétorique. Mais son analyse la plus développée est consacrée aux six principaux témoins de la théorie, dont elle signale avec raison le lien avec la tradition littéraire: trois pages du traité de Démétrios, Péri Hermeneias (=Du Style; il faudrait compléter la bibliographie sur cet auteur avec l'ouvrage de Pierre Chiron, Un rhéteur méconnu: Démtrios (Ps.-Démétrios de Phalère). Essai sur les mutations de la théorie du style à l'époque hellénistique (Paris: Vrin, 2001)), le bref exposé de Philostrate de Lemnos, la Lettre 51 de Grégoire de Nazianze, les deux petits traités faussement attribués à Libanios et à Démétrios...

Reviews Raffaella Cribiore, The School of Libanins in Late Antique Antioch. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007. 360 pp. ISBN-10· 0-691128234 -3 Given the enormous body of writing left bv Libanius (b. 314 C.E.), sophist of Antioch, it is surprising that more scholarship has not been generated on this dynamic figure. Raffaella Cribiore, author of the prize winning Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Princeton, 2001), has gone some distance in filling that gap with the impressive volume under consideration here. Her book serves two purposes: to provide an overview of education in the Greek East in Late Antiquity, with a focus on the school of Libanius in Antioch, and to present new English translations of ox er 200 of Libanius' letters to fathers, students, and other teachers. Using this material, Cribiore argues that assessments of Libanius as a personality based on his orations and the long Autobiography (composed in 374 and supplemented on numerous occasions up to the supposed date of his death, 393: see A. L. Norman, Libanius. Autobiography and Selected Letters, vol I, ed. and trans. A. L. Norman (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1992), "Introduction" pp. 7-16) will become more three-dimensional through the evidence of the letters. Admirably, she does not read the letters as direct reports of Libanius' character or of history: "[l]etters manipulate reality no less than do speeches self-consciously composed for public consumption or autobiography" (p. 3). The character that takes shape in these letters, argues Cribiore, provides a counterbalance to the "old, embittered sophist" of the Autobiography and the late speeches (p. 6). She seeks to keep in view the warm, supportive teacher and passionate devotee of the logoi alongside the more familiar figure: a Libanius anguished over his physical trials and personal losses, and resentful at the loss of students to other teachers and other interests, such as philosophy and Roman law. Cribiore brings attention to the status of the letter as a genre residing "between public and private" (p. 4) and to the teaching of epistolary rhetoric (pp. 169-73). Letters were essential to the sophist in maintaining contact with former students, their families, and friends; he used them as a central form of promotion and recruitment to keep his school, so closely identified with the man himself, active and filled with students. "'A friend's children have come Rhetorica, Vol. XXVII, Issue 1, pp. 98-111, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . C2009 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2009.27.1.98. Reviews 99 to a friend through a friend"' (letter number 204, 321; qtd. p. 110): through such artful formulations Libanius forges a chain of connections among elites across the great distances of the empire. Cribiore emphasizes the role of the carrier, often the student in question, in presenting the letter, and the topos of letter as gift (p. 173; see also Norman, Libanius, pp. 17-43). In the translation section, Cribiore helpfully groups letters into "dossiers": clusters of letters concerning a single student or family. Most had instrumental goals—to evaluate a student to a father, to recommend a student for a position—but more fundamentally, Cribiore observes, each "had to represent the cultural values [Libanius] embodied" (p. 105). They functioned to maintain bonds of philia, the practice of a codified web of relationships (p. 107), forming the connective tissue of elite Greek society in Late Antiquity. Beginning with overview chapters on Libanius in Antioch and schools of rhetoric in the Roman East, Cribiore then moves in more closely to educational practices: the network of relations woven by epistolary practices, processes of admission and evaluation, the content of the curriculum, a long and short course of study, and a discussion of career paths of students after they completed their rhetorical education. The analysis ends with a somewhat cryptic and gloomy section on the silences of Libanius' final years: his illness and depression, the usurpation of rhetoric...

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

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

Reviews Heinrich E Plett, Rhetoric uud Renaissance Culture. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2004. 581pp. scholars. Most of us excel in one or two areas, but he has contributed valuable work in four different fields: historical and theoretical studies of came to general attention with a substantial monograph (based on his 1969 Bonn doctoral dissertation), Rhctorik dcr Affekte. Enylische Vkirkuuysdsthetik im of the importance given to moving the feelings in English Renaissance rhetoric, an understudied topic at that time, remains worth reading and might have become trulv influential had it appeared in English. Professor Plett had already published a student text, Einfidiruug iu die rhetorische Fextanalyse (Hamburg, 1971), which moved from rhetorical criticism into general linguistics, a mo\ e which he consolidated in Textwissenschaft und Textanalyse. Senuotik, Empiustik, Rhctorik (Heidelberg, 1975), subsequently translated into Rumanian (1983). Plett's latest work on rhetorical theory is Systematische Rhctorik: Konzcpt uud Analysen (Munich, 2000), which attempts a svstematization of rhetorical figures using modern linguistic terminology. In 1977 Plett produced the first of several volumes collecting essays bv himself and other scholars, Rhctorik. Kritischc Positional zum Stand dcr Forschuny (Munich). In consecutive vears he published complementary vol­ umes deriv ing from conferences held at the Zentrum fiir Rhetorik- und Renaissance-Studien that he had founded at the University of Essen, each containing 18 essavs in German, French, and English: Renaissance-Rhetorik. Renaissance Rhetoric (Berlin, New York, 1993; see my review in Renais­ sance Quarterly, 49 [1996]: 438-40), and Renaissance-Poetik. Renaissance poetics (Berlin, 1994). Another conference he organized produced a volume called Die Aktualitdt der Rhetorik (Munich, 1996). Having been so active in providing a forum for other scholars' work, it was only fitting that his colleagues re­ paid his good deeds with one of the best Rhetoric Festschriften of recent years, Rhetorica Movet: studies in historical and modern rhetoric in honor ofEieinrich F Plett, ed. P. L. Oesterreicher and T. O. Sloane (Leiden, 1999). Heinrich Plett's work has always been marked by a wide reading and the diligent use of primary and secondary sources, an important compoRhetorica , Vol. XXV, issue 4, pp. 435-448, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . G2007 by The international Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2007.25.4.435. 436 RHETORICA nent of scholarship which resulted in his producing a wide-ranging primary and secondary bibliography, Englische Rhetorik und Poetik 1479-1660. Eine systematische Bibliographie (Opladen, 1985; see my review, Wolfenbütteler Renais­ sance Mitteilungen, 13 [1989]: 75-80). A decade later Plett issued a corrected and enlarged edition, English Renaissance Rhetoric and Poetics. A Systematic Bibliography of Primary and Secondary Sources (Leiden, 1995; see my review, International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 5 [1998]: 260-65). Professor Plett describes the volume under review, Rhetoric and Renais­ sance Culture, as "the result of more than thirty years' work on Renaissance rhetoric" (p. vii). It is systematically organized (the chapters are labelled "AF "), beginning with an overview of the "Scope and Genres of Renaissance Rhetoric" (pp. 11-84). Then comes the longest chapter, “Poetica Rhetorica. Rhetorical Poetics in the Renaissance" (pp. 85-294), divided into the five stages of composition (inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, actio). The survey widens to take in rhetoric's relationship with the visual arts and with music, in a chapter awkwardly titled "Intermedial Rhetoric" (pp. 295-412). Chap­ ter D, “Poeta Orator: Shakespeare as Orator Poet" (pp. 413-498) consists of five parts, four of which the author has translated from essays published in German between 1981 and 1995. Chapter E, "Iconography of Rhetoric and Eloquence" (pp. 499-552), is profusely illustrated (the volume as a whole con­ tains 94 plates), and is followed by two detailed indices, of names and sub­ jects. The volume is handsomely designed and printed, with a commendably high degree of accuracy. Although the over-all structure is clear, there is an unfortunate degree of overlapping between sections, and the same quotations reappear several times over, often with the...

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

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

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

Reviews 299 son seul guide pour l'étude de la dispositio, et que pour Yelocutio ce sera le seul Hermogène, dont il n'avait pas encore parlé. Laissons ici le fait que ces deux décisions seraient vraiment difficiles à justifier d'un point de vue historique (Du Tronchet se souvient-il encore de Fabri? connaît-il déjà Hermogène?). Le choix de Fabri conduit à des platitudes du côté de la dispositio: nous n'avons pas besoin de lui pour apprendre qu'une lettre a un début, un milieu et une fin, même rebaptisés respectivement «cause», «intention» et «conséquence»; et Vaillancourt ne relève pas que, chez Fabri, la «conséquence», qui est la conclusion du syllogisme, peut se trouver ailleurs qu'à la fin, ce qui est tout l'intérêt de ce vocabulaire. Quant à Hermogène, si ce choix permet de bien plus fines remarques sur Yelocutio, on reste parfois sceptique: caractériser les lettres de Pasquier par la deinotès est ne pas savoir ce que désigne celleci —Pasquier n'est pas «habile» comme Démosthène au seul motif qu'il sait s'adapter à ses correspondants. De façon plus générale, la difficulté fondamentale réside dans l'image de la rhétorique qu'ont les deux ouvrages. Comme de nombreux littéraires aujourd'hui, seiziémistes ou non, leur culture rhétorique se limite à Yelocutio et, dans une moindre mesure, à Yethos. Inversement, ils ne sont pas à l'aise avec la dispositio ou avec les passions, ni même avec l'argumentation ou logos (que Vaillancourt réduit aux exempta et autres autorités). Pour la dispositio, seul La Charité ose deux analyses de lettre complète, d'ailleurs stimulantes (p. 101-106), et pour les passions Vaillancourt appelle amitié (avec renvoi à Aristote, Rhétorique, II, 4) ce qui à l'évidence relève de la gratia (p. 294, «je ne veux en rien estre ingrat...» = Aristote, II, 7). Plus fondamentalement encore, tous deux voient dans l'épistolaire le lieu où il y aura le moins de rhétorique, ce mot même ayant sous leur plume le sens trop convenu de formalismes obligés. La lettre «familière» serait, enfin, un espace de sincérité dénué de toute «rhétorique»: l'extrême du sermo déconstruit, face à l'extrême de Yoratio ou discours construit. Avec un tel présupposé, que démentent constamment et l'époque et les corpus étudiés, il n'est pas pour surprendre qu'on arrive mal à dégager du typologique réutilisable. Redisons pour finir combien ces difficultés mêmes sont instructives, car elles renvoient le lecteur de Rhetorica à une des questions fondatrices de cette revue: jusqu'où peut-on appliquer la rhétorique ancienne à des textes qui a priori en étaient informés de part en part? Francis Goyet Université Stendhal, Grenoble James P. Zappen, The Rebirth of Dialogue: Bakhtin, Socrates, and the Rhetorical Tradition (Albany: SUNY Press, 2004), viii + 229 pp. In the roughly twenty years of scholarship on Bakhtin and rhetorical studies, Rebirth ofDialogue stands as the first and only book-length discussion 300 RHETORICA of dialogue as it informs both the early Socratic dialogues and the work of Mikhail Bakhtin. That rhetorician and Bakhtin scholar Jim Zappen would undertake the project is not surprising, for Bakhtin himself provides the impetus for the comparative study, citing the Socratic dialogue as a protonovelistic genre. Zappen does not, however, simply construct a series of correspondences between the two thinkers' perspectives on dialogue; rather, he examines the Socratic in terms of the Bakhtinian, noting the points at which a Bakhtinian reading of the early dialogues extends and enriches our understanding of them as "testing and contesting and creating" innovative ideas during a tumultuous fifth century bce (32). The opening chapter situates the central question of the relationship be­ tween rhetoric and dialogue within twentieth-century rhetorical and philo­ sophical studies. It also presents a central premise of the argument: the early Socratic dialogues illustrate a significant and complex cultural tension between the arete ("excellence" born of birth, status, and courage) of the Homeric tradition and a newer...

Abstract This paper presents a critical assessment of Vives's major rhetorical treatise, De ratione dicendi (1533). In terms of structure it shows that the first book is concerned with the linguistic basis of style, that the second deals with the qualities of style, the four aims of rhetoric, decorum and disposition and that the third presents guidance on composing ten genres of writing practised by humanists. The paper describes Vives's original contributions to the analysis of the linguistic basis of style, the qualities of style, emotional manipulation, decorum, and the composition of history and commentary. In assessing Vives's work it makes comparisons with rhetoric texts by Agricola, Erasmus, Melanchthon, and Ramus. It finds that Vives's reform of rhetoric is based in his encyclopaedic grasp of human learning but that this very encyclopaedism can cause weaknesses in his discussions of particular topics. De ratione dicendi tells us a great deal about Vives's perceptiveness and breadth of reading but, with only three sixteenth century editions, it was not a successful textbook.

This paper presents a critical assessment of Vives’s major rhetorical treatise, De ratione dicendi (1533). In terms of structure it shows that the first book is concerned with the linguistic basis of style, that the second deals with the qualities of style, the four aims of rhetoric, decorum and disposition and that the third presents guidance on composing ten genres of writing practised by humanists. The paper describes Vives’s original contributions to the analysis of the linguistic basis of style, the qualities of style, emotional manipulation, decorum, and the composition of history and commentary. In assessing Vives’s work it makes comparisons with rhetoric texts by Agricola, Erasmus, Melanchthon, and Ramus. It finds that Vives’s reform of rhetoric is based in his encyclopaedic grasp of human learning but that this very encyclopaedism can cause weaknesses in his discussions of particular topics. De ratione dicendi tells us a great deal about Vives’s perceptiveness and breadth of reading but, with only three sixteenth century editions, it was not a successful textbook.

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...

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.

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.

Cet article explore certains des contextes rhétoriques et des caractéristiques stylistiques des plus importantes oeuvres de Wollstonecraft tenant compte de la publication récente de recherches bibliographiques ainsi que de la théorie contemporaine sur le genre. Comme rhéteur de sexe féminin, en marge d’une culture rhétorique masculine Wollstonecraft s’identifie avec ses contemporains masculins mème si elle dédaigne le rôle que plusieurs d’entre eux soulignent pour son genre; par conséquent, elle adopte les identités ainsi que les stratégies rhétoriques masculins et féminins dans son oeuvre. Cette utilisation de divers identités variés est une caractéristique intégrale de sa rhétorique dans son contexte socioculturel, et en quelques sortes représentatif de la rhétorique des marges.

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...

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...

Reéusumé: Cet article explore certains des contextes rhétoriques et des caractéristiques stylistiques des plus importantes oeuvres de Wollstonecraft tenant compte de la publication récente de recherches bibliographiques ainsi que de la théorie contemporaine sur le genre. Comme rhéteur de sexe féminin, en marge d'une culture rhétorique masculine Wollstonecraft s'identifie avec ses contemporains masculins mème si elle dédaigne le rôle que plusieurs d'entre eux soulignent pour son genre; par conséquent, elle adopte les identités ainsi que les stratégies rhétoriques masculins et féminins dans son oeuvre. Cette utilisation de divers identités variés est une caractéristique intégrale de sa rhétorique dans son contexte socio-culturel, et en quelques sortes représentatif de la rhétorique des marges.

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.

Cet article propose un questionnement sur la valeur des élo-ges paradoxaux et plus particulièrement sur les visées de l’Éloge de la négligence de Fronton Comme l’éloge frontonien est irrémédiable-ment fragmentaire, il nous a fallu nous reposer sur des éléments internes à la pièce et présents dans l’ ensemble du corpus frontonien. L’ étude des champs mé taphoriques nous a permis d’ etablir des liens non-négligeables entre l’ idée de négligence et celle de la Nature, qui est associée par le rheteur de façon constante à la rhétorique. Ce constat nous permet de conclure à la valeur apologétique de l’Éloge de la négligence, qui s’inscrit dans la querelle, omniprésente dans le corpus, entre philosophie et rhétorique. Dès lors, bien que l’ éloge paradoxale possède des aspects ludiques, on peut déduire du cas frontonien que le sous-genre de l’ éloge sert bien souvent des visées sérieuses et persuasives.

This paper argues that Aristotle’s conception of epideictic speeches of blame (psogos speeches) did not reflect speaking practices in his day. It surveys the evidence available for speeches of blame, noting the paucity of such speeches, explains why they might not have been given, and recommends that we recognize this absence from classical Greek public address.

The influence of dictaminal treatises in England was weak throughout the Middle Ages and largely restricted to a limited number of royal clerks and a few academics. Most practitioners were royal chancery clerks who dealt with foreign and ecclesiastical powers. This article focuses chiefly on the use of dictaminal letters by middle class English citizens in the fifteenth and earlier sixteenth centuries. These letters show little significant influence of continental or English dictaminal theory but are chiefly either sprawling news bulletins like the Paston letters or, more commonly, imitations of the royal missives from the Signet or Privy Seal offices. As the fifteenth century ended even these vestigial dictaminal forms were replaced among the middles classes by business formats, such as the letter of credit, although they retained some use among the upper classes into the sixteenth century and in some royal missives into the eighteenth century. The article concludes with suggestions on ways contemporary genre theory might be usefully applied to analyze the rise and decline of the ars dictaminis.

Reviews Jeffrey Walker, Rhetoric and Poetics in Antiquity (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), xii + 396 pp. In this lengthy, densely argued volume, Jeffrey Walker engages two particularly contentious issues in the history of rhetoric, offering a novel reconstruction of rhetoric's origins and a revised account of the relation­ ship between rhetoric and poetics in Classical Greece and Rome. This dual focus is reflected in the organization of the study. Parts I and II (ch. 1-4) concentrate primarily on a reading of the rhetorical tradition originating in pre-Aristotelian sources and extending to the "second sophistic" of im­ perial Rome. In Parts III and IV (ch. 5-11), Walker uncovers the rhetorical dimensions of archaic Greek poetry and then traces the tension between grammatical and rhetorical elements in the major (and several minor) Greek and Latin poetic theories. In the first two chapters, Walker advances three claims that are defended at length in the remainder of the book: (1) that the distinction between rhetoric and poetics featured in the standard histories is illusory and has resulted in distorted characterizations of both arts; (2) that the fundamental or "primary" manifestation of rhetorical art is not deliberative or forensic oratory, but rather the various verse and prose forms of epideictic discourse; (3) that accounts of rhetoric's periodic decline in the face of restricted op­ portunities for "practical", political oratory neglect the vital socio-political significance assumed by epideictic eloquence in nearly all periods. Cen­ tral to Walker's argument, then, is an expanded conception of "epideictic". Developing an insight of Chaim Perelman, Walker rejects the traditional characterization of epideictic as a decorative genre, simple entertainment or "mere display", and attributes to it broad suasive and ideological functions: epideictic, for Walker, is "that which shapes and cultivates the basic codes of value and belief by which a society or culture lives" (p. 9). Thus conceived, the epideictic category cuts across the prose-poetry divide, as Walker would include much poetry—including archaic lyric poetry—within it. This enlarged conception of epideictic enables Walker to locate the ori­ gins of rhetoric in discourse practices that predate by centuries the theoretical conceptualization of the art of persuasive oratorical speech (this is the thrust of ch. 2). In this respect, Walker's study represents a healthy alternative to the recent work of scholars such as Thomas Cole and Edward Schiappa which identifies the "birth" of rhetoric with the fourth-century advent of a prop­ erly technical and theoretical vocabulary or "metalanguage". If Walker's 125 126 RHETORICA redescription of epideictic gives grounds for rejecting the narrow concep­ tion of rhetoric offered by Cole and Schiappa, it also confounds the wellknown distinction between "primary" and "secondary" rhetoric. In George Kennedy's formulation, primary rhetoric is associated with practical oratory, with speeches delivered orally in deliberative and forensic settings. This for­ mulation encourages epideictic's treatment as secondary, textual, literary and aesthetic. Walker reverses this narrative and the impoverished notion of epideictic it inscribes: "the epideiktikon is the rhetoric of belief and desire; the pragmatikon [dikanic and demegoric genres] the rhetoric of practical civic business...that necessarily depends on and appeals to the beliefs/desires that epideictic cultivates" (p. 10). Viewed in this frame, epideictic becomes "the 'primary' or central form of rhetoric" while deliberative and forensic speeches are derivative, applied forms of a more general logon techne (p. 41). In Part II (ch. 3-4), Walker considers the fortunes of rhetoric in the Hel­ lenistic and Roman imperial periods. Opposing the traditional characteriza­ tion of these periods as marking rhetoric's decadence and decline, Walker offers a more complicated narrative of a competition between two relatively distinct rhetorical traditions. The first version is that founded by the early sophists and given fullest expression in Isocrates' logdn paidea; it stresses the broad, culture-shaping function of poetic-epideictic eloquence. This tradi­ tion, Walker contends, is preserved in the fragments of Theophrastus and in later authors as diverse as Demetrius, Hermagoras, Dionysius, and Cicero (in De oratore). The second version of rhetoric is more narrow and technical, and by the late Hellenistic period focused almost exclusively on the practice of judicial oratory. This is...

Le discours royal (basilikos logos) est un genre de la rhétorique ancienne qui a connu un grand développement sous l’Empire et dont Libanios fournit un échantillon de cinq exemplaires (éloges des empereurs Constance et Constant, et Julien). Tenus à la louange systématique, les orateurs se heurtaient à la difficulté de traitement que leur posaient les actes peu glorieux ou peu honorables du souverain. Plutôt que de mentir, ils ont eu souvent recours à l’omission. Mais ils pouvaient aussi employer une troisième voie, entre vérité et mensonge, celle du masque rhétorique apposé sur les faits. Cet article s’efforce d’établir une sorte de taxinomie de ces procédés de déguisement à partir des nombreux exemples que nous fournit Libanios. La parenté avec la théorie des états de causes paraît flagrante.

The development of an oratorical literary genre is connected with the work of Antiphon, the first in the canon of ten Attic orators. This paper argues against the modern view that the beginnings of literary oratory date to the 420s B.C. when Antiphon began publishing his speeches. It argues that this view depends on a mistaken conception of literacy in the ancient world and that Antiphon’s speech-writing activities began much earlier. The argument is based on references to Antiphon in contemporary and later sources, the dating of his speeches, the authenticity and dating of the Tetralogies, and Antiphon’s reputation in antiquity as the first logographer.

Reviews Stanley E. Porter ed., Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period, 330 B.C. - A.D. 400 (Leiden: Brill, 1997) xv + 901 pp. Ce fort volume, d'une présentation typographique impeccable, se veut un ouvrage de référence sur la rhétorique antique, destiné principalement aux lecteurs anglophones. Il réunit 29 contributions, réparties en trois groupes, et toutes munies de bibliographies détaillées. La première partie (Rhetoric Defined) commence par un survol de l'histoire de la rhétorique antique confié à G. A. Kennedy: à tout seigneur tout honneur. Puis sont étudiés les grands secteurs de la doctrine: "The Genres of Rhetoric" (G. A. Kennedy), "Arrangement" (W. Wuellner), "Invention" (M. Heath), "Style" (G. O. Rowe), "Delivery and Memory" (T. O. Olbricht). Sur chacun de ces sujets, les auteurs s'efforcent de résumer les principales indications données par les théoriciens grecs et latins. On trouvera donc ici de solides aide-mémoires consacrées aux grandes divisions et classifications de la rhétorique antique. Le chapitre sur l'invention m'a paru spécialement original et éclairant, dans la mesure où il décrit le processus de Vinventio à partir d'un exemple précis et avec un grand recul méthodologique. La deuxième partie (Rhetoric in Practice) est plus curieuse. On était en droit d'attendre une étude de la pratique oratoire, parallèle à l'étude de la théorie qui fait l'objet de la première partie. Mais en réalité on a affaire à une succession de chapitres centrés sur les principaux genres littéraires et consacrés aux rapports de ces genres avec la rhétorique: "The Epistle" (J. T. Reed), "Philosophical Prose" (D. M. Schenkeveld), "Historical Prose" (S. Rebenich), "Poetry and Rhetoric" (R. Webb), "Biography" (R. A. Burridge), "Oratory and Declamation" (D. H. Berry - M. Heath), "Homily and Panegyrical Sermon" (F. Siegert), "The Rhetoric of Romance" (R. F. Hock), "Apocalyptic and 433 434 RHETORICA Prophétie Literature" (J. M. Knight), "Drama and Rhetoric" (R. Scodel). Ceci pose un problème de fond, qui mérite qu'on s'y arrête. Il suffit de lire cette liste de chapitres pour être frappé par une anomalie: "Oratory and Déclamation" est présenté comme un secteur parmi d'autres, enfoui au milieu du livre, dont les rapports avec la rhétorique ne seraient pas plus étroits que ceux de la philosophie ou du roman. En d'autres termes, le mot "rhétorique" est pris dans ce volume au sens de: théorie rhétorique, corps de doctrine, ensemble de cadres d'invention et de procédés d'écriture dont l'influence peut s'exercer sur n'importe quel texte, et par conséquent la pratique oratoire ne se voit reconnaître aucun statut particulier. L'inconvénient de cette conception est de rompre le lien très fort qui unit, dans l'Antiquité, la théorie et la pratique du discours. Pour les Grecs et les Romains, la pratique oratoire (sous ses multiples formes d'exercice scolaire et de discours public) faisait elle-même partie de la rhétorique. Il n'est donc pas surprenant que les auteurs du chapitre sur "Oratory and Déclamation" s'avouent embarrassés. Ils reconnaissent que "rhetoric" and "oratory" ont entretenu une relation essentielle, "symbiotic", tout au long de l'Antiquité (p. 393), mais se voient forcés, faute de place, de renoncer à ce qui serait le véritable sujet (une étude de l'éloquence antique), pour se contenter de brèves illustrations. Et voilà pourquoi les historiens sont plus longuement traités que les orateurs, ou la collection des Panegyrici Latini passée sous silence alors qu'on lit des pages entières sur Bion de Borysthène et Chariton, auteurs intéressants en eux-mêmes, certes, mais dont l'importance est bien moindre pour l'histoire de la rhétorique. On remarque également que la déclamation fait l'objet d'un traitement contradictoire à deux moments du livre: dans le chapitre sur "Oratory and Déclamation" (pp. 406 sqq.), il est question des rapports de la déclamation avec la rhétorique, tandis que...