Reviews 347 dimension often missing (a point mentioned by Trevor Melia in his erudite Comment). Here rhetoric reaches its fullest extension, becoming one with the domain of poetics - but that should come as no surprise to historians of rhetoric. Jean Dietz Moss Ronald H. Carpenter, History as Rhetoric: Style, Narrative, and Persuasion (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1995). Ronald Carpenter's History as Rhetoric argues that the stories of past events we call "history" draw upon the resources of rhetoric and can serve to shape a public understanding of the world. For postmodernists, this may not qualify as news, but Carpenter is no postmodernist. He relies pri­ marily on methods that would satisfy the most doctrinaire neoAristotelian or New Critic. He uses the tools of "scientific history" and traditional literary analysis to demonstrate the rhetoricality of history. The focus of Carpenter's book is on American historians of the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries: Frederick Jackson Turner, Carl Becker, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Frank L. Owsley, and Barbara Tuchman. He attempts to show how each of these writers employs techniques of style and/or narrative in an effort to achieve "opinion leadership" beyond the realms of academic history. In the cases of Turner, Becker, Mahan, and Tuchman, Carpenter argues that they achieved an effective "rhetorical impress," making his case by means of close readings of their texts com­ bined with documentary evidence of the responses of actual readers. As his one negative example, Carpenter attempts to show that Frank Owsley's contribution to the agrarian manifesto I'll Take My Stand failed in its persuasive purpose. Carpenter devotes three chapters (one each on Turner, Becker, and Mahan) to the effects of style, and three chapters (another on Mahan, plus one each on Owsley and Tuchman) to techniques of narrative. In a long concluding chapter, he ranges more broadly across historical and popular writings and even motion pictures to show the pre­ science of Turner's frontier hypothesis in respect to twentieth-century American attitudes toward warfare, and to urge the need for alternatives to the frontiersman metaphor in war-related public discourse. Carpenter is at his best when working as a rhetorical analyst on archival materials. In his chapter on Frederick Jackson Turner, for exam- 348 RHETORICA pie, Carpenter traces the evolution of Turner's style, starting with analyses of primary sources from Turner's high-school and college days, and mov­ ing from those to the later professional writings. Drawing upon both clas­ sical and modem stylistic theory, Carpenter teases out the stylistic lessons Turner learned as a student and shows how those lessons found their way into his mature work. Carpenter then uses published reviews and corre­ spondence from readers to support an argument that, through the power of an "oratorical" style, Turner helped establish the frontiersman as an archetype of American culture. The chapter is a model of stylistic analysis and of cautiously developed argument. Equally interesting and somewhat more venturesome in interpreta­ tion is Carpenter's treatment of Barbara Tuchman's The Guns ofAugust and its role in John Kennedy's decision making during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. That Kennedy had drawn lessons from Tuchman was previously established, and here, as elsewhere in the book, Carpenter acknowledges his debts to other writers with meticulousness and grace. Carpenter's own purpose is to get at specific rhetorical techniques that might account for Tuchman's influence. He draws on Tuchman's correspondence with edi­ torial adviser Denning Miller in an effort to understand the compositional choices made in the writing of her book, and uses Hayden White's tropical theory to characterize the resulting narrative form. He simultaneously develops a speculative argument that draws on documentary evidence to show how specific narrative and stylistic features of The Guns of August might account for its role in Kennedy's thinking during the crisis. Throughout the chapter, Carpenter interweaves narrative, rhetorical analysis, theoretical explication, and the citation of documentary evidence in an admirably coherent and persuasive form. In the Tuchman chapter, Carpenter focuses on the rhetorical effect of a single work on an audience of one. In other chapters he examines rhetori­ cal effects wrought on audiences...

344 RHETORICA and yet know all it takes to be American" (p. 245). In the Afterword, Clark and Halloran reiterate that one of their inten­ tions in editing this volume was to encourage more narratives of the histo­ ry of rhetorical theory and practice in the nineteenth century. In its poten­ tial for encouraging additional studies and new theories of cultural and public discourses, this volume has certainly taken a considerable step toward fulfilling its editors' hopes. Rosa A. Eberly Science, Reason, and Rhetoric, eds. Henry Krips, J. E. McGuire, and Trevor Melia (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1995). This volume of twelve essays and six comments treats a continuingly provocative subject. The book, the product of a conference convened to inaugurate a new program in the rhetoric of science at the University of Pittsburgh, offers some illuminating discussions of the varied appearances of rhetoric in the practice of science. That practice the editors describe carefully in the introduction to the volume. Describing three possible approaches to science, they seek to adopt the third: studies which would "stress the variety and complexity inherent in the production of scientific knowledge and also the attendant human contexts within which science is made and established." Thus they would accept even "accounts of science that are patently not rhetorical." The paths not chosen include a Gorgianic view—science, unable to produce truth, develops strategies of inquiry and uses rhetoric to construct tropes and audiences—and the view that science is sub specie rhetoricae. The book promotes reflection about the relation of rhetoric and science, but, unfortunately, it contains no index to facilitate the examination of concepts, terms, and names. My focus here will be on what seems to me to be the contribution of the volume to rhetoric of sci­ ence studies and on the problems presented by the ahistorical approach of some of the essays. From the editors' introduction, it should not be surprising that the nature and practice of science is the focus of the volume. The nature and practice of rhetoric as an art in itself, however, receives little attention. Most authors proceed as if rhetoric is simply a familiar term without a his­ tory or a discipline, but whose presence in science should be remarked upon. This curious approach is exemplified in the lead-off essay by Stephen Toulmin, the title of which, "Science and the Many Faces of Reviews 345 Rhetoric, would seem to promise to furnish the necessary background. In an attempt to bridge the gap envisioned by philosophers between the polar extremes of rhetoric and rationality, Toulmin turns to the Organon of Aristotle to illustrate the varied and overlapping types of reasoning prac­ ticed by human beings. But his account disappoints by its brevity. In his survey of the Organon, although he makes brief initial reference to the Analytics and the use of dialectical or topical reasoning in science, he then moves on to rhetoric, failing to treat Aristotle's conception of rhetoric or to remark on its relation to dialectic, a point that would seem to illuminate both science and a rhetoric of science. He intends, he says at the end of his seven-page essay, only a "'clearing away [of] the underbrush,"' making no attempt to discuss "questions about the rhetoric of science, or about scien­ tists as rhetors." J. E. McGuire and Trevor Melia, whose responses to Alan Gross's The Rhetoric of Science (1990) have appeared twice in Rhetorica, again reply neg­ atively to Gross's view that science is merely rhetorical invention and rep­ resentation, always relative to time and place (p. 77). Neither foundationalists nor nonfoundationalists, they position themselves as minimal real­ ists, seeing the actual practice of science as constitutive of science. They argue for a "proportionalizing rhetoric" (one that presumes a balance between representation and investigative practice) which would reflect "the proportionalizing strategies of scientific fallibilism" (p. 86). Several studies attend to sociological aspects of rhetoric. Trevor Pinch, in his analysis of the presentation of the Cold Fusion Process, demonstrates the importance of analyzing spoken rhetoric within its con­ text as a means to understanding both the presentation and reception of science by different audiences. Steve Fuller calls for...

Reviews 337 habille d heureuses formules une érudition sans faille. Il intéressera les historiens de la rhétorique et de la philosophie. Mais au-delà du cercle des antiquisants, la démonstration a un enjeu plus large. Car le genus acutum des Stoïciens a eu une importante postérité : il est une des sources vives de toutes les théories de l'« acutezza » et offre des éléments pour mieux comprendre le Cortegiano de Castiglione, YAgudeza de Graciân ou encore le Witz de Freud. Ainsi est soulevé un important problème de l'histoire de la rhétorique. Laurent Pernot Ann Moss, Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structure of Renaissance Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), xvi + 345 pp. The importance of the Renaissance commonplace-book and the theory that underpins it has been acknowledged since the pioneering work of Robert Bolgar and others and reiterated by numerous Renaissance special­ ists ever since. Essential to the theory and practice of imitatio, it impinges on the history not only of rhetoric and dialectic but also of theology, law, and medicine. This book provides us at last with a meticulously detailed account of the origins, flowering, and decline of the commonplace-book in early modern Europe. Ann Moss's approach is broadly chronological. After a lucid, nononsense exposition of the ancient senses of topos and locus (communis) and their permutations in medieval dialectic and rhetoric, she provides a sur­ vey of medieval florilèges and compilations and then proceeds to the early humanist methods of pedagogy which may be regarded as the immediate forerunners of the Renaissance commonplace-book (Rudolph Agricola plays a major role here). Thereafter, the survey moves systematically through the different texts and contexts in which the commonplace method flourished from Erasmus' De copia to the late seventeenth century, when changing cultural practices already prefigure its demise. At each point in the history, individual writers and texts remain firmly in the fore­ ground: many of these are little known, and one of the virtues of Ann Moss's study is that, by refusing to sacrifice them to the big names, it redraws the map of humanist pedagogical practice. One can therefore take one's pick of the many choice items Ann Moss offers: Thomas of Ireland's hugely successful Manipulus florum, John Foxe's do-it-yourself compendium for budding religious controversialists, or the kaleidoscopic 338 RHETORICA Cannochiale aristotélico of 1654, designed by the aptly-named Emmanuele Tesauro to generate witty metaphors and conceits, and already trawled by Umberto Eco. This description might suggest a mere historical repertory, a kind of florilège of florilèges. The sequence is in fact much more subtle than that. Ann Moss is always sensitive to confessional or pedagogical differences, and more generally to the cultural and material history of these books. There are also constant overlaps in the narrative, with cross-references backwards and forwards that indicate the changing fortunes of a single text over several generations and connect different strands to create a mul­ tiple, three-dimensional picture. Thus, through the proliferation of particular texts, one discerns the groundswell of shifting methods and practices, the changes in organiza­ tion (topical, thematic, rhetorical, alphabetical, and so forth), the invention of increasingly efficient indexes and other retrieval systems. At the heart of these is the shift from a manuscript culture to a print culture, which leads first to a rapid increase in the production and use of commonplacebooks , and eventually to a kind of implosion, where the wealth of materi­ als available in print makes it virtually impossible to devise a comprehen­ sive compendium. Indeed, Moss points out the implied analogy between the commonplace-book and "moveable type, capable of both setting a page of text in an apparently immutable form and of rearranging all the elements of that page into other patterns for other meanings" (p. 252); with characteristic prudence, she mentions this analogy only when it finally becomes explicit in one of her later texts, Jean Oudart's Méthode des orateurs of 1668. Yet from the first page of the preface she deploys a running anal­ ogy which would not have been available even twenty years ago...

340 RHETORICA singularly persistent—and, one might add, singularly disturbing in some contexts—would be thoroughly vindicated. Whatever one's perspective, however, no one who is seriously inter­ ested in early modern culture, the history of pedagogy, or the history of ideas can afford to neglect this major contribution. Terence Cave Oratorical Culture in Nineteenth-Century America: Transformations in the Theory and Practice of Rhetoric, eds. Gregory Clark and S. Michael Halloran (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1993). Gregory Clark and S. Michael Halloran's point of departure for this important collection of essays is Gerald Graff's claim in Professing the University that the collegiate oratorical culture in the first half of the nine­ teenth century linked college curricula with the "literary culture outside" (pp. 2-3). Yet as their introduction makes clear, "the culture outside dur­ ing the early years of the nineteenth century was not 'literary' in our sense of the term, but oratorical. Its most prized symbolic work was that of the orator" (p. 3). In fact, "literary" is just one species of expertise that began to develop during the course of the century. As Clark and Halloran write in their introduction, "both the theory of rhetoric taught in the schools and the practice of public discourse sustained outside them were transformed during the nineteenth century from those of the neoclassical oratorical cul­ ture into those of the professional culture we see characterizing both col­ leges and communities by its end" (pp. 5-6). Clark and Halloran use the Burkean concept of transformation to describe the changes in nineteenthcentury oratorical culture, and though the historiographical stance of the introduction and the collective practices of the nine essays are somewhat at odds, this collection makes a significant contribution to scholarship describing the move from a collective moral authority to an individual authority which became grounded, ultimately, on notions of expertise. Further, the volume contributes to studies of collective reading and writ­ ing practices by positing "oratorical culture" as a concept beside "audi­ ence," "community," "rhetorical culture," and "public" to describe where and how groups analyze and produce discourses collectively. In "Edward Everett and Neoclassical Oratory," Ronald Reid argues that Everett's successes and failures "illustrate the nation's changing Reviews 341 oratorical culture" (p. 29) because "Everett exemplifies the declining repu­ tation of neoclassical oratory" (p. 30). Reid contends that Everett's reputa­ tion declined because he could not adapt the neoclassical oratory in which he was trained at Harvard to the needs of Jacksonian democracy. Thus Reid's essay replaces Clark and Halloran's introductory trope of transfor­ mation with that of paradigm shift—"the old oratorical culture" versus "the new oratorical culture." The tensions among different conceptions of permanence and change within Reid's essay force us to question whether oratorical culture, or any culture, is not always undergoing transforma­ tions and how serviceable the notion of "oratorical culture" is for studying change. The contradictory tendencies inherent in belletristic rhetoric are taken on more directly by Gregory Clark in his essay "The Oratorical Pulpit of Timothy Dwight." Clark's argument centers on how Dwight combined Scottish conceptions of taste with the Evangelical Calvinism of his infa­ mous grandfather, Jonathan Edwards. The combination, which resulted in a distinctive theory and practice Clark calls "oratorical poetics," empha­ sized "the force of the language of sentiment" in service to "sustaining a common moral and political culture" (p. 58). Though Dwight's lectures on rhetoric are lost, Clark uses edited editions of the lecture notes of two of Dwight's students to reconstruct what Dwight probably taught. Instruction, of course, raises the question of native ability and of who was authorized to instruct whom. Again, Clark emphasizes the contradictions inherent in belletrism and Enlightenment rhetorics of all kinds, and articu­ lates how those contradictions asserted themselves in early nineteenthcentury America in particular. Russel Hirst's essay on Austin Phelps, Bartlett Professor of Oratory in Andover Theological Seminary from 1848 to 1879, is a rich historical study of how individualism and collectivism manifested themselves in the orato­ ry and homiletic theory of a less-known figure in the history of rhetoric. Valuable as it is both historically and for...

The purpose of the Roman iudicia publica (as described by legal, rhetorical, and philosophical texts and even the name of the institution) was to determine whether or not defendants had violated the various “criminal” statutes which established them. Cicero’s reports of the outcome of real cases suggest a popular expectation that jurors ordinarily attempted to carry out this task. The proliferation of distinct formal charges over time and the existence of jokes about orators fooling jurors confirm this suggestion. We are thus discouraged from imagining collusion between parties and jurors in which the formal charge is understood by all to be a pretext for a competition of oratorical skill or social standing. Roman jurors wanted to believe in their verdicts. Advocates, of course, did not simply tell the truth. Rather, they responded to popular expectations by going out of their way to emphasize the (purported) truth of their speeches.

Alexander of Ashby’s De artificioso modo predicandi has the distinction of being the first medieval sermon rhetoric since the De doctrina Christiana to apply classical rhetorical terms to preaching. The text includes a dedicatory prologue to Alexander’s abbot (of the Augustinian canons at Ashby), the treatise proper on a sermon’s construction, and five sample sermons. In contradistinction to current formalist descriptions of the De artificioso modo predicandi, this essay focuses on its audience awareness. I argue that the historical importance of this treatise lies not merely in its revival of classical terminology, but also in its theorization of rhetorical scenes in which classical teachings might apply to the sermon.

Ever since Aristotle noted in the Rhetoric that, when fashionable, delivery ταύτό πoiήσϵι τη υποκριτική (has “the same effect as acting”; 1404a), classical and medieval rhetorical theorists fulminated against a crowd-pleasing oratory that had devolved into a theatrical spectacle more akin to that provided by the comic “actress” or the “effeminate” male. It cannot be coincidental, however, that, as the fifth rhetorical canon documents the theatricalization of rhetoric, it also offers companion testimony about the so-called emasculation of eloquence. In this essay, I examine the early belief that legal and religious rituals crossed gender lines into effeminacy at they same time that they crossed genre lines into theater. Close analysis suggests that the persistent association between theatrics, bad rhetoric, and effeminacy struck four different targets in a single, well-conceived blow: it marginalized women, homosexuals, bad oratory, and theater by casting certain types of speakers and speech as perverse and disempowered. Delivering delivery today thus entails exposing the ways in which early theorists themselves attempted to deliver it from evil.

Pronuntiatio teaches character creation and analysis. Because the rhetorical curriculum in the British Renaissance considers pronuntiatio essential, retains the educational goal of facilitas, treats every “text” as a declamation, and depicts inventio, dispositio, elocutio, and memoria in behavioral metaphors with rules mirroring those of pronuntiatio, Renaissance rhetoric is in practice an art of behavior centrally concerned with decorum. This connection between Renaissance rhetoric and ethics suggests a defense for the claim that the good orator is the good man and expands the domain of rhetoric from an art of expression, composition, or persuasion to an art of character-fashioning.

Research Article| May 01 1997 Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary J. O. Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary, Typologie des Sources du Moyen Age Occidental, 58 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1995), 373 pp. P. Ruth Taylor-Briggs P. Ruth Taylor-Briggs 139 Florence Rd., Smethwick, Warley, B66 4QN, United Kingdom. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1997) 15 (2): 219–222. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.219 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation P. Ruth Taylor-Briggs; Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary. Rhetorica 1 May 1997; 15 (2): 219–222. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.219 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1997, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1997 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| May 01 1997 Aristotle's Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays. Proceedings of the Twelfth Symposium Aristotelicum David J. Furley and Alexander Nehamas (ed.), Aristotle's Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays. Proceedings of the Twelfth Symposium Aristotelicum (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), xv + 322 pp. John T. Kirby John T. Kirby Program in Classical Studies, Coulter Hall, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1997) 15 (2): 213–215. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.213 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation John T. Kirby; Aristotle's Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays. Proceedings of the Twelfth Symposium Aristotelicum. Rhetorica 1 May 1997; 15 (2): 213–215. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.213 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1997, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1997 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| May 01 1997 A New History of Classical Rhetor; La rhétorique antiqu George A. Kennedy, A New History of Classical Rhetoric (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), xii + 301 pp.Françoise Desbordes, La rhétorique antique (Paris: Hachette, 1996), 303 pp. Laurent Pernot Laurent Pernot Directeur de I'Institut de Grec, Université des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg, U.F.R. des Lettres, 22 rue René Descartes, 67084 Sfrasbourg Cedex, France. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1997) 15 (2): 211–212. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.211 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Laurent Pernot; A New History of Classical Rhetor; La rhétorique antiqu. Rhetorica 1 May 1997; 15 (2): 211–212. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.2.211 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1997, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1997 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews 215 expediency. Jean-Louis Labarrière treats Aristotle's remarkable compari­ son of deliberative oratorical style to skiagraphia, or chiaroscuro, in painting. In Section IV, Alexander Nehamas, in an essay that first appeared in Rorty's 1992 collection on the Poetics, writes on pity and fear in the Rhetoric and Poetics, while André Laks (following influential essays by G. E. R. Lloyd, J. Lallot, and I. Tamba-Mecz and Paul Veyne) attempts a unifying interpretation of Aristotle's theory of metaphor. We have here, then, a formidable collection of essays by students of ancient philosophy, one which future scholars of rhetoric will need to take into account. If the shadow of Plato looms large behind most of the essays, that should come as no great surprise. As is the case with all col­ lections, it would be easy to fault this one for what is omitted or ignored here: it would have been valuable, for example, to have such a group of philosophers comment in more detail on the presocratic / sophistic back­ ground of the Rhetoric. But that would be to miss the virtues of what is included. I prefer, as I have indicated, to take the publication of this col­ lection as an auspicious omen for the philosophical study of rhetoric in general, and of the Rhetoric in particular. John T. Kirby Barbara Cassin, L'effet sophistique (Paris: Gallimard, NRF Essais, 1995), 693 pp. To readers who are not quite acquainted with the idiosyncrasies of French publishing, the release by Gallimard of Barbara Cassin's L'effet sophistique may seem unremarkable. However, for such a mainstream publisher to take the major step of printing nearly seven hundred pages of rhetorical analysis, even in a series devoted to philosophy (NRF Essais), is most remarkable. It means, in terms of France's intellectual landscape, that "rhetoric" has broken into a different field of readership, more accus­ tomed to reading (and giving credence to) Jean-François Lyotard than, say, Marc Fumaroli. Setting aside this strategic effect, L'effet sophistique bears all the charac­ teristics of being a major work on at least three counts. Firstly, it heralds a shift in French philosophy from denying history of rhetoric the status of a discipline to its reincorporation in philosophical debates. However, Cassin's work keeps its distance from both deconstruc­ tion and history of ideas (as in De Romilly's Les grands sophistes dans 216 RHETORICA l'Athènes de Périclès [Paris: De Fallois, 1998]). Secondly, L'effet sophistique has the merit to question sources and to provide new translations and insights into mistranslations (Cassin also heads a team working on a Vocabulaire européen des philosophies). A main tenet of Cassin's method is to immerse her reading-as-translation into the history of readings of particu­ lar texts such as Gorgias' Praise of Helen or Sextus Empiricus' Aduersus mathematicos VU, 65-87, or Galen's Libellus de captionibus and excerpts from Lucian as well as the remains of Antiphon the Sophist. Thirdly, it offers conceptual tools to formulate a theory of political or civic discourse not unrelated to current debates on the nature of democracy, diversity, and human rights. In this respect, L'effet sophistique truly does justice to the art of rhetoric by inscribing an analysis of the Sophists in the history of their reception by ancient and modern philosophy and in "current affairs." What is most topical is the way Cassin articulates the opposition of what she terms "Arendts' Greece" and "Heidegger's Greece" (pp. 248-69), by way of conclusion to a chapter on "City as Performance." She elucidates how Arendt constructs the primacy of politics over philosophy by resort­ ing to Protagoras. L'effet sophistique formulates one central question: in the conflict between the two logoi that haunts ancient thought, between ontology and logology, between the Sophist and the Philosopher, how did the First and the Second Sophistics position themselves as key operators in the inven­ tion of "fictionality"? Can we reconstruct the rhetorical history of that "Other" of philosophy and of good Politics, the Rhetor—either Protagoras, Gorgias, and Antiphon or Philostratos, Ælius Aristides, Lucian, and Longus—and, in the process, obtain a...

This article describes the paradeigma / exemplum from a historical point of view, as it is treated in (primarily Greek) rhetorical theories from Aristotle up to the sixth century AD. The description focuses on four main features of the paradigm: its functions (argument or ornament), the modes of reasoning implied in its use (analogical or inductive), its subject matter, and its literary form. The classification of these aspects is meant to serve as a hermeneutic model for the rhetorical analysis of the use of exempla in late antique and Byzantine authors or texts. Although the contribution of this paper is largely theoretical and methodological, it also offers some guiding questions for such an analysis and suggests how this analysis can be complemented by a semantic approach to the exempla: the questions of how they function and what they mean are inextricably linked.

Reviews George A. Kennedy, A New History of Classical Rhetoric (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), xii + 301 pp. Françoise Desbordes, La rhétorique antique (Paris: Hachette, 1996), 303 pp. Ces dernières années ont vu se multiplier, en Europe et en Amérique, les ouvrages de synthèse, manuels, guides ou recueils, sur la rhétorique. Le marché éditorial en atteste : il y a un besoin croissant en ce domaine, pour la formation des étudiants et pour le perfectionnement des collègues. Les deux ouvrages recensés ici constituent des spécimens particulièrement distingués de cette production. Tout en étant synthétiques, ils restent rela­ tivement circonscrits, puisqu'ils portent, l'un et l'autre, exclusivement sur la rhétorique antique. Il est inutile de présenter George Kennedy aux lecteurs de Rhetorica. Membre fondateur de l'ISHR, George Kennedy a joué un rôle capital dans le regain de l'histoire de la rhétorique à partir des années 1960. Il a montré, à une époque où cela n'allait pas de soi, que la rhétorique antique n'était pas une vieillerie desséchée, vouée aux catalogues de figures, mais une nervure essentielle de la culture gréco-romaine. Trois livres majeurs, devenus des classiques, ont scandé son enquête : The Art of Persuasion in Greece (1963), The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World (1972), Greek Rhetoric under Christian Emperors (1983). Le présent ouvrage, A New History of Classical Rhetoric, fond ensemble ces trois livres, en les abrégeant. La partie de Greek Rhetoric ... qui portait sur Byzance n'a pas été reprise ; inverse­ ment, quelques pages ont été ajoutées sur la rhétorique latine de la fin de l'Antiquité, qui n'était pas évoquée dans les ouvrages précédents. Le petit livre sur le Nouveau Testament, fort apprécié des connaisseurs (New Testament Interprétation through Rhetorical Criticism, 1984), a été également mis à contribution. Tout ce travail de remaniement s'est accompagné, comme il se doit, d'un aggiornamento visant tant les références bibliographiques que cer­ taines questions de fond. Les chevauchements qui pouvaient poser prob­ lème ont été éliminés (à propos de Denys d'Halicamasse, traité à la fois dans The Art of Persuasion ... et dans The Art of Rhetoric ou des progymnasmata , traités à la fois dans The Art ofRhetoric ... et dans Greek Rhetoric La discussion a été partout réduite à l'essentiel : par exemple, le chapitre sur les orateurs attiques se concentre sur Lysias et Démosthène, les autres noms étant seulement énumérés. La bibliographie est restreinte, dans une très large mesure, aux publications en anglais. On pourra discuter, ici ou 211 212 RHETORICA là, des points d'érudition, ou contester telle vue cavalière (par exemple, p. 241, à propos du IIe siècle après J.-C. : « the intellectual exhaustion of the period » ). Mais là n'est pas l'important pour un ouvrage de ce genre. Ce qui compte, c'est que le lecteur dispose d'une histoire complète de la rhé­ torique antique, depuis les origines jusqu'au VIe siècle après J.-C., parfaite­ ment dominée, claire, bien informée. Elle servira de compendium ou de propylées vis-à-vis des ouvrages plus détaillés sur la question, à com­ mencer par ceux de George Kennedy lui-même. Françoise Desbordes rend hommage, dans sa préface, à « l'œuvre monumentale » de George Kennedy (p. 6). Elle a choisi, quant à elle, de poser d'abord la problématique de la rhétorique antique. Une première partie, intitulée modestement « Situation de la rhétorique », passe en revue les questions, antiques et modernes, que soulève l'art de la parole : notam­ ment, la définition de la rhétorique, le problème de sa valeur morale, son enracinement institutionnel (dans la cité, dans l'école), ses rapports avec l'environnement culturel (avec la philosophie, le christianisme, la dialec­ tique, la grammaire). Cet exposé frappe par sa puissance synthétique remarquable. Toutes les questions cruciales y sont réunies, admirablement expliquées en très peu de pages, et constituent une...

Reviews 219 J. O. Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary, Typologie des Sources du Moyen Âge Occidental, 58 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1995), 373 pp. Ward's work on Ciceronian rhetoric in treatise, scholion, and com­ mentary constitutes the fifty-eighth fascicule in a typological series whose aim is "établir la nature propre de chaque genre de sources (Gattungsgeschichte) et arrêter les règles spéciales de critique valable pour chacun." Despite the "centrality," as W. daims, of the art of rhetoric in mediaeval culture, no previous work has surveyed the relevant texts as a group. Texts transmitting Ciceronian rhetoric in mediaeval and Renaissance culture, however, resist classification as a single genre on account of their broad diversity of contexts and application. Therefore, W. restricts his examination to texts designed to impart "theoretical" as opposed to "applied" knowledge—that is, texts whose purpose is to instruct the student in the classical art of general persuasion. Included within this sub-division are texts devoted to colores, etc. Artes poetriae, artes dictaminis, artes praedicandi, and artes orandi, on the other hand, are exam­ ined separately by other scholars in fascicules 59, 60, and 61. At the outset of his work, W. leaves his reader in no doubt regarding the significance of a study of these texts. These texts not only offer an insight into mediaeval and Renaissance ideas about rhetoric and literary styles, but they also help to reveal the "didactic curriculum that must have come to influence most writers and articulate thinkers in the period." W., therefore, eschews the oblique angle from which most previous scholars, in their preoccupation with theological, dialectical, and grammatical issues or concerns, have traced the Fortleben of classical texts. By contrast, W. val­ ues the commentaries of the period as "intrinsically interesting artefacts of cultural history" providing evidence with which to "assess the role played in mediaeval and Renaissance culture by a hybrid ars rhetorica." After providing an extensive bibliography, W. engages in a stimulat­ ing discussion of various general issues. He advances cogent arguments, for example, to explain why the mediaeval and Renaissance treatment of generalized preceptive rhetorical theory is so heterogeneous, suggesting inter alia that the different types of text reflect the attitudes of society to the knowledge enshrined in that text, with commentaries canonizing the past text, thereby confining its progress, and treatises bearing much more the individual stamp of the transmitter. In recognition of the problems inher­ ent in assessing such a heterogeneous genre, W. creates his own division of the extant material into four rough (and occasionally overlapping) sub­ categories: 1) independent treatises; 2) commentaries and glosses on classi­ cal texts or on texts included in 1); 3) continuous or occasional comments, etc., in the form of interlinear / marginal glosses, etc.; and 4) paraphrases, 220 RHETORICA explications, or translations presented without texts themselves. The main section of the book is devoted to a survey of the extant rele­ vant material organized (on the whole successfully) according to the four sub-divisions noted above and within three chronological periods. By far the least successful portion of W/s work is his survey of the first chrono­ logical period, namely the fourth to the eleventh centuries, for the follow­ ing reasons. Firstly, the treatment of these centuries as though they consti­ tuted a homogeneous period seems to ignore certain clearly distinct politi­ cal and cultural phases. Secondly, insufficient relevant historical informa­ tion is provided for this "period" to establish a context within which the texts can be fully appreciated. Thirdly, the organization of W.'s survey breaks down when W., justifying his inclusion of late antique writers because of their strong influence in the mediaeval and Renaissance peri­ ods, concentrates almost exclusively on this later influence rather than on the creation and consumption of the texts in their own chronological con­ text. Fourthly, W. is forced to rely rather heavily in this section on palaeographical , codicological, and stemmatological evidence, with which he is clearly less at home than with historical evidence. In describing the ninthcentury manuscript Leningrad Publich. Bibl. F vel 8 auct. class, lat. as "unrepresentative" in the extent of its glossatory activity, for example, W. ignores the clear evidence of...

228 RHETORICA titre de son recueil. Cette image, empruntée à Quintilien (VUI, v, 34), l'auteur la lie au symbolisme du paon. Elle pourrait éventuellement s'appliquer au recueil même, qui déplie, tout comme le plumage du paon, un brillant éventail de splendeurs. Paul J. Smith Martha Feldman, City Culture and the Madrigal at Venice (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: The University of California Press, 1995), xxxi + 473 pp. with 20 plates, 13 tables, 68 music examples, and 2 figures. A book with a title like this is not an obvious candidate for review in the pages of Rhetorica. A rhetorical way of thinking, however, often sur­ faces in unexpected places. For example, as Paul Grendler has recently confirmed, Cicero played a central role in the educational practice of six­ teenth-century Venice,1 providing some of the key principles by which those who lived and worked there constructed and articulated their own distinctive culture. Feldman begins from the premise that music is a part of this culture and shows that the compositional practice of the day evolved along distinctly rhetorical lines. The key text in this story is Pietro Bembo's Prose della volgar lingua (1525), which advocates Italian rather than Latin as the language of literary expression and Petrarch in particular as the model for the vernacular lyric. In part Bembo and the rhetorical culture for which he wrote were attracted to Petrarch's mastery of sound, and previous music historians have traced this aspect of Bembo's poetics in the practice of the madrigalists of his day. Feldman, however, argues that the influence of the treatise is far greater than previous scholars have believed. Bembo read Petrarch through a Ciceronian filter in which three principles assumed special importance: first, style should be separated into three distinct levels, high, middle, and low; second, the principle of variazione (variation) should create a balance within each style between gravitd (gravity) and piacevolezza (pleasingness); and third, styles should be matched to subjects through decoro (propriety). In particular, Bembo made decoro defined as "moderation" the fundamen1Paul Grendler, Schooling in Renaissance Italy: Literacy and Learning, 1300-1600 (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), pp. 203-34. Reviews 229 tai principle of his stylistics and linked it to variazione, creating a procedure for moderating extremes through variation to avoid excessive emphasis in any single rhetorical register. Such self-expression through a moderation of extremes, Feldman argues, is peculiarly Venetian, for Bembo's readers were accustomed to constructing a stylized self-presentation based on reserve and discretion. Bembo's treatise, in other words, connects Venetian civic identity, rhetorical principles, and expressive idioms in a distinctive, all-encompassing way. This argument is developed in detail in the fifth of ten chapters in the book. The four preceding chapters lay the groundwork by studying the men who patronized composers in sixteenth-century Venice and the infor­ mal "academies" in which patrons and composers (and others) came together to exchange ideas. Two Florentine exiles, Neri Capponi and Ruberto Strozzi, appear to have been the main benefactors of Venice's two most famous mid-century madrigalists, Adrian Willaert and Cipriano de Rore. As wealthy nobles, Capponi and Strozzi practiced an elite, private sort of patronage, in contrast to that of "new men" like Gottardo Occagna, who supported the publication of music in an effort to make himself upwardly mobile, and of Venetian patricians like Antonio Zantani, who added the printing of music to the collection of antiquities, the commis­ sioning of portraits, and other cultural activities designed to bring public recognition and honor to his family. The most renowned vernacular liter­ ary academy in mid-century Venice, however, was presided over by Domenico Venier. Venier himself wrote Petrarchan poetry and provided a drawing room in which musical settings of that poetry were performed, in accordance with Bembo's interpretation of Ciceronian principles. The last five chapters of the book focus more specifically on the theory and composition of this rhetoricized music. The first significant effort to link language and sound came from a priest named Giovanni del Lago, but the link was not really consolidated until 1558, when Gioseffo Zarlino's Le istitutioni harmoniche...

Reviews 213 David J. Furley and Alexander Nehamas (ed.), Aristotle's Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays. Proceedings of the Twelfth Symposium Aristotelicum (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), xv + 322 pp. Scholarly fashions in classics come and go. There have been periods in history, for example, when Ovid was thought a poet superior to Vergil, and Statius, despite his relatively low stock today, is afforded a place of great honor in Dante's Purgatorio. Aristotle, (again in Dante) the "maestro di color che sanno," has had his own vicissitudes through the ages, and at different times, this or that individual treatise has had more or less ascen­ dancy. The Rhetoric is no exception in this regard, and I think it is safe to say that, in the past century or so, most scholars interested in Aristotelian philosophy per se have given both it and the Poetics far less attention than, say, the Metaphysics or Nicomachean Ethics. All of that is beginning to change. Superb new critical editions of both the Poetics and the Rhetoric (both by Rudolf Kassel) have appeared in the last thirty or so years; the old Cope/Sandys commentary on the Rhetoric has been, if not supplanted, then certainly supplemented by that of Father Grimaldi (on books I and II); two recent translations of the Rhetoric into English (with notes) have been published by Oxford University Press and Penguin Books—the former by George Kennedy, the latter by Hugh Lawson-Tancred; and there has even been something of a neo-Aristotelian renaissance in rhetorical theory, in The New Rhetoric of Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. Of particular interest is the sustained and engaging philosophical analysis presented in Eugene Garver's recent Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994). Nor is this all. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, continuing her series of col­ lections of essays on various works of Aristotle, has edited a collection on the Poetics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992) and one on the Rhetoric (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996). Yet another col­ lection of essays on the Rhetoric, edited by Alan Gross and Arthur Walzer, is due out soon. To the latter list we must also add the book under review here. I should say at the outset that its title is not otiose. That these are "philo­ sophical essays" means, precisely, that they have been written with a specifically philosophical cast, as proceedings of the triennial Symposium Aristotelicum (this twelfth one being the first to be held in the USA). I sur­ mise that this orientation will please some and disgruntle others; habent sua fata libelli, but this is particularly true in terms of the various uses dif­ ferent readers will want to make of any given book. The title of Jürgen Sprute's essay in this volume, "Aristotle and the Legitimacy of Rhetoric," 214 RHETORICA might serve (with a question mark) as a subtitle for the book as a whole: as Sprute remarks, "The fact that Aristotle treated rhetoric seriously, gave lectures on it, and wrote what has to be understood as an 'art of rhetoric' seems to have been a source of embarrassment to some modem readers [O]ne could perhaps have expected Aristotle to abstain from shallow things such as an art of persuasion" (p. 117). That, plus the fact that most modem philosophers (in the analytic tradition at least) have seen rhetoric and communication as less exalted topics of study than metaphysics or epistemology, or even logic, is perhaps what has deterred them from a more whole-hearted study of rhetoric (or of the Rhetoric) before now. It is to be hoped that this volume marks not mere token attention, but rather the beginning of a new era. The volume is arranged in four sections: "The Arguments of Rhetoric," "The Status of the Art of Rhetoric," "Rhetoric, Ethics, and Politics," and "Rhetoric and Literary Art." A number of those who attend­ ed the Symposium have contributed essays to this volume (and some of those who are not in this volume, are represented in Rorty's). Eight of the eleven essays in this volume are in English; the remaining three are in French (the one...

222 RHETORICA the subject. Particularly commendable is the suggestion that in future, material be edited and published in collections of excerpts in preference to individual sets of glosses or treatises in order that this work might con­ tribute a valuable insight into the history of ideas. W. notes as a great desideratum a history of the changing understanding and interpretation of the doctrines of classical rhetorical theory, and observes the significance such a history would have in illuminating the manner in which mediaeval and Renaissance scholars viewed the ancient Roman past. Further research into mediaeval commentaries might also elucidate the ways in which the classical text was read and the philosophical ideas in vogue. To conclude, there can be no doubt that W.'s work amply fulfills both the aims of the typological series and his own desire to demonstrate the "fundamental role rhetorical instruction played in mediaeval society." In suggesting the way forward for future scholars, W. effectively acknowl­ edges that research into the vast and diverse material extant in this field remains in its infancy. The pioneering achievement of this work is such that it whets the appetite for this future research by demonstrating what a stimulating study these texts make as a key to unlocking the mediaeval mind. P. Ruth Taylor-Briggs Perrine Galand-Hallyn, Le reflet desfleurs. Description et métalangage poétique d'Homère à la Renaissance, Travaux d'Humanisme et Renaissance, 283 (Genève: Droz, 1994). Perrine Galand-Hallyn, Les yeux de l'éloquence. Poétiques humanistes de l'évidence, préface d'Alain Michel, L'Atelier de la Renaissance, 5 (Orléans: Paradigme, 1995). Voici deux livres importants, dont l'un, Le reflet des fleurs, est l'édition commerciale de la thèse de Perrine Galand-Hallyn, et l'autre, Les yeux de l'éloquence, un recueil d'articles du même auteur. Considérons d'abord Le reflet desfleurs. Le sous-titre de cette étude indique bien l'immensité du ter­ rain qu'elle couvre. Pour avoir emprise sur cette vaste matière, l'auteur a opté pour une approche théorique éclectique, à la fois ancienne et mo­ derne, et un corpus limité de textes bien choisis. Regardons d'abord les Reviews 223 choix théoriques et méthodologiques: le point de départ est une notion de l'ancienne rhétorique: Yevidentia (enargeia ou hypotypose), cette faculté de la description en rhétorique et en littérature de représenter l'objet décrit comme si on l'avait devant les yeux dans toute sa beauté (ou laideur). Comme l'a bien montré l'auteur, les théoriciens de l'Antiquité ont mis ce pouvoir évocateur de la description en rapport avec la magie et l'onirisme, ainsi qu'avec les arts architecturaux et plastiques, - aspects sur lesquels l'auteur ne cesse de revenir au cours de ses analyses. La réflexion métapoétique dans l'Antiquité portant sur la nature du texte tend à s'exprimer par des métaphores qui prennent vite valeur de topos. L'auteur distingue onze domaines thématiques: astres (feu, lumière), navigation, guerre, chasse, sports, architecture, tissage, peinture, sculpture, mosaïque et médecine (aliments). Elle a eu l'heureuse idée d'en dresser la liste (avec indication des principaux lieux d'origine, d'Aristote au Traité du sublime, pp. 142-161). Cette liste pourrait être utilisée comme une checklist lorsqu'on étudie tel auteur de l'Antiquité ou de la Renaissance: elle permet d'évaluer les nombreuses métaphores métatextuelles dont, par exemple, un Montaigne parsème ses Essais. Or, si dans ces cas le discours figure comme comparé mis en rapport avec un comparant artificiel ou naturel, les choses se présentent autrement et inversement dans le cas de la description poétique. Là, l'objet décrit devient en quelque sorte le comparé ayant pour comparant le texte descripteur, effet rehaussé par le mimétisme élaboré entre texte (sons, syn­ taxe, images) et référent. Autrement dit, toute description énargique pré­ suppose explicitement ou implicitement un moment métapoétique: elle nous informe sur son esthétique sous-jacente. Les instruments théoriques pour étudier les effets...

Abstract: This paper analyzes the rhetoric of the eighteenthcentury English debate over occasional conformity in order to develop a better understanding of how persuasive appeals to moderation were used in this particular case. This debate is noteworthy because it reveais how the eighteenth-century veneration of moderation was influeneed by the seventeenth-century Protestant reading of the New Testament. This understanding of moderation led to some of the first arguments suggesting a need for separation of church and state. Further, this example extends our theoretical understanding of moderate rhetoric when we observe its use as a justification for social change.

Research Article| February 01 1997 Carnal Rhetoric: Milton's Iconoclasm and the Poetics of Desire Lana Cable, Camal Rhetoric: Milton's Iconoclasm and the Poetics of Desire (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1995), x + 231 pp. Robert Cockcroft Robert Cockcroft 2 Florence Boot Close, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2QF, England (United Kingdom). Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1997) 15 (1): 114–117. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.1.114 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Robert Cockcroft; Carnal Rhetoric: Milton's Iconoclasm and the Poetics of Desire. Rhetorica 1 February 1997; 15 (1): 114–117. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.1.114 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1997, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1997 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: Contemporary scholars have focused on two concepts in Vico's tkinking: the imaginative universal and the sensus communis. For Vico these concepts emerge from the human race's first experience of religion. For over a century Vico scholarship has been divided over how to view this experience. This division falls along Aristotelian lines: that is, the primitive religious experience can be seen either as poetic—God and religion are made by the human imagination—or it can be viewed as rhetorical—God and religion are discovered. Vico derives his idea of natural law from the concepts of the imaginative imiversal and the sensus communis, and their relation to religion will affect decisively the status of Vico's theory of natural law. As a matter of fact, Vico's thinking on this issue is better understood, first, within the context of Rudolph Otto's The Idea of the Body, and second, in the context of the Baroque rather than in the context of Aristotelian categories of religion and poetic. Viewed within these contexts, the origin of religion is a theophany that is neither made nor discovered but witnessed, and the development of natural law is an historical process only understood in retrospect. Vico thus differs radically from other Enlightenment thinkers, especially Hume, in his account of primitive religion and provides a basis for natural law that is neither superstitious nor rationalistic, but religious.

Research Article| February 01 1997 Ars Poetriae: Rhetorical and Grammatical Invention at the Margins of Literacy William M. Purcell, Ars Poetriae: Rhetorical and Grammatical Invention at the Margins of Literacy, Studies in Rhetoric/Communication (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1996), 193 pp. Elza C. Tlner Elza C. Tlner Department of English, 1501 Lakeside Drive, Lynchburg College, Lynchburg, VA 24501-3199, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1997) 15 (1): 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.1.107 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Elza C. Tlner; Ars Poetriae: Rhetorical and Grammatical Invention at the Margins of Literacy. Rhetorica 1 February 1997; 15 (1): 107–112. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1997.15.1.107 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1997, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1997 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This paper analyzes the rhetoric of the eighteenth- century English debate over occasional conformity in order to develop a better understanding of how persuasive appeals to moderation were used in this particular case. This debate is noteworthy because it reveals how the eighteenth-century veneration of moderation was influenced by the seventeenth-century Protestant reading of the New Testament. This understanding of moderation led to some of the first arguments suggesting a need for separation of church and state. Further, this example extends our theoretical understanding of moderate rhetoric when we observe its use as a justification for social change.

Reviews William M. Purcell, Ars Poetriae: Rhetorical and Grammatical Invention at the Margins of Literacy, Studies in Rhetoric/ Communication (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1996), 193 pp. In the context of the evolution from oral to written discourse in the classical and medieval periods of western Europe, Purcell discusses six texts on the art of versification, or artes poetriae: 1) Matthew of Vendome, Ars versificatoria; 2) Geoffrey of Vinsauf, Poetria nova and Documentum de modo et arte dictandi et versificandi; 3) John of Garland, De arte prosayca, metrica , et rithmica (Parisiana poetria); 4) Gervasius of Melkley, Ars poetica; and 5) Eberhard the German, Laborintus. Composed in the twelfth and thir­ teenth centuries, these texts are revolutionary in their adaptation of rhetoric and grammar to poetry, which in that period was usually read aloud or recited. The book offers a useful introduction to material which may be difficult for most undergraduate students to obtain or to under­ stand; however, the critical framework into which Purcell places these texts needs justification, as it is part of a growing debate on the history of orality and literacy. The book is divided into two parts. Part I, consisting of two chapters, establishes the two main assumptions of the theoretical framework into which Purcell has placed the six treatises on poetic composition. The first assumption sets up a diachronic dichotomy between orality and literacy, from the Greek tradition to the invention of the printing press. Purcell argues that rhetoric in classical Greece and Rome was a discipline designed for oral delivery. Grammar was a written activity, developed for analysis and correction of text. As the societies of the Middle Ages pro­ gressed in literacy, grammar was increasingly applied to written material. Thus, Purcell sets up an oral-literate time spectrum. He treats the ancient Greek and late medieval periods as two poles, the former primarily oral and the latter increasingly text-based or literate. Citing Paul Prill, Purcell asserts that the arts of poetry of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries stand at the cusp of the shift from orality to literacy. The second major assumption of Purcell's theoretical framework is that grammar and rhetoric exchanged functions along the oral-literate time spectrum. In the classical period, rhetorical theory was used as a system of composition for oral delivery, while grammar was a system to correct and to analyze written text. By the time the arts of poetry were composed, these roles had begun to be reversed: "Ultimately, with the advent of the printing press, the text became the thing in and of itself, moving away 107 108 RHETORICA from the oral end of the spectrum and toward the literate end. At the same time, rhetoric—a more orally focused technology—moved toward the literate, and grammar—a more literally focused technology—moved toward the oral. The tension created by the rhetorical/grammatical move­ ment is reflected in the theoretical treatises in the artes poetriae themselves" (p. 5). Part II consists of five chapters, arranged chronologically, on the artes poetriae which illustrate the developments in the matrix of orality, literacy, grammar, and rhetoric which Purcell has set up in the first section of his book. Purcell provides excellent summaries of these treatises by giving an overview of their sections on invention, arrangement, and style. Less attention is given to invention and arrangement, as the author's primary interest is the overlapping of grammar and rhetoric in the domain of style, a unique contribution of poetic theory in the Middle Ages. Purcell's study of figures in the artes poetriae shows how the medieval tradition leads to the systematic relation of style to stasis theory in Renaissance rhetoric. This is the most valuable contribution of the book. Purcell argues that these treatises are not simply extensions or adapta­ tions of classical rhetoric, but that they establish a unique genre of rhetori­ cal theory at a time when orality and literacy coexisted. To demonstrate this point, he observes that the existing editions of the texts can be mis­ leading in causing readers to assume a debt to the classical sources. For example, the Faral edition and the Nims translation of Geoffrey of Vinsauf's Poetria Nova...

120 RHETORICA Rhétorique et image. Textes en hommage à Â. Kïbédi Varga, ed. Léo H. Hoek and Kees Meerhoff (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1995), 318 pp. The subject of this book has been aptly chosen: it echoes and honours Kibédi Varga's published work on visual rhetoric and narratology (for example, Rhétorique et littérature and Discours, récit, image, as well as numerous articles—the bibliography of his works in French, German, English, Dutch, and Hungarian runs to twenty packed pages); it also reflects his founding of the Association for Word and Image Studies ten years ago. Rhétorique et image ranges widely over several disciplines and yet it has a unity of theme and purpose. It is both illuminating and open-ended, refreshingly undogmatic and tentative, and thus, paradoxically perhaps, goes some way towards defining a methodology. Some of the writers here allude to the evolution of their subject and apply the ancient topoi in a modem context. What is new in this book is the narrowing down of the subject to the place of rhetoric in word and image studies. There are four sections: "Reflexions interarts," "Reflexions rhé­ toriques," "Echanges," and "Reflets: fins de siècle," necessarily overlap­ ping, but providing a useful focus. The academic papers are framed and enhanced by a previously unpublished introductory poem, "Un retour à San Biagio," by Yves Bonnefoy, and another closing poem by Salah Stétie, "Fièvre et Guérison de lTcône." Sorin Alexandrescu starts from a photograph taken by the author, of bottles and glasses on a table, and analyses the limits of meaning such an unposed photograph may have. While not representing action, it contains a "récit," presupposing past action and implying a future; but if it is to have meaning, some external information (title, supporting text, context) is necessary to "narrativise" it. Elrud Ibsch gives a very critical account of Charles Jencks' The Language of Post-Modern Architecture, rejecting his idea that this architecture is distinguished from modernist architecture by its semantic richness and its power of communication. His theory of build­ ings as metaphors (in relation to other buildings) is also found wanting because of the confusion over whether the metaphor lies in the observer, the building, or the architect, Ibsch concludes that Jencks' method is that of a critic, who may therefore be allowed personal judgments and a depar­ ture from impartiality, but it is not helpful to historians of literature or architecture. David Scott addresses squarely the rhetoric of images through the example of Dutch postage-stamps of the last forty years, a Reviews 121 particularly beautiful series of typographic and commemorative stamps designed by leading graphic artists. Scott concentrates on the rhetorical figures of repetition, pleonasm, emphasis, enumeration, and parallelism, all in the larger context of communication (semiotics and hermeneutics) and the balance between decorativeness and persuasiveness. Leo Hoek concludes this first section with an attempt at classifying the ways in which text and image may interact, among which are pictorial poetry, clas­ sical ekphrasis (or "art transposition"), novels about artists, art criticism, history, or theory. The author concludes that it is not so much the nature of the text or image which provides the best basis for its classification, but rather the process of production and reception. In production what mat­ ters is which comes first, text (for example, book illustration) or image (for example, emblematic literature), but for reception it is simultaneity, which is important since text and image appear together, although one has pri­ macy over the other. Anne-Marie Christin begins the second, more strictly rhetorical sec­ tion with an analysis of memoria and actio, subjects which usually receive little attention from historians of rhetoric; she concentrates on memory as an important component of visual thought. Starting from the legendary anecdote of Simonides' identification of the guests at a feast after the roof had collapsed, she qualifies this by a discussion of ideas of space and place from Cicero to the birth of printing and on to the present day. She reflects on what the rhetoricians say about writing, images, and the need for blank spaces in the formation of memory. Bernard Vouilloux looks at...

112 RHETORICA On the whole, while his critical assumptions need to be supplemented with recent scholarship on orality, literacy, and the history of education, Purcell's work is useful because it summarizes material which is not easily available to most undergraduate students. His discussion of the content of the poetic manuals will be helpful to those who are not familiar with Latin, or whose libraries do not contain the printed editions of the texts, some of which are out of print or only available in microfilm (e.g., Catherine Yodice Giles' Ph.D. dissertation, the only English translation of Gervasius of Melkle/s Ars poética; Traugott Lawler's edition and translation of John of Garland's Parisiana poetria; and Evelyn Carlson's translation of Eberhard the German's Laborintus, her 1930 M.A. thesis). The appendix of figures, with definitions, is especially useful, along with the bibliography of sources relat­ ing to the poetic treatises. In a subsequent edition, the author might consid­ er including a chart comparing the classical definitions of these figures with those in the medieval poetic manuals, to illustrate how the medieval manu­ als depart from the classical tradition, a point which Purcell emphasizes. However, undergraduate students who seek broad outlines and neat categories for material must be cautioned, just as Purcell shows, that mate­ rial frequently resists tidy schematization; that principles of grammar and rhetoric overlap in figurative language; and that medieval poetics adapts and transcends classical theory in a variety of ways. Illustrations of how this theory operates in poetic texts and cultural contexts, and in relation to various views of language change and interaction, are needed to support the critical assumptions in this book. William Purcell has made an impor­ tant beginning in an area which has long been overlooked in the history of composition and literary criticism: medieval poetics, a field in which the criteria for measuring orality and literacy await further study. Elza C. Tiner John Parker and Carol A. Johnson, Sir Walter Raleigh's Speech from the Scaffold: A Translation of the 1619 Dutch Edition, and Comparison with English Texts (Minneapolis, MN: Associates of the James Ford Bell Library, 1995), ii + 79 pp. Sir Walter Raleigh's speech from the scaffold, October 29,1618, in the Old Palace Yard at Westminster, has lived long as an "exit" speech of con­ siderable historic importance, especially familiar to students of British public address. It was included in David Brewer's older anthology and in Reviews 113 the excellent An Historical Anthology of Select British Speeches.1 Scholars of the history of rhetoric do not need to be told that one of the initial steps in their explorations is to answer the question, "What did that orator really say?" Whose version, manuscript or printed, was the closest to the event, and how reliable are the available versions? We remember how Thucydides dealt with the problem in the fifth century BCE: "With references to the speeches in this history, . . . some I heard myself, others I got from various quarters; it was in all cases difficult to carry them word for word in one's memory, so my habit has been to make the speakers say what was in my opinion demanded of them by the vari­ ous occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the general sense of what they really said."2 So what did Pericles and others really say? Only when the step of description is accomplished as well as possi­ ble, can the rhetorical critic with the greatest meaningfulness enter into sound analysis and insightful evaluation. With painstaking and thorough scholarship, Parker and Johnson dig deeply into their chosen terrain. They construct a succinct and wellwritten sketch (pp. 1-11) of the man and his role in the late Elizabethan and early Stuart eras. "Entrepreneur, politician, poet, historian, explorer, colonizer" (p. 1), Raleigh was a central figure in his time, a time when "the line between dissent and treason was not always apparent" (p. 5). Parker, Curator Emeritus of the James Ford Bell Library, and Johnson, Assistant Professor in the University Library, enter into a microscopic, forty-three-page comparison of the eight available printed versions of the...

114 RHETORICA than once, insists he is telling the truth: "If I speak untruthfully . . . , O God, let me never come into thy kingdom" (p. 27). In an impressive compression of facts into nine pages of the publish­ ing history of the printed versions and six pages of detailed endnotes, Parker and Johnson give us a wealth of data, and one goes away feeling that indeed one has gotten closer to the speech event than anyone has pre­ viously been privileged to get. The authors conclude, "... it becomes clear that although frequently published, Raleigh's speech has been presented from relatively few of the potentially available texts: three from identifi­ able manuscripts, and four basic printed sources, with various conflations of these texts. The Dutch edition takes its place, therefore, as the earliest of the published texts, the closest to the event it describes" (p. 69). A limited edition of six hundred copies of this volume was printed. Those fortunate enough to secure a copy will possess a classic volume of rigorous scholarship, a model for those drawn to the history of rhetoric. J. Vernon Jensen Lana Cable, Carnal Rhetoric: Milton's Iconoclasm and the Poetics of Desire (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1995), x + 231 pp. This is an interesting but irritating book. Lana Cable's survey of Milton's affective rhetoric ambitiously extends Paul Ricoeur's doctrine of metaphor, which (more emphatically than the other theory assimilated by Cable) already constitutes a serious implicit challenge to older thinking. For Quintilian, emotion is mainly derived from enargeia and visio, and for the Roman rhetoricians (as Beth Innocenti recently reminded us), such visio was best expressed in graphic, sensory, non-figurative language. For Ricoeur, thinking and poetic feeling (the most positive and transformative mode of emotion) are integral. They work through metaphor, and, in the Aristotelian terms which Ricoeur adopts, the differences between the metaphorical idea (or image) and its referent are as important as the similarities. Overcoming every pre-existent sense of difference, metaphor at its most novel "does not merely actualize a potential connotation, it creates it. It is a semantic innova­ tion, an emergent meaning."1 Since feeling is an integral part of this process, rhetoric will project its most intense pathos when it orients this innovation towards things of the greatest import, as it does in Milton. Ricoeur protests at a tendency, derived from Hume, to think of :Mario J. Valdes, ed., A Ricoeur Reader: Reflection and Imagination (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991), p. 79. Reviews 115 imagery as decaying sense impression, basically passive; he favours the active Kantian view of "imagination as the place of nascent meanings and categories."2 Applied to the rhetorical arousal of emotion, this means the subsuming of pathos into ethos: sensory images, whether of the past, the present, or the future, of the actual or the potential, are presented through the "likeness" of metaphor. This brings new connotations to bear for both "tenor" and "vehicle" (terms which Ricoeur adopts from Richards), and presses these on the reader or listener through the emotional, logical, and linguistic shock of a comparison that transcends the "first-order feelings" or "bodily emotions"3 derived from sense—or from the direct verbal evo­ cation of sensory experience? Repeated shocks must draw attention from the subjects of debate (however emotive) to the condition of the debaters, and to the inspiriting relationship of persuader and persuadee. Cable's point of departure is to question or qualify Ricoeur's idea that the "second-order feelings" attendant on metaphor transcend (or suspend) the emotional impact of sense. In her view, "A more psychologically cred­ ible account of metaphor's dependence on imagination and feeling would have to recognize that these two are functioning in tandem all the time, whether occasioned by literary experience or by some other kind of experi­ ence . . . drawing ... on sense perceptions both immediate and remem­ bered; on understanding and knowledge; on beliefs, aspirations, opinions, and prejudices . . ." (p. 29). This existing complex of influences must (though Cable never adequately explains the point) constitute the mental and emotional images, the "complacency" (p. 32) which iconoclastic metaphor breaks or refashions. In fusing it with poetry and semantics, Cable is...

Contemporary scholars have focused on two concepts in Vico’s thinking: the imaginative universal and the sensus communis. For Vico these concepts emerge from the human race’s first experience of religion. For over a century Vico scholarship has been divided over how to view this experience. This division falls along Aristotelian lines: that is, the primitive religious experience can be seen either as poetic—God and religion are made by the human imagination—or it can be viewed as rhetorical—God and religion are discovered. Vico derives his idea of natural law from the concepts of the imaginative universal and the sensus communis, and their relation to religion will affect decisively the status of Vico’s theory of natural law. As a matter of fact, Vico’s thinking on this issue is better understood, first, within the context of Rudolph Otto’s The Idea of the Body, and second, in the context of the Baroque rather than in the context of Aristotelian categories of religion and poetic. Viewed within these contexts, the origin of religion is a theophany that is neither made nor discovered but witnessed, and the development of natural law is an historical process only understood in retrospect. Vico thus differs radically from other Enlightenment thinkers, especially Hume, in his account of primitive religion and provides a basis for natural law that is neither superstitious nor rationalistic, but religious.

Reviews 117 material. Concentrating on the prose and Samson Agonistes, she does best with Areopagitica, Iconoclastes, and Samson itself. Even here, her analysis some­ times lacks rhetorical or lexical precision. An acute analysis of Milton's appalled history of censorship, which recounts how a Pope "excommunicat­ ed the reading of heretical books" (p. 126), would be even richer if she had noticed other aspects of the metonymy which she apparently does not recog­ nise (though semantic innovation might well work in a quite distinctive way through this trope). She misreads "the single whiff of a negative" character­ ising royal arrogance (p. 156) as a bad smell, rather than a puff of wind. But it is invigorating to see the iconoclastic reading extended to positive images like Areopagitica's metaphor of books as men, and she gives a fine account of Milton's demolition job, not only on the false image of Charles I but also on his false religion and his idolised prayers. Her theory works well here, to illuminate the rhetoric of Milton's own rhetorical analysis. Finally, her discussion of Samson forms a challenging summation of the whole approach. Dalila and Harapha are read as metaphors for two related states of mind which Samson must transcend, his "icons of shame and glory." This is persuasive, like the broad idea that Samson "becomes a metaphor for the paradox of bearing witness that is true to transformative desire, true to an impetus toward that which cannot itself be known" (p. 176). But the sharpness of Samson's agon, the complexity of his feelings and the labyrinth of his moral reasoning, remain underplayed. Far more than the other displeasing features of the book, such as its overblown word-processor prose, this failure to integrate a very valuable line of inves­ tigation with a broader and more balanced concept of rhetoric, stands out. Robert Cockcroft Albert W. Halsall, Victor Hugo et l'art de convaincre - Le récit hugolien: rhétorique, argumentation, persuasion (Montréal: Éditions Balzac, 1995), 496 pp. "L'art de convaincre" - c'est sous ce titre qu'Albert Halsall avait déjà publié en 1988 une très intéressante étude consacrée à la rhétorique du récit (aux Éditions Paratexte, à Toronto). Il y insistait sur la nécessité de soumettre les genres narratifs - qui sont devenus depuis deux cents ans les genres littéraires par excellence -, au delà des analyses narratologiques courantes, à un examen rhétorique, afin de mettre en relief leur caractère idéologique, confirmant ou attaquant la doxa (d'une nation, d une péri­ ode). C'est ainsi que l'analyse rhétorique apportera une contribution 118 RHETORICA importante à ¡'histoire des idées. Le présent livre fait suite au premier; il en est une application pra­ tique, non pas à un type particulier de récit mais à l'ensemble de l'œuvre narrative d'un seul auteur. Le choix de Victor Hugo ne paraît surprenant qu'à première vue: nous savons, certes, que dans un vers célèbre et sou­ vent cité des Contemplations le grand poète romantique avait déclaré "la guerre à la rhétorique", mais existe-t-il en fait une écriture qui en soit entièrement dénuée? Halsall montre fort bien que la doctrine romantique de l'originalité peut être considérée comme une stratégie rhétorique et que, en réalité, Hugo entend substituer une nouvelle rhétorique à la vieille: à la mesure classique, il opposera la démesure, aux figures d'atténuation (comme la litote) les procédés hyperboliques d'exténuation (p. 24). Ses fi­ gures préférées seront l'hyperbole et l'antithèse. Loin de rejeter l'art ora­ toire, il en intervertit systématiquement les termes: selon un texte de Hugo datant de 1834, le grand orateur c'est Mirabeau, précisément parce qu'il est "reprochable de toutes parts", parce qu'il possède toutes les pro­ priétés qu'un orateur ne devrait pas posséder: il est laid, il a l'organe dur, il est haï de toute l'assemblée, etc. (p. 30). Dans l'immense bibliographie de...

Abstract: The teaching and practice of rhetoric at Trinity College, Dublin, in the eighteenth century have been little discussed in the literature. This article describes the curriculum and pedagogy related to the old and “new rhetoric” of the Scottish enlightenment as disclosed by documents in the archives of Trinity College Library; the published lectures of two Erasmus Smith Professors of Oratory and History, John Lawson and Thomas Leland; and the lectures of Thomas Sheridan on elocution. Minutes of the student historical clubs in which debates and harangues are preserved illustrate the interests of the students, their techniques of debate, and the demonstrative exhortations of their officers. The student orations chronicle the gradual absorption of the principles of the new rhetoric at the College.

Research Article| November 01 1996 Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece John Poulakos, Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1995), xiv + 220 pp. Richard Leo Enos Richard Leo Enos Department of English, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX 76129, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (4): 461–465. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.461 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Richard Leo Enos; Sophistical Rhetoric in Classical Greece. Rhetorica 1 November 1996; 14 (4): 461–465. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.461 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: Vico's theory of metaphor is best understood as a monster in the tradition of classical rhetorical invention. It is the mutant offspring of metaphor characterized as “necessary” (an “ear” of com, for example) and metaphor characterized in terms of analogy. From the perspective of his method. Vico marries these apparently incompatible forms inherited from Aristotle and thereby identifies a third type of linguistic metaphor. I argue that the metaphor identifies a stipulatory definition taken out of context. In order to situate this claim, I outline Vico's genetic analysis and elaborate in general terms what metaphor and definition share. Most importantly. Vico insists that beings, actions, and events are linguistically identified in some particular diseursive context. Indeed, in many cases that context alone determines whether the expression can be called a definition or a metaphor. Like Cicero's ideal jurist, Vico's hero employs motivated words and realizes possibilities available to common sense. Henee Vico's theory of metaphor is both “constructivist”—language has the power to makes things—and “humartist”—it must do so in a form appropriate to history and culture. Vico's theory is consequently important to us because it challenges the proper/figurative distinction championed in the philosophy of language and adds a pragmatic dimension to contemporary views of metaphor at work in literary theory.

Abstract: This essay explores how classical legal or forensic rhetoric informs Henry Fielding's work as a novelist. Focusing on the dichotomous or contradictory application and characterization of forensic rhetoric in Fielding's three major novels—joseph Andrews, Tom jones, and Amelia—I will suggest that the exuberance and confidence that tjrpify the novelist's portrayal of legal rhetoric within the diegetic realm of his narrators is undermined or rendered problematic by the wariness and pessimism with which the same kind of discourse is presented within the mimetie worlds of the stories themselves. After speculating about the biographical, historical, and aesthetic ramifications of this dichotomy, the essay concludes with brief discussion of the ideological significance of Fielding's portrayal of the lawyerly art of persuasion.

Research Article| November 01 1996 Delightful Conviction: Jonathan Edwards and the Rhetoric of Conversion Stephen R. Yarbrough and John C. Adams, Delightful Conviction: Jonathan Edwards and the Rhetoric of Conversion, Great American Orators, 20 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993), xxiv + 176 pp. Ronald F. Reid Ronald F. Reid P.O Box 209, Northfield, MA 01360, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (4): 468–471. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.468 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Ronald F. Reid; Delightful Conviction: Jonathan Edwards and the Rhetoric of Conversion. Rhetorica 1 November 1996; 14 (4): 468–471. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.468 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| November 01 1996 Rhetoric-Rhétoriqueurs-Rederijkers Jelle Koopmans, Mark A. Meadow, Kees Meerhoff, and Marijke Spies, eds., Rhetoric-Rhétoriqueurs-Rederijkers, Proceedings of the Colloquium, Amsterdam, 10-13 November 1993, Koninklijke Nederlandse Academie van Wetenschappen, Verhandelingen van de Afdeling Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks, Deel 162 (Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1995). Alex L. Gordon Alex L. Gordon Department of French, Spanish and Italian, University College, The University of Manitoba, 500 Dysart Rd., Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2M8, Canada Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (4): 465–468. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.465 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Alex L. Gordon; Rhetoric-Rhétoriqueurs-Rederijkers. Rhetorica 1 November 1996; 14 (4): 465–468. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.4.465 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: When lyric poets in late Renaissance England responded to the demand for wonder in poetry and all courtly activity by astonishing audiences through style, they drew upon the Greek rhetorical tradition, which presents roughness and obscurity as coordinate methods of making style deinos, or admirable. In the Life of Cowley, Samuel Johnson also sees roughness and obscurity as coordinate qualities in the verse of the “metaphysical poets” he says erred in pursuit of wonder. Before admirable style went out of fashion, poet-critics praised its ability to provoke the audience's inferences and to transcend persuasión by “ravishing” the audience's will, precisely the effects that Demetrius attributes to the charaktēr deinos in On Style. Yet deinolēs is the term used to describe both the most powerful style and the clever style of sophistic epideixis, and this breadth of meaning helps explain both the rise and fall of wit.

Abstract: Traditional histories of rhetoric assume that the practical oratory of lawcourts and political assemblies is the “primary,” original form of rhetoric in its “preconceptual” or predisciplinary origins in archaic Greece. Hesiod's “Hymn to the Muses,” however, presents both prince and bard as practicing an art of psychagogic suasion, and presents the prince's discursive power as dependent on, and derived from, the paradigms of eloquence and wisdom embodied in the epideictic/poetic discourse of the bard: epideictic is the “primary” form of “rhetoric” in Hesiod's world. Hesiod's account agrees with what is known about the discursive practices of oral/traditional societies worldwide.

Research Article| August 01 1996 Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character Eugene Garver,Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), pp. xii + 325. John Angus Campbell John Angus Campbell Department of Communication, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (3): 341–346. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.3.341 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation John Angus Campbell; Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character. Rhetorica 1 August 1996; 14 (3): 341–346. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.3.341 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: Ideology can be considered the ethos of the modern, liberal, democratic, capitalist nation state. Working from the descriptions of political ethos in Aristotle's Rhetoric, Tapies, and Politics, the differences from and similarities to post-Renaissance political structures underline the modern insistence on ways to stabilise the representation of the group in power, giving it its veil of authority, as well as ways to stabilise the description or definition of the individual within the nation. Looking at a number of contemporary commentaries from both political theory and cultural studies, the essay elaborates the rhetoric necessary to constitute ideology as the ethos of the nation state, and goes on to detail some of the constraints on the individual who, in gaining access to power, becomes subject to that state. The rhetoric of ideology provides not only an ethos for the character of the group in power, but also a set of guidelines for establishing a spedfic responsive state in the audience, an ethics of pathos. Its ethos is a strategy that imposes a strategy. The circularity of this ethos marks many of the analyses undertaken by current theory, and it has only recently been challenged by, among others, feminist historians of rhetoric. The discussion moves to a point where it asks: given that multinational and transnational corporations now share with the nation state the regularisation of capitalist exploitation, is ideology effective as a political rhetoric any more? Who is the wife of the nation state? And, what is the ethos of the multinational?

Abstract:This essay indicates how the implicit normative framework in the texts of Michel Foucault can lead to a poststructural rhetorical praxis that is neither relativistic nor unrealistically utopian. In relation to the Enlightenment project broadly conceived, Foucault's work in this area shows both similarities to and differences from Kant and Habermas. Some normative standards are precluded within Foucault's system, but others are implied and can be articulated. There is a concept of limit work in Foucault, and the essay concludes by explaining this concept and applying it to Philipp Jenninger's Kristallnacht address.

Research Article| May 01 1996 Rethinking the History of Rhetoric Takis Poulakos, ed., Rethinking the History of Rhetoric, Polemics Series (Boulder: Westview Press, 1993), 285 pp. C. Jan Swearingen C. Jan Swearingen Department of English, Box 19035, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019-0035, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (2): 231–233. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.2.231 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation C. Jan Swearingen; Rethinking the History of Rhetoric. Rhetorica 1 May 1996; 14 (2): 231–233. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.2.231 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| February 01 1996 The Performance of Conviction: Plainness and Rhetoric in the Early English Renaissance Kenneth J. E. Graham, The Performance of Conviction: Plainness and Rhetoric in the Early English Renaissance (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1994), xiv + 232 pp. Arthur F. Kinney Arthur F. Kinney 25 Hunter Hill Dr., Amherst, MA 01002, USA. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1996) 14 (1): 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.1.108 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Arthur F. Kinney; The Performance of Conviction: Plainness and Rhetoric in the Early English Renaissance. Rhetorica 1 February 1996; 14 (1): 108–111. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1996.14.1.108 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1996 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| November 01 1995 Rhetoric and Marxism James Arnt Aune, Rhetoric and Marxism (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994). S. Jeffrey Jones S. Jeffrey Jones Department of English, Texas A&;M University, College Station, TX 77843-4227, USA Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1995) 13 (4): 457–464. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.4.457 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation S. Jeffrey Jones; Rhetoric and Marxism. Rhetorica 1 November 1995; 13 (4): 457–464. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.4.457 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1995, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1995 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: This paper examines Cicero's relation to Roman imperialism by focusing primarily upon his speech in behalf of Pompey's special command against Mithradates (Pro lege Manilia, 66 BC) and his speech in favor of extending Caesar's command in Gaul (De provinciis consularibus, 56 BC). These two moments in which Cicero contributed substantially to the empowerment of the two great imperialist generais who destroyed the Republic suggest the need to reassess versions of Cicero's career which see film primarily in terms of domestic Roman politics and cast him as the heroic, would-be savior of the Republic. Applying a Marxist reading particularly indebted to Pierre Macherey, I try to explore the internal contradictions of the texts as pointers to the contradictions of late Republican society, contradictions which constitute the very conditions of possibility for Cicero's political participation.

Research Article| November 01 1995 The Recovery of Rhetoric: Persuasive Discourse and Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences R. H. Roberts and J. M. M. Good (ed.), The Recovery of Rhetoric: Persuasive Discourse and Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences (London: Bristol Classical Press, 1993), xii + 278 pp. Peter Mack Peter Mack Department of English, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1995) 13 (4): 455–456. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.4.455 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Peter Mack; The Recovery of Rhetoric: Persuasive Discourse and Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences. Rhetorica 1 November 1995; 13 (4): 455–456. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.4.455 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1995, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1995 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: In this essay, we explore the intersections of rhetoric and feminism and the resulting transformations to both disciplines. Rhetoric offers feminism a vibrant process of inquiring, organizing, and thinking, as well as a theorized space to talk about effective communication; feminism offers rhetoric a reason to bridge differences, to include, and to empower, as well as a politicized space to discuss rhetorical values. The fraditional rhetorical canons, with their enthymematic familiarity, mark the sections of this essay, for they emphasize the mutually heuristic nature of the border crossings between these two disdplines. Although the linearity of print demands that we treat the canons consecutively, they, nevertheless, have a tendency to overlap and interact. Our discussions of arrangement, style, and delivery, for instance, both assume and depend upon a rethinking of invention and memory—a rethinking that recognizes the role that both these canons play in current efforts to reconceptualize and reenact what it means to know, speak, and write. As our essay argues, such attention to what we speak about, and how and why we speak, urges ail of us not only to continued exploration and interrogation but also to a renewed responsibility for our professional and personal discursive acts.

Abstract: It is often asserted nowadays that the medieval period “fragmented” the classical rhetorical inheritance, while the Renaissance restored it to its former coherence. The story of the assimilation in the Middle Ages and Renaissance of Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory is examined here in order to demonstrate the problems inherent in such a position. It is argued that the full utilization of the text of Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory in the Renaissance, along with the discrediting of the Ad Herennium (as a work of Cicero) that is associated with the name of Raffaello Regio in the last decade of the fifteenth century, are not the instances of the “recovery” of antiquity and supersession of “medieval philology” that they are often thought to be. Instead the opposite seems to be the case. The philological “recovery” of Quintilian led away from the incorporation of the Institutes into contemporary rhetorical practice and towards philology for its own sake. This, together with the bitter professional jealousies among the Italian schoolmen of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, led, almost “accidentally” as it were, to a “sundering” of the “whole” that the Middle Ages had put together out of rhetorical fragments from antiquity. The medieval period, less concerned with philological niceties than with the practical utility of good advice from the past, constructed a new kind of rhetorical text from an amalgam of old texts: the Ad Herennium commentary, made up of the text of the Ad Herennium, explanations, summaries, and discussions from the medieval schoolroom, and portions of Boethius' De differentiis topicis, Quintilian's Institutes, and other classical sources. This serviceable “unity” the Renaissance “sundered” by (a) discrediting the Ad Herennium as an authoritative Ciceronian text, and (b) placing the Institutes far beyond the practical capabilities of contemporary rhetorical training courses by restoring it to its original length (vis-à-vis the abridgements and assimilations of the medieval period). In this process of turning the classical texts into icons, the Renaissance scholars were predictably unable to re-create the kaleidoscopic, one-thousand-year reality of rhetorical attitudes and texts in antiquity, from the fragments that the Middle Ages had used to build up their new form of integrated text. Much had been lost, but what had been gained?

Abstract: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the enemy of books and civilized learning, might seem poles apart from Quintilian, who was so popular in France in the eighteenth century. Nevertheless, although there are only small traces of direct contact between the author of Émile and the Institutio, comparison between the two works is illuminating. Both are large-scale educational treatises embodying a vision of humanity. The important common ground between them concerns the importance of early childhood, a certain moral idealism, and the prfrence for a manly form of speech. Significant divergences begin to appear in relation to three major areas of concern: citizenship and the public life, the relation of words to things, and the question of acting, imagination, and fiction. Je ne me lasse point de le redire: mettez toutes les leçons des jeunes gens en actions plustôt qu'en discours; qu'ils n'apprennent rien dans les livres de ce que l'expérience peut leur enseigner. Quel extravagant projet de les exercer à parler sans sujet de rien dire, de croire leur faire sentir sur les bancs d'un collège l'énergie du langage des passions, et toute la force de l'art de persuader sans intérêt de rien persuader à personne! Tous les préceptes de la rhétorique ne semblent qu'un pur verbiage à quiconque n'en sent pas l'usage pour son profit. Qu'importe à un Ecolier comment s'y prit Annibal pour déterminer ses soldats à passer les Alpes? (I never tire of repeating it: put ail your tessons for young people into actions, not speeches; let them learn nothing from books which they could learn from experience. What an insane idea to exercise them in speaking when they have nothing to speak about, to believe one can make them feel on their school benches the language of the passions and ail the force of the art of persuasion, when they have no interest in persuading anybody! All the precepts of rhetoric are pure verbiage to anyone who cannot see what use they are to him. What does it matter to a schoolboy how Hannibal set about persuading his soldiers to cross the Alps?)

Research Article| May 01 1995 Renaissance-Rhetorik, Renaissance Rhetoric Heinrich F. Plett, ed., Renaissance-Rhetorik, Renaissance Rhetoric (Berlin-New York: W. de Gruyter, 1993), viii + 391 pp. Marc van der Poel Marc van der Poel Vakgroep Griekse en Latijnse Taal en Cultuur, Faculteit der Letteren, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, Postbus 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (1995) 13 (2): 213–217. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.2.213 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Marc van der Poel; Renaissance-Rhetorik, Renaissance Rhetoric. Rhetorica 1 May 1995; 13 (2): 213–217. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1995.13.2.213 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1995, The International Society for the History of Rhetoric1995 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract: A major focus of the school themes in the collections of Roman declamations knowrn as controversiae (practice court cases) is the period of a young man's adolescence, and especially his relationship with his father during this period. In part this can be explained because teachers in the private schools of rhetoric selected themes that naturally appealed to their students—male adolescents in their mid and late teens. This focus is especially notable in the Major Declamations, and since they are the only full examples of controversiae,the phenomenon can most easily be explored in reference to this werk. In its nineteen declamations youths are generally portrayed sympathetically, in contrast to their fathers who are often cruel and harsh. Relations between the two are generally very strained. The themes were popular because they reflected the reality of growing up in a paternally dominated society where fathers had absolute power(even of life and death) over their sons. These declamations therefore had a cathartic effect and escapist value fer Roman teenaged boys,who could vent or explore in legitimate and acceptable ways their repressed, pent-up, and often hostile feelings toward their fathers. The declamations therefore provide an important resource, when used judiciously, for associating social history with the history of rhetoric.