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

Reviews La Rhétorique d'Aristote. Traditions et commentaires de l'antiquité au XVIIe siècle. Textes réunis par G. Dahan et I. Rosier-Catach. Paris. Vrin, 1998. Pp. 356. Il volume raccoglie i testi delle relaziom presentate nel corso di un colloquio dedicate alla Retorica di Aristotele (Centre de la Baume-lès-Aix, 915 luglio 1995). Nella premessa i due curatori da un lato ricordano la perenne centralità della R. di A., quale testa di riterimento di teoria e prassi retorica dall'Antichità ai nostri giorni e, proprio per questo, quasi un testo senza storia. Dall'altro puntualizzano che il colloquia ha voluto verificare questo status singolare della R. di A., sia sul piano della tradizione del trattato, sia su quello dei commenti ad esso relativi. Cosi gli studi raccolti nel volume, piuttosto che l'analisi del testo in sé, privilegiano la prospettiva storica secondo cui si sana variamente orientati i differenti usi pragmatici, della R. di A. Tali studi "env isagent d'une part la longue durée (de l'Antiquité au XVIIe siècle), d'autre part dans des traditions différentes (traditions grecques antique et byzantine, latines romaine et médiév ale, traditions arabe et juive médiév ales, traditions humanistes de la Renaissance et du début de l'age classique) et s'efforcent de mettre en lumière des éléments de continuité ou de divergence et surtout de faire apparaître les regards différents qui ont été portés sur le même texte'' (p. 7). Nelle diverse epoche e nei differenti ambiti culturali la conoscenza e il riuso della R. di A si sono realizzati in modo piuttosto articolato. Nota nella sua interezza o solo in parte, o ancora attraverso estratti e compendi, ha comunque esercitato un'influenza déterminante. La stessa circolazione del testa della R. è strettamente collegata al complesso problema delle traduzioni e "ritraduzioni" (traduzioni faite direttamente dal greco in arabo e poi "ritradotte " in latina o in ebraico: i pensatori arabi ebbero infatti a disposizione la traduzione della R. nella loro lingua molto tempo prima che fossero allestite le prime traduzioni latine) (p. 8). Per di più ricezione e interpretazione della R. di A. non solo hanno riguardato la storia interna del testa, la sua tradizione e trasmissione, ma hanno anche generato riflessioni sulia esatta collocazione della retorica (e della R. di A.) nel piu generale campo dei saperi intellettuali. Si è stabilito cosi un sofisticato dialogo intertestuale che, nel ricondurre alla R. di A. quale ipotesto, ha prodotto, dall'età ellenistica in poi, nuove interpretazioni, nuove riflessioni (p. 9). C The international Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XXI, Number 1 (Winter 2003). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 55 56 RHETORICA Il saggio di L. Calboli Montefusco ("La force probatoire des pistéis atekhnoi d'Aristote aux rhéteurs latins de la république et de l'empire") parte dal confronto fra due passi famosi che definiscono e distinguono i due tipi di pistéis, atekhnoi e entekhnoi (Quintiliano, Inst. Or. 5, 1, 1-2; Arist. Rhet. I 1355 b 35-39). Per meglio comprendere l'antitesi di Aristotele fra pistéis atekhnoi ed entekhnoi, resa da Quintiliano corne antitesi tra probationes inartificiales e artificiales, la Calboli Montefusco ricostruisce con ricchezza di dettagli la problemática nozione di pistis in Aristotele, in stretto nesso con la funzione che Aristotele stesso assegna alla tekhnê, e accoglie decisamente l'interpretazione tradizionale, che attribuisce ad entrambi i tipi di pistéis il valore di "strumenti di persuasione," utilizzabili anche insieme nel discorso, ma autonomi e indipendenti l'uno dall'altro, rafforzandola con l'analisi di vari passi della R. che aiutano non solo a comprendere meglio il senso di pistis in Aristotele, ma anche ad osservare il recupero che Aristotele opera di questa nozione nell'ambito della dottrina del pathos. Cicerone (De orat. 2.116) apporta importanti modifiche alio schema di Aristotele, unitamente ad alcune innovazioni in sede teórica (Inv. 2.48), che egli applica a più riprese nella prassi oratoria, dalla difesa...

Un’antica formula di riconciliazione, me mnesikakein, nata nella democrazia ateniese di fine V secolo, viene analizzata sia nel suo contesto storico, sia attraverso tre momenti esemplari che hanno segnato la conclusione di alcuni degli eventi più drammatici del XX secolo: la memoria dell’Olocausto; l’amnistia per i fascisti nell’Italia repubblicana del dopo-guerra; l’attività della Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) nel Sud Africa del présidente Mandela. In tali occasioni, in forme diverse tra loro, si è ripresentata la stessa domanda della vicenda ateniese sulia validité delle soluzioni proposte. Tale analisi consente di approfondire la dialettica fra memoria, perdono ed oblio.

Jan Miernowski Les limites de la rhétorique L 'empire rhétorique connaît-il des limites? Aron Kibédi Varga a récemment posé cette question dans son article "Universalité et limites de la rhétorique".1 II est symp­ tomatique que la seconde partie du titre soit discutée seulement dans les trois dernières pages du texte, et cela surtout sur un mode interro­ gatif. Dans le présent numéro de la revue, nous reprenons le débat en le concentrant sur un moment historique précis: la Renaissance, et particulièrement la Renaissance française. Existe-t-il un au-delà de la rhétorique pour les humanistes français qui viennent de redécouvrir le riche héritage de l'art ora­ toire classique et qui ambitionnent de fonder leur propre éloquence dans la poésie et les sciences, la politique et la prédication? A n'en pas douter, l'au-delà rhétorique est lui-même une figure oratoire (Rigolot). Est-ce à dire que les limites de la rhétorique à la Renais­ sance ne sont que les frontières internes d'un empire fatalement uni­ versel? Ou bien inversement: la culture renaissante conçoit-elle des phénomènes discursifs qui échappent à l'emprise de l'art du bien dire? Telle la poésie, province en apparence pacifiée et soumise, mais qui rêve d'être la nouvelle métropole (Cornilliat). Ou bien le signe esthétique en tant que tel, dont la fulgurante évidence n'a que faire des stratégies argumentatives étriquées (Demonet). Autrement dit, vouloir tracer les limites de la rhétorique à la Renaissance revient à interroger des théories sémiotiques, des gestuelles pathétiques et des valeurs éthiques qui font obstacle—que ce soit ouvertement ou non—à l'expansion de l'art de l'éloquence: Theméneutique occultiste du hiéroglyphe, à écarter si Ton projette la mise en ordre oratoire des mathématiques (Pantin); la haine, qui, au lieu de convaincre les } Rhetorica 18, (2000) pp. 1-28.© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XX, Number 4 (Autumn 2002). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA - 318 RHETORICA volontés libres s'adonne au rituel de l'anathème (Miernowski); la grâce, ce point de mire obligé mais inévitablement hors d'atteinte pour la persuasion prédicante (Fragonard). On l'a bien compris: sonder les limites de la rhétorique à la Renaissance ne signifie pas seulement explorer les frontières d'une culture, objet de l'investigation. C'est aussi tester l'outillage mental mobilisé par l'investigateur, c'est mettre en question ses paradigmes intellectuels: dans quelle mesure la rhétorique est-elle un objet de l'histoire parmi d'autres et jusqu'à quel point est-elle son moule formateur? L'expérience esthétique est-elle le produit du discours ou plutôt le surplus de sa signification? Le sacré d'une culture est-il le reflet ou bien le revers du débat politique et social? Autant de questions de méthode suscitées par la recherche historique sur la rhétorique renaissante. Cette recherche a été puissamment stimulée par les conseils et par les doutes de mes amis seiziémistes, tout particulièrement Fran­ cis Goyet, Ullrich Langer et David Quint. Le débat, dont le produit collectif est ici présenté au lecteur, a eu lieu pendant les sessions des congrès de la Renaissance Society of America et de l'International Society for the History of Rhetoric, à Chicago et à Varsovie en 2001. Je voudrais remercier très chaleureusement son Excellence Monsieur Benoît d'Aboville, Ambassadeur de France en Pologne, pour l'intérêt qu'il a bien voulu manifester pour nos discussions. La rencontre de Varsovie n'aurait pas pu être réalisée sans l'aide du Centre de Civili­ sation Française, de l'Institut de Philologie Romane, ainsi que du Cen­ tre des Études sur la Tradition Classique de l'Université de Varsovie, dirigés respectivement par MM...

La façon dont la rhétorique rend compte du phénomène esthétique peut être examinée à partir de quelques passages des Essais. Comme les autres, le signe esthétique devrait pouvoir être classé du côté du nécessaire, du probable ou du téméraire, conformément aux catégories rapportées par Aristote, Quintilien et les dialectiques légales de la Renaissance. Contrairement à tous les autres signes dignes de soupçon, certains textes littéraires réunissent chez Montaigne le signe le moins certain, ou téméraire, et le jugement le plus sûr selon son principe d’appréciation, une inspiration digne du démon de Socrate. L’opinion la plus hardie peut être aussi la plus juste, par un phénomène qui conjugue les différents symptômes répertoriés par Goodman. Ainsi, la nature des métaphores produites par celui même qui juge de la qualité des figures d’autrui met en scène l’intime conviction de l’œuvre d’art.

Le développement des études rhétoriques contredit la tendance des modernes à lire l’ancienne poésie—par exemple celle de la Renaissance—selon le modèle romantique d’un “anti-discours” centré sur le langage. Nous avons pris conscience de la dimension rhétorique de ces poèmes: suffit-elle à les définir, ou sommes-nous capables de juger, sans anachronisme, si une telle poésie se situe “au-delà” de la rhétorique—comme elle-même le prétend parfois? La réponse est incertaine, d’abord parce que la Renaissance n’en a pas décidé sans équivoque, ensuite parce que nous-mêmes n’avons pas décidé en quoi consiste l’actuel “retour” de la rhétorique: transformation de notre culture du discours, ou simple application de la science historique? L’ancienne poésie est l’une des pierres de touche de ce problème; elle révèle des postulats incompatibles, suggère des réponses contradictoires. L’objet de cette étude n’est pas de choisir parmi ces réponses: seulement de les classer.

Dans les pamphlets les plus extrémistes du temps des guerres de religion en France—tels ceux qui suivent la Saint-Barthélemy et le meurtre des Guises—la haine introduit l’anathème comme une sorte de rituel quasi-magique, fondamentalement étranger aux prémisses mêmes de l’éloquence humaniste. Il s’agit surtout de la conception aristotélicienne d’une haine qui s’oppose diamétralement à la colère, au lieu d’en être juste une forme aiguë, comme c’est le cas dans la tradition cicéronienne. En présupposant le droit impératif à la haine, le discours pamphlétaire devient indifférent à la persuasion, ainsi qu’à la libre volonté des interlocuteurs.

A la Renaissance, la rhétorique tend à s’imposer non seulement comme l’art de persuader, mais comme un moyen d’organiser les discours (sur le plan logique aussi bien qu’esthétique), éventuellement applicable à tous les domaines du savoir. En mathématiques, Jacques Peletier du Mans, a joué à cet égard un rôle décisif. Poète, poéticien, philosophe et mathématicien, il a toujours défendu l’idée que dire c’est mettre en ordre, et pour s’en expliquer, il est passé tout naturellement par les catégories de la rhétorique. Mais Peletier assume aussi un autre héritage: celui de Nicolas de Cuse, pour qui les mathématiques peuvent être, par allégorie, une sorte de langue théologique. Leur discours, dans ce cadre, ne vaut plus essentiellement par son ordre, mais par le rayonnement de ses concepts: il fonctionne à la façon d’une langue hiéroglyphique et vise à mettre en correspondance le monde inférieur à un monde supérieur, au lieu de faciliter la communication entre les hommes. Cette étude présente la tension, dans l’œuvre de Peletier, entre ces deux représentations du langage mathématique.

La double topique du refus de la rhétorique et de l’imputation des effets de la prédication à l’action de la grâce est caractéristique de la rhétorique de la prédication. Elle n’implique en fait aucune précision sur le style à adopter, doute des signes d’acquiescement émotif et dépossède le prédicateur de l’efficacité du discours. Elle écarte le rhétorique conçu comme mensonge et la théologie conçue comme un discours clos. Elle place par ailleurs le critique devant des impasses, et achoppe sur l’examen des cas concrets, ce qui appelle à remanier les critères génériques. Elle révèle cependant le risque inhérent à toute rhétorique: son échec à persuader.

La Renaissance est allée chercher dans l’Antiquité des modèles exemplaires d’aphasie réelle ou simulée. Elle a ressuscité Sappho, la parleuse muette; elle a récrit les fables d’Actéon, d’Arachné, d’Io, de Philomèle et de bien d’autres figures emblématiques de l’impossibilité de parler. Mais la privation de parole est surtout mise au service de la rhétorique de l’éloge: on renoncera à parler pour mieux se faire entendre. Les écrivains recourent volontiers à une image ancienne de cette “éloquence du silence:” le rideau de Timanthe. Quelques exemples empruntés à Louise Labé, Joachim du Bellay, Agrippa d’Aubigné et Montaigne serviront d’illustrations.

304 RHETORICA by being overly literal. He also inserts sub-titles to what the Rhet. Al. deals with next, which aid the reader immensely There are 761 notes at the bottom of each page of translation and in almost one hundred pages (pp. 117-201) of "Notes Complémentaires". These contain an abundance of cross-references to other ancient sources (especially identifying relevant passages in other rhetorical works which are very helpful), while references to modern liter­ ature (mostly French at that) are kept to a minimum. This is hardly the place for a detailed critique, so let me give just one example of a topic in which I have my own scholarly interest: Rhet. Al. 29 on the exordium. Chiron gives us almost fifty detailed notes, though curiously little mention is made of the Demosthenic exordia or the Budé text of the exordia edited by R. Clavaud (1974). The edition also has an index of proper names (pp. 203-205), a lengthy index of Greek terms (pp. 207-258), and a concordance of previous major texts with differing divisions: Erasmus (1539 and 1550), Bekker in the Berlin Aristotle (1881), Hammer's revision of Spengel in the Teubner (1894), and Fuhrmann's recent Teubner (pp. 259-268). Chiron cites the works of other scholars on the Rhet. Al., works that are mostly articles, of which some are lengthy and others only notes. None can compare to what Chiron gives us in his Budé edition, an edition that is also testimony to the general quality and trustworthiness of the Budé series. Chiron's detailed assessment and critique of the Rhet. Al. will make his edition useful for anyone working on Greek rhetoric, oratory, or indeed interested in Greek literature. It is an important addition to scholarship, and for that he should be commended. Ian Worthington University ofMissouri-Columbia Pierre Chiron, Un rhéteur méconnu: Démétrios (Ps.-Démétrios de Phalère). Essai sur les mutations de la théorie du style à l'époque hellénistique (Paris: Vrin, 2001) 448pp. Dopo vari anni dalla sua pubblicazione del PH di Demetrio per la collana "Les Belles Lettres" (Démétrios, Du Style, Parigi 1993) Pierre Chiron ci offre adesso un'analisi molto approfondita di questo trattato nel tentativo, argomentato sempre con grande cura, di contribuire a risolvere alcune delle difficoltà che hanno tormentato da secoli gli studiosi di questo testo. Oltre alla prefazione di M. Patillon una introduzione ed una conclusione fanno da cornice a ben nove lunghi capitoli nei quali l'autore non solo fa il punto sullo status quaestionis ed affronta problemi di datazione e di attribuzione, ma anche esamina in modo capillare la dottrina esposta da Demetrio. Non soddisfatto dei criteri adottati dai suoi predecessori, Chiron pensa infatti che sia opportuno cambiare metodo e "passer à une étude axée sur le texte Reviews 305 lui-même, ses tensions internes, ses présupposés et les diverses sources dont il laisse entrevoir l'utilisation" (p. 32). Questo spiega dunque perché il discorso sull attribuzione del trattato e sulla sua datazione, iniziato nel primo capitolo con la presentazione delle varie, a suo parère insoddisfacenti, soluzioni, riprenda solo alla fine, nel nono. Qui Chiron si sofferma su quattro question! principali (1. Le PH peut-il avoir été écrit par Démétrios de Phalère? 2. Quels sont les arguments en faveur d'une datation "haute"? 3. Une datation "basse" est-elle soutenable? 4. Dans quelle mesure peut-on préciser une datation intermédiaire?) aile quali, dopo una minuziosa analisi dei dati a disposizione e delle ipotesi già fatte da altri studiosi, dà risposte che, per quanto mai categoriche, lasciano comunque chiaramente intravedere la sua posizione: il PH sarebbe opéra di un retore di nome Demetrio attivo alla fine del II o all'inizio del I sec. a.C. La sua formazione peripatetica sarebbe dovuta all'utilizzo diretto delle opéré di Aristotele e di Teofrasto che Apellicone di Teo aveva reso nuovamente accessibili ad Atene dopo il loro sotterramento da parte di Neleo di Scepsi e dei suoi eredi. Giunto a Roma forse nell'86, dopo la vittoria di Silla, insieme alla biblioteca di...

314 RHETORICA Jean Nienkamp, Internal Rhetorics: Toward a History and Theory of SelfPersuasion (Carbondale, Southern Illinois University Press, 2001), xiv + 170 pp. In her deceptively slim volume, Internal Rhetorics, Jean Nienkamp pro­ vides historical precedents and theoretical arguments for opening up the self as a site for rhetorical study. She examines several key texts from the Classical, Enlightenment, and Modern periods to develop a theory of inter­ nal rhetoric, the concept of thinking as verbal interaction and the self as a socially constituted collection of internalized discourses. Since neither traditional nor expansive understandings of rhetoric theo­ retically preclude the extension of their studies to the self, Nienkamp sur­ mises that this aspect of rhetoric has been "eclipsed by various political, educational, and philosophical factors that have shaped thinking about lan­ guage use" (p. x). Traditional rhetoric's historical emphasis as an intentional practice for public address and the postmodern ban of vocabulary sugges­ tive of a unitary subject are two powerful predispositions against thinking of rhetoric as internal. Another, as Nienkamp emphasizes, is the Platonic division of philosophical and rhetorical reason and the long historical reign of thought over language. Nienkamp's history and theory of internal rhetoric clearly favors the epistemic rhetorics of Isocrates and the twentieth-century rhetoricians and psychologists she examines. Internal rhetoric, Nienkamp argues, unites the divisive disciplinary con­ cerns of traditional and expansive (interpretive) rhetorics by pointing to both the effects and intents of language and its use; it also reestablishes rhetoric's relations with psychology and philosophy by providing a complex rhetorical reading of the self and offering a model of moral agency in an antifoundationalist age. Central to these proposals is Nienkamp's distinction between cultivated and primary internal rhetoric. A deliberately cultivated moral rea­ soning is the form internal rhetoric takes in the Classical and Enlightenment texts examined in Part One. Associated with the intentionally crafted dis­ course of traditional rhetoric, cultivated internal rhetoric is the conscious use of a learned language to effect desired change in the self. Primary internal rhetoric is the form self-persuasion assumes in the post-Freudian Modern texts examined in Part Two. Associated with expansive rhetoric, primary internal rhetoric understands the powerful unconscious imperatives of mul­ tiple, often conflicting social discourses influencing internal rhetoric and constituting the rhetorical self. Because his representation of logos is both epistemic and ethical, Isocrates is Nienkamp's classical standard for internal rhetoric. The Socratic-PlatonicAristotelian treatments of self-persuasion, although identifying and address­ ing the divided psyche, depict the coercion of reason over the appetites rather than the linguistically interactive negotiation Nienkamp identifies as rhetor­ ical. Francis Bacon, the Third Earl of Shaftesbury and Richard Whately, Nienkamp's Enlightenment figures, emphasize the highly rhetorical nature of moral reasoning, the intense, concerted interactions with reason to move Reviews 315 the will away from the passions; but they use a faculty psychology whose discrete, innate parts are more acted upon than acting. Nienkamp wants an epistemic rhetoric to underwrite her theory of thought and the self, but she returns in her conclusion to the cultivated ethical reasoning associated with traditional rhetoric to propose a theory of moral agency. Nienkamp's historical depictions of rhetorical thought and the self should prove fascinating to anyone wondering or worrying about the fate of the self in rhetoric. Rhetorical representations of thought from Homer to Ken­ neth Burke portray a psyche whose constituent parts are innate. Along with Burke, Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca use the Freudian un­ conscious to unseat "the rationalist and theological ethics of earlier periods" (p. 81), but the Freudian psyche is also comprised of innate parts. Not until Nienkamp examines the psychologies of George Mead and Lev Vygotsky does her theory of internal rhetoric reflect the historicized nature of thought processes, consciousness, and the mind. Her social-constructionist rhetorical view of thought and the self is based on knowledge gained from the social sciences, an epistemological stance epistemic rhetoric refutes. The rhetori­ cal self as depicted by Nienkamp's rhetorics and philosophies is clearly a cultivated, not experiential, self. Although she proposes collaboration with psychology to redress this problem, rhetoric is incorrigibly aligned with phi­ losophy and never more so...

Reviews 311 Rita Copeland, Pedagogy, Intellectuals, and Dissent in the Later Middle Ages: Lollardy and Ideas of Learning, (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer­ sity Press, 2001), xii + 243 pp. Rita Copeland's subjects—the pedagogical strategies of the Lollard heresy and the rhetoric of dissent and repression in late medieval England— might seem remote from the concerns of contemporary rhetoric and peda­ gogy That apparent gap between past and present is one Copeland labors to close. "What this book offers," she announces, "is a study of issues that were of profound importance for the Middle Ages and that will disappear from our historiographical map if we do not recognize them as being im­ portant to ourselves" (p. 1). In a fifty-page general introduction, "Pedagogy and Intellectuals," Copeland views late medieval struggles over lay access to religious knowledge through the lenses of postmodern pedagogical theory, postcolonial studies, and liberationist pedagogy. That "pedagogy is the most political and politicized of discourses" (p. 18) is for her as true of the Middle Ages as it is today; understanding the relation of pedagogy and dissent in medieval England helps illuminate "what most insistently links past with present" (p. 20). Later chapters connect the prison narratives of the Lollard intellectuals Richard Wyche and William Thorpe to the writings of Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Ken Saro Wiwa, and Nelson Mandela (p. 151) and find the blur­ ring of pedagogical and inquisitorial methods in Thorpe's 1407 interrogation "poignantly resonant with modern literatures of political detention" (p. 210). Readers may find some of Copeland's parallels forced; however, few medievalists will dispute the value of her contribution to the burgeoning study of Lollardy, which has transformed our understanding of medieval English culture and has provoked radical reinterpretations of authors from Geoffrey Chaucer to Margery Kempe. Beginning in the 1380s, Copeland argues, a university-trained elite, eventually to be hereticized as Lollards, developed and implemented a sys­ tematic pedagogy that sought to disestablish hierarchies separating aca­ demics and laypeople, teachers and students, leaders and followers. Cen­ tral to that pedagogy was the promotion of "literal" reading to instate "an independent and conscientious knowledge of Scripture among the laity" (p. 123-124). (Copeland is careful to distinguish the Scriptural literalism of present-day fundamentalism from that of Lollardy, which retained "the interpretive flexibilities of traditional multi-layered exegesis [p. 127].) In advancing this pedagogy, Lollard intellectuals repudiated a long-standing association of the literal sense with childishness, an association whose history Copeland painstakingly traces to a split in late Antiquity between pedagogy and hermeneutics. The English Church hierarchy responded with a counter-pedagogy that, among other things, reasserted the association of the literal with the childish and deployed a rhetoric of infantilization to attempt a broad intellectual disenfranchisement of lay adults. The Church's crackdown on heterodoxy met with limited success, however; although it did staunch the flow of 312 RHETORICA dissident intellectuals from the universities to lay communities through censorship, imprisonment, and capital punishment, it could not undo the damage wrought by dissident academics such as Wyche and Thorpe, for "the products of intellectual labor, the pedagogical apparatuses that are exportable from one milieu to another, once set in motion, can long outlast the power of the individual teacher to teach" (p. 219). Pedagogies, Intellectuals, and Dissent evinces the meticulous scholarship and nuanced treatment of abstruse rhetorical issues that one would expect from the author of Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1991). Copeland's analyses of intellectual labor, pedagogies, the "literal sense," and the politics of childhood illuminate the story of dissent and repression well known to scholars of Lollardy. Her study is a must for specialists in late medieval England. Though non-medievalists may struggle with Copeland's dense analyses of politico-religious issues, I expect that scholars of contemporary pedagogy and rhetoric—particularly oppositional pedagogies and rhetorics of resistance and coercion—will find this book well worth the effort. Karen A. Winstead The Ohio State University Luigi Spina, L'oratore scriteriato. Per una storia letteraria e política di Tersite, Napoli : Loffredo, 2001, pp. 124. Luigi Spina's short essay brilliantly shows how rich (and sometimes contradictory) can be the rhetorical reuse of...

312 RHETORICA dissident intellectuals from the universities to lay communities through censorship, imprisonment, and capital punishment, it could not undo the damage wrought by dissident academics such as Wyche and Thorpe, for "the products of intellectual labor, the pedagogical apparatuses that are exportable from one milieu to another, once set in motion, can long outlast the power of the individual teacher to teach" (p. 219). Pedagogies, Intellectuals, and Dissent evinces the meticulous scholarship and nuanced treatment of abstruse rhetorical issues that one would expect from the author of Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1991). Copeland's analyses of intellectual labor, pedagogies, the "literal sense," and the politics of childhood illuminate the story of dissent and repression well known to scholars of Lollardy. Her study is a must for specialists in late medieval England. Though non-medievalists may struggle with Copeland's dense analyses of politico-religious issues, I expect that scholars of contemporary pedagogy and rhetoric—particularly oppositional pedagogies and rhetorics of resistance and coercion—will find this book well worth the effort. Karen A. Winstead The Ohio State University Luigi Spina, L'oratore scriteriato. Per una storia letteraria e política di Tersite, Napoli : Loffredo, 2001, pp. 124. Luigi Spina's short essay brilliantly shows how rich (and sometimes contradictory) can be the rhetorical reuse of a mythical character. He starts, in fact, from a recent episode in Italian political debate about liberalism, in which the category of "tersitismo" appeared as a clearly negative label, as a synonym of populism. With an interesting ambivalence this topical image is sometimes reverted, so that the ugly and misshapen Thersites becomes the symbol of an alternative vision, of a true popular polemic against war and power. The rehabilitation of a scapegoat is in fact a widespread operation. In the longue durée of Thersites it leads to some stimulating parallels with various characters of myth and history: Hephaistos, Aesopus, Socrates, Demosthenes ... Till to the most paradoxical issue: the latent identification of Thersites with his most powerful enemy, Odysseus, which starts from a significant passage of Sophocles' Philoctetes, and comes from Thersites' effective rhetorical strategy (the paradigm of cynical rhetoric). Spina's critical path follows Thersites' ambivalence through some an­ cient and modern significant versions. First of all, of course, Homer's 67 verses, and their impressive use of characterization, intentional ellypis, and accurate mixture of mimesis and dieghesis. Secondly, Quintus of Smyrne's epic continuation, that for the first time puts Thersithes in connection with a fe­ male figure, Penthesilea. A very important moment in the modem reception Reviews 313 is certainly the Elisabethan stage: first of all William Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida (1602), "an Iliad retold by Thersites" according to Gérard Genette. In this extremely polyphonic play the hero embodies in fact the radical demys­ tification of the epic tradition. From a stylistic point of view it is remarkable the anthrozoomorphic imagery frequently connected with Thersites. The Iron Age (1612) concludes Thomas Heywood's complex mythological fresco; its first part ends with Thersites' metaliterary monologue. He plays the role of the "rayling rogue", who came to Troy "to laugh at mad men" and finds a "meeting soul" in the famous Trojan spy, responsible of the fall of Troy: Sinon. Finally, Dryden's classicistic rewriting of Shakespeare's drama is focussed on Thersites' anticlericalism, and on his skeptical neutrality. Even in this important moment of modern reception Thersites' image wavers between the negative Homeric topic and the positive liberating force of comicality. The XXth century presents the culminating point of Thersites' rehabil­ itation. Moreover, its tendency to experimentation enlarges the spectrum of rewritings. The Italian latinist Concetto Marchiesi adopts a very specific mix­ ture of autobiography and fiction. In his II libro di Tersite (1920) the hero stands for the isolation of the protesting intellectual, full of Horatian irony and completely lacking Homeric aggressivity. Stefan Zweig's drama Tersites (sic) (1907) offers a completely new tragic version, that shows the Freudian hidden side of the Homeric text. We face here a common feature of XXth century poet­ ics: the exaltation of defeat as a productive force and the consequent devalua­ tion of victory as a sterile...

The rhetorical ideas inherited from the Greeks have established the notion that skilled use of language is always indicated by eloquent expression, and that silence is either an aberration or a lack of skill. As we penetrate the silence that has surrounded one of the great civilizations of the earth, however, and look at Egyptian rhetoric, we find alternative views on what makes a skilled speaker. While the Egyptians esteemed eloquent speaking, a skill that in fact had a very high value in their society, Egyptian rules of rhetoric also clearly specify that knowing when not to speak is essential, and very respected, rhetorical knowledge. The Egyptian approach to rhetoric is thus a balance between eloquence and wise silence. Egyptian rules of speech also strongly emphasize adherence to social behaviors that support a conservative status quo. For the Egyptians, much more than for the Greeks, skilled speech should support, not question, society. The few studies of Egyptian rhetoric which have previously been done discuss some of the moral components of that rhetoric and the importance of silence. The current study looks at Egyptian attitudes toward language as both a magical and a practical element of life, and in addition this study places the rules of Egyptian rhetoric solidly within the Egyptian social system.

In November 1562 the chief interpreter for Süleyman the Magnificent, one Ibrahim, delivered a brief oration at the coronation of Maximilian II in Frankfurt. The present study seeks to explain how it was that the speech was given there, provides the texts of one published version of it, and tries to account for its stylistic features. Study of speeches such as Ibrahim’s reveals aspects of Renaissance culture which have been neglected in standard accounts.

Reviews Scott Consigny, Gorgias: Sophist and Artist (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2001). 296pp. Why the Sophists? Why Gorgias? Why now? W. K. C. Guthrie points to a rupture in the history of sophistic studies that leads to some preliminary answers: "It is true that the powerful impetus of this movement [i.e., the revival of sophistry since the 1930s] was given by the rise of totalitarian gov­ ernments in Europe and the second world war, and it was indeed disturbing to learn that the aim of the German Nazi Party, as described in its official programme, was the production of 'guardians in the highest Platonic sense'" (The Sophists, Cambridge University Press, 1971, p. 10). Among classicists, historians, and philosophers, the interest in sophistic studies that emerged out of this historical rupture was defined by a negative impulse: If Plato's ideas support immoral ideologies, then we must turn instead to the ideas of his most bitter rivals, the Sophists. Yet the revival of sophistry specifically within rhetorical studies took on a different character. Instead of being defined by a negative impulse, studies of sophistic rhetoric were defined by the positive search for affinities between ancient and modern theories of persuasion. Robert Scott and Michael Leff, for example, found precedents for epistemic rhetoric among the sophistic fragments, and John Poulakos invoked sophistic notions of propriety and the opportune moment in his universal definition of rhetoric. Scott Consigny's Gorgias: Sophist and Artist represents a new phase in studies of sophistic rhetoric. In this complex and well-written book, Consigny avoids making problematic generalizations about "the Sophists," who were, in reality, a thoroughly disparate group of traveling teachers; he does not rely excessively on Plato's dialogues as source materials for Gorgias's art of rhetoric; and he resists the neosophistic impulse to appropriate ancient doctrines for modern purposes. In his introduction, Consigny discusses prior scholarship on the Sophists and the method of historiography that informs his analysis. Here Consigny contends that the fragmentary nature of Gorgias's texts, their questionable authenticity, and the ambiguous language in which Gorgias wrote create a "hermeneutic aporia," an interpretive impasse. Some "objectivist" scholars attempt to escape this aporia by suggesting that there is a single, correct interpretation of Gorgianic rhetoric, and it is the function of historical schol­ arship to discover it. Other "rhapsodic" scholars argue that the meaning© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XX, Number 3 (Summer 2002). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 299 300 RHETORICA Gorgias intended in his writings is now lost forever, and they use subjective interpretations of Gorgianic rhetoric to construct neosophistic theories that have modern relevance. Consigny, on the other hand, draws from Stanley Fish's notion of interpretive communities, arguing that pure truth is inacces­ sible and pure subjectivity is insufficient. Scholarly conventions established in academic discourse communities should guide our interpretations of Gor­ gianic rhetoric. While much prior scholarship identifies Gorgias as either a subjectivist or an empiricist, Consigny favors a newly emerging third school of criticism that identifies Gorgias as an antifoundationalist. Consigny begins his antifoundationalist reading of Gorgianic rhetoric with an interpretation of On Not-Being as an attack against both philosophical truth and empirical realism. In other texts (Epitaphios, Helen, and Palamedes), Gorgias articulates a more positive antifoundationalist theory of language based on the ancient notion of the contest or agon. Here language is defined by context, by the play of interaction among participants in a linguistic game that is governed by communal rules, and words derive meaning from their role in this interaction. Within such a framework, foundational truth is impossible since each context brings with it a different set of constraints, and radical subjectivity is also impossible since these very same constraints prevent chaos. Next Consigny argues that Gorgias articulates a nascent social con­ structionist view of knowledge in which established social conventions (or "tropes") condition individuals to act in communally authorized ways. Yet Gorgias is not in favor of a micro-social theory of conventions that separate communities by focusing on their foundational...

Reviews 301 tions, and its clear articulation of the antifoundationalist position, will make this book a valuable resource for scholars and students alike. Bruce McComiskey The University ofAlabama at Birmingham Bruce McComiskey, Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric, (Carbon­ dale:, Southern Illinois University Press, 2002), xiii + 156 pp. Contributing to the conversation about rereading/rewriting the his­ tory of rhetoric, Bruce McComiskey's Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric clearly summarizes the raging and wide-ranging debates regarding the use value of revisiting the Sophists; compellingly argues for a historiographical methodology, which he terms "neosophistic appropriation"; re-reads Gor­ gias on his own terms, rather than Plato's; and, finally, attempts to realize his own methodology by rethinking Gorgias's (potential) contribution to "contemporary pedagogical and political ends" (p. 1). Recapping the seminal arguments of the past several decades regarding scholarly attempts to redeem the Sophists from their Platonic condemna­ tion and to reclaim their practices and theories, McComiskey's summary will surely find an appropriate home in graduate seminars on the history of rhetoric. Working with and against Edward Schiappa's criticism of particu­ lar neosophistic research (but curiously neglecting John Poulakos's response to same), McComiskey offers "neosophistic appropriation" as a corrective to Schiappa's (via Richard Rorty) methodological taxonomy of "histori­ cal reconstruction" and "rational reconstruction." Although McComiskey agrees with Schiappa that we "must maintain a clear distinction between the goals and methods of historical scholarship that interprets ancient doc­ trines and 'neo'historical scholarship that appropriates ancient doctrines for contemporary purposes" (p. 8), he argues, in contrast, that "neosophistic appropriation" is methodologically distinct from rational reconstructive ap­ proaches insofar as "neosophistic appropriation" writers "search the past for contributions to modern theoretical problems and problematics" (p. 10). "Although," McComiskey further argues, "all neosophists engage in the critical act of appropriation, not all neosophists appropriate ancient doctrines in the same way" (p. 11). Identifying three different approaches, McComiskey ultimately values and identifies with the third. The first approach "appropriate [s] Plato's characterization...either valuing Plato's misrepresentations or disparaging them" (p. 11). The second approach "put[s] aside Plato's mis­ representations of sophistic doctrines, appropriating doctrines instead from actual sophistic texts and historical interpretations of them in order to find common threads among the 'older sophists' and contemporary composition and rhetorical theorists" (p. 11). And the third approach, although similar to the second in purpose, attempts to "understand the unique contributions 302 RHETORICA of individual sophists...to contemporary rhetorical theory and composition, (p. 11, emphasis added). Claiming that the "more specific the appropria­ tion, the stronger the resulting neosophistic rhetoric," McComiskey turns his attention to a reappropriation of the Sophist Gorgias. Part One of Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric provides a provoca­ tive rereading of Gorgias's On Non-Existence, the Encomium ofHelen, and the Defense of Palamedes, arguing that, read together, they constitute a "holis­ tic statement about communal and ethical uses of logos, a statement that runs counter to Plato's (mis)representation of it in his dialogue the Gor­ gias" (p. 12). Chapter 1, then, argues compellingly that Plato misrepresents Gorgias's theory of rhetoric as foundational, specifically as based on a foun­ dational epistemology. For example, as McComiskey points out, Gorgias, in the Palemedes, uses a form of the Greek eido to express the concept of knowl­ edge, which "implies an understanding that is derived empirically from a situation"; whereas Plato's use of episteme "implies an understanding that exists prior to any given situation in which it might be applied" (pp. 24-5). Hence, McComiskey's rereading of the specific Sophist, Gorgias, and the specific sophistic text, exemplifies a "strong," neosophistic approach. This rereading allows us to see how Plato's misappropriation of Gorgias serves to make "Gorgias's rhetorical method based on kairos, or the right moment, seem absurd" (p. 12). McComiskey's similar approaches to the Helen and the Palemedes "provide the epistemological, rather than foundational, grounding for a nascent theory of rhetoric, complete with its negative and positive uses" (p. 12). That is, we, appropriating Gorgias, do not need an epistemological foundation to practice rhetoric. We can read/reappropriate, he argues, the Helen to see where rhetoric...

Reviews 303 in achieving his neosophistic goal to put ancient, sophistic rhetoric on the road to journey toward contemporary concerns (p. 58). Michelle Baliff The University of Georgia Pierre Chiron (ed.), Pseudo-Aristote, Rhétorique à Alexandre (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, Collection des Universités de France, 2002) CLXXIV + 269pp. The Rhetorica ad Alexandrian (hereafter Rhet. Ah) is one of the two major classical Greek rhetorical handbooks, the other being Aristotle's Rhetoric, and is commonly viewed as the poorer of the two works. It takes its name from the dedication at the start of the work: "Aristotle to Alexander [the Great]: Greetings". Scholars and students who have had to use Loeb edition of the Rhet. Ah, edited by H. Rackham (Aristotle Vol. XVI), published in 1937 (reprinted in 1987), or the Teubner edition of M. Fuhrmann, published in 1966, will welcome with great delight Chiron's edition. Chiron's long introduction and copious, detailed notes, in addition to text and translation, make this book a valuable scholarly resource (though anyone without a reading knowledge of French will still have to use the Loeb of course). The very long Introduction (pp. VII-CLXXIV) is practically a book in itself. Chiron covers in great detail the structure of the Rhet. Al. (pp. VII-XL), its date and authorship (pp. XL-CVII), its relationship to ancient rhetoric and the influence of ancient rhetoricians on it (pp. CVII-CLV), the manuscript tradition (CLV-CLXVII), and finally the various manuscripts of the work and editions (pp. CLXIX-CLXXIV). The date and authorship of the Rhet. Al. are controversial issues; seldom has a dedication caused so much trouble. Chiron assigns the Rhet. Al. to the period 340-300, and for stylistic and philosophical reasons rejects, rightly, the attribution to Aristotle. Chiron seems content to follow Quintilian (3.4.9), who ascribes the authorship to another of Alexander's teachers, Anaximenes of Lampsacus. This is the generally accepted author of the Rhet. Al., but even so Chiron urges caution, given that the text may well have been altered from its original composition, and is even a composite. This conclusion, not novel to be sure, comes from a very detailed analysis of the "source tradition" on the Rhet. Al. and a comparison of it with Aristotle's Rhetoric. So too does Chiron's view on the influence of the Rhetoric on the Rhet. Al. The text and translation are on pp. 2-116; Chiron follows for the most part the divisions of Bekker's text of 1881, and the apparatus criticus contains the variant readings pertinent to Chiron's text. The Rhet. Al. is not an easy work to read; it is full of technical Greek terms, descriptions of the various functions of speeches, types of examples to give, and so on. Chiron's transla­ tion is good, faithfully reproducing the Greek while not causing confusion 304 RHETORICA by being overly literal. He also inserts sub-titles to what the Rhet. Al. deals with next, which aid the reader immensely There are 761 notes at the bottom of each page of translation and in almost one hundred pages (pp. 117-201) of "Notes Complémentaires". These contain an abundance of cross-references to other ancient sources (especially identifying relevant passages in other rhetorical works which are very helpful), while references to modern liter­ ature (mostly French at that) are kept to a minimum. This is hardly the place for a detailed critique, so let me give just one example of a topic in which I have my own scholarly interest: Rhet. Al. 29 on the exordium. Chiron gives us almost fifty detailed notes, though curiously little mention is made of the Demosthenic exordia or the Budé text of the exordia edited by R. Clavaud (1974). The edition also has an index of proper names (pp. 203-205), a lengthy index of Greek terms (pp. 207-258), and a concordance of previous major texts with differing divisions: Erasmus (1539 and 1550), Bekker in the Berlin Aristotle (1881), Hammer's revision of Spengel in the Teubner (1894), and Fuhrmann's recent Teubner (pp. 259-268). Chiron cites the works of other scholars on the Rhet. Al., works that are mostly...

306 RHETORICA con un encomiabile lavoro di analisi del testo di Demetrio in rapporto aile dottrine stilistiche peripatética e stoica ne argomenta una finalité più ampiamente letteraria che semplicemente retorica (cap. IV). Dopo un breve capitolo (cap. V) dedicato all'analisi di possibili influenze teofrastee sui tre principi metodologici (dianoia, lexis, sunthesis) secondo i quali Demetrio esamina ciascuno dei quattro stili, l'autore dà poi largo spazio (cap. VI) alla dottrina delle figure. Ad una sua veloce presentazione 'genealógica' e aU'indicazione dei diversi significati 'tecnici' dei termine skhêma fa seguito infatti l'analisi sis­ temática delle singóle figure, compito non facile visto che Demetrio ne parla in modo frammentario e tutt'altro che metódico all'interno délia sua pre­ sentazione degli stili. Interessanti le conclusioni: la trattazione di Demetrio rappresenterebbe, nella sua disorganica formulazione, "une passionnante collection de traditions diverses, comme saisies dans le processus de leur mise au point et de leur systématisation" (p. 238), indizio cronológico im­ portante che potrebbe provarne l'anteriorità rispetto a repertori ben costituiti come quello che troviamo nel IV libro délia Rhetorica ad Herennium. A grammatica , fonética e rítmica, cioè agli ulteriori aspetti tecnici che contribuiscono alla formulazione délia stilistica di Demetrio, è dedicato il VII capitolo e alla valutazione di alcuni aspetti letterari l'VIII. Ma il lavoro di Chiron è più ricco di quanto questa breve descrizione lasci supporre: la valutazione sempre comparativa délia dottrina di Demetrio e l'enorme raccolta di materiale, di volta in volta discusso con rigore filológico e con acuto senso critico in vista di una collocazione temporale dei trattato, ne fanno certamente uno strumento prezioso per gli studiosi. Se un appunto deve essere fatto, questo riguarda l'aspetto tipográfico: una presentazione un po' più ariosa ed una maggiore evidenziazione dei paragrafi all'interno dei capitoli avrebbero reso forse il testo di più agile consultazione. Lucia Calboli Montefusco Università di Bologna Andrew Laird, Powers of Expression, Expressions of Power. Speech Pre­ sentation and Eatin Eiterature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) XVIII + 358pp. L ouvrage d'Andrew Laird est un livre assurément étrange, inventif, provocateur, séduisant et irritant, dont la principale règle méthodologique semble être de ne jamais permettre au lecteur de faire une pause ni de retrou­ ver les repères auxquels la philologie classique l'a habitué. On croit être en terrain connu lorsqu'on lit quelques pages consacrées au discours indirect chez Thucydide et voici qu'en plein milieu surgissent le Pape Urbain II et Reviews 307 le problème de savoir ce qu'il a véritablement dit au concile de Clermont en 1095. Enée n'avait probablement jamais imaginé qu'après avoir quitté les Phéniciens de Carthage, il se retrouverait accompagné du "puissant cheikh", anonyme, d'un village libanais, tout comme son aventure avec Didon ne le prédisposait pas nécessairement à rencontrer la Thérèse Raquin de Zola. Une foule considérable de personnages inattendus, échappés des œuvres littéraires les plus variées, hante les pages de ce livre, faisant généralement irruption là où on les attend le moins. Au milieu d'un tel maelstrôm, on finit par trouver presque banal que le Lazarillo du roman picaresque éponyme apparaisse alors qu'il est question de ses lointains ancêtres imaginés par Pétrone. Dans ses remerciements, Laird dit sa reconnaissance pour le re­ gretté D. Fowler "for endeavouring (sympathetically) to purge this book of excessive idealism and eccentricity". On n'ose penser à ce que devait être la version initiale d'un livre qu'il serait trop facile de caricaturer, alors qu'il mérite effectivement la sympathie et l'admiration pour de multiples raisons et, en particulier, parce qu'il associe l'enthousiasme du jeune chercheur- il s'agit de la reprise d'une thèse soutenue à Oxford -et des connaissances réellement exceptionnelles dans les domaines de la philologie antique, de la narratologie, de l'histoire de la littérature sous toutes ses formes. La bib­ liographie, en plusieurs langues, est immense, baroque dans sa variété et utilisée à bon...

George Mackenzie’s “What Eloquence is fit for the Bar” (1672), perhaps unique in the early modern literature of Scots law, provides access to the state of judicial rhetoric in post-Restoration Scotland. This essay summarizes the contents of the essay and briefly relates it to his career and other writings. It shows that Mackenzie conceived of eloquence as a site of struggle for personal, professional, and international status.

In De inventione Cicero defends rhetoric by presenting a myth of the progress of the human species from asocial brutes to rational and social creatures. However, as Cicero explains the corruption of rhetoric by cunning individuals moved only by private interest, his myth reveals the present situation to be every bit as divided and contentious as the mythic state of nature. His myth discovers that rhetoric cannot escape corruption. Stasis theory, however, offers the possibility of an ethical rhetorical practice. By formalizing the agonistic clash of interests as a method of invention, stasis theory transforms a source of social instability into a resource for on-going social reinvention.

The following thirteen theses expose the anthropology of the homo rhetoricus and attempt to outline a new design of philosophy for the 21st century: I. Man is a rhetorical being. - II. The general power of speech exists as a fundamental and universal phenomenon in human life world and is the necessary foundation of all artificial rhetoric. - III. Man as homo rhetoricus is the main object of a fundamental, rhetorical anthropology. - IV. The categories of classical rhetoric have a heuristic function with respect to the anthropology of the homo rhetoricus. - V. The five basic faculties of invention, disposition, elocution, memory and performance form a heuristic pattern for a fundamental, rhetorical conception of spirit (Geist). - VI. The (post-)modern existence of homo rhetoricus is dominated by the figure of irony. - VII. Ironic alterity also designates the culture in the beginning of the 21st century. - VIII. The danger of an unlimited postmodern irony consists of an infinite ironical regress. - IX. Philosophy in general is also a creation of the homo rhetoricus. - X. The rhetorical metacritique of philosophy is directed against classical metaphysics as well as against its antagonist - postmodern deconstruction. - XI. Both—the supposed evidence of dogmatic metaphysics and the neosophistical evidence of non-evidence are contingent. - XII. The rhetorical enlightenment does not aim at a pure postmodern deconstruction of philosophy but consequently reaches forward to its fundamental, rhetorical reconstruction. - XIII. A rhetorically well-informed and enlightened metaphysics represents a new and positive mode of existence of the homo rhetoricus.

During the last thirty years, a growing scholarly attention has been paid to Spanish rhetoric. This paper gives an overview of the main studies on the subject and, with detailed bibliographical reference, draws a picture which presents the main features of Spanish rhetorical theory in the sixteenth century. Thus, references are made to the Council of Trent and its encouraging of sacred rhetoric, to the weight of Ciceronianism among Spanish rhetoricians -albeit some exceptions-, to the rigid detachment between rhetoric and poetics, to the relatively high production on the subject and to the limited influence of rhetoric and classical learning in the teaching of the time.

The aim of this paper is to explore the Montaigne’s use of enargeia in three essays: “Des Cannibales,” “Des Coches” and “De Texercitation.” During the French Renaissance, enargeia remained a central means by which writers transferred living experience into language. The elaborate visual possibilities offered by enargeia, encapsulated in the writings of Quintilian, were popularised in France through the diffusion of Erasmus’s rhetorical handbook De diuplici copia verborum ac reruin. However, the sense of graphic presence and truth conveyed by Erasmus’s handbook came to be challenged through the increasing awareness of the disparity between living experience and verbal language. In his Essais, Montaigne’s awareness of the deceptive properties of visual representation allows him to explore, often playfully, the pleasures and instabilities of linguistic expression, and to gain a heightened insight into the perceptual inadequacy which characterize much human behaviour. In this way, Montaigne poignantly demonstrates the instructive nature of rhetorical theories on which he draws to illustrate his understanding of human experience.

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

This essay examines Montaigne’s admiration for ancient Sparta from a rhetorical and an ideological standpoint. The praise of Sparta in the Essais takes the form of a paradoxical encomium which allows Montaigne to challenge the received opinions of his time and to define his own values against the prevailing discourse of humanism. In the process the Essais also confront the problem of comparing the past to the present and of reconciling ancient and modern institutions. In this way the praise of Sparta emerges not only as a rhetorical exercise but also as an essay of self-definition and an inquiry into historical relativism.

This paper is a modern reformulation of Aristotle's concepts of topos and enthymeme and the relation between them. Briefly, a topos may be understood as a binary relation which replaces implication in the syllogism to yield an enthymeme. If a syllogism is an argument of the form, (1)If P, and P implies Q, then Q

In The Merchant of Venice Shakespeare draws on several aspects of the classical rhetorical tradition so widely studied in Renaissance England. The main characters have distinctive rhetorical styles: Launcelot and the would-be witty courtiers are rhetorically characterized by vices of language, Shylock by rhetorical questions and figures of repetition, and Portia by figures of thought. A close examination of the characters’ rhetorical traits reveals significant similarities between Shylock’s language and that of Declamation 95 in Sylvain’s The Orator, and between Portia’s forensic strategy and the classical theory of status. Written in the mid-1590s, The Merchant of Venice illustrates the very uses and abuses of rhetoric described in Henry Peacham’s revised version of The Garden of Eloquence (1593).

L’énorme réussite de La Regenta (1884–85) a certainement éclipsé l’excellent conteur qu’était Leopoldo Garcia de las Alas, dit Clarín (1852–1901). En effet, parmi la centaine de contes qu’il a écrits tout au long de sa courte vie, aucun n’a jamais atteint une renommée rappelant, de près ou de loin, celle de son contemporain Guy de Maupassant en France. Qu’à cela ne tienne! Car voici qu’un petit récit mi-parodique mi-classique datant de 1893 et intitulé Un viejo verde, subvertit, cliché et ironie aidant, toute une doxa littéraire ayant trait à la séduction d’une enfant par un adulte. Un récit présenté à la manière d’une image-devinette (category-mistake), donnant lieu à un jeu de mots, sert finalement d’écran à un fantasme clarinien de séduction tout autre … Para-doxes rhétoriques du cliché clarinien!

102 RHETORICA translation of that declamation (pp. 93-115) is not wholly convincing. The bibliography of secondary literature (pp. 627-28) needs to be extended in a revised edition. But such cavilling is hardly to the point. Vickers's introduction is lucid, wide-ranging and masterly. His notes are superb and properly acknowledge the contributions of earlier scholars. His selection of texts is enterprising, including much that is new, as well as a judicious choice of the best that is well-known. He provides a helpful glossary and user-friendly indexes to the material. This book is as useful as Russell and Winterbottom's famous selection of Ancient Literary Criticism and when it appears in paperback teachers and students of renaissance literature will find it indispensable. Peter Mack University of Warwick Manuel López Muñoz, Fray Luis de Granada y la retórica (Almería: Universidad de Almería, 2000) 222pp. Este libro es sin duda una rigurosa y documentada monografía so­ bre la aportación de Fray Luis de Granada a la retórica eclesiástica del Renacimiento. Manuel López Muñoz hace gala de un exquisito sentido filológico, patente tanto en lo ajustado del bagaje bibliográfico utilizado como en la selección, manejo y análisis de las fuentes. Asimismo, hay que advertir la alta calidad de las traducciones de los múltiples pasajes que se citan a lo largo del texto. Ahora bien, además de un profundo conocimiento del tema, el autor demuestra una indiscutible capacidad para transmitir los contenidos con un estilo muy cuidado y ameno. Por ello, pese a que esta obra va dirigida esencialmente a un público especializado, su lectura resulta ple­ namente accesible para cualquier lector culto, aunque no esté familiarizado con los usos y términos habituales en la bibliografía retórica. Los dos capítulos iniciales poseen un carácter eminentemente introduc­ torio. El primero muestra la evolución de la retórica desde la Antigüedad Clásica hasta las épocas paleocristiana y medieval. El segundo ofrece un panorama general de la retórica renacentista. En este último se pone de man­ ifiesto la notable importancia que adquirió la retórica eclesiástica durante el siglo XVI. Ciertamente, la retórica general, con una praxis en el ámbito civil, tuvo durante ese período un alcance sumamente limitado. Pero, ¿podría haber sido de otro modo en una época en la que las monarquías absolu­ tas estaban en una fase de plena consolidación? Ahora bien, en el ámbito religioso la aparición de los movimientos reformistas generó una situación radicalmente distinta. El uso de discursos persuasivos tenía ahí una final­ idad práctica indiscutible en unas diatribas que a menudo iban más allá de lo meramente teológico. La retórica se convirtió, pues, en un instrumento Reviews 103 de primer orden para la formación de clérigos, tanto en el marco católico como en el protestante. Los múltiples tratados publicados durante la men­ cionada centuria responden a las necesidades derivadas de tal estado de cosas. Como muy bien advierte López Muñoz, estos tratados constituyen un testimonio de una 'retórica minimalista'; es decir, en lugar de ofrecer una presentación global de la disciplina, se concentran de lleno en los mecan­ ismos de la predicación (lo que ha dado en llamarse 'arte concionatoria'). Este rasgo constituye probablemente el fenómeno más característico de la retórica renacentista. El tercer capítulo profundiza en esa misma línea, a par­ tir del tratamiento dado por la retórica humanística a los concioimudi genera. El autor presenta con cierto detalle la tipología de géneros de predicación en quince de los tratadistas más representativos de la retórica europea del período humanístico (entre los que se incluye el propio Fray Luis). La plu­ ralidad de tentativas clasificatorias documentadas ponen en tela de juicio la manida afirmación de que la retórica renacentista depende por entero de las fuentes antiguas, v muv particularmente del corpus doctrinal de Quintiliano. El capítulo cuarto está dedicado...

Reviews 101 Brian Vickers ed., English Renaissance Literary Criticism (Oxford: Clarendon, 1999) xvi + 655pp. Brian Vickers's anthology collects modern spelling selections from the most important critical statements in English between Sir Thomas Elyot's Boke named the Governonr (1531) and Thomas Hobbes's 1675 preface to his translation of Homer's Odyssey. Dryden's critical prose, much of it published before 1675, is justifiably treated as beyond the scope of a renaissance anthology. The dominant figures are Sir Thomas Wilson, George Puttenham, Sir Philip Sidney, whose Defence ofPoetry is included complete, John Hoskyns, Thomas Heywood and Ben Jonson. In comparison to the two volumes of G. Gregory Smith's Elizabethan Critical Essays (1904), which it replaces, Vickers's book includes more poetry (notably Baldwin's "Collingbourne", from the Mirrorfor Magistrates, Spenser's "October" from The Shepheardes Calendar, a scene attributed to Shakespeare in which Lodowick and Edward III discuss the writing of love poetry, and John Ford's "Elegy on John Fletcher", here printed for the first time) and more rhetoric. Vickers gives less space to Gabriel Harvey and Thomas Campion and omits Thomas Lodge, William Webbe and Thomas Nashe. Vickers's introduction insists that since literature was a form of rhetoric, English renaissance literary criticism was largely prescriptive, aiming to provide the kind of help which would be useful to writers (pp. 1-6). This enables him to put rhetoric at the centre of renaissance literary criticism and justifies his extensive selections from Wilson, Puttenham and Hoskyns (the latter two particularly illustrating the figures of speech). Vickers's excellent notes show the reliance of these English rhetorics on classical sources and also on Susenbrotus's continental Latin compilation Epitome troporum ac schematorum. He might have pointed out that both Wilson's rhetoric and Angel Day's account of the figures (15 editions between them) offer a wider diffusion for the "Englished Susenbrotus" than Puttenham, whose Arte of English Poesie, was printed only once. Vickers quotes Jonson and Wilson on the importance of ethics for lit­ erature (pp. 12-13) which he links with the fashion for epideictic (excellently illustrated among the texts he includes). Perhaps Vickers ought to acknowl­ edge that the ethical teaching of the Arcadia, whose heroes have faults which run from deceit to intended rape (and against whose impulses humanist ethical education is strikingly ineffectual), is more problematic than can be summed up as a concern to embody fully-realized images of virtue and vice (p. 13). Vickers notes the way rhetoricians took examples of the figures and tropes from Arcadia, giving examples from Puttenham and Hoskyns. He had no space for Abraham Fraunce or for Fulke Greville's ethical reading ofArca­ dia. Given his rhetorical focus, Vickers might have said more about copia and amplification, or perhaps have found space for some of the English examples of dialectical analyses of texts. Part of William Temple's analysis of Sidney's Defence would have suited his selection well. On the other hand the argu­ ment that Erasmus's encomium on marriage is the source for Shakespeare's first seventeen sonnets (pp. 32-39), which justifies the inclusion of Wilson's 102 RHETORICA translation of that declamation (pp. 93-115) is not wholly convincing. The bibliography of secondary literature (pp. 627-28) needs to be extended in a revised edition. But such cavilling is hardly to the point. Vickers's introduction is lucid, wide-ranging and masterly. His notes are superb and properly acknowledge the contributions of earlier scholars. His selection of texts is enterprising, including much that is new, as well as a judicious choice of the best that is well-known. He provides a helpful glossary and user-friendly indexes to the material. This book is as useful as Russell and Winterbottom's famous selection of Ancient Literary Criticism and when it appears in paperback teachers and students of renaissance literature will find it indispensable. Peter Mack University of Warwick Manuel López Muñoz, Fray Luis de Granada y la retórica (Almería: Universidad de Almería, 2000) 222pp. Este libro es sin duda una rigurosa y documentada monografía so­ bre la aportación de Fray Luis de Granada a la...

Reviews Carla Castelli, Meter sophiston: la tragedia nei trattati greci di retorica (Milano, Led 2000) II Filarete: Pubblicazioni della Facoltá di Lettere e Filosofía dell'Universitá degli studi di Milano, CLXXVIII, pp. 188. Grazie ad un accurato esame delle opere tecniche dei retori antichi, da Anassimene ai corpora scoliastici bizantini, Carla Castelli mette in rilievo in codesto volume la permanenza nella prassi didattica delle scuole di retorica di stilemi e strutture logico-argomentative della tragedia. Nel primo capitolo, "Retorica e tragedia: una difficile integrazione", Fautrice indaga i motivi per i quali un genere poético come la tragedia è ritenuto utile all'oratoria. Il punto di incontro tra tragedia e retorica è il pubblico destinatario dei discorsi politici o giudiziarii. L'oratore deve commisurare sia il suo atteggiamento esteriore sia la struttura interna del discorso alie esigenze communicative. Equesto un insegnamento che i retori antichi hanno lasciato ai moderni; la strumentazione della parola a finí persuasivi avviene anche attraverso una attenta scelta della materia didattica. La selezione delle tragédie operata dai retori greci consegno ai posteri di tutti i tempi ed alia loro imitazione un patrimonio poético che diversamente non avrebbe avuto la giusta rilevanza metodológica. La "Nuova Retorica" con la sua capacité di manipolare la parola ai fini della comunicazione, del dibattito politico e giudiziario si serve ancora oggi degli insegnamenti e della teoria técnica degli antichi retori per dettare le proprie leggi: una declamazione pacata vicina alia recitazione, uno stile solenne ma di una moderata teatralitá, un lessico naturale ma capace di impressionare ed emozionare il destinatario. Nei capitoli secondo, terzo e quarto Fautrice esamina con attenzione e precisa documentazione i giudizi critici sui tre tragici, Futilizzazione técnica e le citazioni delle tragédie nei trattati. Nelle loro valutazioni sulF utilité della tragedia per Foratoria i retori mostrano una preferenza per Euripide, nel quale individuano "il superamento dell'alteritá tra espressione poética ed espressione prosastica teorizzata da Aristotele" (p.61). Questi (Retorica 1404b25) aveva individuato nel poética colui che per primo aveva orientato il suo linguaggio verso il quotidiano . Ed è proprio questa caratteristica a rendere prezioso Finsegnamento di Euripide per l'oratore, il quale deve possedere un linguaggio chiaro ed immediatamente comprensibile. Ció non significa una caduta dell'eloquio nella rozzezza espressiva, al contrario esso deve essere il frutto di una notevole padronanza lessicale e di una significativa capacité espressiva. Euripide© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XX, Number 1 (Winter 2002). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 97 98 RHETORICA è vero maestro di retorica non solo per il linguaggio ma anche per la capacité dialettica ed argomentativa, per l'espressione dei caratteri e dei sentimenti. Riguardo alie esemplificazioni tratte dai tragici e occorrenti nei trattati di retorica, all'occasionalité dell'uso técnico di Eschilo risponde un buon impiego di citazioni sofoclee ed una quantité notevole di esempi tratti da Euripide. Gli esempi attinti dalle opere sofoclee, in particolare YElettra, ricorrono in tutte le fasi della strutturazione del discorso: inventio, dispositio ed elocutio. Le tragédie euripidee si rivelano invece particolarmente utili non solo nella fase di strutturazione del discorso ma anche in quella di elaborazione dell'argomentazione e nelLepilogo. I trattati di retorica portano un contributo limitato alia nostra conoscenza delle tragédie greche. Le scuole di retorica tendevano ad operare scelte fondate generalmente su opere giunteci integre, frutto di una selezione in qualche modo giá effettuata. L'autrice dimostra anche che i retori si servivano spesso di citazioni di seconda mano delle tragédie o si affidavano alia memoria. Per quanto riguarda Euripide poi una notevole influenza sulla quantité di citazioni di brevi versi dovette esercitare il précoce patrimonio proverbiale gnómico. II volume è completato dai "Riferimenti bibliografici,,/ i quali offrono non solo le indicazioni delle edizioni canoniche dei singoli autori citati ma anche una ampia e ragionata selezione della principale bibliografía sull'argomento; da un "Indice dei passi retorici citati"; da uno delle citazioni dei tragici e da un altro selettivo delle "Locuzioni tecniche". L'indagine della Castelli si segnala per la...

Cette étude se propose d’examiner la place et le rôle des mythes et des fables dans la rhétorique de l’époque impériale, en montrant comment cette dernière exploite ces deux types de merveilleux et comment elle les distingue l’un de l’autre grâce aux rapports qu’ils entretiennent avec la morale, la réalité et la vérité, ce qui nous permet de mieux comprendre comment est perçu le mythe à cette époque. On constate que la fable a un rôle pédagogique de première importance dans les Exercices, mais les Techniques privilégient la polyvalence et la séduction des mythes afin de persuader leur auditoire.

98 RHETORICA è vero maestro di retorica non solo per il linguaggio ma anche per la capacité dialettica ed argomentativa, per l'espressione dei caratteri e dei sentimenti. Riguardo alie esemplificazioni tratte dai tragici e occorrenti nei trattati di retorica, all'occasionalité dell'uso técnico di Eschilo risponde un buon impiego di citazioni sofoclee ed una quantité notevole di esempi tratti da Euripide. Gli esempi attinti dalle opere sofoclee, in particolare YElettra, ricorrono in tutte le fasi della strutturazione del discorso: inventio, dispositio ed elocutio. Le tragédie euripidee si rivelano invece particolarmente utili non solo nella fase di strutturazione del discorso ma anche in quella di elaborazione dell'argomentazione e nelLepilogo. I trattati di retorica portano un contributo limitato alia nostra conoscenza delle tragédie greche. Le scuole di retorica tendevano ad operare scelte fondate generalmente su opere giunteci integre, frutto di una selezione in qualche modo giá effettuata. L'autrice dimostra anche che i retori si servivano spesso di citazioni di seconda mano delle tragédie o si affidavano alia memoria. Per quanto riguarda Euripide poi una notevole influenza sulla quantité di citazioni di brevi versi dovette esercitare il précoce patrimonio proverbiale gnómico. II volume è completato dai "Riferimenti bibliografici,,/ i quali offrono non solo le indicazioni delle edizioni canoniche dei singoli autori citati ma anche una ampia e ragionata selezione della principale bibliografía sull'argomento; da un "Indice dei passi retorici citati"; da uno delle citazioni dei tragici e da un altro selettivo delle "Locuzioni tecniche". L'indagine della Castelli si segnala per la prospettiva nuova nella quale vengono esaminati i rapporti tra retorica e tragedia. Viene messo in evidenza il ruolo dei poeti tragici nella prassi didattica e la loro presenza effettiva nei trattati di retorica.. L'opera, al di lé del contributo scientifico che offre, suscita grande interesse anche nel lettore non técnico; da essa egli trae il giusto apprezzamento dell'apporto della poesía alla realtà della comunicazione. Non vuoto esercizio letterario ma strumento efficace di persuasione, la retorica trova i suoi strumenti persuasivi anche attraverso la poesía. Una buona segnalazione per i maestri della comunicazione del terzo Millennio. Giuseppina Matino Università Federico II, Napoli Richard Rex ed., A Reformation Rhetoric: Thomas Swynnerton's The Tropes and Figures of Scripture Edited by Richard Rex; Renaissance Texts from Manuscript, no. 1 (RTM Publications, PO Box 221, Cam­ bridge CB1 2XD, 1999) ix + 190 pp. It is a pleasure to welcome this new series, "Renaissance Texts from Manuscript , the brainchild of Jeremy Maule. He conceived it, brought Reviews 99 together a lively team of younger scholars, each with a text to edit, and spent much time discussing textual and other problems. His absurdlv premature death robbed us of one of the leading manuscript scholars of his generation, and it is a small consolation to have this series outlive him, produced to the high standards of palaeographical accuracy and typographical elegance that he would have striven for. It is a special pleasure to welcome the first volume, an edition of a hith­ erto unknown English rhetoric text. Such discoveries do not occur more than once or twice a century. This text, which exists in one manuscript only in the Public Record Office, Rew, was virtuallv unknown until Joseph Block cited it in an essay on "Thomas CromwelEs Patronage of Preaching" (Six­ teenth Century Journal, 8, 1977: 37-50). It is now edited by Richard Rex, of Queens' College Cambridge, a Reformation historian who has already pub­ lished some important work (The Theologx/ of John Fisher (Cambridge, 1991); Henry VIII and the English Reformation (Basingstoke, 1993); and several sub­ stantial essays). Dr. Rex is following in the footsteps of other historians who have made substantial contributions to the history of rhetoric, such as John O. Ward, John Monfasani, and Quentin Skinner. He provides a remarkably thorough and well-documented introduction, which is as long as the text itself, and in some respects more stimulating. He summarizes the little that is known about Swvnnerton, who got into trouble with the ecclesiastical authorities on several occasions, wrote a number of other works which have disappeared, and died in 1554. One of the most striking facts about...

In the Rhetoric, Aristotle identifies “bringing-before-the-eyes” as a capacity that is crucial to metaphors because it allows rhetors to actualize actions immediately before audiences, leading those audiences to insight. Because this description suggests that metaphors activate cognitive mechanisms on the part of their listeners, “bringing-before-the-eyes” has been considered a key element within Aristotle’s theory and the nexus of that approach to metaphor and contemporary conceptual ones. Yet, no study has probed these claims to any degree. Accordingly, this paper examines Aristotle’s references to “bringing-before-the-eyes” as well as to two associated concerns, energeia / actualization and sense perception. This examination demonstrates that “bringing-before-the-eyes” is not explicitly cognitive but instead a perceptive capacity. In this, Aristotle’s theory anticipates recent approaches to language because it allows the audience to participate in the persuasive process at a level that extends its role beyond the traditional Aristotelian understanding that it is the target of emotional appeals.

En las últimas tres décadas se ha producido un progresivo interés por la obra de Antonio Llull, principalmente, por sus De oratione libri septem (1558). Es en esta obra en la que centramos nuestro estudio de la inventio, considerado desde la perspectiva de la teoria de la argumentaciôn, que abarca los dos primeros libros De oratione. En éstos, se puede percibir la adscripción de Llull a la doctrina de Aristóteles, a la que une la preceptiva de Hermagoras, rastreada en las obras latinas y bizantinas influidas por este rétor, pero siempre asumiendo de manera crítica sus fuentes, lo que dota al tratado de Llull de una indudable originalidad.

422 RHETORICA auf die âufiere Einwirkung auf die Menschen im Sinne der Vorfeldaufgabe beschrânkt. In diesem Kontext gelingt der Verfasserin eine für die allgemeine "Geschichte des Willensbegriffes" (p. 160) tatsâchlich wichtige und intéressante Entdeckung. Bei der Beschreibung des inneren Wirkens Gottes setzt Augustinus das delectare mit dem movere nahezu gleich. Aus dem Dreierschema der officia oratoris wird so ein Zweierschema, das die affektiv-voluntative Seite des Menschen im Kontrast zum kognitiven Bereich starker betont. So wird am Ende der nicht unerhebliche Anteil rhetorischer Terminologie bei der Herausbildung des Willensbegriffes bei Augustinus sichtbar. Um so mehr verwundert es, dass der Verfasserin bei ihrer Interpreta­ tion von De doctrina Christiana die ebenfalls stark akzentuierte Bedeutung des movere bzw.flectere und damit die affektiv-voluntative Seite der christlichen Rhetorik des Augustinus entgeht: Im Unterschied zu Cicero stehe für Au­ gustinus auch hier "das docere im Vordergrund" (p. 38). Die Stellen, in denen Augustinus das commovere des stilus grandis (De doct. chr. IV.27) herausstellt oder mit ausdrücklichem Verweis auf Cicero die entscheidende Bedeutung des flectere für den Redesieg (victoria) betont (De doct. chr. IV.28), werden dabei anscheinend überlesen. Kann es sein, daB die Verfasserin unter dem Eindruck der vermeintlichen "Genialitât" (p. 159) des Kirchenvaters den gravierenden Anteil der klassischen antiken Rhetorik an seiner Theoriebildung zu gering einschàtzt? Dieser Kritikpunkt gefâhrdet aber nicht den positiven Gesamteindruck der ansonsten akribischen Studie, die den Variantenreichtum der Prâsenz des rhetorischen Schemas der officia oratoris im Gesamtwerk des Augustinus eindrucksvoll erschliefit und so ein unverzichtbares Hilfsmittel für die zukünftige Augustinusforschung darstellt. Peter L. Oesterreich Augustana-Hochschule, Neuendettelsau Jean-Yves Tilliette, Des mots a la parole: Une lecture de la "Poetria Nova" de Geoffroy de Vinsauf (Geneva: Droz, 2000) 199 pp. The extraordinary popularity of Geoffrey de Vinsauf's early thirteenthcentury Poetria Nova was due in no small part to its being at once de arte and ex arte, a textbook on how to write poetry that is itself a poem. Most of the Poetria Nova's modern readers and many of its medieval ones nonetheless have emphasized its doctrine over its poetry, thereby missing, according to Jean-Yves Tilliette, much of what was new about Geoffrey's "New Poetics". Only by approaching the poem as a homogeneous and coherent work of literature rather than as a collection of conventional rules that have been set in verse, Tilliette argues, can we properly understand its unique status Reviews 423 as both manifesto and exemplar of a "new poetry" that replaces the early medieval "aesthetic of iaiitatio" with verbal virtuosity, explicitly recognises the historical break with the classical tradition caused by the Incarnation of Christ, and conceives of the poet as creator rather than artisan (pp. 9-12). Before he supports this thesis with a close reading or "intrinsic analysis" of the Poetria Nova, Tilliette devotes three chapters of "extrinsic analysis" to the chief influences that define the "cultural environment" of Geoffrey's poem: classical rhetoric as it was taught in the late Middle Ages, Horace's Ars poética or the "Old Poetics", and the Latin allegories of cosmic order and knowledge by Bernardus Silvestris and other writers of the twelfthcentury "School of Chartres". With rhetoric Geoffrey's new poetry shares the function of argument and (moral) persuasion; from the Ars poética, as interpreted by medieval commentators, derives the key insight of the new poetics, that poetry is a specific mode of apprehending and appropriating the world, whose "proper" sense is (paradoxically) the "figurative" sense; and from the platonizing poets comes the conception of the poet as demiurge who reveals the hidden archetypes by recreating in his poetry other possible worlds beyond the sensible world. The remaining five chapters demonstrate how the text of the Poetria Nova simultaneously expounds and embodies what Geoffrey conceives to be the highest goal of poetry: to use figurative language to make "possi­ ble worlds" visible and thus, in effect, to "reinvent the universe" (p. 68). Each of these chapters analyzes a different section of the Poetria Nova, using questions raised by that section's divergence from traditional pedagogy to highlight Geoffrey's originality. Thus, chapter 4 attempts to explain...

Reviews 429 In questo senso, l'insegnamento délia retorica classica puô essere vivificato solo nel saper cogliere la sua struttura portante, fissata da Aristotele nella capacità di tener conto, contemporáneamente, dell'oratore, del pubblico e del discorso. Dunque, una contestualizzazione più precisa delTarte proposta da Cattani avrebbe forse consentito di sviluppare una critica serrata delle con­ traintes che i nuovi mezzi di comunicazione impongono all'argomentazione, e avrebbe forse aiutato a distinguere meglio (mi si perdonerà il gioco verbale) lo spazio délia "botta" da quello délia "risposta": non sempre, infatti, Tarte dell attaccare coincide con quella del replicare, anche se le parti possono spesso scambiarsi, ed il libero disputante deve saperle sostenere entrambe, come il sapiente stoico che, secondo Aristone di Chio, doveva imitare l'attore esperto nel saper recitare sia da Agamennone che da Tersite. Luigi Spina Università Federico JJ, Napoli Stefano Arduini, Prolegómenos a una teoría general de lasfiguras (Murcia, Universidad de Murcia, 2000), 200 pp. El autor propone en esta obra una interesante vía de aproximación al estudio de las figuras retóricas, destacando su función constructora y formadora. Debido a la existencia de constantes subyacentes a los procesos, Arduini cree posible reconducir el gran número de las figuras retóricas a unos pocos campos. Asimismo, se propone mostrar que el mecanismo de funcionamiento de las figuras está constituido por una serie de universales expresivos que adquieren una realización particular en cada cultura. Tras constatar que la retórica ha experimentado un pujante renacimiento en la segunda mitad del siglo XX, el autor insiste en la necesidad de superar los enfoques reductores de la disciplina para volver a considerarla como una teoría general del discurso, y propone abordar el terreno de las figuras desde una perspectiva cognoscitiva que supere las aproximaciones de índole lingüísticode manera que las figuras sean entendidas no como simples ornamentos o desvíos lingüísticos, sino como procedimientos cognitivos capaces de construir nuestra estructura conceptual y el medio a través del cual conseguimos formarnos una idea del mundo. Se interesa el autor por los esquemas formales que subyacen a las diversas manifestaciones expresivas del hombre y sirven para construir el mundo, estudiando lo universal, y no los aspectos modificables dependientes del lugar o del tiempo. Dichos esquemas son, a su modo de ver, de índole retórica, y representan medios por los cuales mundo y lenguaje entran en contacto. Recuerda el autor las ideas de autores como W. von Humboldt, E. Sapir, B. L. Whorf o M. Bajtin, quienes destacan la activa función que 430 RHETORICA tiene el lenguaje en la construcción de la realidad, coincidiendo en la idea de que la realidad no es independiente del lenguaje, sino que éste es el único medio posible de describir y construir aquélla. Para Arduini, las dos posiciones clásicas del objetivismo (según el cual la realidad es independiente de cualquier sistema de referencia y puede ser observada objetivamente) y del subjetivismo (conforme al cual sólo es posible observar la realidad a través de la mirada del sujeto) no tienen en cuenta el hecho de que la relación sujetono puede ser resuelta con la eliminación de uno de esos componentes. Por ello, y asumiendo las ideas del moderno constructivismo, el autor sostiene que sujeto y objeto no son elementos autónomos, sino que resultan inseparables, y que lenguaje y mundo se construyen recíprocamente, por lo que distinguir las categorías retóricas de la expresión significa decir algo sobre la forma humana de organizar el mundo. Expone después Arduini su idea de Campo Retórico como la vasta área de los conocimientos y de las experiencias comunicativas adquiridas por el individuo, por la sociedad y por las culturas a lo largo de su historia, siendo el depósito que identifica comunicativamente una cultura como tal. Los Campos Teóricos existen solo como potencialidades, las cuales son activadas en los actos comunicativos concretos. Dentro de los campos retóricos se sitúa el hecho retórico, en el que ocupa un lugar importante el propio texto. Para explicar la configuración...

Reviews 427 pour les théories de l'écriture conçues à la Renaissance. Pire, on jubile d'y céder chaque fois davantage. Kees Meerhoff Huizinga Instituut, Universiteit van Amsterdam Adelino Cattani, Botta e risposta: Harte della replica (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2001), 244 pp. NelTIntroduzione al volume (pp. 7-14), Cattani delinea l'obiettivo che intende realizzare: "All'interno di una riflessione sul valore—sulla funzione e sui limiti—del dibattito, nelle pagine che seguono s'intende estrarre qualche principio, formulare qualche regoletta e mettere in luce qualche meccanismo argomentativo usato e usabile in contesti di dibattito, con l'intento di migliorare la capacité (o arte) di replicare. Ne risulterà una sorta di reper­ torio mínimo di tecniche utili per affrontare un contraddittorio e un prontu­ ario per valutare, da spettatore-giudice, le altrui prestazioni in un dibattito, perché, come ben si sa e come si vedrà, non sempre vince la tesi migliore, ma quella meglio argomentata, non il discorso 'giusto', ma quello giustamente impostato, non l'opinione più ragionevole, ma quella piú motivata" (p. 13). Valutare un'opera a partiré dalla dichiarazione d'intenti dell'autore é uno dei modi per condurre onestamente una recensione, e questo vale soprattutto quando l'autore stesso ha la bonté di esprimere con chiarezza obiettivi e metodi. Seguendo lo schéma tracciato da Cattani, si possono dunque individ­ uare: 1) l'estrazione di qualche principio, nei primi quattro capitoli (I."Su ogni cosa vi sono due punti di vista". Ovvero: il diritto di mettere tutto in dubbio; IL La tradizione dei discorsi duplici; III. Forme e funzioni della disputa; IV. Cooperazione e competizione); 2) la formulazione di qualche regoletta ecc., nei restanti nove capitoli (V. Cinque modi di dibattere; VI. Tecniche ed espedienti ; VIL II disputator córtese. Códice di condotta per una discussione cooperativa; VIII. Valutazione del dibattito; IX. Come dire il falso dicendo il vero; X. Come replicare; XI. Quando lo humour diventa un argomento; XII. La manipolazione retorica; XIII. Valore e limiti del dibattito). La Conclusione (pp. 225-227) è affidata ad un decálogo: I dieci diritti del libero disputante, evidente ripresa ("Tutti, dalla foca monaca al lettore, hanno qualche diritto che qualcun altro di occupa di codificare , p. 225) di altre, ormai classiche, elencazioni di diritti (ad esempio, i dieci diritti imprescrittibili del lettore, fissati da Daniel Pennac). La ricca bibliografía (pp. 231-244) é organizzata secondo percorsi tematici. Volendo accettare la ripartizione tra parte teórica (breve, pp. 15-59) e parte pratica (piú estesa, pp. 61-223), converrá tornare per un momento su titolo q sottotitolo del volume. INTel Grande JDrzionario della hingua Italiana di 428 RHETORICA Salvatore Battaglia (II, 237, s.v. zbotta') si definisce cosï la locuzione: "Botta e risposta: rápido scambio di stoccate, di colpi" e, in senso figurato: "dialogo fitto, a battute rapide, pronte". D'altra parte, dall'elenco dei capitoli prima tracciato, si pud rilevare che solo il X capitolo sembra riferirsi all'argomento adombrato nel sottotitolo. In questa piccola contraddizione "paratestuale" si cela, in realtà, un problema di definizione dello spazio del dibattito e della sua pragmática, che Cattani cerca di risolvere proprio nella parte teórica, ricorrendo al pat­ rimonio della retorica antica e alie pratiche della sofistica. Se è possibile esprimere, motivare e sostenere due punti di vista perfettamente contrari sullo stesso argomento (ricorderei, a conferma, il duplice progymnasma di Libanio, un encomio ed un biasimo di Achille), allora le rególe del dibattito si sottraggono ad ogni parámetro etico-ideologico, o meglio, sará solo la forza argomentativa e persuasiva, calibrata nel rispetto della classica triade aristotélica (oratore, ascoltatore/giuria, discorso), a consentiré il successo di tali valori in un dibattito. Quest'ultimo è, infatti, il "termine generale scelto per designare onnicomprensivamente ogni tipo di scambio argomentativo fatto di botte e risposte" (p. 67), anche perché, a differenza di altri vocaboli che fanno parte del lessico del discutere/dibattere (analizzati alie pp. 62-66), il dibattito prevede la presenza essenziale di quella "terza parte, costituita da chi ascolta e da chi giudicherá". Il volume, dunque, prima che una guida all'arte del replicare, è una difesa, argomentata e ricca di esempi, della validité civile e dell'utilit...

Reviews Giulio Guidorizzi e Simone Beta, La metáfora, testi greci e latini tradotti e commentât! (Pisa: Edizioni ETS, 2000), 243 pp. Un nuovo volume sulla metafora: non un nuovo saggio, né una nuova prospettiva ermeneutica di una fra le più complesse risorse dell'attività co­ municativa, paradigmática della duttilità del linguaggio. Più semplicemente, un'utile ed esauriente raccolta di testi antichi sulla metafora, per la precisione 54, greci e latini (pp. 37-123), accompagnati da un commento di pari estensione (pp. 125-220) e incorniciati da una breve introduzione (pp. 11-36) e da una bibliografía selettiva (pp. 221-230), cui segue un indice completo dei passi citati (pp. 231-242). L'introduzione puô essere valutata come una sorta di guida alla lettura e all· inquadramento dei testi, al di là del commento che li accompagna singolarmente . In essa vengono fissati alcuni punti chiave: 1) "inizio aristotélico" della riflessione sulla metafora; 2) "apparente paradosso" del ricchissimo impiego della metafora nella poesía greca prima della sua teorizzazione: il termine appare per la prima volta nell'Evagora di Isocrate; 3) tratti fondamentali del consolidamento della teoría retorica della metafora a partiré da Aristotele; 4) teorie moderne della metafora e messa in discussione della "marmórea solidità della retorica 'cosiddetta' classica"; 5) approfondimento critico della teoría aristotélica e delle sue contraddizioni. Lo scopo prevalentemente didattico del volume (Guidorizzi ricorda in premessa che il libro nasce come "sviluppo e completamento di un lavoro pubblicato in forma di dispensa universitaria") ne consentirá un'adeguata utilizzazione per chi vorrà verificare un'analisi diacronica della presenza della teoría della metafora nella trattatistica antica ed attrezzarsi, cosi, per una proficua valutazione delle continuità e discontinuità con le teorie moderne. Per quanto riguarda i testi, il criterio della loro scelta—con disposizione in sequenza cronológica—è consistito evidentemente nella presenza in essi del termine técnico o di una locuzione che lo designi. Da questo punto di vista, sembra costituire un'eccezione T9, Aristóteles, Rhetorica III 2.1 (1404 b 1-12)—p. 46, commento a p. 139 s.—, che riguarda in generale la chiarezza della lexis. Il terzo dei tre testi che aprono la raccolta, prima della consistente sequenza di testi aristotelici (ben 21 su 54), è unpasso dell'orazione di Eschine Contro Timarco 166 s. (p. 40, commento a p. 128 s.). Lo precedono due testi di Isocrate. Gli autori sottolineano che "il passo riportato, benché privo di© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XIX, Number 4 (Autumn 2001). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley' CA 94704-1223, USA 419 420 RHETORICA qualsiasi portata teórica, é utile per dimostrare come la parola metaphorá fosse giá sufficientemente diffusa anche al di fuori di un ámbito técnico, al punto di poter essere usata perfino davanti al vasto pubblico di una giuria popolare". La giusta osservazione potrebbe riguardare anche altri elementi della terminología lingüistica, che verranno poi fissati in modo univoco nella trattatistica retorica o grammaticale: si pensi, ad esempio a rhema, verbo, ma anche locuzione, espressione, enunciato, come é spesso testimoniato proprio nell' oratoria attica. In ogni caso, nel passo di Eschine la valenza del termine técnico é in realtá attenuata dalla presenza del suo "determinante" costitutivo, cioé onomato-n\ la metaphorá é sempre spostamento, trasferimento di nomi, anche se l'effetto della collocation, la risorsa lingüistica che permette di separare un sintagma forte dal punto di vista semántico e sintattico, anticipando uno dei due termini del nesso e contando sulla presunzione di reperibilitá dell'altro a breve distanza testuale, autorizza spesso a rendere autosufficiente proprio uno dei due termini, con conseguente eliminazione dell'altro. Ebbene, nel passo eschineo, l'osservazione dell'oratore concerne proprio la possibilitá che Demostene rovesci sul giovane Alessandro, figlio di Filippo, delle ben elabórate "metafore di nomi", rendendo ridicola la cittá di Atene. Si puó immaginare, dunque, che, proprio nel periodo in cui il termine si fissava técnicamente, il sintagma completo lo rendesse piú "popolare" e largamente comprensibile, potremmo dire paradossalmente, proprio per la visibilitá della sua valenza metaf...

424 RHETORICA Tilliette's principal aim may be to (re)claim the Poetria Nova as literature and for literary studies, but his book will nonetheless interest historians of rhetoric. Not only does he show how Geoffrey's conception of poetry was fundamentally rhetorical, but he also discovers specific uses of classical rhetorical concepts in some of the passages he considers most central to Geoffrey's poetic project. For example, he maintains that the two central techniques of amplificatio (apostrophe and prosopopeia) are valued above the three techniques that precede and the three that follow them because, through their use of dialogue, they serve to move rather than to instruct and delight the hearer (p. 97). Still more interesting is Tilliette's detailed argument that the first of the two poems illustrating easy ornament is structured on the model of a lawyer's speech, which serves to underscore its debt to Anselm's legalistic theology of the Incarnation (pp. 139-52). Informed by the best contemporary scholarship, rich in critical insight, and provocative in its thesis, this is a book from which all students of the Poetria Nova can profit. Martin Camargo University ofMissouri Claudine Jomphe, Les théories de la dispositio et le Grand Oeuvre de Ron­ sard (Paris: H. Champion, 2000) Études et essais sur la Renaissance, 24. 416 pp. L'étude de Claudine Jomphe est une gageure. Son ambition est d'ana­ lyser, à l'aide des instruments offerts par la rhétorique et la poétique, un texte laissé inachevé par Pierre de Ronsard, prince des poètes à l'époque de la Renaissance. On sait qu'à la mort du roi Charles ix (1574) pour lequel il avait une réelle affection, Ronsard a abandonné son projet d'écrire une épopée nationale digne à la fois de la France et de sa propre stature. Projet caressé dès le début de sa carrière et encouragé par ses amis poètes et poéticiens. Dans le manifeste de la Pléiade, Joachim du Bellay incite les écrivains à "employer cette grande éloquence" pour "bâtir le corps entier d'une belle histoire" en dépouillant ce qui nous reste des "vieilles chroniques françaises" (Défense et illustration, 1549, ii, 5). Jacques Peletier du Mans, de son côté, commence son chapitre sur l'épopée en affirmant que "l'Oeuvre Héroïque est celui qui donne le prix, et le vrai titre de Poète" (Art Poétique, 1555, ii, 8). Avec sa ténacité coutumière, Ronsard a tenté de mener à bien une entreprise d'une importance capitale pour l'émancipation de la langue et de la civilisation françaises; fidèle au principe fondamental des "nouveaux poètes , il a construit son Grand Oeuvre en imitant les modèles classiques, ainsi Homère, les Argonautiques d'Apollonios de Rhodes (3e s. avant J.C .) et bien sûr 1 Enéide. Poète érudit, il connaissait également les épopées Reviews 425 de 1 Antiquité tardive ainsi que celles de la Renaissance italienne, en latin comme en volgare. Il estimait que YOrlando Furioso de l'Arioste est un "mon­ stre aux belles parties , c est-à-dire un texte dont certains "membres" ne manquent pas de beauté, mais dont le "corps" dans son ensemble est dif­ forme (Épître en tête de la Franciade, 1572). Malgré son intention déclarée à créer une oeuvre aux proportions har­ monieuses, destinée à devenir "classique" à son tour, Ronsard n'a pas réussi à achever 1 épopée de ses rêves. Les manuels d'histoire littéraire sont en général sévères à l'égard de la Franciade: ils la traitent d' "épopée manquée" et soulignent que les tentatives réitérées de l'auteur se soldent par un "échec complet". Dans son étude à la fois solide et élégante, Claudine Jomphe analyse longuement chacun des quatre chants de la Franciade et essaie de mettre en évidence les problèmes de construction auxquels le poète se voyait confronté. Elle nous montre ainsi un Ronsard qui reste tenté par son passé: au coeur du chant épique se dessine un chansonnier d'amour...

Although Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle (1623–1673), did not belong to the scientific community which after 1660 formed itself around the Royal Society, several of the philosophical issues discussed there are reflected in her writings. Lengthy reflections on language and style which run through her philosophical works provide evidence that the linguistic and rhetorical debates of the early Royal Society also left their mark. The isolation which Cavendish faced as a woman writer obliged her to discuss problems of terminology and style even more intensively, thereby adhering to the rhetorical principle of perspicuity which Thomas Sprat demanded in his proposal for a scientific plain style. The influence of the New Science on Cavendish’s work becomes obvious when her later writings are compared to her earlier ones where traces of a courtly and more elitist understanding of style can still be found. In this paper the development of Cavendish’s stylistic attitudes is traced in several of her works, including her Utopian narrative The Blazing World (1666).

420 RHETORICA qualsiasi portata teórica, é utile per dimostrare come la parola metaphorá fosse giá sufficientemente diffusa anche al di fuori di un ámbito técnico, al punto di poter essere usata perfino davanti al vasto pubblico di una giuria popolare". La giusta osservazione potrebbe riguardare anche altri elementi della terminología lingüistica, che verranno poi fissati in modo univoco nella trattatistica retorica o grammaticale: si pensi, ad esempio a rhema, verbo, ma anche locuzione, espressione, enunciato, come é spesso testimoniato proprio nell' oratoria attica. In ogni caso, nel passo di Eschine la valenza del termine técnico é in realtá attenuata dalla presenza del suo "determinante" costitutivo, cioé onomato-n\ la metaphorá é sempre spostamento, trasferimento di nomi, anche se l'effetto della collocation, la risorsa lingüistica che permette di separare un sintagma forte dal punto di vista semántico e sintattico, anticipando uno dei due termini del nesso e contando sulla presunzione di reperibilitá dell'altro a breve distanza testuale, autorizza spesso a rendere autosufficiente proprio uno dei due termini, con conseguente eliminazione dell'altro. Ebbene, nel passo eschineo, l'osservazione dell'oratore concerne proprio la possibilitá che Demostene rovesci sul giovane Alessandro, figlio di Filippo, delle ben elabórate "metafore di nomi", rendendo ridicola la cittá di Atene. Si puó immaginare, dunque, che, proprio nel periodo in cui il termine si fissava técnicamente, il sintagma completo lo rendesse piú "popolare" e largamente comprensibile, potremmo dire paradossalmente, proprio per la visibilitá della sua valenza metafórica (l'operazione di spostare, trasferire una parola da un referente ad un altro). Luigi Spina Università Federico If Napoli Barbara Kursawe, Docere delectare movere. Die officia oratoris bei Au­ gustinus in Rhetorik und Gnadenlehre (Paderborn: Schoningh, 2000), 180 pp. Die Studie stellt den direkten und indirekten EinfluB des rhetorischen Dreierschemas der officia oratoris im Gesamtwerk des Augustinus heraus. Sie weist die grundlegende Bedeutung der drei rhetorischen Grundkategorien docere, delectare, movere und der ihnen korrelierenden "Vorfeldaufgabe (p. 11) des attentum, benevolum, docilemfacere sowohl fiir Rhetoriktheorie als auch die theologischen Schriften des Augustinus, insbesondere seine Gnadenlehre, iiberzeugend nach. Dabei erinnert der erste Teil des Buches in knapper Form an die sakulare rhetoriktheoretische Vorgeschichte der officia oratoris bei Cicero und Quintilian. Der zweite Teil untersucht dann Reviews 421 eingehend ihre Rezeption in De doctrina Christiana, und der dritte Teil geht ihrer variantenreichen Prasenz in weiteren Schriften des Augustinus nach. Schliefilich weist der vierte Teil—insbesondere mit Verweis auf die Psalmen und den Paulusbrief—den gravierenden Anted nach, den die rhetorische Terminologie der officia oratoris an der Formulierung der Gnadentheologie des Augustinus besitzt. Insgesamt weist die Studie den EinfluP des rhetorischen Dreierschemas docere delectare movere bei Augustinus "in alien Phasen seiner literarischen Tatigkeit" (p. 153) nach und kommt zu einem differenzierten Ergebnis: Au­ gustinus gebraucht das Denkmuster der officia oratoris einer ersten Textgruppe gemaP ganz im Sinne der antiken Rhetorik Ciceros und Quintilians, in einer zweiten weicht er durch eigenstandige Formulierungen von ihr ab, und in einer dritten deutet er sie um und entfernt sich sogar von ihr. Die mit der klassischen Rhetorik konforme erste Textgruppe enthalt z.B. AuPerungen uber die Wichtigkeit der Erweckung der Aufmerksamkeit bei der Predigt und Katechese angesichts ihrer Gefahrdung durch das taedium der Horer, ferner liber die Bedeutung des movere in der Rhetorik der Bibel und im kirchlichen Gesang. In einer Linie mit der klassischen Rhetorik steht auch die Metaphorik des Augustinus, die die verstandnislose Haltung der Horer als Kaltsein (frigidum esse) und die Wirkung erfolgreicher Redewirkung als Entflammen oder Anziinden (inflammare oder accendere) beschreibt. Zu der zweiten Textgruppe gehort z.B. die Restriktion der Vorfeldaufgabe fur den christlichen Katecheten auf das attention parare. Anders als bei der an­ tiken Beratungs- oder Gerichtsrede kann namlich bei der christlichen Unterweisung das Wohlwollen der Glaubigen in der Regel vorausgesetzt werden. Ferner darf der christliche Lehrer darauf vertrauen, daP die Gelehrigkeit seiner Horer jederzeit durch eine innere Erleuchtung durch den Heiligen Geist herbeigefiihrt werden kann. Ein weiteres Beispiel, in dem Augusti­ nus uber die klassische Rhetoriktheorie hinausgeht, ist die Beschreibung der intimen affektischen Redner-Horer-Beziehung bei der Katechese als eines gemeinsamen Wohnens im Herzen des anderen. Mit dieser "Riickwirkung der bei den Horern erzeugten Affekte auf den Redner" (p. 57) erweitert Augustinus...

On enigma as a rhetorical figure: a brief history in the rhetoricians, encyclopedists, and patristic commentators from Aristotle to Dante’s time, with a rhetorical analysis of the figure. Special attention is given to Augustine in the De trinitate XV on St. Paul’s well-known “in aenigmate” (I Cor. 13:12). Some implications of Augustine’s linking of the figurative and the figural (typological, historical) are considered, with a re-examination of Auerbach’s “Figura” on this question. The importance for our own reading of rhetoric in relation to history and poetry is stressed.

Reviews Thomas A. Szlezak, Reading Plato, trans. Graham Zanker (New York: Routledge, 1999), xii + 137 pp. This short book will be interesting to all readers of Plato and all those who have pondered the relationship of oral and written discourse. It consists of twenty-seven short sections (2-6 pages each) the totality of which makes the following argument: Plato's philosophy can best be understood when read in the light of his critique of writing in the Phaedrus. According to Szlezak, nineteenth and twentieth-century readers have misunderstood and misinterpreted Plato's dialogues. This is so, he explains, because they have paid insufficient attention to Plato's critical comments on writing, because they have tended "to align the great thinkers of the past with the attitudes of [their] own times" (p. Ill), and because thy have confused Plato's esotericism, which is directed to a cause, with the notion of secrecy, which is directed to power (p. 115). Szlezak observes that starting with Schleiermacher "the modern devo­ tees of the god Theuth" (p. 41) have missed the intent of Plato's critique of writing. Consequently, they have supplemented the text of the Phaedrus in in­ admissible ways. Their graphocentric orientation and anachronistic readings have kept them from seeing Plato's repeated point that written philosophy itself can only go so far; to go further, it needs support, the kind that only the dialectician's oral logos can provide. Szlezak applies Plato's critique of writing to most Platonic dialogues, and shows that most of the recent interpretations have little, if any, merit. This is so, he argues, because the internal evidence of several dialogues points not to what is written but to what remains to be spoken about the texts at hand. Rather than read each dialogue separately, Szlezak reads across several dialogues, and identifies seven structural features they all share: 1) they typically depict conversations, with only occasional monologues within the conversational framework; 2) the conversations are place- and time-bound, happen between true-to-life participants most of whom are historically verifi­ able; 3) they all have a discussion leader, generally Socrates; 4) the discussion leader converses with one partner at a time, and in some cases he replaces the real partner with an imaginary one; 5) the discussion leader answers all objections, introduces all elements helpful to the conversation, refutes all other participants but is never himself refuted; 6) the conversation is raised to a higher level in the course of warding off an attack; and 7) none of the© The International Society for the History of Rhetoric, Rhetorica, Volume XIX, Number 3 (Summer 2001). Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223, USA 341 342 RHETORICA dialogues comes to a definite conclusion, they all point to the need for further investigation and reflection, and they all have one or more "deliberate gaps" (pp. 18-19; 103-108). Szlezak does not argue for the general superiority of oral discourse over its written counterpart. Rather, he shows that oral discourse has a higher status but only for those capable of playing the role of a philosopher, more specifically a dialectician in the Platonic tradition. To play such a role requires that one identify significant topics for discussion (it is simply not the case that any one topic is as good as any other), expedite the discussion through poignant questions, refute objections, and defend doctrines committed to writing. Effectively, a Platonic dialectician possesses something of higher value (ta timiotera) than his philosophical writings (p. 49). This something consists of doctrines whose articulation happens orally and whose function is to support, defend, or extend written doctrines. Reading Plato is a good piece of scholarship, it guides the reader through Plato's dialogues carefully and thoughtfully. And it raises questions that expose the limitations of the disciples of Derridolatry. At the same time, however, it brings attention to several theoretical issues that Szlezak does not address. For example, how is a contemporary reader to "adapt himself to the perspective of the author, against all kinds of prejudices and resistance which are specific to...

344 RHETORICA in which he worked out his dramatistic poetics" (p. 105). As a set, the four chapters of Part One are the strongest of the collection in their consistent presentation and elaboration of Burke's later concept of aesthetics. Part Two collects three essays that consider Burke's work in the context of reader-response criticism, critical theory, and philosophy. Greig Hender­ son's "A Rhetoric of Form: The Early Burke and Reader-Response Criticism" considers Burke's concept of the formal relation between texts and audi­ ence expectations in the light of Wolfgang Iser's and Stanley Fish's readerresponse theories. Thomas Carmichael's "Screening Symbolicity: Kenneth Burke and Contemporary Theory" similarly examines Burke's theories in comparison with contemporary critical theory, suggesting ways in which Burke prefigured theorists like deMan and Lyotard vis a vis dramatism's antifoundationalist principles. Finally, Robert Wess's essay "Pentadic Terms and Master Tropes" examines A Grammar ofMotives's concluding chapter, "Four Master Tropes", in terms of its philosophical implications for dramatism. Part Three returns to more biographical material, but with the added emphasis of Burke's relation to religion. Wayne C. Booth's retrospective ac­ count of his correspondence with Burke emphasizes prominent religious undertones in the numerous "voices" Burke's letters often assumed. Burke's essay "Sensation, Memory, Imitation/and Story" represents Burke's strug­ gles towards the completion of the dramatistic model and, furthermore, is indicative of the religious undertones in Burke's theories. The final essay is Michael Feehan's discussion of Mary Baker Eddy, a prominent Christian Scientist, and her influence on Burke's Permanence and Change. Like Kenneth Burke in Greenwich Village, the editors of Unending Con­ versations see their collection as invoking and pluralizing "Burke's topos of the conversation" in contexts previously unvisited by Burke scholarship. As early attempts at expanding the range of application of dramatism, both texts offer useful and engaging starting points for further research. Paulo Campos The Ohio State University Peter L. Oesterreich and Thomas O. Sloane eds, Rhetorica Movet. Studies in Historical and Modern Rhetoric in Honour of Heinrich F. Plett (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 545. After yielding so many scholars the chance to discuss rhetoric, Prof. Plett s dedication to the subject is gracefully acknowledged in this collection of essays, published on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. In institutional terms his work has benefited all readers of Rhetorica: he was one of the founders of the ISHR in 1977 and served as its first Secretary General; he established the Centre for Rhetoric and Renaissance Studies at the Universitv Reviews 345 of Essen in 1989, and is an associate editor of this journal. In his own writing, such as the much-cited Rhetorik der Affekte, in the words of Thomas O. Sloane he "has welded a strong link between literary criticism and insights from the history of rhetoric". Written in English and German, Rhetorica Movet engages with the sub­ jects of three international conferences Prof. Plett organized at Essen: twothirds of it studies early modern rhetoric and poetics, with a subsidiary section on modern oratory. Some of the former contributions guide a rhetor­ ical technique smartly through an exercise programme, readying it at its classical antecedents then watching it bend and twist in a period's usage. Bernhard F. Scholz distinguishes Quintilian's view of ekphrasis as a report on the effect that a scene (not a work of art) has on the speaker's inner eye, such that the listener seems to see it too. Andrea and Peter Oesterreich examine Luther's comments on the relationship between rhetoric and dialectic. For Luther, dialectic produced faith while hope was aroused by rhetoric. Two authors take up Shakespeare's rhetoric: Wolfgang G. Muller, on the comic and persuasive uses of the enthymeme, and Peter Mack, on variants of antithesis which connect opposites structuring the last scene of The Winter's Tale. Two stylistic essays use frequency analysis on Dryden's versification (Hermann Bluhme) and mirroring structures in Spanish golden age verse (Jose Antonio Mayoral). Heiner Peters describes Sterne's explo­ ration of analogies between rhetoric and the art of fortification in Tristram Shandy. Other essays defend rhetoric. Judith Rice...

Ever since Plato, the Sophists have been seen as teaching "the art of persuasion", particularly the art (or skill) of persuasive speaking in the lawcourts and the assembly on which success in life depended. I argue that this view is mistaken. Although Gorgias describes logos as working to persuade Helen, he does not present persuasion as the goal of his own work, nor does any other Sophist see persuasion as the primary aim of his logoi. Most sophistic discourse was composed in the form of antilogies (pairs of opposed logoi), in which category I include works like Helen where the other side—the poetic tradition Gorgias explicitly cites as his opponent—is implicitly present. The purpose of these works is primarily to display skill in intellectual argument, as well as to give pleasure. Persuasion may be a goal of some sophistic works, but it is not their primary goal; and teaching the art of persuasion was not a major concern of the Sophists.

346 RHETORICA Roman notions of politics and ethics. Marijke Spies studies the claims made by an Amsterdam chamber of rhetoric, the Eglantine, that its writings on the art of rhetoric - which focused on natural human reason, took its examples from the vernacular and familiar, and gave instances of negotiation - were part of a process of reconciliation after the city left the Spanish crown to join the Dutch Republic in 1578. Several articles use ideas from classical rhetoric to interrogate modern German literature. Helmut Schanze discusses the relationship between the­ atrical speech and political oratory by examining the use of the metaphors of theatre and forum in Goethe, Jean Paul and recent studies of television and digital media. Gert Otto examines modern funeral orations by Max Frisch, Heinrich Boll and Christa Wolf in the light of the classical (Thucydides) and romantic (Grillparzer, Borne) traditions of consolatory oratory. Theodor Verweyen discusses the use of metonymy in Bertolt Brecht and Gottfried Benn in the light of modern analyses of classical theories this trope. Several of the modern pieces focus on the speech act and its context Rainer Schulze describes how studies of rhetoric have interacted with cognitive linguistics in the analysis of metaphors as constituents of understanding. Thomas O. Sloane mischievously argues that playing with words engenders a famil­ iarity and therefore a competence in playing with ideas—within defined playgrounds. As this brief notice has shown, the volume should be read as an un­ usually generous number of Rhetorica rather than a exploration of different aspects of a single topic (the editors wisely steer clear of an introduction). The wide range of the essays, literary critical, historical and theoretical, is a just tribute to the dedicatee's scholarship. Ceri Sullivan University of Wales, Bangor Georgia Clarke and Paul Crossley eds, Architecture and Language: Con­ structing Identity in European Architecture c. 1000—c. 1650 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). This volume of collected papers is noteworthy as containing the first extensive studies by art historians to acknowledge and explore the influence of teaching and theory of rhetoric on writings about architecture and on architectural practice in the Renaissance and early modern period. We have had a number of good books and articles on the influence of rhetoric on painting and on music in the Renaissance, and many works on architecture discuss political and social meanings of buildings without actually using the word rhetoric or employing rhetorical terminology, but until now we have lacked good assessments of the indebtedness of architectural treatises to Reviews 347 rhetorical invention, arrangement, and style, including viewing the classical orders of architecture in terms of rhetorical commonplaces, all of which is done in chapters of this book. The first four chapters discuss the language used by medieval writers to describe features of architectures in England, France, Italy, and Germany. It was only with Leon Battista Alberti, writing in the mid-fifteenth century, that the concepts and vocabulary of classical rhetoric entered architectural treatises. In "Architecture, Language, and Rhetoric in Alberti's De Re Aedificatoria ", Caroline van Eck shows that Alberti's source for theory and termi­ nology was not so much Vitruvius's De Architecture, as usually believed, but classical works on rhetoric by Aristotle, Cicero, Quintilian, and others. (There is an English translation of Alberti's treatise by J. Rykwert et al., published by the Harvard University Press, 1988.) Cammy Brothers then continues the subject with a chapter entitled 'Architectural Texts and Imitation in Late-Fifteenth- and Early-SixteenthCentury Rome". Debates ox er imitetio and eemuletio among Renaissance rhetoricians are echoed in architectural writing, and Brothers concludes that "the desire for authoritative models emerges from architectural treatises with increasing clarity over the course of the sixteenth century and parallels the development of an increasingly strict Ciceronianism" (p. 100). Subsequent chapters that will especially interest students of the history of rhetoric include "Sanmichelli's Architecture anti Literary Theory", by Paul Davies and David Hemsoll; "Architects and Academies: Architectural Theories of Imitetio and Literary Debates on Language and Style", by Alina A. Payne; and "The Rhetorical Model in the Formation of French Architectural Language in the Sixteenth Century: The Triumphal Arch as a Commonplace", by Yves Pauwels. Important rhetorical terms...

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