Reviews 325 form, or form ox er content? Malm's work is not really situated in relation to extant criticism on Aristotle and his reception, despite the eighteen pages on which the eminent Classics scholar Stephen Halliwell is cited. In the end, I have no clear sense of either Halliwell's arguments or how Malm's account of mimesis may or may not relate to them. Other scholars are cited with still greater opacity: for example, in a not uninteresting excursion on the sublime and its relation to visualization (phantasia), we are told, "The evolution of aes­ thetics can be tied to the ev olution of a new kind of social subject, as Peter de Bolla has demonstrated" (p. 139). No explanation follows. To my' mind, the best chapter of The Soul of Poetry Redefined is its tenth and last, "Emotions and the system of genres" (pp. 171-85). Here Malm advances, however tentatively, a real argument with explanatory force. Addressing the question of whv Aristotle stresses content over style and dra­ matic poetry over lyric, Malm writes that in the Poetics, "The pleasure of poetry. . .comes mainiv from understanding, and from pity and fear which are means of understanding. In this way, Aristotle distances poetry consider­ able' from the Platonic critique of linguistic voluptuousness and decadence. . . . Defining the soul of poetrv as lexis, mimesis-representation would have been to subject it to Plato's critique of rhetoric and representation. The soul of poetrv being muthos, content and structure, poetry becomes less reproachable" (p. 175). For Aristotle, emotions are "instrumental," intended to influence an audience, and thus fundamentally rhetorical (p. 176). It is only in the Renais­ sance—Malm adduces Antonio Minturno's L'Arte Poetica (1564)—that lyric, as the representation of a character's emotions, is theorized as a third genre alongside epic and drama. "The definition of a lyric genre," Malm argues, "could onlv take place by redefining emotions from instruments into objects" (p. 178)—a process Malm associates with painting and its theorization as the objectiv e representation of emotion (pp. 178-83). These arguments, sketched at the end of Malm's study, might profitably be pursued in future research. Whatev er the shortcomings of its content might be, The Soul of Poetry Redefined is, as a physical object, resplendent. In cover design, front papers (of a deep scarlet), page layout, and type face, the book is a delight to behold; its paper quality is a delight for the fingers. The Museum Tusculanum Press of the University of Copenhagen is to be commended for reminding us in the age of the internet that academic books can still be things of beauty. Adam Potkay, The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg William Fitzgerald, Spiritual Modalities: Prayer as Rhetoric and Perfor­ mance. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2012. x+158 pp. ISBN 9780271056227 Spiritual Modalities is an extremely useful book. It not only explores in depth the rhetorical power of prayer; it also provides abundant hermeneutic resources for the further study of this ancient yet still contemporary speech 326 RHETORIC A act genre. Creatively employing Kenneth Burke's dramatism as an interpre­ tive lens, William Fitzgerald has written a detailed post-secular analysis that reveals prayer as an embodied performance, a cognitive scene of address, a material act of invocation, and a social attitude of reverence. Historians of rhetoric might question Fitzgerald's claim that his book is "the first system­ atic study of prayer in relation to rhetoric" (3) and place it instead within the loose tradition of rhetorics of prayer (sometimes anachronistically called artes orandi) that stretches back to William of Auvergne's Rhetorica divina and Erasmus's Modus orandi Deum. Nonetheless, Spiritual Modalities is cer­ tainly a significant contribution to the ongoing religious turn in rhetorical studies and the human sciences more generally. One of the most impressive things about Spiritual Modalities is that Fitzgerald achieves many critical and theoretical goals simultaneously and thus his book can be used in different ways by different readers. For example, he analyzes prayer as a specific rhetorical genre and also employs it as a general meta-rhetorical framework. Rhetorical critics of prayer will value the rich illustrations...

328 RHETORICA that Fitzgerald is correct in predicting that future rhetorical study does indeed have a prayer. Steven Mailloux Loyola Marymount University Kathy Eden, The Renaissance Rediscovery of Intimacy, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2012. x, 149 pp. ISBN: 9780226184623 William P. Weaver, Untutored Lines: The Making of the English Epyllion (Edinburgh Critical Studies in Renaissance Culture), Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2012. x, 219 pp. ISBN: 9780748644650 Daniel Derrin, Rhetoric and the Familiar in Francis Bacon and John Donne, Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, with The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc., 2013. xii, 197 pp. ISBN: 9781611476033. Catherine Nicholson, Uncommon Tongues: Eloquence and Eccentricity in the English Renaissance, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014. iv, 218 pp. ISBN: 9780812245585 Roland Greene, Five Words: Critical Semantics in the Age of Shakespeare and Cervantes, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2013. x, 210 pp. ISBN: 9780226000633. Of the five monographs on Renaissance literature reviewed here, the three by Kathy Eden, William P. Weaver, and Daniel Derrin offer learned applications of the history of rhetoric to significant authors and genres of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, while the two by Catherine Nicholson and Roland Greene touch on rhetoric in examining early modem complexities of language as indicators of cultural tensions and changes. Eden's The Renaissance Rediscovery of Intimacy makes a significant contri­ bution to the long-standing but frequently contested scholarly project of defin­ ing the Renaissance by the development of individualism. She reexamines the influence of classical authors on Petrarch, Erasmus, and Montaigne to trace their lineage in the rediscovery of what she calls throughout "a rhetoric and hermeneutics of intimacy," that is, a style of intimate writing and reading, activities that Eden, following Hans-Georg Gadamer, sees as inseparable. Focusing on familiar letters, Eden asserts that Petrarch's "letter reading is rooted in the intimacy associated with friendship" (p. 67). Guided by the Senecan model, he transforms Cicero's "rhetoric of intimacy" into "a hermeJ neutics of intimacy" by using the familiar letter to overcome not only physical distance (its chief function according to many ancient letter writers), but also temporal distance, in an effort "to understand his favorite ancient authors, whom he figures in epistolary terms as absent friends" (p. 69). Thus Petrarch, not Montaigne, was "individuality's founding father" (p. 120). The emphasis Reviews 329 Montaigne gives to writing, to friendship, and to frank self-revelation to his reader demonstrates that letter writing is foundational to his devel­ opment of the essay. His famous self-expression is grounded in friendly conversation, almost epistolary senno, between writer and reader. More­ over Montaigne foregrounds style in a legal and proprietary sense that Eden has traced from classical through humanist discussions of familiar­ ity, based in Roman and Greek concepts of the family and of property. Chapter 1 has surveyed the ancient "rhetoric of intimacy" from Aristotle to Demetrius and Quintilian. Erasmus's thoroughly rhetorical textbook on letter writing, De conscribendis epistolis, would seeni to fit awkwardly between Petrarch and Montaigne in Eden's genealogy of a rhetoric and hermeneutics of intimacy, as she acknow­ ledges, but she finds intimate writing in his correspondence, discussions of epistolary exercises in his pedagogical works De ratione studii and De copia, and praise of intimacv in the section on handwriting in De recta pronuntiatione. In its companion dialogue on stvle, Ciceronianus, Bulephorus emphasizes intimate reading as well as writing, both exemplified by the letter. As editor, Erasmus approaches Jerome's works as an intimate reader and describes style as ethos in his preface. Jerome's own editing of Scripture depends on a careful studv of stvle for evidence of forgerv and other corruption. As New Testament editor, Erasmus urges readers to experience Christ by approaching the Gospels as thev would a letter from a friend, while in his Paraphrase on Romans he attempts to capture St. Paul's ethos and use of multiple masks to reach diverse audiences. Eden's rich analysis of Erasmus's interest in intimate writing and reading in a wide range of works pioneers an exciting new scholarly direction in Erasmus studies that goes beyond the epistolary rhetoric he teaches to boys as an exercise...

Reviews Mats Malm, The Soul of Poetry Redefined: Vacillations of Mimesis from Aristotle to Romanticism, Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2012. 238 pp. ISBN 9788763537421 The Soul ofPoetry Redefined is a book that may be of interest to students of poetry and rhetoric, especially those invested in Aristotle's Poetics. Its central claim is that Aristotle is ambiguous in his conceptualization of mimesis, the "soul [psuche] of tragedy" (Poetics, quoted p. 12), if not of poetry in general. Malm presents the ambiguity in this way: When someone—be it Aristotle or any interpreter of his—says that poetry is mimesis or imitation of characters, actions, passions, etc., what is meant by "imitation"? Is it that actions and passions are composed, in the sense of construing [i.e., constructing?] a story, similar to how the historian arranges his account but with the freedom of invention, or that they are represented through words, just like the painter represents things and persons through colours? (Pp. 12-13) In Malm's account, this tension between content and form—muthos and lexis— gives rise to various adaptations of the Poetics over time, from Averroès in the twelfth century to Charles Batteux and Johann Adolph Schlegel in the eighteenth. From Averroès onward, Malm finds mimesis-as-representation stres­ sed over mimesis-as-plot-composition. The soul of poetry thus becomes visual imagery (p. 19) and metaphor (p. 45). Exceptional, in Malm's account, are Corneille and Racine: "The French classicists focus not on mimesisrepresentation but on mimesis-composition, so the 'verisimilar' here comes close to that of Aristotle" (p. 103). Yet this strikes me as unsurprising, given that Corneille and Racine were writing and theorizing on tragedy, just as Aristotle was, while Averroès and those who he influenced through Latin translation in the late Middle Ages and Renaissance addressed literature, and the arts, more generally. There are several basic problems with Malm's study of mimesis and its reception. First, with respect to Aristotle's Poetics, it is not clear to me that "mimesis-representation" and "mimesis-composition" are conceptually separable: I would think, rather, that composition involves representation, and vice versa. Second, I am not sure what's at stake in Malm's study. Could anyone disagree that some poetic theorists have stressed content over Rhetorica, Vol. XXXIV, Issue 3, pp. 324-335. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 1533-8541. © 2016 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/joumals.php?p=reprints. DOI: 10.1525/rh.20l6.34.3.324. Reviews 325 form, or form ox er content? Malm's work is not really situated in relation to extant criticism on Aristotle and his reception, despite the eighteen pages on which the eminent Classics scholar Stephen Halliwell is cited. In the end, I have no clear sense of either Halliwell's arguments or how Malm's account of mimesis may or may not relate to them. Other scholars are cited with still greater opacity: for example, in a not uninteresting excursion on the sublime and its relation to visualization (phantasia), we are told, "The evolution of aes­ thetics can be tied to the ev olution of a new kind of social subject, as Peter de Bolla has demonstrated" (p. 139). No explanation follows. To my' mind, the best chapter of The Soul of Poetry Redefined is its tenth and last, "Emotions and the system of genres" (pp. 171-85). Here Malm advances, however tentatively, a real argument with explanatory force. Addressing the question of whv Aristotle stresses content over style and dra­ matic poetry over lyric, Malm writes that in the Poetics, "The pleasure of poetry. . .comes mainiv from understanding, and from pity and fear which are means of understanding. In this way, Aristotle distances poetry consider­ able' from the Platonic critique of linguistic voluptuousness and decadence. . . . Defining the soul of poetrv as lexis, mimesis-representation would have been to subject it to Plato's critique of rhetoric and representation. The soul of poetrv being muthos, content and structure, poetry...

Different from some of his other works on practical philosophy Aristotle's Rhetoric has a rather strong orientation towards the everyday life world of the poleis of his time. That applies to many of his reflections on the conditions of communication in the poleis as well as to his utterances about social values which are based on common sense. In Aristotle's view the orator's ethos and thus his consequent reference to intersubjectively valid values is the most important instrument for a rhetor to claim credibility. In comparison with the ethopoiia of fourth-century rhetorical practice at Athens there are several structural similarities which, however, are neither due to interdependencies nor manifest themselves in intertextual references, but are due to the fact that Aristotle refers to the orators' conditions of action in a democratic system. Besides, there are also strong differences which seem to have two main reasons: Aristotle's inclination to differentiate and to systematize his topics as well as his tendency to ‘elitism’ which might have philosophical and socio-political components, whereby in the Rhetoric the socio-political ones predominate.

Different from some of his other works on practical philosophy Aristotle’s Rhetoric has a rather strong orientation towards the everyday life world of the poleis of his time. That applies to many of his reflections on the conditions of communication in the poleis as well as to his utterances about social values which are based on common sense. In Aristotle’s view the orator’s ethos and thus his consequent reference to intersubjectively valid values is the most important instrument for a rhetor to claim credibility. In comparison with the ethopoiia of fourth-century rhetorical practice at Athens there are several structural similarities which, however, are neither due to interdependencies nor manifest themselves in intertextual references, but are due to the fact that Aristotle refers to the orators’ conditions of action in a democratic system. Besides, there are also strong differences which seem to have two mam reasons: Aristotle’s inclination to differentiate and to systematize his topics as well as his tendency to ‘elitism’ which might have philosophical and socio-political components, whereby in the Rhetoric the socio-political ones predominate.

216 RHETORICA del fratello di Guizzardo, i Flores veritatis gramatice di Bertoluccio (sopra ricordato), conservata anche in altri due manoscritti (e attribuita a Gentile da Cingoli in un altro ms.). Lo studio di quest'opera che, secondo il giudizio di Gian Carlo Alessio, è "un manuale costruito coi modelli della grammatica speculativa", sarebbe molto intéressante perché potrebbe costituire il legame tra la tradizione di riflessione grammaticale, importata probabilmente tra i maestri delle arti e medicina di Bologna da Gentile da Cingoli (il maestro di Angelo di Arezzo), e la tradizione di insegnamento della grammatica e della retorica (dictamen) di ámbito giuridico-notarile che convivevano a Bologna, non sempre in buoni rapporti. COSTANTINO MARMO, BOLOGNA Matthew Kempshall, Rhetoric and the Writing of History, 400-1500, Manchester University Press, 2012, x + 627 pp. ISBN 9780719070310 Peter Van Nuffelen, Orosius and the Rhetoric of History, Oxford University Press, 2012, viii + 252 pp. ISBN 9780199655274 In recent years, scholarly attitudes towards writers of history in the late antique and medieval period have undergone a fundamental series of trans­ formations. It is no longer sufficient to describe these individuals as mere imi­ tators of a glorious classical historiographical tradition, using tools that they only barely understood with limited success. Nor can they be unreflectively dismissed simply as polemicists and moralizers, subject to the particular pressures that attended an overly-literal reception of Biblical themes and models. The two books under review here add further fuel to a revisionist reading of medieval historiography by focusing upon the ways in which authors could strategically utilize techniques of argumentation and presenta­ tion drawn from the training in rhetoric and grammar that underpinned the literary culture of the period. Matthew Kempshall's Rhetoric and the Writing of History, 400-1500 is a magisterial, synthetic introduction to the subject, aimed principally at students and scholars new to the field and encompassing some 550 pages of elegantly written, exhaustively supported argumentation. In his Orosius and the Rhetoric ofHistory, meanwhile, Peter Van Nuffelen offers a collection of carefully drawn interpretative vignettes which seek to engage scholars of both historiography and Christian literature of the period, and, in the process, to redirect the focus of Orosian scholarship by placing him within the context of secular, as well as Christian, historiography of the fifth and sixth centuries. Both projects are, therefore, explicitly rehabilitative in nature: Kempshall's to demonstrate that medieval historiography was neither crude nor credulous nor conceptually unsophisticated" (536), and Van Nuffelen's to deliver Orosius from the accusation that he was an unimaginative, unintelligent theologian who fundamentally misunderstood the works of his patron, Augustine of Reviews 217 Hippo. Both authors go about their projects by emphasizing the close and enduring relationship between the writing of history and the practices, concerns, and techniques of classical rhetoric. In particular, both acknowledge and build upon existing arguments about the extensive and substantial influ­ ence of manuals of rhetoric (particularly Cicero, Quintilian, and the pseudoCiceronian Rhetonoi iid Hei'eniiiimi) on the education that authors of the period received. For Kempshall, the pervasiveness of classical rhetoric in medieval thought and literature should not be understood as a black mark against the veracity, reliability, or integrity of practitioners of the period. On the contrary, the principles of deliberative, judicial, and demonstrative rhetoric provided the writers of history with the tools that thev needed in order to fulfill the tripartite objective of history: to teach, to move, and to please. After first outlining the immense diversity of texts that are collected together under the rubric of medi­ eval historiography and the fundamental forms and objectives of the three types of classical rhetoric that authors of those texts might be expected to be familiar with, Kempshall proceeds to explore in detail the principles and tech­ niques of classical rhetoric, and the texts and contexts in which they can be found in historical writing of the period. In the process, he also questions and begins upon a deconstruction of the tendency to identify the 12th and 15th centuries as w atershed moments in the history of medieval historiographv . While he agrees that the intellectual and cultural developments of those centuries do mark significant points in the dev elopment of medieval...

Reviews 113 had to resort to the footnotes with their quotations in Latin in order to fully understand the text. This confession is a hardly covert recommendation to publish as soon as possible an English translation of this wonderful book, written in the best tradition of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric. Kees Meerhoff, Amsterdam Marv Carruthers, The Experience of Beauty in the Middle Ages (OxfordWarburg Studies), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. xii + 233 pp. ISBN 9780199590322 The Experience of Beauty in the Middle Ages is, like the rhetorical artworks it examines, a tour (iter) through the beauty of artifice. As we progress, our expert guide, Mary Carruthers, offers us insights into aspects of rhetoric that led the medieval reader to pleasure, such as suavitas (sweetness). Indeed, the book's own construction embodies the rhetorical pleasure of varietas, as our guide now points to Augustine, then Dante, before casting back to Aristotle and then taking up Aquinas; meanwhile her favourite, Bene of Florence, is never far from the scene. Chapter 1 examines the notion of ludic space and the medieval distinc­ tion of serin and ioca, moving from medieval school debates to the complex compositional and experiential aesthetics of the Anglo-Saxon Dream of the Rood. The next chapter explores the sensory and volitional nature of aesthe­ tics, particularly considering the aesthetic of difficult style in patristic letters and those of Bernard of Clairvaux. Chapter 3 discusses 'sweetness' as both aesthetic pleasure and a form of medicine in medieval thought, and compre­ hensively analyses the valences of multiple Latin terms for 'sweetness', including how medieval thinkers recognized the dangers of sweetness in persuasion. The fourth chapter considers the conceptual and linguistic history in the classical and Medieval Latin tradition of the Modern concept of 'Taste' as an aesthetic judgment. In Chapter 5, Carruthers shows us how the medieval mind and body valued 'varietas', utilizing hybridity ('monsters') not just didactic purposes, but for the aesthetic sensory experi­ ence it could offer as well. And yet, if we proceed through the book via its own ductus, the path it sets out before us, as Carruthers has outlined here and elsewhere,1 we arrive in the final chapter, 'Ordinary Beauty', at a conundrum. Only here is volume's title term 'Beauty' given definition and the concept of 'aesthetics' subjected to ’Here, p. 53; see also Carruthers, 'The Concept of ductus, or Journeying through a Work of Art', in Rhetoric Beyond Words: Delight and Persuasion in the Arts ofthe Middle Ages, ed. Mary Carruthers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 190-213: 'an ongoing, dynamic process rather than. . .the examination of a static or completed object'; 'Ductus is the way by which a work leads someone through itself'. 114 RHETORIC A analysis.2 These late-placed definitions allow us to see that while Carrutilers' focus in the preceding chapters on the aesthetic attributes of human-crafted artifacts has lent itself to an analysis and vocabulary of pleasure, it has not nec­ essarily lent itself to a vocabulary of beauty, in the way traditionally associated with natural and supernatural forms (human, landscape, divine). Carruthers has been able to show us medieval readers taking enjoyment and pleasure in texts constructed to evince suavitas and varietas, but the leap from this to 'beauty' resides in a conflation that pertains throughout the volume: corporeal sensation = aesthetic sensation = beauty.3 In terms of the book's argument, then, Carruthers need only find sensory perception to find beauty. This is not, however, a necessary correlation, as a text cited by Carruthers in her earlier chapter on ductus reveals: there she quotes Horace, Ars poetica (99): 'It is not enough for poems to be beautiful—they must be sweet'.4 This would suggest a distinction between aesthetic ideal and sensory pleasure that tends to be collapsed in The Experience ofBeauty. Neither does the identifi­ cation of sensory input with beauty allow for the medieval understanding that sensory pleasure could be taken in what was not beautiful—for example, sin. It is also telling that the words 'pulcher' / 'pulchritudo', which one might think most immediately expressive of 'beauty' in Medieval Latin, hardly appear until the final chapter. Also of concern...

110 RHETORICA dialect when the sophists spread their teaching in the Hellenic world. The inscriptive evidence provides a strong case for the utility of sophistic rhetoric. This innovative volume builds a case for using physical artifacts along with textual evidence to research the histories of rhetoric. Researchers look­ ing into under-represented or marginalized traditions may find this book useful for providing a method to examine the cultural context of these understudied rhetorics. Enos is arguing for an expansion of method which feminist rhetoricians are already strongly embracing. Scholars looking to expand their repertoires in academic investigation may find these new ave­ nues for research rewarding. Robert Lively, Arizona State University B. Fernandes Pereira, Retórica e Eloquéncia em Portugal na época do Renascimento, Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional - Casa da Moeda, 2012; 988 pp. ISBN 9789722719711 For most people, the rich history of Portuguese rhetoric is terra incog­ nita. The comprehensive survey of Belmiro Pereira offers a unique occasion to explore these unknown fields and discover their many treasures. Many ISHR members will be delighted to see their names in the footnotes of this extremely well documented book. It starts with an overview of medieval rhetoric and the transmission of ancient texts during this period; there are chapters on the artes dictandi and artes praedicandi, on classical rhetoric in medieval Portuguese culture, on reading the Fathers of the Church, on the growing interest in the works of Aristotle, Cicero and Quintilian in the four­ teenth and fifteenth centuries. As in other parts of the book, Pereira indica­ tes where the manuscripts of these works are to be found: this precise information about the major places of learning in Portugal and Spain is very welcome. It also shows the aim of the author to present rhetoric in the wider context of education, culture and religion. This aim continues to be pursued in the second part of the book, which deals with rhetoric and the rise of humanism in Portugal. The prominence of rhetoric in Renaissance culture is considered in an international perspec­ tive, with special emphasis on developments in Spain, France and, more unexpectedly, in Germany and the Low Countries. Indeed, one of the major discoveries in this book is the importance of Northern humanism for the evolution of rhetorical education in Portugal. The author has founded his research on an extensive knowledge of the sources in the various countries under consideration. His reading of studies published in all these countries on the subject of Renaissance rhetoric is vast, up to date and accurate. A stu­ dent of German or Spanish rhetoric may learn a great deal from this book about his or her own field of interest. The presence of major works of ancient, medieval and Renaissance rhetoric in the more important Portuguese libraries is documented for two Reviews 111 periods, before and after the year 1537. The author singles out the years 1527 to 1548 for special consideration. In these two decades the King of Portugal, John the Third, sent his country's most promising students to Paris to have them acquaint themselves with the ideas and methods of Erasmian humanism. They gathered in a college run more or less perma­ nently by Portuguese scholars: Sancta Barbara, in French Sainte-Barbe. Moreover, the syllabus of the Santa Cruz monastery in Coimbra was reorga­ nised according to modern standards. Finallv, in the year 1548 the humanist Colegio das Artes is established by order of the King in the same city; and teachers educated in centres of learning in Paris and elsewhere in Europe are engaged to bring to Portugal the methods of reading and writing devel­ oped by major humanist educators. According to B. Pereira 1537 was a pivotal year: the centre of higher education was transferred from Eisbon to Coimbra and the King's brother Henry (D. Henrique) founded in Braga a new college, Saint Paul's. In this latter college, the influence of Northern humanism is conspicuous due to the presence of teachers such as N. Clenardus and J. Vasaeus. Pereira gives a great deal of attention to the career of A. Pinus (Pinheiro), educated in Paris and afterwards entrus­ ted with high offices at the Portuguese court...

This article considers the epistemology of Classical rhetoric and Hippocratic medicine, focusing on two key terms: semeion and tekmerion. Through an analysis of the specific case of ancient Greek medicine and rhetoric, we hope to bring out the conjectural and fallible nature of human knowledge. The paper focuses on the epistemological and methodological affinity between these two ancient technai, and considers the medical uses of semeion and tekmerion in the light of their meaning in the rhetorical sphere. Chronologically, the analysis follows an inverse pathway: it starts from Aristotle and from Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, and then moves on to Antiphon’s texts (chosen as an exemplary case) and ends with the Corpus Hippocraticum.

108 RHETORICA numbering is still useful; Behr edited orations 1—16 in 1968 and Keil in 1898 (reprinted) edited 17-52. In addition Behr in 1981-86 translated all the works of Aristides in 2 volumes. Raffaella Cribiore, New York Richard Leo Enos, Greek Rhetoric Before Aristotle. Revised and Expanded Edition. Anderson, SC: Parlor Press, 2012. 272 pp. Cloth: $60. Paper: $32. Adobe ebook: $20. ISBN-13: 978-1-60235-212-4. When Greek Rhetoric Before Aristotle's first edition was released in 1993, the reviews were not flattering. Carol Poster's review in Rhetoric Society Quar­ terly (26.3) called the book, "quite disappointing, containing little information that is not readily available in the libraries of most research universities." Similarly, William W. Fortenbaugh, writing in Philosophy and Rhetoric (28.2) notes that "Enos's discussion of Homer and the rhapsodes disappointed me, despite the fact that I am no expert in Homeric questions." The early cri­ ticisms of the book seem unduly harsh considering the territory Enos is exploring. Fortenbaugh, for instance, sums it up nicely as "for it [Enos's book] confronted me with material either long forgotten or rarely considered," but then drops this consideration from his critique. What Poster and Fortenbaugh did not recognize at the time was that Richard Leo Enos was planting the seeds of his theory of Archaeological Rhetoric. Enos begins his theory in the first edition of Greek Rhetoric Before Aristotle and expands this idea in several iterations leading to the expanded and revised second edition. In his 2002 article in RSQ (32.1), "The Archae­ ology of Women in Rhetoric: Rhetorical Sequencing as a Research Method for Historical Scholarship," Enos argues that research needs to cut through "pedantic refinery, exhibiting two traits essential to research: a passion for discovering primary sources and the cavalier, but resourceful, methods by which they go about solving their research problems." It is in this spirit that the Revised and Expanded edition attempts to reinterpret early Greek rhetorical tradition through archaeological and epigraphical evidence—and in cultural context. This is exactly what the Revised and Expanded edition addresses. In the nineteen years since the original edition was published, Enos refined his theory of Archaeological Rhetoric. The new edition is almost twice the length of the original and attempts to answer the criticisms of the earlier edition. What early critics misunderstood was that Enos was not attempting to be comprehensive in his chapters, he was attempting to redefine method in rhetorical inquiry. Expanded from the original five, Greek Rhetoric Before Aristotle's nine chapters are loosely chronological following his theory of Archaeological Rhetoric, including a strong bibliography developed since the initial volume. It is, of course, impossible to fully represent every aspect of Enos's arguments and examples here, but several high points are worth noting. Reviews 109 The first two chapters consider the development Homeric literature as a discourse genie spread by the Greek rhapsodes. Enos explains that once this body of knowledge was created, the discourse modes of heuristic, eris­ tic, and protreptic were needed to expand and recite the hymns. His discus­ sion of the rhapsodes better explains the shift in Greek culture from true orality to a written medium. Using archaeological examples, Enos examines inscriptions that explicit archaeological evidence, predating Homer by sev­ eral hundred years, reveals that this early form of paragraph was already being standardized within an oral culture" (49). These examples of written text were actually attempts to quantify elements already deduced in speech. Chapters III through V explore the problem in studying Hellenic rhetoric: scholars often assume that rhetorical acts were practiced only by the educated few. Professor Enos argues that during this era craft and functional literacy was widespread. Given the emerging development of alphabetic systems, the ability to decode was readilv available. His archaeological evidence is intrigu­ ing to the growing functional literacy among the tradesmen of the polis, such as the recording of votes bv citizens on potsherds, or ostraca. Chapter IV and V are perhaps the most interesting chapters in the volume. Sicily's "rhetorical climate" (97) is important because it frames the contributions of Corax and Tisias, and the importance of Gorgias to the...

Reviews Kathleen S. Lamp. A City of Marble. The Rhetoric of Augustan Rome. South Carolina, 2013. 208 pp. ISBN 9781611172775 What is the relationship between rhetoric, both spoken and visual, and ci\'ic participation in Augustan Rome? A City of Marble. The Rhetoric of Augustan Rome, attempts to address this question, beginning in the intro­ duction by examining Augustus' Famous assertion that he "entered Rome a city of brick and left it a citv of marble". The study goes on to examine how visual displays function themselves as a form of persuasion that, in Augustus' case, helped him to win and maintain power. Her argument is that Augustan culture was heavilv influenced bv rhetorical theory, which in turn "guided ci\ ic participation and rhetorical practice" (p. 5), and fur­ ther, that the synthesis of rhetoric to image and politics in so sweeping a manner was a central aspect of Augustus' accomplishment. The first chapter surveys Rome's "rhetorical situation" upon Augustus' assumption of sole command. One of the conundrums Augustus faced was how to maintain the goodwill of those he governed. Lamp asserts (p. 13) that Augustus' attempts to gain acceptance were rhetorical from the standpoint that "thev represented a tvpe of persuasive communication between the peo­ ple and the government about the workings of the state". A significant part of his rhetorical strategy7 was his reliance on various mythological traditions such as those of Aeneas, Romulus, and of the monarchy and its demise. Chapter two ("Seeing Rhetorical Theory") argues that the ancient theory of rhetoric broadened under the empire to include other literary genres beyond oratorv, including non-traditional forms of media not usually associated with rhetoric, including coins, monuments, and city planning. The chapter inclu­ des a good discussion of the relationship between the visual and memory in rhetorical theorists, focusing on Quintilian and Cicero who clearly associ­ ated the two, and who, in addition, addressed the role of monuments and urban spaces in creating collective public memory. The next chapter ("The Augustan Political Myth") builds on the first two, and starts with a close examination of the Ara Pads as a piece of Augustan rhetoric, examining how it constructed myth and memory in Augustan Rome. She argues that the altar used conventions of rhetoric that were roughly analogous to those expounded in the rhetorical theories of Cicero and Quintilian with a view to addressing its audience. Chapter four Rhetorica, Vol. XXXIII, Issue 4, pp. 431-442. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 1533-8541. C 2016 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press s Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/joumals.php7p—reprints. DOI: 10.1525/rh.2015.33.4.431. 432 RHETORICA ("Let Us Now Praise Great Men") similarly examines the Forum of Augustus and its rhetorical function; the chapter begins with a discussion of Isocrates theory of rhetoric that argued against the use of visual media or static representative forms of rhetoric, such as statuary. Of course, this is precisely what Augustus' forum was - a monument that employed a permanent, visual record intended to educate the audience in a particular set of values with a view to imitation, something that had a long-standing tradition in Rome, particularly with the use of funerary images. The chapter concludes with an interesting discussion of how the rhetoric of the forum itself parallels its function as an administrative and judicial center where oratory would be practiced. Lamp then turns in chapter five ("Coins, Material Rhetoric, and Circu­ lation") to the dissemination of the Augustan political myth. She traces, via the numismatic record, the creation of that myth, but further argues that it evolved over time, noting that the coins issued at the end of his reign indi­ cate a popular acceptance of that myth. She focuses on three aspects of Augustus' program prior to 13 BC: pietas, succession, and the trifecta of peace, victory, and prosperity. In the numismatic record after 9 BC we find emblems designed to emphasize Augustus' pietas and his role as poutifex maximus, while she notes that prior to...

440 RHETORIC A and justice. It offers an aspirational vision for the new rhetoric that has been unfolding for nearly a century. Hannah Arendt famously wrote of the human condition as in the world. Crosswhite's project embraces her vision as synonymous with the deep insight into the human condition that is offered by a philosophical rhetoric and the world its insights might instigate. Gerard A. Hauser University of Colorado Boulder Quentin Skinner, Forensic Shakespeare (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014), 368 pp. ISBN: 978-0199558247 Quentin Skinner last devoted a monograph to theories of rhetoric almost twenty years ago, in his Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy ofHobbes (1996). Forensic Shakespeare is in the same vein, deviating from the attention Skinner gives to republican liberty in his two more recent works (Liberty Before Liberalism, 1997 and Hobbes and Republican Liberty, 2008). Those look­ ing for further commentary on these themes within the scope of the history of political thought will not find it here; it is not Skinner's purpose. Forensic Shakespeare at no point treads this familiar ground of the history of political thought; the analysis, however, remains thoroughly within the realm of intellectual history. There are questions literary scholars might be keen to ask of this book, especially related to interpretation and theatrical staging, but Skinner makes clear from the outset that these are outside his remit. He is interested in what he calls "explanation" rather than "interpretation", in treating Shakespeare's works as historical texts, open to the sort of histor­ ical analysis Skinner is known for. The central claim of the book is that "among Shakespeare's plays there are several in which the dramaturgy is extensively drawn from clas­ sical and Renaissance treatises on judicial rhetoric" (p. 1). Skinner's focus is on two periods in Shakespeare's career - between 1594 and 1600, and between the summer of 1603 and the beginning of 1605 - covering plays such as Romeo and Juliet, The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, and Othello. These, especially Hamlet and those belonging to the Jacobean period, Skinner sug­ gests can be referred to as Shakespeare's "forensic plays" for their use of the rules and styles of forensic rhetoric - the rhetoric of the courtroom. This should immediately resonate with any reader familiar with these plays; the climax of the plot often involves a court scene in which the guilt of characters is disputed, whether in the courtroom of The Merchant of Venice or the tomb of Romeo and Juliet. But the question of why Shakespeare turns to forensic rhetoric in these periods of his career is a question that Skinner leaves open. As he 'states in his introduction, he intends this book as a foundational one - he will argue that Shakespeare was using these rhetorical sources in his plays, any further questions or conclusions are left for future studies. Reviews 441 Aftei a shoi t inti eduction, setting out his purpose, giving fulsome acknowledgement to the existing literature on the subject, and establishing his methodological boundaries, Skinner opens with a description of the clas­ sical rhetorical tiadition in Shakespeare s England, giving a thorough over­ view on the topic for those not otherwise familiar with it. Already Skinner begins to hint at Shakespeare's deviation from such traditional rhetorical norms, a topic to which he returns in the final pages of the book. This first chapter almost stands alone as a useful introduction to the revival, teaching and debates of classical rhetoric in Renaissance England, and is of itself demonstrative of Skinner's rich knowledge of the topic. The second chapter introduces the forensic plays, which are distin­ guished from the rest of Shakespeare's work in their focus on the forensic yem/s of rhetoric. Skinner makes the tantalizing suggestion that "Shakes­ peare is interested at most stages of his literary career in the full range of distinctively rhetorical utterance" (p. 48), but focuses on Shakespeare's use of forensic rhetoric in this selection of plays, leaving space for a study of Shakespeare and his engagement with the other two types of rhetoric - epideictic and deliberative, both which have a strong relationship with the political. The remaining chapters explore the parts of...

Reviews 433 The study is in general good, but not without some flaws and omis­ sions. For example, in chapter one she asserts with little argument that Augustus sought to associate himself with Servius and his reforms in partic­ ular. Her short history of rhetoric under Augustus relies too much on Tacitus' Dialogits and on relatively later sources, (Cassius Dio and Quintilian), omitting Seneca the Elder and Seutonius' lives of famous rhetoricians that bring us closer to Augustus. She asserts in chapter two that history started to become recognized as a rhetorical theory under Augustus, something already clearly understood by Cicero (one thinks of his letter to Lucceius, Ad fanuliares 5.12). Chapter three relies too much on Ann Vasaly and not enough on other scholarship (e.g. Catherine Edwards, Mary Jaeger, and Andrew Feldherr to cite a few) who look at Rome as a "text", and the chapter seems to make a conclusion long since established - that the city could be read as such. Indeed, it seems to me a general flaw of the book that the biblio­ graphy is frequently jejune, while the study itself covers a good deal of ter­ ritory that has already' been traversed. Still, Kathleen Lamp's study will help us to rethink the connections between the visual and the rhetorical during this crucial epoch. Steve Rutledge, Sheridan, Oregon [Quintiliano], L'astrologo (Declamazioni maggiori, 4), a cura di Antonio Stramaglia. Cassino : Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 2013,251 pp. ISBN 9788883170713, e [Quintilien], Le tombeau ensorcelé, (Grandes déclamations, 10), a cura di Catherine Schneider. Cassino: Edizioni delTUniversità degli Studi di Cassino, 2013, 359 pp. ISBN 9788883170683 1 volumi 4 e 10 delle Declamazioni maggiori, rispettivamente curati da A. Stramaglia e C. Schneider, usciti nel maggio 2013 per le Edizioni dell'Università di Cassino, si iscrivono all'interno di un progetto internazionale di traduzione e commento delle diciannove Maiores che raggiunge cosi un totale di undid tomi pubblicati. Entrambi i volumi presentano la stessa struttura, comune a tutta la serie. Nell'introduzione è esposto in modo sintético lo sviluppo dell'argomentazione di ciascun discorso e sono analizzate le principali caratteristiche delle diverse parti in cui si articola. Seguono poi considerazioni generali sulla lingua e sullo stile, e quindi ipotesi sulla datazione e riflessioni sulla fortuna. Successivamente viene proposto il testo latino affiancato da traduzione, in italiano in un caso e in francese nell'altro, e corredato da un ricco apparato di note critiche e di commento. Per entrambi i volumi, il testo latino assunto come base è quello dell edizione teubneriana curata da Hâkanson nel 1982, ma in numerosi passi entrambi gli studiosi se ne discostano, sempre segnalandolo e dandone dovuto conto nelle note di commento. Nella Declamazione maggiore 4 Stramaglia 434 RHETORICA introduce anche una suddivisione degli ampi capitoli dell'edizione critica di Hâkanson in paragrafi di più breve estensione: questa mise en page del testo risulta particolarmente utile per il reperimento e la citazione dei passi. La Declamazione maggiore 4, curata da Stramaglia, è incentrata sul tema dell'astrologia. Si tratta di un discorso pronunciato da un vir fortis che chiede alio Stato, come ricompensa per i suoi atti di valore, il permesso di suicidarsi senza essere per questo condannato a restare privo di sepoltura, secondo quanto previsto dalla legge. La sua decisione deriva dalla volontà di contrastare una funesta profezia fatta da un astrólogo prima délia sua nascita e secondo la quale, dopo essere diventato un eroe di guerra per la sua patria, si sarebbe macchiato di parricidio. L'azione giudiziaria nasce dalLopposizione del padre alla richiesta del figlio. Questa controversia è caratterizzata da un sapiente equilibrio tra terni declamatori tradizionali (contrasto padre-figlio; motivo del parricidio; figura del vir fortis e suo diritto a scegliere la propria ricompensa) e motivi (almeno per noi) più originali, corne il rilievo dato appunto alla temática délia astrologia. Nell'Introduzione Stramaglia nota in particolare corne la scelta del soggetto principale si presenti quale un'evidente concessione a gusti declamatori moderni, anche se poi la declamazione resta rigorosa­ mente « classica » nel suo sviluppo e nella sua articolazione. Se infatti il rilievo dato all'astrologia non avrebbe certo incontrato il plauso...

Current histories of rhetoric neglect the early Christian period (ca. 30–430 CE) in several crucial ways-Augustine is overemphasized and made to serve as a summary of Christian thought rather than an endpoint, the texts of church fathers before 300 CE are neglected or lumped together, and the texts of the New Testament are left unexamined. An alternative outline of early Christian rhetoric is offered, explored through the angles of political self-invention, doctrinal ghostwriting, apologetics, and fractured sermonization. Early Christianity was not a monolithic religion that eventually made peace with classical rhetoric, but as a rhetorical force in its own right, and comprised of more factions earlv on than just the apostolic church.

Book Review| August 01 2015 Review: The Theory and Practice of Life: Isocrates and the Philosophers, by Tarik Wareh Tarik Wareh, The Theory and Practice of Life: Isocrates and the Philosophers. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies. Distributed by Harvard University Press, 2012, viii + 236 pp. ISBN 9780674067134 David Depew David Depew University of Iowa Project of the Rhetoric of Inquiry (POROI). 230 North Clinton, 100 Bowman House, Iowa City, Iowa 52242 USA david-depew@uiowa.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2015) 33 (3): 320–322. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2015.33.3.320 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation David Depew; Review: The Theory and Practice of Life: Isocrates and the Philosophers, by Tarik Wareh. Rhetorica 1 August 2015; 33 (3): 320–322. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2015.33.3.320 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintInfo.asp.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

322 RHETORICA differently in theology, mathematics, natural science, politics, ethics, poetics, and-Isocrates's home turf-rhetoric. Aristotle's Rhetoric, for example, focuses on enthymematic forms of syllogismos as appropriate responses to contin­ gent situations. It thereby contrasts with Isocrates's tendency, as Aristotle sees it, to heighten emotions by assimilating deliberative and forensic forms of public address to panoramic epideictic displays (Rhetoric I.9.1368a20-33). I trust it is not just because I am less familiar than Wareh with the fortunes of Academics and Isocrateans in the mid 340s, when Philip began to exercise hegemony over Greek poleis, that I was effortlessly drawn along by his discus­ sion of this subject in the second half of his book. I have no trouble believing that the rise of a courtly style of politics with the Macedonian ascendency had, being Macedonian, its vulgar side. Still, the translation Wareh includes of a remark­ ably sycophantic letter Plato's successor Speusippus wrote to Phillip urging him to purge his court of Isocrateans and give the Academy an exclusive lock on knowledge viewed as cultural capital makes for pretty depressing reading. Wareh sees the same tangle of intrigue in Aristotle's ties to Hermias, the tyrant of Atarnea near Lesbos. Isocrates's pleas for influence were no less attuned to court life. In fact, in the forms of address that emerged when philosophers were first turned into courtiers, Wareh concludes by showing, was born the mirror-of-princes rhetoric that gave Isocrates a rebirth in the Renaissance. David Depew University of Iowa Rachel Ahern Knudsen, Homeric Speech and the Origins of Rhetoric, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014. 230 pp. ISBN 9781421412269 Rachel Ahem Knudsen's Homeric Speech and the Origins of Rhetoric (hereafter Homeric Speech) provides a new, detailed perspective on an old debate: how ought we to regard the works of Homer when considering the beginnings of rhetoric in ancient Greece? The standard accounts of rhe­ toric's origins are represented by the traditional scholarship of George Kennedy (The Art of Persuasion in Greece, 1963) and Laurent Pemot (Rhetoric in Antiquity, 2005). These works offer the received view that, while rhetori­ cal techniques are evident in the earliest forms of extant Greek literature, the formalization of rhetoric as a disciplinary art (techne) began in the Fifth Century BCE when it was "invented" by Corax and Tisias on the island of Sicily. Current scholarship by historians of rhetoric—represented by the works of Thomas Cole (The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, 1991) and Edward Schiappa (The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece, 1999)—have challenged traditional views on the origins of rhetoric. Cole argues that the actual founders of rhetoric are Plato and Aristotle, while Schiappa argues that the term rhetorike did not even exist until Plato created Reviews 323 the term in his dialogue Goryias (pp. 18, 19). Additionally, the traditional distinctions separating rhetoric and poetry have been reconsidered because of such excellent research as Jeffrey Walker's Rhetoric and Poetics in Antiquity (2000), a work that Knudsen "has affinities with" in support of her own views (p. 20). Knudsen's objective is clearly stated: The contention of this book is ... that Homer not only demonstrates rhetorical practice in the speech of his characters, but that the patterns of persuasion that he depicts embody, in very specific ways, the rheto­ ric identified in theoretical treatises from the fifth and fourth centuries BCE, and that reached its fullest expression in Aristotle's Rhetoric" (pp. 3-4). Knudsen presents impressive scholarship in support of her position, but the merits of her contributions have some qualifications. Knudsen presents a detailed examination of the formal speeches of the Iliad in which she reveals systematic patterns of discourse using the following rhetorical concepts: enthymeme, diathesis, ethos, gnome, paradeigma, and topics. Her findings, appearing in both her criticism and also the frequencycharts citing the use of concepts and speakers, make it clear that the formal speech passages in the Iliad demonstrate the employment of rhetorical techni­ ques throughout the work (pp. 78, 80, 82). The obvious counter-argument to Knudsen's position is that rhetoric can and is employed without a conscious application but rather...

320 RHETORICA attuali, esse non valgono certamente per il libro che Emmanuelle Danblon ci ha regalato: una ricerca coraggiosa, ricca di ipotesi originali ed innovative, all'altezza delle sfide che la modernità pone ad una disciplina che da Aristotele in poi non ha mai smesso di nutriré la cultura occidentale. Mauro Serra, Fisciano (Salerno) Tarik Wareh, The Theory and Practice of Life: Isocrates and the Philoso­ phers. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies. Distributed by Harvard University Press, 2012, viii + 236 pp. ISBN 9780674067134 The perennial contest between rhetoric and philosophy expresses itself, among other ways, in the expulsion from the potted stories these disciplines tell about themselves of authors who in their own day were thickly intertwi­ ned. The granddaddy of such expulsions is the erasure of Isocrates from the story of ancient philosophy. I blithely suppose that most teachers of Greek philosophy know who Isocrates was, if only because Plato and Aristotle both mention him (Phaedrus 279a; Rhetoric, fifteen loci). They may also know that these mentions allude to the rivalry between Academics and Isocrateans , who established competing schools in 4th century Athens. When he was young Aristotle effectively hawked the wares of the Academy in public performances that were long appreciated, by Cicero among others, for their eloquence. But no sooner do historians of philosophy mention these facts than we hear that Isocrates's advertisement of himself as a teacher of philosophia was little more than a pretentious way of differentiating himself from (other) sophists and of cutting into the Academics's (and later the Lyceum's) market. By contrast, Tarik Wareh's The Theory and Practice of Life: Isocrates and the Philosophers builds on growing appreciation of the way in which Aristotle took Isocrates's philosophia (general education achieved by imita­ tion with a view to public success in oratory and so in politics) seriously enough to incorporate Isocratean themes into his own philosophy of human things (ta anthropopina): ethics, politics, rhetoric, and poetics. The question is how deeply Aristotle transformed these themes in appropriating them. In addressing this issue Wareh is encouraged by the appearance of yet another reconstruction (from a lacunose array of fragments and testimonial of Aristotle's Protrepticus, a speech inviting prospective students to frame their lives around the love of wisdom as Academics conceived it and solicit­ ing the powers that be to support (or at least tolerate) the Academic approach to education. D. S. Hutchinson's and M. R. Johnson's edition of the Protrepticus frames the issues that divided Isocrateans and Academics by reconstructing the fragments as a dialogue-well, a set of rival speeches, anyway-between 'Isocrates,' 'Aristotle,' and a Pythagorean named 'Heraclides ' (http://www.protrepticus.info). 'Heraclides' adopts the apolitical, indeed anti-political, view of a sub-sect of Pythagoreans whom 'Aristotle' Reviews 321 identifies as 'nnithematici.' "The human creature is nothing/' he says, "and nothing is secure in human affairs ... All the things that seem great to peo­ ple are an optical illusion." From this sour perspective there is little or no difference between external goods such as wealth, health, beauty, and power and the ends of political life. Isocrates's philosophia inscribed just this difference into rhetorical practice by inducing reflective understanding of the big picture as a way of responding in a timely way to issues closer to hand. 'Aristotle's row was harder to hoe. The Academic curriculum fea­ tured high-end mathematics as propaedeutic to other studies. That is because Plato and the mathematician Eudoxus, co-founder of the Academy, regarded mathematical sciences as valuable, while, like the aristocrats they were or sympathized with, despising their practical and technical applica­ tions. They thereby seemed to ask citizens to waste their time on useless subjects that by their very nature depreciate civic life. According to Wareh, 'Aristotle' distinguishes himself from 'Heraclites' by repeating the Acade­ my's party line only' after having "stronglv assured us that his vision is inclusive of everything moral and intelligent that would generally have been credited to the Isocratean approach" (44). 'Aristotle' does recognize techne and praxis as successively developed forms of knowledge that have been nurtured by and contribute to polis life. He also realizes that the...

324 RHETORICA these canons of rhetoric and Aristotle's treatment of them (p. 148). Those qua­ lifications noted, what is done with the analysis of rhetoric in the Iliad is clearly impressive and a contribution. Another positive feature of Homeric Speech is the study of rhetoric in works that appear after Homer. Knudsen's treatment of Archaic poetry is a contribution that shows the use of rhetoric in poetic discourse. Her work helps us to see that the bright dividing lines that traditionally have existed between rhetoric and poetry need to be reconsidered (pp. 126, 152). It is unfortunate that Knudsen choose not to expand her study to include a more thorough examination of tragic rhetoric, sophistic speeches, and the Socratic dialogues of Plato because a more detailed analysis of these topics would have helped to view the relationship of rhetoric and poetics by providing a better understanding of the relationship of mimetic and non-mimetic dis­ course (pp. 136-37). Extending the contributions of this work into the areas mentioned above also would have enriched such observations as those made by Walker: "'Poetry' stands to 'rhetoric' as one of its major divisions, and as the eldest form of epideictic eloquence, along with the newer 'free verse' forms of historical, philosophical, panegyric, and declamatory logoi, which are descended from Homeric narrative, Hesiodic wisdom-lore, and the varie­ ties of lyric praise and blame" (Rhetoric and Poetics in Antiquity, p. 120). Homeric Speech and the Origins of Rhetoric is clearly a contribution enrich­ ing our understanding of Homer, the use of rhetoric prior to the Classical Period, and a better understanding of the relationship between rhetoric and poetics before they evolved into separate disciplines. Knudsen's objective, as stated in the closing chapter, is to show that "Homeric techniques of per­ suasion—although they appear within a mythic narrative—are often the same as the intricate techniques of persuasion used by speakers in the Athe­ nian assembly and taught by the sophists, handbook-writers, and Aristotle himself" (p. 155). I believe that Knudsen attained this objective, but greater attention to the items pointed out in this review would have enhanced the fulfillment of her objective to an even greater degree. Richard Leo Enos Texas Christian University Alessandro Garcea, Caesar's De Analogía. Edition, Translation, and Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), xiv+304 p. ISBN 9780199603978 Il prezioso volume in questione è frutto della rielaborazione del travail inédit presentato, secondo le consuetudini francesi, all'esame di abilitazione alia Sorbona nel 2007: Garcea (G.), ora professore nella medesima prestigiosa umversità e allora Maître de conférences, dopo aver brillantemente svolto la sua preparazione all'Università di Torino sotto la guida di un'esperta di Reviews 325 grammatica romana come Valeria Lomanto (allieva a sua volta di Nino Marinone), dal 2007 al 2010 ha rielaborato la sua tesi e l'ha tradotta dal francese all'inglese cosí da assicurarle una broader audience e l'accoglimento presso uno dei più esclusivi editori intemazionali. Un ulteriore segno, se si vuole, del venir meno di quella parità ira le lingue europee di cultura che aveva caratterizzato gli studi classici e che viene ora sempre di più spazzata via dal totalita­ rismo anglofono; ma G. ha agito pragmáticamente (anche sotto altri aspetti, 10 vedremo subito) ed è difficile dargli torto, anche se resta, almeno in chi scrive, il rimpianto per un mondo delle lettere più democrático (e soprattutto per la conoscenza della bibliografía non in inglese da parte di chi parla solo fingiese, ormai una chimera anche presso i classicisti). L'unico vero appunto che si puô muovere a G. è che il sottotitolo che annuncia edizione, traduzione e commente è riduttivo e ingannevole: quasi metà del libro (p. 3-124), infatti, è occupata da un saggio introduttivo in due parti che costituisce un contribute di straordinario pregio e che per la sua ampiezza e ricchezza sta stretto nelle vesti dei "Prolegomeni all'edi­ zione"; paralelamente, chi è abituato all'edizione critica tradizionale e ricorda le essenziali 14 pagine dedicate da Funaioli a Cesare (C.) nei GRF rischia di perdersi in una mise en page in cui a testo ed apparato non è riconosciuta la tradizionale centralita, quasi...

The aim of classical rhetoric is to convince and persuade. Being essentially enigmatic, biblical rhetoric invites the reader to reflect by himself to find the solution, respecting his freedom, his dignity and responsibility.

Book Review| May 01 2015 Review: The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Commentaries on Aphthonius's Progymnasmata, (Society of Biblical Literature, Writings from the Greco-Roman World 31), by Hock, Ronald F. Hock, Ronald F., trans., The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Commentaries on Aphthonius's Progymnasmata, (Society of Biblical Literature, Writings from the Greco-Roman World 31), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. xii + 345 pp. ISBN 978-1-58983-644-0 Robert J. Penella Robert J. Penella Department of Classics, Fordham University, Bronx, NY 10458, USA, rpenella@fordham.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2015) 33 (2): 217–219. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.2.217 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Robert J. Penella; Review: The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Commentaries on Aphthonius's Progymnasmata, (Society of Biblical Literature, Writings from the Greco-Roman World 31), by Hock, Ronald F.. Rhetorica 1 May 2015; 33 (2): 217–219. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2015.33.2.217 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2015 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

The aim of classical rhetoric is to convince and persuade. Being essentially enigmatic, biblical rhetoric invites the reader to reflect by himself to find the solution, respecting his freedom, his dignity and responsibility.

Reviews 217 signposting and recapitulating his argument as it unfolds. In this and other ways he mirrors the qualities he values in Hume's own writing. Christopher Reid University ofLondon Hock, Ronald F., trans., The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Commentaries on Aphthonins's Progymnasmata, (Society of Biblical Literature, Writ­ ings from the Greco-Roman World 31), Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. xii + 345 pp. ISBN 978-1-58983-644-0 This is the third and last volume of a trilogv, all three volumes of which present ancient and Byzantine texts and facing translations, equipped with extensive introductions and commentary, on the chrein, the third of the canon­ ical fourteen progymnasmata, the compositional exercises that began at the intermediate level of the Roman imperial literary-rhetorical education and extended into the advanced level. All three volumes have been published by the Society of Biblical Literature. The first two were co-authored by the late Edward N. O'Neil. O'Neill's scholarly partner Ronald F. Hock has brought the project to its conclusion and benefited from materials pertinent to the third volume that O'Neil left behind. The first volume (1986) presented mainly Roman imperial Greek and Latin discussions of the chreia from an­ cient theoretical works. The second volume (2002) offered ancient and Byzan­ tine classroom exercises in which chreiai were read, copied, declined, and, when the student was ready, elaborated. And now in this final volume Hock gives us the sections of six Byzantine texts that comment on the discussion of the chreia in the Progymnasmata of the late ancient rhetorical theorist Aphthonius , whose work, admitted to the so-called Hermogenic Corpus, became the authority par excellence on these compositional exercises. Hock's Byzantine commentaries on Aphthonius, intended for teachers or students, are by John of Sardis (ninth century), the so-called P-Scholia (ca. 1000), John Doxapatres (eleventh century), the Rhetorica Marciana (twelfth century), Maximus Planudes (thirteenth century), and Matthew Camariotes (fifteenth century). These commentators on Aphthonius, like Aphthonius himself, discussed all fourteen progymnasmata. Hock has excerpted from them only the sections on the chreia. Aphthonius's discussion of the chreia—a saying, an action, or a com­ bination of action and saying, ascribed to a person of note—is only a few pages long. It begins with some brief theoretical remarks. Aphthonius gives a definition and an etymology of the term. He explains the three kinds of chreia. And he lists the eight headings to be used for elaborating a chreia. But the greater part of his discussion is dedicated to the presentation of an elabo­ ration of the chreia "Isocrates said that the root of education is bitter, but the fruits are sweet." Aphthonius's short discussion of the chreia (as well as the 218 RHETORICA rest of his Progymnasmata) generated pages and pages of sequential Byzan­ tine commentaries. One thinks of the similar fate of better known canonized texts: Plato and Aristotle, Hippocrates and Galen. It is something of a déjà lu experience to read commentator after commentator on Aphthonius s spare treatment; indeed, Hock's introductions to each of the commentators, too, inevitably have some repetitiveness to them. Still, one does find peculiarities and idiosyncrasies in the various Byzantine texts, even "some independent analysis" (p. 28). Yet to expect to find much originality in this kind of material is to set oneself up for disappointment; to complain about its pedantry and triviality is to expect a pre-modern scholastic tradition not to be itself (cf. pp. 3, 6). Hock does well in his introductions to keep an eye on the whole work from which the particular chreia section is being excerpted, although his full discussion of Maximus Planudes on the progymnasma speaking-incharacter (pp. 285-92) in his introduction to Planudes on the chreia was perhaps unnecessary there. The commentators clarify, supplement, and illustrate Aphthonius. They have a "penchant... to build on one another" (p. 134). (Matthew Camariotes, though, is in a skimpy class of his own, briefer on the chreia even than Aphthonius.) They bring in material both from the ancient progymnasmatic theoreticians ps.-Hermogenes, Nicolaus of Myra, and Theon (a large portion of the P-Scholia, for example, is simply...

This article tackles a significant theme that surfaces occasionally in Stoicism: the claim that “the sage will speak direct words” (euthurrhemonesei). It explores euthurrhemosune as a Cynic and Laconizing topos in Stoicism, probably going back to Zeno himself, but developed by Diogenes of Babylon as something distinctively wholesome—linguistically and ethically—in Stoic style of expression, and then attacked from a Platonic and Academic stance by Cicero, at a time when some among the Stoics themselves began distancing themselves from their Cynic heritage, as notably Panaetius. Finally, the connection between euthurrhemosune and parrhesia on the one hand, suntomia and brachylogia on the other is also examined from an ethical and stylistic point of view.

This article tackles a significant theme that surfaces occasionally in Stoicism: the claim that “the sage will speak direct words” (<i>cuthurrhemonesei</i>). It explores <i>cnthurrhemosune</i> as a Cynic and Laconizing topos in Stoicism, probably going back to Zeno himself, but developed by Diogenes of Babylon as something distinctively wholesome—linguistically and ethically—in Stoic style of expression, and then attacked from a Platonic and Academic stance by Cicero, at a time when some among the Stoics themselves began distancing themselves from their Cynic heritage, as notably Panaetius. Finally, the connection between <i>euthurrhemosune</i> and <i>par- rhesia</i> on the one hand, <i>suntomiu</i> and <i>brachylogia</i> on the other is also examined from an ethical and stylistic point of view.

This essay argues that Edmund Spenser's legal poem, the Two Cantos of Mutabilitie, considers how civil conflicts implicitly generate a basis for their own evaluation and resolution. To illustrate this idea, Spenser draws from a tradition of rhetorical argumentation stretching from Aristotle and Cicero to Rudolph Agricola and Philip Sidney. This tradition emphasizes how fictions establish the shared questions that can create a deliberative context for equitable judgment when general law and particular case come into conflict. Dramatizing this rational process through an allegorical legal trial, Spenser illuminates how divergent judgments and actions become ethically legible to one another as parts of the same deliberative whole.

Book Review| November 01 2014 Review: Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic, by Peter White Peter White. Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 256 pp. Hardcover: $60. Paperback: $29.95. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-538851-0. Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2010. Rhetorica (2014) 32 (4): 412–414. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.412 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic, by Peter White. Rhetorica 1 November 2014; 32 (4): 412–414. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.412 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews Peter White. Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Repub­ lic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 256 pp. Hardcover: $60. Paperback: $29.95. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-538851-0. Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2010. Cicero in Letters is a major landmark in the study of Ciceronian letters, and a book that belongs in the personal libraries of all scholars interested in the fields of Cicero and ancient letters. Building on and extending the seminal work of D. R. Shackleton Bailey, Peter White meticulously analyzes the massive corpus of extant Ciceronian letters, focusing on how the letters function as a form of social media, as it were, constructing and maintaining Cicero's personal networks. Although White engages to a certain degree with sociolinguistic method, the general approach of the book is philological, concerned primarily with close reading of individual letters, analysis of the editorial process that gave form to the extant collect, prosopography, and historical reconstruction of letters' functions as part of the reciprocity systems embedded in elite Roman networks of amicitia. Cicero in Letters, available in hardcover, softcover and electronic ver­ sions, consists of a preface, six chapters, an afterword, two appendices, notes, bibliography and indices. The main body of the book is divided into two major parts. "Part I: Reading the Letters from the Outside In" (83 pages) con­ sists of three chapters focusing on the form and context of Cicero's letters, "1. Constraints and Biases in Roman Letter Writing," "2. The Editing of the Collection," and "3. Frames of the Letter." Next is "Part II: Epistolary Preoc­ cupations" (76 pages), comprised of three chapters emphasizing the content of the letters, "4. The Letters and Literature," "5. Giving and Getting Advice by Letter," and "6. Letter Writing and Leadership." The organization of the book is thematic rather than strictly analytical, and the approach, despite meticulous scholarship, more exploratory and essayistic than scientific or argumentative. All Ciceronian passages are quoted both in Latin and in the author's own translations. The translations are generally accurate and read­ able, and the writing style of both White's text and translations is accessible to the non-specialist. The first chapter, "Reading the Letters from the Outside In," sets letter writing within its social and generic context. It exemplifies ways in which Rhetorica, Vol. XXXII, Issue 4, pp. 0-430, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2014.32.4.0. Reviews 413 the study of Latin letters differs radically from that of Greek. Biblical schol­ ars, especially, and a smaller group of rhetorical scholars, have produced exhaustive studies of the form and context of Greek letters, including the lo­ gistics of letter production and delivery and the relationships among letters, letter-theory and rhetorical theory, but as much ancient epistolary scholar­ ship is concerned with the Pauline epistles, less work has been devoted to Latin letters than Greek, and what work does exist is more focused on seeing letters as a lens through which to examine literature, history or politics rather than studying epistolographv for its own sake. White's work, following this general trend, displays particular strengths in analyzing how Cicero's letters responded to the problem of maintaining political influence and networks at a distance. While White's first chapter does a workmanlike job of dis­ cussing issues of letter transmission and production, and such issues as the importance of the presence formula, the discussion is presented somewhat in a vacuum, approaching, for example, the philophronetic nature of an­ cient epistolographv as a point to be proven rather than as position that has been widely accepted in the study in ancient letters since Deissman (1910, 1911) and Koskenniemi (1956). White's treatment of how Cicero in­ flects these common practices is detailed and meticulous, albeit scholars of ancient letter-writing may find frustrating the lack of comparative material or responsiveness to existing scholarship on ancient letters (e...

414 RHETORICA The focus of "Chapter 5 Giving and Getting Advice by Letter" is the way advice was offered as a gift to the recipient. This act of advice giving, though, was fraught with many perils. White's analysis of these perils shows encyclopedic knowledge of Cicero's social relationships and sensitive close reading. He shows how the advice giver had to balance the risk of bad advice with the opposite risk that bland generalities would be useless, and the hierarchical problem that while detailed and specific advice was the most useful gift, it could also appear condescending. Furthermore, advice given or received could implicate the interlocutors in each others' actions, leading to credit in the case of good results and discredit otherwise. Finally, "Chapter 6: Letter Writing and Leadership," shows the role of letters in the political events of 44 and 43, showing how letters functioned as part of political persuasion, influence peddling, and strategic communica­ tion. White shows how Cicero's letters help us understand his involvement in these events in a more personal and direct manner than the Philippic Orations and provide for us a rare opportunity to understand the positions, motivations, and maneuvers of the Roman political elite in a time of crisis. Overall, Cicero in Letters is an erudite, readable and original work that promises to be a major landmark in its area. Rhetorical scholars, however, will find frustrating a few significant lacunae in White's approach. The first, and most obvious, is that in explaining Ciceronian persuasion, White does not cite Cicero's rhetorical works at all, apparently thinking that Cicero's books on persuasion are of no use at all in helping us understand his per­ suasive practices. A second issue not addressed by White is the pedagogical circulation of letters. Roland Barthes famously said that "literature is what is taught" (1986). As many letter collections circulated in antiquity as peda­ gogical models, and Cicero's orations also functioned as models for students of rhetoric, it is puzzling that White does not address the possibility of peda­ gogical intentions and uses of the letters. Despite lack of direct interaction with rhetorical scholarship and rhetorical approaches to epistolography and epistolary theory, White's Cicero in Letters lays invaluable groundwork for future rhetorical studies of Ciceronian letters. Carol Poster York University Samuel McCormick, Letters to Power: Public Advocacy Without Pub­ lic Intellectuals. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011.197 pp. ISBN (Hardcover) 978-0-271-05073-7 Samuel McCormick s new volume holds two arguments in equipoise. As its title suggests, the first argument focuses on Letters to Power. It is an investigation of epistolary rhetoric, its form, its audiences, its strategies, and its cunning. Make no mistake, this is not your standard issue ars dictaininis. Reviews 415 Under McCormick s careful hand, the old art of letter writing is invested with a host of pressing lessons: about power, about the professoriate, and about the history of rhetoric. As his subtitle suggests, the second argument is about Public Advocacy Without Public Intellectuals. Here McCormick's concern is with learned intervention. In an age in which the classic role of the public intellectual is increasingly unavailable, McCormick asks what modes of resistance are available for today's institutionalized academics? The book's conceit, of course, is that these two arguments work in tandem: that the epistolary form provides rhetorical resources for learned advocacy. McCormick's account of epistolary rhetoric is grounded in the letters of Seneca the Younger, Christine de Pizan, Immanuel Kant, and Soren Kierkegaard. He argues that the epistolary form constitutes a "minor rhe­ toric" (13). It is a "minor" rhetoric not because letters are subordinate to treatises, but because the letters harbor the capacity to destabilize the hierar­ chy according to which treatises or tomes are more important than personal letters. Most importantly from my perspective, as a "minor rhetoric" the letter harbors the potential to reshape the history of rhetoric. From the per­ spective of the epistolary form, Seneca, Christine, Kant, and Kierkegaard now fit squarely in rhetorical history. Significantly, their place in such a history requires no recourse to the thematics of their thought; Seneca thematized retirement and Kierkegaard...

This essay argues that Edmund Spenser’s legal poem, the Two Cantos of Mutabilitie, considers how civil conflicts implicitly generate a basis for their own evaluation and resolution. To illustrate this idea, Spenser draws from a tradition of rhetorical argumentation stretching from Aristotle and Cicero to Rudolph Agricola and Philip Sidney This tradition emphasizes how fictions establish the shared questions that can create a deliberative context for equitable judgment when general law and particular case come into conflict. Dramatizing this rational process through an allegorical legal trial, Spenser illuminates how divergent judgments and actions become ethically legible to one another as parts of the same deliberative whole.

Pro Sulla §§18–19 demonstrates a tactic of self-depiction unique in Cicero's speeches; the orator represents an internal dialogue in which his natural kindness towards the Catilinarian Autronius is overcome by arguments that his audience can recognize as the prosecutor's stock tactics of emotional amplification prescribed in De Inventione. By ostentatiously persuading himself to sternness with the stock appeals designed to persuade a normative audience, the orator can justify his actions against the Catilinarians while asserting that his essential nature is kind and compassionate. This tactic is both essential for Cicero's persuasive strategy and useful for his broader self-depiction for the reading audience of the speech.

Book Review| August 01 2014 Review: Metamorphoses of Rhetoric. Classical Rhetoric in the Eighteenth Century, by Otto Fischer and Ann Öhrberg Otto Fischer and Ann Öhrberg, eds., Metamorphoses of Rhetoric. Classical Rhetoric in the Eighteenth Century. (Studia Rhetorica Upsaliensia 3), Uppsala: Rhetoric at the Department of Literature, Uppsala University, 2011, 213 pp., ISBN: 978-91-980081-0-4. ISSN: 1102–9714 Merete Onsberg Merete Onsberg Department of Media, Cognition and Communication, Section of Rhetoric, University of Copenhagen, Karen Blixens Vej 4, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, DENMARK. onsberg@hum.ku.dk Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2014) 32 (3): 319–321. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.319 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Merete Onsberg; Review: Metamorphoses of Rhetoric. Classical Rhetoric in the Eighteenth Century, by Otto Fischer and Ann Öhrberg. Rhetorica 1 August 2014; 32 (3): 319–321. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.319 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Pro Sulla §§18–19 demonstrates a tactic of self-depiction unique in Cicero’s speeches; the orator represents an internal dialogue in which his natural kindness towards the Catilinarian Autronius is overcome by arguments that his audience can recognize as the prosecutor’s stock tactics of emotional amplification prescribed in De Inventione. By ostentatiously persuading himself to sternness with the stock appeals designed to persuade a normative audience, the orator can justify his actions against the Catilinarians while asserting that his essential nature is kind and compassionate. This tactic is both essential for Cicero’s persuasive strategy and useful for his broader self-depiction for the reading audience of the speech.

Reviews 319 mate surpassing by the same forces of Renaissance humanism that renewed its cultural lease in the Western world. William P. Weaver Baylor University Otto Fischer and Ann Ôhrberg, eds., Metamorphoses ofRhetoric. Clas­ sical Rhetoric in the Eighteenth Century. (Studia Rhetorica Upsaliensia 3), Uppsala: Rhetoric at the Department of Literature, Uppsala University, 2011, 213 pp., ISBN: 978-91-980081-0-4. ISSN: 1102-9714 As a result of the critique from grammarians and philosophers of the pre­ vious centuries, eighteenth century rhetoric can be said to undergo metamor­ phoses in several ways. Inspired by a new philosophical awareness of man's thought and language combined with an interest in conversational commu­ nication, works on style and taste came to the fore in all European countries. This volume presents important eighteenth century rhetorical works and their contexts in France, Germany, and Sweden. Two chapters deal with rhetoric's status in France. Marc André Bernier from Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières follows the changes through inventio: "Metamorphoses of the inventio in Eighteenth-Century France from Bernard Lamy to Jean-Francois Marmontel" (pp. 25-43). Here we find in­ ventio combined with creativity in Marmontel's poetics. This gives way to a cosmological inventio integrating nature, history, and words in an untra­ ditionally way stressing the infinite possibilities. In "Renouveau de la rhétorique et critique des théories classiques du lan­ gage" (pp. 45-69) Gabrielle Radica from Université de Picardie-Jules Verne in Amiens uses Etiene Bonnot de Condillac and Jean-Jacques Rousseau as examples. With illustrative citations from these two authors she presents the epistemological context for her conclusion: Condillac and Rousseau gave new life to the passions, their language and effect based on "fondements an­ thropologiques" (p. 64) - not a result of rhetoric as ars, but rather of a natural practice. One gets the impression that these passions, at least in a Condillac's pedagogical context, should always be polite. Regarding the beauty of style, he recommends two properties: "la netteté et le caractère" (p. 53). Anna Cullhed from Uppsala University studies Entwurfeiner Théorie und Literatur der schbnen Wissenschaften by Johann Joachim Eschenburg. Through the changes in the respective editions she follows the evolvement of belletrist rhetoric from the end of the eighteenth into the beginning of the nineteenth century (pp. 71-107). Eschenburg is a well-chosen demonstration of the growing tension between rhetoric and poetics. Interestingly enough, he is acquainted with the Scottish rhetoricians Campbell, Lord Karnes and Blair (p- 94). 320 RHETORICA The last four chapters by three scholars from Uppsala University and a Ph.D-student from Órebro University give an insightful picture of eigh­ teenth century rhetoric in Sweden. Here lies the book's main contribution to eighteenth century scholarship. Material from Swedish archives and press is made available to the public. Otto Fischer gives an overview of how the critique of rhetorical matters - for example, textbooks used in schools - led to a new return to antique authors (pp. 109-131). From his reading of pub­ lished as well as unpublished material, he gives a good impression of the inherent tension concerning rhetoric towards 1800: "to rescue eloquence we must do away with rhetoric, at least with rhetoric conceived of as theory and pedagogy." (pp. 120-21) Marie-Christine Skuncke is known within Nordic rhetoric for her book about Gustav Ill's rhetorical and political education. In "Appropriations of Political Rhetoric in Eighteenth-Century Sweden" (pp. 133-51), she returns to Gustav III focusing on his speech from 1772. This crucial speech ended an unruly, though politically free period and restored a powerful monarchy. Skuncke juxtaposes a critical pamphlet from the emerging middle class with the king's speech and find them both eloquent. Stefan Rimm's "Rhetoric, Texts and Tradition in Swedish 18th Century Schools" (pp. 153-72) is related to his dissertation on the subject. Read­ ers may already have some idea of Apthonius' progymnasmata in Swedish schools from papers at ISHR conferences. Rimm focuses on Vosius' Elementa Rhetorica analyzing several editions. To some degree Rimm underestimates the influence of belletrist rhetoric on school rhetoric at the end of the century, but he rightly warns us against...

Reviews Christopher Reid, "Imprison'd Wranglers": The Rhetorical Culture ofthe House ofCommons, 1760-1800, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 270 pp., ISBN: 978-0-19-958109-2 As rhetoricians expand the parameters of rhetorical histories, the inter­ actions between politicians and the people on "Main Street" or "out of doors" become as important as the words of famous orators. In Imprison'd Wranglers, Christopher Reid extends this approach to the eighteenth-century British Parliament. He argues for a "rhetorical culture" surrounding the House of Commons in an era when politicians became public figures. According to Reid, new relationships developed between Members and constituents with the expansion of print culture: "eloquence was flowing outside the House, to be captured, admired, or caricatured in print, before flowing back in the form of pamphlets and newspaper reports... which were read in the Chamber " (p. 14). By tracing this flow through multiple institutions and media, he produces a comprehensive account of change and continuity in parliamentary oratory. The title of Reid's book comes from William Cowper's The Task (1785), in which the poet, reading newspaper reports of debates, longs to "set th' im­ prison'd wranglers free." While Cowper reconstructs orators' performances, Reid examines now MPs were metaphorically "imprisoned" in the "chain of newspaper mediations that brought speech events in Westminster" to distant constituents and reassesses the rhetorical dynamics of distributing parliamentary speech in print (p. 3). By addressing "the complex reciprocity between print and oratory" in late eighteenth-century Britain, Imprison'd Wranglers complements recent work by Carolyn Eastman (A Nation ofSpeechifiers , 2009) and Sandra Gustafson (Imagining Deliberative Democracy, 2011), who explore how printed American oratory fostered new political identities in the new nation and promoted new forms of rhetorical education at the turn of the nineteenth century (Eastman, p. 10). Reid likewise studies how print reconstructions of the British Commons "brought parliamentary debate onto a broader terrain of public argument," "permanently altered the rhetorical context" of political speech, and gave the people "a stake in Parliament" (Reid, p. 11, 75). To survey the breadth of Parliament's "rhetorical culture," Reid exam­ ines newspapers, pamphlets, letters, collections like William Cobbett's ParliaRhetorica , Vol. XXXII, Issue 3, pp. 312-323, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2014.32.3.312. Reviews 313 ntaty History ofEngland, and satirical sketches (p. 3). The architecture of the Chamber, the classical curriculum, and the working conditions of newspaper reporters also come under his purview. He draws on political historians like David Cannadine and Joanna Innes but approaches parliamentary texts and practices as a historian of rhetoric. Reid compares parliamentary speaking techniques to classical and eighteenth-century rhetorical theories and ad­ dresses the challenges of working with transcripts of oral performances. For him, reporters transcripts matter less as accurate representations of speech than as efforts to represent "the House as a place of collective rhetorical action ... in which political arguments and meanings were forged" (p. 17). These archives, including the transcripts, the Chamber, and reporting practices, re­ veal how oratory circulated beyond the Chamber and brought constituents into the political nation. Imprison'd Wranglers comprises four sections: Part 1 (Chapter 2) ap­ plies Roxanne Mountford's "geography of a communicative event" to St. Stephen's Chapel, the home of the eighteenth-century Commons (p. 25). The three chapters of Part 2 discuss how Parliament reached the public through the "fictitious tribunals of the press" (Chapter 3), reporters who copied debates from memory (Chapter 4), and visual satirists like James Gillray (Chapter 5) (p. 75). In Part 3, Reid examines how MPs modified classical rhetorical practices including declamation (Chapter 6) and the con­ cept of ethos (Chapter 7) in the face of increasing publicity. Part 4 features a broader view of parliamentary rhetorical culture with a case study of the 1773 Lord Clive debates (Chapter 8) and an exploration of MPs' persuasive uses of quotation (Chapter 9). Reid concludes with...

Reviews 317 Peter Mack, A History of Renaissance Rhetoric 1380-1620 (OxfordWarburg Studies), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. 345 pp ISBN: 978-0-19-959728-4 In A bdistoi i/ of Renaissance Rhetoric 2380—1620, Peter Mack expertly describes the fortunes of Renaissance rhetoric within its academic and textual settings. Rhetoric in the Renaissance was a school subject, mostly covered in the grammar schools, with secondary importance in the universities, and thousands of rhetorical textbooks from the period survive as testimony to its ascendancy within the liberal arts curriculum. With a dizzying command of technical detail, Mack has delved into this large and complex textual record and emerged with a synthesis that will be required reading for students of the subject. Beginning with a description of the most significant ancient treatises on rhetoric, followed by a chapter on the contributions of key fifteenth-century Italians (and one notable Cretan, George of Trebizond), Mack proceeds to a series of four chapters focused on teachers whose textbooks had an extraordinary impact on the theory and teaching of rhetoric in the sixteenth century: Rudolph Agricola, Erasmus, Melanchthon, and Ramus. The chapter on Melanchthon, the "dominant figure" of the years 1519-45 (p. 104), is filled out with sections on his chief students and followers. The chapter on Ramus (and his associate Omer Talon) gives a useful overview of the controversy and key combatants surrounding his polarizing reforms. With helpful tables outlining the contents of their principle writings on rhetoric, Mack charts their innovative and (again in the case of Ramus) agonistic adaptations of the classical program. The first half of the book is therefore devoted to the big players in the book market for Renaissance rhetoric - those whose work best adapted the classical program to the educational needs and occasions of the humanist school. Indeed, for much of the period that Mack describes, Renaissance rhetoric was a symbiosis of two types of books on rhetoric: classical (Ciceronian) treatises and humanist manuals. For most of the sixteenth century, there is a strong correlation between the numbers of editions of the Rhetorica ad Herennium (still generally attributed to Cicero in the period) and the most popular humanist treatises (pp. 30-2). Mack explains the apparent symbiosis by noting the frequent use of humanist treatises as a preliminary study, a prologue to the study of a full-length classical treatise. But after decades of steady demand, humanist manuals and classical treatises alike suffer steep declines in production after the 1560s. The cause of the sudden decline is not clear, though Mack offers a number of suggestions: the rising fortunes of Talon's rhetoric, which was not coupled to full-length treatises; new syntheses of classical and humanist rhetoric, such as found in the popular De arte rhetorica libri tres (1562) of the Jesuit educator Cyprian Soarez; the scholastic revival of the late-sixteenth century; or even the efficiency of the second-hand book market to meet continuing demand for humanist and classical rhetorics. 318 RHETORICA Renaissance rhetoric was equally tied up with the fortunes of the liberal arts, especially logic or dialectic. It is one of the virtues of HRR 1380— 1620 that it provides through the main part of the narrative a parallel account of the fortunes of both humanist rhetoric and dialectic. Melanchthon described his textbooks on rhetoric and dialectic as companion pieces, and even Ramus, who notoriously drew a sharp distinction between dialectic and rhetoric, distributing four of the five classical offices of rhetoric between them, insisted on the necessity and complementarity of both (pp. 142-5). Both rhetoric and dialectic were combined in a very influential method of critical reading, one of the uses of Renaissance rhetoric to which Mack is especially attentive. The parallel fortunes of rhetoric and dialectic in northern Europe that Mack tells in the first half of the book are complemented, in the second half, by a chapter on the fortunes of rhetoric in southern Europe in the sixteenth-century (chapter 8), and chapters on the contemporary fortunes of specialized rhetorical treatises: manuals of tropes and figures (chapter 10), letter-writing manuals (chapter 11), preaching manuals and legal di­ alectics (chapter 12), and vernacular rhetorics (chapter 13). In...

Although much has been written about ancient rhetorical theories of example, few scholars have examined the subtypes of example contained in these ancient rhetorical theories. As a corrective to this scholarly blind spot, this article explores the lesser-known conceptual history of “comparison,” which Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize as a subtype of example. Taken together, their rhetorical theories suggest that arguments by comparison are hypothetical, contentious, indirect, interrogative, and frequently deceptive. Moreover, Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize comparison by calling attention to the persuasive artistry of Socrates, notably his use of arguments by comparison to provoke interlocutors without challenging them directly. Understanding and explaining these rhetorical theories of comparison is the primary task of this article.

Reviews 197 Walker completes his work with a subtle admonition coupled with a call to return to what has worked and what matters—an Isocratean model of training rhetors that eschews the place of impractical (high) theory (p. 280). While it's nearly impossible to pin down the most significant contribu­ tion from The Genuine Teaehers of This Art, Walker's opus goes a long way to resolve what Alan Gross has termed the "historical discontinuity" of the rhetoiical tradition, which results from what George Kennedy labels the technical, sophistic," and "philosophic" traditions by arguing at least in the Isocratean model, a tradition rooted in pedagogy, the tripartite distinction is a false one-all three coexisted happily and, importantly, effectively (Gross, pp. 32-33).' After all, as Walker not so subtly reminds us, "what makes rhetoric rhetoric is its teaching tradition, its function as an 'art of producing rhetors'" (p. 285). Kathleen Lamp Arizona State University Francesco Berardi, La dottrina dell'evidenza nella tradizione retorica greca e latina (Papers on Rhetoric. Monographs 3), Perugia: Editrice zzPliniana ", 2012, 242 pp., ISBN 978-88-97830-01-6 L'esigenza di una nuova monografía dedicata al tema studiatissimo dell'evidenza è opportunamente giustificata da Francesco Berardi (di seguito F. B.), che rileva due prospettive altrettanto parziali nella cospicua bibliografía sull'argomento: l'una, critico-letteraria, incentrata sulla tradi­ zione alessandrina; l'altra, tecnico-retorica, frammentata nelle tassonomie polimorfe ed eterogenee dei manuali greci e latini. Scopo del volume è dunque fare ordine in questa complessa tradizione e classificare le diverse forme dell'evidenza secondo le rispettive funzioni, seguendo il modo in cui sono state concepite e si sono quindi sviluppate nella precettistica antica (pp. 11-17). La distinzione terminológica preliminare tra ¿vspyaa, vivificazione del messaggio attraverso l'uso di metafore e similitudini che animano referenti inanimati, ed ¿vápyeia, evidenza pittorica realizzata mediante l'arcumulo di descrizioni denotative (pp. 19-39), permette di comprendere perché l'evidenza sia considerata virtù fondamentale della narrazione, improntata a descrizioni minuziose e realistiche. Ribaltando la communis opinio sulla base di una cronología rigorosa, F.B. dimostra come questo apporte giunga alia ]Alan G. Gross, "The Rhetorical Tradition," in Richard Graff, Arthur E Walzer, Janet M. Atwill, eds. The Viability ofthe Rhetorical Tradition (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005). See also, George Kennedy. Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980). 198 RHETORICA retorica dalle teorie poetiche e storiografiche, e non vice versa (pp. 41-49). Nel quadro dello stile semplice e disadorno, tale forma di evidenza pud trasformarsi, da semplice virtú narrativa deWinuentio, in qualité specifica delYelocutio. Questo processo tende poi a estendersi, al punto che, adop­ tando la dottrina dell'ornato stilistico e della figura-lumen, nelle Partitiones oratoriae Cicerone avrebbe per primo elevato chiarezza, brevità, crédibilité, evidenza, etopea e decoro al rango di parametri principali del discorso ora­ torio. Con Dionigi di Alicarnasso e Quintiliano questa evidenza si sarebbe ulteriormente connotata come frutto della collaborazione del destinatario del messaggio alla costruzione dell'illusione visiva (pp. 51-73). Infine, dallo schema accademico delle uirtutes elocutionis è probabile che sia germogliata la teoria delle categorie stilistiche (lôéoei) ove, nella prospettiva degli esiti finali dell'effetto visivo, l'evidenza è intesa essenzialmente come vigore espressivo funzionale alla purezza, alla bellezza, allô splendore, ecc. (pp. 75-88). E B. circoscrive a ragione tutti questi ambiti della dottrina retorica alio studio dell'evidenza corne effetto e li distingue dai casi in cui essa è causa di una rappresentazione mentale subordinata alla mozione degli affetti o all'ornato stilistico. Dopo aver ricordato i legami cognitivi tra cpavTaaioc e tolOoç secondo Aristotele e Quintiliano, E B. ricostruisce con grande precisione il ruolo delle circostanze (wpewpew), intese come forma più po­ tente di argomentazione e progressivamente adottate ai fini dell'amplificatio nell'esercizio di scrittura definito xoivôç tôtcoç dai progymnasmata. Poiché riguarda fatti gié accertati, quest'ultimo si colloca dopo la dimostrazione e tende dunque a corrispondere alla perorazione finale di un discorso. E B. istituisce cosí una convergenza tra i due settori, distinti dai fatto che, a differenza di quanto accade ne! zluogo comune', Pepilogo di un'orazione riguarda sempre...

204 RHETORICA on the value for the human sciences of "contested concepts" and the endless debate which must go on around them. This collection provides models of different ways of studying the fas­ cinating parallelism between medicine and rhetoric. It shows how rhetorical knowledge can enhance our understanding of early modern medical and health-related works and it offers engaging readings of some very interesting little-known texts. Peter Mack Warburg Institute, London Patricia Pender, Early Modern Women's Writing and the Rhetoric of Modesty (Early Modern Literature in History, eds. Cedric C. Brown and Andrew Hadfield), New York: Palgrave/MacMillan, 2012. 218 pp., ISBN: 978-0-230-36224-6 In Early Modern Women's Writing and the Rhetoric of Modesty, Patricia Pender argues that the modesty topos frequent in early modern English women's works should not be read literally, but as "the very mark of liter­ ariness" and "early modern women's subtle and strategic self-fashioning" (3). In the introduction, Pender surveys earlier feminist criticism on modesty topoi that used this material to explain women's lower rate of publication, and argues that these critics have read the passages too literally, and, as a consequence, that we continue "to underrate [early modern women's] con­ siderable rhetorical ability and agency" (6). Pender's study reviews the use of modesty topoi in prefaces and writings by English authors Anne Askew, Katherine Parr, Mary Sidney, Aemilia Lanyer, and Anne Bradstreet, and also examines what Pender sees as a general tendency "to read women's modesty tropes autobiographically" (7). Chapter 1 surveys advice for the deployment of modesty topoi in classi­ cal and Renaissance rhetorics: Cicero, Quintilian, Ad Herennium, Castiglione, George Puttenham, Abraham Fraunce, and John Hoskins. Especially helpful is the summary (pp. 22-24) of the flexible and varied forms of this rhetorical strategy: disavowal of authorship, remorse, belittling the achievement, lack of time for writing, writing only at the behest of another, role of compiler not author, apology citing utility of the subject, and, in general, writers' discounting of their abilities. Pender links the use of the modesty topos to early modern understanding of figures as "dissimulation" (borrowing from Puttenham) and early modern anxiety about "women's innate duplicity" (34). Pender, whose background is English literature not history of rhetoric, convincingly argues that for women, as well as for men, avowing modesty is often not an apology, but rather a display of rhetorical proficiency. In Chapter 2 Pender quite brilliantly uses John Bale's editing of Anne Askew s Examinations as an example of the emphasis on "collaborative co- Reviews 205 authorship (al) in the early modern history of the book. However, in­ stead of seeing Bale as supporting Askew's purpose, Pender searches for those places where Askew's words "exceed the frame that Bale provides for them, finding that Askew offers a "profoundly confident and combative self-representation under the guise of weak and humble woman" (49). This conclusion is not news in Askew criticism, although reading Askew through the rhetoric of modesty is innovative and helpful. It is disappointing that Pender did not follow through, though, on her initial observation. For ex­ ample, she argues that Bale misunderstands Askew's rhetoric of modesty (complimenting judges, humble submission, quoting authority) to circum­ vent her accusers (60-61), that Bale himself is misled by Askew's modesty into reading her as a weak woman made strong by God's grace (59-60): "[wjhan she semed most feble, than was she most stronge. And gladly she rejoiced in that weaknesse, that Christ's power myght strongelye dwell in her" (61). Here is a missed opportunity to argue, instead, for collaborative coathorship, to see that Bale does understand Askew, recognizing her wily use of Paul's celebration of the weak and foolish made strong and wise by Christ (1 Corinthians 1:27—a celebration that Erasmus had famously deployed in The Praise of Folly). In Chapter 3, Pender suggests that focusing on modesty rhetoric in Katherine Parr's Prayers or Medytacions refines "our understanding of her development of a degendered, generically-human speaking subject" (72). But, suggests Pender, although Parr does not apologize for her sex, substi­ tuting the...

Reviews Walker, Jeffrey. The Genuine Teachers ofThis Art. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2011.356 pp., ISBN: 978-1-61117-016-0 Walker s 1 he Genuine Tenehers of This Art takes its title from a line in Cicero s De orntore in which Antonius attempts to delineate "inexperienced teachers ' who do not train rhetors like Aristotle from sophists like Isocrates who train skilled speakers (pp. 5,44). The title line frames the major argument of the book—that training rhetors, that is, teaching is the unifying element of rhetoric that brings together strains of "discourse, practices, analysis, [and] teaching" (p.l). Walker claims scholars of rhetoric have much overlooked the "school masters." His attempt to correct this omission establishes Isocrates as the founder of the sophistic paideia, which Walker traces from the fourth century BCE, through the Hellenistic period and stasis theory, the late Repub­ lic in Cicero's De orntore, and finally into the Second Sophistic in the works of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Through this pedagogical history, Walker ar­ gues, that for Isocrates the "handbook" (teehne) and sophistic traditions were one, effectivelv decentering the "philosophic" tradition. There are too manv high points in The Genuine Teachers of This Art, particularly' for scholars of the history of rhetoric and teachers of rhetoric and composition, to summarize here but permit me to try to touch on a few. Walker's first chapter, a (counter) reading of Cicero's De orntore, begins by classifying Aristotle's rhetoric as primarily interested in "judgment and theory" as opposed to "civic deliberation" and therefore largely outside the realm of training rhetors (pp. 19, 22). Walker makes a brief but interesting argument that Antonius' topics are not from Aristotle but rather are closer to Isocrates' ideai, arguing Aristotle is primarily referenced for the sake of authority (pp. 23, 30-1, 48). Ultimately, Walker argues what Cicero's Crassus and Antonius finally agree on—broad experience—is fundamentally Isocratean (pp. 41, 53, 56). The claim that "there was a teehne of Isocrates, and that it probably was the ancestor of the later sophistic technai” concludes Walker's second chapter (p 90). In order to advance the possibility of an Isocratean teehne, Walker must refute several lines of argument prevalent in the field, specifically that if Isocrates did write a teehne, it was more likely a collection of example speeches, that the teehne attributed to Isocrates was written by a "younger Rhetorica, Vol. XXXII, Issue 2, pp. 195-211, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . C2014 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2014.32.2.195. 196 RHETORICA Isocrates/' and that it was against Isocrates' own philosophy to write a handbook of precepts. These lines of argument, predominantly advanced by Karl Barwick, though fairly broadly accepted, are refuted by Walker at length, in part, by using parallel case based on other sophistic technai and, most interestingly, by suggesting two definitions of techne, which Walker distinguishes with a subscript to differentiate a non-creative, rule driven art with a more or less guaranteed product from a creative, methodological driven art with the possibility of a successful outcome produced by a skilled practitioner (pp. 63-75). The following chapter takes in an in-depth look at what a techne of Isocrates might have looked like with Walker concluding that the techne likely had two main parts, "the pragmatikos topos [concerned with inquiry and invention] and the lektikos topos [concerned with style] and possibly ... an organized set of progymnasmata" (p. 154). While many of Walker's conclusions in this chapter suggest the techne probably looked similar to the Rhetoric to Alexander, this third chapter is a fascinating look inside Isocrates' pedagogy. These two chapters on Isocrates are likely the most controversial in the book, and while Walker admits he has offered no "irrefutable" evidence of a techne of Isocrates, he does marshal a persuasive case based on available evidence, however scant. The Fourth Chapter, "In the Garden of...

Although much has been written about ancient rhetorical theories of example, few scholars have examined the subtypes of example contained in these ancient rhetorical theories. As a corrective to this scholarly blind spot, this article explores the lesser-known conceptual history of "comparison," which Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize as a subtype of example. Taken together, their rhetorical theories suggest that arguments by comparison are hypothetical, contentious, indirect, interrogative, and frequently deceptive. Moreover, Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize comparison by calling attention to the persuasive artistry of Socrates, notably his use of arguments by comparison to provoke interlocutors without challenging them directly. Understanding and explaining these rhetorical theories of comparison is the primary task of this article.

Reviews 207 some women to break the written silence of earlier times"(Travitsky, xviii). How much more accurate would Pender's introduction have been, had she used the modesty trope of conversation instead of the combative figure of the crow. Jane Donawerth University ofMaryland Lois Peters Agnew, Thomas De Quincey: British Rhetoric's Romantic Turn, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2012. 165 pp., ISBN: 978-0-8043-3148-2 Although rhetoricians often stress the lack of innovation in early nine­ teenth-century rhetorical theory and practice, Lois Agnew shows through the case of Romantic author Thomas De Quincey that rhetoric was still a ver­ satile resource for literary authors in the period. De Quincey, best known for Confessions of an English Opium-Eater (1822), redefines rhetoric as "a detached investigation of multiple perspectives" (p. 10), and Agnew examines his mul­ tifaceted theory and practice in her monograph. Extending her conclusion from Outward, Visible Propriety (2008), Agnew approaches De Quincey as an example of "rhetoric's transition to the modern era" from a unifying civic discourse to varied arts of style (p. 1). In this monograph, she builds on Jason Camlot's argument that "a previously coherent tradition of prag­ matic rhetoric is ... redistributed into the diverse localized sites of individual [nineteenth-century] periodicals" and traces how De Quincey revises the the­ ory and practice of rhetoric in his career as a magazine contributor? Because De Quincey demonstrates that rhetoric "need not be connected to practical decision making," Agnew argues that he reinvents rhetoric for the modern world as a form of intellectual inquiry and multiperspectival display (p. 15). For Agnew, De Quincey is a rhetorician because he treats writing as social interaction even though he divorces rhetoric from political ends: His "perspective on language and public life is grounded in classical rhetorical traditions, yet radically distinct from those traditions in ways that reflect his attention to the cultural circumstances in which he finds himself" (p. 2). De Quincey, according to Agnew, synthesizes classical rhetoric, eighteenthcentury Scottish rhetorics, and Romantic poetics. Because he combines tradi­ tions to create an art of rhetoric that orchestrates multiple perspectives, Ag­ new compares De Quincey's "dialogic" rhetoric to the theories of twentiethcentury literary critic Mikhail Bakhtin. Like Bakhtin's ideal novelist, De Quincey "produces a vision of rhetoric ... in which the speaker/writer interacts constantly with listeners who hold differing points of view and 1 J- Camlot, Style and the Nineteenth-Century British Critic: Sincere Mannerisms (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2008), 14. 208 RHETORICA imaginatively integrates those perspectives" (p. 13). De Quincey anticipates the multivocal techniques of Victorian fiction when he extends rhetoric to the interplay of multiple perspectives in early nineteenth-century Britain. In the first chapter, Agnew introduces De Quincey and the Romantic era to rhetoricians. She makes a convincing case for the ubiquity and utility of rhetoric in this period: Not only was rhetoric an available resource for classically-educated authors, but they also needed rhetoric to respond to new audiences, publishing practices, and political situations. Agnew recounts elements of De Quincey's life that are familiar to Romanticists, like his piecemeal education, opium addiction, and tense relationship with William Wordsworth, and explains that De Quincey responds to a society "embroiled in the conflicting impulses of market-driven production and intellectual play" (p. 41). The instabilities of early nineteenth-century British society demanded a rhetorical approach to authorship and a reconsideration of rhetoric's functions, and De Quincey's life and writing exemplify these changes. In the next three chapters, Agnew examines De Quincey's "dialogic" rhetoric. She "track[s] key themes that emerge through the course of De Quincey's writings," including an embrace of open, philosophical questions over limited, political cases; an emphasis on the "eddying of thoughts" over the communication of facts; and a conversational dynamic that makes readers fellow participants in the discourse (p. 103). Agnew recovers his rhetorical theory from scattered, occasional essays like a review of Whatley's Elements ofRhetoric (1828), "Style" (1840), and "On Language" (1847). While De Quincey performs what he theorizes in these pieces, Agnew applies his theories to famous works such as;Confessions. For example, he "creates a narrative in which the...

200 RHETORICA in un determinato ámbito della precettistica retorica, collegando le finalitá e i procedimenti espressivi che le sono propri e non altri (pp- 212—213 n. 814). Alessandro Garcea Paris Jane Donawerth, Conversational Rhetoric: The Rise and Pall ofa Women's Tradition, 1600-1900. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2012. xi-xv +205 pp., ISBN: 978-0-8093-8630-7 In her introduction, Jane Donawerth identifies the research gap that her new book seeks to address. Over the past thirty years, historians have inves­ tigated women's involvement in rhetorical theory in terms of its absence— "why there wasn't any" (p. 2). Furthermore, much of the conversation has tended to underscore rhetorical practices and not rhetorical theories. Don­ awerth asserts that scholars need to ask new questions: "How did women theorize communication, and if they did not do it in rhetoric and composition textbooks, where did they do it" (p. 2). Women theorized rhetoric based on their gendered experiences and on the genres that they were reading. Thus, women's rhetorical theory has centered on conversation—not oratory—as the basis for all discourse. In significant ways, Donawerth's book extends and complements her 2002 anthology, Rhetorical Theory by Women before 1900, which made avail­ able to scholars, teachers, and students extensive primary texts of women's rhetorical theory. Her new book builds on this collection by including an analysis of conversation as an important tradition in women's rhetorical the­ ory. In addition, she incorporates new women, particularly those defending women's right to preach, and she provides more analysis of the historical context and its influence in shaping this aspect of women's rhetoric. To construct her argument, Donawerth examines women's rhetorical theory from a variety of sources, including humanist works defending women's education, conduct books, defenses of women's preaching, and elocution manuals. In so doing, she introduces readers to the works of various women theorists during this three-hundred-year span. However, she contends that in the 1850s, when women started writing composition and rhetoric textbooks for male as well as female students, these "theo­ ries of conversation-based discourse gradually disappeared, or rather, were absorbed into composition pedagogy" (p. 2). To theorize rhetoric in this way, in her introduction Donawerth clarifies that she defines rhetorical theory as "writing about the nature and means of communication" (p. 7). She also situates her argument, outlines her historical method, and explains how she defines other terms relevant to her study. With its detailed framing of Donawerth's argument, the introduction should be helpful to those just beginning to navigate the field and to engage in these Reviews 201 discussion. Donawerth s book and several mentioned in her introduction are from the Studies in Rhetorics and Feminisms series, which demonstrates the significant scholarly contribution this series has made. Given the constraints of this review, I will focus on the first and fourth chapters since they feature a sampling of the diverse texts examined, and the fourth chapter aligns with some of my research interests. Chapter 1 provides a start for the book's focus by analyzing women's theorizing of conversation in humanist dialogues and defenses of women's education during the seven­ teenth century. It does so by examining the writing of Madeleine de Scudéry, Margaret Cavendish, Bathsua Makin, and Mary Astell. During this period, humanist and classical rhetorical education were available only for men; however, there were some "exceptional women" who managed to receive such training (p. 19). With this education, these women fashioned theories of communication, and they published in humanist genres, including "dia­ logues, epistles, print orations, and encyclopedias" (p. 19). Donawerth argues that these four women theorists "radically revised classical rhetoric by cen­ tering their theories on conversation rather than public speech" (p. 39). In so doing, they challenged some of the limits conventionally associated with gendered discourse of this period. in chapter four, Donawerth contends that sentimental culture, associ­ ated with "the public display of emotion" and with women, found its perfect outlet in elocution (p. 105). The chapter investigates the ways nineteenthcenturv elocution manuals incorporated into this tradition of conversation "a theoretical consideration of women's bodies...

202 RHETORICA mainstream composition studies, especially in the model of conversation for pedagogy" (p. 127). Examples of an exception as well as this merging are explored in texts by women such as Mary Augusta Jordan and Gertrude Buck, respectively. As noted, the conclusion argues that the tradition s de­ cline is linked to women starting to write rhetoric and composition textbooks for mixed-gender audiences. I would have liked to see more discussion of this claim, particularly related to the discussion of Buck. For instance, Buck's texts emerged directly from the all-women classes she taught at Vassar Col­ lege, and many examples in her books are targeted specifically at women. Although Buck's case may have been atypical, perhaps these differences could have been explored. In addressing new questions related to women's theorizing of rhetoric, Conversational Rhetoric is to be commended for enacting the new directions that historians and feminist scholars in the field have urged (Royster and Kirsch 2012; Gold 2012). In so doing, it illuminates a significant tradition of women theorizing conversation and introduces us to women with whom we may be unfamiliar. The book also suggests the need to investigate other examples of how women have theorized conversation and other potential ways that women have conceptualized communication. In spanning three hundred years and investigating such a wide array of texts, the book also is exemplary in terms of the breadth and depth that Donawerth brings to such an analysis. Suzanne Bordelon San Diego State University Stephen Pender and Nancy Struever eds, Rhetoric and Medicine in Early Modern Europe, Farnham: Ashgate, 2012, ix, 299 pp., ISBN: 9781 -4094-3022-6 Rhetoric and Medicine have been compared since antiquity. Both are eminently practical arts, requiring their practitioners to work with the vari­ ability of human experience, on the basis of a growing but still contestable body of theory. Both are intimately concerned with persuasion and with the emotions. Rhetoric and Medicine in Early Modern Europe is a collection of ten essays, introduction and afterword, based on panels from the 2003 annual meeting of the Renaissance Society of America. This is a thought-provoking collection, including some excellent essays, which explores the relations be­ tween medicine and rhetoric from many different points of view and in relation to a range of different types of subject-matter. Stephen Pender in­ troduces the collection with an analysis of the physician's different needs for persuasion (rational and emotional). His own essay "Between Medicine and Rhetoric (revised from his 2005 article in Early Science and MLedicine} surveys the relations between rhetoric and the art of medicine in Plato's Phaedrus and Reviews 203 Gorgias, Aristotle s Rhetoric and the early modern English physician John Cotta's A Short Discoverie of the Unobserved Dangers ofSeverall Sorts ofIgnorant and Unconsiderate Practisers of Physicke in England (1612). Focusing on the uncertainty of medical diagnosis and treatment enables Cotta to align the physician's pragmatic flexibility with the prudence of the orator: "a practical, prudential interpretation of probable signs directed toward intervention.. .is at the heart of medical practice" (p. 59). Jean Dietz Moss analyses five local physician's descriptions of the health­ giving properties of the waters of Bath, which aimed to promote the attrac­ tions of the spa, written between 1572 and 1697. She analyses the rhetori­ cal techniques employed by these publicists, discussing their deployment of narratives, authorities and evidence in order to extol the divinely pro­ vided health-giving properties of the spa. Richard Sugg analyses the use of the metaphor of anatomy in a range of sixteenth and seventtenth-century titles. Andrea Carlino resituates Andreas Vesalius within the humanist mi­ lieu of 1540s Padua and particularly within the Accademia degli Infiammati. He argues that the title of Vesalius's famous work De humani corporis fab­ rica libri septeni (1543) alludes through the word fabrica both to Cicero's De natnra deorum and to architectural works such as Sebastiano Serlio's Sette libri d'Architettnra. He documents Vesalius's connections with members of the Accademia degli infiammati, including a letter to Benedetto Varchi in which he mentions the recent publication of Daniele Barbaro's commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric. He...

El 13 de julio de 1556 moría Philibert de Rye, obispo de Ginebra. Un grupo de eruditos relacionados con la Universidad de Dola le tributóun homenaje literario, entre cuyos textos destacamos una elegía dialogada, desarrollada en dísticos elegíacos, obra del humanista Antonio Llull, texto que no recoge ninguno de los repertorios de la producción de este tratadista mallorquín. En este artículo estudiaremos este poema por primera vez, tanto en lo referente a sus fuentes y sus antecedentes literarios, como a la luz de los tratados de Llull Progymnasmata rhetorica (1550/1551/1572) y De oratione libri septem (1558).

Reviews 85 Paddy Bullard, Edmund Burke nud the Art of Rhetoric, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 272 pp. ISBN 978-1-107-00657-7 In Edmund Burke and the Art of Rhetoric Paddy Bullard "proposes a theory of Burke's rhetoric" (p. 3). Bullard approaches the question "of the artfulness with which Burke wrote and spoke" (p. 21) not by superimposing the \ ocabularv of classical rhetorical handbooks on Burke's performances; not by using Burke's A Philosophical Enquiry into the Sublime and Beautiful as a source of technical, critical vocabulary; but bv looking to Burke's oeuvre to identify the rhetorical questions that preoccupied Burke and how he addressed the questions throughout his career. Readers will witness enactment of Burkean rhetorical virtues as Bullard examines Burke from perspectives as broad as classical and early modern thinking about rhetoric, to the practical occasions and stakes of Burke's political writing and speaking, to the textual dynamics of his rhetoric. The result is a compelling analysis of Burke's rhetoric that deserves to be read by scholars of eighteenth-century rhetorical theories and practices, and by any scholar interested in generating theory based on practice—indeed anv scholar who wants to read exemplary rhetorical criticism. Broadly speaking, the central question or issue that preoccupies Burke is the nature of the speaker-audience relationship. Bullard describes Burke's rhetoric as a "rhetoric of character," concerned with "who is addressing whom, on behalf of whom" (p. 5; see also pp. 7, 11). Bullard captures the dynamic nature of the relationship when he describes Burke's art of rhetoric as "an art of moral equipoise" (p. 10; see also p. 22). Put differently, "A well-established ethos giv es a speaker licence to be urgent, to abjure false delicacy, and to resist neutrality, and it allows him to do all this without renouncing the claims of equity" (p. 9). The speaker earns the audience's trust by displaying knowledge of characters and his own political judgment, and the audience grants the speaker a license to advocate with zeal. Bullard develops his analysis and argument in an introduction, six chapters, and a conclusion. In the introduction Bullard defends his objects of study and critical vocabulary. He chooses to focus on "the relatively small number of treatises and speeches that Burke authorized as his own (either through publication or private endorsement), while the texts of his publicly reported speeches are treated with caution" (p. 21). Readers will almost certainly find the arguments for the selection to be sound, the central one being that Burke calls for attention to, and Bullard attends to, stylistic detail because this is where the action is—where audiences experience rhetorical effects. In chapters 1 and 2, Bullard covers standard topics in writing the history of rhetoric, namely Burke's intellectual context for thinking about rhetoric and the place of rhetoric in Irish education. This is not a routine history of rhetoric that broadly covers the usual suspects but instead focuses on clas­ sical, seventeenth-century and contemporary writers who explored the idea that is at the heart of Burke's rhetoric of character: that orators are best able to 86 RHETORICA secure a good moral character in the minds of their audience by demonstrat­ ing their understanding of what moral character is" (p. 28). Bullard covers Aristotle's treatment of rhetorical ethos and its guises in Roman thinkers in­ cluding Cicero and Quintilian. He uses Locke as a critical prompt to discuss writings by Hobbes, Edward Reynolds, and La Bruyère and to trace "how the rhetorical category of ethos returned to relevance during the seventeenth century as part of a popularized prudential moralism" (p. 42) in history, psy­ chology, and character-writing. He traces the Aristotelian model's adaptions in writings about pulpit eloquence and their secular processes in Shaftesbury and Smith. Similarly, the history of eighteenth-century rhetoric education among English speakers is not commonplace but instead advances the claim that "there are several important respects in which the Irish, rather than the Scots, should be seen as the real pioneers of this new development ["the study of literature in modern vernacular languages"] in the art of rhetoric" (p...

El 13 de julio de 1556 moría Philibert de Rye, obispo de Ginebra. Un grupo de eruditos relacionados con la Universidad de Dola le tributó un homenaje literario, entre cuyos textos destacamos una elegía dialogada, desarrollada en dísticos elegíacos, obra del humanista Antonio Llull, texto que no recoge ninguno de los repertorios de la producción de este tratadista mallorquín. En este artículo estudiaremos este poema por primera vez, tanto en lo referente a sus fuentes y sus antecedentes literarios, como a la luz de los tratados de Llull <i>Progymnasmata rhetorica</i> (1550/1551/1572) y <i>De oratione libri septem</i> (1558).

88 RHETORICA who seek a history of rhetorical theory that teaches, delights, and moves will find it here. Beth Innocenti University ofKansas William Pallister, Between Worlds: The Rhetorical Universe of Paradise Lost (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008). ISBN 978-0-80209835 -1; Daniel Shore, Milton and the Art ofRhetoric (Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 2012). isbn: 978-1-107-02150-1 Two books published in the last few years each have much to offer on the subject of how the English poet and statesman John Milton (1608-74) employed rhetoric in his various works and particularly in his epic poem Paradise Lost. William Pallister reminds or perhaps informs Miltonists of the centrality of rhetoric in the Renaissance and its utility both for persuasion and morality. He argues that contemporary criticism has overlooked the formal poetic and rhetorical presentation of Milton's ideas (7-8). Pallister's particu­ lar focus is Paradise Lost and the rhetorical issue of future contingency, which he traces through Milton's epic poem in terms of three distinct rhetorics, of hell, of heaven, and of paradise, the paradisal one being the most rhetorical because the most contingent. Pallister divides his book into two equal halves. His first five chapters are heavily documented demonstrations of Renaissance rhetoric, its clas­ sical roots, and Milton's engagement with it. In chapter one, Pallister first identifies contingency and probability as key issues in deliberative rhetoric and locates their discussion in such authors as Augustine, Boethius, Ock­ ham, Aquinas, Valla, Pomponazzi, Erasmus, Luther, and Calvin. He then demonstrates how Milton's theological concerns for free will in Paradise Lost are reflected in his preservation therein of future contingency. Chap­ ter two surveys the classical rhetoricians who had written on contingency, such as Isocrates, Aristotle, and Cicero, since Milton cites these authorities in his short pedagogical tract, Of Education (1644) rather than any of the educational theorists of his own period. Chapter three surveys Renaissance rhetoric in terms of its focus on eloquent style and its prescribed utility in politics, ethics, poetry, and theology, and in chapter four demonstrates how Milton's own prose identifies eloquence as "none . . . but the serious and hearty love of truth" (80; An Apology against a Pamphlet, Yale Prose 1: 948-49), a love that Pallister associates with Milton's "humanistic faith in the power of eloquence to captivate its audience and compel them to accept Christian values" (10). Chapter five considers rhetoric's relation to Christian theology and particularly the Bible as a rhetorical text, preaching as a rhetorical art, and God as a rhetorical and especially a poetic speaker. Reviews 89 With this foundation laid, Pallister proceeds in the second half of his book to investigate the rhetorical nature of Paradise Lost. In chapter six, he takes us to the poitions of Milton s epic that take place in heaven. Since there is little contingency possible in God's omniscience, the master tropes of hea\ en aie polugtoton and especiallv conduplica110, and the favored genus dieendi is epideixis, especially praise. Chapter seven surveys Satan's presentation as an orator in various authors before and including Milton, whose Satan is an accomplished orator, and chapter eight identifies the master trope of hell as demotes, or rhetorical cleverness, by which Satan not only deceives others but “tricks himself into seeing a contingent future that no longer exists for the defeated angels" (176). Chapters nine and ten treat rhetoric in the Carden of Eden, “the hub of Milton's rhetorical universe, [where] the theological, dramatic, and discursive conditions exist for rhetoric to thrive on all levels" (197) and where it comes most into its own as a agent of moral persuasion in the psychomachia of man's inner being (198). Pallister's text is a manifestly learned, monograph-length discussion of how Renaissance rhetoric, and particularly deliberative rhetoric, informs the greatest epic in the English language. Elis volume is well worthy to have won the Modern Language Association of America's Prize for Independent Scholars in 2009. Like all sublunary publications, however, it is not always perfect. Its extensive surveys in the first half are sometimes more trees than forest and might have benefitted from more signposting...

Ancient Greek and Roman compositional instruction, as evidenced in Greek handbooks on the progymnasmata and Quintilian's Institutio Oratoria, included a strong moral component. The importance of moral pedagogy to ancient teachers and theorists is seen not only in the themes and contents of the exercises, but also in their sequencing and justification.