Historians of rhetoric continue to debate the relative degree of transmission and implementation of the progymnasmata during the Middle Ages. This essay intervenes in this debate by analyzing Matthew of Vendôme's Ars versificatoria (Art of the Versemaker), showing that the treatise emphasizes the construction of probable assertions within a system of rhetorically-informed poetic composition. While past scholarship has shown Matthew's indebtedness to Ciceronian and Horatian rhetoric and poetics, this essay argues that progymnasmata exercises focused on probability and verisimilitude may have also influenced Matthew, suggesting the continued influence of the exercises within rhetorical and grammatical education during the 12th century.

Book Review| August 01 2019 Review: Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks, edited by Michele Kennerly and Damien Smith Pfister Michele Kennerly and Damien Smith Pfister, eds., Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks, Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press, 2018. 328 pp. ISBN: 9780817359041 Elizabeth Losh Elizabeth Losh American Studies and English William & Mary College Apartments, 318 114 North Boundary St. Williamsburg, VA 23185 lizlosh@wm.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (3): 325–327. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.325 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 Elizabeth Losh; Review: Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks, edited by Michele Kennerly and Damien Smith Pfister. Rhetorica 1 August 2019; 37 (3): 325–327. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.325 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Nel 1490 fu pubblicato a Venezia, sotto il nome di un ignoto Girolamo Capiduro, un In Rhetorica ad Herennium commentarium che godette di un notevole successo e di numerose ristampe. Attraverso l'analisi del testo, si intende dimostrare come esso sia in realtà il recupero di un commentario di Giorgio Valla, composto al tempo in cui questi insegnava Retorica a Pavia. Girolamo Capiduro è dunque uno pseudonimo che l'umanista Giorgio Valla, allora insegnante di Retorica presso la Scuola veneziana di San Marco, usò per la stampa della sua opera giovanile; opera con la quale egli tentò di rispondere a quella corrente di pensiero che proprio in quegli anni aveva iniziato a mettere in dubbio la paternità ciceroniana del trattato.

Book Review| August 01 2019 Review: Jean Baudrillard: The Rhetoric of Symbolic Exchange, by Brian Gogan Brian Gogan, Jean Baudrillard: The Rhetoric of Symbolic Exchange. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2017. 234 pp. ISBN: 9780809336258 Paul Allen Miller Paul Allen Miller Department of Languages, Literatures, and Cultures University of South Carolina Welsh Humanities Building Columbia, SC 29204 MILLERPA@mailbox.sc.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (3): 323–325. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.323 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 Paul Allen Miller; Review: Jean Baudrillard: The Rhetoric of Symbolic Exchange, by Brian Gogan. Rhetorica 1 August 2019; 37 (3): 323–325. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.323 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2019 Review: Aristotle and Confucius on Rhetoric and Truth: The Form and the Way, by Haixia W. Lan Haixia W. Lan. Aristotle and Confucius on Rhetoric and Truth: The Form and the Way. Routledge, 2017. 228 pp. ISBN 9781472487360 LuMing Mao, PhD LuMing Mao, PhD Department of Writing and Rhetoric Studies Languages & Communication Building 255 S. Central Campus Dr., Rm. 3700 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 LuMing.Mao@utah.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (3): 328–330. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.328 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 LuMing Mao; Review: Aristotle and Confucius on Rhetoric and Truth: The Form and the Way, by Haixia W. Lan. Rhetorica 1 August 2019; 37 (3): 328–330. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.328 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This article reconstructs the concept of rhetorical action to excavate its original, recurrent, and—for many—discomforting links to constitutive politics. By examining the history of rhetorical action through the ancient period to the mid-17th century, I will argue that that relationship between rhetorical action and constitutive politics is a powerful prism for understanding actio. The article’s contributions are twofold and compounding. The first is the establishment of a positive account of the relation between actio and constitutive rhetoric for the ancient politicians and early modern dramatists, which pushes the usual bookends of actio’s history both backward and forward, providing analytical leverage to critically reflect on its standard history. The second contribution is a demonstration that much of the confusion and discomfort surrounding actio results from formulating actio negatively against its constitutive political threat. In sum, this article contributes to both the theoretical and historical understanding of rhetorical action.

Reviews 323 demonstrating that Nonnus was thoroughly at home in the topoi that belong to TrocpocxXrpixoi Zoyoi. The case studies that follow, however, home in on exceptional instances, such as that of Typhon addressing his own limbs as if they were soldiers (Dionysiaca 2.258-355). This way of proceeding leaves unclear whether Nonnus's handling of topoi can really be characterized in terms of him "inverting and parodying these traditional elements" (p. 296); for the most part, he seems quite conventional here. The structure of Chapter 5 means that the discussion of the speech by an Achaean sailor look­ ing at Europa (Dionysiaca 1.93-124; discussed on pp. 236-42) is widely sepa­ rated from Hera's speech about the same event (Dionysiaca 1.326-43; discussed on pp. 262—1), so that bringing out the purposeful connections between the two involves a good deal of repetition. In general, Verhelst occa­ sionally has a tendency to paraphrase and summarize in cases where more analysis is required—but some of this is perhaps inevitable when dealing with the Dionysiaca, which is not a book that is very familiar even to scholars specializing in late antiquity. And Verhelst is to be applauded for her efforts to make her book appeal to a wider community of classicists; she certainly succeeds in making Nonnus sound more interesting than the picture of him in the standard handbooks would suggest. The book is on the whole free from blemishes, give or take a few typos (e.g., for "248" in the title on p. 306, read "48.248"), unidiomatic expressions (e.g. the Dutchism "hunting for effect" on p. X) and minor mistakes (e.g. on p. 103, where the exhortative topoi concerning to oouyepox and to ¿x3r(o6u£vov are strangely equated with the consequences of "victory" and "defeat," respectively). Unfortunately (and due to no mis­ take of the author), the book is set in accordance with the bizarre editorial decision taken some time ago by Brill (also in evidence in other recent publications) to print all single-letter and unpunctuated abbreviations in small caps, so that one finds side by side references to, say, Nonnus's Par. and d. (instead of D.), Euripides's Bacch. and ia (instead of IA) or, in bibliographical references, "Ann Arbor (Mich.)" and "Cambridge (uk)." It is to be hoped that Brill will soon abandon this silly convention. Luuk EIuitink Leiden University Brian Gogan, jean Baudrillard: The Rhetoric of Symbolic Exchange. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2017. 234 pp. ISBN: 9780809336258 Baudrillard has always been difficult to categorize. He began life as a German studies scholar and translator, taught sociology as well as philos­ ophy, and later in life became a general commentator on culture, politics, and society. He was a photographer, a theory pop star, an aphorist and 324 RHETORICA a provocateur. Brian Gogan argues that he is best understood as a rhetori­ cal theorist. He offers a serviceable compact overview of Baudrillard's vast oeuvre in this book. He writes clearly and signposts his argument abun­ dantly. He often relies more on citation of secondary sources than a close reading of Baudrillard's texts. Baudrillard's most famous concept is the "simulacrum.'' While diffi­ cult, the simulacrum is perhaps best understood as a likeness without a referent. In the era of "fake news" and "alternative facts," this idea is per­ haps easier to accept than it was when introduced in the seventies and eighties. While the proliferation of simulacra has been accelerated by social media and our ability to simulate and disseminate anything imagin­ able, simulacra, like the poor, have always been with us. Gogan asks us to understand the concept of the simulacrum in terms of three central motifs that make up Baudrillard's rhetorical theory: the art of appearance, the art of disappearance, and symbolic exchange. The art of appearance is the production of a simulacrum that need not be tied to any pre-existing object. Nonetheless, the simulacrum rhetorically functions in the world as if it were a representation, and it can be reproduced endlessly creating its own functional economy. We might think of certain forms of advertising or even internet myths...

Historians of rhetoric continue to debate the relative degree of transmission and implementation of the progymnasmata during the Middle Ages. This essay intervenes in this debate by analyzing Matthew of Vendôme's Ars versificatoria (Art of the Versemaker), showing that the treatise emphasizes the construction of probable assertions within a system of rhetorically-informed poetic composition. While past scholarship has shown Matthew's indebtedness to Ciceronian and Horatian rhetoric and poetics, this essay argues that progymnasmata exercises focused on probability and verisimilitude may have also influenced Matthew, suggesting the continued influence of the exercises within rhetorical and grammatical education during the 12th century.

Reviews Berenice Verhelst, Direct Speech in Nonnus' Dionysiaca: Narrative and Rhetorical Functions of the Characters' "Varied" and "Many-Faceted" Words. (Mnemosyne Supplements 397), Leiden / Boston: Brill, 2017. XI + 330 pp. ISBN: 9789004325890 The epic poem Dionysiaca, written by Nonnus of Panopolis sometime in the fifth century ce in 48 books, is the longest surviving poem from antiq­ uity. It relays the god Dionysus's childhood and youth, his expedition to India and his eventually triumphant return to Europe, in a sprawling, extremely discursive narrative. It is a notoriously difficult work to get a han­ dle on, and Verhelst does her readers a real service by including a summary of the poem in an appendix to the book under review (pp. 302-7). Amidst a recent upsurge of scholarly interest in Nonnus (the main fruits of which are ably reviewed in the introduction), Verhelst—in her first monograph—seeks to deepen our understanding of the special character of the Dionysiaca and the literary culture from which it sprang by focusing on a single prominent aspect of the poem, namely the form and function of its 305 directly repor­ ted speeches. Taken together, these speeches comprise 7,573 of the poem's 21,286 lines. Her hunch that an analysis of the speeches is a productive way to approach Nonnus's zorziZH on the whole pays off handsomely. Verhelst has written a book that is in many ways illuminating and will be essential reading for anyone interested in Nonnus and late-antique litera­ ture more generally as well as in the interaction between rhetorical theory and literary practice. A lengthy introduction globally compares Nonnus's strategies of speech representation to those of Homer, Apollonius of Rhodes, and Quintus of Smyrna. It shows that Nonnus's speeches both occur with a higher frequency and are on average significantly longer than those of his predecessors. In addition, Nonnus displays a marked preference for giving speeches to relatively minor characters, who also only speak once, and for representing monologues over dialogues. 78% of speeches stand alone, as opposed to only 14% in the Iliad, for instance. Both these initial observations raise questions about the nature and function of represented speeches in the Dionysiaca, as they appear to run counter to the idea, often found in scholarship on earlier Greek epics, that speeches serve to show how characters interact with one another and how they develop through Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 3, pp. 321-330. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2019 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: https://doi.Org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.3.321 322 RHETORICA successive speeches. The body of Verhelst's book is divided into two parts, each with three chapters. The first part aims to show that Nonnus's spee­ ches are the product of a refined interplay between the conventions governing speech representation in the earlier literary tradition and the overtly formalistic rhetorical "bent" of late-antique culture. The second homes in on the narrative functions of the set speeches in the Dionysiaca. Except for Chapter 6, which contains an in-depth analysis of the speeches in the Beroe episode (Dionysiaca 41-43), each chapter combines a survey of the topic under discussion (e.g. "Tiç-speeches" in Chapter 3, or "persuasive speeches" in Chapter 4) with a number of more specific case studies. The strength of Verhelst's treatment throughout is that she fruitfully uses the speeches to synthesize and to confirm or modify emerging strands in recent scholarship on Nonnus and to suggest further lines of inquiry. For example, while scattered publications have focused on particular intertexts of the Dionysiaca, Verhelst makes a convincing case that, in order truly to understand the texture of Nonnus's poetry, we need to be aware of how he is constantly conscious of and playing with essentially the whole Greek tradition, including not only epic, but also tragedy, lyric, the novel, histori­ ography, rhetorical theory, and even the visual arts. A...

Reviews 325 Following Baudrillard, Gogan asserts throughout the book that "percep­ tion itself is rhetorical (8). He means that "language use brings about percep­ tion (8). Here is where I think many a materialist, but also many a more traditional scholar, will have a hard time following. For if the claim were sim­ ply that tropes and the use of language shapes human perception, there could be no argument. What you perceive as the just, the normal, or even—more concretely the sexual is inevitably affected by the categories and images through which you process your perceptions. Moreover, even the object world itself is created as a set of distinct identifiable objects through the existence, elaboration, and circulation of linguistic categories. There was a world in which oxygen did not exist, grav ity was not a concept, and in which the atoms of Lucretius were v ery different from those of Einstein or Niels Bohr. In the end, howev er, these observations do not establish the claim that "language use brings about perception." The prelinguistic infant has percep­ tion. My dog, whose language use is minimal, perceives. And this elementary recognition is important. While there may be no human perception worthy of entering into symbolic exchange not shaped by language use (i.e., rhetoric), that is v ery different from saying "perception is rhetorical." The latter asserts there is no necessarv referent of perception. It asserts that all perceptions are merely simulacra and in no sense representations. Phantasia, on this level, is triumphant, and meaning has disappeared. Nonetheless, Aristotle's position, which Gogan quotes approvingly, is very different. For Aristotle, phantasia ("appearance") is what mediates between perception and judgment (144). Thus, while there may be no judg­ ment without rhetoric, aisthësis ("perception") exists and so differential judge­ ments can be made. Indeed, the appearance on which judgment is predicated must be rigorously separated from perception itself. In a world of "alternative facts" and of "fake news," a world in which climate science is a matter of opin­ ion, the imperative not to reduce experience to the exchange of interchangeable simulacra, all equally unmoored from perception, has never been more urgent. Baudrillard was masterful in predicting and analyzing the rhetoric of our post­ truth society, but we will need something more to survive it. Paul Allen Miller University of South Carolina Michele Kenrterly and Damien Smith Pfister, eds., Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks, Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press, 2018. 328 pp. ISBN: 9780817359041 When Edward Corbett first published his didactic volume Classical Rhetoric for the Modem Student, the context was mid-century television cul­ ture, and many of Corbett's examples, which were intended to demonstrate the continuing applicability of traditional tropes from ancient Athens, relied on familiarity with mass media. Since that time - when Corbett marveled at the introduction of the data-rich medium of microfilm - much in information 326 RHETORICA technology has changed dramatically, including the advent of personal com­ puting, the rise of social media platforms, and the ubiquity of access to dis­ tributed networks. Of course, there were significant works published on classical rheto­ ric and digital communication during the nineties, including Richard Lanham's The Electronic Word and Kathleen Welch's Electric Rhetoric dur­ ing the Web 1.0 era. Although Lanham and Welch are not contributors to Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks, this new volume is a notable achievement in representing a very broad range of perspectives from classi­ cal rhetoric - including concepts from Aristotle, Plato, Protagoras, Isocrates, and Gorgias - and applying them to seemingly ephemeral online phenom­ ena expressed in networked publics. The introduction to Ancient Rhetorics and Digital Networks outlines the case for understanding the ancients through contemporary digital practices and vice versa; at the same time, it resists simplistic or arbitrary "cutting and pasting" (2) of heterogeneous sources without sufficient justification. It observes that the texts in the collection represent a range of possible linka­ ges between present and past: historical antecedents, analogues for practi­ ces, heuristics for theoretical framing, and cues to conventions such as social customs and moral orientations, as well as relations of renewal. Many of the essays outline broad theories to explain internet infra­ structures...

Nel 1490 fu pubblicato a Venezia, sotto il nome di un ignoto Girolamo Capiduro, un In Rhetorica ad Herennium commentarium che godette di un notevole successo e di numerose ristampe. Attraverso l’analisi del testo, si intende dimostrare come esso sia in realtà il recupero di un commentario di Giorgio Valla, composto al tempo in cui questi insegnava Retorica a Pavia. Girolamo Capiduro è dunque uno pseudonimo che l’umanista Giorgio Valla, allora insegnante di Retorica presso la Scuola veneziana di San Marco, usò per la stampa della sua opera giovanile; opera con la quale egli tentò di rispondere a quella corrente di pensiero che proprio in quegli anni aveva iniziato a mettere in dubbio la patemità ciceroniana del trattato.

Using a set of examples drawn from imperial concern with Christian theological unity in the fourth century, this essay describes the heretofore unremarked-on functioning of homonoia concepts in addition to persuasion: justification of coercion and propaganda. Grounded in the idea that unanimity and consensus are natural goods, the rhetorical form persuaded through eliciting a desire to participate in those natural goods. Such rhetoric implicitly justified coercive social policy (a.k.a. punishment) when positive persuasion proved insufficient. Additionally, imperial pundits could assert the desirability of consensus as a form of propaganda when “unanimous” decisions were publicized to imply a lack of dissent and make it harder for other would-be dissenters to find allies, therefore decreasing the likelihood of dissent elsewhere.

328 RHETORICA Haixia W. Lan. Aristotle and Confucius on Rhetoric and Truth: The Form and the Way. Routledge, 2017. 228 pp. ISBN 9781472487360 At a 2013 Rhetoric Society of America Summer Institute seminar on comparative rhetoric, twenty-five scholars spent a week together reading scholarship on comparative rhetoric of the recent past and charting out possible paths for the future. In their culminating statement, "A Manifesto: The What and How of Comparative Rhetoric," which appeared in Rhetoric Review in 2015 (34.3), they outlined best practices in the subfield, underscoring both the imperative to speak for and with the other and the need to cultivate self-reflexivity and accountability for such engagement. They further called on comparative rhetoric scholars to search for "simultaneity, heterogeneity, and interdependence" both within and between different rhetorical traditions and practices. Haixia Lan's Aristotle and Confucius on Rhetoric and Truth: The Form and the Way provides an example of what such best practices actually can look like and of how best to center comparative rhetorical studies on simultaneity, heterogeneity, and interdependence. Lan's monograph, consisting of five chapters together with an introduc­ tion and an epilogue, offers an in-depth comparative study of Aristotle (384322 BCE) and Confucius (551—479 BCE), two pivotal figures hailing from Greek and Chinese ancient cultures, respectively. While plenty of studies have focused on Aristotle and Confucius in the past, they tend to be informed by a philosophical and literary framework. Meanwhile, comparative rhetoric scholars have also studied Aristotle and Confucius, but none, in my view, has offered such a comprehensive study of these two thinkers as Lan has done, for which she must be commended. The introduction provides a succinct overview, laying out both its object of study (focusing on the similarities and differences in Aristotle and Confucius's rhetorical thinking) and its method of study (deploying a rela­ tional and contextualized approach that traverses disciplinary boundaries). Such a study, for Lan, not only presents comparative rhetoricians with a better opportunity to understand these two thinkers' singular contributions to the development of rhetoric but also enhances the prospect of a more felicitous exchange between the two cultures they represent and continue to influence and, better still, between East and West in the global contact zones of the twenty-first century. No less important, Lan's study also counters sticky bina­ ries that pit, for example, Aristotle's purported discourse of abstraction and linearity against Confucius's alleged discourse of pragmatism and circularity. It further problematizes past studies that focus exclusively on either differen­ ces or similarities but not both or that are long in overgeneralizations and short on contextualized or recontextualized engagements and discussions. Each of the five subsequent chapters provides a detailed and nuanced analysis of one central aspect of Aristotle and Confucius's rhetorical thinking. They together contribute to a portrait of two individuals being separated by time and space but joined by an unfailing insistence on hylomorphic thinking that Truth or tianming (the cosmic order) is enmattered in, and can be Reviews 329 actualized through, rhetorical practices; on engaging self, other, and the cos­ mos with an inclusive vision; and on conceptualizing ultimate realities with analogy, be it form (by Aristotle) or the way (by Confucius). For example, in Chapter One, Lan takes up rhetorical invention or the dynamic and mutually entailing relationship between language-in-use and knowledge-making. She characterizes Aristotle's views on episteme as knowledge of certainty, techne as knowledge of probability, and rhetoric as techne that intersects with episteme. In other words, Aristotle's rhetoric dwells in this in-between space where certainty and unpredictability join hands and dialectic and sophistical reasoning mingle with each other. Chapter Two, “Interpreting the Analects," takes its readers to Confucius, to the Analects, a collection of conversations between the Master and his students compiled by the latter after his death, and to the rhetorical dimension of his ways of knowing and speaking, the latter of which mani­ fests itself in Confucius's complex understanding of rhetorical invention, of the role language, audience, and context play in the making of probable or local knowledge. For Lan, developing an historical and interdisciplin­ ary understanding of rhetorical invention...

Book Review| May 01 2019 Reviews: Antebellum American Women’s Poetry: A Rhetoric of Sentiment, by Wendy Dasler Johnson Wendy Dasler Johnson, Antebellum American Women’s Poetry: A Rhetoric of Sentiment, Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2016. 265 pp. ISBN: 9780809335008 Paige V. Banaji Paige V. Banaji Assistant Professor of English Department of English & Foreign Languages Barry University 11300 NE 2nd Ave Miami Shores, FL 33161 pbanaji@barry.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (2): 207–209. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.207 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 Paige V. Banaji; Reviews: Antebellum American Women’s Poetry: A Rhetoric of Sentiment, by Wendy Dasler Johnson. Rhetorica 1 May 2019; 37 (2): 207–209. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.207 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| May 01 2019 Reviews: Logos without Rhetoric: The Arts of Language before Plato, edited by Robin Reames Robin Reames, ed., Logos without Rhetoric: The Arts of Language before Plato, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2017. 191 pp. ISBN 9781611177688 Christopher Moore Christopher Moore Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Classics Director of Undergraduate Studies for Philosophy Director of the Hellenic Studies Group 240E Sparks Building University Park , PA 16802 c.moore@psu.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (2): 209–212. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.209 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 Christopher Moore; Reviews: Logos without Rhetoric: The Arts of Language before Plato, edited by Robin Reames. Rhetorica 1 May 2019; 37 (2): 209–212. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.209 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Thomas A. Discenna Davos Redux: Language and Ethics in the Work of Cassirer and Rhetorical Theory I As I had not expected to find it in him, I must confess that I have found a neo-Kantian here in Heidegger.1 f the history7 of Western thought is replete with individuals that one might euphemistically label as "characters," prone to extremes not only in their thought and writings but in their private lives as well, then Ernst Cassirer must be regarded as something of an outlier.2 Recognized by his contemporaries for an unerring sense of equanimity, his evenhandedness as a scholar was a value that he affirmed even when it may have perhaps been better to lay down gauntlets and more forcefully defend positions he held dear? Indeed, at the conclusion to the famous Davos Disputation, a performance was held at which the participants, Cassirer and Heidegger, were caricatured by their students, Emmanuel Levinas playing the part of Cassirer repeating "I am in a conciliatory mood" over and over while flour flowed from atop his head, and out of his pockets, a "cruel allusion to Cassirer's intellectual poverty and 1 Ernst Cassirer in Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem ofMetaphysics. 5th Ed., enlarged. Trans. Robert Taft. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997), 193. It should be noted that this phrase and much of Cassirer's opening remarks do not appear in the two other translations of the Davos Disputation. 2See, for instance, Simon Critchley, The Book of Dead Philosophers (New York: Vintage, 2008); Andrew Shaffer, Great Philosophers who failed at love (New York: Harper Perennial, 2011). 3This is not to suggest that such positions did not exist only that his defense ot them bore the stamp of a conciliatory attitude that balanced even the most extreme of positions. Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 2, pp. 189-197, ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2019 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. ucpressjoumals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.189 190 RHETORICA defeat/'4 As much as it may be true that Levinas's caricature mocked his teacher's "failure" at Davos it is simultaneously an allusion to Cassirer's fundamental equability, a trait that permeates his work and, apparently, his very being. Thus, it seems strange, or perhaps entirely appropriate, that such a character should, in this contemporary age of extremes, be found at the center of contentious intellectual disputes regarding the meaning and importance of his philosophical legacy. Following an extended period when studies of Cassirer were, more or less, moribund save for stalwarts such as John Michael Krois and Donald Philip Verene, a renewed interest in his work seems to have taken root, though, perhaps inevitably, there seems no hope of consensus regarding what it all might mean. Now that very unCassirerean spirit of contention seems to have come to the field of rhetorical studies where in this journal two articles representing contrasting interpretations of Cassirer's intellectual contributions to our understanding of rhetoric have been published in recent years.5 My ambition in the first article was threefold: First, to con­ tribute to the literature surrounding the now famous debate between Cassirer and Heidegger at Davos by reading it as an instantiation of the ongoing conversation between rhetoric and philosophy; second, through such a reading to question recent efforts to appropriate Heidegger's work for advancing metaphysi­ cal claims for rhetorical work; and, finally, and most importantly, to initiate a conversation among rhetoricians concerning the utility of Cassirer's work by offering "a case for reading Cassirer's philos­ ophy of symbolic forms as both a metaphysical and normative ground for a rhetorical theory whose central purpose is to construct a decent, cultured, and critical humanism."6 In respect to these goals the first essay seems to have been mostly successful. While they have little to say about the context of Davos, Bengtson and Rosengren seem to accept, in their "contrastive critique" to my article my major contention that...

In the 5th century a number of sophists challenged the orthodox understanding of morality and claimed that practicing injustice was the best and most profitable way for an individual to live. Although a number of responses to sophistic immoralism were made, one argument, in fact coming from a pair of sophists, has not received the attention it deserves. According to the argument I call Immortal Repute, self-interested individuals should reject immorality and cultivate virtue instead, for only a virtuous agent can win the sort of everlasting reputation that makes a life truly admirable and successful.

Reviews Wendy Dasler Johnson, Antebellum American Women's Poetry: A Rhetoric of Sentiment, Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2016. 265 pp. ISBN: 9780809335008 Sentimental poetry is not a common subject of rhetorical analysis. Nor is it a highly regarded literary form. However, Wendy Dasler Johnson argues that for a large number of antebellum American women, sentimental poetry served as an important rhetorical space where they could voice their opinions on social and moral issues. Specifically, Johnson presents a deep and focused analysis of the sentimental verse of antebellum America's three most popular female poets: Lydia Huntley Sigourney, Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, and Julia Ward Howe. Thanks to three decades of feminist recovery scholarship, Sigourney, Harper, and Howe are not entirely obscure figures in literary and rhetorical histories. Scholars of nineteenth-century American literature have recovered the writing of these three women, and feminist historians of rhetoric have recognized their rhetorical accomplishments as reformers in education, abo­ lition, temperance, and suffrage. However, their sentimental poetry remains a blind spot in both literary and rhetorical scholarship. While rhetorical scho­ lars do not usually consider poetry as part of these women's rhetorical oeuvre, literary scholars have struggled to analyze their verse. Johnson quotes (p. 1) the lament of literary scholar Cheryl Walker, who, upon the rediscovery of antebellum American women's sentimental poetry, said, "The problem is, we don't know how to read their poems." Johnson claims that a rhetorical framework is the solution to this problem. A literary/rhetorical divide has marginalized women's sentimental poetry in both literary and rhetorical his­ tory, and Johnson's study actively traverses this divide. To recover antebellum women's sentimental verse, Johnson argues that poetry, especially sentimental poetry, is a rhetorical genre. "[M]any hold to a modernist view," Johnson writes, "that literature by definition makes no arguments" (p. 4). However, nineteenth-century Americans, influenced by the belletrism and faculty psychology found in the rhetorical theory of George Campbell and Hugh Blair, understood poetry as a sub­ category of rhetoric, and they valued sentimentalism as part of the process of persuasion. Citing Campbell, Johnson demonstrates how eighteenthand nineteenth-century rhetorical theory linked "'sentiment to moral Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 2, pp. 207-212. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2.207. 208 RHETORICA and 'sensible/ not to an excess of feeling" (p. 7). As Campbell explains, "what is addressed solely to the moral powers of the mind, is not so prop­ erly denominated the pathetic, as the sentimental."1 Thus, as Johnson concludes, poetry is a valid rhetorical genre, and sentimentalism is a rhetor­ ical appeal that "works alongside pathos or persuasion of public feeling" to "invok[e] arguments about ethics, rational values, and judgments" (p. 18). Eventually, sentimentalism "got linked to women pejoratively," alongside the rise of women's literacy and the establishment of elite, white, male English departments (pp. 7-8). This feminization of sentimental verse played no small part in the marginalization of the genre. However, as John­ son demonstrates, in early nineteenth-century America, poetry was a valid rhetorical genre, and sentimentalism was considered a masculine discourse, which women co-opted in order to write about public issues. True to the rhetorical nature of her project, Johnson divides her study into three main parts: "Logos" (or rhetorical aims), "Ethos" (writing perso­ nae), and "Pathos" (audience appeals). In each section, Johnson offers anal­ yses informed by literary research, eighteenth-century rhetorical theory, and postmodern theories of semiotics that work to foreground the rhetoric of sentimentalism in the verse of Sigourney, Harper, and Howe. In Part 1, which consists of one chapter, Johnson examines the "reasoning and theo­ ries of persuasion" that these three women use to justify their right and their duty to write (p. 12). According to Johnson, sentimental logos does not rely on syllogism but rather is found in sentimental poets' use...

The main purpose of this paper is to discuss parrhesia (literally “free speech”), in the rhetorical theory of Bartholomew Keckermann (Systema rhetoricae, Hanau 1608) with particular attention to its nature, forms, and functions. For Keckermann, parrhesia is not only one of the rhetorical figures related to expressing or amplifying emotions, but also may be considered as a regulative idea of speech best epitomized in the postulate, to speak “everything freely and sincerely,” since the term includes the Greek notion. Aside from such ancient authors as Quintilian, the major source of theoretical inspirations for Keckermann are the textbooks written by Melanchthon (on the relations between parrhesia and flattery), Ramus (on parrhesia as a kind of exclamation) and Sturm (on the critical power of parrhesia). With a firm grounding in this contextual background, this analysis elucidates Keckermann’s contribution to the Renaissance debate on this rhetorical schema.

The sententia, which I translate as “a concise expression of one’s sense of things,” plays an important role in Quintilian’s approach to the formation of an orator and to the forms public speech should take. Passages about sententiae, which appear across the Institutio Oratoria, show how Quintilian attempts to temper a generational frenzy for making clever quips: by reminding readers that sententiae also can be familiar lines of verse or prose circulating in culture and by advising readers that sentence-length variety increases an orator’s affective and communicative efficacy. Studying sententiae in Quintilian enriches our understanding of past and present attitudes toward what one might generally call being quotable. These days, quotable forms include sound bites and tweets, and some critics view those short forms as analogous to sententiae. Quintilian’s views on sententiae, therefore, not only prove applicable to on-going debates about the place of quotable forms in rhetorical pedagogy and practice but also might help channel those debates in more productive directions.

In this article, I trace the evolution of Geoffrey of Vinsauf’s doctrine of transsumptio as it developed from his Documentum de modo et arte dictandi et versificandi (late 12th century) to the Poetria nova (1202–1213). Although scholars have conflated transsumptio with translatio (or metaphor), this article argues that transsumptio is Geoffrey’s attempt to schematize how occupying a position of difference (or the transference of the self into an alternate mode of being) reveals metaphorical possibility in language. I close by imputing the development of Geoffrey’s doctrine of transsumptio to a reinvestigation of the Rhetorica ad Herennium between composing his two major treatises.

Reviews 209 Howe uses suggestive dialogue to persuade her male readers to admit her to their literary canon. Like Howe, Johnson seeks to legitimate sentimental poetry; however, Johnson does so by reading this verse through a rhetorical lens. Johnson's anal­ yses are rich and incisive. Sometimes, her larger argument gets lost in the details of her close reading. Moreover, while Johnson promises to offer readers a heuristic for reading sentimental verse, her analyses are often too local and deep to be generalizable to other texts. Regardless, Antebellum American Women s Poetry makes a valuable contribution to both rhetorical and literary scholarship, particularly feminist scholarship on nineteenth-century American women's writing. Demonstrating the importance of sentimental verse in nine­ teenth-century America, Johnson recovers a site of women's rhetorical activity that has otherwise been lost to the divide between literature and rhetoric. Paige V. Banaji Barry University Robin Reames, ed., Logos without Rhetoric: The Arts of Language before Plato, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2017. 191 pp. ISBN 9781611177688 The contributors to Logos without Rhetoric confront Edward Schiappa's so-called "nominalist" view of rhetorike techne - that it makes little sense to speak of a discipline of rhetoric before the coinage and circulation of the term rhetorike, which Schiappa famously attributes to Plato in the Gorgias. Rather than examine Schiappa's view directly, the contributors try to give substance to an "evolutionary" or "developmental" view. On this account, important ingredients of rhetoric appear in the fifth century and even before. These views do not, of course, conflict; they rather shift the question from (i) "when did the thing called rhetorike begin, and what is that thing so named?" to (ii) "what stuff if any within that thing predates its/their being called rhetorike?" The first question gets at a specific concept, its work, and its effects within Greek self-understanding, with the goal of reconstructing specific debates and conscious practices that deployed or were governed by that concept. The second question searches for any treatment of language as a "manipulation of persuasive means" (p. 8), an inquiry bound only by our own presumptions of relevance. Now, from an Aristotelian perspective, rhetorike (techne) is at once a sys­ tematic theory7 and an ongoing inquiry into the various kinds of persuasive manipulation. From that perspective, what one wants to find in an account of the origins of rhetorike is not particularly clever, routimzed, or flexible deployments of persuasive manipulation but rather evidence for the rise of a discipline, an increasingly concerted, increasingly self-conscious effort through time to understand the extent and nature of it. 210 RHETORICA Be that as it may, questions (i) and (ii) could differ markedly. The contri­ butors to Logos without Rhetoric draw the two questions together by trying to attribute a quasi- (or proto-) systematic quasi- (or proto-) consciousness to their various authors' use of persuasive manipulation, such that they could be seen not only as speaking well but also as coming to think about the task of speaking well. (The authors generally do not address the extent to which these efforts were concerted or dialectical - that is, a matter of public discus­ sion.) Success in the contributors' enterprise depends, then, on their actually identifying theoretical or disciplinary rudiments in texts. This is in principle possible since, whatever the coinage situation for the term, rhetorike must have been formed and accepted in response to some prior if rudimentary the­ oretical or disciplinary activity. As it turns out, the chapters themselves are of rather mixed success. Terry Papillon ("Unity, Dissociation, and Schismogenesis in Isocrates") contributes a short, jargon-heavy, and free-floating chapter about the rheto­ ric of divisiveness. It wavers between two theses, the rather grand and lessevidenced one that "Isocrates. . . redefined the notion of politics" (p. 17) and the rather mundane and quite plausible one that "Isocrates shows us a prac­ tical example of an early Greek rhetorical practice" (p. 18). Robert Gaines ("Theodorus Byzantius on the Parts of a Speech") argues that a pre-Platonic figure, Theodorus, distinguished oratorical speeches into twelve parts and that we see the adoption of this normative distinction in the (fragmentary) ps.-Lysianic Against Andocides for Impiety...

Erik Bengtson and Mats Rosengren Choices that Matter: The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms and Contemporary Rhetoric w hen we decided to respond to Thomas A. Discenna's origi­ nal article, "Rhetoric's ghost at Davos: Reading Cassirer in the rhetorical tradition," we had a two-fold purpose.1 2 First, we wanted to support the important claim that Ernst Cassirer can con­ tribute significantly to the contemporary field of rhetorical studies. Second, we wanted to make sure that the coming renaissance for Cassirer's work within rhetorical studies will be based on a solid foun­ dation, that is, on an understanding of Cassirer's work that renders the complexities and qualities of his philosophy. We and Discenna are part­ ners in the first ambition. However, as we argued in "A PhilosophicalAnthropological Case for Cassirer in Rhetoric," Discenna's article did not provide the solid foundation we were hoping to find. Hence, we felt obliged to respond, and do so even more after having read Discenna's reply (in this volume) to our article. On the upside - and for this we want to thank the editors of Rhetorica - the two original articles, as well as the two contributions in this volume, hopefully provide scholars of rhetoric with an incentive to go further and to dig deeper. As strong believers in the heuristic value of pro et contra argumentation, we acknowledge that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It is valuable for the continued process of in­ troducing Cassirer in contemporary disciplinary rhetorical debates that the discussion in Rhetorica includes both Discenna's more traditional account - repeating some of the historical critiques against, as well 1Thomas A. Discenna, "Rhetoric's ghost at Davos: Reading Cassirer in the rhe­ torical tradition," Rhetorica 32.3 (2014): 245-266. 2Mats Rosengren och Erik Bengtson, "A Philosophical-Anthropological Case for Cassirer in Rhetoric," Rhetorica 353 (2017): 346-65. Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 2, pp. 198-206. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2019 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: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.2T98 Choices that Matter 199 entrenched understandings of, Cassirer s work — and our alternative account, founded on a contemporary reassessment of the philosophy of symbolic forms. In a nutshell, the reconsideration that we suggest does not repeat the historical criticism of Cassirer that once contributed to putting him in the margins of academic thought, and instead asks if those very traits, formerly seen as flaws, can be seen as strengths. In this article we focus on clarifying our position in relation to two central points of conflict in our discussion with Discenna. Both concern how to understand Cassirer and how to understand rhetoric today. The first issue is the place of language. The second concerns ethics. We would like our article to entice the reader to go directly to Cassirer to understand Cassirer. Iterated statements from secondary sources must - due to the long-standing tradition of misinterpretations of Cassirer's work - be treated with caution. Towards the end of the article we will also respond to Discenna's poetic critique regarding the concept of "thrown-ness." In our view, this critique completely misses the mark as an account of our position. On the Place oe Language Let us start by discussing the place of language within the philoso­ phy of symbolic forms, as well as within contemporary rhetorical theory. In Discenna's reply in this volume, he underscores the "centrality" of language for Cassirer as well as for rhetoric. In the context of that argu­ ment, we must note that the term "central" or "centrality" is ambiguous. It can on the one hand be understood as synonymous with "important" or "crucial." Following that interpretation, the statement that language is "central" to the philosophy of symbolic forms or to rhetoric becomes completely uncontroversial. To position us as opposing that claim would be a straw man argument. The entire first volume of the Philosophy of Symbolic Forms is...

Book Review| February 01 2019 Review: Ethics and the Orator: The Ciceronian Tradition of Political Morality, by Gary A. Remer Gary A. Remer, Ethics and the Orator: The Ciceronian Tradition of Political Morality, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2017. xii, 291 pp. ISBN: 9780226439167 Jakob Wisse Jakob Wisse School of History, Classics and Archaeology Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU England, UK jakob.wisse@ncl.ac.uk +44 (0) 191 208 7974 Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (1): 91–94. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.91 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 Jakob Wisse; Review: Ethics and the Orator: The Ciceronian Tradition of Political Morality, by Gary A. Remer. Rhetorica 1 February 2019; 37 (1): 91–94. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.91 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2019 Review: The Social Life of Books: Reading Together in the Eighteenth-Century Home, by Abigail Williams Abigail Williams, The Social Life of Books: Reading Together in the Eighteenth-Century Home, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017. 352 pp. ISBN: 9780300228106 Don Paul Abbott Don Paul Abbott Department of English Voorhies Hall 1 Shields Avenue University of California Davis, CA 95616 dpabbott@ucdavis.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (1): 83–85. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.83 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 Don Paul Abbott; Review: The Social Life of Books: Reading Together in the Eighteenth-Century Home, by Abigail Williams. Rhetorica 1 February 2019; 37 (1): 83–85. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.83 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2019 Review: Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts, by Brad McAdon Brad McAdon, Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts, Eugene Oregon, Pickwick Publications, 2018. 333 pp. ISBN: 9781532637728 Arthur Walzer Arthur Walzer Professor Emeritus, Communication Studies University of Minnesota awalzer@umn.edu 40 Prospect Park W, 1J Brooklyn, NY 11215 Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (1): 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.87 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 Arthur Walzer; Review: Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts, by Brad McAdon. Rhetorica 1 February 2019; 37 (1): 87–90. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.87 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| February 01 2019 Review: La retorica degli esercizi preparatori. Glossario ragionato dei, by Francesco Berardi Francesco Berardi, La retorica degli esercizi preparatori. Glossario ragionato deiProgymnásmata, Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag (Spudasmata, 172), 2017. 346 pp. ISBN: 9783487155951. Rodolfo González Equihua Rodolfo González Equihua Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 58910 Morelia, Michoacán, México rodolfoge@gmail.com Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2019) 37 (1): 85–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.85 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 Rodolfo González Equihua; Review: La retorica degli esercizi preparatori. Glossario ragionato dei, by Francesco Berardi. Rhetorica 1 February 2019; 37 (1): 85–87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37.1.85 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. © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews 91 Gary A. Remer, Ethics and the Orator: The Ciceronian Tradition of Polit­ ical Morality, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press 2017. xii, 291 pp. ISBN: 9780226439167 The subjects of Remer's book are of central importance to the study of (western) rhetoric: the troubled relationship between rhetoric and morality, both in general and as approached by Aristotle, Cicero, and others; and the reception of Ciceronian ideas and their potential contemporary relevance. He proceeds in roughly chronological order. In a long introduction and a first chapter he sets the scene and favourably contrasts Cicero's approach to that of Aristotle, and in a second chapter then develops his most impor­ tant claim: that Ciceronian rhetorical morality is based on the notion of decorum. Four chapters follow on later authors and issues, and their links with Cicero: Machiavelli, Lipsius, the notion of (the orator as) a political rep­ resentative, and the relationship between rhetoric and "deliberative democ­ racy." Here, I shall mainly concentrate on the introduction and chapters 1-2, as they make up almost half the book and are meant to define the issues addressed in the rest. In these chapters, Remer argues for the value of Cicero's approach to the ethics of rhetoric, especially as compared to that of Aristotle's Rhetoric. The latter's much-discussed inclusion of emotional persuasion (pathos) is of course particularly relevant. It is problematic in ethical terms, as it suggests that he endorses emotional manipulation. In addition, it seems to be inconsis­ tent with the first chapter of the work (1.1), where Aristotle criticises contem­ porary writers on rhetoric for including emotional appeal in their "arts" (technai). Remer (42, alib.) accepts the now common solution, associated espe­ cially with Nussbaum (cf. 11-13 for nuances): Aristotle regards emotions as grounded in cognition, and recognises only emotional appeals that are based on argument; and this implies that the opportunities for manipulation are severely restricted, as emotions can again be removed by counter-arguments that is, they are "responsive to cognitive modification" (36). I am on record as rejecting such views (Ethos and Pathos from Aristotle to Cicero, Amsterdam, Hakkert, 1989,17-20; 72-4), and for all of their popularity, they still seem highly dubious to me. For one thing, the fit with what Aristotle in fact says in his first chapter is not particularly good. Moreover, according to Aristotle the whole point of the emotions in a rhetorical context is that they make people change their judgements (Rhet. 2.1, 1377b30-1378a6; 1378a20-23); an angry person, e.g., is thus likely in fact to be impervious to counter-arguments. However that may be, Remer accepts the common view as a plausible interpretation of Aristotle's ideas - ideas which, however, he proceeds to criticise. He points out, e.g., that Aristotle himself sometimes recognises non-cognitive emotional responses (36-7); that Aristotle also seems to suggest the use of false arguments (43-4); and that reality shows that emotions are often not responsive to cognitive modification (44—8, including a discussion of the Willie Horton case). These points, while not all new, are valuable. More fundamentally, however, he faults Aristotle for providing only moral rules external to rhetoric (48—9), that is, 92 RHETORICA in terms developed especially by Michael Leff (Rhetoric and Public Affairs 1, 1998, 61-88), he regards Aristotle as offering a weak rather than a strong defence of rhetoric. It is such a strong, intrinsic defence that Remer claims to find in Cicero. This, however, is highly problematic. Cicero, as is well known, saw argu­ ments as generally less important than ethos, presenting the characters on one's own side favourably, and pathos, playing upon the audience's emotions (e.g., De or. 2.178). Remer fully acknowledges that Cicero, pragmat­ ically, sees "rhetorical deception" as necessary in real life. He nonetheless attempts to mitigate this "manipulative" view of rhetorical persuasion. For instance, according to De or. 2.203 Antonius, in his defence of Norbanus, employed "commonplaces" (loci) to elicit emotions. Remer asserts that he thus elicited emotions through argumentation; but the term locus is also frequently used for non-argumentative emotional appeal (e...

This article argues that Kant’s attack on the ars oratoria in §53 of the Critique of the Power of Judgment is directed against eighteenth-century school rhetoric, in particular against the “art of speech” (Redekunst) of Johann Christoph Gottsched. It is pointed out that Kant suggests a revision of Gottsched’s conception of “true eloquence,” which was the predominant rhetorical ideal at the time. On this basis, and in response to recent discussions on “Kantian rhetoric,” Kant’s own ideal of speech is addressed. It emerges that he favors a culture of speech embedded in moral cultivation, which excludes any disciplinary form of rhetoric.

Reviews Abigail Williams, The Social Life of Books: Reading Together in the Eighteenth-Century Home, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017. 352 pp. ISBN: 9780300228106 Elocution has long been relegated to the margins of rhetoric's history. While it was dutifully acknowledged as the subject of numerous treatises, the elocutionists' elevation of delivery over the presumably more substantial aspects of rhetoric often led historians to conclude that elocution was inferior to more recognizable approaches to eighteenth-century rhetoric. And the elo­ cutionists' penchant for diagrams, notational devices, charts, and elaborate illustrations seemed more a sign of eccentricity than seriousness. This histor­ ical inattention to elocution was rather at odds with elocutionism's incredible popularity, prevalence, and persistence in the Anglophone world. In recent years, scholars have begun to see the movement not as an aber­ ration but rather as an important cultural and educational moment in the development of rhetoric. This réévaluation of elocution has been furthered by relatively recent essays in this journal by Philippa Spoel, Dana Harrington, Debra Hawhee and Cory Holding, Paddy Bullard, Thomas Sloane, and others. More recently, the almost simultaneous publication, in 2017, of three major books has significantly enhanced our understanding of elocution: Marian Wilson Kimber, The Elocutionists: Women, Music, and the Spoken Word (Univer­ sity of Illinois Press); Paula McDowell, The Invention ofthe Oral: Print Commerce and Fugitive Voices In Eighteenth-Century Britain (University of Chicago Press); and, of course, the subject of this review, Abigail Williams, The Social Life of Books: Reading Together in the Eighteenth-Century Home. All three of these books extend, in important ways, our understanding of elocution beyond existing accounts. "Elocution" does not appear in the title, but nearly every page of The Social Life of Books is about the movement, either directly or indirectly. Williams calls her subject "sociable reading," and reading is what elocution was about. Although elocutionists would sometimes attend to oratory, their focus remained the reading of a text written by another, and reading it aloud and well. Williams considers many familiar figures of what she calls the "elocu­ tion industry" including William Enfield, Thomas Sheridan, and John Walker. But she goes well beyond the recognized scenes of elocution—the schoolroom, the lecture hall, and the pulpit—to investigate, in intimate detail, the mostly unexplored patterns and practices of oral reading in the English home. Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 1, pp. 83-94. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 15338541 . © 2019 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/journals.php?p=reprints. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2019.37T.83. 84 RHETORICA Her portrayal of the quotidian orality of the eighteenth-century English derives from an impressive immersion in letters, diaries, journals, periodi­ cals, library records, commercial transactions, and myriad other documents. What emerges from this meticulous scrutiny of the records of ordinary Britons is the realization that oral reading was a pervasive feature of English home life that transversed social class, educational attainment, economic status, and geographical boundaries. Williams explains that sociable reading was so ubiquitous because, well, it was sociable. Reading aloud to others is a pleasurable and very human experience. In addition to sharing the pleasures of the printed word, Williams also documents other more practical motiva­ tions for sociable reading. Such reasons include what she calls "limited oph­ thalmology." Thus, "reading aloud gave those with failing vision access to books and letters" and so "many read with others' eyes" (66). The ill and the dying were also read to as a source of comfort and a demonstration of the reader's sympathy. And, of course there were economic reasons for read­ ing aloud. While book ownership increased in the eighteenth century, books remained expensive. Communal reading became a form of "book sharing" in which many could participate without incurring the cost of book own­ ership. And perhaps most importantly, reading aloud at home offered an effective method of moral instruction. This was particularly applicable to young ladies "whose solitary, compulsive reading of fiction in their...

This article seeks to demonstrate that, already at the end of the fifth century BCE, the style of the tragedian Agathon was described in terms that would also be used for what is later called Asianism in the first century BCE. This is accomplished by relating the characterization of the Asiatic style, as provided by Cicero, to the descriptions of Agathon’s style. Both Agathon’s style and the later Asiatic style are conceptualized as ‘Asiatic- barbaric.’ Consequently, the Atticists of the first century BCE were not the first to vilify their opponents by situating specific stylistics and rhetoric within Asia since Agathon’s critics had already used similar strategies to mark his style as exotic and extravagant.

Reviews 87 igual forma cabida las voces que explican los llamados ejercicios de acompaña­ miento u apoyo: la lectura, la audición y la paráfrasis, así como los de perfec­ cionamiento, como la elaboración y la réplica. Hasta aquí, nada que objetar; sin embargo, sorprende un poco la inclusión de la mayoría de los términos restantes, no tanto porque no sean pertinentes o porque carezcan de solidez expositiva, sino porque uno comienza a preguntarse por las discriminazioni y a pensar que la cifra de treinta y nueve lemas resulta más arbitraria o, al menos, no plenamente sustentada de lo que debería ser un glosario razonado. La nítida distinción que hay en los términos glosados cuando de los propios ejercicios se trata, se torna confusa cuando de la elección del aparato termino­ lógico que debe cubrir una obra de esta naturaleza depende. Berardi tiene en su descargo, como él mismo reconoce, la dificultad que supone establecer una premisa metodológica que explique el sentido y los límites de un glosario como el que nos presenta. La obra cuenta con quince esquemas que facilitan la confrontación y puntos en común de las voces glosadas y que a fines pedagógicos resultan sumamente útiles, de ahí que se echen en falta en la sxypcxaic, la yvóur) y la xpcíoí. Cierran la obra una bibliografía, un índice de autores y otro índice de términos retóricos en griego v en latín. En conjunto y, salvo las matizaciones indicadas, el glosario constituye una aportación altamente significativa en el panorama de los estudios de la retórica escolar v un instrumento valioso para el análisis histórico-crítico, literario y contextual de la literatura clásica. Rodolfo González Equihua Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Brad McAdon, Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts, Eugene Oregon, Pickwick Publications, 2018. 333 pp. ISBN: 9781532637728 Some of the best current work in historical rhetorical criticism is being done in religious studies, particularly of the New Testament. Duane Watson's The Rhetoric of the New Testament: A Bibliographic Survey (2006) lists hun­ dreds of works; scholars who identify with disciplinary rhetoric constitute a small fraction of the authors Watson lists. Brad McAdon s Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts makes a worthy addi­ tion by a rhetoric scholar to this work. The "conflicts" of the book's title refer to differing views concerning events around Jesus' birth and his relationship to his family in the gospels and to friction between the Pauline and Petrine communities over circumci­ sion in the Epistle to the Galatians and in the Acts of the Apostles. McAdon argues that the gospel writers and the author of Acts mediated these conflicts through rhetorical mimesis that the authors resolved the issues or obscured the disagreements through the creation of new texts based on 88 RHETORICA imitated source texts. While I have reservations about McAdon's method and some of his conclusions, I admire this book for its erudition and for the clarity and strength of its argument. After an Introduction summarizing each chapter, McAdon turns in chapter 2 to the roles that imitation played in Greece and Rome from the 5th century BCE to the 2nd century CE. The pervasiveness of imitation, espe­ cially Roman imitation of Greek sources, has been studied by Classicists in the context of intertextuality. Within rhetoric, imitation's locale was the classroom. As McAdon effectively summarizes, "mimesis/imitation was the means by which students were taught to read, write, critically analyze a text, and prepare a speech" (244). Drawing on the detailed analysis of G. N. Knauer, he concludes this chapter by analyzing the relationships between Virgil's Aeneid and its Homeric sources, a relationship that for him parallels the relationship between the New Testament writers and their sources. In chapters three, four and five, McAdon focuses on the literary relations­ hips between the three Synoptic Gospels. Scholarly consensus is that Mark's was written first, followed by Matthew's, then Luke's. There is also wide agreement (though...

Come “regola”, la tortura di schiavi innocenti che è stata concordata dai querelantia fini probatori (βάσανος probatori) fu ritenuto dagli oratori lo strumento più efficace per giungere alla verità. Questo paper, con riferimento alla psicologia dell”antica Grecia, spiega perché la menzionata regola fu di cruciale importanza per la retorica. Gli oratori, sulla base della presunta attendibilità dell”istituzione dei βάσανος, furono in grado di sviluppare argomenti basati sulle sfide (πρόκλησις), che possono essere comprese al meglio alla luce della concezione greca, piuttosto che moderna, di razionalità ed azione umana. Di conseguenza, a dispetto dell”incertezza che circonda l”attualità della tortura a fini probatori nell”età degli oratori, l”importanza retorica dei πρόκλησής εις βάσανον è innegabile e va esaminata attentamente.

Reviews 85 Williams convincing and comprehensive case for the pervasiveness of reading aloud in the English home would appear to contradict the thesis of an eighteenth-century "reading revolution" that gave the rise to the silent reader. On this point, she concludes that "two contradictory things happened in the history of eighteenth-century reading. One is the birth of a generation of silent readers . . . But at the same time there was a near obsession with learning to read out loud: this was the great age of elocution" (11). Silent reading did not displace orality. Instead, "the vocalizing of texts in the eigh­ teenth century . . . shows us that the exchange between the written and the spoken word continued to move backward and forward" (277). Williams explains that writing "a history of the social life of books is necessarily a work born of myriad of sources. It involves reading between the lines and joining dots that may not always be entirely visible" (10). And in her history she manages this "myriad of sources" with dexterity and joins together a great many dots (more than this review can indicate) with a clarity and concision of style too often absent from humanistic schol­ arship. Her work is invaluable in demonstrating that elocution was not the idiosyncratic invention of minor actors and obscure academics obsessed with oral delivery but rather a movement that met important cultural, edu­ cational, and social needs in the lives of many eighteenth-century Britons. In short, Abigail Williams' The Social Life of Books is an important book about books—and about rhetoric. Don Paul Abbott University of California, Davis Francesco Berardi, La retorica degli esercizi preparatori. Glossario ragionato dei Progymnásmata, Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag (Spudasmata, 172), 2017. 346 pp. ISBN: 9783487155951. La obra, fruto de un proyecto postdoctoral auspiciado por la Universi­ dad de Chieti bajo la dirección de Maria Silvana Celentano y en origen contemplado para su difusión en línea, tuvo a bien concretarse en este libro que hace un examen meticuloso de la doctrina retórica contenida en los pro­ gymnásmata a través de treinta y nueve términos técnicos que el autor estima fundamentales. Es decir, que si en un principio estaba destinado a limitarse a catorce entradas que expusieran cada ejercicio a la luz de la tradición que parte de los cuatro manuales en lengua griega que conservamos, los de Teón, Pseudo Hermógenes, Aftonio y Nicolás de Mira, al final, con el cotejo de la tradición de las Artes rhetoricae y con la revisión del corpus de comen­ tarios de época bizantina y de las fuentes papiráceas, parecía inevitable dar cabida a veinticinco entradas más. Es así como podemos encontrarnos, por ejemplo, con un lema que aborda el propio concepto de Kpoyupvczop.o(TOí, donde, además de ofrecer las características principales de esta cassetta degli attrezi en trece puntos, da cabida a la mención de las evidencias epigráficas 86 RHETORIC A y papiráceas que muestran la difusión y recepción del método. Este apar­ tado junto con el capítulo "Le fonti progimnasmatiche" conforman una buena puesta al día en la materia. El porqué de un glosario razonado obedece, como aduce Francesco Berardi, a que estos manuales constituyen un óptimo cristal para leer e interpretar los textos clásicos, ya que nos ayudan a identificar los procedi­ mientos expresivos y principios de composición empleados y compartidos por otros autores y de paso, añado, nos previenen de emitir juicios prema­ turos sobre su grado de individualidad u originalidad cuando ejercemos la crítica literaria. En el mundo académico, los estudios de progymnásmata aplicados como metodología no extemporánea sino coetánea a los géneros que florecieron en la literatura de época imperial llegaron, por la renovación hermenéutica que supusieron, para quedarse. Pero quizá, ante todo, el cre­ ciente interés se deba a su peculiaridad en cuanto sistema de enseñanza y didáctica con respecto a la retórica de las artes: lejos de entrar in medias res a una disciplina intrincada por la...

In this paper I discuss Lorenzo Valla’s criticism of the traditional Square of Opposition displayed in the second book of the Dialectica. I show that, according to Valla, the opposition rules of the propositions must take into account both common speeches and the correct use of Latin language, not the formal link occurring between the parts of propositions. In Valla’s perspective, this theoretical change is carried out through rhetoric and philology, and it involves a reassessment of the arts of the trivium. As regards this topic, I argue that Valla aims niether to reduce dialectic to rhetoric nor to replace the former with the latter, but rather to establish some rhetorical principles as a better-suited way to set the opposition rules, because they take into account the linguistic context in which these rules apply.

96 RHETORICA I take issue with Mifsud's verdict that Aristotle sacrifices Homer is that, if the project is to "excavate the gift in rhetoric and rhetoric in the gift, [in order to] discover resources for resisting tyranny" (p. 11), then it seems ill-advised to make doxa responsible for the loss of the magic inherent in the gift. Indeed, at the 2016 NCA event several panelists focused their commentaries on doxa as the gift of inherited stories, transmitted through generations. Stories circu­ late through private as well as public networks; they are the gifts of rhetorically constituted social formations. Aristotle's doxa of prudential rhetoric do in fact have the capacity to resist tyranny, as the history of the polis shows. That tyr­ anny sometimes wins is hardly proof to the contrary. In gifting theory, a sacrifice is a gift with no obligation or debt. In Mifsud's portrayal, Homer is almost Christ-like insofar as he gives to Aris­ totle without expectation of return. Mifsud pursues an ostensibly prescrip­ tive analysis of what the gift ought to be, never quite accounting for the move away from the gift as a logic of the relationship between poiesis and rhetoric. It is intriguing that the classical focus of Mifsud's investiga­ tion of the gift does not direct her toward history's most powerful caution­ ary tale regarding dangerous gifts. Virgil's fear of the Greeks bearing gifts is nowhere to be found in Rhetoric and the Gift, which obscures the possibil­ ity that even the gift left at the city gates may bring brutality long before the technical apparatus of rhetoric. (Those who attended the tribute panel will not soon forget John Poulakos's artful present to Mari Lee: a wooden horse with a retractable ribbon in its mouth bearing forty Greek words— one for each warrior hidden inside the Trojan gift—illustrating the continuity of Indo-European etymology.) Mifsud describes how Homer's "song-like speech is his well-recognized gift to the civic world" (p. 33). His call to Aristotle is "imaginative, inventive, and ingenious" (p. 33). In it, all manner of goods— hospitality, friendship, love (p. 86), honor (p. 103), and equity (p. 107)—maybe discovered. This view of gifting is irresistibly hopeful. To conclude, I submit that Mifsud's book is a masterful analysis of Homeric traces in the rhetorical tradition that continue to exert influence to this day. I would contend, how­ ever, that her reading of the gift, together with its implications for rhetoric, overlooks those aspects of gifting that are inflected with other rhetorical impul­ ses: fear, enmity, and coercion. E. Johanna Hartelius, University of Pittsburgh Silvia Gastaldi, Aristotele. Retorica, Introduzione, traduzione e commento, Roma, Carocci 2014 (ristampa 2017) ISBN: 9788843074198; Maria Fernanda Ferrini, [Aristotele]. Retorica ad Alessandro, Milano, Bompiani 2015. ISBN: 9788845279249 Nell'ampia messe di studi sulla retorica greca e latina prodotti negli ultimi decenni un posto di rilevo occupano senza dubbio quelli dedicati alie prime Technai rhetorikai consérvate, la Retorica di Aristotele e la Retorica ad Alessandro. Reviews 97 Per la collana Classici di Carocci Editore, Silvia Gastaldi ha curato una nuova edizione délia Retorica aristotélica, con testo greco, traduzione ita­ liana ed ampio commento. Nell'introduzione si legge che la Retorica aristo­ télica "sembra davvero collocarsi al crocevia tra un'impostazione teórica, finalizzata a riflettere sulle modalité attraverso cui si costruisce un discorso persuasivo, qualunque sia il suo ámbito di applicazione, e una prospettiva pragmática, che rinvia alie pratiche comunicative proprie délia città greca, e perciô legate alla realtà fattuale" (p. 14). La consapevolezza del duplice binario lungo il quale si muove Aristotele — quello délia descrizione empirica delle pratiche del discorso del mondo reale e quello délia teorizzazione di un modello scientifico di retorica filosófica - anima Lanalisi délia Gastaldi sia nelle pagine introduttive sia nel commento al testo. La studiosa non manca peraltro di sottolineare il debito dello Stagirita nei confronti délia tradizione retorica precedente, che aveva i suoi poli fondamentali nelLinsegnamento dei sofisti da un lato, nella riflessione platónica dall'altro (pp. 10-11). Il testo greco, come specificato in una Nota al testo...

100 RHETORICA Hui Wu, “Guiguzi," China's First Treatise on Rhetoric: A Critical Trans­ lation and Commentary, Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, xiv + 180 pp. 2016. ISBN: 9780809335268 "Guiguzi," China's First Treatise on Rhetoric: A Critical Translation and Commentary consists of Hui Wu's translation of the classical Chinese text of Guiguzi, accompanied by an introduction to the original text, notes on the translation, and a glossary of the key terms in Guigucian rhetoric. C. Jan Swearingen also contributes a concluding commentary on the similarities and differences among the rhetorics of Guiguzi, the sophists, and the PreSocrates , as well as Plato and Aristotle. This book offers the field a muchneeded direct encounter with indigenous Chinese rhetorical theories and concepts. In the past two decades, both comparative and Chinese rhetorical studies have significantly remapped our sense of "the" rhetorical tradition. Mary Garrett, Xing Lu, Arabella Lyon, LuMing Mao, and C. Jan Swearingen (to name a few) have reinterpreted key Chinese rhetorical concepts, terms, and modes of meaning-making in order not only to understand Chinese rhet­ oric in its own contexts but also to change the paradigms of rhetorical criti­ cism in the present age of globalization. However, not much scholarly attention has been paid to translations of classical Chinese treatises. Limited primary textual evidence and inaccurate translation have contributed to ori­ entalist (mis)readings of Chinese rhetorical theories, in which the Chinese tradition is held to lack rhetorical thinking. Such a deficiency narrative has spurred comparative rhetoricians to study Chinese rhetoric without the bur­ den of the Eurocentric model, and here I am thinking of Xing Lu's Rhetoric in Ancient China, Fifth to Third Century B.C.E.: A Comparison with Classical Greek Rhetoric. I am also thinking of LuMing Mao in his "Essence, Absence, Useful­ ness: Engaging Non-Euro-American Rhetorics Interologically." Being well aware of the "paucity of primary texts and inadequate trans­ lations," Hui Wu allies herself with attempts to remake the Chinese rhetorical tradition (p. 7). In particular, Wu distinguishes the Guigucian rhetoric from Confucian rhetoric. The latter expresses a strong mistrust of eloquence and stresses a strict connection between language use, action, and moral orders. In Wu's estimation, the addition of Guiguzi to the landscape of rhetoric "offers an opportunity for critical studies of an indigenous rhetorical theory and practice excluded from the rhetorical canon in both China and the West" (p. 9). By bringing Guiguzi back into conversations of non-Greco-Roman rhe­ torics, the translation and commentaries of Wu and Swearingen redefine the scope of rhetoric, innovate with Guigucian rhetorical terms and concepts, and offer us language to think outside of Eurocentric logic and rationality. In order to situate her translation in the sociopolitical context of the orig­ inal, Wu first takes her readers back to the pre-Qin Warring States period (475-221 BCE). In so doing, she reassesses Guiguzi by critiquing the dominant receptions of the book in both Chinese and Western contexts. While Guiguzi is conventionally seen as a magic book on war strategies, Wu dissociates it from issues of military deployment. According to Wu, although Guiguzi, Master Guigu, is the presumed teacher of the zong-heng practitioners (who Reviews 101 were travelling persuaders famous for eloquent military consultations), his rhetorical theory is "independent" from that of his students, because "the entire treatise [Guiguzi] hardly develops any notions or terminologies directly related to the school's [the zong-heng school's] war strategies" (p. 20). Further, instead of accepting that Guiguzi is unfathomably difficult or enigmatic, Wu portrays it as a "profound theory of rhetoric" (p. 20). Closely related, she rejects the common Western characterization of Guiguzi as a "Chinese Sophistic," as if it intends to teach manipulation and distrust. She further points out that such a Western understanding forces us to understand Guiguzzi in terms of the debate between Plato and the sophists about communi­ cative ethics. In Wu's English translation, Guiguzi is neither a magic book on military affairs nor a mysterious or deceptive anti-rhetorical doctrine. It is instead a treatise about a rhetorical theory that relies on yin-yang philoso­ phy, the Dao, and moral doctrines to develop rhetorical tactics for building human...

After serving as Indonesia’s first female president from 2001 to 2004, Megawati Sukarnoputri remains one of Indonesia’s most influential politicians. However, Indonesian rhetoric in general and Megawati’s rhetoric in particular have been largely inaccessible to Western rhetorical scholarship because of barriers in language and culture. This essay extends scholarly access to Megawati’s rhetoric by transcribing, translating, and evaluating key portions of her May 27, 2014 address at the Rakernas Partai Nasdem (National Democratic Parties Convention). Contextualized within the Indonesian political- rhetorical situation, Megawati’s rhetoric embodies the necessity of paradox for negotiating identity as a powerful woman within a historically androcentric system.

Cicero, in the early work de ïnventione (1.18), defines what is the hermagorean doctrine of ϰρινόμενον: “the point for the judge’s decision is the issue which arises from the denial (ex infirmatione) and tight assertion of the excuse (et confirmatione rationis)”. The doubts on the authenticity of the text are old, and modern editors delete the reference to the confirmatio. However, most of manuscripts attest the necessity of the confirmation of the defense. Also, confirmatio is that by means of which our speech proceeding in argument adds belief, and authority, and corroboration to our cause (de Inv., 1.34). Moreover Cicero, in Partitiones oratoriae (104), explains that only by continuous refutations between the parties to the proceedings it arises the ϰρινόμενον: this is the rhetorical counterpart of dialectic antilogy. Finally, the early medieval commentaries of the de ïnventione give reason to the firmamentum after the ϰρινόμενον.

Reviews Menegaldi in Ciceronis Rhetorica Glose, Edizione critica a cura di Filippo Bognini, Firenze, SISMEL-Edizioni del Galluzzo 2015, pp. CLII-286. ISBN: 9788884505910 La prestigiosa collana di testi della Société Internazionale per lo Studio del Medioevo Latino (SISMEL) si arricchisce di un nuovo volume, ossia il commento, finora inedito, al De inventione ciceroniano di Menegaldo, un commentatore attivo fra Luítimo scorcio del sec. XI e la prima metá del XII secolo. L'edizione è curata magistralmente, per rigore e per ampiezza di riferimenti utili anche a ulteriori ricerche e/o edizioni, da Filippo Bognini (d'ora in poi B.), un giovane ricercatore dell'Universitá Ca' Foscari di Vene­ zia, studioso della tradizione grammaticale e retorica medievale e umanistica (sua peraltro la recente edizione critica del Breviarium de dictamine di Alberico di Montecassino). La figura di Menegaldo (dai manoscritti risultano le diciture Menegaldus , Menegaudus, Manegaldus o Mainegaldus, d'ora in poi M.) si colloca a un punto di svolta nella storia della cultura scolastica, e in particolare della tradizione retorica del Basso Medioevo. Fra la seconda metà dell'XI e il XII secolo - quando le nuove esigenze della scena politica, del diritto e delle controversie teologiche fanno si che il dibattito pubblico e dottrinario trovi un più vivace contesto pratico di applicazione - si registra un forte impulso all'istruzione sistemática delle arti della scrittura (artes dictaminis o artes dictandi ) e in generale della retorica, impulso che comporta un rinnovato inter­ esse per il De inventione e la Rhetorica ad Herennium, entrambe ritenute auténticamente ciceroniane e rispettivamente note anche come Rhetorica Vêtus e Rhetorica Nova (sulla ricezione medievale della retorica ciceroniana il rinvio obbligato resta la messa a punto del volume, a cura di V. Cox e J. O. Ward, The Rhetoric of Cicero in its Medieval and Early Renaissance Com­ mentary Tradition, Leiden, Brill, 2006). Tale interesse trova adesso la sua principale espressione testuale nella forma delle glose: un apparato continuo di note a commento del senso e della lettera del testo, pubblicato - ben diversamente dalla mise en page Carolina del commento, caratterizzata da note a margine del testo e/o interlinean - su un supporto autonomo dal testo commentato ma formalmente collegato ad esso proprio dai "lemmi" costituiti dalle prime parole della frase o del parágrafo volta per volta presi in esame. Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVI, Issue 1, pp. 92-102. ISSN: 0734-8584, electronic ISSN: 1533-8541.© 2018 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved. Please direct aU 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: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.L92. Reviews 93 Al nome di M. sono riconducibili una serie di commenti, alcuni perduti (fra gli altri un commento ai Salmi), altri pervenutici in maniera piú o meno cospicua (fra cui glosse alie Metamorfosi di Ovidio e all'Ars poética di Orazio). Secondo alcuni autorevoli studiosi questo autore potrebbe identificarsi con il polemista Manegoldo di Lautenbach, attivo nellXI secolo in area francotedesca come esponente del movimento noto come "riforma gregoriana". Pur sembrando a B. questa identificazione plausibile, a suo giudizio gli elementi finora raccolti sono insufficient! per esprimersi categóricamente in modo favorevole. Dalle indagini di B. sul milieu di circolazione delle opere di M. e da un accurato esame delle fonti del testo édito, comunque, emerge il profilo intellettuale di un autore di area non italiana, gravitante in area franco-tedesca, buon conoscitore del canone degli autori classici (in particolare Sallustio, Virgilio, Lucano, Terenzio, Orazio e Ovidio), che leggeva Cicerone verosímilmente per un capitolo di canonici, attualizzando il testo con esempi pratici legati alia loro vita quotidiana. Al di la delle questioni biografiche - sulle quali il lavoro di B. fomisce comunque un rilevante contributo - per la ricostruzione della tradizione reto­ rica (e scolastica) medievale conta di piú il fatto che M. rappresenta uno dei piú illustri esponenti di una dotta e impegnata schiera di commentatores, capace di rinnovare la tradizione esegetica dei testi degli auctores classici, awalendosi in particolare della forma-commento, continua e lemmatica, delle glose. Per quanto riguarda...

This essay situates the political thought of the French Renaissance prose writer Jean Bodin within the dual tradition of political theory and epideictic rhetoric. Bodin’s pragmatic reappraisal of superstition, as a bulwark against atheism and anarchy, represents a sort of convergence of paradoxical encomium and political realism in the service of religious pluralism and pacification of civil war. When juxtaposed with his more famous predecessor Niccolò Machiavelli and more renowned contemporary Michel de Montaigne, Bodin’s treatment of superstition, both in his vernacular masterpiece Les six livres de la République and in his neo-Latin works, emerges as a timely intervention in confessional strife and a classical adaptation of epideictic wisdom.

94 RHETORICA capacita di attualizzare; le osservazioni etimologiche e filologiche e, infine, il ricorso al commento "interno" del testo, commentare cioé il de inventione col de inventione stesso (e, in 7 casi, con la Rhetorica ad Herennium). A seguiré si trova un esame sistemático della tradizione manoscritta del commento (cap. 3) e un'analisi delle relazioni tra i manoscritti (cap. 4). Nella costituzione del testo B. distingue due recensiones, alpha (costituita da cinque manoscritti, il cui piú importante é Túnico integro: H) e beta (sostanzialmente un solo manoscritto : T), ma quella che viene pubblicata in effetti é la recensio alpha, Túnica riconducibile integralmente direttamente a M., mentre beta é sostantanzialmente un collage di piú commenti, incluso quello di M. presente in alpha. Questa sezione si conclude con una Bibliografía selezionata e una Nota al testo, nella quale si rende conto dei criteri di presentazione del testo cri­ tico. Nella seconda parte del volume si trova il testo critico vero e proprio delle glose. II testo viene presentato da M. in una facies continua; inoltre, per agevolare la lettura, é stato formattato con capoversi e paragrafi facendo riferimento alia divisione in libri, capitoli e paragrafi del de inventione secondo Tedizione teubneriana di E. Stroebel. Gli apparati in calce al testo sono tre. II primo é l'apparato critico vero e proprio, di tipo positivo (nel quale cioé viene in primo luogo presentata la variante accolta nel testo cri­ tico); nel secondo e nel terzo si trovano soltanto alcuni cenni relativi rispettivamente alie fonti e alia fortuna (entrambi questi aspetti vengono piú ampiamente trattati nel cap. 2 dei Prolegomena). Chiude il volume una doppia serie di indici: quella dei manoscritti e quella dei nomi. Francesco Caparrotta, Bagheria (Palermo) Mari Lee Mifsud, Rhetoric and the Gift: Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Contemporary Communication (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 2015), 186pp. ISBN: 9780820704852 Mari Lee Mifsud's elegant and illuminating excavation of the Homeric references in Aristotle's rhetorical theory demonstrates the enduring value of the notion of the gift for the study of rhetoric. It compellingly introduces an alternative metaphor to the familiar logics of rhetoric as an economy, a war, or a cheap trick. In so doing, it not only offers contemporary rhetoricians a ver­ satile hermeneutic that connects rhetorical scholarship to other academic pro­ jects but also reminds us of rhetoric's centrality in the social choreography of Aristotle's time as well as our own. The present review of Rhetoric and the Gift is inspired and informed by a 2016 tribute panel, organized by Marie-Odile Hobeika for the National Communication Association's annual conference, during which panelists Jane S. Sutton, John Poulakos, Nathan A. Crick, and myself offered commentary and critique. Explicating classical poiesis in rhetorike, Mifsud traces the concept of the gift (and gifting) in two interdependent registers: the gift of the pre-figuration Reviews 95 call that demands a response, and, second, the gift in the response, articulated through figuration. With attention to the registers' tension, she challenges Maicel Mauss s widely cited sociological study, which characterizes gifting as a hierarchical negotiation of power through "prestations," the metainstitutional practices that compel gift recipients "to make a return." Mifsud asks, "Can we imagine giving, not figured through cycles of obligatory return?" (p. 143). In her response to this question, we have the essence of Mifsud's contribution to rhetorical theory, for she "explores rhetoric not only at the level of the artful response hut [also] at the level of the call and response, or said another wav, at the level of the gift and rhetoric prior to and in excess of art" (p. 3). To develop the idea of rhetoric as the gift that exceeds art, Mifsud invokes Diane Davis s "preoriginary' rhetoricitv," the non-relation in which a call to "inessential solidarity " is issued. This call is by definition from an Other; or it may come as a gift from far aw ay and long ago. Like Davis, Mifsud hopes that "the theory of the gift offers a theory' of human solidarity" (p. 4), as long as it is able to resist the practices that conventionally define rhetoric: strategy, persuasion, deliberation, and consensus. Homer's gift to rhetoric, to Aristotle...

The aim of this article is to examine handbooks of rhetoric produced for the purpose of the teaching and training of French preachers in the second half of the seventeenth century - as of today such handbooks have rarely been studied by the scholars. I will endeavour to assess their role in a history of rhetoric considered less as a theory or a pedagogy than as an art of producing oral speeches. After having explained the circumstances of their production, I will study their attempt to modernize the principles and techniques inherited from classical treatises on a specific topic, namely the usage of passions, when it comes to talking from the pulpit.

Starting in the 1970s, frame analysis became a popular technique of textual analysis in different disciplines (communication, mass media, sociology). There is no agreed-upon definition of frame analysis or of ways of measuring its key concepts. This paper explores the relationship between frame analysis and rhetoric. The paper reviews all main concepts developed in frame analysis. Concept after concept, it maps the correspondence between frame analysis and rhetorical concepts. It shows how frame analysis stopped short of developing what was really required to measure frames: tropes and figures. The analysis of a specific text confirms the power of rhetorical analysis for teasing out meaning systems and argumentative structures.

Book Review| November 01 2018 Review: Mikhail Bakhtin: Rhetoric, Poetics, Dialogics, Rhetoricality, by Bialostosky, Don Bialostosky, Don. Mikhail Bakhtin: Rhetoric, Poetics, Dialogics, Rhetoricality. Anderson, SC: Parlor Press, LLC, 2016. 191 pp. ISBN 9781602357259 Frank Farmer Frank Farmer Frank Farmer English Department, The University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA farmerf@ku.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2018) 36 (4): 434–437. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.434 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 Frank Farmer; Review: Mikhail Bakhtin: Rhetoric, Poetics, Dialogics, Rhetoricality, by Bialostosky, Don. Rhetorica 1 November 2018; 36 (4): 434–437. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.434 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. © 2018 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2018 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2018 Review: Demosthenes’ On the Crown: Rhetorical Perspectives, edited by James J. Murphy James J. Murphy, ed., Demosthenes’ On the Crown: Rhetorical Perspectives, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2016. 232 pp. ISBN: 9780809335107 Michael Gagarin Michael Gagarin Michael Gagarin Department of Classics, University of Texas at Austin 2210 Speedway, Stop C3400 Austin, Texas 78712-1738 USA gagarin@austin.utexas.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2018) 36 (4): 430–432. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.430 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 Michael Gagarin; Review: Demosthenes’ On the Crown: Rhetorical Perspectives, edited by James J. Murphy. Rhetorica 1 November 2018; 36 (4): 430–432. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.430 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. © 2018 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2018 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Terence, celebrated author of six comedies, has been studied in many classrooms during Antiquity. A witness of this fact is the extensive commentary by Donatus. Among most fathers of the Church, Terence had a bad press. For Lactantius, the eloquence displayed in comedy is altogether pernicious. Augustine singles out a well-known passage from the Eunuch for censure on several occasions. In Renaissance education, nonetheless, Terence remained a prerequisite for mastering eloquence. Erasmus strongly recommended him to teachers of his age. Melanchthon's belief in Terence as a master of excellence in everyday Latin and a model of rhetorical skill was strengthened by his positive appraisal of Terence's moral intentions. In the theological philosophy he developed, ancient ethics acquired a prominent place. Disciples of the praæceptor Germaniæ published extensive commentaries on Terence's comedies. J. Willich carefully defined the moral issues of each individual scene in his surprisingly detailed analysis of Terence's comedies. His commentary (1550) enjoyed considerable fame.

Book Review| November 01 2018 Review: The Shape of Herodotean Rhetoric: A Study of the Speeches in Herodotus’ Histories with Special Attention to Books 5-9, by Vasiliki Zali Vasiliki Zali. The Shape of Herodotean Rhetoric: A Study of the Speeches in Herodotus’ Histories with Special Attention to Books 5-9. International Studies in the History of Rhetoric 6. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015. VIII + 383 pp. ISBN: 9789004278967 David M. Timmerman David M. Timmerman David M. Timmerman Carthage College 2001 Alford Park Drive LH 303 Kenosha WI 53140-1994 USA dtimmerman@carthage.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2018) 36 (4): 432–434. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.432 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 M. Timmerman; Review: The Shape of Herodotean Rhetoric: A Study of the Speeches in Herodotus’ Histories with Special Attention to Books 5-9, by Vasiliki Zali. Rhetorica 1 November 2018; 36 (4): 432–434. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.432 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. © 2018 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2018 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2018 Review: Traditions of Eloquence: The Jesuits and Modern Rhetorical Studies, edited by Cinthia Gannett and John C. Brereton Cinthia Gannett and John C. Brereton, eds., Traditions of Eloquence: The Jesuits and Modern Rhetorical Studies, New York: Fordham University Press, 2016. 444 pp. ISBN: 9780823264537 Nancy L. Christiansen Nancy L. Christiansen Nancy L. Christiansen 4198 Joseph F. Smith Building Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 USA nancy_christiansen@byu.edu Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Rhetorica (2018) 36 (4): 437–439. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.437 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 Nancy L. Christiansen; Review: Traditions of Eloquence: The Jesuits and Modern Rhetorical Studies, edited by Cinthia Gannett and John C. Brereton. Rhetorica 1 November 2018; 36 (4): 437–439. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2018.36.4.437 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. © 2018 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/journals.php?p=reprints.2018 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Im Zentrum von Vallas Umgestaltung der Dialektik als rhetorischer Methode steht ein neues Verständnis von certum, das aus Quintilians Institutio oratoria stammt. Diesem Verständnis zufolge ist Gewissheit in dem begründet, was allgemein akzeptiert wird, nicht in dem, was wahr ist. Damit trennt Valla certum und verum. In den Dialecticae disputationes stellt er Dialektik nicht als eine logische oder philosophische Methode zum Beweis von Wahrheiten dar, sondern als Praxis Geständnisse herbeizuführen und als juristische Produktion konsensueller Gewissheiten. Auch in anderen Werken, etwa den Elegantiae und seinem Kommentar zu Quintilians Institutio, verbindet er durchweg certum mit Konsens, insbesondere Konsens im Sinne der rhetorischen Strategie der status-Theorie.