This article contributes to recent efforts to add life and movement to rhetorical studies by focusing on the representation of movement in medical texts. More specifically, this study examines medical texts, illustrations, and photographs involving movement by Johann Casper Lavater, G. B. Duchenne de Bologne, Charles Darwin, and Étienne-Jules Marey. By identifying how figures of speech epitomize arguments, this examination follows a shift in the way arguments about movement are represented, a shift from static, visual arguments to gestural enthymemes, as they are named, arguments that are made in movements; these shifts are linked to developments in medical technologies involving photography. These arguments about and using movement attempt to “capture” or express the moments within which life, through the embodied gesture, resides. This extended understanding of the enthymeme broadens current understanding of argument to include delivery, links medical and rhetorical discursive practices, and informs how we make sense of and study the relationships between technology and rhetoric both in the past and present.

La IV Declamazione Maggiore pseudoquintilianea, un caso di mors voluntaria, è chiaramente influenzata da Seneca. Il rapporto intertestuale con Seneca filosofo può essere colto nei passaggi dell’argumentatio in cui il declamatore, che sostiene la necessità del suicidio, discute in generale il valore qualitativo del tempo, la vanità di una vita mal spesa, i vantaggi della mors opportune. D’altra parte, il personaggio del figlio parricida presenta tratti tipicamente senecani: la percezione di una forza irrefrenabile che sorge dall’inconscio (nescioquid) e spinge il protagonista al delitto trova corrispondenze intertestuali nel Tieste e in altre tragedie di Seneca.

As a designation for specific arguments providing clever explanations or excuses in mock-forensic speeches (controversiae), the technical metaphor color is mainly known from the work of Seneca the Elder. But while the many colores he cites lack their speech context, the Major Declamations ascribed to Quintilian give a unique opportunity to study the techniques of “colouring” within the framework of entire speeches. After a reconsideration of what we know about the origin and the exact meaning of color, this article demonstrates the dual function of colores as a means both of generating arguments and of creating stories, i.e. as a device that is rhetorical as well as literary.

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

Antonio Stramaglia An International Project On The Pseudo-Quintilianic Declamationes Majores I n 1999 the University of Cassino launched a research project1 on one of the most neglected fields of ancient Roman culture: the nineteen so-called Major Declamations falsely ascribed to Quintilian, the sole fictitious forensic speeches (controversiae) that classical Latin antiquity has handed down to us in their entirety.2 The aims of the project were (and still are, as the enterprise is in progress): 1) a thorough revision of the text of the Maiores; 2) a re-edition of as many speeches as possible in individual volumes containing a critically revised Latin text, a translation, and a detailed commentary; 3) a fresh investigation of these texts both from a rhetorical and from a literary-historical point of view. The project soon acquired international dimensions: whereas subventions from public institutions gradually decreased, the num1PRIN 1999: "Le Declamazioni maggiori dello Pseudo-Quintiliano," co-hnanced by the University of Cassino and by the Italian Ministry of University. Funding for the project has been subsequently applied for (with varying success) in 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007; the'project has been coordinated in its various phases either by myself or by Oronzo Pecere (Cassino). Standard edition: L. Hakanson, ed., Declamationes XIX maiores Quintiliano falso ascriptae (Stutgardiae: Teubner, 1982). For a recent survey (with bibliography) see my article cited in n. 4 below. Rhetorica, Vol. XXVII, Issue 3, pp. 237-239, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2009 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2009.27.3.237. 238 RHETORICA ber of collaborators joining from all over the res publica litterarum constantly increased, so that the group now counts thirteen mem­ bers from seven different countries.3 Nine years after the launch, the results attained for each of the project's goals can be summarized as follows: 1) the textual revision of the Maiores (entailing both reconstruction of textual history and constitutio textus) has reached an advanced stage;4 5 6 7 the present writer will publish the revised text, together with a com­ plete annotated Italian translation, in the "Classici Latini UTET" (Turin) collection; 2) a special collection of commentaries has been issued by Cassino University Press (Edizioni delPUniversita degli Studi di Cassino); each volume is thoroughly revised by one or two other members of the group, before being given its imprimatur. Seven volumes have appeared so far; one more is scheduled to be despatched to the press during 2009;b others are in preparation;' 3) a considerable number of monographs and articles by members of our group have elucidated the Declamationes maiores both within the context 3Bé Breij (Nijmegen); Graziana Brescia (Foggia); Nicola HtSmke (Rostock); Gernot Krapinger (Graz); Giovanna Longo (Bari/Cassino); Lucia Pasetti (Bologna); Oronzo Pecere (Cassino); Catherine Schneider (Strasbourg); Antonio Stramaglia (Cassino); Marc van der Poel (Nijmegen); Danielle van Mal-Maeder (Lausanne); Michael Winterbottom (Oxford); Thomas Zinsmaier (Tübingen). 4See meanwhile: C. Schneider, "Quelques réflexions sur la date de publication des Grandes déclamations pseudo-quintiliennes," Latomus 59 (2000): 614-632; A. Stra­ maglia, Le Declamationes maiores pseudo-quintilianee: genesi di una raccolta declaniatoria e fisionomia della sua trastnissione testuale, in E. Amato, ed., Approches de la Troisième Sophistique. Hommages a ]. Schamp (Bruxelles: Latomus, 2006): 555-588. 5A. Stramaglia, [Quintiliano]. I gemelli malati: un caso di vivisczione (Declamazioni maggiori, 8) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 1999); ld., [Quintiliano]. La città che si cibà dei suoi cadaveri (Declamazioni maggiori, 22) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 2002); C. Schneider, [Quintilien]. Le sol­ dat de Marins (Grandes déclamations, 3) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 2004); G. Krapinger, [Quintilian]. Die Bienen des armeu Mannes (GrôPere Deklamationen, 13) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Università degli Studi di Cassino, 2005); Id., [Quintilian]. Der Gladiator (Grôfiere Deklamationen, 9) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Uni­ versità degli Studi di Cassino, 2007); G. Longo, [Quintiliano]. La pozionedell'odio (Decla­ mazioni maggiori), 14-15) (Cassino: Edizioni dell'Università degli...

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

Abstract Latin prose Panegyrics are a fourth-century product of Gallic rhetorical schools; they celebrate the emperor's virtues by widely employing structures and topoi commonly associated with epideictic theory and practice. This paper explores the presence of hymnic features within the corpus of the Latin Panegyrics. The following passages are investigated: 1) the celebration of Diocletian and Maximian as Iovius and Herculius in Panegyrics 10(2).1–6 and 11(3).3; 2) the praise of the Tiber and the hymn to the supreme God in the Panegyric dedicated to Constantine 12(9).18; 26; 3) the hymn to Greece in the Panegyric to Julian 3(11).8. The analysis shows how the panegyrists re-worked the laudatory material by adapting the style and topoi of hymns to gods to praise of the emperor.

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

This article builds upon the work of Richard Haswell's “NCTE/CCCC's Recent War on Scholarship” by providing an alternative framework for empirical inquiry based on principles of skepticism. It examines the literature relating to empirical research and argues that one of the issues at hand is the perceived link of empirical research to positivism, which clashes with the dominant social constructivist paradigm. It draws upon classical rhetoric and the work of radial empiricist William James to formulate an alternative framework for empirical research based on skeptical principles.

Abstract During WWII psychologist Carl Rogers introduced a verbal counseling technique that could be utilized by clergy, teachers, and USO workers to help veterans overcome problems of readjustment. Rogers's arhetorical principles were adapted for the writing classroom by Young, Becker, and Pike—an adaptation that later led composition historian James Berlin to misinterpret the implementation of Rogers's principles in his study of a WWII communication program. These misinterpretations of Rogers's original intent have resulted in debate over the rhetorical or arhetorical nature of Rogerian rhetoric and have led to an inaccurate association between Rogerian rhetoric and expressivist and therapeutic writing. Notes 1My thanks to RR reviewers Paul Bator and Janice Lauer for their detailed and helpful revision recommendations, and to my colleagues Robin Veder and Mary Richards for their generous advice on early drafts. 2 Rhetoric and Reality is required reading for many PhD programs in rhetoric and composition and as such has informed, and continues to inform, a majority of scholars in the field. Sharon Crowley cites Rhetoric and Reality as the source for her statement that "[o]ne truly radical communication skills program … was implemented at the University of Denver" (Composition 172). And David Russell refers to Rhetoric and Reality several times in support of his treatment of communications courses and expressivist writing instruction. 3Although Young, Becker, and Pike defer to Anatol Rapoport's Fights, Games and Debates as a foundation for their theory, Rapoport is rarely mentioned as the initiator of either the strategies for or the terms Rogerian argument or Rogerian rhetoric. 4See Halasek; Bator; Hairston; and Ede. 5It is now (many years following the publication of the Rogers and Young et al.'s discussion) possible for Rogers's strategy of "listening" to a reader's point of view to succeed in a synchronous online chat environment, where a writer has a present/absent audience, and the reader is capable of presenting immediate feedback to the writer. 6Young, Becker, and Pike insist that the other two prongs of their Rogerian argument strategy for writers are an alternative to conventional argument, but their proposal of delineating "the area within which he believes the reader's position to be valid" and convincing the reader that he and the writer have "moral qualities (honesty, integrity, and good will)" in common seem little more than a watered-down version of Aristotle's very conventional appeal to ethos (275). 7Rogers did later validate his person-centered approach through the formation of the Carl Rogers Institute for Peace, an organization that helped ease social tensions in such troubled areas as Northern Ireland, South Africa, and Central America. Perhaps it was this successful approach to social and political conflict resolution that initially attracted Young et al. to Rogers's principles and convinced them to attempt an adaptation of those same principles as an alternative to the agonistic type of argument taught in the writing classroom. 8The conventions of the Institute of General Semantics state that the term general semantics is not capitalized. 9In his introductory chapter to Rhetoric and Reality, Berlin does identify the use of general semantics as "a device for propaganda analysis" (10) and does give Denver credit for promoting "cooperative rather then competitive thinking" (101). 10Brigadier General Elliot D. Cooke conducted a study for the War Department in the spring of 1943 and concluded that "nearly as many men were being discharged from the Army as were entering through induction stations" due to "a thing called psychoneurosis" (11). By 1946 at least 40 percent of men receiving pensions for a physical disability were labeled as psychoneurotics, but only 10 percent of that 40 percent had seen combat. 11Archival evidence from the University of Denver reveals that enrollment rose "by 57 percent compared to the pre-war enrollments of 1939" and "the percent of Veterans on campus rose to 60 percent" (Zazzarino). 12Elbow sees the terms expressivist or expressionist as problematic and credits them both as terms of "disapproval" coined by Berlin. In defining the terms as "writing that expresses what I feel, see, think," Elbow concludes that they are "indistinguishable from any other kind of writing" ("Binary Thinking" 20). 13See also Halasek for an insightful analysis of ways in which Elbow's "Believing Game" can be applied to Rogerian principles.

In this paper, it is argued that the classical rhetorical framework undergoes a transformation because of an important change in Western thought. Following this hypothesis, I analyze a rhetorical notion of “dissuasion” as a rhetorical technique of creating a “general disposition to inaction” in addition to a classical rhetorical notion of “dissuasion” that aims at “refraining from an action”.

220 RHETORICA of the Hamberg Papyrus 128, reasserting Theophrastean authorship, though not without giving due consideration to the reservations of other scholars. Elisabetta Matelli, Teodette di Faselidi, Retore, looks at the surviving titles of the rhetorical work(s), which is made difficult by his close association with Aris­ totle. She concludes tentatively that those titles represent different phases of the same work, and adds, for good measure, that Theodectes regarded it as a parergon compared with the tragic dramas by which he wished to be remembered. Theodectes the tragedian assumes centre stage in the chap­ ter by Andrea Martano, Teodette di Faselide Poeta Tragico: Riflessioni Attorno At Fr. 6 Snell, in which the assumption that Euripides was the only signif­ icant influence on Fourth Century tragedy is questioned, and Agathon is set beside him as a possible source. Martano also discusses problems of the production of Theodectes' plays. Theodectes remains a shadowy figure, es­ pecially since there may have been two of them. Stephen White, Theophrastus and Callisthenes, is concerned with a lost tribute which Theophrastus paid to Alexander's historian. From its scanty remains he assesses the extent to which it embodies the standard topoi of eulogy identified bv Aristotle, which include comparison. In particular, he argues that the philosophical elements in the eulogy centred on the limits placed on a good person's eudainionia when he has to deal with someone who has enjoved an excess of it (in this case Alexander). David Konstan, The Emotion in Aristotle Rhetoric 2.7: Grati­ tude, Not Kindness, discusses the different interpretations of charis, and argues correctly that it is not an emotion but a disposition to do something specific, an act of kindness. His chapter also trawls through a wide sea of literature, and thereby performs the useful service of illustrating how difficult the word is to translate in all its occurrences. One can be sure that Bill Fortenbaugh has been gratified to be presented with these essays, which not only build on the work in which he has been closely involved, but both pursue and suggest new lines of research in rhetorical studies. Stephen Usher Royal Holloway, University of London Lucia Calboli Montefusco, ed., Declamation. Proceedings of the Se­ minars held at the Scuola Superiore di Studi Umanistici, Bologna (February-March, 2006), Papers on Rhetoric VIII. Roma: Herder, 2007, XVIII, 291. Il volume documenta gli incontri seminariali organizzati dalla scuola Superiore di Studi Umanistici a Bologna nel 2006 sul tema della declamazione . A Gualtiero Calboli va il grande merito di aver curato l'organizzazione scientifica del seminario interdottorale e di aver raccolto in volume i contributi degli studiosi che hanno caratterizzato la complessa identita cultu- Reviews 221 i dit? dell iniziatix a. Alio stesso Calboli si deve, oltre allarticolata prefazione che apie il \olume (pp. VÍI-XVII1), 1 intervento introduttivo agli incontri (La clamamom tin ntoina, dnitto, letteratura c lógica, pp. 29-56), che indaga sul rapporte tra declamazione e teoría retorica, diritto, letteratura e lógica. Come campo meiitevole di approfondimento viene individuata la sinergia ti a la declamazione, intesa come momento esempliticativo e applicativo, e la piecettistica teórica tissata nella tradizione mannalistica. In particolare, nel contribute date dalle declamazioni alio sviluppo e allapplicazione pratica di una sistemática dottrina degli status, Calboli individua la connessione con il diritto. Quanto al rapporte con la letteratura, oltre alla contiguïté temática tra la produzione declamatoria e la commedia attica, viene messo in rilievo il contribute lornito dall attixita declamatoria alla dottrina dei tropi e delle fi­ gure che trovavano nella liberta garantita dall'ambiente scolastico xxn'humus particularmente fertile. Alla polisemia della metafora rappresentata dal termine color in ám­ bito retorico e dedicate il saggio di Lucia Calboli Montefusco (La funzione strategica dei colores nella pratica declamatoria, pp. 157-79). Un'attenzione par­ ticolare viene riservata alia metafora in questione nelle controversie senecane e nella produzione declamatoria pseudoquintilianea, nonché in alcuni passi deWInstitutio oratoria. La scelta del color conferisce alia controversia le caratteristiche di un particolare status, secondo la versione ermagorea della dottrina e della tópica corrispondente. Un'errata interpretazione del color di Seneca risulta fondata su una presunta equivalenza con la μετάθεσις τής αίτιας quale...

Latin prose Panegyrics are a fourth-century product of Gallic rhetorical schools; they celebrate the emperor’s virtues by widely employing structures and topoi commonly associated with epideictic theory and practice. This paper explores the presence of hymnic features within the corpus of the Latin Panegyrics. The following passages are investigated: 1) the celebration of Diocletian and Maximian as Iovius and Herculius in Panegyrics 10(2).1–6 and 11(3).3; 2) the praise of the Tiber and the hymn to the supreme God in the Panegyric dedicated to Constantine 12(9). 18; 26; 3) the hymn to Greece in the Panegyric to Julian 3(11).8. The analysis shows how the panegyrists re-worked the laudatory material by adapting the style and topoi of hymns to gods to praise of the emperor.

Reviews David C. Mirhady, ed., Influences on Peripatetic Rhetoric: Essays in Honor of William W. Fortenbaugh. Leiden: Brill, 2007. viii + 282 pp. This valuable collection of fourteen essays divides itself naturally into two parts: those which conform strictly to its title (1, 2, 3, 5, 8,11,13), and the rest, which focus on Aristotle's Rhetoric (4, 14), Rhetorica Ad Alexandrian (6) and post-Aristotelian topics (7, 9, 10, 12). Mirhady's Introduction assembles the diverse elements that inform the book very skilfully: the present state of scholarship, the historical background, a synopsis of the contents of Aristotle Rhetoric and the Rhetorica Ad Alexandrian, and summaries of the fourteen chapters. Dirk Schenkeveld, Theory and Practice in Fourth-Century Eloquence, is con­ cerned with a particular feature, mainly of deliberative oratory: the speaker's adoption of a didactic tone, usually when introducing a key narrative or ar­ gument. He does not consider whether this tone is a function of the characters of its two chief proponents, Isocrates, who was a teacher, and Demosthenes, who was famously superior in his attitude to his audiences and opponents; while the examples in Lysias look suspiciously formulaic. These character­ istics would go some way to explaining the absence of recommendations for them from the theorists. In Ethos in Persuasion and in Musical Education in Plato and Aristotle, Eckart Schutrumpf finds the latter's proposition that a speaker's good character is by itself a device of persuasion too simplistic compared with the examination conducted by Plato, in whose Gorgias and Protagoras audiences are seen as more susceptible to purely rhetorical skills than to a speaker's perceived moral qualities. Schutrumpf traces a development in Plato's attitude to persuasion, with the need to replace it by force being increasingly considered. Aristotle consistently takes a more optimistic view of human nature. David Mirhady, Aristotle's Enthynienie, Thymos, and Plato, sets out to establish the emotional content of the Aristotelian enthymeme by reference to its etymology. After admitting that the verb had come to mean no more than 'consider,' Mirhady argues that the enthymeme connotes "a form of cognitive activity that takes place in the context of emotional response.'' But the enthymeme is concerned with emotions only in so far as the human experiences from which it draws its premisses have emotional content, and for Aristotle it is always closer to logic (the syllogism) than to the irrational Rhetorica, Vol. XXVII, Issue 2, pp. 218—234, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2009 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DO1: 10.1525/RH.200A27.2.218. Reviews 219 thoughts and actions of the thymos. In his Techniques of Proof in 4th Century Rhctoiic, Tobias Rheinhardt finds connections between Aristotle s Rhetoric, his dialectical theory' in the Topics, and the Rhetorica Ad Alexandrum in respect of arguments related to some of the standard themes of deliberative and forensic oratory; This chapter begins and ends with a welcome reassertion of the view that the birth of rhetorical theory is to be assigned firmly to the Fifth Century: a fact which can easily be established by noticing the recurrence of a wide array of technical proofs and topoi in Antiphon and the early speeches how Aristotle defines an ideal written text as one which is susceptible to oral performance, and that epideictic oratory is aimed at an audience which is both spectator and critic, who dissects a discourse and passes judgement on the question of whether the author/speaker has discovered all the possible means of persuasion. She notes that Aristotle differs from his predecessors in distinguishing between styles suitable for deliberative and forensic oratory. Her study also clarifies several of the obscurities in Aristotle's account of these styles by reconciling different parts of it. In Carl Werner Muller's Der Euripideische Philoktet und Die Rhetorik des 4. Jnhrhunderts the starting-point is Dion of Prusa's opinion that the rhetorical content of Euripides Philoctetes distinguishes it from its Aeschylean and...

Reviews 231 Caroline van Eck, Classical Rhetoric and the Visual Arts in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge & New York, 2007 225 pp. The central claim of Caroline van Eek's new book is that classical rhetoric s treatment of the non-verbal and figurative aspects of persuasive communication influenced both the producers and consumers of visual art and architecture in early modern Europe. Primarily drawing on discussions of gesture and image in Quintilian and Cicero (but also Aristotle and Long­ inus), van Eck links what she sees as the primary aim of oratory—vivid representation, enarycia—to the v isual realm of image making. Classical rhetoricians who argued that figurative language and gesture enabled or­ ators to bring their subject to life before the eyes (and the mind's eye) gave early modern artists and spectators a framework within which to create and experience visual art. The argument of the book is that classical rhetoric and early modern visual art share an emphasis on figuration, defined by van Eck as "giving an outward, visible shape to emotion, thoughts or memories that creates the illusion of human life and agency" (p. 9). Attending to figuration by viewing early modern v isual art through the lens of rhetoric rather than post-Kantian aesthetics, van Eck argues, offers a better understanding of the socio-cultural function of art in the period. After making the case for a connection between rhetoric and the visual arts in the Introduction, van Eck devotes the first section of the book to theory. The two chapters that make up this section offer detailed readings of Alberti's De Pictura and three Italian Renaissance architectural treatises, by Vincenzo Scamozzi, Gherardo Spini, and Daniel Barbaro. The discussion of Alberti is focused on linking the representational character of painting to the role of representation in rhetorical theory. While there is little doubt that visual artists were concerned with representation, van Eck argues that the role of persuasion in that representative enterprise has not been adequately explored. Similarly, while the persuasive aspect of oratory is an obvious focus of classical rhetorical theory, it is the goal of vividly representing human activity that made rhetoric an important conceptual toolbox for an art theorist like Alberti. Viewed in this way, rhetoric and visual art share common ground in seeking to bring to life that which is absent. The argument is compelling, though the emphasis on painting as per­ suasive representation elides aesthetic considerations in favor of an under­ standing of artistic practice as a form of interested communication. Of course, this is van Eek's point: that the influence of Kantian aesthetics (particularly the disinterested appreciation of the beautiful) on art history has obscured the value early modern artists and spectators placed on the ability of an artwork to move or persuade. In pointing out the historical difference sep­ arating Renaissance and Enlightenment subjects, van Eck reveals interesting connections between rhetoric and the visual arts. If there is a limitation to the approach it is in van Eek's tendency to subordinate pleasing or delightful aspects of the work of art to its ability to persuade. This tendency takes 232 RHETORICA the discussion away from the particularities of individual works of art in the service of demonstrating the consistent, but more general emphasis on vividness of representation. If some of the discussion of representation is overly general, the same cannot be said about the van Eek's treatment of her specialty, architectural theory When she turns to architecture in the second chapter, for example, the discussion takes on a less speculative and more scholarly tone. This may stem from the fact that the attitude toward architecture that she hopes to reveal is by her own admission "rarely made explicit" in the period (p. 31). To uncover the hidden relationship between rhetoric and architecture she turns to the somewhat neglected work of Spini, Barbaro, and Scamozzi. What van Eck finds in these treatises is relatively clear evidence of the direct influence of classical rhetorical authorities on the three authors' conceptualization of architecture as a persuasive art form intimately linked to human knowledge and activity. Yet the concentration on three minor works begs the question...

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

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

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

In 1925 Everett Lee Hunt contributed “Plato and Aristotle on Rhetoric and Rhetoricians” to Studies in Rhetoric and Public Speaking in Honor of James A. Winans. He approvingly noted the work of Ferd...

Abstract Scholars of rhetoric have veered away from non-traditional rhetorical artifacts in the classical period. In this article I examine the Ara Pacis Augustae, Altar of Augustan Peace, as one such overlooked rhetorical artifact. I argue the altar, although constructed as a war monument, shapes public memory to persuade the people of Rome to accept the dynastic succession of Augustus's heir. In addition, I show a variety of rhetorical theories operate on the altar in visual form including amplification, imitation, and enthymeme. Ultimately I contend that by focusing on non-traditional rhetorical artifacts, we can deepen our understanding of the rhetorical tradition in a period in which rhetoric is generally believed to have faded away. Additional informationNotes on contributorsKathleen LampKathleen Lamp is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Communication, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 702 S. Wright St., 244 Lincoln Hall, MC-456, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. E-mail: lamp@uiuc.edu

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

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

One of the few features of Aristotelian rhetoric that his successors have noticed and developed is his three kinds, deliberative, judicial and epideictic. I want to look at what function the division of rhetoric into three kinds serves in his own argument.

Research Article| January 01 2009 Rhetoric as a Balancing of Ends: Cicero and Machiavelli Gary Remer Gary Remer Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2009) 42 (1): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/25655336 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Gary Remer; Rhetoric as a Balancing of Ends: Cicero and Machiavelli. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2009; 42 (1): 1–28. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25655336 Download citation file: 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 Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressPhilosophy & Rhetoric Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2009 The Pennsylvania State University2009The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| January 01 2009 Political Emotions: Aristotle and the Symphony of Reason and Emotion Political Emotions: Aristotle and the Symphony of Reason and EmotionSokolon, Marlene K. Jason Ingram Jason Ingram Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2009) 42 (1): 92–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/25655340 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Jason Ingram; Political Emotions: Aristotle and the Symphony of Reason and Emotion. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2009; 42 (1): 92–95. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25655340 Download citation file: 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 Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressPhilosophy & Rhetoric Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2009 The Pennsylvania State University2009The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract The author argues that we have chosen a rhetorical history that normalizes and silences rhetorical bodies. In response, the author exhumes an embodied history of rhetoric, reexamining the myths of the Greek goddess Metis as a means of enlivening rhetorical theory and history. The author then connects these myths to other rhetorical traditions invoked by Hélène Cixous and Gloria Anzaldúa, connecting Metis to Medusa and to mestiza consciousness. The author affirms the rhetorical power of the body, specifically of those bodies that challenge rhetorical norms. Notes 1I thank generous RR reviewers Richard Enos and Michelle Ballif for their advice and assistance with this essay. 2In Grosz's words, "[T]he body has remained a conceptual blind spot in both mainstream Western philosophical thought and contemporary feminist theory" (Volatile 3). The body then becomes "what is not mind … implicitly defined as unruly, disruptive, in need of direction or judgment, merely incidental … a brute givenness which requires overcoming" (Volatile 3–4). 3Thanks to Richard Enos for his thoughtful comments in reviewing an earlier draft of this manuscript. 4Disability studies scholars use the term normate to designate the unexamined and privileged subject position of the supposedly (or temporarily) able-bodied individual. The word normative also converts the idea of normalcy into an active process—norms "are" but they also "act"—we live in a culture in which norms are enforced, a normative society. It can—and has—been argued that in antiquity there was not a concept of normalcy per se. But as Lennard Davis writes, although the word normal appeared in English only in the mid-nineteenth century, "before the rise of the concept of normalcy … there appears not to have been a concept of the normal, but instead the regnant paradigm was one revolving around the word ideal. … [I]n the culture of the ideal, physical imperfections are not seen as absolute but as part of a descending continuum from top to bottom. No one, for example, can have an ideal body, and therefore no one has to have an ideal body" (Enforcing 105). Yet Aristotle had more than one concept of ideality—he expounded on the idea of the mean, for instance. He outlined the idea of both an absolute mean, a method for measuring humans against one another, and a relative mean, a system for disciplining oneself (Nicomachean Ethics II 6–7). I would argue that the commingling of these imperatives results in a normative culture or society—both the upheld fiction of perfection and the systematic self- and Other-surveillance and bodily discipline of normative processes. 5This is true for women particularly, but the stigma of femininity is also applied to men. For instance, Demosthenes was said to have been soft and lame because he spoke with a stutter and had an overly feminine demeanor. Physical disability is mingled with femininity to discredit him—see his exchanges with Meidias in particular and Cicero's investigation of Demosthenes' self-education in De Oratore. The story of Demosthenes that has been popularized holds that through rhetorical practice Demosthenes overcame these "impediments" to become a great orator (see Hawhee; Fredal). The possibility that Demosthenes' difference could have queered his bodily/rhetorical performance in a generative sense is not addressed—indeed, any such transgressive possibility is ignored, despite that fact that other historians convincingly challenge the narratives of overcoming and passing that have been ascribed to Demosthenes (see Martha Rose). 6In contrast, an abstract, flawless (male) body becomes a tool for norming. As (Plato wrote and) Socrates said in the Phaedrus, "[A]ny discourse ought to be constructed like a living creature, with its own body, as it were; it must not lack either head or feet; it must have a middle and extremities so composed as to suit each other and the whole work" (128). 7In the Phaedrus, Plato could be seen to change positions slightly, suggesting that certain forms of more "scientific" and therefore "noble" rhetoric might be acceptable (see White; Ramsay; McAdon; Solmsen for a range of readings). 8I gesture here to the work of Rosemarie Garland-Thomson and her book Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature, foundational in disability studies. Garland-Thomson was one of the first scholars to show that "seeing disability as a representational system engages several premises of current critical theory: that representation structures reality, that the margins constitute the center, that human identity is multiple and unstable, and that all analysis and evaluation has political implications" ("The New Disability Studies" 19). These premises are also the premises of this essay. 9Hawhee's linkages between mêtis and wrestling, and then between wrestling and rhetoric, provide an interesting image for this form of intelligence: "the corporeality of mêtis" as "struggle" or "the swarming mass of cunning craftiness and flailing limbs" (46, 45). 10In Randy Lee Eickhoff's recent translation of the Odyssey, he points out that Odysseus, considered to be another exemplar of mêtis, uses the name me tis or "no man" as a pun (n4; 404). 11 Mêtis has the practical advantage (and perhaps theoretical disadvantage) of "disappearing into its own action [so that] it has no image of itself" (de Certeau 82). Mêtis cannot be contextualized or schematized because each time it occurs in a context, it shifts that context, and each sequence it is inserted into is distorted (de Certeau 83–84). 12In the classical context, Homer, the mythical seer Tiresias, Oedipus, the great orator Demosthenes, Paris's killer Philoctetes, Croesus's deaf son, and others form our view of disability. In these stories, typically, disability impels narrative through the themes of overcoming, compensation, divine punishment, and charity. 13As I have previously argued, we can also view mythical discourse as, in the words of Susan Jarratt, "capable of containing the beginnings of … public argument and internal debate" (35). Despite the idea, advanced by Eric Havelock in particular, that myth was rote and didactic, we might see myth as being connected to the body, as being highly rhetorical, as being an arena for mêtis—thus my retellings hopefully honor this spirit (see also Slatkin). 14The myth of Metis can be traced as far back as Hesiod (Theogony lines 886–900). 15It is worth noting that these ableist accents on the denunciation of mêtis are also accompanied by a distinct ethnocentrism and even xenophobia. The word metic meant immigrant in ancient Athens. The word is a compound of the words change (meta) and house (oikos), and literally meant someone who changed houses. Many of Plato's attacks on the flexibility, malleability, and the bodily materiality of rhetoric are aimed at the Sophists, metic non-Athenians, and are part and parcel with a larger ideological agenda. 16 Techne was similarly made practical. As Janet Atwill explains in Rhetoric Re-Claimed, techne, when it is allied with mêtis (as it is by the Sophists), "deforms limits into new paths in order to reach—or, better yet, to produce—an alternative destination" (69). Yet we now refer to technai, handbooks full of sets of rules and examples, when we think of techne. William Covino argues that "reactions against the Sophists contributed to the establishment of rhetoric as techne without magic" (20). This distortion is similar to the attempt to ally mêtis only with the forms of knowledge Plato and Aristotle most highly value—to make it precise, a science, as Aristotle does. 17When defining phronesis in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle never truly rules out the idea that one would need some form of cunning intelligence to have "prudence," and the version of phronesis he outlines is certainly an abstract form of knowledge. He suggests that to have prudence one must understand particulars as well as universals. Yet the version of phronesis that was later adopted—for instance as one of the Medieval four cardinal virtues—sheds much of this uncertainty and avoids reference to cunning intelligence. 18There also may have been a familial connection between Hephaestus and Medusa—in some myths the two are sexual partners. Their child, Cacus, was said to be a fire-breathing giant. Cacus was said to eat human flesh and nail human heads to his door. Killing him was one of Heracles's twelve labors (Graves, The Greek Myths 158). This link is not made by all scholars, though the story shows up in Ovid and in Virgil's Aeneid. 19Often, Medusa wasseen to symbolize "artful eloquence." For instance, Coluccio Salutati in the fourteenth century and Nancy Vickers in the twenty-first both argue for this reading. As Salutati suggests, the snakes on her head might be seen as "rhetorical ornaments … instruments of wisdom" because snakes are "reported to be the most cunning" (55). In this interpretation Medusa turns an audience to stone not because of her looks but because of her rhetorical power—her audience "so convinced of what they have been persuaded that they may be said to have acquired a stony quality" (56). Vickers goes further, sourcing this connection back to Plato (254). She also argues that Medusa's "stoning" be seen as a rhetorical power, an ability to change the audience's state of mind, accompanied by a somatic effect. Finally, she suggests that Medusa's rhetorical power might represent the freezing of us all before the specter of the feminine—and she asks what we might do to reverse a legacy of neutralization and appropriation of the Other. 20As an example of the ways that myths crucially disagree with one another, we can see that in Homer's version of the story, Medusa comes into the world with her head of snakes. I think such differences reveal quite marked transitions in and contestations of signification. 21Of course it matters very much whether Medusa was raped or not. As Patricia Klindienst Joplin has argued, this rape has often been elided, and responsibility for it shifted away from Poseiden to Athena. She suggests that this shifting of responsibility essentially excuses men's violence toward women and thus silences women further. 22Detienne and Vernant write that mêtis was often symbolized by the octopus. Thus this connection to the octopus of mêtis may not have been coincidental. Certainly the original Medusa myth relied upon a reference to the dangerous, trapping "knot made up of a thousand arms" that the octopus represented and that conveyed a sense of the powerful double-ness and unpredictability of mêtis (38). 23Graves writes that vials of Medusa's blood were widely distributed: The blood had the power both to kill and to cure (Greek Myths 175). There are many contradictory stories about who received the blood, who distributed it, and who used it for good, who for bad (Greek Myths 175). 24The myth may also express a male fear of Medusa's creative power—she is so "procreative" that her children Chrysaor and Pegasus spring from her dead body (Graves, Greek Myths 127). 25I would argue that as teachers, we need to avoid the temptation to "eat" mêtis and wrest control over knowledge away from students. Students' cunning strategies and divergent expressions may threaten us or challenge us, but we cannot believe that mêtis is something we use on students, that we can be the sole tricksters, holding student bodies captive. Nor can we use the brute force of Zeus or Perseus to coopt their power when it threatens us, to subordinate their thinking bodies. 26The French word métis is related to the Spanish word mestizo, both coming from the Latin word mixtus, the past participle of the verb to mix and connoting mixed blood. 27In critical theory the concept of metissage also locates and interrogates the ways that certain forms of knowledge have been relegated to the margins, and thus this concept links usefully to the stories I have been reanimating. Metissage, obviously etymologically linked to mêtis and meaning mixture or miscegenation, has been used as a critical lens through which one might observe issues of identity, resistance, exclusion, and intersectionality. Relying upon metaphors of mixture that are biological and cultural, this concept of metissage both is like and is what Gloria Anzaldúa refers to when she writes about mestiza consciousness. (See Steinberg and Kincheloe; Hardt and Negri; Gruzinski; Glissant.) 28Coatlalopeuh later becomes conflated with the Virgin of Guadalupe after the Spanish Roman Catholic conquest of Mexico. 29Carrie McMaster also suggests that we might learn from Anzaldúa's writing about her own bodily difference—having experienced congenital disease, chronic illness, disability—to "draw non-homogenizing parallels between various embodied identities" ("Negotiating" 103). In Anzaldúa's own words, "[T]hose experiences [with disability] kept me from being a 'normal' person. The way I identify myself subjectively as well as the way I act out there in the world was shaped by my responses to physical and emotional pain" ("Last Words?" 289). From this we can make some suggestions about the epistemological entailments of mestiza knowledge—it comes from unique, never "normal," bodied experiences. The "leap" that should be encouraged, then, is to see such situated knowledge as vital and perhaps even central to human experience. The "abnormal" body is not something given to women symbolically as a form of derogation; it is an engine for understanding and thus has serious rhetorical power.

An important aspect commonly overlooked in Gorgias' Encomium of Helen is the complicated cultural terrain on which it sits—a complex crossroad where legality and mythology intersect in the powerful...

This video reflection starts in a presentation on comics at the Thomas R. Watson Conference last October, which prompted the author to explore the etymology of cosmos and comos through an alternate reading of Gorgias'Encomium of Helen. The author then works with comos, as revelry, to offer thoughts on comics as a form of multimodal composition and its use in the classroom.

This essay examines the disappearance of the study of style from rhetoric’s disciplinary research agenda and from contemporary writing classrooms, linking the decline of disciplinary interest in style to contemporary writing handbooks, which tend to treat style in reductive ways. Also pointing out the disappearance of “sentence-based” style rhetorics, the essay argues for a disciplinary re-commitment to the study and teaching of style, one of the original canons of classical rhetoric. The essay ends with several pedagogical examples of how to re-introduce style to writing classroom, as well as an invitation to other scholars to share their approaches to teaching writing style.

Abstract: What follows is an Arabic-English translation of Alfarabi's short commentary on Aristotle's Rhetoric. This is the first English translation of a significant medieval Arabic text made available to English-speaking scholars in rhetoric, philosophy, and logic.

Current scholarship tells us that skills in teaming are essential for students and practitioners of professional communication. Writers must be able to cooperate with subject-matter experts and team members to make effective decisions and complete projects. Scholarship also suggests that rapid changes in technology and changes in teaming processes challenge workplace communication and cooperation. Professional writers must be able to use complex software for projects that are often completed by multidisciplinary teams working remotely. Moreover, as technical writers shift from content developers to project managers, our responsibilities now include user-advocacy and supervision, further invigorating the need for successful communication. This article offers a different vision of an ancient heuristic—stasis theory—as a solution for the teaming challenges facing today's professional writers. Stasis theory, used as a generative heuristic rather than an eristic weapon, can help foster teaming and effective decision making in contemporary pedagogical and workplace contexts.

The development of the rhetorical tradition in the West owes a largely unacknowledged debt to Islamic scholars. Between 711 and 1492 CE, Muslim-controlled Spain became a significant site of scholarly inquiry into the European Classical heritage—often involving the efforts of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim thinkers. One of the luminaries of this scholarly tradition is Ibn Rushd (known more generally by his Latinized name, Averroes), known to Medieval thinkers as “The Commentator” for his vast, multifaceted corpus of work on Aristotle, The Master of Those Who Know.

What follows is an Arabic-English translation of Alfarabi’s short commentary on Aristotle’s Rhetoric. This is the first English translation of a significant medieval Arabic text made available to English-speaking scholars in rhetoric, philosophy, and logic.

AbstractThe explosion in the study of late antiquity during the last generation has generated an important number of works devoted to Greek rhetoric; on the other hand, the influence of confessionalism in patristic studies has decreased. With that in mind, this paper aims to underline the importance of John Chrysostom's Encomium to Meletius and to highlight the impact of rhetoric on the internal struggles of Nicenism during the last years of the fourth century ce in Antioch.

Abstract In 1531, Julius Caesar Scaliger published his Oratio pro M. Tullio Cicerone contra Des. Erasmum, a scathing attack on Erasmus occasioned by the publication three years earlier of Erasmus's Dialogus Ciceronianus sive de optimo dicendi genere, which, in turn, had attacked the proponents of the view that Cicero was the best and only model for good Latin rhetorical style. Erasmus never responded in print to Scaliger's vituperative “oration” (in reality, a pamphlet meant to be circulated among the literati). This paper argues that Erasmus did not respond because Scaliger's insults were so vile and beside the point that they did not deserve serious attention. A rhetorical re-reading of the Oratio provides some insight into the “proper” conduct of insults more generally, especially as they are meant as vehicles for “upward mobility” in a Res publica litteraria.

Kathleen E. Welch, author ofElectric Rhetoric: Classical Rhetoric, Oralism, and a New LiteracyandThe Contemporary Reception of Classical Rhetoric: Appropriations of Ancient Discourse, is the Samuel Roberts Noble Family Foundation Presidential Professor of English at the University of Oklahoma.

Reviews 339 Latomus on the orations of Cicero, published in Paris as early as 1531 by the freshly arrived Flemish printer Chrétien Wechel, would have been recorded in the RRSTC. As is well known, the activities of these young German scholars were of crucial importance for the development and—rhetorical— orientation of what is now called the Collège de France, founded in 1530. I am sure that any other specialist of a limited field of study can make critical remarks of this kind. Some will be justified, others rejected with good reason by the authors of the RRSTC. Not one single person will be capable of asking pertinent questions concerning the full scope of the catalogue: that privilege—if it is one—is restricted to J. J. Murphy and L. D. Green. This new edition of the RRSTC is a landmark in the history of Renais­ sance scholarship. It is a life-time achievement, but not in the sense that it is now in its final and definitive state. The authors promise to add in due course not only new entries, but full indexes of dates, places of publication, printers. The addition of these indexes would indeed enhance the value of the book and make it accessible to a larger and more diverse audience. Considering all the work that has been done so far, one hesitates to impose another task on the authors' shoulders. Is there no end to their efforts? There seems to be none. The heavv and grateful use of the RRSTC by the entire scholarly community will be their due reward. Kees Meerhoff Huizinga Instituut, Universiteit van Amsterdam Franz-Hubert Robling: Redner und Rhetorik: Studie zur Regriffs- und Ideengeschichte des Rednerideals (Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte: Sonderheft 5) (Hamburg: Meiner, 2007); 305 S. ISBN 3-7873-1834-8. Michael J. Hyde, ed.: The Ethos ofRhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric / Com­ munication) (Columbia, SC : University of South Carolina Press, 2004). XXVIII, 231 pp. ISBN 1-57003-538-5. L'étude de F.-H. Robling (= FHR), réalisée dans le cadre du projet de la Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft «Historisches Wôrterbuch der Rhetorik», se propose d'étudier l'image idéale de l'orateur, telle qu'elle a été conçue en rhétorique depuis l'Antiquité jusqu'au 18e s. Ce programme, embrassant une période qui s'étend sur plus de vingt siècles, relève a priori d'une gageure, mais l'auteur souligne dans la préface que son intention est d'offrir un regard synthétique sur une tradition qui s'achève avec Kant. Après avoir dégagé un aperçu sur l'état des recherches (pp. 13-23), FHR défend la méthode qu'il a ici adoptée: c'est en suivant le fil de l'histoire des idées, en prenant en compte les contextes technique, culturel, éthique et anthropologique particulier, qu il se propose de reconstruire le concept esthétique, philosophique et culturel d'«orateur», entendu comme «Sub- 340 RHETORICA jekt der Rhetorik, wie ihn die rhetorische Kunstlehre in ihren kanonischen Schriften behandelt» (p. 28). Le livre se divise en quatre parties. Dans une première partie (pp. 29-73: «Teil A: Der Redner als Fachmann der Rede: Das antike Grundmodell), Fauteur étudie le modèle antique de l'orateur, conçu par la sophistique, puis Aristote et la rhétorique d'école gréco-romaine, comme spécialiste et «technicien» (techmtès, artifex) du dis­ cours. FHR poursuit son examen avec une courte réflexion sur les tâches de l'orateur qui, dès l'Antiquité, révèlent une opposition entre, d'une part, une conception moralement neutre de la technique, où l'on demande à l'orateur de convaincre à travers un discours efficace, et, d'autre part, une orientation éthique en vertu de laquelle l'orateur doit persuader de ce qui est bien et présenter un comportement irréprochable et un caractère honnête. Mais la subjectivité de celui qui prend la parole entre aussi en jeu; c'est ce que FHR étudie dans les pages qui suivent, avant de montrer, dans un dernier cha­ pitre, comment les situations publiques dans lesquelles...

Reviews Lawrence D. Green and James J. Murphy, Renaissance Rhetoric ShortTitle Catalogue 1460-1700. Second edition. Aldershot UK/Burlington USA: Ashgate, 2006, xxxv, 467 pp. ISBN 0 7546 0509 4 As the cover of the new RRSTC of works on rhetoric from the beginning of printing to the Enlightenment states, or rather understates, this catalogue is a "revised and expanded" version of the one published by James J. Murphy two and a half decades earlier. My personal copy of this first edition tells me that I purchased it in New York City, April 23, 1981.1 still remember my excitement after leaving the publisher's office: this was indeed a precious gift for all those interested in Renaissance rhetoric. And it was a very courageous gift as well, since it inevitably demonstrated not only the vast knowledge of one of the founding fathers of the ISHR in those rich but largely unexplored fields, but also the gaps in his knowledge. Over the years, we—students of Renaissance rhetoric, in various stages of immaturity—all had the STC on our shelves, making good use of all it had to offer, and feeling proud to be able to add an edition, or a name, or an entirely unknown work in its margins. No one, except Lawrence Green, went so far as to devote the major part of his research time—and doubtlessly a considerable part of his spare time—to the correction and expansion of Murphy's pioneering catalogue. The results of his efforts are now available in print, and the Introduction preceding the actual RRSTC shows with admirable clarity how the author managed to integrate a wealth of new printed bibliographical material and an everexpanding variety of high quality internet sources into the previous edition. It is difficult to conceive how much relentless work and genuine scholarship are hidden behind the following simple lines in the opening paragraph of the Introduction: "The RRSTC now presents 1,717 authors and 3,842 rhetorical titles in 12,325 printings, published in 310 towns and cities by 3,340 printers and publishers from Finland to Mexico." At the same time, one cannot fail to be deeply impressed and even more deeply grateful to the author. In its present form, the volume contains some five hundred pages printed in small type. The 1,717 authors are listed in alphabetical order. As far as possible, copies of their works have been inspected in order to prevent the kind of fantasies one often finds in catalogues. The entry on Rhetorica, Vol. XXVI, Issue 3, pp. 337-343, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2008 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2008.26.3.337. 338 RHETORICA Cicero alone covers 30 pages, and is in itself an eloquent invitation to all students of classical rhetoric to consider more carefully and respectfully the complex history of the transmission of all the major texts they are studying. It also offers many new opportunities to investigate the interaction between commentary and textbook in the course of time. As such, this book is not only an invaluable tool for Renaissance specialists, but a guide to the study of rhetoric from Antiquity to the present. By its very nature, an ambitious enterprise like this is open-ended; too much is happening at present on the internet. Almost every day new biblio­ graphical data become available. This is the paradox of the present moment: we all want to have a printed catalogue like the new RRSTC and we will bless its existence. At the same time, modern bibliographical tools are moving so swiftly, that ultimate perfection is more out of reach than ever. This is why Professor Green clearly states in his Introduction how much he would wel­ come suggestions, additions and corrections: like no one else, he is aware of the unavoidable shortcomings of this second edition, immensely expanded and improved though it is. The author explicitly invites readers to send their...

The explosion in the study of late antiquity during the last generation has generated an important number of works devoted to Greek rhetoric; on the other hand, the influence of confessionalism in patristic studies has decreased. With that in mind, this paper aims to underline the importance of John Chrysostom’s Encomium to Meletius and to highlight the impact of rhetoric on the internal struggles of Nicenism during the last years of the fourth century ce in Antioch

In 1531, Julius Caesar Scaliger published his Oratio pro M. Tullio Cicerone contra Des. Erasmum, a scathing attack on Erasmus occasioned by the publication three years earlier of Erasmus’s Dialogus Ciceronianus sive tie optimo dicendi genere, which, in turn, had attacked the proponents of the view that Cicero was the best and only model for good Latin rhetorical style. Erasmus never responded in print to Scaliger’s vituperative “oration” (in reality, a pamphlet meant to be circulated among the literati). This paper argues that Erasmus did not respond because Scaliger’s insults were so vile and beside the point that they did not deserve serious attention. A rhetorical re-reading of the Oratio provides some insight into the “proper” conduct of insults more generally, especially as they are meant as vehicles for “upward mobility” in a Res publica litteraria.

Abstract Popular eighteenth-century British biographies of Cicero had a significant impact on the rhetorical identity formation of Elizabeth Montagu (1720–1800). As the acknowledged founder of the “Bluestocking” salon, Elizabeth Montagu played a key role in forming the conversational and epistolary eloquence of her broad and influential network of men and women. A careful analysis of the young Elizabeth's epistolary discussion of biographies of Cicero and Atticus, especially Conyers Middleton's Life of Cicero, provides insight into Montagu's mature rhetorical practice as well as neo-Ciceronian influences on men's and women's rhetorical identity formation in eighteenth-century Britain.

Book Review| May 01 2008 Review: The Secret History of Emotion: From Aristotle's Rhetoric to Modern Brain Science, by Daniel M. Gross Daniel M. GrossThe Secret History of Emotion: From Aristotle's Rhetoric to Modern Brain Science. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2006. x + 194 pp. Rhetorica (2008) 26 (2): 200–202. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2008.26.2.200 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: The Secret History of Emotion: From Aristotle's Rhetoric to Modern Brain Science, by Daniel M. Gross. Rhetorica 1 May 2008; 26 (2): 200–202. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2008.26.2.200 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. © 2008 by the Regents of the University of California2008 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract This paper argues that Cicero's reading of Demosthenes' De corona and his preoccupation with Demosthenes at the time he was composing the Brutus and in particular the Orator are evident in the list of thirty-four sententiae (“figures of thought”) given at Orator 137–9. Examples of all of these may be found in the De corona and they are listed here. It is also argued that the De corona was by far the most influential of Demosthenes' speeches on Cicero's Philippics.

Why is it that discussion of the sophists and sophistic activity routinely mentions the fees they charged, but never explores why the sophists might have charged fees and why this rather mundane detail would warrant such regular reiteration? I argue that the sophists charged fees to demystify the ways in which gift-exchange made it possible to naturalize culturally established values and misrecognize power relations as relations of generosity and friendship. By charging fees, the sophists showed that trade in skillful political discourse was always tied to the pursuit of advantage and power. This critical practice was rejected by Socrates, so that when his students needed a way to highlight the distinctions between their master and other teachers and schools (since in the popular mind all alike were sophists), they fixated upon the fees the sophists charged as a distinguishing trait. As a result, it took on the form of a stigma, and has been remained a defining charge against the sophists ever since.

Hans-Georg Gadamer's idiosyncratic reading of what he calls “the distant ancient meaning of rhetoric” pulls out an unfamiliar thread in the history of the Greek logos from the weave of the ancient texts, and his separation of the sophistic challenge from rhetoric proper stems from his commitment to rhetoric. What has typically been read as rhetoric's counter-tradition, a kairotic-performative rhetoric championed by Isocrates and Cicero against Platonic essentialist philosophy, is for Gadamer the counter-tradition to Western essentialism as a whole, anchored squarely in Plato's dialogic example. In this reading, Plato becomes strange to all ersatz platonists, and the great body of the dialogues become the gravitational center of a humanist rhetoric. Gadamer's recommendation that we treat Plato's dialegesthai as the highest fruit of ancient rhetoric provides a fresh opportunity to reimagine our interdisciplinary debates.

The audience's violent response to the 2003 Rockford College commencement address illuminates challenges that surround the epideictic genre in a politically divided society. This essay explores the nature of the conflict that arose that day in order to consider ways in which the generic form of epideictic potentially facilitates communication among people with different views. This opportunity can be realized as rhetors and audiences acknowledge generic constraints, acknowledge social concerns, search for shared understanding, and commit themselves to an epideictic encounter that serves the educational function of constructively interrogating and reimagining public values.

Analogical reasoning has long been an important tool in the production of scientific knowledge, yet many scientists remain hesitant to fully endorse (or even admit) its use. As the teachers of scientific and technical writers, we have an opportunity and responsibility to teach them to use analogy without their writing becoming “overly inductive,” as Aristotle warned. To that end, I here offer an analysis of an example of the effective use of analogy in Rodney Brooks's “Intelligence Without Representation.” In this article, Brooks provides a model for incorporating these tools into an argument by building four of them into an enthymeme that clearly organizes his argument. This combination of inductive and deductive reasoning helped the article become a very influential piece of scholarship in artificial intelligence research, and it can help our students learn to use analogy in their own writing. Every one who effects persuasion through proof does in fact use either enthymemes or examples: there is no other way. (Aristotle, 1984b Aristotle. 1984b. The rhetoric and the poetics of Aristotle, Edited by: Roberts, W. R. and Bywater, I. New York: The Modern Library. [Google Scholar], p. 26)