I explain why Thomas Wilson likens to cuttlefish those orators who rely too heavily on inkhorn terms. For the sake of comparison, I also discuss how Renaissance critics use other creaturely metaphors—eels, snakes, devils, and oxen—to impugn bad rhetoricians. My underlying purpose is to reveal Wilson’s neglected religious motives for rejecting inkpot words and, by extension, some of the key religious motives informing the period's language controversies.

Research Article| January 01 2008 Some Aspects of Christian Mystical Rhetoric, Philosophy, and Poetry Ryan J. Stark Ryan J. Stark Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2008) 41 (3): 260–277. https://doi.org/10.2307/25655316 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Ryan J. Stark; Some Aspects of Christian Mystical Rhetoric, Philosophy, and Poetry. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2008; 41 (3): 260–277. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25655316 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 © 2008 The Pennsylvania State University2008The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.