Ancient Latin Rhetoric

Currite;1 festinet medicus, quid, inepte, moraris Tonsor? Equo citius quam pedes ire potes. Currite; forsan adhuc dabitur reperire calentem; Forsan adhuc misero flatus in ore manet. Omnia nunc ego te, tibi per carissima rerum, Oro; Machaonia, si quid in arte vales; Si decus accendit, si mentem praemia tangunt, Quanta foret nostri, sit tibi cura sui, Incolumem quod si nobis, Henrice repones, 10 Tunc mihi tu Paeon, tunc mihi Phoebus eris. Tunc ego te magni venerabor Numinis instar, Viribus in lucem, quo revocante, redit. Fulmina nec metuas; perhibent nam saepe Cyclopes, Vindictae illius poenituisse Iovem. Iussa viri properant; sed quo tamen omina, laeva In terram e quercu, fusca volavit avis? Nimirum vitam notat arbor opima Tonantis, Nam fertur priscos glans aluisse patre. Functorum locus est tellus; nigrantia letum 20 Significant; leto convenit ille color. Quam timeo auspicium ne quid ferale minetur! Ni revelet melior, tristia visa, Deus. O facinus! Moesti redeunt! Ne dicite quicquam. Scimus! Inest tacitum vultibus iudicium. Occidit infelix! Non formae profuit illi Gratia, non leves et sine veste genae! En iacet, út riguo languens amaranthus in horto, Improba quem verni subruit aura Noti! Aspice quam roseos nondum sua purpura visus 30 Liquerit! Et vivus spiret in ore decor! Hanc faciem feretro Pallas extentus habebat, Talis et ante rogos Parthenopeus erat. Quae iam spes hominum? Quae iam fiducia vitae? Quo se momento quis putet esse suum? Quam cito bullatae, pluvius tumor interit, undae, Tam postrema cito cuilibet hora venit.

Currite;1 festinet medicus, quid, inepte, moraris Tonsor? Equo citius quam pedes ire potes. Currite; forsan adhuc dabitur reperire calentem; Forsan adhuc misero flatus in ore manet. Omnia nunc ego te, tibi per carissima rerum, Oro; Machaonia, si quid in arte vales; Si decus accendit, si mentem praemia tangunt, Quanta foret nostri, sit tibi cura sui, Incolumem quod si nobis, Henrice repones, 10 Tunc mihi tu Paeon, tunc mihi Phoebus eris. Tunc ego te magni venerabor Numinis instar, Viribus in lucem, quo revocante, redit. Fulmina nec metuas; perhibent nam saepe Cyclopes, Vindictae illius poenituisse Iovem. Iussa viri properant; sed quo tamen omina, laeva In terram e quercu, fusca volavit avis? Nimirum vitam notat arbor opima Tonantis, Nam fertur priscos glans aluisse patre. Functorum locus est tellus; nigrantia letum 20 Significant; leto convenit ille color. Quam timeo auspicium ne quid ferale minetur! Ni revelet melior, tristia visa, Deus. O facinus! Moesti redeunt! Ne dicite quicquam. Scimus! Inest tacitum vultibus iudicium. Occidit infelix! Non formae profuit illi Gratia, non leves et sine veste genae! En iacet, út riguo languens amaranthus in horto, Improba quem verni subruit aura Noti! Aspice quam roseos nondum sua purpura visus 30 Liquerit! Et vivus spiret in ore decor! Hanc faciem feretro Pallas extentus habebat, Talis et ante rogos Parthenopeus erat. Quae iam spes hominum? Quae iam fiducia vitae? Quo se momento quis putet esse suum? Quam cito bullatae, pluvius tumor interit, undae, Tam postrema cito cuilibet hora venit.

This book focuses on a hitherto neglected aspect of the study of the elocutio of Paul's letters: colometry, i.e., the way in which ancient authors used to structure their orality-oriented compositions into »côla« (κῶλα) and »periods« (περίοδοι). Based on a thorough study of rhetorical treatises from the Greco-Roman world, the author first develops a set of criteria for delineating the côla and the periods. Using 2 Corinthians 10–13 as a case study, she then examines the extent to which Paul's style complies with the conventions of structuring prose outlined by the ancient rhetoricians. Lastly, she explores the links between colometric structure and punctuation, showing how colometric analysis can inform exegetical debates related to segmentation issues and questioning how we might (re)punctuate Paul's letters in order to render something of their oral logic of structuration.

The four classic speeches of the Roman statesman Cicero (106-43 BCE) against the seditionist Catiline. Renowned both as superlative examples of rhetoric and as an eloquent defense of the old Roman Republic on the verge of collapse. The contemporary account of these events by the Roman historian Sallust is included.

Answering they 12 said, "We wish, if it would please you, to finish in the presence of Prester John, who rules over us, and whatever he decides, we will accept. Therefore, let us stand before him tomorrow." A good day was determined for the conclusion. It was sketched out in the presence of Prester John, and the preceding words were set forth in order, in his presence. Then how much he marveled, entrusting their words of discernment, and asked the names of the three kings, that they might be revealed to him. The correct name of each was given to him. And, in the dignity[?] of time, because he was advanced in many years, one spoke before the others, saying "I am named Sudetertius, which can be rendered 'third god' ." Then another said, "I am called Dusnucsedns, which can be rendered 'second god' ." Then 9 i.e. person of property? 10 ?the evil spirits. 11 The three speaking. 12 The twelve? www.holybooks.com Here the Lines of Forms Give us Signs And Father the Creator has twice six letters, Pater Creator And Father the Creator brings twice seventy. 140 26 Aries, which is born from P, carries twice seven, Aries And the five letters hold six nines. And Taurus, born from A, has three numbers; Taurus The six letters of Taurus hold five and sixty figures. And Gemini, born from T, carries nine, Gemini And the six letters of Gemini give nine tens. And Cancer, born from E, holds three fives, Cancer And Cancer brings two fifties minus one. And mighty Leo, born from R, carries twice six, Leo And Leo brings forty and five. Virgo, born from C, carries three nines, Virgo And Virgo brings fifty and nine figures. Libra, born from R, brings twice six, Libra And Libra holds two twos plus fifty figures. Scorpio, the tail, born from E, holds three fives, Scorpio And Scorpio gives us one hundred minus five. Sagittarius in three lines comes from A Sagittarius And it brings twice forty and eight 27 Sagittarius gives twice forty-five and eight. 28 Capricorn, born from T, has nine, Capricornus And he in seven lines gives us seven twenties minus one. 29 And Aquarius, arising from O, gives nine, Aquarius And there are in eight lines one hundred with five removed. Pisces has twice six and is born to us from R, Picis And Pisces gives us two forties. 30 So God remains and will remain in his deity. His name reshapes for you the twelve signs, Therefore his name remains in which he maintains the signs without motion. But it needs to be inquired, concerning P, how unity can be in itself, or how it is, and what it may contain within itself, and what will be from it, or what it is, and what it will be, or what will be from it. While the letter P shows us unity, if it is fitting for it to give forth from itself, concerning itself, as if it were two-ness. This is fitting concerning itself, as if to be as in three-ness. Therefore the letter P carries fourteen, and from P is born Aries. By that means, P consists of one, and unless one is born from him, one is not born from him except through the form. The form ought to be one in itself, and it ought to be like him from whom it ought to be. Because one in itself is from one and to one. 35 It is like one. When P is spoken, it produces from itself its only son, and he will be commanded through his name Musehi, which in our language is pronounced Ihesum. 36 He exists, and he is retaining himself to be in the first form, because he brings about the salvation of his people from sin. Behold a virgin brings forth a son whose name is pronounced Leuname, which to us is called Emanuel, and in the end he is called Sued, which in our language is Deus. He was in this letter P and he is, and he will be the beginning, the middle, and the end and it is said abundantly in one form in one. One beginning is the father, and he produces a son, and the son is spoken through the middle. And sons ought to be from themselves, present to themselves. He is called the end, because in him everyone comes to their conclusion. Therefore, no part is a part in itself. So part exists and the part in one. Therefore no part is a part threatening [projecting] in one. Therefore part, in one and from one, is not threatening [projecting]. So in many ways we need to understand the difference between substance and quality.

Roman Stoicism is typically read as a therapeutic philosophy that is centered around the care of the self and presented in the form of a self-help manual. Closer examination reveals a less reassuring and more challenging side to the school's teachings, one that provokes ethical re ection at the limits of the self's intactness and coherence. The self is less an object of inquiry than the byproduct of a complex set

En esle arlículo me ocupo de las características del oyenle del discurso retórico y de las diferencias que existen entre los oyentes de distintos discursos y entre los oyenles del mismo discurso. Propongo la noción y el término de poliacroasis para explicar las distintas funciones, actitudes e interpretaciones que de un discurso llevan a cabo sus oyentes, caracterizados por la multiplicidad y la diversidad. Se presta especial atención a la poliacroasis basada en la diferencia entre los oyentes que pueden tomar decisiones a propósito de los discursos y aquellos otros que no deciden. Partiendo de la retórica, la poliacroasis es tenida en cuenta como componente de la comunicación general y, por tanto, también de la comunicación de la literalura oral.

Volume pubblicato con il contributo dell'Associazione Mnemosine FRANCESCO BERARDI L'EKPHRASIS DELLA BATTAGLIA IN SALL. CAT. 56-61 TRA MODELLI LETTERARI E INSEGNAMENTO RETORICO 'Tutto ha inizio da Omero': nell'antichità era diffusa l'idea che presso l'Iliade e l'Odissea si trovassero gli archetipi di ogni catena topica 1 ; ed è così anche per il motivo della vivida descrizione della battaglia, di cui si intende qui ricostruire in breve la tradizione letteraria per delinearne i tratti caratteristici ed analizzarne un efficace esempio nei capitoli finali del Bellum Catilinae di Sallustio 2. L'infuocato conflitto che si scatena tra le fila troiane ed achee subito dopo il ferimento di Menelao è ritratto così in dettaglio da dare l'impressione agli antichi commentatori che il poeta fosse presente alla scena e registrasse anche i più piccoli movimenti conferendo in tal modo grande credibilità al racconto 3. L'assalto di Sarpedone al carro di Patroclo è rappresentato, poi, come in un quadro, in virtù della precisione con cui il poeta riproduce il giogo scricchiolante, le redini imbrigliate e ogni altro particolare dello scontro 4. Le note trasmesse dagli scolii or ora ricordati testimoniano l'atteggiamento di certa filologia alessandrina che, sulla scorta di un'antica polemica sorta intorno al testo omerico, si interroga sui contenuti di verità riscontrabili nel poema e sui possibili criteri da adottare nell'accertamento della stessa individuandoli nel concetto di αὐτοψία, preso in prestito dalle prime riflessioni degli storici 5. Il dibattito è acceso e vede intrecciarsi le ragioni della poesia con quelle della storiografia per cui ognuna 1 Celebri le parole di Quintiliano in inst. 10, 1, 46 con la potente immagine dell'Oceano da cui derivano, come rivoli, tutti i generi di eloquenza, e di Dione Crisostomo (18, 8), che individua in Omero il πρῶτος εὑρετής di ogni arte, una fonte inesauribile di sapere adatta a uomini di ogni età. Per gli aspetti che qui più interessano, Omero è considerato il primo storiografo: cfr. Strab. 1, 5, 2; e il primo pittore, capace di superare persino la vivezza della pittura: vd.

In this paper I deal with lhe characteristics of the hearer of rhetorical discourse and the differences existing between the hearers of different discourses and between the hearers of the same discourse. I propose the notion and the term of polycroasis in order to explain the different functions, attitudes and interpretations of a discourse that is archived by is hearers, who are characterized by multiplicity and diversity. Special attention is paid to the polyacroasis based on the difference between the hearers who may make decisions as to discourses and those others who not decide. Starting out from rhetoric, polyacroasis is taken into account as a component of general communication and, hence, also of a communication of oral literature.En esle arlículo me ocupo de las características del oyenle del discurso retórico y de las diferencias que existen entre los oyentes de distintos discursos y entre los oyenles del mismo discurso. Propongo la noción y el término de poliacroasis para...

El objetivo de este artículo consiste en estudiar, a partir de la Retórica de Aristóteles, la representación oratoria. Se indagará en relación a sus procedimientos para enmarcarlos dentro de su especificidad genérica y se los pondrá en relación con los propios de la representación teatral. Nuestra hipótesis asegura que Aristóteles no identifica ambas representaciones en cuanto a sus procedimientos y semántica sino solo en tanto a que son representaciones, y que sus recursos comunes adquieren una semántica y un funcionamiento acordes a cada disciplina. Así, nos interesará desmontar la lectura que algunos críticos han realizado del tratado ˗y que ha llegado hasta hoy˗ que consiste en asegurar que, para el filósofo, ambas representaciones funcionan de la misma manera. En nuestro análisis concebimos ambas disciplinas en una interacción dinámica y no una subordinada a la otra en el sentido de imitar o tomar procedimientos sin refuncionalizarlos.This article aims to study the oratorical r...

In this paper we analyze the poorly studied use of the proper name as a means of self-designation in the Aeneid, by trying to place it within the rhetorical theory and to identify its principal values. As some passages of Quintilian show (inst. 9,3,21 e 1,5,41-54), it is a well-known rhetorical device, part of the wider phenomenon of inmutatio. This expedient, skillfully placed in icastic positions, covers various values, such as the κλέος, the εὐγένεια, the public role (political, military and religious), the pietas and the tragic πάθος. Moreover, this type of inmutatio regularly contributes to increasing the solemnity and gravitas of the speech and the situation. Finally, the greater occurrence of anthroponyms in the speeches of the three main characters (Aeneas, Dido, Turnus) does not seem casual and underlines their dominant qualities.

EL LIBRO que reseñamos constituye el volumen 290 de Mnemosyne, Bibliotheca Classica Batava, una colección que cuenta ya con más de ciento cincuenta años de historia, y este es un hecho que, a nuestro juicio, dice bastante de la repercusión, alcance y calidad de los trabajos que acoge, tal y como puede corroborarse, también, de esta pequeña monografía. 1

This essay investigates the impact of Cicero's rhetoric surrounding Marcus Marcellus in the Verrines on subsequent historical studies of the general. I begin by scrutinizing the actions of Marcellus during the sack of the city of Syracuse, particularly regarding his abstention from spoils, and compare these actions to that of his successors in order to determine what impact he had on Roman visions of merciful conquerors. I then analyze how Cicero utilized this developing historical memory of Marcellus as a foil in his prosecution of the praetor Verres. I show how Cicero created an image of an exemplary general as a rhetorical device, but one which was inconsistent with less demanding past recollections. I then examine how post-Ciceronian historians struggled to reconcile these two contradictory versions of Marcellus, and how Cicero's own censure of Verres' plundering darkened the memory of Marcellus in turn. I conclude by arguing that historical interpretations of Marcellus in the early Republic demonstrate a split personality, vacillating between Marcellan clemency and Verrine brutality within the same literary character.

En la Antigua Roma, la enseñanza desempeñaba un papel fundamental en la formación de los jóvenes romanos. En el presente trabajo se analiza la estructura y los programas educativos de la enseñanza romana en sus tres niveles: el primario, el secundario y el superior; prestando especial atención en descubrir el método de enseñanza de la historia, la cual tendrá un papel vital en este proceso educativo con especial peso en la enseñanza secundaria y superior, concretamente en la escuela del rethor. Del mismo modo, se señalarán los distintos ejercicios realizados por los alumnos que suponían tratar, de forma directa o indirecta, narraciones y personajes históricos, profundizando en las denominadas “declamaciones de termas históricos”. Además, se abordarán las fuentes clásicas de distintos autores considerados historiadores, tales como Cicerón, Julio César, Salustio y Tito Livio.

Artis rhetoricae enchiridion sive Martiani Capellae (c. 500 p. C. ?) operis, quod De nuptiis Mercurii et Philologiae inscribitur, liber V ad usum Academiae Vivarii novi discipulorum a Georgio A. Laminario (Čepelák) in novam hanc formam digestus et aliquot exemplis additis auctus.

THESIS on oratory would not, I think, be complete without a preliminary gratiarum actio, though I am t~ankful for the lack of a water-clock! Therefore, first, I would like to thank my supervIsor, Professor David Levene, for taking me on as a student in the first place and for all the help, support, encouragement and criticism (always both positive and constructive) which has made my research enjoyable and fruitful, and without whom this thesis could not have been written. I am eternally grateful. Next, many scholars have contributed to the thesis in many ways. From the School of Classics in the University of Leeds, Professor Malcolm Heath has always been very generous: in terms of his time, his knowledge of rhetorical theory and his extensive library. His ability to listen to and comment on much of this thesis as it developed has greatly helped clarify my thought. Others who have helped include

The French scholar Laurent Pernot has been at the forefront of the study of ancient rhetoric for over two decades. His standard work La Rhétorique dans l’Antiquité has been translated into four languages, including an English edition that I found very useful for the (undergraduate) classroom. Pernot has now written a succinct and insightful book on epideictic rhetoric, focusing in particular on ancient praise. Remarkably, the author has chosen to publish this work in English right away, meaning that readers without French do not have to wait for a translation. Before offering an overview of the chapters and some observations on Pernot’s argument, I want to emphatically recommend this book to anyone — scholars and students — with an interest in Roman (cultural) history. Pernot firmly establishes epideictic’s centrality to life in the cities of the Roman Empire.

Conceptual structures are, as a rule, approached from logical perspectives in a broad sense. However, since Antiquity there has been another approach to conceptual structures in thought and language, namely the rhetorical tradition. The relationship between these two grand traditions of Western Thought, Logic and Rhetoric, is complicated and sometimes uneasy – and yet, both are indispensable, as it would seem. Certainly, a (supposedly) practical field such as Information Architecture bears witness to the fact that for those who actually strive to work out IT systems conceptually congenial to human users, rhetorical and logical considerations intertwine in an almost inextricable manner.

I t ) { 109 7 DIE RIIETORISCIIE FT]NKTION DER MEIAPIMR .. 7.1 Woher, so fragen wir jetzt, schöpft die Metaphorik ihre rhetorische Uberzeugungskraft? Denn schließlich wird die Metapher seit Aristoteles vornehmlich als ein Instrument der Rhetorik angesehen. Diese nun gilt als ein Redetypus, der die Funktion hat, beim Empfänger eine Entscheidung hervorzurufen. Darin soll sie sich von der "Dialektik" unterscheiden, welche sich darauf beschränke, ihm gewisse Sachverhalte klarzumachen. Mit anderen Worten: Der rhetorische Diskurs überzeugt den Zuhörer, und zwar nicht auf intellektueller, sondern auf emotioneller Ebene. Er beeinflußt oder modifiziert seine Einstellung zu einem gewissen Fragepunkt; er versetzt ihn von einem anfänglichen Geftihlszustand in einen anderen. Solches wtirde u. a. durch die Verwendung der Tropen, also auch durch die Metaphorik, geleistbt. Wir präzisieren unsere Frage: Auf welche Weise leistet die Metapher diesen emotionalen Impact? 7.2 Aristoteles' Antwort lautet: Die Metapher übt eine Kraft auf den Empfäinger aus, indem sie selber die Dinge als Kräfte darstellt. Und er ftihrt folgende Beispiele an:

Er Epítome que Justino realizó a partir de las Hrstorias Filípicas de Pompeyo l-lTrogo es una obra verdaderamente compleja para ser usada como fuente histórica fiable. Por una parte, no se trata tanto de un resumen como una selección de pasajes que son además reelaborados, con 1o que 1a eliminación de secciones de1 texto original y la alteración de las que se conservan oscurece en muchas ocasiones la interpretación del relato.' Por otra parte, Justino aplicó al Epítome sus propios puntos de vista, dando una imagen de las Hisrorias Filípicas que se aparta en buena medida de 1o que debió ser el sentido originario de la obra. Por lo tanto, para los investigadores modernos resulta tin verdadero reto comprender ciertos pasajes que supuestamente derivarían de la obra del autor galo, y deslindar cuáles fueron las ideas de éste, después de que Justino modificara sustantivamente su obra histórica, e incluso añadiera de su propia mano no pocas frases al texto original.'Uno de estos episodios confusos delEpítome es sin duda ei discurso etolio, recogido en el capítulo z del libro xxvrrr. Este pasaje ha suscitado una viva polémica, pues mientras algunos historiadores han defbndido su historicidad, otros han considerado que la escena es inverosímil, la cronología imposible. y el contenido confuso. En el presente trabajo trataremos de proponer una respuesta a algunos de los interrogantes que hay en torno a este discurso, y ello nos llevará a plantear algunas reflexiones sobre la perspectiva de Trogo respecto al imperialismo romano y la manera en que Justino manifestó sus preferencias personales a la hora de elaborar eI Epítome.

NOV. I DE ORTU IMPERII DOMINI MAIORIANI AUGUSTI. (458 Ian. 11) ( Based upon the Latin text of Mommsen and Meyer's edition, Berlin, 1905 ). Imp. Maiorianus a. ad senatum. Imperatorem me factum, patres conscripti, vestrae electionis arbitrio et fortissimi exercitus ordinatione cognoscite. Adsit aestimationi omnium propitia divinitas, quae regni nostri augeat pro vestra et publica utilitate successus, qui ad sustinendi principatus apicem non voluntate mea, sed obsequio publicae devotionis accessi, ne aut mihi soli viverem aut ingratus rei publicae, cui natus sum, sub hac recusatione iudicarer. Dicatis quoque Iano Kalendis suscepti feliciter consulatus ereximus fasces, ut praesens annus nascentis imperii nostri incrementa suscipiens nostro etiam nomine signaretur. Favete nunc principi quem fecistis et tractandarum rerum curam participate nobiscum, ut imperium, quod mihi vobis adnitentibus datum est, studiis communibus augeatur. Praesumite iustitiam nostris vigere temporibus et sub innocentiae merito proficere posse virtutes. Nemo delationes metuat, quas et privati in aliorum moribus condemnavimus et nunc specialiter persequimur; nullus calumnias reformidet, nisi quas ipse commoverit. Erit apud nos cum parente patricioque nostro Ricimere rei militaris pervigil cura. Romani orbis statum, quem communibus excubiis et ab externo hoste et a domestica clade liberavimus, propitia divinitate servemus. Puto instituti nostri vobis inesse notitiam, qua mihi amorem vestrum vitae et periculorum quondam socius indubitanter spondeo: enitar tamen rebus omnibus, si superna concesserint, auctoritate principis et obsequio collegae, ut vestrum in me vobis non possit displicere iudicium. Et manu divina: Optamus vos felicissimos et florentissimos per multos annos bene valere, sanctissimi ordinis patres conscripti. Dat. III. id. ian. Ravennae, d. n. Maioriano a. I. cons.