Roman Oratory Research Articles

The Trials of Apuleius: An Ironic Legal History

This article is an exercise in what might be termed ‘ironic’ legal history. The first part explores the idea of ‘ironic’ history, which aligns the insights of literary ‘ironism’ with those of micro and ‘anecdotal’ history and ‘new’ historicism. It will focus more particularly on the work of Richard Rorty, Carlo Ginzburg and Stephen Greenblatt. The second part of the article will present a ‘case-study’ in ironic legal history; revisiting the second-century trial of the Roman orator and writer Apuleius. Apuleius wrote two notably different accounts of the same experience, one pretending to fact, the other to fiction. To read these accounts is to engage in an exercise in ironic legal history.

Sophia Papaioannou, Andreas Serafim (eds.): Comic Invective in Ancient Greek and Roman Oratory.

Sophia Papaioannou, Andreas Serafim (eds.): Comic Invective in Ancient Greek and Roman Oratory.

Ciceros Beweisführung aus der Wahrscheinlichkeit im Geldstreit zwischen dem Schauspieler Roscius und Fannius Chaerea

The paper explores the argumentation from probability in Cicero’s speech Pro Roscio comoedo, concerning the financial litigation between a famous Roman actor Quintus Roscius and an unknown businessman Fannius Chaerea. The Roman rhetorician had analysed the question of probability in his earlier dissertation De inventione, which influenced his art of persuasion. Because of lack of the strong proofs the arguments from probability played a great role in the defence of Roscius. Cicero used different types of likelihood arguments: syllogistic argument from probability, credibilia, incredibilia, verisimilia, as well as the arguments from ethos and kedros. He seems to be here aware of the Greek theory of argumentation present in the writings of Aristotle and Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. The Roman orator recalled often the truth and juxtaposed it with the probability. Cicero employed likelihood proofs in his speech, both in argumentation and in refutation.

CONFUCIUS AND CICERO: OLD IDEAS FOR A NEW WORLD, NEW IDEAS FOR AN OLD WORLD. . Edited by AndreaBalbo and JaewonAhn. Roma Sinica: Mutual Interactions between Ancient Roman and Eastern Thought. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, 2019. Pp. vi + 216. Hardback, $88.99.

Religious Studies ReviewVolume 49, Issue 1 p. 93-94 Short Reviews of Recent Publications: East Asia CONFUCIUS AND CICERO: OLD IDEAS FOR A NEW WORLD, NEW IDEAS FOR AN OLD WORLD. . Edited by Andrea Balbo and Jaewon Ahn. Roma Sinica: Mutual Interactions between Ancient Roman and Eastern Thought. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, 2019. Pp. vi + 216. Hardback, $88.99. First published: 24 April 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/rsr.16382Read the full textAboutRelatedInformationPDFPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessClose modalShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Volume49, Issue1Special Issue: Unique Approaches to Christianity in Africa and BeyondMarch 2023Pages 93-94 RelatedInformation RecommendedAmphitheaters in the Roman WorldHazel Dodge, A Companion to Sport and Spectacle in Greek and Roman Antiquity, [1]The Thought‐World of Ancient RomeRobert A. Kaster, David Konstan, The Adventure of the Human Intellect: Self, Society, and the Divine in Ancient World Cultures, [1]The Old KingdomMichel Baud PhD, A Companion to Ancient Egypt, [1]Roman Oratory Before Cicero: The Elder Cato and Gaius GracchusEnrica Sciarrino, A Companion to Roman Rhetoric, [1]

Kvintilijanovi principi odgoja i obrazovanja rimskih govornika / Quintilian’s principles of education of Roman orators

Social values, as well as the state of society at a certain time, are optimally reflected in the contents and methods of education of new generations. When it comes to Roman education, Marcus Fabius Quintilian belongs to those who placed the social ideal at the center of education and subordinated everything else to it. In the 1st century. D., distinguished himself as a teacher of rhetoric by theorizing about the education of orators and, also, by giving examples for practice. He accepted the task that was somehow imposed on him - to write a work based on many years of experience - how to raise a perfect orator. The Institutio Oratoria is a completely preserved work that determines the stages and methods of mastering the art of oratory from the earliest age of a child. As far as it is known, it is the only preserved systematic ancient pedagogical reflection. This paperwork tries to concisely present the principles that Quintilian considered fundamental in education, which resulted in a perfect Roman orator. The presentation of principles was done by analyzing historical sources and comparing them with contemporary pedagogical concepts.

Chain of Gold: Greek Rhetoric in the Roman Empire

At a time of renewed interest in Greek rhetoric during the Roman Empire, Chain of Gold establishes itself as an essential text that fills a gap in criticism of this period known as the Second Sophistic. Jarratt observes that the political mode has often been strangely ignored in readings of Second Sophistic texts, especially given their unique postcolonial context, the complex power relations of Greek sophists to their audiences, and the backdrop of potential imperial violence to those who would risk critique. Chain of Gold begins to address this omission, with rigor and creativity, through a sustained inquiry into the politics of rhetorical form.Jarratt’s great insight is that the complicated political role of these sophists required a careful balancing of limited free speaking (parrhēsía) with safer and more effective modes of “figured discourse” as conceptualized by Frederick Ahl (1984) utilizing persuasive strategies that relied on obliqueness, strategic silences, and especially references to classical Greek literature and myth that would have different meanings for their Greek and Roman audiences. Reading these cloaked arguments with attunement to the political, Jarratt finds manifold visions of good government–“projections of possible futures” (21)–as well as coded critiques of empire.Jarratt’s approach results in truly innovative readings of prominent Second Sophistic texts. For example, the chapter analyzing Philostratus’s Imagines, an extensive collection of ekphrases describing over sixty imaginary paintings, eschews the approach most critics have taken, which is to read the descriptions as a demonstration of Philostratus’s own aesthetic theories and commitments. Instead, Jarratt highlights the political dimensions of the Imagines’ colonial, pedagogical framing device–a Greek sophist lecturing a group of upper-class student-age Roman boys about the paintings–and the narrative content of the descriptions themselves.In her reading, Jarratt ambitiously clusters each ekphrasis into various topoi of ethnicity, geography, and gender. She then analyzes how each subject, such as foreign rulers or women, is treated across the entire set of descriptions. This allows her to argue persuasively, for example, that the treatment of women across the Imagines emphasizes sympathy, respect, and admiration. (This is the first scholarly analysis in at least eighty years that considers every one of Philostratus’s descriptions.) Her conclusion–that Philostratus uses ekphrasis in order to enable his Roman audience to imagine the “responsibilities of acting in a power-laden multicultural, imperial context” and to “treat their colonial subjects with care” (100)–breaks new ground for a rhetorical genre usually seen as essentially poetic.Other chapters read figured discourse in more immediately recognizable political contexts, such as Aristides’s Roman Oration. Jarratt shows that, though Aristides ostensibly seems to praise Rome (both city and empire), the text actually offers deep and pervasive “undercurrents of critique” (46) thanks to specific topics Aristides is silent about and Homeric allusions that emphasize absence and hollowness, creating an antisublime aesthetic suggesting the political failures of Rome.Chain of Gold assumes no previous knowledge of the Second Sophistic, and the range of texts in each accessible chapter provides a thorough introduction to the subject, spanning the first four centuries of the common era, a wide range of rhetorical genres, and a set of authors whose relationship to the empire and ability to speak freely varied greatly. The case studies themselves present compelling and exciting models of reading coded political positioning relevant not just to rhetoric scholars and students but to those working in postcolonial studies, comparative literature, and classics. For historians of rhetoric familiar with this literature, Jarratt’s readings are creative and often genuinely surprising, inspiring, one hopes, a new generation of rhetoric scholars to grapple with these complex and until recently underestimated texts.

Influence Work, Resistance, and Educational Life-Worlds: Quintilian’s [Marcus Fabius Quintilianus] (35-95 CE) Analysis of Roman Oratory as an Instructive Ethnohistorical Resource and Conceptual Precursor of Symbolic Interactionist Scholarship

Despite the striking affinities of classical Greek and Latin rhetoric with the pragmatist/interactionist analysis of the situated negotiation of reality and its profound relevance for the analysis of human group life more generally, few contemporary social scientists are aware of the exceptionally astute analyses of persuasive inter­change developed by Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian.
 Having considered the analyses of rhetoric developed by Aristotle (384-322 BCE) and Cicero (106-43 BCE) in interactionist terms (Prus 2007a; 2010), the present paper examines Quintilian’s (35-95 CE) contributions to the study of persuasive interchange more specifically and the nature of human knowing and acting more generally.
 Focusing on the education and practices of orators (rhetoricians), Quintilian (a practitioner as well as a distinc­tively thorough instructor of the craft) provides one of the most sustained, most systematic analyses of influence work and resistance to be found in the literature.
 Following an overview of Quintilian’s “ethnohistorical” account of Roman oratory, this paper concludes by draw­ing conceptual parallels between Quintilian’s analysis of influence work and the broader, transcontextual features of symbolic interactionist scholarship (Mead 1934; Blumer 1969; Prus 1996; 1997; 1999; Prus and Grills 2003). This includes “generic social processes” such as: acquiring perspectives, attending to identity, being involved, doing activity, en­gaging in persuasive interchange, developing relationships, experiencing emotionality, attaining linguistic fluency, and partici­pating in collective events. Offering a great many departure points for comparative analysis, as well as ethnographic examinations of the influence process, Quintilian’s analysis is particularly instructive as he addresses these and related aspects of human knowing, acting, and interchange in highly direct, articulate, and detailed ways.
 Acknowledging the conceptual, methodological, and analytic affinities of The Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian with symbolic interactionism, an epilogue, Quintilian as an Intellectual Precursor to American Pragmatist Thought and the Interactionist Study of Human Group Life, addresses the relative lack of attention given to classical Greek and Latin scholarship by the American pragmatists and their intellectual progeny, as well as the importance of maintaining a more sustained transcontextual and transhistorical focus on the study of human knowing, acting, and interchange.

Excessive Temper(ament), Flawed Character: On the Entanglement of the “Medical” and the “Ethical” in the History of Rhetoric

Abstract Rhetoric is a bodily art. “Character” itself is an emanation, or a translation of an individual’s physical nature: excessive, outlandish characters are used in ancient rhetoric as relevant examples of this connection. Starting from the controversial legacy of Mark Antony as an orator, this paper explores how medical theory underpins ancient rhetorical thought on the excessive orator and reveals the linkage of character, the body, and its environment. By reexamining the famous cases of Mark Antony, Cassius Severus, Maecenas, and Cicero himself in the light of Greek discourse on the effects of humoral imbalance on speech, I revisit the legacies of several heroes and villains of Roman oratory, as well as contemplate the enduring seduction of excess.

Chain of Gold: Greek Rhetoric in the Roman Empire by Susan Jarratt

Reviewed by: Chain of Gold: Greek Rhetoric in the Roman Empire by Susan Jarratt Anna Peterson Susan Jarratt, Chain of Gold: Greek Rhetoric in the Roman Empire. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2019. 200 pp. Coined by Philostratus in the early third century CE, the label “Second Sophistic” (c. 50-250 CE) is increasingly recognized as an imperfect periodic designation. Does it refer exclusively to the tradition of epideictic rhetoric as described by Philostratus? Or can it be expanded to include the full range of Greek literary production during the first three centuries CE? At its core the term reflects feelings of belatedness and nostalgia, such that the common narrative of the period has become one in which an elite Hellenic identity was defined above all by paideia (“education” or “culture”). While this rooting of an elite Greek identity in the classical past is well recognized as a response to Roman hegemony,1 recent scholarship has begun to expand on this conventional view, pointing to elements of continuity both with earlier Hellenistic literature and the literature of the fourth century CE.2 Jarratt’s monograph Chain of Gold consequently sets a tall task for itself in once again addressing the cultural politics of the Second Sophistic. It is an ambitious and thought-provoking work, even if in the end it does not completely succeed in what it sets out to do. At its core, it argues for a reappraisal of the “second sophistic habit of dwelling in the past” as something that was not “monologic and static” but “varied and dynamic” and that offered the writers and performers of the period “a politically protected way of ‘talking back’ to empire.” (17) For Jarratt, the obsession with the past that has come to define this period of Greek literature is not a simple matter of nostalgia but rather of critical memory, one that allowed the authors of this period to reimagine and keep alive a deliberative civic space. Jarratt’s aim in this book is not at its core an entirely new idea. That said, what makes her work so thought provoking is her desire to locate “a colonial counterdiscourse” in a broad range of works (38). Moreover, she is certainly correct that too often classicists have been overly hesitant about reading the literature of the period through the lens of postcolonial theory (3). In addition to an introductory chapter outlining the monograph’s methodology, Chain of Gold develops this argument across six case studies, covering respectively Dio Chyrsostom’s Euboean Discourse (Chapter 2), Aelius Aristides’ Roman Oration (Chapter 3), Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius of Tyana [End Page 103] (Chapter 4) and Imagines (Chapter 5), Heliodorus’ Aithiopika (Chapter 6), and Libanius’ To Those Who Call Him Tiresome (Chapter 7). Generally speaking, this is a nice mixture of well-trod and often overlooked texts. Her strongest chapters are those which connect what she calls rhetorical vision to the post-colonial concerns outlined in the monograph’s first chapter. For example, her discussion in Chapter 3 of Aristides’ Roman Oration explores how “the ‘ sophist . . . draws on the resources of [Homeric] epic to enhance his powers of visualization,” providing his audience not only “a phantasm of [Rome’s] imperium but also a techne of viewing” (47). Likewise, Chapter 5 reads Philostratus’ Imagines—an intriguing collection of descriptions of works of art—as an exploration in rhetorical vision that pushes the limits of ekphrasis. Treating the text as a museum of sorts, Jarratt acts as curator, bringing out how the text handles reoccurring images of youth, women, and different ethnicities, among others. This is Jarratt’s most successful chapter, in part thanks to the inclusion of an appendix, which maps out the paintings in relation to one another. In a few instances, however, Jarratt does not make full use of the ancient evidence. The clearest example of this comes in her discussion of Dio Chrysostom’s Euboean Discourse (Or. 7). In this speech, Dio professes that he will narrate a personal experience, relating how, after being shipwrecked in Euboea, he was taken in by a huntsman, who recounted his own troubled participation in local politics. The huntsman’s tale then prompts Dio to expound on...

Crossing boundaries and facing others: South African perspectives on the transgressive rhetoric of preaching

The core question posed by this article is, ‘what are the characteristics of a transgressive rhetoric, as evidenced by preaching in South Africa, in particular in view of the transition to democracy, and as based on the African philosophy of Ubuntu?’ Or, the other way around, ‘what type of (homiletical) rhetoric was in fact needed to achieve the political transition in South Africa?’ Cognisance is taken in particular of the rhetorical structures used in this regard by former Archbishop Desmond Tutu, under the headings of inter-facing, inter-forming and inter-futuring. These rhetorical structures are evaluated in the light of certain rhetorical principles, as expressed in classical Roman oratory. Contribution: This article traces elements of historical thought and source interpretation by revisiting the particular historical role that former Archbishop Tutu played in the formation of democracy in South Africa, by means of an interpretation of selected writings, i.e. sermons and speeches by the former Archbishop.

The “Cicero”/“Cicero” Puzzling Case

AbstractThis paper aims to solve the following twofold problem. Suppose that a rational speaker, Ralph, mistakenly takes (for some reason) the Roman orator Cicero and the World War II German spy Cicero to be the same individual. By sincerely uttering the sentence “Cicero is an orator and a spy”, (a) does Ralph use the name “Cicero” of the Roman orator or the name “Cicero” of the German spy or another name of the genus “Cicero”? And (b) which Cicero does Ralph refer to: the Roman orator, the German spy, both of them or neither of them? After drawing a distinction between the notion of mistaking one individual for another (exemplified by Kripke's “Jones”/“Smith” case and Putnam's “water”/“water” case) and the notion of wrongly taking two individuals to be one and the same individual (exemplified by the “Cicero”/“Cicero” case under discussion), I will defend the following solution to the last puzzling case: Ralph inadvertently creates an abstract individual playing the role of “fusion” or “amalgam” of the two Ciceros and also inadvertently creates a new name “Cicero” referring to such an individual.

Comic Invective in Ancient Greek and Roman Oratory ed. by Sophia Papaioannou and Andreas Serafim

Comic Invective in Ancient Greek and Roman Oratory ed. by Sophia Papaioannou and Andreas Serafim

Plato’s Socrates and a new interpretation of the kosmos

One of the most common problems encountered in present-day research into ancient natural philosophy is the question of when the term kosmos (κόσμος) began to be used not only for order, but also for the meaning of world order. This article attempts to argue that this new interpretation of kosmos is connected with Socratic thought and asserts that the Socratic anthropological turn can only be meaningfully discussed due to changes in the field of natural philosophy. This anthropological turn is best expressed by Roman orator and philosopher Cicero in his well-known work Tusculan Disputations. The article attempts to offer an interpretation based on the belief that the collocation world order presumes a philosophical turn towards a focus on humans and their internal world experiences. For the author’s interpretation, the specific concept of koinonia (κοινωνία) as it is found first in Empedocles’ fragments and later in Plato’s philosophy is important. The article consists of three parts: the first part deals with several traditional meanings of kosmos (Homer, Hesiod, Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander, Heraclitus, Pythagoreans etc.), the second part with meanings that Socratic philosophy (especially Plato, partly Xenophon) assigns to the term, and the final part attempts to argue that it is explicitly Plato who first began using kosmos with the meaning of world or world order.

Freud and the Émigré: Austrian Émigrés, Exiles, and the Legacy of Psychoanalysis in Britain, 1930S-1970S ed. by Elana Shapira and Daniela Finzi

Reviewed by: Freud and the Émigré: Austrian Émigrés, Exiles, and the Legacy of Psychoanalysis in Britain, 1930S-1970S ed. by Elana Shapira and Daniela Finzi Steven Beller Elana Shapira and Daniela Finzi, eds., Freud and the Émigré: Austrian Émigrés, Exiles, and the Legacy of Psychoanalysis in Britain, 1930S-1970S. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021. 277 pp. Émigrés from Austria were one of the most influential groups in shaping modern British society and culture. Wherever you turn, you find an Austrian émigré: Karl Popper, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Friedrich Hayek, George Weidenfeld, Rudolf Bing, Ernst Gombrich, and Peter Pulzer, to name just a few. If you expand it to the second generation and include descendants of "old" Austrians, then you get another fascinating list of hugely influential figures with some émigré background: Marianne Faithfull, an icon of the 1960s, was the granddaughter of a Sacher-Masoch; Stephen Fry, Ben Elton, Richard Curtis, and perhaps most influential of all, Tom Stoppard all have "Austrian" [End Page 139] Jewish émigré backgrounds. Modern British popular culture would just not have been the same without the Austrian émigrés. And then there is also Sigmund Freud, along with his descendants and followers. The immense achievement of émigrés in Britain has been well catalogued by Daniel Snowman in Hitler's Émigrés (2002), and the Freudian emigration has also been covered by such works as Freud in Exile (1988; edited by Edward Timms and Naomi Segal). The volume under review carries this research further, with many valuable contributions delineating the interaction of the Freudian psychoanalytic tradition with British wartime and postwar culture. Some of the larger claims made by Elana Shapira in her introduction are open to discussion, as I am not quite sure Freud and psychoanalysis were quite as dominant in framing the Austrian émigré identity and culture, the "Viennese community," as she appears to suggest. Nonetheless there is much material of great interest here for anyone looking for how "Austria" survived post-1938 elsewhere. The first topic, aptly, covers the relationship of the master, Sigmund Freud, with England, starting from his childhood. The initial connections were through family, his two half-brothers in Manchester, whom he visited as a teenager, but Freud developed a lifelong admiration of England as the land of freedom and, as Liliane Weissberg relates, even claimed to H. G. Wells in 1939 that since his teenage visit it had been "an intense wish phantasy" of his to become an Englishman. In this Anglophilia, Freud was like many other Viennese Jews, Theodor Herzl included, who loved the sense of liberty that the image of English parliamentary politics, among other factors, projected. Weissberg develops an interesting discussion of how Freud's love of England as the new promised land entwined with his increasing identification with Moses, as made evident by his famous, or notorious, last major work, Moses and Monotheism. Volker Welter provides a chapter on how Ernst Freud, the son of Sigmund who became an architect, attempted to provide homes for psychoanalysis in its new English home just as he had in Berlin, with the psychoanalyst's consulting room, couch included, attached to the psychoanalyst's home. Another Viennese, who never felt as much at home in England as Freud but who took up Freud's psychoanalytical approach in spirit if not in detail, was Stefan Zweig. As Werner Michler shows in his analysis of Beware of Pity, Zweig played fast and loose with psychoanalytic theory, sticking primarily to his own psychological insights. Nonetheless, Zweig, who greatly admired [End Page 140] Freud, was deeply honored to give a eulogy at Freud's funeral in Golders Green. The elaborateness of the eulogy perhaps gives an insight into why Zweig felt uncomfortable in England. As Michler dryly relates, Ernest Jones, the Welsh leader of psychoanalysis in Britain, had claimed in his own speech that Freud was "being buried to-day in the atmosphere he would have wished, one of stark truth and realism; in sheer simplicity, without a note of pomp or ceremony"; Zweig's Roman oration was completely at variance with this. There follow chapters on two more émigrés who traded in the psychological culture associated with Freud. Laura Marcus...

PAINTING CATILINE INTO A CORNER: FORM AND CONTENT IN CICERO'S IN CATILINAM 1.1

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? (‘Just how much longer, really, Catiline, will you abuse our patience?’). The famous incipit—‘And what are you reading, Master Buddenbrook? Ah, Cicero! A difficult text, the work of a great Roman orator. Quousque tandem, Catilina. Huh-uh-hmm, yes, I've not entirely forgotten my Latin, either’— already impressed contemporaries, including some ordinarily not so readily impressed. It rings through Sallust's version of Catiline's shadowy address to his followers, when he asks regarding the injustices they suffer (Cat. 20.9): quae quousque tandem patiemini, o fortissumi uiri? (‘Just how much longer, really, will you put up with these, o bravest men?’). More playfully, and less well-known, Sallust employed the expression again in a speech by Philippus (Hist. 1.77.17 M./67 R.): uos autem, patres conscripti, quo usque cunctando rem publicam intutam patiemini et uerbis arma temptabitis? (‘But you, members of the Senate, just how much longer will you suffer our Republic to be unsafe by your hesitation and make an attempt on arms with words?’). Soon afterwards it served Cicero's son, who, as governor of Asia, put down Hybreas fils for having dared to quote from his father's work in his presence (Sen. Suas. 7.14): ‘age’, inquit [sc. Marcus Tullius], ‘non putas me didicisse patris mei: “quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra”?’ (‘“Come now”, he said, “do you think that I do not know by heart my father's ‘Just how much longer, really, Catiline, will you abuse our patience’?”’). Just about the same time, Livy recalled it in order to colour Manlius’ exhortation of his followers (6.18.5): quousque tandem ignorabitis uires uestras, quas natura ne beluas quidem ignorare uoluit? … audendum est aliquid uniuersis aut omnia singulis patienda. quousque me circumspectabitis? (‘Just how much longer, really, will you remain ignorant of your own strength, which nature has willed even brutes to know? … We must dare all together, or else, separately, suffer all. Just how much longer will you keep looking round for me?’). Thereafter Quintilian would refer to it twice, when discussing apostrophe and rhetorical questions (Inst. 4.1.68, 9.2.7), just a couple of years before Tacitus has the maladroit Q. Haterius encourage Tiberius to seize the reins—quo usque patieris, Caesar, non adesse caput rei publicae? (‘Just how much longer, Caesar, will you suffer the absence of the head of state?’, Ann. 1.13.4); a few decades later still, Apuleius puts it into the mouth of the slave who chastises his master, now in asinine form (Met. 3.27): ‘quo usque tandem’, inquit, ‘cantherium patiemur istum paulo ante cibariis iumentorum, nunc etiam simulacris deorum infestum?’ (‘“Just how much longer, really,” he said, “will we suffer this old gelding to attack the animals’ food just a little while ago and now even the gods’ statues?”’). He trusted, no doubt, that the famous question would alert his readers more than anything to the many ‘similarities between Catiline and Lucius’, in order to have them appreciate this ‘ludicrous copy of Cicero's arch-enemy’. Some time after, and in a different corner of the Empire altogether, a teacher's bronze statue would carry the inscription:VERBACICRO | NISQVOVSQ | TANDEMABVTE | RECATELINAPA | TIENTIANOS | TRA.

How the Unfinished Fugue of Bach’s Kunst der Fuge (BWV 1080) Would Be Completed as a Fully Realized Instrumental Klangrede

The Roman orator’s six-part dispositio, described and applied to the analysis of Bach’s instrumental music in the author’s previous publications, can also be adopted in an attempt to complete the unfinished fugue in Bach’s Kunst der Fuge. An analysis of Bach’s unfinished score shows that he implemented the first two parts of the dispositio entirely and the third part only partially. Any attempt to complete the unfinished fugue must first conclude the third part of the dispositio and then implement the dispositio’s final three parts according to directions given by Bach in the existing score. Strict consideration of the fugue’s contrapuntal technique leads to the conclusion that Bach planned it as a quadruple fugue.

ТВОРИ ЦИЦЕРОНА У РИТОРИЦІ «МОГИЛЯНСЬКИЙ ОРАТОР» (1636)

The article analyses which works of Marcus Tullius Cicero are mentioned and (or) quoted in the textbook on the rhetoric of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy “Orator Mohileanus” (1636) by Joseph Kononovich-Gorbatsky. The Ukrainian teacher prefers the speeches of the Roman orator. 49 speeches of Cicero are mentioned or quoted 228 times (16 legal speeches — 148 times, 33 political speeches — 80 times).There are three cases of special attention to Cicero’s speeches: their chronology is presented; the technique of confirmation is analysed on the example of “In Defense of Archias the Poet” and common places are collected for imitation. Among Cicero’s treatises on oratory, the most popular are “Rhetorica ad Herennium” (as Joseph Kononovich-Gorbatsky means, authored by Cicero) and “About the Subdivisions of Oratory”. In total, seven rhetorical treatises are mentioned or cited 101 times. A special role is given to “About the Subdivisions of Oratory”. The structure of the first treatise clearly repeats the composition of the work of the Roman classic, the titles of the sections are duplicated, parallels are constantly drawn. Unlike other rhetorical works, Cicero’s “About the Subdivisions of Oratory” are quoted in Ukrainian rhetoric in large fragments. Six Tullius’s philosophical works are sporadically (12 times) presented in Ukrainian rhetoric; Cicero’s letters — three times only.

The Bible on the Shakespearean Stage: Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Edited by Thomas Fulton and Kristen Poole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. xvi+304.

Previous articleNext article FreeBook ReviewThe Bible on the Shakespearean Stage: Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Edited by Thomas Fulton and Kristen Poole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. xvi+304.Kurt SchreyerKurt SchreyerUniversity of Missouri–St. Louis Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreJudging from the essays in The Bible on the Shakespearean Stage, the “turn to religion” remains a stimulating and productive approach to the study of early modern literature and culture. In fact, this volume offers some of the most important contributions to the topic of Shakespeare’s relationship to the biblical text since Hannibal Hamlin’s The Bible in Shakespeare (2013). No mere catalog of biblical allusions, the collection focuses on post-Reformation reading (broadly understood), interpretation, and debate in England and on the Continent. As the editors observe, “Though largely focused on ‘reading’ as an interpretive mode, scholars in this volume are also attentive to the ways that scriptural representations on the stage derive from both the written page and the pulpit; indeed, the pulpit and the stage are both places where the biblical text is, in a sense, performed as well as interpreted” (4). The Shakespearean stage is not dutifully acquiescent to the received doctrine of any denominational or theological camp but rather highly engaged with the vexatious manifestations of contemporary theological polemic. To paraphrase Jesse Lander’s reading of Hamlet in chapter 11, if the Bible may be said to be a groundwork for the play, its presence provokes rather than pacifies the maimed rites and the whirling words that disorient both characters and audience.In the first of the volume’s four parts, both Bruce Gordon and Aaron Pratt demonstrate that bibliographically fixing “the Bibles of the Reformation and post-Reformation periods” is considerably more difficult than we might expect, for they “were by no means static entities” (32), and our modern taxonomies “have obscured from view the actual Bibles and New Testaments that shaped the scriptural encounters of Shakespeare and his contemporaries” (35). Subsequent essays pursue other forms of complexity in fascinating ways, including the intricacies of literal meaning (Jay Zysk), hermeneutical interpretation and debate (Kristen Poole), exegetical harmonization (Tom Bishop), Roman oratory and biblical lament (Adrian Streete), biblical allusions (Beatrice Groves, Hannibal Hamlin, Richard Strier), and political theology (Thomas Fulton). Julia Reinhard Lupton’s afterword not only offers a thoughtful reflection on the contributions to the volume but also gleans the practical wisdom and virtues it promotes for our contemporary community of scholars. Along with Lander’s and Pratt’s essays cited above, Shaina Trapedo’s account of The Merchant of Venice must be singled out for its fresh and inspired approach. The play, she argues, explores the intellectual and doctrinal debt, simultaneously legitimized and denounced, of Reformed Christianity to Jewish scripture and hermeneutics. “Gratiano’s sarcastic ‘I thank thee, Jew’ and appropriation of the term ‘Daniel’ reveal the paradox of gratitude Shakespeare uses to power his play: ever-present in the admission of thanks is a confession of inadequacy and dependence” (184).The ideological thread that intertwines this diverse web of scholarly interests may be found in the book’s subtitle, Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Whatever its disavowals of confessional sympathies, the volume’s focus and, one gathers, its real interest lie in Reformed discourses, with the result that the reading practices—biblical and theatrical—of recusant communities are not explored. English Catholicism is, it would seem, a past phenomenon by the late sixteenth century. Even Shakespeare’s medieval Danish prince is “quite clearly” Protestant (80). Some readers may find its contributions uneven or may quibble with particulars, but Fulton and Poole have gathered a formidable body of scholarship to help us think about and with Shakespeare’s religious culture. This collection of essays may be read, excerpted, and deployed in a number of productive ways in the undergraduate and graduate classroom: by Shakespeare play, by biblical book or genre, by early modern material text, or by exegetical debate, to name only a few. It is a must-read for scholars wishing to expand and deepen their knowledge of early modern biblical exegetes and their influence on Shakespeare’s culture and works. Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Modern Philology Volume 117, Number 2November 2019 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/705615HistoryPublished online August 07, 2019 For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

LIBERALISM – FREEDOM VERSUS RESPONSIBILITY

Marcus Tullius Cicero was Roman orator, philosopher, politician, political theorist, consul and constitutionalist, who were serving for the Republic’s highest court and highest honour. Cicero was priority of liberal values in ancient world. While Cicero the humanist deeply infl uenced the culture of the Renaissance, Cicero the republican inspired the Founding Fathers of the USA and the revolutionaries of the French Revolution. Cicero’s career as a statesman was marked by inconsistencies. [1 - 2] These principles of ethical behavior are dealt much earlier Aristotle and Confucius. Even earlier it was in the Old Testament canon of the prophets [3 - 4]. The Christian treatment in unethical behavior is a sin-making. These principles are also other world religions.

Atticism: The Language of 5th-century Oratory or a Quantifiable Stylistic Phenomenon?

Abstract This paper comparatively explores Atticism as it first appeared in fifth-century Greek oratory and was later revived by Imperial Greek authors. Using Dionysius’ of Halicarnassus and his appreciations of oratory and orators as a frame of reference and then expanding his inferences on works of Imperial era, I attempt to parameterize Atticism as a phenomenon. Ultimately this study will apprise us of the usage of Atticism in Imperial Roman oratory as well, as it then becomes obvious that Atticism has transcended the boundaries of language and has transformed into a constructional rhetorical system. This paper employs a unified node-based metric formulation for implementing various syntactical construction metrics, indicative of the syntactical attributes of the sentences. The developed metrics were applied to annotated texts of six authors, which were then comparatively examined using Principal Component Analysis.