Rhetorica Ad Herennium 4r4i3j

Rhetorica ad Herennium The Rhetorica ad Herennium (“Rhetoric: For Heren- The Rhetorica ad Herennium suggests that in a standard nius”), formerly attributed to Cicero but of unknown au- format for argument (widely followed today in any five thorship, is the oldest surviving Latin book on rhetoric, part essay) there were six steps. dating from the late 80s BCE,[1] and is still used today as a textbook on the structure and uses of rhetoric and • Exordium, in which the writer uses relevant generpersuasion. alities, anecdotes, quotes, or analogies to capture attention and then connects them to the specific topic.

1

• Narratio, in which the author succinctly states what will be the argument, thesis or point that is to be proven

Overview

The Rhetorica ad Herennium was addressed to Gaius Herennius (otherwise unknown). The Rhetorica remained the most popular book on rhetoric during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. It was commonly used, along with Cicero’s De Inventione, to teach rhetoric, and over one hundred manuscripts are extant. It was also translated extensively into European vernacular languages and continued to serve as the standard schoolbook text on rhetoric during the Renaissance. The work focuses on the practical applications and examples of rhetoric. It is also the first book to teach rhetoric in a very highly structured and disciplined form.

• Divisio, in which the author outlines the main points, or reviews the debate to clarify what needs to be discussed further • Confirmatio,which sets out the arguments (often three) for the thesis that the author s as well as evidence ing them • Refutatio, which sets out and refutes the opposing arguments • Conclusio, which is a summary of the argument, describing the urgency of the viewpoint and actions that could be taken

Its discussion of elocutio (style) is the oldest surviving systematic treatment of Latin style, and many of the examThe Rhetorica ad Herennium divides oral rhetoric into ples are of contemporary Roman events. This new style, three styles. Each style has traits that make it most efwhich flowered in the century following this work’s writfective for specific purposes in oration. ing, promoted revolutionary advances in Roman literature and oratory. However, according to some analysts, • Grand, this style uses intricate arrangement of teaching oratory in Latin was inherently controversial becomplex language. The diction used is formal and cause oratory was seen as a political tool, which had to impressive. The purpose of this style is to move an be kept in the hands of the Greek-speaking upper class.[2] audience, either emotionally or to perform some acThe Rhetorica ad Herennium can be seen as part of a libtion. eral populist movement, carried forward by those, like L. Plotius Gallus, who was the first to open a school of • Middle, this style uses more relaxed language than rhetoric at Rome conducted entirely in Latin. He opened the Grand style but not quite at the level of casual the school in 93 BCE.[3] The work contains the first conversation. It avoids using colloquialisms but is known description of the method of loci, a mnemonic not overly formal. The Middle style’s purpose is to technique. Ad Herennium also provides the first complete please or entertain an audience. treatment of memoria (memorization of speeches).[4] • Simple, this style uses ordinary speech common to According to the work, there are three types of causes everyday conversation. It uses colloquialisms and that a speaker would address: informal language. This style is best suited for instruction and explanation. • Demonstrativum, where there is praise or condemnation of a particular person

2 Rhetorical Figures from Book IV

• Deliberativum, where policy is discussed Book IV of the Rhetorica ad Herennium’s systematic treatment of Latin oratory style identifies two categories

• Iudiciale, where legal controversies are addressed 1

2

2 RHETORICAL FIGURES FROM BOOK IV

of rhetorical devices, or Figures. These are Figures of Diction, which are identifiable in the language itself, and Figures of Thought, which are derived from the ideas presented. Although these figures have been in use in rhetoric throughout history, the Rhetorica ad Herennium was the first text to compile them and discuss the effects they have on an audience. Many of the following figures described in Book IV are still used in modern rhetoric, though they were originally intended specifically for use in oral debate.

brought him excellence, his excellence glory, his glory rivals). Definition is the concise statement of a person or object’s characteristic traits, transition restates a previous statement to set up the presentation of a new one, and correction is the deliberate retraction of a statement in order to replace it with a more fitting one. Paralipsis is best used as an indirect reference in a debate, it occurs when a speaker pretends to be ing or ignorant of points that are not relevant, when he is actually addressing them as points relevant to the discussion.

The Figures of Diction include: Epanaphora, when the same word starts successive sentences, antistrophe, when the same word ends successive sentences, interlacement, when the previous two occur simultaneously, transplacement, when the same word is reused frequently. The repetition of the same word in these four figures produces an elegant and pleasant sound for the listener, rather than simply being repetitive.

Disjunction happens when two or more clauses end in verbs with similar meanings, conjunction when the clauses are connected by one verb between them, and adjunction when the verb connecting the clauses is located at the beginning or end. The author groups these three figures together, stating that disjunction is best suited for limited use to convey elegance while one should use conjunction more frequently for its brevity.

Antithesis is when the structure of the sentence is built upon contraries. Apostrophe expresses grief or resentment by addressing a specific person or object. Interrogation reinforces an argument by asking the opposition a series of rhetorical questions after they have presented their case, while reasoning by question and answer involves asking and answering oneself the reasoning behind every statement made. These figures use conversational style to hold the audience’s attention. A maxim is a saying that concisely shows what happens in life and therefore ought to happen as it applies to the situation the speaker is talking about. Reasoning by contraries uses one statement to prove an opposite statement.

Reduplication is the repetition of words for emphasis or an appeal to pity. Synonymy or Interpretation is similar to reduplication, only instead of repeating the same word it replaces it with a synonym. Reciprocal change is when two differing thoughts are arranged so that one follows the other despite the discrepancy (example: I do not write poems, because I cannot write the sort I wish, and I do not wish to write the sort I can). Surrender evokes pity by submitting to another’s opinion on the topic. A speaker uses indecision by asking rhetorically which of two or more words he should use. Elimination lists multiple options or possibilities, and then systematically removes all except one of them, the point the speaker is arguing. Asyndeton is the presentation of concise clauses connected without conjunctions, which the Rhetorica ad Herennium claims creates animation and power in the speech. Aposiopesis occurs when a speaker deliberately does not finish a statement about his opponent, allowing suspicion of his opponent to settle in the audience. Conclusion identifies the necessary consequences or results of a previous statement.

Colon or clause is when a series of up to three brief but complete clauses are strung together to communicate an entire thought. It is called isocolon when the clauses have an equal number of syllables. Similar to this is the comma or phrase, where single words are split up in a sentence to give it a halting, staccato sound. Both these figures create emphasis on the independent words or clauses within the entire thought. Period is the opposite, in which words in a sentence are close-packed and The author distinguishes the last ten figures of diction uninterrupted to form a complete thought. from the rest. The common characteristic of these ten Homoeoptoton occurs when two or more words in the figures is the application of language beyond the strict same sentence are in the same case with the same ending, meaning of the words. The first he identifies as Onowhile homoeoteleuton features words without inflection matopoeia, the term given for words assigned to sounds we cannot properly imitate with language, such as “hiss” that have the same ending. Paronomasia changes a sound or a letter in a word to make it sound similar to or “roar.” Antonomasia or pronomination is the use of an epithet when addressing a person or object in place of another word with a different meaning. These three figures are most relevant in highly inflected languages with their proper name. Metonymy occurs when an object is referred to as something closely associated with it rather cases like Latin, and the Rhetorica ad Herennium states than its proper name. Periphrasis is the use of more they are best used in speeches of entertainment. words than are necessary to express a simple idea (exHypophora occurs in debate when the speaker asks him- ample: “The steadiness of the tortoise defeated the imself or his opponent what points can be made against his patience of the hare,” rather than “The tortoise defeated case or in favor of the opponent’s, then using his own an- the hare,”). Hyperbaton upsets the order of the words swer to attack the position of the opponent. Climax is used. Hyperbole exaggerates the truth. Synecdoche octhe repetition of a preceding word in the process of mov- curs when a whole point is understood when only a small ing on to a new one (example: The industry of Africanus part is addressed. Catachresis is the use of an inexact

3 but similar word in place of the proper one (example: The power of man is short). The author defines metaphor as the application of one object to another due to some indirect similarity, and allegory as the implication of multiple meanings to a phrase beyond the actual letter of the words used. The Figures of Thought include: Distribution, which assigns specific roles to a number of objects or people in order to identify their place in the structure of the argument, and frankness of speech, in which the speaker exercises his right to speak freely despite the presence of superiors. Understatement occurs when a speaker downplays a particular advantage he might have over someone in order to avoid appearing arrogant. Vivid description describes the consequences of something with impressive and elaborate detail. Division separates all the possible causes of something, and then resolves them with reasoning that is connected. Accumulation is the connection of all the points made throughout an argument at the end of a speech, adding emphasis to the conclusion. Dwelling on the point is the continuous repetition of the same point, while refining disguises dwelling on the same topic by continuously saying the same thing in new ways. Dialogue is used as a figure of thought when the speaker puts words in the mouth of his opponent for the sake of rhetorical conversation to illustrate his point. Comparisons point out similar traits in different people or objects, while exemplification is the citing of something done in the past along with the name of the person or thing that did it. Portrayal identifies a person with a physical description rather than their name, while character delineation identifies a person with noticeable elements of their character or personality. Both of these figures allow the speaker to draw particular attentions to specific traits of that person. Personification assigns an inanimate object or an absent person traits to help the audience understand its character. Emphasis leaves more to be suspected about a topic than what is actually said, while conciseness is the precise expression of a thought using the least amount of language possible. Ocular demonstration is similar to vivid description, though the emphasis is on the visual elements of the scene described.[5]

3

See also • Rhetorical operations • Five paragraph essay • Cicero, De Inventione • Rhetorica ad Alexandrum

4

Notes

[1] Reference to Sulpicius’ tribunate of 88, and Gaius Marius’ final consulship (86) http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/

E/Roman/Texts/Rhetorica_ad_Herennium/1*.html''. Missing or empty |title= (help); [2] “J. Carcopino”. Daily Life in Ancient Rome. [3] “Roman rhetoric : an overview”. societasviaromana.net. Retrieved 28 July 2015. [4] Douglas Boin/Karl Galinsky. “Rhetorica ad Herennium ages on Memory”. utexas.edu. Retrieved 28 July 2015. [5] “Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi (Rhetorica ad Herennium)". Internet Archive. Retrieved 28 July 2015.

5 References • Rhetorica ad Herennium (Friedrich Marx, ed. Prolegomena in editio maior .), Tuebner, Leipzig, 1923. • Golla, Georg. Sprachliche Beobachtungen zum auctor ad Herennium, Breslau, 1935. • Kroll, Wilhelm. Die Entwicklung der lateinischen Sprache, Glotta 22 (1934). 24-27. • Kroll, Wilhelm. Der Text des Cornificius, Philologus 89 (1934). 63-84 • Tolkiehn, Johannes. Jahresbuch des philologischen Vereins zu Berlin 45 (1919)

6 External links • Rhetorica ad Herennium on Internet Archive. Latin text with English translation by Harry Caplan. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1954.

4

7 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

7

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

7.1

Text

• Rhetorica ad Herennium Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorica_ad_Herennium?oldid=674993297 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Charles Matthews, Wetman, Rich Farmbrough, Viriditas, Wikidea, Stefanomione, Dpaking, Саша Стефановић, Cyberchimp, FlaBot, GrumpyTroll, SmackBot, Escarbot, Cynwolfe, Magioladitis, Mwidunn, Jdaloner, Fuddle, ClueBot, SummerWithMorons, Permagnus~enwiki, Alexbot, MystBot, Addbot, Dranorter, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Twpsyn Pentref, Omnipaedista, Mgr. Martin Faktor, Curb Chain, BG19bot, Engranaje, Puthoni, KH-1, Pakka83, Morris Tichenor and Anonymous: 21

7.2

Images

7.3

Content license

• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0