The interaction between orator and audience, the passions and distrust held by many concerning the predominance of one individual, but also the individual’s struggle as an advisor and political leader, these are the quintessential elements of 4th century rhetoric. As an individual personality, the orator draws strength from his audience, while the rhetorical texts mirror his own thoughts and those of his audience as part of a two-way relationship, in which individuality meets, opposes, and identifies with the masses. For the first time, this volume systematically compares minor orators with the major figures of rhetoric, Demosthenes and Isocrates, taking into account other findings as well, such as extracts of Hyperides from the Archimedes Palimpsest. Moreover, this book provides insight into the controversy surrounding the art of discourse in the rhetorical texts of Anaximenes, Aristotle, and especially of Isocrates who took up a clear stance against the philosophy of the 4th century.

The interaction between orator and audience, the passions and distrust held by many concerning the predominance of one individual, but also the individual’s struggle as an advisor and political leader, these are the quintessential elements of 4th century rhetoric. As an individual personality, the orator draws strength from his audience, while the rhetorical texts mirror his own thoughts and those of his audience as part of a two-way relationship, in which individuality meets, opposes, and identifies with the masses. For the first time, this volume systematically compares minor orators with the major figures of rhetoric, Demosthenes and Isocrates, taking into account other findings as well, such as extracts of Hyperides from the Archimedes Palimpsest. Moreover, this book provides insight into the controversy surrounding the art of discourse in the rhetorical texts of Anaximenes, Aristotle, and especially of Isocrates who took up a clear stance against the philosophy of the 4th century.

Theopompus of Chios was one of the most important ancient Greek historians of the fourth century BC. Although his work has survived only in fragments, it is still a rich and vital source of information for Greek political, social, and intellectual history during the age of Philip of Macedon. This book explores both Theopompus's historical method and the intellectual milieu in which he worked, while placing the fragments themselves in "context" by examining where and why they are cited by later authors. Flower's illuminating and original study leads up to some important new conclusions about historical writing in the fourth century BC--that there was no so-called Isocratean school of rhetorical history; that Theopompus used moral explanations typical of Greek thought to account for historical changes; and that oral tradition, as opposed to rhetorical invention, was still vibrant in the fourth century. All Greek in the book is translated.

In The Genres of Rhetorical Speeches in Greek and Roman Antiquity, Cristina Pepe offers a complete overview of the concept of speech genre within ancient rhetoric. By analyzing sources dating from the 5th-4th century BC, the author proves that the well-known classification in three rhetorical genres (deliberative, judicial, epideictic), introduced by Aristotle, was rooted in the debate concerning the forms and functions of the art of persuasion in classical Athens. Genres play a leading role in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, and the analysis of considerable sections of the treatise shows profound links between the characterization of the rhetorical genres and Aristotelian philosophy as a whole. Finally, the volume explores the developments of the theory of genres in Hellenistic and Imperial rhetoric.

RHETORIC the counterpart of Dialectic. Both alike are concerned with such things as come more or less within the general ken of all men and belong to no definite science. Accordingly all men make use more or less of both; for to a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them to defend themselves and to attack others. Ordinary people do this either at random or through practice and from acquired habit. Both ways being possible the subject can plainly be handled systematically for it is possible to inquire the reason why some speakers succeed through practice and others spontaneously; and every one will at once agree that such an inquiry is the function of an art.

Speeches of praise and blame constituted a form of oratory put to brilliant and creative use in the classical Greek period (fifth to fourth century BC) and the Roman imperial period (first to fourth century AD), and they have influenced public speakers through all the succeeding ages. Yet unlike the other classical genres of rhetoric, epideictic rhetoric remains something of a mystery. It was the least important genre at the start of Greek oratory, but its role grew exponentially in subsequent periods, even though epideictic orations were not meant to elicit any action on the part of the listener, as judicial and deliberative speeches attempted to do. So why did the ancients value the oratory of praise so highly? In Epideictic Rhetoric, Laurent Pernot offers an authoritative overview of the genre that surveys its history in ancient Greece and Rome, its technical aspects, and its social function. He begins by defining epideictic rhetoric and tracing its evolution from its first realizations in classical Greece to its eloquent triumph in the Greco-Roman world. No longer were speeches limited to tribunals, assemblies, and courts—they now involved ceremonies as well, which changed the political and social implications of public speaking. Pernot analyzes the techniques of praise, both as stipulated by theoreticians and as practiced by orators. He describes how epideictic rhetoric functioned to give shape to the representations and common beliefs of a group, render explicit and justify accepted values, and offer lessons on new values. Finally, Pernot incorporates current research about rhetoric into the analysis of praise.

"This volume, examining the reception of ancient rhetoric, aims to demonstrate that the past is always part of the present: in the ways in which decisions about crucial political, social and economic matters have been made historically; or in organic interaction with literature, philosophy and culture at the core of the foundation principles of Western thought and values. Analysis is meant to cover the broadest possible spectrum of considerations that focus on the totality of rhetorical species (i.e. forensic, deliberative and epideictic) as they are applied to diversified topics (including, but not limited to, language, science, religion, literature, theatre and other cultural processes (e.g. athletics), politics and leadership, pedagogy and gender studies) and cross-cultural, geographical and temporal contexts"--