Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 An apology for the unity of 2 Corinthians
- Part 1 A survey of ancient forensic discourse
- 2 The anatomy of a genre: sources, nature, and features of forensic rhetoric
- 3 Forensic exigency
- 4 Forensic invention
- 5 Forensic disposition
- 6 Apologetic letters
- Part 2 A rhetorical analysis of 2 Corinthians as ancient apology
- Appendix I How the peroratio (12.11–13.10) summarizes 2 Corinthians
- Appendix II Topoi for each subtype of the qualitative stasis
- List of references
- Index of biblical references
- Index of ancient authors and sources
- Subject index
4 - Forensic invention
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 November 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 An apology for the unity of 2 Corinthians
- Part 1 A survey of ancient forensic discourse
- 2 The anatomy of a genre: sources, nature, and features of forensic rhetoric
- 3 Forensic exigency
- 4 Forensic invention
- 5 Forensic disposition
- 6 Apologetic letters
- Part 2 A rhetorical analysis of 2 Corinthians as ancient apology
- Appendix I How the peroratio (12.11–13.10) summarizes 2 Corinthians
- Appendix II Topoi for each subtype of the qualitative stasis
- List of references
- Index of biblical references
- Index of ancient authors and sources
- Subject index
Summary
Essential issue and stasis theory
The first concern when preparing an accusation or defense speech is determining the basic issue(s) upon which the case turns. Christoff Neumeister (1964, p. 15; cf. Volkmann, 1885; J. Martin, 1974; Lausberg, 1998) begins his consideration of the characteristics of forensic oratory in Cicero with these remarks:
Der Gegenstand einer Gerichtsrede ist die causa, der juristische Fall. Jede causa enthält eine Frage (quaestio), etwa: “Hat Milo den Clodius ermordet?” Der Ankläger behauptet: “Er hat ihn ermordet”, der Verteidiger entgegnet: “Nein, er hat es nicht getan.” Die Behauptung des Anklägers und die abstreitende Gegenbehauptung des Verteidigers bilden einen Widerspruch (controversia), der nach Auflösung verlangt. Er ist gleichsam das dynamische Prinzip, das den ganzen Gerichtsprozeß in Bewegung bringt. Gleichzeitig gibt er der causa die logische Struktur, bestimmt, in der Terminologie der Rhetorik gesprochen, ihren status.
[The object of a court-speech is the causa, the legal case. Each causa contains a question (quaestio), something like: “Has Milo murdered Clodius?” The accuser claims: “He has murdered him”; the defender replies: “No, he has not done it.” The claim of the accuser and the denying counter-claim of the defender form a contradiction (controversia) that afterwards requires resolution. This is the dynamic principle that brings the whole court-process in movement, as it were. Simultaneously as it gives the causa the logical structure, it decides, in the terminology of spoken rhetoric, its status.]
Reflection upon these dynamics – case, question, opposing arguments – resulted in the development of stasis theory.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ancient Rhetoric and Paul's ApologyThe Compositional Unity of 2 Corinthians, pp. 41 - 70Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004