No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
III. Rhetoric: The Authority of Self-Presentation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2016
Extract
‘Democracy is a constitution of speech-making’, wrote Demosthenes, the great orator of the fourth century. The Assembly is the arena where policy decisions of the state were publicly debated and decided – and where political careers were made and lost. The law courts were a forum not just for conflict resolution but for competition in status between elite males. The theatre staged debate for an audience’s reflection. Even in the more private sphere of the symposium amid the wine, women and song we see the party game of speeches on a particular topic. In the agora, the market place, and, more formally, in the theatre, visiting intellectuals and professional speech-makers – often called ‘sophists’ – gave speeches for the edification and amusement of a paying audience. What is perhaps as important as this institutional framework is the ideological underpinning of such practices. That both sides of a question must be publicly debated is a constant watchword of democratic principle. That all citizens are equal before the law, and that the provision of a law court with a public jury is basic to a democratic polity – these are principles uncontested in democratic theory. Isêgoria – the right of all citizens to speak – is announced in the opening ritual of each Assembly with the herald’s question, ‘Who wants to speak?’. There is a wonderful phrase that sums up these principles: es meson. It means literally ‘into the middle’ – but implies that a grounding ideal of democracy is that all issues should be set out in public for debate and decision. Demosthenes was right: Athenian democracy can be summed up as a ‘constitution of speech-making’.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 2002
References
1 En logois politeia, Dem. 19. 184.
2 See on performance and participation e.g. Goldhill (1999), 1–32; Sinclair (1988); Ober (1989).
3 See Vernant (1982); Finley (1983); Loraux (1986); Farrar (1988); Meier (1990); Boegehold and Scafuroedd. (1994).
4 Kennedy (1963); Swearingen (1991); Cole (1991); Poulakos ed. (1993).
5 Useful accounts in Kerferd (1981); Guthrie (1962-1981) voi. III; Goldhill (1986), 222–43; de Romilly (1992); and, more polemically, Jarratt (1991); Poulakos (1995).
6 See e.g. Lloyd (1987).
7 See e.g. Bourdieu (1977).
8 As discussed by Kerferd (1981), 83–110, and in more technical detail by e.g. Sinclair (1976); Burnyeat (1976); Schiappa (1991).
9 Eur. fr. 19 (from the Aiolos).
10 The exact source of these arguments – reported by Aristotle Rhet. 1402al 7 and Plato Phaedrus 273a-b – is debated. It is attributed rather vaguely to Corax or Tisias; but in either case functions as an exemplary case of the argument from probability.
11 For a heavy-duty philosophical account of the enthymeme, see Burnyeat (1994) and (1996).
12 This bizarre piece is usefully edited and translated in Robinson (1979).
13 See Vlastos (1991); Kahn (1995).
14 Theognis 35–8: see Figueira and Nagy edd. (1985).
15 Od. 390–484; on class in the Odyssey see Rose (1992), 92–140.
16 See Stone (1988); Brickhouse and Smith (1989); Euben (1997); Kraut (1984).
17 The best introduction to Gorgias is Wardy (1996) which draws also on the studies of Segal (1962); Rosenmeyer (1955).
18 See Wardy (1996), 6–24 – who has the relevant bibliography also.
19 A text and translation and commentary can be found in MacDowell (1982), though he is well criticized by Wardy (1996), 25–51.
20 Gorgias, Encomium 1.
21 Gorgias, Encomium 5.
22 Gorgias, Encomium 6.
23 Gorgias, Encomium 7.
24 Gorgias, Encomium 8.
25 See Buxton (1982).
26 Gorgias, Encomium 12.
27 See Walsh (1984).
28 Gorgias, Encomium 15.
29 Gorgias, Encomium 21.
30 The few facts about Lysias’ life are discussed in Carey (1989); Edwards and Usher (1985), which also has texts; and with more technical detail by Dover (1968). For translations see Todd (1996).
31 Dionysus of Halicarnassus, Essay on Lysias 18.
32 See Ober (1989); Cartlege, Miilett, Todd edd. (1990); Cohen (1991).
33 Lysias 12. 14.
34 Lysias 12. 16.
35 Lysias 12. 32.
36 Lysias 12. 84.
37 Lysias 12. 34.
38 Lysias 12. 100: akêkoate, heoràkate, peponthate, ekhete, dikazete.
39 For all the facts on Athenian legal process see Todd (1993).
40 See Omitowoju (2002) with extensive bibliography, and Cohen (1991), 98–170.
41 Lysias 1. 1.
42 Lysias 1. 6.
43 Lysias 1. 7.
44 Lysias 1. 9.
45 Lysias 1. 10.
46 Semonides 7. 108–9, brilliantly discussed by Loraux (1993), 72–110.
47 Lysias 1. 12.
48 Lysias 1. 25–6.
49 Tanner (1980) is unsurpassed here.
50 Lysias 1. 47.
51 See Todd (1993); Cartledge, Millett, Todd edd. 1990); Cohen (1991); Ober (1989).
52 Transmitted to us as Demosthenes 59, but written by Apollodorus. For text, translation and commentary see Carey (1992).
53 For the biography and its bibliography see e.g. Sealey (1993), and as a more general background Strauss (1987).
54 See Hall (1995).
55 See Connor (1971) for a good introduction to this.
56 Discussed at length in Winkler (1990), 45–70, Dover (1978), and Davidson (1997) (whose criticisms of Foucault in particular are tendentious), with background discussion in Halperin (1990), 88–112 and Cohen (1991), 171–202. See now Fisher (2001).
57 Fine discussion in Ober (1989).
58 Aeschines 1. 132–3. On the use of Homer in court see Ford (1999).
59 Dem. 19. 247–50.
60 Dem. 18. 289.
61 Dem. 18. 265.
62 Dem. 1.2.
63 Dem. 1. 28.
64 Very well discussed by Hesk (2000).
65 See Cole (1991), 33–46; and especially Martin (1989).
66 Discussed by Too (1995).
67 Against the Sophists 15.
68 For bibliography and more extensive discussion of the material of the next paragraphs, see Goldhill (1999).
69 Isocrates 5. 230.
70 Isocrates 5. 271–3.
71 See e.g. Rundle (1998) for an introduction to this vast field.
72 On Aristotle’s Rhetoric see the essays collected in Furley and Nehemas edd. (1994); Rorty ed. (1996), which is especially good on ‘the emotions’, and the briefer general introduction in Wardy (1996), 108–38.
73 Arist., Rhet. 1. 9. 28–9 (1367a).
74 Arist., Rhet. 1. 9. 30 (1367b).
75 Arist., Rhet. 1. 9. 30 (1367b).