Rhetoric in the fourth academy

Classical Quarterly

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 531-547

  Reinhardt, Tobias ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 62449242043     PISSN: 00098388     EISSN: 14716844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cq/50.2.531     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Important works on Philo include: K. von Fritz, 'PhiIon 40 (von Larissa)', RE 1.19 (1938), 2535-44
2. J. Glucker, Antiochus and the Late Academy (Gōttingen, 1978), passim
3. D. N. Sedley, 'The end of the Academy', Phronesis 26 (1981), 67-75
4. H. J. Tarrant, Scepticism or Platonism? (Cambridge, 1985)
5. J. Barnes, 'Review of Tarrant', CR 36 (1986), 75-7
6. G. Striker, 'Review of Tarrant', AncPhil 1 (1991), 202-6
7. W. Görier, 'Philon aus Larissa', in H. Flashar (ed.), Die Philosophie der Antike, vol. 4.2 (Basel, 1994), 915-37
8. See also B. Inwood and J. Mansfeld (edd.), Assent and Argument - Studies in Cicero's Academic Books (Leiden/New York/Cologne, 1997)
9. There is a collection of fragments by H. J. Mette, 'Philon von Larisa', Lustrum 28-9 (1986-7), 9-24
10. Against a twofold shift of Cicero's philosophical position from scepticism to dogmatism and back, maintained by J. Glucker, 'Cicero's philosophical affiliations', in J. Dillon and A. A. Long (edd.), The Question of 'Eclecticism' (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, 1988), 34-69
11. and P. Steinmetz, 'Beobachtungen zu Ciceros philosophischem Standpunkt', in W. W. Fortenbaugh and P. Steinmetz (edd.), Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos (New Brunswick/ London, 1989), 1-22
12. see the convincing arguments of W. Görler, 'Silencing the troublemaker: De Legibus 1.39 and the continuity of Cicero's scepticism', in J. G. F. Powell (ed.), Cicero the Philosopher (Oxford, 1995), 85-113
13. Or. §12: . . . et fateor me oratorem, si modo sim aut etiam quicumque sim, non ex rhetorum officinis sed ex Academiae spatiis exstitisse. Note the contrast of narrowness and space for later reference. Cf. also K. Reinhardt, Poseidonios (Munich, 1921), 212
14. A different interpretation of the passage in J. Wisse, Ethos and Pathos from Aristotle to Cicero (Amsterdam, 1989), 171-2
15. Philo: H. von Arnim, Dion von Prusa (Berlin, 1898), 4-114
16. Antiochus: W. Kroll, 'Studien über Ciceros Schrift de oratore', RhM 58 (1903), 552-97
17. Cicero: A. D. Leeman, H. Pinkster and J. Wisse, De oratore libri III, vol. 4 (Heidelberg, 1996), 87-101
18. Cf. G. Patzig, 'Cicero als Philosoph, am Beispiel der Schrift De finibus', Gymnasium 86 (1979), 304-22
19. Cf. A. E. Douglas, 'A Ciceronian contribution to rhetorical theory', Eranos 55 (1957), 18-26
20. M. Winterbottom, 'Cicero and the middle style', in J. Diggle, J. B. Hall, and H. D. Jocelyn (edd.), Studies in Latin Literature and its Tradition in Honour of C. O. Brink, PCPS Suppl. 15 (Cambridge, 1989), 125-31
21. D. M. Schenkeveld, 'Philosophical prose', in S. E. Porter (ed.), Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period 330 B.C.-A.D. 400 (Leiden/New York/ Cologne, 1997), 195-264 with further literature (197, n. 4). A detailed reconstruction of the quarrel in Brittain (n. 1), 279-92
22. Cf. e.g. P. Couissin, "The stoicism of the New Academy', in M. Burnyeat (ed.), The Sceptical Tradition (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, 1983), 31-63
23. and G. Striker, 'On the difference between the Pyrrhonists and the Academics', in G. Striker, Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics (Cambridge, 1996), 135-49
24. The fragments are collected in D. Matthes, Hermagorae Temnitae Testimonia et Fragmenta (Leipzig, 1962)
25. See also J. Stroux, 'Summum ius summa iniuria - Ein Kapitel aus der Geschichte der interpretatio iuris', in J. Stroux, Römische Rechtswissenschaft und Rhetorik (Potsdam, 1949), 7-66
26. D. Matthes, 'Hermagoras von Temnos 1904-1955', Lustrum 3 (1958), 58-214, 262-78
27. K. Barwick, Augustins Schrift De rhetorica und Hermagoras von Temnos', Philologus 105 (1961), 97-110
28. L. Calboli Montefusco, La dottrina degli Status nella retorica greca e romana (Bologna, 1984)
29. D. A. Russell, Greek Declamation (Cambridge, 1983), 40-73
30. G. A. Kennedy, A New History of Classical Rhetoric (Princeton, 1994), 97-101
31. M. Heath, 'The substructure of theory from Hermagoras to Hermogenes', CQ 44 (1994), 114-29
32. See also M. Heath, Hermogenes on Issues (Oxford, 1995). That the tradition links theory very firmly to Hermagoras does not imply that he did not himself rely on works of predecessors
33. Cic. Inv. 1.34-43, on which passage see M. C. Leff, 'The topics of argumentative invention in Latin rhetorical theory from Cicero to Boethius', Rhetorica 1 (1983), 23-44
34. W. Kroll, 'Rhetorik', RE Suppl. 7 (1940), 1040-1138, at 1096
35. The was a preliminary exercise, a M. L. Clarke, 'The thesis in Roman rhetorical schools of the Republic', CQ 45 (1951), 159-66
36. H. Throm, Die Thesis (Paderborn, 1932). Although the extant texts of come from the Imperial era, it is very likely that the type of exercise is Hellenistic
37. related passages are collected in E. G. Sihler, AJPh 23 (1902), 283-94
38. On, for instance, the in utramque partem - structure of the de Div. see M. Schofield, 'Cicero for and against divination', JRS 76 (1986), 47-65
39. The way in which Cicero introduces the first disputatio in the Tusculans seems not to suggest that the rhetorical slant was imposed by him on an originally philosophical method. Cf. also A. E. Douglas, 'Form and Content in the Tusculan Disputations', in: Powell (n. 3), 197-218
40. On in utramque partem dicere as a rhetorical way of arguing in Cicero, see also A. A. Long, 'Cicero's Plato and Aristotle', in Powell (n. 3), 37-62, in particular 52-8; Görier (n. 1), 930
41. On the division in its context, see also K. Barwick, 'Das rednerische Bildungsideal Ciceros', Abhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, philologisch-historische Klasse 54.3 (Berlin, 1963), at 51-8
42. A. Dihle ('Poseidonius' system of moral philosophy', JHS 93 [1973], 50-7) argues that the was introduced by Posidonius. Yet Aristo of Chios is reported to have found the useless in the third century B.C. (S. E. Adv. Math. 7.12). The variation in terminology does not seem significant
43. On this letter see also P. A. Brunt, 'Cicero's officium in the civil war', JRS 76 (1986), 12-32, at 13
44. M. Griffin, 'Philosophy, politics and politicians at Rome', in J. Barnes and W. Griffin (edd.), Philosophia Togata (Oxford, 1989), 1-37, at 34
45. G. O. Hutchinson, Cicero's Correspondence (Oxford, 1998), 148
46. in the Topica where Cicero is addressing a jurist, he gives an alternative translation which resembles a set-phrase of legal formulae (cf. H. Krüger, 'Die Worte "qua de re agitur" und (res) "qua de agitur" in den Prozessformeln', ZRG 29 [1908], 378-89). But id de quo agitur is in itself more neutral than the usual translations of which have the forensic ring of school-rhetoric. This might have influenced Cicero's choice of expression
47. On this aspect of the Rlietoric the standard work is still F. Solmsen, Die Entwicklung der aristotelischen Logik und Rhetorik (Berlin, 1929)
48. The partial structural parallelism of the methods of sceptical Academics and Peripatetics in the Hellenistic era is manifest also in another (related) area. It is well known that to contrast opposing views is one of the principles according to which the tenets of philosophers in the doxographical tradition are organized. The sources show a shift of attitude in the use of this method similar to that which I am presuming for the use of the Cf. J. Mansfeld, 'Doxography and dialectic', ANRW 2.36.4 (1990), 3056-229, at 3063: 'The Skeptical mode of presentation, later called diaphonia (disagreement), is not much more than a diaeresis (from a purely formal point of view, it of course still is) employed to a different purpose. The diairetic construction of a status quaestionis, or listing of such views as were available and even, sometimes, theoretically possible, could be used to help one, in a preliminary way, to discover the truth; this is how Aristotle and Theophrastus used it. It could also be used to produce a stalemate. The disagreement(s) could be allowed to remain as they were, and suspension of judgement could be recommended. This is how the Academics used it. One may say that part of the history of ancient doxography is contained in the switch from a Peripatetic dialectical dihairesis, with the emphasis on finding one's way towards the truth, to an Academic dihairesis stated in the shape of a diaphonia in order to preclude, or indefinitely to postpone, a decision.
49. M. Wallies, De fontibus Ciceronis Topicorum (Halle, 1878); Kroll (n. 5)
50. J. Dillon, The Middle Platonists (London, 1977), 102-4
51. Proposals as to the further development of the topical doctrine in J. van Ophuijsen, 'Where have the Topics gone?', in W W. Fortenbaugh and D. Mirhardy (edd.), Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle (New Brunswick/London, 1994), 131-73
52. See J. Brunschwig (ed.), Aristote - Topiques I-IV (Paris, 1967), xxxviii
53. Cf. A. A. Long and D. N. Sedley (edd.), The Hellenistic Philosophers, vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1987), 188, where Topica §§ 6-7 is given as 31F
54. Cf. J. S. Reid, M. Tulli Ciceronis Academica (London, 1885), at 139-40 on Acad. 1.32 for Cicero's use of disserere (as opposed to dicere) to refer to