Handout #9

PARTS OF A RHETORICAL SPEECH

Aristotle, Rhetoric

Quintilian, Instituto oratoria, bks. 4-5.

Cicero, De inventione, De partitione oratoria.

Rhetorica ad Herennium

1. Exordium, Prooi5mion (Proem) (Quintilian 4.1-3)

            The exordium functions to obtain the attention and goodwill of audience (Cicero, De Partitione oratoria §28), and to introduce the causa (issue) (Rhetorica ad Herennium). It is to be stated concisely. According to Aristotle (Rhet. 3.13.3) the exordium is used in deliberative rhetoric only when there is a conflict of opinions. Quintilian (3.8.6) suggests that the exordium can be dispensed with in deliberative rhetoric, since the audience is already well disposed to the speaker.

            In epideictic rhetoric the exordium can be loosely organized and free flowing but is usally based on the topoi of praise and blame. “In epideictic exordia one must make the hearer believe that he shares the praise, either himself or his family or his pursuits, or at any rate in some way or another” (Aristotle, Rhet. 3.14.11).

In forensic rhetoric the exordium provides a sample of the subject.

2. Narratio, dih/ghsiv (statement of the facts)

            The narratio provides the background to the speech (Cicero, De Partione oratoria §32). The narratio states the reason for the complaint (in forensic rhetoric) and lists briefly the events leading to the complaint. It will also mention other events relevant to the proofs that follow. Fictitious statements may be used to stir the emotions of the judged (4.2.19), and it may begin with reference to an individual, either to be praised or criticized (4.2.129).

3. Propositio/partitio (the proposition to be established)

            This provides the transition to the ‘proof’ and consists of a summary of the narratio and an indication of the issue(s) to be addressed in the probatio. It is to be stated briefly and unemotionally (Cicero, De inventione 1.22-26; Quintilian 4.5.26-28).

4. Probatio, confirmatio, pi/stiv (proof)

            This section is normally divided into a series of kephalaia, headings.

The proof consists of a series of arguments in defence of the proposition. These include arguments from the opposite, examples, citations of authoritative texts, analogies, and comparisons.

            This may also include a refutatio (rebuttal of opposing views). Various strategies are useful here: contradicting allegations that are palpably false; arguments against specific charges; lumping together opposing views and attacking them en masse. Here commonplaces, witticisms, and analogies may be employed effectively.

5. Peroratio, exhortatio, e0pi/logov (concluding appeal, conclusion)

            Here the orator summarizes the case and appeals to the judges. It functions to dispose the reader favorably, to amplify or depreciate, and to excite the emotions of the audience.

Possible Division of 1 Corinthians 1¾4

[1:1-3            Epistolary Address]

1:4-10            Exordium, Prooi5mion

            Paul frames the exordium by picking up the vocabulary of his audience (“being made wealthy,” “word [reason]”, “gnosis [knowledge],” “[spiritual] gifts”) and using it in his own way.

1:11-17           Narratio,dih/ghsiv

            Paul outlines the problem (divisions, centred around various preachers and their baptizing activities) and how he has learned of the problem.

1:18-19            Propositio

            The main thesis to be defended: “For the ‘word of the Cross’ is insanity to those are perishing but to those of us who are saved it is the power of God, for it is written ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the sages and I will reject the understanding of the wise’ [Isa 29:14].”

1:20¾3:13       Probatio, confirmatio, pi/stiv  (Proofs)

1:20-25 First Proof

   Human wisdom is ineffectual in securing a relationship with God, and God’s wisdom appears as foolishness

1:26-31 Second Proof

   The example of the Corinthians themselves

2:1-5 Third Proof

   Paul’s own example

2:6¾3:9 Fourth Proof

   The nature of genuine (heavenly) wisdom, and who can receive it

   Digression: 2:14¾3:10: Proof that the Corinthian ‘wise’ are in fact sarkikoi (fleshly, not spiritual).

3:10-17 Fifth Proof

   Analogy of the architect.

3:18¾4:23      Peroratio, exhortatio,e0pi/logov (conclusion)

            Exortations not to boast in (human) wisdom, and an emotional appeal using a sygkrisis (comparison) of the Corinthians’ wealth, advantages and (so-called) ‘wisdom’ and Paul’s own status.

Useful Readings on Rhetoric

Anderson, R. Dean. Glossary of Greek Rhetorical Terms. Biblical Exegesis & Theology 24. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2000.

Kennedy, George A. New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1984. An introduction to rhetoric and rhetorical analysis of selected New Testament texts.

Lausberg, Heinrich. Handbook of Literary Rhetoric: A Foundation for Literary Study. Leiden, New York and Köln: E.J. Brill, 1998. A comprehensive analysis of classical rhetoric.

Mack, Burton L. Rhetoric and the New Testament. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990. An excellent introduction to rhetorical divisions, tropes, and forms, illustrated with reference to various New Testament texts.