On the Reception of Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Byzantium

• Authors: Helena Cichocka

Title variants

EN

On the Reception of Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Byzantium

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

The paper deals with the reception of Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric (Rhet. I 1355b26–27) in several Byzantine commentators of Hermogenes’ and Aphthonius’ treatises. A justification of critical interpretation of this definition is to be found in the commentaries of Troilus and Athanasius (4th/5th century) as well as Sopatros (6th century) and Doxapatres (11th century), Maximus Planudes (13th/14th century) and several anonymous commentators. The Byzantine tradition has found Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric to be all too theoretical and insufficiently connected to practical activity, which Byzantium identified with political life.

EN

The paper deals with the reception of Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric(Rhet. I 1355b26–27) in several Byzantine commentators of Hermogenes’and Aphthonius’ treatises. A justification of critical interpretationof this definition is to be found in the commentaries of Troilus and Athanasius(4th/5th century) as well as Sopatros (6th century) and Doxapatres(11th century), Maximus Planudes (13th/14th century) and several anonymouscommentators. The Byzantine tradition has found Aristotle’s definitionof rhetoric to be all too theoretical and insufficiently connected topractical activity, which Byzantium identified with political life.

Keywords

PL

Aristotle; rhetoric; Troilus; Athanasius; Sopatros; Doxapatres; Maximus Planudes

EN

Aristotle; rhetoric; Troilus; Athanasius; Sopatros; Doxapatres; Maximus; Planudes; Aristotle; rhetoric; Troilus; Athanasius; Sopatros; Doxapatres; Maximus; Planudes

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Peitho. Examina Antiqua
• Year: 2012
• Volume: 3
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 231-238

Dates

published

2012-02-11

Contributors

author

Helena Cichocka

References

• Arystoteles, 1988, Retoryka. Poetyka, przełożył, wstępem i komentarzem opatrzył H. Podbielski, Warszawa.
• Cichocka, H., 1990, „Recepcja traktatu Hermogenesa „De ideis” w renesansie (zagadnienia wybrane)”, Eos 78, s. 225–236.
• Cichocka, H., 1994, Teoria retoryki bizantyńskiej, Warszawa.
• Cichocka, H., 1995, „Bizantyńska definicja retoryki a jej klasyczne wzorce”, Meander 11–12, s. 535–547.
• Cichocka, H., 2004, Mimesis i retoryka w traktatach Dionizjusza z Halikarnasu a tradycja bizantyńska, Warszawa.
• Conley, Th. M., 1990, “Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Byzantium”, Rhetorica 8, s. 29–44.
• Crem, T. M., 1956, “The Definition of Rhetoric according to Aristotle”, LThPh 12, pp. 233–250.
• Oehler, K., 1964, „Aristoteles in Byzanz”, GRBS 5, s. 133–146 (reprint w: K. Oehler, Antike Philosophie und byzantinisches Mittelalter, München 1969, s. 272–286).
• Rabe, H. (ed.), 1931, Prolegomenon Sylloge, Lipsiae.
• Rabe, H. (ed.), 1975, Hermogenes, Opera, Stuttgardiae.
• Rutheford, I., 1992, «Inverting the Canon: Hermogenes on Literature», HSCP 94, s. 355–378.
• Schouler, B., 1995, „La définition de la rhétorique dans l’enseignement byzantin”, Byzantion 65, s. 137–175.
• Walz, Ch. (ed.), 1833, Rhetores Graeci, vol. V, Stuttgardiae.
• Walz, Ch. (ed.), 1834a, Rhetores Graeci, vol. III, Stuttgardiae.
• Walz, Ch. (ed.), 1934b, Rhetores Graeci, vol. VI, Stuttgardiae.
• Westerink, L. G. (ed.), Olympiodorus, In Platonis Gorgiam Commentaria, Leipzig.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/pea.2012.1.11