Author: Fortenbaugh, William W.
Title: Cicero’s knowledge of the rhetorical treatises of Aristotle and Theophrastus
Review/Collection: in: Cicero's knowledge of the Peripatos / ed. by Fortenbaugh William W.& Steinmetz Peter, VIII, 281; Rutgers Univ. stud. in classical humanities ; 4
Place edition: New Brunswick & N.J
Editor: Transaction Publ
Year edition: 1989
Pages: 39-60
Keywords: Philosophie - Filosofia - Philosophy, Sources - Fonti - Sources
Description: This chapter discusses whether the prose rhythm contained in the Omtor exhibits a significant improvement in Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotelian and Theophrastean treatises. The De oratore was written in 55 B.C., as much as thirty-five years after the De inventione. It is a dialogue, not a treatise. It is longer, far more carefully written and generally regarded as Cicero’s major contribution to rhetorical studies. Yet in regard to Aristotle and Theophrastus, Cicero does not seem to have advanced much beyond handbook knowledge. Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotle’s Collection of Arts is more problematic. Antonius is made to say that he had read the book of Aristotle in which the latter set forth the arts of earlier rhetoricians. The Attic-Asian controversy was, then, an occasion for rethinking the origins of prose rhythm and for offering a more accurate account which gave special recognition to Thrasymachus and Gorgias.[Author]
Author initials: Fortenbaugh 1989
Title: Cicero’s knowledge of the rhetorical treatises of Aristotle and Theophrastus
Review/Collection: in: Cicero's knowledge of the Peripatos / ed. by Fortenbaugh William W.& Steinmetz Peter, VIII, 281; Rutgers Univ. stud. in classical humanities ; 4
Place edition: New Brunswick & N.J
Editor: Transaction Publ
Year edition: 1989
Pages: 39-60
Keywords: Philosophie - Filosofia - Philosophy, Sources - Fonti - Sources
Description: This chapter discusses whether the prose rhythm contained in the Omtor exhibits a significant improvement in Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotelian and Theophrastean treatises. The De oratore was written in 55 B.C., as much as thirty-five years after the De inventione. It is a dialogue, not a treatise. It is longer, far more carefully written and generally regarded as Cicero’s major contribution to rhetorical studies. Yet in regard to Aristotle and Theophrastus, Cicero does not seem to have advanced much beyond handbook knowledge. Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotle’s Collection of Arts is more problematic. Antonius is made to say that he had read the book of Aristotle in which the latter set forth the arts of earlier rhetoricians. The Attic-Asian controversy was, then, an occasion for rethinking the origins of prose rhythm and for offering a more accurate account which gave special recognition to Thrasymachus and Gorgias.[Author]
Author initials: Fortenbaugh 1989
