Teaching rhetoric: What medieval rhetoric can offer contemporary rhetorical pedagogy

Брой 8 Shane Crombie LCC International University, Klaipeda, Lithuania, e-mail: scrombie@lcc.lt

Abstract

This essay draws comparisons between the contemporary teaching of rhetoric to that of the medieval period in Western Europe. Being both pragmatic and prescriptive, medieval rhetorical teachers adapted the best practices of earlier periods to address the circumstances of the day. Examining the rhetorical context of time, and assessing the challenges to rhetoric in a period of decentralization and societal fragmentation, it explores how the new Christian culture used the art for its own purposes. Looking at the three arts of medieval rhetoric there is an appreciation for the flexibility and adaptability of rhetoric to prevailing circumstances. The links between 21^st-century rhetoric and the vast expanse of medieval times are many offering useful insight.

Key Words: Medieval rhetoric, Contemporary rhetoric, Pedagogy

Introduction

 Having taught undergraduate rhetoric, and rhetorical criticism, for the last number of years, it has become clear to me that we have entered a new rhetorical era. The sheer superabundance of written and audiovisual texts to which students are constantly exposed has not been supported by an understanding of, and appreciation for, their persuasiveness, planned or otherwise. The digital reality of our time means anyone can have access to fathomless material.

According to Biddle, the sheer volume of information available to us today reveals less than we hope. Rather, it heralds a new Dark Age and a world of ever-increasing incomprehension[1]. His assertation that the technological revolution has brought us to the cusp of a New Dark Age may be hyperbolic, though on closer reflection it is possible to draw some parallels to what happened in post-5th century Europe and today. There has been a cultural and ideological fracturing with no common language. Centers of learning have become decentralized and anyone who has access to an audience can set themselves up as self-appointed teachers. Today we use the title ‘influencer’ with the reverence once reserved for ‘magister’.

Many of these texts are ephemeral. Rhetorical appreciation for a TicTok video, for example, is scant, as soon as it is consumed it is gone with “poor returns on overwhelming flows of information”[2]. As a result it has become increasingly difficult to teach this subject in a way that students can put into practice what they are taught in class. Is it even possible to apply rhetoric in a formal and traditional sense where meaning is objective, and ethics are situational? The answer to this is a qualified yes. Rhetoric must, and will, continue to play a vital part in a rounded and purposeful education, provided it does what it has always done – pragmatically responding to the circumstances it finds itself in.

As a universal tool for expression, composition, and communication the Western rhetorical tradition has been pivotal in the training of young minds since before Plato, changing in response to the requirements of the era.[3] “Viewed in its historical perspective, the art of rhetoric could be likened to the chameleon: changing its appearance in accordance with the tides of social and intellectual circumstance.”[4] The rhetorical needs of Ancient Athens and classical Rome were not the needs of Renaissance Florence. Likewise, that which was required from rhetoric in the scholastic period differs incomparably from the current era. The chameleonic evolution of rhetoric has also been reflected in how the art has been viewed as an academic pursuit, and consequently on how it is taught. If this is the case the rhetoric chameleon may be forced to change again. This time instead of finding a new set of colours, is it not to our advantage to look back in time and see what preexisting shades exist that may be to our benefit? Even if we are not on the verge of a new Dark Age I propose that a period worth looking for the purposes of reinvention at is the vast and complex epoch between the end of classicalism and the Renaissance. The medieval period can teach us valuable lessons in both the teaching and the use of rhetoric today.

The Rhetorical Context of the Middle Ages  

According to Clarke, medieval rhetoric does not seem to offer much hope. With the disappearance of classical education “there remained only rhetoric as the art of words, a laboured and feeble art by now but faintly preserving in an age that cared little for such things, something of the old Greek love of beauty.”[5]  While it is true that the heights of Greek and Latin rhetoric declined, the influence of the ars rhetorica were far from extinguished.

Education systems in the late 5^th century were influenced by what went before.  There were four main schools of rhetorical thought that dominated the period. The first is Hellenic. Looking to Aristotle, for example, works such as The Rhetoric, Sophistical Refutations and The Topics were significant treatises that were part of rhetorical training, both of which will be found in university core reading lists centuries later. These texts, however, were primarily philosophical and ethical.[6] While there is of course material that deals with oration and speech in these texts, they were not used to teach how rhetoric was to be used, with the goal of persuasion, but were used to form character and understanding. Along with other Greek philosophers, they were important reference points in the rhetorical tradition.

The second school, and one that will have lasting influence, is that of the Ciceronian tradition. Cicero became a towering figure in the emergent Latin rhetoric. While there are many texts attributed to him, his De Investigationes and De Oratorewere ranked very highly. His significance was such that it inspired the other great pseudo-Ciceronian rhetorical text, Rhetorica ad Herennium. Quintilian who was writing a hundred years after Cicero’s death is qualified as being in the same tradition. Reading the Insitiutio Oratoria, the categories and loci of Cicero are very much in evidence. Cicero will have a direct bearing on some of the other texts discussed later.

The third school, that of grammar, dominated Roman education and would continue to play a significant role well after the fall of the Western Empire. Using the great works of Donatus, the Ars Major, and the Priscian’s earlier Ars Grammatica, great attention was given to the use of language. Latin, which in an earlier time was rejected as vulgar and coarse in favor of Greek, had evolved to such an extent that its precision and subtlety were ideal for detailed writing and conversation. Latin, of course, was to remain the language of learning for many centuries to come. In matters of theology, for example, where precise language is necessary, it was an indispensable part of scholarship and learning. Latin however would wane, and as vernacular languages developed, they too would be refined and augmented as had previously happened to the Roman tongue.

The fourth school is the Second Sophistic. This school focused on the practical power of rhetoric rather than the philosophical dimensions associated with Aristotle and Plato. In this school the power of language was learned and practiced. There were four major models employed in the exercise of rhetoric – declamatio, suasoria, controversia and progymnasmata. Followers of the movement of the second sophistic learned how to give fictitious speeches (declamation), political discourse (suasoria), and legal argument (controversia), all of which were aimed at persuasion rather than substance. Progymnasmata, for example, gave attention to detail, equipping students to look in detail and communicate with accuracy. Progymnasmata was a set of rudimentary exercises designed to prepare students of rhetoric for the creation and performance of orations.[7] Using myths, narratives, comparison, and fables and anecdotes, rhetorical students would master linguistic precision.[8] The mastery of language and its efficiency can be seen in one of the notable graduates of this school; St. Augustine. His association would have both negative and positive effects on the course of rhetorical development, as will be elaborated subsequently. These four schools are the foundations from which rhetoric in the Medieval period drew from. As period of change and development may serve as a paradigm for how rhetoric can be used.

The Challenge to Rhetoric

While these well-established traditions were part and parcel of rhetoric up until the middle of the fifth century, the ensuing period will have a direct impact on rhetorical appreciation, use and training. To appreciate this, three significant factors need to be considered: the decline of Roman civilization in the West, the dominance of the Christian Church, and the raw materials available for the study of rhetoric. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire in the West is long and complex and does not need to be treated here in detail. Assuming it as a historical fact, the decline of order and structure resulted in a decentralization of civil power and authority. The same was the case for education. This does not mean there was no education; far from it. According to James Murphy there were grammarians and logicians in every town.[9] The fact remains that with the decline of civil structure, priorities changed. This is most visible in the field of religion. Christendom slowly replaced imperium. From the Council of Nicaea, and the reforms of Pope St. Gregory the Great in roughly the same period, the organization of the Church became structured and centralized. In the West Latin remained the language of the Church, and initially this was mirrored in what existed of the secular field, though over time the Romance and Germanic languages would proliferate. The dominance of the Christian Church would have a direct impact on rhetoric. There was a rejection of what was considered pagan. The writers of Greece and Rome were firmly in this category. There was a great questioning of venerable texts, which to this point had been held in the highest regard. On a practical level, there was also another major threat to previous educational traditions.

With the advance of the non-Roman tribes, much was lost in terms of documents and sources. The burning of the great library of Alexandria is the most famous example of many such events of the period. In the following centuries, only incomplete and fragmentary elements remain. Aristotle is practically lost and for the most part, scholars relied on incompletes (works of St. Isadore of Seville, for example) and sentences, fragments of authors bundled together. However, the rhetorical tradition would survive thanks to a handful of scholars, the most noteworthy being St. Augustine of Hippo.[10]

St. Augustine is the bridge between the classical world and the newly emerging reality. As a trained rhetorician, the former professor of rhetoric in Milan, struggled with this question: how can the pagan and the Christian engage? In his City of God, we can see that he believes that the Church takes the place of civil and earthly power. In so far as this is true there is only the need to rely on the grace of God. The City of God is imperfectly manifest on earth, there is the need to engage with things of earth. In his time, he had to contend with not only spreading the Christian faith, but he also had to contend with internal strife and schism. Donatism, for example, was literally in his own parish. He stands as the prime advocate of the use of rhetoric.

His reappraisal of rhetoric is influenced by Plato’s Phaedrus. Rhetoric had a higher motivation than persuasion; it was about truth and love, and to that extent it was to be used, to teach and defend the Christian Gospel.  Here he echoes the words of Rabanus Maurus: “use everything for our good.” [11] St. Augustine’s De Doctrina Christiana is the highest example of this. His idea that the knowing of and the explaining of are different things, and his use of signs – to the point of view of the author – are early seeds of semiotics.

As demonstrated the challenge to rhetoric became its opportunity. There is a pragmatism at play; if it works, let it be used. Terms and concepts were redesigned to fit the given purpose. Virtue, for example, is equated with the Ciceronian concept of sapientia as found in De Inventione, shifting Cicero’s social and political aims to a Neoplatonic, and ultimately Christian, theological understanding.[12]

Pragmatic and Prescriptive

Two noticeable aspects of Medieval European Rhetoric are prescriptivity and pragmaticism. The rhetorical experience of the period is prescriptive in so far as its teaching and subsequent use were dominated by clear ideas on how rhetoric is to be used. There exists a substantial record of texts that show how and why rhetoric should be used, giving both students and teachers hard data to work from. As the ars rhetorica (the rhetorical arts) were part of the civil, ecclesiastical and secular life, the surviving manuals and instructions give us a unique insight into the social structure of the time. Students were being trained for the jobs market that existed.

In the post-classical new world not everything from previous times was palatable to tastes of nascent Christendom.  Western European Medieval rhetoric is essentially a rebrand. There was a pragmatic approach to how rhetoric was viewed and utilized. The new generation of rhetoricians chose the best of previous traditions, selectively using what was of most benefit to their purposes. St. Augustine’s pragmatism is found repeatedly in medieval rhetoric. Taking the example of St. Jerome’s teacher Victorianus, Clarke notes that in his use of rhetoric, “he makes no attempt whatsoever to work in the full apparatus of Greek rhetorical terminology. He does not seek to further the content of the Ciceronian civilizing thesis, but only to demonstrate the logical and rhetorical principles that lie behind the framework of Cicero’s text.”[13] Even though the writings of the pagans were now suspect, there was an appreciation for what could be gleaned from the ashes of classicalism.

As a significant element of the teaching of the time, current educational practice itself pragmatically can benefit from the experience of the period. An essential aspect of rhetoric teaching is its adaptability to the social conditions of the time.  “The burden of ‘persuasion and eloquence’ has moved from the law-court or assembly-hall, to the treatise, the written apology or argument, and the literary essay. This application of the rules of the art to the textbook of the art (instead of to that which the art effects, a speech or legal defence), this transfer of the rules of rhetoric to the written rather than the spoken word, is a landmark in the evolution of the medieval attitude to classical rhetoric.”[14]

The Three Arts

With St. Augustine and other such scholars’ blessing rhetoric was given a reprieve. A selective reading of what was available, of classical texts was permitted and encouraged. Cicero was read, as were the grammarians. As time developed and as civic life reorganized, the need for persuasive communication emerged as a priority. This is most clearly seen in what can be described as the “Three Arts” –– letter writing (ars dictaminis), poetry (ars poeticae), and preaching (ars praedicandi). This section will look at each in turn and will focus on a text related to each, as collected by James A. Murphy.[15] One of the most significant aspects is their prescriptive nature – the authors are giving their readers a manual for best practices. The arts have three things in common. All focus on a fixed subject, there is a selective use of the rhetorical tradition and a prescriptive use of a particular model.

Letter writing was used in civil and ecclesiastical affairs. It was important for the sender to communicate effectively, so the desired result would be obtained. The earliest manual associated with this art is attributed to Alberic of Montecasino – a monk of that monastery. He focuses on Cicero and in his text, the hallmarks of Ciceronian arrangement are apparent. The author stresses the form, and following the form correctly, he argues, will bring the best results.  The most famous manual of the art however is the Rationes Dictandi. It was written around the year 1083, by an anonymous author in Bologna, Italy. The author focuses on the formal parts of the letter, which already seem to have been fixed – salutation, introduction, narration, petition and conclusion. Many parts are subdivided. He gives, however, the most focus to the salutation, giving numerous examples of how to greet the person being addressed. This gives us a remarkable insight into the society of the time. While letters were for many purposes it is clear that they were persuasive tools with their own rules and expectations.

The poetry of the period shifts from the strict use of grammar and syntax to something else. The New Poetry (1208-13) of Geoffrey of Vinsauf, shows a shift toward narrative. The storytelling power of the poem becomes prevalent. In this text, the author is moving away from the prescriptions of the Horace to a freer use of language. There is still the emphasis on correct writing, however the shift of emphasis is to the power of narration. Chaucer even quotes Vinsauf, and it seems that the Canterbury Tales were influenced by the new poetry.

The final of the three arts is preaching. The ars praedicandi was of great significance on the life of medieval Europe. It is interesting that for the first 1200 years of church history, there is no record of teaching manuals on the art of preaching. It was until this point a very reserved art – only bishops and specially nominated clergy could preach. About the year 1230 this changed. In the University of Paris, a new style of preaching emerged – the thematic or the ‘university sermon.’ Previously to this new groups appeared in the Church – the mendicant orders of friars (the Dominicans and the Franciscans) whose mission was preaching. There was a renewed focus on preaching and preaching best practices.

In 1322 the first such manual was published called The Form of Preaching written by the Englishman Robert of Basevorn. This book castigates preachers who try to do this communication art without knowing the form preaching should take. Unlike St. Augustine, he tells his readers how to actually preach. Using many of Cicero’s ideas he selectively gives a guide on how to effectively reach the heart of the listener. He advises shock and awe by telling stories and the consequences of actions. Most importantly, he focuses on the theme of the bible verses that are being read in church. For Robert, preaching is teaching, and while it may be necessary to scare, it is most important to delight – which is one of the key purposes of classical rhetoric.

Applying this to the Digital Age

At first glance, we cannot draw immediate parallels with letters, the new poetry and preaching to the current day rhetorical experience. There is no evidence that we are in the last days of the Western cultural empire, though such thoughts are sometimes proffered. Further, I do not propose a deus ex machina type application of medieval rhetoric to today’s situation. There has, however, been a shift. The pandemic experience has advanced an already rapid digitalization of communication and interaction. The works of McLuhan, Ong and Postman framing the concept of media ecology have long since observed that such paradigm shifts in society impact the way we communicate. When looking at media ecology the means of communication gets the most attention, with scant or incidental consideration of what Herrick describes as the planned and purposeful role of rhetoric.[16]

This has been nowhere more visible than in the classroom. Taking this shift into account, the incorporation of artificial intelligence in our communication systems, the superabundance of texts and the fragmentation of meaning, it seems as if the colours of rhetoric are changing again. There may be a temptation to think that we are entering into Huxley’s Brave New World but a closer consideration of other major shifts in communication and rhetoric will indicate that the situation that we are experiencing at the 21st century is not too dissimilar to other periods in time. From this, we can observe three things.

Firstly, great significance is given to form. Using the categories of Cicero and other classical rhetoricians, medieval rhetoric used what was available in a very systematic way. The school system laid out progressive steps that acted as building blocks, resulting in a student being capable of the use of language and the interpretation of texts. While education has moved from rote learning, there is an advantage to knowing tried and tested means of learning. Before a student graduated as a letter writer, poet or preacher, they had a firm foundation in how language was expected to work, knowing the recognizable features and patterns. This provided a good command of language and the proper application thereof.

Secondly, the appreciation of form leads to good praxis. As mentioned above, Robert of Basevorn castigated preachers not because of their lack of information but their lack of knowledge of the art of preaching. The how is as important as the what. While anyone with a computer connection to the internet can be a publisher, communicator and influencer, few have training, or appreciation, for best professional practices. Medieval rhetoric laboured the how, giving great emphasis on practical training, not just the ability to ad lib.

Thirdly, the pragmatic appropriation and application of previous best practices can save us time coming up with brand-new strategies. Not everything is applicable, but a discerning selective use of what has been proven to work can help form a generation of communicators that are not just reacting to texts but understanding them, interpreting and judging them appropriately. After all, fundamentals do not change profoundly – as Karr famously quipped plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!

Conclusion.

Medieval rhetoric took the best of what was available, and applied it to the communication needs of the day.  Moving from the rich traditions of classicalism to the purposefulness of Augustinian Christianity, rhetoric has been used to communicate, to convince and create. Marked by pragmatism and prescription the rhetoricians of the medieval world preserved the critical study of eloquence and persuasive communication.

This paper is not proposing that medieval rhetoric in and of itself is the answer to the pedagogical issues that face us. The differences that exist between the world of the 5th to 14th centuries and the current era are of course very significant. What we can say, however, is that the lessons of the past have esteemed value. Pragmatism is one such value. Taking the best of what had gone before and using it in specific circumstances addressed very adequately rhetorical needs. Take for example the progymnasmata. As part of a larger curriculum, these exercises trained students to be observant and clear in their communication. As far as the ‘language’ of social media is concerned, and taking into account the fact that the generation of the currently undergraduate students has grown up with this as their lingua franca, precise and accurate use of language is more necessary than ever. Pragmatically selecting things that have really worked in the past, that have been tried and tested, and which have lasted for centuries, there is validity in suggesting these practices can be of use today.

Examining the three arts that are described in this paper: letter writing, poetry, and preaching, we can see that they have a number of things in common: a fixed subject, a selective use of the rhetorical tradition, and a prescriptive use of a particular model. Looking at the documentation that survives from the era it is apparent that prescriptivity can be of benefit in teaching the fundamentals of rhetoric. The authors of the works cited were clear that those who wish to excel in these particular arts needed to follow certain patterns and meet certain standards. In the digital age, there are ubiquitous opportunities to communicate, but limited examples of quality communication. Apply the example of letter writing, for example. In the medieval period there existed definite formulas for writing letters, from the salutation to the conclusion. The letter practitioners of Monte Casino and Bologna left very definite instructions for best practices associated with dictation. Since letters were a primary method of communication the form was considered as important as the content. If applied to social media, we can observe that form plays a significant role. Good linguistic skills are secondary to content and meaning.

If one were to post online content that could be considered disagreeable the social consequences can be significant. There is considerable merit to the argument that those who are engaged in university studies would greatly benefit from training in these fields – and there is much to draw from.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Biddle, J. (2023) New Dark Age: Technology and the End of the Future. 2^nd London: Verso.
2. Duchan, J. (2023) In: A History of Speech-Language Pathology: Middle Ages: 400 – 1500 AD.Accessible at:  https://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~duchan/new_history/middle_ages/progymnasmata.html [Retrieved Jan 27, 2023].
3. Herrick, J.A. (2017) The History and Theory of Rhetoric. An Introduction. Boston: Pearson.
4. Horner, W.B. and Leff, M. (1998) Rhetoric and Pedagogy: Its History, Philosophy, and Practice: Essays in Honor of James J. Murphy. London: Routledge.
5. Kennedy, G.A. (2011.) A New History of Classical Rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
6. Kennedy, G.A. (2003) Progymnasmata: Greek textbooks of prose composition and rhetoric – Trans Malcom Heath. Accessible at: https://web-s-ebscohost-com.libproxy.lcc.lt/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/ZTAwMHh3d19fNDk4MzQ2X19BTg2?sid=a097306a-fca2-4e31-a056-94f90e33c8b8@redis&vid=5&format=EB&rid=9 [Retrieved Jan 26, 2024].
7. Murphy, J. A. (1971) The Three Medieval Rhetorical Arts. Berkley: University of California Press.
8. Ward, J. O.(2019) Classical Rhetoric in the Middle Ages : The Medieval Rhetors and Their Art 400–1300, with Manuscript Survey to 1500 CE. International Studies in the History of Rhetoric. Leiden: Brill.
9. Schreiner, C. S. (2020). New Dark Age: Technology and the End of the Future. Pacific Asia Inquiry, 11(1): 206–212.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

About the author

 

Shane Crombie is an Associate Professor of Communications at LCC International University, Klaipeda, Lithuania. He holds a MA from the University of Leicester, UK and a D. Min in Homiletics from the Aquinas Institute of Theology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. His research fields include preaching, pandemic and post-covid communication, rhetoric, and university pedagogy.

[1] Biddle, J. 2018: 21. [2] Ibid., 214. [3] Ward, J. O. 2019: 64. [4]Ibid., 70. [5] Clarke, A., 1953: 156-7. [6] Herrick, J., 2017: 116. [7] Duchan. J., 2023. [8] Kennedy, G., 2011: 232. [9] In Murphy, J., 1971. [10] As Ward observes; “To carve out ideas of eloquence and attitudes to rhetoric, at a more general level than this, from the cultural matrix in which they were embedded, is a task made difficult by the nature of the Augustinian, or integrated, approach to theology and the arts that prevailed in the clerical intellectual life of the day.” In Ward, J. O. 2019: 228. [11] Murphy, J. 1971: 19. [12] Ward, J. O. 2019: 123. [13] Ibid, 122-123. [14] Ibid, 125-126. [15] I make extensive use of Murphy’s The Three Medieval Arts. In this text he provides an overview of medieval rhetoric and provides a translation to English of the three documents associated with the respective ‘arts’. Any reference to Rationes Dictandi, The New Poetry and The Form of Preaching come from Murphy, et al’s translation. [16]Herrick, J.  2017: 9.