AN ARISTOTELIAN ANALYSIS OF THE
RHETORIC OF SELECTED SHAKESPEAREAN
PASSAGES

Thesis for tho Dogma of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Edna Maria Williams

I958

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AN ARISTOTELIAN ANALYSIS OF THE RHETORIC
OF SELECTED SHAKESPEAREAN PASSAGES

By

Edna Marie Williams

An abstract of a thesis submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Arte

Department of Speech
Michigan State University
1958

Approved by 30‘s.. kw)» s -

(”-4
Major Professor \5 ’

 

 

If a?"

 

In his book, The Oration in Shakespeare,

 

 

Milton Boone Kennedy1 has classified the orations
appearing in Shakespeare's plays according to Aria-
totle's three kinds of public address: deliberative,
forensic, and epideictic. Kennedy's book is mainly
concerned with Shakespeare's dramatic uses of the ora-
tion in his plays, and with the structural and rhe-
torical qualities of the orations as they appear in
the various stages of his writing career. One of the
conclusions of Kennedy's study is that Shakespeare
”perfected the revival of the ancient rhetoric in
poetic." Kennedy observed also that some of the ora-
tions of the latter periods of Shakespeare's writing
career contain a kind of rhetoric which he classified
as Aristotelian.

The purpose of this study has been to analyze,
according to Aristotelian rhetorical principles,
twelve forensic orations from Shakespeare's plays as
they were identified by Kennedy in an attempt to find
evidence to support Kennedy's conclusions cited above.

Criteria for analysis were developed from Aris-
totle's Rhetoric.2 These rhetorical principles Vere
applied in detail to Hermione's oration fron‘ghgiflig-

ter's Tale, the best Shakespearean oration in Kennedy's

 

opinion. The same rhetorical precepts were basic to

1

2

the analyses of the remaining eleven erations, which

were executed through the use of annotated manuscripts.

These analyses considered the following points.

1.

The structure of the oration was analyzed, inn
eluding an identification of the speech parts
(the proem, the statement, the narration, the
argument, the refutation, and the epilogue)

as well as a consideration of those Aristote-
lian precepts which deal specifically with the
use of the narration to establish ethical or
emotional proof in forensic speaking (5. 16,
p. 230) and with the function of the epilogue
in forensic address (3. 19, p. 240).
The identification of the speakeris use of
non-artistic proof was made, as well as an
identification and evaluation of the speaker's
use of the three modes of artistic proof (the
ethical, the emotional, and the logical). The
analysis of the logical mode of proof was
largely concerned with an identification of
the enthymematic reasoning process and the
premises fron.which these_enthymemes are drawn
in terms of certain sign, example (historical
and invented), probability, analogy or analo-
gical reasoning, maxim and refutative enthy-

memes based on.oh3ection or counter-argument.

‘A‘

 

 

 

3
3. The identification of Aristotle's four possible
issues of forensic speaking was made (3. 17,
p. 233), as well as an identification of his
three subjects of forensic speaking (1. 5,
p. 19). ihe speaker's use of those lines of
argument which can be employed "in dealing
with prejudice" in forensic speaking were also

considered (3. 15, p. 226).

Analysis of the twelve forensic orations showed
that the structures of those orations in the third and
fourth periods of Shakespeare's writing career were
more Aristotelian in terms of the parts present and
the use of those parts than were the structures of
the orations from the first and second periods.

Analyses of the use of the non-artistic modes
of proof revealed only three speakers even making
preparations for the use of a witness in their ora-
tions. The results of the analysis of the speakers'
uses of artistic proof, however, indicated that the
orations from the last two writing periods of Shake-
speare's career contain more argumentative and per-
suasive use of rhetoric than the earlier orations.
Furthermore, the speakers of the later periods, with
one exception, use the artistic modes of proof more
effectively and persuasively than do the speakers of
the earlier writing periods.

4

The identification of the forensic issues with

which the orations are concerned revealed: three speak-

ers argue "that the act did less harm than is alleged";
five speakers argue "that the act was not committed":
and four speakers argue "that the act was justified."

An identification of the forensic subjects of the

orations revealed: five speakers deal with honor;

seven speakers deal with justice; and two speakers

deal with expediency. An identification of the speak-

ers' use of lines of argument when "dealing with pre-

Judice" showed: eight speakers choose arguments which

would clear them of suspicion; seven speakers openly
refute the charges which are brought against them;
one speaker "meets calumny with calumny"; and one

speaker argues that "the act was a mischance, a mis-

take.” It is possible, in other words, to identify

these Aristotelian concepts in these dramaturgic ora-

tions of Shakespeare.
In consideration of the results of these ana-

lyses, this study would seem to offer further intrin-
sic evidence that Shakespeare did know and apply Aris-

totelian rhetorical precepts to the composition of his

forensic orations.

1Milton Boone Kennedy, The Oration in Shake»
s eare, (Chapel Hill: The University of North Caro-
Igna Press, 1942).

2Aristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle, trans.,
Lane Cooper, (New York: filppleton:5entury—Crofts, Inc.,

1932).

AN ARISTOTELIAN ANALYSIS OF THE RHETORIC
OF SELECTED SHAKESPEAREAN PASSAGES

By
Edna Marie Williams

A THESIS
Submitted to the College of Communication Arts
Michigan State University of Agriculture and
Applied Science in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Speech

1958

.._ .1-

I

I .‘
»/.v
LIL/Li

AC KN O‘I'JLED G BEEN TS

 

The writer is deeply appreciative of the guid-
ance, encouragement, and assistance given by the
director of this study, Dr. Donald H. Ecroyd; of the
instruction and criticism offered by Dr. David C.
Ralph, both in his capacity as a classroom instructor
and as a committee member; of the advice offered by
Dr. Evelyn Scholl on matters of style and of the aid
she extended to facilitate an accurate interpreta-
tion of Shakespearean passages; and for the time and
effort expended by Dr. John Walker and Dr. Fred J.

Siebert as members of the committee.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AC Klq OVJ LED GIVE—L‘IJTS O O C C C O 0 O O O O O O O .

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

IV.

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Statement of Problem
Limitations of Study
Justification

Sources

Method and Plan of Organization

CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . .
Summary of the Analysis

THE ANALYSIS OF THE ORATION OF HERMIONE
FROM THE WINTER'S TALE . . . . . . .

 

Dramatic Setting

An Annotated Manuscript of Hermione's
Oration

Structure

Logical Proof

Ethical Proof

Pathetic Proof

Conclusions

THE ANALYSES OF ELEVEN ORATIONS BY THE USE

OF ANNOTATED MANUSCRIPTS . . . . . .

Aegeon's Oration from The Comedy 2;
Errors
Antipholus of Ephesus' Oration from

The Comed of Errors
Tamora's OratIEn from Titus Andronicus
Friar Lawrence's Oration from The

 

Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet __—
Mowbray s UFation from Th3 Tragedy 23
Richard II
The EarI OTTWorcester's (Thomas Percy)
Oration from Henry £1, Part I.

iii

#4

Page
ii

. .-_,—.—.—_~»—__—4 _

 

10

59

97

J-

BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O

The Lord Chief Justice's Oration

from Henr IV, Part II
Shylock's OraEIon from The Merchant

2: Venice
IsabeIIa's Oration from Measure for

Measure
OtheIIo's Oration from The Tragedy of
Othello ‘—
Achbiades' Oration from Timon 33
Athens

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . 179

iv

 

Table

4.

7.

LIST OF TABLES

Orations to be Analyzed . . . . . . . . .

Orations to be Analyzed and the Plays in

A

which They Appear . . . . . . . . . . .

Comparison of the Synonymy or Parallel-
isms Inherent within Aristotle's Theory
of the Place of Rhetoric in the Poetic
Drama and of Rhetoric as a Means of
Persuasive Speaking . . . . . . . . .

Summary of the Structure of the
orations O I O O O O O O I O O O O C

Summation of the Elements of Logical
Proof Used by the Twelve Forensic
Speakers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Uses of the EpiIOgue . . . . . . . .

A

Summary of Certain Other Factors . . .

Page

25

52

193

195

198
200

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Statement of Problem

 

Milton Boone Kennedy terminates his book,
The Oration £2 Shakespeare, with the following state-
ment: ”He [Shakespeard] perfected the revival of the
ancient rhetoric in poetic.”1 This assertion is rather
astounding when one considers that the Aristotelian
perspective of the relation of rhetoric to poetic was
not observed to any great extent in.Elizabethan drama.
In the second place, Kennedy and many others for that
matter have raised a question as to whether or not
Shakespeare himself was even aware or Aristotle's

theory as it is set forth in The Poetics; and if he

 

was, there is still the question or whether or not he
applied this theory consciously in his dramaturgy..
Thirdly, Senecan precepts, which contain some dis-
torted views of Greek drama, seemingly exerted a

potent influence upon.Elizabethan drama, but there is
little evidence or Aristotelian theory in its sophistic
practices. In view of these three generally-accepted

 

1Milton Boone Kennedy, The Oration in Shaken

s eare, (Chapel Hill: The'University of fioFEh
CaroIIna Press, 1942), p. 249.

1

 

I'l‘

‘A'JJ 140‘} b

’
-U," 1‘ O I
i . V ‘
‘ ..._‘ s » -5 J as". “JD“ .
--- —\ ...-o c‘ -
' -v. .‘e ‘ Q ’ ‘ ' r - 4 l ‘
. t " [’lec" ' J ‘ I

 

 

 

I ” ‘ v .. - U ‘ . 5
.J p. ' ,‘o .J‘( e" ‘ .‘2' ..'
to — -- ~ -.-~ . e..- i “.
V
t O o ‘ V’d ' | r ‘ “b... O
. I r
. u 0. ll":
. - .
s . ' °
‘ .1 , In I .
e .. - ' '7' ‘f ' ’ ' .
u - u 112
. 9;s - — a '7‘ “
. dvrg-r
" O
f ' i '
_ ‘ e: . J “f. " '.3 r‘ '1 e. .e.(’
~ e
I. '
. t .. l .' ' ‘ - H s ’ ‘ 'r
\ . 0 0' I at v [I
v I ‘n'
>_, ‘ 3 t ’ '
. C
. .' ‘ “p f. ‘
t 1 ’ | e
n
‘ .‘ g' 1". Ag.
‘ l
|
7- ' °
2 ‘ "u ' . I?) «:- °s‘
s.
.5 t
. . .
e)’ , . 9
k l '3 Q \ o X .
' 1. )1 . I H'
C
. v I. to- .
( “ . ' o
.( -I;‘\.'r ('0. w
t L i. ). -' .fl"
' ‘ ... I s
’ co ’xlr.“f.~ I- "
s , d . ) - .. ' I . “
. ‘ I l \ w °' ' '~ .
. ‘ -‘ 1( I..'~.'.~‘ 1'7 r’gjg ".3

V ‘ W117} ':~‘If..-'T(‘§.".‘ .°.[ ,-

   

“figu an,rvf?r7

   

4

Oldeldcoz . -2 J .
° L “.‘IC' '31": 1].} F 14*." (,3 w- ;',.I

. his so - ‘ ' "." h
, .9 ”3 Yiisssnea aside eeefiiwié wtfv HI' 39511 "
_ u ,1 ,. . .. . can

   

a w
z in ouuaffvo QIJBII

   

v

       

w.-
-. I
. “ -}J. ' - L . 4
a-“ -
-U' V
e
t

    

     
 

   

c

Q ' .

2
conclusions, Kennedy's assertion that Shakespeare
”perfected the revival of the ancient rhetoric in
poetic" piques the curiosity. Considering all opera-
tive factors, it would be impossible to prove or dis.
prove his statement. It is possible, however, to gain
a functional appreciation and evaluation of his conclu-
sion by examining certain shakespearean passages and
their respective contextual situations.

The purpose of this research is to analyze
some Shakespearean passages and the circumstantial
context in which they appear in an effort to identify
those elements of rhetorical theory which Aristotle
treated in his work, Th2 Rhetoric. In his book, '
Kennedy has classified all of the orations in Shake-
speare's plays into Aristotle's three kinds of ora-
tions: the deliberative; the judicial or forensic;
and the epideictic.2 He has observed that during the
third and fourth periods of Shakespeare's writing
career that the orations of the plays in these periods
contain a usage of rhetoric which is akin to Aristo-
telian theory. He has not, however, conducted a
detailed rhetorical analysis of any of these orations
to substantiate his observations and conclusions.
This study assumes that Kennedy's conclusions are

correct, and is therefore concerned with a detailed

 

2Ibid., p. 31.

3

rhetorical analysis of some of the dramatic passages
which Kennedy has classified into Aristotle's three

kinds of rhetorical speaking.

Limitationggof Study
To reiteratez. The purpose of this research
is to analyze certain Shakespearean passages and their
respective contextual situations in an attempt to
identify the playwright's conscious or unconscious
employment of Aristotle's precepts of rhetoric as he
has voiced these precepts in The Rhetoric. Kennedy's

 

classification of the orations in Shakespeare's plays
into the three kinds of oratory has been used to
select the Shakespearean passages which have been
subjected to a rhetorical analysis. These eighteen
orations which Kennedy has designated as forensic have\
been chosen as material for the analysis. Three of
these orations, however, are from E2331 1; and three
are from.§£g£y XIII. Because of a question of author-
ship concerning these plays, these six orations have
not been analyzed. The remaining twelve orations
which have been subjected to analysis are listed in

Table I .

4

TABLE 1
ORATIOHS TO BE ANALYZED

Play Speaker Act Scene
Comedy of Errors Antipholus of V i
Ephesus
Comedy of Errors Egeon I i
Titus Andronicus Tamora I 1
Renee and Juliet Friar Lawrence V iii
Richard II Mowbray I I
Henry IV, Part I worcester V 1
Henry IV, Part II Chief Justice IV ii
Merchant of Venice Shylock IV vii
Measure for Measure Isabella II ii
Othello Othello I iii
Timon of Athens Alcibiades III v 5
Winter's Tale Hermione III ii
Justification

 

Research thus far indicates no evidence of
any rhetorical analysis of the orations in Shakespeare's
plays in terms or Aristotelian precepts, and the reason
seems obvious. Rhetoric in the Renaissance was'not a
practical tool of civic or politically-minded men as
it was in Aristotle's day. It was not inclusively
”the art of persuasion.” If Shakespeare did use Aris-
totelian principles of rhetoric in his persuasive
speeches, this use would be unexpected, hence, unlikely
to be sought out or analyzed.

Rhetorical theory in the Renaissance was.
mainly a system.or rules designed to aid the communi-

cant to write imaginatively. Sister Miriam Joseph in

 

3Ibid., p. 66.

5

her book, Shakegpeare's[Egg‘g£.thg_é£tg‘2£ Language,
reviews the extant schools of rhetoric in Shake-
speare's day, and demonstrates Renaissance rhetoric
as an elaborate theory of composition with figures,
tropes, and nore terminology than the rhetoricians
themselves eeuld logicallycatalogue.4 In his book,
E13 52g Rhetoric in the Renaissance, W. G. Crane
illustrates the close-~sometimes almost synonymous--
association of rhetoric and wit during this period.
This wit accrued from the processes of ornamentation
and amplification through the employment of figures

5 ‘When one

of speech, allegory, apophthegems, etc.
contrasts this imaginative Renaissance rhetorical
theory of composition with the Aristotelian "art” of
oral persuasien, which is typified as far as style is
concerned by the phrase, ”the golden mean of expres-
sion," one is readily aware of differences between
these-two bodies of rhetorical theory, When one con-
siders, however, that both bodies of theory were
followed for the purposes of communicating effectively,
these apparent differences do not seen.too disturbing.
e. with: “(W—n-
‘Fity_PF;s§:'I§I§T%E§. 4. '

5W, G. Crane, Wit and Rhetoric in the Rangig-

sance, (New Yerk: The Columbia University—Press,
,pe 8e .

 

   
   
  
 
 
  
    
    
    
  

3

Wtoavudhnflwdmu
~efien€ n1 {access lo alcohol seesxe~ede-swetth-

cluoaedv sautetfaush

 
 
 

zessmsanomeb has .zso s'slsOQI- '

.ee-x I33“. 'r uoitfiaoqmo Io ‘woen's osmosis as as .’
snafu} :faufi o.a qififi gifilvwlm131 euom bns .OOQOQ‘

. ,3 FL-u :4: y ". . ”1'54!“ 34' \_ 118°51'- ti {HUGS IO'ISOIfld'
.. . .‘J. ,fa.e e.’ Inv.’ w" a? "{-L.l‘yd7. "we at!
o.—-o—...c. ---. —.—. o- ’-- “M ”Oi-O w

. “‘i‘m'r;s“.‘=,'. Max's we! 0'Jo:.--ow.{- bk"! r'ods'rscuIII

 

‘uu :--..s ' :I asldsioceea
oft ‘ . ‘ ‘V g y ' Q . ' e 0
.. vi. A , e ... . . - ._ 'H. w .e nt- 1. . "viz-got”; J4” t zd'f

,Qr". ‘ ‘
- AL ‘ . 1" , I O k‘l F'm
I
5 'f‘. . .- r
L . ' ‘ \
Q , '. .e. ‘ . I. ._ I- ‘ L 1 ‘1‘
’ r
- to 9w
..-L, . ! f I 1 _
s d I l '1 .4‘ l (11:0
._ - '9 o.
. L‘. . .. - 1 - ‘ v '
. ' . ‘ It,”
,_‘ I . _ - r
e ‘ ‘ L‘. (J
‘8‘“: ‘ l '
z ’ U ‘
39B ' "o r ' u
'0'. I”
P. _, ,
} 0 l ‘. ' q
H.131 ’ I’ ‘
‘ I '7 0‘ ‘ 1" L}
.‘ I
«In. w L . . . M . .
. ~ 6 i. .. 1,3”. .. .‘. (“1
v'. vi“, ., e.
., .om . .1128: ) (r .3 I 5.”. . ~ c. ' n . '
. - ., 1., ., .019 AC? ozosa
-‘._.‘-..-.~ . -

 

 

, . r I
(Y " J I
10 ”L: A, .‘e’t..C.\ihLu..- wi' ')_'~~.J e 1- 1“ °. ‘ .

' . -1'1fll!3 3I’Qm!rf.5~’ en' 1"“ ' f" I "‘3’ ’

 

e S—

   

 

I... ,«dwmflld 10 (3'19 at“
9

’3 . «’1' ‘am {'Ia 4

    
      

6
The following quotation, although it draws a simi-
larity between Roman rhetoric--not Aristotelian prac-
tices--and Renaissance theory, aids to point up the
slightness of the dissimilarity between Rexpissance
rhetorical theory and the rhetorical practices advo-
cated by Aristotle in his Rhetoric.

Yet Rhetoric is treated as a simple ver-
bal discipline in histories which touch upon it--
as the art of speaking well; applied either as it
was in Rome to forensic oratory as associated with
the interpretation of laws, or more frequently
applied as it was in the Renaissance in the inter-
pretation and use of words of orators and poets,
and associated with or even indistinguishable
from poetic and literary criticism.6

The point is that “rhetoric is rhetoric”
whether it be a means by which hmaginative composition
was written or a body of precepts and practices‘de-
signed to meet the exigencies of practical living
through oral discourse. The dissimilarity existing
between ancient Aristotelian theory and the Ranaissance
theories is not indicative of a change in the total
process of communication, but indicates instead, a
change in that certain facets of the total process of
communication received more emphasis than did others:
Upon a casual observation of the two theories, one

might think that to Aristotle, the reception of the

content (the ideas or message) of the communication

 

6James McKeon, ”Rhetoric in the Middle Ages,"
SEOOUIM 9 (VOle XVII, Jun, 1942), p. 1e

7
was the important thing, while, to the Elizabethan
penman, the means by which the content was conveyed
to the hearer or the reader was the aspect of the com-
municative process which received the most emphasis.
For all practical purposes, however, the body of
theory, rules, and methods making up rhetoric remains
relatively constant whether it be an "art" which
strives to seek out ”all the available means of per-
suasion" or simply a body of rules, etc., which enabled
the Elizabethan communicant to write imaginatively and
effectively. Functioning under this assumption then,
an analysis of Shakespeare's writings in Aristotelian
terms seems Justifiable.

If principles of Aristotelian rhetoric are
clearly distinguishable in the speechqmaking ofithese
selected Shakespearean characters, conclusions such as
the following might be implied:

l. Aristotelian rhetorical precepts can be in-
corporated in the successful play which seeks to
communicate persuasively. Thus, the rhetoricisn
can effectively subject certain sections of such
plays to critical analysis.

2. The playwright whose plays were successful
in his own age presented through his works a re-
flection of the standards and value systems of
that age. Therefore, what was successful drama-
tic persuasion:

a) can be assumed to have used techniques con-

sidered persuasive by the audience,

b) can be assumed to have presented the ”best”

of such techniques known and used in that
era,

c) can be assumed to have been constructed

carefull by the playwright in terms of
a) and by.

  

3.1.2.

       
  
    
  
   
    
   
 
 
   
  
 

V ‘ e i

   

mm: M2: on: 0;: «mn- .anw enamel-a (9'! ',
beg-evade saw messes ed: :1on rd easel end .ln-eg
-mco 95% to dcecPs «a. saw notion all to tossed Id? QC.
.hicfquzre ficnn' :an .‘t-t‘VIJ-J‘VY field? account; OVIGIDLEI. . -
lo v‘cd en‘ trovcv" ,a~sOQtuq {softostq III 103
shiatsu 21%;:2 u :u gafazr shouts: Rat .oeiun .[100‘3
\g «' 4; ..( Ito-l ewv- ..;,.: tzlhf: [IOVIJDIO'I
«(en is c : : cf u.°mur It; 42““ :u: foes cu: novtuia

beldhhe :vr'x ' . H v - ._“ .1.“ a g: 'aoIfiQUO

   
         
      
 

. . ' -.'.. . ‘2 , '1. - . i. D"! .
in). V LIV, --. ‘-».-‘-. .I ; .u'. -.; x-. h. 2‘: ..I .73.. .L . on:
O
I
I . - t ' , .1
‘11.; o .r " a . " .' 1' 0 ~ ‘ J $.
0 ' . . \ O
‘ -Lr‘ l ": ’ ‘1 .’
|
L I - ' K“
b
I " l
C
I x . ' '_
' £4 1 L() ’.. Cu .‘ e.
' V
“I. ’ I . ‘ .sf) ‘
a
0‘
D
\‘v
I‘ O -
-s I fl' .'..' 4
l ‘ C
-t. s, '
-‘l a "‘ r
.‘v (
'53 -."'a J e o h
fiar‘s f ' ‘ r ,I...‘ ’ ‘ I _
e7 0..,'-'.'l‘ . .J .-.'.1(
; .3 ' .'.e 9- ‘ . . J .
-J fi--’ 1. . . - .
- z 0- '.'. AI. - ‘ ‘.- . _' ‘ \\.. ‘go’. ; In. r. . ‘. ’ “ ‘
a 'I ' a.
o rw- . . w- . .2. ‘..-~ ' ' '
‘ ., 4— ., -. 1.: :n ritzsnsf.
c '0': ”gun‘s 1.." £ .4. '-.‘- 3 (2.1" "I . c” “‘3‘ I ' I ’ x '10..
c 4 -- U 3 O ' -- ' “ e.- ."‘."/l' \’ ‘A U
.I'
O D - . 2 e w
- .ncineechr at:
e - A ' . '
unto egaptudos. been cram I

 

4.,“ bomvrzkf: on it.“ {A .
teoao?hue ed; go evzeaueueq tenable .
. .3621: beqne‘semq swan c3 bonuses eo’ as: (d
1;: beta 8,] ' '

 
  
 
  

  

8
3. Shakespeare, the playwright, did use Aris-
totelian rhetorical principles, consciously or
unconsciously, as Kennedy observed.
Sources
Aristotle's Rhetoric, translated by Lane Cooper,
and The Cambridge Edition Text 2: the Complete Works 2g

Shakespeare, edited by William Aldis wright, are the

 

basic sources used in this study. A.number of second-
ary materials are also referred to, and these books,
dissertations, and articles are listed in the appended

bibliography.

Method and Plan of Organization

 

Chapter II of this study is devoted to an
explanation and delineation of the Aristotelian rheto-
rical precepts which have been applied in the analyses
of the forensic orations.

In his book Kennedy observes that as Shake-
speare's writing career progressed the orations improved
both in terms of structure and in terms of the Aristo-
telian precepts employed. He states that Hermione's
oration from Th: Winter's Isis, a play written in the
last period of the playwright's career, represents
Shakespeare's best oration in terms of structure,
dramatic integration, and in the employment of rhetori-
cal persuasive precepts. Chapter mfliof this study is
therefore devoted to a detailed rhetorical analysis of
Hermione's oration, applying the rhetorical principles

9

which are set forth in Chapter II.
In Chapter IV the remaining eleven orations
are analyzed, applying the same rhetorical principles.

These analyses, however, are executed through the use

of annotated manuscripts of the orations. In the con-

cluding chapter of this study, Chapter V, the results
of these analyses are summarized and compared with the
conclusions derived from the analysis of the oration

of Hermione. Hermione's oration is adopted as the

criterion by which the other orations are evaluated.

A summary of the conclusions of this study is also

included in this chapter.

CHAPTER II
CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS

In his book, The Oration in Shakespeare,
Milton Boone Kennedy has identified the dramatic

speeches in Shakespeare's plays which conformed with

the following definition: "an oration is a formal

public speech spoken before an audience."1 Using this
definition as his basic criterion of selection, he has

classified the speeches into the three Aristotelian

types of orations: the deliberative oration, the

epideictic oration (the ceremonial speech), and the
forensic oration.2 After reviewing Shakespeare's

use of the oration in his dramaturgy, Kennedy states
that during the culminating periods of the playwright's
career his plays contain a desirable and properly
balanced combination and use of the elements of rhet-
oric and poetic.3 Because of the presence ef this
desirable, proportional use of the rhetoric and the

1Milton B. Kennedy, The Oration in Shakespeare,
(Chapel Hill: The University of Forth Caro na ress,

1942), p. 29.
' 21bid., p. 63.

3Ibid., p. 249.
10

11

poetic, Kennedy asserts that Shakespeare has revived

ion of the part that rhetor
as Aristotle voiced this

Aristotle's concept ic should

occupy in the drmmatic poetic,

concept in his Poetics.
"He [Shakespeare] per

the poetic."4

Kennedy's concluding state-

ment is that: fected the revival

of the ancient rhetoric in
his study are as follows:

Shakespeare perceived that the display

ef sophistic rhetoric for its own sake made at
best for inferior art . . . the critical view—

point established early in his career, he applied
e master ef the rhet-

Other con-

cluding statements of

immediately, and soon been:
oric in his plays.

The first step in the direction of this

lot

mastery was the substitution 3; climactic
c arac er s _g.g_ e

for the e isodIc movemen
earlIer EEIzaEethgn drama.5"—

Poetics treats the subject of

Aristotle in his

s succinctly and

the episodic are the worst.'

emphatically: "Of simple

episodic plot
Plots and actions I call
is neither probability or

a Plot episodic when there
then

of the episodes.” He

ssity in the sequence
climactic plot, in

he desirability of the

”occur unexpectedly and

11000

discusses t
at the

which the incidents

same time in consequence of each other."6
Alon with lacin the em hasis on lot

a; the main element 2; s poetic, 5: set abou

#__-

41b1d., p. 249.

w

(The italics are this writer's.)

51bid., p. 247.

*

6David Daiches, Critical A roaches te Litera-
Efiglevood CIIIfFI New

ture, (Prentice-Hall, Inc.:
Jersey, 1956). P. 32.

 
  

b‘cvtve'x sad e'meqaegsfie Jan's edxesas theme! .ouen' . .

   

bloods. ol'xots-‘h Jada s-zsq said 1c nougeeaoe s'eitefll‘n -

 
 
  

lids heolov dams-Ir; .22. ,oNsoq cidsm'xb ed: at [@81er

    

~casta gnfbuiuaoa e‘gistu n .5313805 aid at quonoe

         

.07?ch M75 Lance‘s.“ £31.. misaluial OH” :sms 0.1 Jae. '. .

        

-noc w-na ‘ .aiinfiu a:;_u} olqcawnt Jaelona and to {

       

;mrfi:g 2‘ 24; 24¢; H!" 10 2J:3MoJBJu QJIEUIO

J

       

Edi-JAIL! ' ‘J ":0... '. -' It. “ 3,"; "1 1'.9“'Q. ..' J.

O ‘ I'.‘

  
      
 

an 39hr sic! T 3.2 g-n I 'y ' a ciJzinros 10

 

- ,v ‘- e f en .' '
at " .. ‘1 , f' .‘ J . . O O O 4'... II! 6 e ' I "“: J :0. ad

  
      
 
  

  
  

O s‘ . a 1 ‘~ ‘ °’- ’ ' .
Ue'tr‘zk‘; ‘ n g “" & ' 'r. ‘e . t . , h :- ,- the. . 'J.iz~'~" .
~"4rq 7.: ‘v n", cmfitrc Jawv '. .rff' ’ "In?

 
  
  
  

 

  
 
 
  
 

  
 
  

.:;9 _.I _ . .|.!\ ._' .'g ‘ .r-l"“. ;-.
. ‘l "'_I i . ‘ -M
givruaffl§BC Blfifl 018 QOILBJI enI; .?§3 .C ‘ F1615 -
3.' .' i 1' I - e .

".

  

I t v
,;_ k- .gp‘ - .
.. - . ‘k ‘ _' N' . A«I‘te
. ."

'; hm? '*‘- .

‘
I
.“ ”'0: h '.
. f -

  

12

naki the integplay 2; character and circunp
s ance FE? essence of lot acEIon."Thus EIs
pIot actIon Became essen aInyaramatic rather
than narrative. Horeover, in centering the dra-
he secured unity of

natic action about a crisis,

action through leading to it from an initial

action and away from it to a denouenent.
individualizing

The third step was the
of character along with the psychological study
his development of dramatic

of character.
character, he emphasized emotional reaction in
f mind and habit of think-

its relation to state e
in; or mental attitude. '25 this wa he develo ed
greatly in explanation of characterlgfig crIEIcaI
c rcunstance. 153 while kee In aIwa s foremost
en HasIs 25 lot action as e erminea b what
characters d or HIE not'gg, Ee reco zed‘the
ossIEIIIEies of'pIoE action determinefi E; char-
acters Efircughffhg :gpressiog 31 thought.
Kennedy's conclusions regarding Shakespeare's
use of plot and the proper relationship between plot
and character to evoke a ”Unity of action” are also
poetic theory:

in harmony with Aristotelian
the action plot involves agents
who must necessarily have their
ter and

distinctive qualities of both charac
thought since it is from these we ascribe.

certain qualities to their actions.

' ”do not act in order to portray the

C O 0

[characters],

These “agents
--an action

Characters," but ”for the sake of action,“

”conplete within itself."9

that is
Kennedy concl

In summary, then: udes that as

career progressed the playwright

Shakespeare's writing
n the important element in

J”

made the plot or the actio

—*

7gp. cit., pp. 247-243. (Italics are this

writer's.

€93. cit., p. 26
91b1d.

   
 
  
 
   
 
 
  
    
   
  
     
  
  
  
 
  
  
 

91

M30 bus 'xectm §I£§$m1§£ g
s!% Hair. 111+. nos $5 '§_‘5__a_ esee e
«can clothe". as e omens 4—3331}.
«an: ad: 3.1M: two In: .mvoecoM .evtss'zm all”
'10 (sin- bonuses s11 .atei'xo a Juno’s n01308 all“

Is?3::: as :*r[% *1 c‘ 4 fi.hsei dgucmd: notice

. ubm9JCHOh a so J2 M313 {£98 has H0138.
I union“:- 55"..{3'1’ 9.113 at! " .',.¢ CHIN? .d'r
[ (burs; -colgni fewer; em! :' 1% goals 'erssmsdo 'lo
I SIJ'"Nt: Lo e.-vM"0'a.hL at; a? .ucroschu lo
I at acidsan- 12~r*“~-- ~ofiira '3‘ *‘ .103oeunda ’
. ~:€n§z.:; '1' "3"” . .' : . :; Nrcolc'f P3? r
' heaov's irref- '12 Ian’ «.7116 w. .e.‘:..1_".‘is Injucm ‘10 p.11

   

   

'9
es,
-
.o
-
v

" e
.rc. ‘

i 5:31 J}';' ¢:‘~‘.’9.s-‘;*‘ ‘ 7;. f.(~.‘.,‘~.'“JeJ :'- Lt" YIJBO'I-t q
I M -.- ‘ :-e-I . —-- .,- ~ “- ’ .— " V'fi" “I _ ‘ k‘..-‘
.‘13Csflfl‘jo. .- .' 4ft: "V’J'Nfl 'fr .'9:1° wheauo'x 3
“‘3’?“ .“ 1'3“” "'— ' "*7 ”s? , ' . ‘ . '_ ' “' "
. Lag): If: ._ ‘1‘"- L x . z? 9 41.x”: '-,g«,' .~ . .: canqme
'\ I . s . “‘ . ..-'J . '. “M- - ' 7-.— -
, 9,; De. . “29,13.“ « .. em; . :' <c ;, : :. ;... sJLB'IEIG

'- ‘ ’ “r“ " ':‘ " * . ‘0... -' - --— '-- woo-v“.
~12. ’2’ F“ Km; ...'1‘ fr.‘ .‘fi' 1'! .= ‘ ‘ 3’11: ' fannr
. J 9.. ‘lrflt‘- - :: -f" ". ’ 0.:l} ..' '.r ' . q: 1...;1'1“ ”3" '37:

-s 5-..-

 

 

  
  
  

    

A

a ;- 3 B! To"

  
 

‘ I

     

    

idalq"zalc “4-) 7 10:5 “1"1" "ff: 'i'.’ -‘s.-r - - ?

 

It camel: alarm-3.521} 35;;
“a .__‘

I"; -4’Ip.

 
 

1?(’ f:- -: '4 mfg; '10 3 01:; 9.“ ft of)“
. -M I‘...’ M“...
pus ecu sooner) ..~ses~x~es .aq . no V
. ' I ‘
‘5‘” ’ 0V5. V... . " -,'§ #

, ‘_c ‘q'. r.‘:eh -
Wg-p ‘ " ' a
4‘71 1 h

:;-‘~ 4'". .‘aj

  
 
 

 

  
   
 

        
 
 

‘ I

13

his dramaturgy: that he refined his manipulation of

h as instruments to

character and action, using bot

advance the all-important plot. Shakespeare further

haracter of his dramatic agents,

isplay of this inner

developed the inner c

subordinating the outward d

”mental” personality or character to

”emotional” and

the furtherance of the climactic plot and keeping it

in harmony with the action.

These conclusions have been derived by Kennedy
plication of Aristotelian

His concluding point,

poetic theory to

from his ap
also based

Shakespeare's works.

on Aristotelian poetic theory, is concerned with

Shakespeare's use of rhetoric in the poetic drama.

ristotelian basis for his

, [the perfection of plot and the develop~

ment of character] Shakespeare worked out his
His emotional rhetoric he

rhetoric in poetic.

kept from running into detached showiness and

extravagance of traditional sophistic by making

it integral in character—-the natural expression

of emotional thinking. His rhetoric of oratory

he kept from.being the mere declamation of aca-
ditionsl sophistic by making

demic exercise of tra
it integral in plot development-~the logical ex-

pression of intellectual thinking designed in
sion which would influence

the interest of persua
action. His {Setoric in poetic is thus also
Aristotelian.

With this A
poetic

This ponclusigp is the focal point pf the present

study.
conclusions because, according to the author, the

It has been necessary to summarize Kennedy's

#—

10Kennedy, 92. cit., p. 248.

14
development of character

perfection of plot and the
were prerequisite to effecting a proper, proportional,
and Aristotelian use of the rhetoric in the dramatic

 

poetic.
Louis Dollarhide in his dissertation, Shake-
speare's 'Richard III' and Bgnaissancg Rhetoric, pre-

gument to Kennedy's conclusion

sents an opposing ar
ed the revival of the

that ”He [Shakespearé] perfect

ancient rhetoric in poetic."

Shakespeare's integration of rhetoric in
the dramatic fabric of his later plays has led
some critics to strain the case for his know-
ledge of Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetics. (See

a depen ence on

Kennedy pp. 247-249.) uc
proved seems

Aristotle while it has not been
Shakespeare's creative

ultimately to detract from

ability. Enough.Aristotelianism sifted down to
the grammar school students by way of Cicero and
Quintilian to awaken the tantalizing suggestion

of direct knowledge and influence.1
Dollarhide found in his study that ”nearly

play could be analyzed under the related

all of the
and speeches of

on, disputation,
"each scene of the play” was

ese rhetorical movements.

headings of orati

vehemence; and that
dominated by one or more of th

inferred from the foregoing
with an Aristotelian.

As can be quote, however,

Dollarhide was not concerned

rhetorical analysis. Instead, his study was concerned

11Louis E. Dollarhide, Shakes eare's 'Richard
III' and Renaissance Rhetoric (unpuEIEsEed Ph. D.
orth Carolina, 1954),

fiiisertat on, n vers y o
p. 14, see footnote 39.

—1

M
wedcscado 'c snechievet end has solo 1e cotton! ;

,isnoi's-zoqcmt ,zeqmq s palsoe’xie es ulstupeaemoleifl'.‘

tcl'dssmwzf‘ '31: _‘ 71: sf'infiod'! add 30 can Hill-36381“ III,
.sldeei
entfri'xsiiod 83110.1
. if}: {___._I 3Lm'olf; 's'euegl
‘rsmogca gwfo«qqo u» sdael
‘: “L" 3163

fission!

,‘iermymi

SIB.‘£c:~Jr-"-..; w... ;' -
.. ., . . (kl ;;jqqs11°q

508360303 138'. 'I'.‘~;J."e ' -
. .--- .a'avinnn 1.;sj Wt afli

 

 

- MM-“ e.-
- ‘ --
~ ‘0“ - .c‘

.ODInasiicQ .3 stucdll

 

‘:: ’\
. rf’ia"
:4

fie

 

15

with the traditional Ciceronian canons of Rhetoric

as they were taught in the Renaissance grammar schools.

One of the conclusions of his study is as follows:

The oration appeared not only as a

formal address in the manner described by
Kennedy, but also as soliloquies delivered
"formally" to an audience, and as speeches
within dia10gue. It was demonstrated fur-

ther that Shakespeare interrupted these set
speeches with dialogue and finally brokg speeches

up and gave parts to several speakers.
The foregoing is included to acquaint the reader

with a controversy regarding the basic hypothesis

of this study. Dollarhide's opinion of Kennedy's

conclusion, however, is presented in a footnote,

and it is given strictly in the realm of opinion.
Scholars have long been contending the

question: Did Shakespeare have a knowledge of

the contents of Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetic?

Dollarhide contends that the playwright did not;

Kennedy holds the opposite viewpoint. Since

Kennedy's book reveals considerable evidence as to
the validity of his conclusions, it seems sensible
that the purpose of this study should be to
examine some of the dramatic speeches that
Kennedy has defined as orations, thus attempting_

to identify and evaluate Shakespeare's conscious or

12Ibid., p. 209.

61

oi'roden'h ‘Ir. sacrum antacid-LEO imro Hiba'u W»

h

.aiooaoa "En‘Fuiat-133 canines on“: '3? Idgxrnd «new peanut

:cm'I. m ' , ‘ ‘ '

unno mi} '10 0d 'l

Qty?“

 

 

l6
unconscious use of Aristotelian precepts of rhetoric.

Kennedy's conclusion that Shakespeare did use a con-

cept of rhetoric in his orations which can be identi-

is assumed as a
analysis made will

fied as Aristotelian, basic hypothesis
in the study in the hope that the

constitute further evidence for or against this basic

premdse.
That Shakespeare could have
ric and poetic either directly from

known Aristotelian

precepts of rheto

actual contact with the ancient's works or indirectly

” that was in the air during

from.the "Aristotelianism
y the following:

the Renaissance will be demonstrated b

in his dissertation gives wel

cerning Shakespeare's grammar

Dollarhide l-substanti~

ated information con
school education. Using T. W. Baldwin's William
reeke, as one of

glislcsparejg small Latino g lesse G

of his sources he states:

It now seems clear from the work of T.
W. Baldwin that Shakespeare's rhetorical training

in the Tudor grammar school was acquired along
The whole intent
am from the petty school
to the climaxing study of Quintilian in the sixth
form of the grammar school was the shaping of the
crater as the highest goal to be sought.1

Shakespeare's grammar school training was done exclu-

sively through the use of Latin texts. Baldwin on

this point says:

1322;23. p. 5. See footnote 9.

 

17

Latin Text is the main stream

Here in the
only

(of the tradition) the English Rhetorics are
or untutored, Shakspere

the eddies. Either tutored
would derive his knowledge from the main stream.14

Baldwin concludes that Shakespeare's books on logic

and rhetoric were probably:

Herennium, the

. . the Rhetoricae ad
figures .53 rhetorical theory;

elementary text for
Cicero's Topics, for the places of invention,
Melanchthon, or some similar text, for a systeme

atic survey of the sy110gism: Susenbrotus' E itome,
for figures of speech; Erasmus' 23 Du lici Copia,
st 1e and the Modus

for the two ways of varying y
the application 0

Conscribendi E istclas, for
e we me ads to the old art of dictamen;
for the appli-

finally Aphthonius' Progyggasmata
theme-Ir t ng: and at last

cation of rhetoric to
Quintilian's Institutio Oratoria for the classi-

cal oration.

Sister Miriam Joseph in her book, Shakespeare's
Use 2; the Arts 2; Language, classifies the schools of

rhetoric which probably exerted some influence on’

Shakespeare's composition. Her classification of the

1 Latin sources from which the
derived coincides with Bald-

traditions English

rhetoric textbooks were

win's statement of the tradition sources which he con-

eludes Shakespeare studied from, with the exception

verifies the schelar's

of Erasmus. Kennedy, however,
In a dis-

inclusion in this tradition classification.

cussion of the confusion of the rhetoric and poetic

elements during the Middle Ages, Kennedy says of him:

——

1‘22;9.. p. 6. See footnote 20.

1?;233., p. 5. See footnotes 10-17.

18

And Erasmus, while still rhetorical in
top forward in emphasizing

his approach, took a s
the value of the classics for their thought lgd
content as well as for their stylistic form.

After reviewing the different schools of

rhetoric which could have influenced Shakespeare's
tor Hiriam.Joseph concludes that in

composition, Sis
the Bandsts,

all three schools (the Traditionalists,

and the Figurists) ”there is a fundamental likeness

ious differences,
not hitherto adequately

despite obv for in all of them are

discernable to a degree,

recOgnized, the dominant features of.Aristotle's

'17 Her conclusions and her methodology are

rhetoric.
Richards. In answer to

somewhat refuted by I. A.
e says that Shakespeare who ill

”rhetor-

her conclusions h us-
could have illustrated the

trated so much,
e without formal in-

ical theory in its entire scop

”13 Although these two viewpoints contra-

struction.

in content, they can nevertheless be

dict one another
nce that Shakespeare could

construed to give evide

have acquired knowledge of Aristotle's rhetorical

precepts: the former statement of Sister Miriam

Joseph gives a direct indication of some basic ”Aris-

totelianism” in all extant schools of rhetoric, and

See footnote 32.

——

16K°nn°dyg P-Be Cite, pe 20o

1'7Sister Miriam Joseph, 23. cit., p. 18.

”The Places and the Fig-

181. s. Richards,
r (1949), p. 20.

urea," Kenyon Review, Winte

I‘7"

   
  

81

.nleaeiaocedw iiiss eildw .aumns13 but

an}: secqne 1:1 Marcel case a secs .dcso'rq s a"

fig? ddagofii died: sol solsasiv and to 0015' Odim”
.mnc. Olig'fgfa wind: "at as lieu on 330300.

 
 

’0

    
     
    
 
   
   
  
  
  
  

.20 r .|-’ .3” . (‘0‘ . ' ' ' ‘ . -
J (n r I“ . _.! u- {ninefveq teal} .f.r'
€‘tTé«~3r3.", Lev ' | r‘ 3791 rjv H
. no ctdw chosen“,

C
.' ‘0 -' ' — ’ ‘ - .
' l U ‘ . - ' v ‘ a . I I r h I '_ :0 F.‘ .

‘84.-..‘2qh‘. e" A . t|"l ." ' .l. . .
7 ~ - ~ . .. dun): 901.13 £1.

r
K
.1
y“.
3
k.
\

v" - ' ... r ‘, .' . . . . - .
- - A. - e. x - K .II'. " " {1 a, I,”
so: uvw“' ‘c I ...7 , 'n. . ' . - ' "
.. .. - . -. s. , 1 -, '7 031:7 805

.. '{.';. -. . i.--s'-‘ f. .
. .r .. . efurywensfb

e .t
- x ' '
g ' 4‘77 '1
at H ,. ~-- - v
. ‘_ g , _.

’ . "."."‘d'I

{"s .‘ ‘ e O

. v I

. . 'J.-( '-

s .'

 

iii”
._
D
'0
.‘
I
f
a
,—
v
'

_ i-

*gsib‘ --
O

fl
o“
‘0
O

‘b_
I
O
\4
C
l
.—
\
V

" " .‘IRI'!

 

     

AO—P Vv‘fi- 3"?—
9
.
t
0
I

-

   

- .-'..,r;v t3'tq ,

 
 
 

a”
A do

 
   
 

I
I .
I

. .- - ‘9
A :4 Ignz’.l(,cb

 
 
       

has .0210C3uu 10 efni"¢
_- -n 'u J ”:7 ,-I 'o. k-£.{: ‘3? 'l‘c}:t"’;.£’doa

 
    

M ~~v-~ ‘_.

    
  

‘

uegfifosondool sea .03 q I: ~- .“.“~”.
- v....-"~=‘ -gg .zbsrmelial

v ~‘ 13"” “9““ mm some"

     
 

    

n.
- O

 
  
 

     

 

I.
I
ca

“ o ' ‘...

 

i'-
\

   

19

from I. A. Biehards' assertion we can infer that if

torical precepts were in exis

evidence to believe they were,

Aristotelian rho tense,

and we have substantial

Shakespeare would have been aware of them and could

dramaturgy.

porated them into his
n's The Arte

leknown that Thomas Wilso
in London in 1553, (Shake-

have incor

It is wel

g; Rhetoriqug, published
speare's writing period was fr
ervasive in influence of

ks of the traditional school.

on 1591 to 1611) was

all the English

the most p
Kennedy

rhetoric textboc
"had Wilson's Arte 2; Rhetor-

states that Shakespeare
19

as a basis for theory of rhetoric."

igue

Russell Wagner says of Wilson's work:
under the head of rho-
ich in an-
sable to
the time of

He re-assembled,
toric all the scattered principles wh
cient times had been thought indispen
the complete art of the orator since

the ”first full treatment of the best of classi-

It is
making that doctrine ”really useful in

cal doctrine,”
affairs.” It is a "pragmatic,

the world of practical
” in which the influences

namic body of principles
20

highly discernable.

of Cicero are
In re-uniting, selecting, and adapting

the classical principles of public address, W

son restored the body and, to some extent, re-

dy

19Kennedy, 22. cit., p. 218.
ryant, ”Thomas

20?. ers in Rhetoric, Donald c. B
Wilson's ConErIEuEIons c etoric,” (unpublished mate-
rial), Washingten University, St. Louis, 1940, p. 2.

20
formed the concepts of rhetorical theory.2l
Karl‘Iallaee, writing of the ”Early English
Rhetoricians en the Structure of Rhetorical Prose"
has noted a change in oral and written discourse which
suggests the influence of Aristotelian rhetorical

preeepts.

The Tudor and early Stuart Rhetoricians
who from 1509-1625 theorized about the principles
of speechemaking and sermonizing, of writing
tracts, pamphlets, and letters, reveal a shift
in opinion concerning the form and structure of
discourse. . . . the chief theorists appear to be
gradually modifying, and in a few cases abandon-
ing, the classical arrangement of rhetorical prose,
in favor of an arrangement and progression of
thought that is held to be better adapted to the
speaker's or writer's purpose, the character of
his audience, and the attendant circumstances of
time, place and occasion. The classical struc-
ture, with its exordium, narration or exposition,
proposition, confirmation, eonfutation, and con-
clusion, is clearly the preferred method of plan-
ning a composition, yet it makes room for a more
functional order and arrangement. Furthermore,
though the principal rhetoricians prefer that
prose should be ordered after the classical pat-
tern, they also admit, besides the functional
arrangement, a kind of logical structure. lith-
out having in mind a strict logical unity as we
know it today, they seem to recognize that dis-
position is influenced by the relation of a theme
or proposition and the way its points grow out
of or lead up to it.22

Available evidence suggests that Shakespeare
could have been acquainted with both Aristotle's

Rhetoric and Poetics. The Poetics was "known at'

211mm, 1). 5.

2?;2ig.. "Early English Rhetoricians on the
Structure of Rhetorical Prose,” p. 15.

US

Eli-med; [asbxoasd't '30 830100509 ‘1" 5“

afi'm'z'” cod 1o::siJi-x*7 ,eoslls' 1m 1.

ism-xcssm 3'11. )U’IV}: and no 81131011.!

’.

2:1: ”a" a} einsno a becom-

j“.I"Wi «do aJee;;

. s 301.901. .'

2. 01‘. «in
'10

so! an; or times

3‘ m! one-12g

I‘.
~-_..-.‘ q»

”a...

9‘6 .q ‘,btdI£Q
£13st "a: 183

._ J ‘ " . ’ "‘ o if‘
. . W ‘4. .1 . Q'
n." -s, " '- UJ; . '. g

I -.

 

21
Cambridge by 1542, if not before.”23 Kennedy's study
of Shakespeare's plays leads him to believe that
Shakespeare ”came to know it through contact with
dramatists who had attended the universities, if he

had not known it before.”24

Suggestions of the
playwright's knowledge of 222 Poetics are to be found
within passages of his plays, 3.5. Hamlet's advice to
the players, etc.25 Lane Cooper in his work, Th2

Poetics 25 Aristotle, Its leaning and Influence, ex-

 

 

tends the source of ”AristotelianismF upon Shakespeare
to Italy: ' h

It is a question how much Shakespeare knew
about the ”rules till near the end of his career;
but he could not.have been produced without the
Italian dramatists and critics, his forerunners,
who studied Aristotle and diffused the knowledge
of classical drama that was in the air.26

In regard to The Rhetoric, it is known that
it was available in England after the early 1500's.27
To summarize, then, when we consider that

Shakespeare's formal rhetorical training is thought

to have been in the traditional manner with Cicero

 

25Marvin T. Herrick, ”The Poetics of Aris-
totle i3 E¥gland, (New Haven:.inle UniverEIty Press,
2 p0 0
24K0nn0dy, 92o 2—13" P. 218e
251bid., pp. 234-246.
26Ibid., p. 232. See footnote 51.

27Herrick,‘gp.‘gi§., p. 13

22
and Quintiil ion as the classical sources: that the
three schools of rhetoric extant during Shakespeare's
writing career contained some fundamentals of ”Aris-
totelianism” as Sister Miriam Jeseph has observed,
and that Shakespeare was directly acquainted with
Wilson's rhetoric, it appears that Kennedy's conclu-
sions that some of Shakespeare's later orations con-
tain rhetoric which can be classified as Aristotelian
is a legitimate one. It is also known that Aris-
totle's Rhetoric and Poetics were circulating in
England in Shakespeare's day and that Aristotelian
rhetorical and poetic theory were available. Shake-
speare’s later plays show evidences of being influ-
enced by a source which is akin to Aristotelian .
dramatic and rhetorical theory as Kennedy has observed.
These circumstances strongly suggest that the play-
wright could have been aware of and could have incor-
porated the ancient's precepts into his dramaturgy.
The classical conception of rhetoric under the influ-
ence of Bacon and Jensen became a clear actuality in
the seventeenth century.28 But this does not mean

that there were no rhetorical innovations in

 

28James E. Wade, Mediaeval Rhetoric in Shake-
s care, (unpublished Ph. D: dissertation, University
LEErary, St. Louis University, 1942), p. 1.

  

Q

:2e'~:n¢ hrtauie 9.4.: u a!“

Sire znsvxe ef:s:9:91 lo 2!“.

  
    

.
| I

     
  

  

u.~-_:‘.~*. ~=~c2 iocftssoo two ’1‘ -

-‘ :-° ‘;:21 :92212 as 'ulalm.—

   

.:' f v.13 sot --:ss§?9111; fed: - o

  

    

.322; s"? H: 'b7”$ ‘
_ - . .-. -J ‘;o.i ' \ 2 ‘ - ,.‘
- “V3122 .5: {gum ‘.Je '-»- 8:35-?5

, . .4 .39. baggy Will!
0‘ a: '(Sgl ‘wIZTQVvai; 3117;? .’a) Q

       
    
  

25
Elizabethan times.29 Considering the alert aptitudes
of Shakespeare and the change which was taking place
in the rhetorical theory in his time, it seems reason-
able to consider the later works of the playwright as
hybrid literary products of the medieval rhetorical
tradition (See page 54), and as Kennedy has observed,
as literary masterpieces which consciously or uncon-
sciously absorbed the classical precepts which were
then in circulation, and which in the seventeenth
century matured and became the standards of both oral
and written prose and poetry.

When reviewing the evidence concerning Shake-
speare's knowledge or awareness of his conscious or
unconscious application of Aristotelian precepts in
his dramaturgy, and the changes which were occurring
in the communicative process of his era, Kennedy's
conclusions appear to be both reasonable and justi-
fiable.

His conclusion, however, that Shakespeare
”perfected the revival of the ancient rhetoric in
poetic," is based on a generalized methodology, i.g.,
he has not analyzed in detail any of the dramatic
speeches which he has classified into Aristotle's
three kinds of oratory: and he has not analyzed these

orations in terms of Aristotle's Rhetoric. His main

 

29Ibid., p. s.

24
concern in his book has been to show the reader Shake-
speare's use of the oration in his dramaturgy. He
has explained how Shakespeare has skillfully inte-
grated the oration into his plays; how he has used the
oration effectively as a means of character revela-
tion,as a means to advance the plot, and as a means
of pointing up significant events or a character's
reaction to an important event. He has observed that
these orations include logical and persuasive speak-
ing, but he has not conducted any detailed rhetorical
analysis to substantiate his observation. The only
attention Kennedy has given to rhetorical analysis
is to construct a general outline of the content of
some of the orations to reveal Shakespeare's use of
the introduction, narration, refutation, and epilogue,
and to treat the quality of Shakespeare's orations in
the four writing periods of the playwright's career.30
The purpose of this study, as previously stated, is
to analyze some dramatic speeches that Kennedy has
defined as orations in an attempt to identify and
evaluate Shakespeare's conscious or unconscious use
(of Aristotelian precepts of rhetoric.
It remains to determine the scope of this

analysis and to determine the criteria which are to

30Kennedy,_p. cit., see Chapter V, ”Struc-
ture of Orations."

   
 
  
  
    
    
       
  
    
   
    
  
   
  
  
 

’fi
-oinda 'xobssq :-. _ won’ 0:. need and i0“ “ ‘ .
9'25 "Kiev-"is _- .'f‘ 1:1 noisste ads 1. 00'.
-9; ,f 7.4;, r‘,i - f .z. ewri “-(ASQZO‘JRI'E. wad beatelq'mw
1:» .’ 1'... as. x. .‘n‘ ': :Nn' 1- 61%: 1.3.11 3’013310 M3
-..7;...,..- . .. ~ -.. - ,-. gievlsoet‘le slots".
:,.- -:. g, ‘ , ~:4 'tu oJ anion s al.801i .|
-- n acicnleq 10 9
34‘ . f‘“ , ' . . - . i. ' J 7 601303.!
-5. a ~- ,v ._ '° .. ' y . N; " ' ‘ :t: can“:
.,4. . . . .. ,. q; ‘3“: .
. i ' - ' " J r. f = {:1’isftll
*‘ . . . ' ' - -° " .'"'lf'“‘1

0

-‘ ‘:- " CI

 

A . '
r ,' f. ‘. ' '4r38
. ." 'r s
. O
‘ 3
0 ~ ' .
. I
. r. e
.' ‘
0!]..
t ' ~ : .
I "’ Q . . ’ t‘
t ' . . _ ' 4"(q*

,_ ‘ . ‘ .- 4 ' i c (.3

  
 

.g . z" .195

, 5 .'_'.;B V.

  
    
 

r . . '
a hzlwA to

   

of“: lo , -* ' '
cache euJ enioueseb ch'fwuuw

' ed eta—don“ shoot-m odd

    

  

solutes-3f: c: has cut

    
 

   

     
 

. "3 ex 7' ' " 'W 7' A
'-.4F,'.-* ‘ ' .' “ .
ee‘a I."- M8
iv.

{fa , - fifhvs"eli'
. .. , 9".1‘ ~a.’ ‘ .

 
   

  

 

25
be applied in the examination of the dramatic passages.
As stated in Chapter I, the specific orations
which are subjected to analysis are those dramatic
speeches from.Shakespeare's work which Kennedy has
classified as forensic orations. These speeches are

listed in Table 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2
Play Act-Scene Speaker Purpose
PERIOD I
The Comedy I i Aegeon Defense of himself
of Errors
The Comedy
of Errors V i Antipholus Defense of himself
of Ephesus
Titus Andro-
nicus I i Tamera Defense of son
PERIOD II
Romeo and
Juliet V iii Friar Lawrence Exposition of situ-
ation: Defense
of himself
Richard II V i Howbray Defense of himself
Henry IV,
Part I V 1 Worcester Defense of himself
Henry IV, “
Part II V ii Chief Justice Defense of himself
Merchant of
Venice IV vii Shylock Defense of himself
PERIOD III
Measure for
Measure II ii Isabella Defense of Claudio
Othello ~\ I iii Othello Defense of himself
Timon of
Athens III v Alcibiades Defense of himself
PERIOD IV
‘Winter's 32
Tale III ii Hermione Defense of herself

 

52Ibid., p. 67.

26

From the foregoing table it will be noted that
the analyses are concerned with similar or identical

speaking situations. The reason for this choice is

two-fold: 1) Assuming that Shakespeare does use Aris-
totelian persuasive precepts in his orations, these
precepts would seemingly be more discernable in a
judicial situation wherein the speaker's main objec-
tive is to influence the belief of his immediate lis-
teners in the play, either positively or negatively,

on an issue that is of deep personal concern. In ten
out of twelve orations the speaker is speaking in
self-defense. 2) Because of the similarity of situa-
tions, it is possible to draw more definite conclusions

and generalizations regarding Shakespeare's use of

Aristotelian rhetorical theory.

This study covers orations from plays written
in all four periods of Shakespeare's career. Kennedy
has observed that the playwright used the oration
most frequently in his early plays at which time he
was "most generally given to experiment in language";
and that "like his predecessors," he found "the ora-
tion a convenient vehicle for rhetorical display."

As Shakespeare gave more attention to the defelopment
of plot, the number of the orations used in his plays

decreased; but "along with the development of the plot

structure, "Shakespeare showed "discrimination and

27
concentration in the use of the oration.” He refined
the oratorical speech, fitting it to the individual
character of the speaker, and using it more skill-

fully to advance the plot. Lastly, Kennedy has ob-

served:

. . . there is a growing interest and de-
veloping skill in Shakespeare's use of the trial

scene and the forensic. The tenseness of situa-
tion characteristic of a trial scene furnishes

occasion and opportunity for unusually effective
use of a carefully worked out speech of defense.

In connection with the foregoing, an attempt
is made to note specifically the basic differences in
the quality of the forensic orations used by Shake-
speare in the four periods of his writing career.

It should be kept in.mind that in a study of
this nature there are variables such as characteriza-
tion and the playwright's dramatic purpose; and that
any conclusions drawn are drawn in consideration of
these and other non-realistic elements.

The methodology for this study as outlined
at the end of Chapter I, is to analyze in full detail
according to Aristotelian rhetorical precepts Her-
mione's oration from.The Winter's gglg. This drama-

tic speech is fren.Shakespeare's fourth period of writ-
ing. In regard to its quality, Mr. Kennedy states:

33Ib1d., p. 73.

28

Hernione's oration represents the best
of Shakespeare's work in dramatic integration.
. . . Furthermore, her forensic achieves the
introduction of rhetoric in poetic according to
the best of classical tradition in a play which

represents Shakespeare's most ambitious effort

in harmonizing the romantic and classical ideals
of poetic in drmma.54

Asswming that Kennedy's statements are correct,
it should be possible to use the oration of Hermione
as a standard to which the other orations could be
compared and by which they could be evaluated. By
this methodology, the basic differences and similari-
ties in the techniques used by Shakespeare in the com-
position of his orations can be more easily and
accurately made.

It should be made clear that Kennedy's con-
clusions regarding Shakespeare's use of the oration
in his dramaturgy have been made by applying Aris-
totle’s theory of what constitutes drama as that
theory is voiced in 223 Poetics; that Kennedy has been
concerned with the various elements of Shakespeare's
plays: the plot and the development of character as
well as the oration: and that this study is concerned
only with Kennedy's generalized conclusion, "He
[Shakespeare] perfected the revival of the ancient
rhetoric in poetic." Some attention is given to plot

and character because the overall effect of an

34Ib1d., p. 163.

29

oretien is naturally contingent to some extent upon
these two elements. Nevertheless, plot and character
are not treated as main elements of the analysis,

unless they are essential contributing factors to the

overall speaking situation.
With these limitations in.mind, then, let us

consider the formulation of specific rhetorical cri-
teria which are applied in the present analysis.
Aristotle's conceptien of the place of rhe-

toric in the poetic drama which appears in Chapter

‘XIX of The Rgetics is as follows:

It remains to speak of the Diction and

Thought, the other parts of Tragedy having been
Concerning the Thought, we may assume

discussed.
wflsat is said in the Rhetoric; to which inquiry
the subject more strictly belongs. Under Thought
is included every effect which has to be produced
by speech: in particular-~proof and refutation:
the excitation of the feelings, such as pity,
fear, and anger, and the like; the heightening or
extenuating of facts. Further, it is evident
that the dramatic incidents must be treated fro-
the same points of view as the dramatic speeches,
when the object is to evoke the sense of pity,
The only differ-

fear, grandeur, or probability.
ence is that the incidents should speak for them»

selves without verbal exposition; while the
effects aimed at in a speech should be produced

by the speaker, and as a result of the speech.
if the proper

For what were the need of a speaker,
impression were at once conveyed, quite apart

from.what he says.
”Concerning the Thought, we may assume which

is said in the Rhetoric; to which inquiry the subject

.more strictly belongs." Since Aristotle refers us

35Ib1do’ p. 30

  

-?

‘0

 
 
 

J

 
 
  

    
 

.. ~ a.” .1- .‘tf'YS'.’ ' .sane-eIe a

O

- : '- 'x: P3 boast-'1'! e.-

     

' -fl .

_- e~ e19 ted: II.

 
     
   

"I -‘i' t.-';'n."":)'

 
 

399131113 'an'

   

'C'Llum ' .‘a .— ' r...
. H i. .. o1 (VITOifinv: 911:! at his.-
.u .01. -ele': smooch}. scale “' roof. (I I ' a .3
v .3, e t some .. 3

O- .'_

”II-56?"

" ‘_ ,L .

0 ." ‘ °

A»

I
e ‘ ,9"
- ’3.

      

 
  
    
    
 
    
 

  
  
  
  

.e
.S _ M

f.

n
.4
C‘-

1'...

  

..fl

‘ e
.‘._’ -‘

  

-- - d
u -‘c.

. h
.

     
 

50

to 222 Rhetoric, the procedure which is followed to
determine the criteria for analysis is first, to
demonstrate only to an expedient extent that the con-
tents of Th2 Rhetoric are in harmony with Aristotle's
concept of the place of rhetoric in the poetic drama;
and second, to establish the criteria which are
applied in the analysis of the forensic orations.

"Under Thought is included every effect which
has to be produced by speech.“ When comparing this
statement from Eh: Poetics with the definition of
rhetoric itself as found in The Rhetoric: ”So let

 

Rhetoric be defined as the faculty (power) of dis-
covering in the particular case what are the avail-
able means of persuasion,”56 points of identity
appear. These points of identity, whether rhetoric
be a subsidiary element in the poetic drama or whether
it be a means of speaking effectively and persuasively,
are inherent in the phrases, ”every effect which has
to be produced by speech” and ”discovering in the par-
ticular case what are the available means of persua-
sion.I In 2h: Poetics, Aristotle defines those

effects as being ”proof and refutation”; ”the excita-
tion of feelings such as pity, fear, anger, and the
like,” and ”the heightening or extenuating of facts.”

56Aristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle, trans.,
Lane Cooper, (New Tori?" IppletonéCZntury-Crofts, Inc.,
1932), lo 2’ Fe 7.

31

In The Rhetoric, persuasion, which is the
basic element of ”proof and refutation," is effected
by the speaker's use of non-artistic proofs (the use
of testimonies, witnesses, laws, etc.), and the three
modes of artistic proofs, ethical, pathetic and legi-
cal proof.

Considering ethical proof first, Aristotle
says that to establish this mode of proof:

The speaker must paint his portrait in
the right colors . . . the speaker must seen to
have good sense; good moral character, and good
will toward the audience.3

To establish pathetic proof, the speaker must ”put
his hearers in the proper frame of mind. He "must
understand emotions, and have propositions at command
for inducting them.”:58 To establish logical proof:

The speaker must know the general prin-
ciples of arguing . . . he must have ideas about
the uses and kinds of logical patterns and the
logical questions or issues wggch occur in . . .
every sort of subject matter.

A speaker's Judicious use of the three fore-
going modes of proof constitutes then, to a large

extent the means by which he can effect persuasion.

Table.3 shows the identical or parallel elements

 

37Taken from an unpublished outline on Aris-
totle's Rhetoric prepared by H. A. Wilchelns, Cornell
University, n. a.

33Ib1d.
39Ib1d.

32
inherent within the precepts of The Poetics and those

of The Rhetoric, with reference to persuasive speaking.

TABEE 3

‘A COMPARISON OF THE SYNONYMY 0R PARALLELISHS
IHHERENT WITHIN ARISTOTLES'S THEORY OF THE
PLACE OF RHETORIC IN THE POETIC DRAMA
AND OF RHETORIC AS A MEANS OF
PERSUASIVE SPEAKING

The Rhetoric The Poetics

1. Ethical Proof (ethos) 1. Excitation of feelings of
pity, fear, anger, etc.

2. Pathetic proof 2. Excitation of feelings of

(pathos) pity, fear, anger, etc.

3. Logical proof (legos) 3. Proof and refutation.

4. The three modes of . 4. The heightening and exten-

proof and narration. uating of facts.

5. The object of speech: 5. The object of speech: to

to persuade~~involving evoke a sense of pity, gran—

all three modes of dour, or probabilityo-in-

proof. volving the three modes of
proof.

Such a presentation, of course, distorts the
intent of Aristotle because it presents the three
modes of proof as separate entities rather than as
three complementary aspects of the total speaking
situation. To clarify, 3.5., a link in a speaker's
chain of reasoning may be stated in such a way that
it will add to the speaker's pathetic and ethical
proof as it simultaneously presents a cogent argu-
ment to the audience. Similarly, in the rhetoric of
the poetic drama, a character may ”extenuato" or
”heighten” some facts through logical methodoIOgy,

and thereby evoke ”a sense of pity or grandeur.”

33
Because of the presence of the logical and pathetic
elements, his factual account may be acceptable as
proof or refutation of the issue at hand.

The synonymy of the legical proof in EE£.§ES'
tggig and the proof and refutation in Th3 Poetics is
obvious. The pathetic and ethical proofs find their
relative parallels in the ”excitation of feelings":
Ono's passions or emotions are usually aroused only to
the degree to which one identifies oneself positively
or negatively with the subject at hand. The source of
this identification or empathy is usually found in the
ethical qualities of a character or in the ethical and
emotional nature of the issues in which the character
is involved. ”The excitation of feelings“ is accom-
plished to thedegree that the speaker evinces to his
hearers that he is emotionally moved by what he is
uttering and to the degree that the speaker, both by
ethos and pathos, is capable of producing the desired
emotional reaction in his audience. "The excitation
of feelings," then, is to a large extent dependent
upon the pathetic and ethical proofs inherent in or
established by the speaker. The logical mode of proof
is by no means excluded from this effect produced by
speech. It seems, however, that the two other proofs
would be more dominantly employed to evoke an ”excita-

tion of feelings” in the audience.

n.

 

——-‘—

   
    
   
    
 
   
   
  
  
   
  
  
  
     
  
   

CG
ofssnsvr has Iani}c1 era 10 oonesews ed: 3.
9r - :.-_'. 9...?» -~‘ «an Jw'uoor Jews»? efd .fl

0 s - g

. , . . '_.'~ 1)? \f‘;' of .1191."‘U301 1.

-s-yx' .l' ,' ' -".
’- ".. . J , i. a ,"HCQ!O 9d!

‘- ”h L.. ) .- . z r‘ '3; “n. .‘(a’ifl “if: b“. .

‘V

"in! .‘m
- _ . . . _ . .0 : J'u'ltlf' wilds!
r ' A
. 1 ~r rqrivwnq £"I°"
-e
._.+ own 96 cliff
. I .‘
. . .. ‘. ‘34.,” w
. .°+~»’z aid!
' 4“ ISOEN’.
‘51:?!le
. win/n! a! "

( .hfiPIIq

g I ‘ ." {icqv - .*.

 
 

" r ' Inn'o’ 3.! da’u

a?" a ‘* ' '
3 . 1- swungc names: on [d ”it"
ow; on; 3nd: ,qevewn

 
 

' 'V I r.
.‘ g0 sheriff/Tr? TE,“ ','§

 
 
  

eleosq acute

 

   
 
  
  

u ‘emeee 31 .:.
3:“. sieve ethpnlpe thesaurus one. It,

 

«flute:

 

I: "H

 

  

54
In Th: Poetics, Aristotle describes “the
heightening and extenuating of facts” as two of the
effects which should be produced by rhetoric in the
drama. This phrase in itself embraces much of the
theory in The Rhetoric. To heighten the facts of an

 

issue or circumstance in the poetic drama suggests the
use of the pathetic and ethical means of proof, but
it by no means excludes a logical approach or the
establishment of logical proof in the presentation.
To extenuate the facts: to represent an issue or a
circunstance as being less offensive, less serious than
it has been alleged to be, suggests a logical approach
and the establishment of logical proof predominantly;
but again, it by no means precludes the speaker's use
of the ethical or pathetic modes of proof. I

When comparing the ends of rhetoric as Arise
totle has defined them in The Rhetoric and Th3 Poetics

 

(See Table 5), it is necessary to keep in mind that in
The Rhetoric the real, the practical, the expedient

 

are being dealt with. The ultimate end is persuasion.
In The Poetics, the imitation of life and artistic en-

 

deavor are the paramount considerations. The rhetoric
of the playwright is subordinated to his overall-
dranatic purposes. He incorporates it with various
other devices to create an impression upon the view-

ers of his work. In both The Rhetoric and The Poetics,

35

however, the same elements are incorporated, as it
has been demonstrated. Persuasion through speech is
vital to the total impression which the playwright
wishes to make upon his audience: it must be per-
suaded in one form or another before it is capable
of reacting to the characters, issues, and circume
stances that are being portrayed.

The foregoing demonstration of the synonymy
and parallelism of Aristotle's concept of rhetoric,
whether it be a theory of effective public speaking
or a subsidiary element in the poetic drama, then,
justifies the establishment of criteria for analysis
of the dramatic speeches by drawing these criteria
from The Rhetoric. Since Aristotle refers the reader
to The Rhetoric when he speaks of the proper relation-
ship between rhetoric and the poetic in drama; and
since Mr. Kennedy has asserted that Shakespeare's
later oratorical passages are in harmony with.Aris-
totelian precepts, the bulk of this study is concerned
with a detailed analysis of the specified orations in
terms of Aristotle's precepts of rhetorical discourse
as they are set forth in The Rhetoric.

In The Rhetoric, Aristotle has divided the
types of speaking into three categories: deliberative
(political, advisory); forensic (legal), and epideic-
tic (ceremonial).4° He has explained that the three

36
nodes of proof: logical, pathetic, and ethical, are
to be incorporated in all three branches of speaking,
as is the non-artistic mode of proof. In addition to
these four means of persuasion applicable to all three
branches of rhetoric, Aristotle has formulated speci-
fic precepts which are to be applied to each branch
of speaking in particular. In accordance with the
philosopher's methodology. an examination of the
speeches is made to identify and analyze the means
by which the speaker has established logical, ethical,
and pathetic proof and also to note if any form of
inch-artistic proof has been incorporated into the
speaking situation. In addition, the speeches are
analyzed in light of some of the rhetorical precepts
which Aristotle has formulated in regard to forensic
speaking in particular. It remains now to define and
to specify the criteria which are applied in the
analysis.
The Non-artistic Mode of Proof: Aristotle
defines the non-artistic mode of proof:
By "non-artistic" proofs are meant all
such as are not supgiied by ou'own efforts, but
existed beforehand.

Aristotle refers to them.as “a non-technical means of

persuasion.” He enumerates five kinds of non-artistic

 

40M13t0t19, 23s 2.3.2" 1e 3, Fe 16.

4111914., 1. 2, p. 8.

37

means of proof: ”laws, witnesses, contracts, tor-
tures, and oaths,a commenting thereafter that "these
belong especially to the forensic branch of Rhetoric.”42

Aristotle's treatment of the non-artistic
modes of proof is involved and lengthy. For the sake
of brevity, mere mentien is made of his points. Dur-
ing the examination of the orations, those precepts
which are applicable in the analysis are defined from
223 Rhetoric and are applied to the orations.

Covering the speaker's use of laws to estab-
lish proof, Aristotle delineates the techniques of
argument which should be followed in specific in-
stances and circumstances. He defines the two kinds
of laws: the written law and the unwritten law-9the
latter being the universal law housing the principle
of equity.45

Treating the subject of witnesses, Aristotle
designates two kinds: the ”ancient, time-honored wit-
nesses,“ whose Judgments are recorded, and the ”recent
witnesses”--those who testify at the scene of the
trial.44 -He instructs the speaker concerning the use

of witnesses, and to a greater length concerning the

 

421b1d., 1. 15, p. 80.
43Ib1d., 1. 15. pp. 30-31.
*4Ib1d., pp. 32-84.

58

use of contracts, tortures, and oaths--how they should
be incorporated in establishing proof.45

In the analysis of Shakespeare’s orations, the
speaker's use of the non-artistic modes of proof are
examined in light of Aristotle's precepts as they are
set forth in Book I, Chapter 15 of The Rhetoric.

The Three Artistic Hodes of Proof: In regard
to ethical proof (ethos) and its importance in foren-
sic speaking, Aristotle says:

Now Rhetoric finds its end in {udgment .
. . in forensic speaking the decision of the
Jury) is a Judgment; and hence the speaker must
not merely see to it that his speech (as an
argument) shall be convincing and persuasive,
but he must (in and by the speech) give the
right impression of himself and get the judge
(audience) into the right state of mind . . .
producing the right attitude in the hearer is
. . . important in forensic.

As for the speakers themselves, the
sources of our trust in them are three, for apart
from the arguments (in a speech) there are three
things that gain our belief, namely, intelligence,
character, and good will. Speakers are untrust-
worthy in what they say or advise from one or
more of the following causes. Either through
want of intelligence they form wrong opinions;
or, while they form correct opinions, their ras-
cality leads them to say what they do not think;
or, while intelligent and honest enough they
are not well-disposed (to the hearer).46

In consideration of the above, the analysis
treats those utterances of the speaker which aid in

the establishment of ethical proof or which reflect

 

45Ib1d., pp. 84-89.
461b1de, 2e 1' pp. 91‘92e

 

Load

8:

   

---._

39
the ethos of the speaker. Any technique or method
which the speaker uses to show ”good will toward the
audience“; which reflects or establishes the speaker's
”intelligence" and ”character” as being ”trustworthy”
is identified as part of the means by which the speak-
er has established ethical proof.

In regard to pathetic proof, Aristotle begins
by defining what he means by emotion: " . . . those
states which are attended by pain and pleasure."47
He then explains how pathetic proof is incorporated
into persuasive speaking:

. . . persuasion is effected through the
audience, when they are brought by the speech
into a state of emotion; for we give very differ-
ent decisions undertme sway of pain or joy, and
liking and hatred.48

First, the analysis of the designated ora-
tions identifies the specific emotion which the speak-
er has produced by his speech: secondly, the means by
which the speaker has produced an emotional reaction
in his audience is analyzed; and third; an attempt is
made to determine to what extent the established
pathetic proof augments the total effectiveness of
the speech.

In considering logical proof, Aristotle first

treats the ”means of persuasion common to all branches

 

47Ib1d., 2. 1, p. 92.
481b1d., 2. 20, p. 147.

40
of speaking”:

”It remains to discuss the means that are
common to all three. These common (universal)
means are generally two-~that is under one genus
there are two sgecies, namely the Example and
the Enthmnmme.4

‘When treating the subject of legical proof in
connection with forensic speaking, the rhetorician
states: ”Argument by enthymeme is more characteris-
tic” of this branch of rhetoric.50

Aristotle defines the enthymeme as a ”rhetori-
cal syllogism.” In other words, the enthymeme is to
rhetoric what the syllogism is to logic. It is, in
a sense, a link of reasoning in a persuasive argument.
It is based on deduction: I

To conclude from certain assumptions that
something else follows from those assumptions
(something distinct from them, yet dependent
upon their existing) either universally or as
a rule--this in Dialectic, is called a syllo-
gism, and in Rhetoric an enthymeme."1

An explanation of the nature of the enthymeme
and the enthymematic reasoning process as it was con-
ceived by Aristotle has been aptly interpreted and
presented by James McBurney in his dissertation, The

Place 2; the‘Enthymeme in Rhetorical Theory.52 In

 

499333., 2. 20, p. 147.

503213., 3. 17, p. 235.

5132351., 1. 2, p. 10.

52James McBurney, “The Place of the Enthymeme

in Rhetorical Theory,“ Abstract of Ph. D. Dissertation
from Speech Monographs, Vol. III (1936).

41
one section of his work, McBurney treats the enthy-
meme in relation to the nature of the subject matter
from which.it is drawn, demonstrating that enthymemes
are formulated from.probabilities, signs, examples
(involving analogical reasoning based on induction),
and refutation. He also explains how enthymemes are
employed in the reasoning process. His interpretation
of Aristotle's enthymeme and the enthymematic reasons
ing process is as follows: Enthymemes drawn from
probabilities (arguments which are usually accepted
as being true because it is probable that they are
so) attempt to account for a fact or a principle al-
ready maintained. Such an enthymeme assigns a cause
or a reason for the existence of a fact or principle

already acknowledged.53

Enthymemes which find their

basis in signs seek to supply a reason which will in

turn establish the existence of a fact without offer-
ing any causal relation between the sign and the fact
under consideration. There are three types of signs

from.which such enthymemes can be drawn: the certain
sign (indisputable); the fallible sign (disputable)

54 Aristotle cites two kinds of ex-

and the example.
ample from which enthymemes can be formed: the histo-
rical example, drawn from reliable sources in his-

tory, and the invented example. The invented example

 

551b1d., p. 56.

54Ibid., p. 57.

42
.Aristotle also subdivides into two classes: the illus-
trative parallel and the fable.55 Enthymemes formu-
lated from the example are based on induction and the
analogical reasoning process, whereas the enthymemes
drawn from.probabilities and signs are based on deduc-
tion.56 To summarise McBurney's interpretation up
to this point: ”An enthymeme, then, is a syllogism
drawn from probable causes, signs (certain and
fallible), and examples,” starting with probable pre-
mises and lacking formal‘validity.57 Refutative en-
thymemes are formed by either bringing up an objec-
tion to the preceding argument offered by the opponent
or by the construction of a counter-syllogism.or argu-
ment. McBurney makes an interesting comment in regard
to such enthymemes when they are drawn from probabili-
ties and signs: ”it is impossible to refute enthy-
memes which reason from probabilities because the
premises cannot be proven to be anything but probable,"
and the same holds true when the enthynanes are drawn
fromsigns.58

Aristotle also states that maxhns can be used

 

55.22.12.

56993. , pp. 53-59.
57;bid., p. 58.
533233., p. 65.

45
as the basis of enthymemes. He defines a maxim as
"a general sentiment (sententious generalization)
respecting human life and action."59

Since Aristotle asserts the enthymeme to be
the basis of logical proof in forensic speaking, the
analysis of the orations is made to identify Shake»;
speare's use of the enthymeme and the enthymematic
reasoning process. In addition to the identification
of the enthymemes, the premises from which they are
drawn is designated in terms of probabilities, signs,
examples, maxims, and of refutation.

Aristotle has much to say in regard to the
means of establishing logical proof in the forensic
speaking situation. He first introduces the reader
to the elements of this branch of rhetoric. They are,
basically, ”accusation and defense"; the time element
is in the past--”for it is always with regard to
things already done that the one party accuses and

the other defends."60

The “aim of judicial pleaders
concerns justice and injustice and they in like manner
make the other considerations subsidiary to these.”61

Since ”expediency, justice, and honor, and their oppo-

 

59Aristotle, 22. ggg., 2. 21, p. 150.

60Ibid., 1. 3, p. 17.

611bid., 1. s, p. 19.

44

sites are the subjects,” the speaker must treat these
subjects in his proof.62 Aristotle enumerates the
four possible issues with which the judicial pleader
will be concerned: (1) that the act was not commit-
ted; (2) that the act did no harm; (5) that the act
did 1.33 harm than 1. alleged; and (4) that the act
was justified; and he advises that the speaker's .
arguments d1ould be drawn to demonstrate the invali-
dity of the accusation only in terms of one of these
four issues.65

Treating the establishment of logical proof
and the use of enthymemes in forensic speaking, the
ancient says:

Forensic speaking has to do with.matters
of fact~~now true or untrue, and necessarily so;
here strict proof is more feasible, since the
past cannot change. But the enthymemes should
not be given in an unbroken string; interweave
them with different matter, or your arguments
will damage each other's effect. There is a
limit to the length of each series. . . . And
avoid using the enthymeme when you are trying to
stir emotion, for it will eitheg dispel the emo-
tion or itself be futile. . . . 4

If you have proofs of your case, then use
them, and speak from moral character (use moral
suasion) as well; if you have nothing for enthy-
memes, then rely upon moral suasion alone. After
all, it is more in keeping with the true worth
to reveal yourself as a man of probity than as
short in argument. 5

 

6S2239.
5§gpgg., 3. 17, p. 233.
64;ggg., p. 234.
65gpgg., p. 235.

 

 

es
esedd Jseq' scum xefioeqe and “.edoetdam add
511;: ‘0‘".‘11’0u1o PIJOJei‘lfl 36.1001q 8m .3 '

aebwe'v ‘-"~' ... r"- ‘
l .4 .4 15', - .,,L ‘..c C“.1'-' 1131' €6UEE1 91d:

.o 0

~J-xs. n r.; is ” ~' ' O.
‘ I ‘1 - 6 .. ‘. ‘. .‘e‘v? ' f ' e .
, .1. .Lenaesnoo ed '
so r; .'.. ‘ war ~1 "’
_ ' ° 0 ‘ '- ‘ '
up. Joe ~nd JadJ (S)
O
I. .
|'_A ‘ ; 4 ‘...'-a ’? ‘ ““'- 0 d
.. Am “T. a..‘ '
, e ..
lm " ' ' 'e "' ‘ L L
- - o ‘ ‘1 ‘ . '.
a ...50 .uSJtIJ‘Ut ”I
"'- '1.‘ " .4. ' ‘ I".
I: ‘ .‘t r ' ' ' I. |
J 1.10 r couemnnmt'
\ 13’ r .
;‘( "(. e : " .. ‘.y. .0. > - r
a I 0.. \' Lo [’3 f
.14.?)1‘81 m, '
Ao'"
A
l
. ‘4. r ‘
one has
.- . .nslcas
‘W -
C ‘t
.f
x - e-- '1 \ rt'
r ‘ ° ‘
.8", . f
e ' e O . -
-1 e . fl
. ' ' ’ .‘ (M1
.F ‘ ' a‘ V
e' " ' O
1 ' .
O o I . ' J. r.
‘ t ’ ’ . 0 e .
. LI» Llfi‘ I
o-_( ~ I ' .
file-H x ‘ I.
~e\,
e ., O . ' ' 1' 't : ' .
it. 1 ._ i f ’
— V
‘ ‘0: . 1 V .I ‘ 1
C. v' f. ' ' 2‘. I
'. - .. _ . r . a ‘ i -" i ‘
':€.‘ I. . . 1 (h . U
. u ' 1 . “ ' I.’ t -
[1+ ' ( ' -I Corfu. ‘frs t h. ’. ‘jfi
‘VWr.f ”2 f...‘ " ' es ' . _" Q s
,' 1 g. ' . . -. ‘ (“:5
28 r26£:|‘ ‘,__ I , I ‘58 1 I r o. - » ‘ 0; . E.
J i ‘ \
. J K ‘ 12"}- "\ PS § ' . -‘ a. ‘. . ‘1‘
.~: .2 r '1-~
cc ‘ 1‘1 n3 ’

. ucMU3tt at John:

 

  
   
  
    
 
     
      
 
 
  
  

  
 
   
     
       
     

45

To shorten this presentation, mention will
merely be made of other passages wherein Aristotle
deals with the establishment of logical proof in the
forensic speech: In Book III (for specific refer-
ences, see footnotes), the rhetorician lists nine
different ways of dealing with prejudice66 and four
ways of responding to interrOgation.67

In consideration of the foregoing, the ana-
lysis of Shakespeare's use of logical proof in his
orations first, identifies the enthymematic chain of
reasoning and determines the premises of these enthy-
memes in terms of probabilities, signs, examples,
maxims and refutation. Cursory attention is given
to an identification of the issue at hand to deter-
mine which of the four possible issues in forensic
speaking designated by Aristotle is involved in the
oration. Notice is also given to determine to what
extent the subjects of ”expediency, justice, honor
and their opposites" are incorporated into the proof
of the speakers. The effectiveness of the established
logical proof is evaluated along with the other as-
pects of the speech and the unique speaking situation.
What Aristotle has said in regard to interrogation
and dealing with prejudice (for brevity's sake these

 

66Ibid., 3. 15, p. 226.
57Ibid., 5. 18, p. 238.

46
precepts are not discussed) will be kept in mind dur-
ing the analysis; and if there is evidence of their
use, the precepts involved are defined from Egg Egg-
tggig and are applied in the analysis.

In Book III of his work, Aristotle explains
the structure or arrangement (33533) of the speech,
and again lays down certain rules to be applied in
the forensic speaking situation. The basis of all
speech structure, Aristotle says is that

i a Speech has two parts. Necessarily you state
your case, and you prove it. In Rhetoric we must
call these two processes, respectively, Statement
and Argument.68

”Statement" and "Argument,” then, are the
basic essentials of a speech, and *at most the parts
cannot exceed fouruwProem, Statement, Argument, and
Epilogue.” Refutation of an opponent is part of the
argument; narration is a variety of statement. Aris-
totle defines the epilogue and the proem as aids to
memory.69 Concerning their special use in forensic
speaking, he states:

The superlative function of the proenl'is] te
make clear the end and object of your work.

And hence, if your matter is plain and short,
a proen really should not be employed.70

 

681b1d., 1. 15, p. 220.
69Ibid., 3. 14, p. 220.
70Ibid. p. 223.

47

Nor is the Epilogue always a part of the
forensic speech: it is needless, for example,
when the speech is short, or if the facts are
easy to keep in.mind: an epilogue serves to re-
duce the apparent length of your speech.'71

The Epilogue is made up of four elements.
(1) You must render the audience well-disposed
to yourself, and ill-disposed to your opponent:
(2) you must magnify and depreciate (make what-
ever favors your case seem.more im ortant and
whatever favors his case seem less : (3) you
must put the audience into the right state of
emotion; and (4) you must refresh their men-
ories. (summary) 2

It is clear from the above that Aristotle's
precepts concerning the structure and arrangement of
speeches are quite flexible and practical.

It is important to note his commentaries on
the use of the narration in forensic speaking:

The defence needs less narration . . .
unless your story will bear on the contention
[khatJ it was no injustice, or the like. Fur-
ther, speak briefly of events as past and gone,
except when representing them as present will
excite pity and indignation. . . . The narration
should depict character. . . . One thing that
will give this quality is the revelation of moral
purpose; for the quality of the ethos is deter-
mined by the quality of the purpose revealed--
do not speak as if from the intellect after the
fashion of the day: let the words come as if
from a moral purpose: ”This, I willed; aye, it
was my natural choice: nay, though it profiteth
me nothing, even so it was better.”75

And in narrating employ the traits of
emotion. Use the symptoms familiar to all, and

 

72Ibid., 3. 19, p. 240.
73Ibid., 3. 16, p. 250.

48

any special signs of emotion in the defendant
or his adversary.74

The foregoing precepts which Aristotle has
formulated regarding the organization of the oration
and its specific adaptations to forensic speaking are
adopted as criteria for a structural analysis of the
designated speeches. Aristotle’s treatment of the
use of narration to establish ethical and pathetic
proof is obviously an overlapping of material for
analysis. When such a narration appears in an ora-
tion, the narrationissnalyzed under both pathetic or
ethical proof and structural analysis.

It will be recalled that Kennedy has examined
the structure of Shakespeare's orations and has con-
cluded that their quality steadily improved as the
playwright’s writing career progressed. In the plays
of the first period, he has observed that the ora-
tions are "simple in structure” and ”artificially
set” into the milieu of the plot. In the second
period, Kennedy cites Howbray's defense against
Bolingbroke (Richard II) as an example of an oration
wherein Shakespeare ”reveals a maturing sense for the
use of argumentative-rhetoric”: and says that this
oration foreshadows the excellence of Hermione's'

speech of defense (The Winter's Tale) written approxi-

 

74Ibid., p. 231.

49

lately fifteen years later.75 When treating the
third writing period, Kennedy states: ”Whenever Shake-
speare's hand touches the oration . . .t, the maturity
of his genius creates a work of finished rhetorical
art."'76 It will be recalled that Kennedy cited Her-
mione's oration fromihe fourth period as the best
example of Shakespeare's art, both in its rhetorical
quality and in its dramatic integration into the play
plot. Comparing the structure of the orations all
the way from Th: Comedy 2; Errors to the plays from
the third and fourth periods, Kennedy concludes:
”Outline becomes more and more subdued as more and
more effort and skill are devoted to feeling and
expression.”77

When commenting upon the overall structure of
Shakespeare's orations, Kennedy leaves his Aristote-
lian poetic criteria and states: "The structure of
Shakespeare's orations reveals their fidelity to the
best classical tradition.” By the term "classical,'
he is referring to Cicero, Quintilian and Thomas
Wilson, in addition to Aristotle.78 Through a review
of the writings of these authorities on the subject

 

75Kennedy, 22. g$£., pp. 104-105.
76;pgg., p. 107.
77;pgg., p. 111.
73;23§., p. 147.

50
of structure or arrangement, he has demonstrated the
similarities of their theories.79 Considering this
demonstration, and recalling Aristotle's own flexible
treatment of the parts of the oration, this study
proposes to examine the structure of the specified
orations in terms of Aristotle's precepts to identi-
fy Shakespeare's use of the proem, statement, narra-
tion, argument, refutation, and epilogue. It is im-
portant here to mention that all these parts may not
be found in one passage of speaking or may not be
found within any one speech. Also, the forensic speech
with its element of refutation or argument obviously
involves more than one speaker. Then, too, Shake-
speare's method of drmmaturgy may have found it neces-
sary to shift the position of a part of the oration,
such as the introduction or proem, to some source
other than the main speaker.

To summarize this point of analysis: the
orations are analyzed both according to the general
precepts of Aristotle concerning the parts and arrange-
ment of a speech, and according to the specific pre-
cepts concerning forensic speaking. Attention 1‘~W
also given to the structural development of the ora-

tions which Kennedy has partially treated in his

 

79Ib1d., pp. 116-129.

51
work.80 A comparison of the structure of the ora-
tions is made to determine both their differences and
the ways in which Kennedy considers the later ones
to have improved upon the earlier orations. The
structure of Hermione's oration (The Winter's gglg)
is adopted as the criterion for this comparison.

In Book III of The Rhetoric, Aristotle states:

 

The provinces of study which concern the
making of a speech are three: (1) the means of
effecting persuasion (the four modes of proof);
(2) the style; and (5) the right ordering of the
several divisions of the whole.81

Up to this point the criteria established for analysis
have included Aristotle's first and third parts of
”The provinces of study which concern the making of
a speech.” It remains to treat part two, the style.
To Aristotle, style, or lexis, meant the way in which
the thoughts of the speaker are expressed. Lexis in-
volved "choice of words, syntax, and delivery."32

”In his book, Kennedy states that he has made
”no attempt to analyze the eloquence of Shakespeare's

orations.'85 It should be remembered also that in

his general treatment of the structure of the orations,

 

80Ibid., 103-147.
81Aristotle, gp. cit., 3. 1, p. 182.
BzIbid.

 

83Kennedy, gp. cit., p. 141.

52
while it has been partially drawn from.the third book

of The Rhetoric, Kennedy has coupled Aristotle's pre-

 

cepts with those of other classical rhetoricians.

His treatment of the orations in the Aristotelian vein
does not embrace a consideration of the "choice of
words" and ”syntax"; and for this reason, his concluu
sion that Shakespeare ”perfected the revival of the
ancient rhetoric in poetic" is based on incomplete
evidence. Since this study has adopted Kennedy's
conclusion as its basic hypothesis, however, it seems
wise to execute an analysis only of those Aristotelian
elements discussed by Kennedy.

In addition to this reason for omitting a con-
sideration of style, certain other problems are also
apparent. In Book III, for example, Aristotle speaks
of the ”golden.mean” of expression as it applies to

rose, while Shakespeare's orations are written in
poetic form.84 Also, the ancient rhetorician explain-
ed the subject of legig for the student of 332; dis-
course. It is well-known, however, that rhetoric in
the Renaissance was predominantly a theory of composi-
tion rather than a theory of oral persuasive discourse.
The nature of this theory of rhetorical composition,

revealed by Morris Crell in his introduction to

 

849£e Cite, 3e 2, pe 185.

53
Euphues: The Anatomy 9; Wit: Euphues and His Egglan ,
further complicates the problem.when one considers
an analysis of Shakespeare's poetic drama in terms
of Aristotelian prose precepts. Breaking in on Croll
as he is discussing the schemes and figures (the de-
vices by which composition was written in the Renais-
sance), we learn of the precipitating reason for the
predominance of the ornateness of expression in Renais-
sance rhetoric:

What new charm did the schemes have in the
sixteenth century? We might answer that the love
for all forms of ornateness, characteristic of
the Renaissance, would alone have served to re-
vive the schemata. But the true explanation of
the phenomenon is certainly that now for the
first time these figures appeared in an artistic
and elaborate use in the vernacular. The novelty
consists, not in the figures themselves, but in
the fact that they are sounded on a new instru-
ment, and that an art which had been the posses-
sion of clerks alone becomes the property of men
and women of the world. In the history of
fashiogs there are episodes much stranger than
thiBeB

In regard to the influence of this rhetorical
ornateness of expression upon Shakespeare's composi-
tion in particular, James E. Wade in his dissertation,

Mediaeval Rhetoric in Shakespeare, studied intensively

 

 

Shakespeare's early poems ’Venus and Adonis and The

Rape 23 Lucrece to note the playwright's use of the

85
Morris Wm. Croll Eu hues: The Anatom of
Wit: Eu hues 22d His En land 5 John L-I', ed. Harry
CIemon and Morris Wm. CroII, TEonaon ew York, 1916),
see “Introduction,” p. liv.

 

54

theory of rhetorical composition as it was taught in
the grammar schools of the day.“ In addition to this
main area of concentration,‘Wade conducted a survey
of twelve plays ranging from 1590 to 1610. One of
the conclusions of his study is that the rhetorical
theory of the Middle Ages “accounts for part of
Shakespeare's linguistic effects in his drama.”86
As Shakespeare's art became more mature, the rhetori-
cal ornamentation was subordinated to his poetic and
dramatic purposes, but he never ceased using the orna-
mental rhetoric which was passed on to the Renaissance
through the Middle Ages.87 Wade states that this orna-
mental rhetoric was less distinguishable in Shakespeare's
later plays because it became "an integral part of his
imagery and functional use of language." But, when
Shakespeare wrote his last plays, (1609 to 1611), Wade
points out that "the mediaeval tradition was not
dead.” His plays were still being written for a
I'rhetoric-minded audience."88

Wade and Kennedy agree, then, that Shakespeare's
use of language became less distinguishably ornate as
the playwright's career progressed. wad. states, how-

ever, that his composition near the termination of

86w‘d03 O O Cite, Po 155.
872212.. P. 57, see footnote 14.

88Ibid., p. 33.

55

his career still contained rhetorical elements in-
herited from the mediaeval tradition and that Shake-
speare was still writing for an audience which ex-
pected and appreciated an ornate mmde of expression.

It seems reasonable, then, if Shakespeare's composi-
tion was congruous with the rhetorical theory of his
time, and wade concludes thatit‘was, that his use of
style would not be Aristotelian, even though '
other aspects of his rhetoric in the orations of
his later plays were-mas Kennedy has observed.

The foregoing material is included to demon-
strate the reasons for the writer's withdrawal from
attempting an analysis of the style of Shakespeare's
oratiOns in terms of Aristotle's Book III of The Rha-
Eggig. Scholars have been and are still contending
the moot question: Did Shakespeare know of and in-
corporate Aristotle's Poetics into his dramaturgy?
(As has been previously noted, Kennedy discusses this
question.)89 The incongruous points of view pre-
sented and the foregoing paramount question produce
a problem which is too broad and too involved to be
treated in this study. Some mention is made of style
in connection with the analysis of the three modes
of proof; but Shakespeare's syntax and his choice

of words is not analyzed in terms of the Aristotelian

 

BQKanQdy, .22. Cite, ppe 218-2460

56
conception of the ”golden mean” of expression, or
”lexis,” per se. The examination of the orations
applies only Aristotle's precepts concerning the
structure and arrangement of speeches from Book III
of The Rhetoric.

The scope of analysis: This analysis treats

 

the twelve forensic orations from the plays of Shake-
speare as they are listed on page twenty-five.

The methodology of analysis: The overall

 

methodology of this analysis is based on comparison.

Hermione's oration from The Winter's Tale is analyzed

 

and evaluated in terms of the Aristotelian rhetorical
criteria which are hereafter summarized. The other
orations are analyzed through the use of annotated
manuscripts of the speeches, i.e., each oration is
examined by the application of the same Aristotelian
principles which are applied to the fore-mentioned
oration, but the analysis does not include a lengthy
explanation of the Aristotelian elements found there-
in. In the concluding chapter of this study the re-
sults of these analyses are summarized and compared
to Hermione's oration. The excellency of Hermione's
speech, then, is adopted as a criterion of evaluation
and it is applied to the other orations to ascertain
their qualities and merits. The reasons for the

improving quality in Shakespeare's orations as re~

57

corded in Kennedy are made more discernable by follow-

ing this procedure.

The Aristotelian rhetorical_principles which

 

are basic to the analysis:

 

I.

II.

An Analysis of the Non-Artistic Proofs is Con-
cerned with:

An identification of the speaker's use of a
mode of non-artistic proof.

An evaluation of its use, per se, and in its
relation to the other aspects of the speech
with consideration of the dramatic circum-
stances.

A.
B.

The
A.

B.

C.

Three Modes of Artistic Proof.
The analysis of the speaker's use of ethical
proof is concerned with the following:

1.

2.

The identification of the utterances,
techniques, or methods used by the speaker
to establish ethical proof.

An evaluation of the speaker's use of
ethical proof, per se, and in its relation
to the other aspects of the speech with
consideration of the dramatic circum-
stances.

The analysis of the speaker's use of pathetic
proof is concerned with the following:

1.
2.

3.

The specific emotion produced by the
speech is identified.

The means by which the speaker has estab-
lished emotion proof is identified and
analyzed with consideration of the drama-
tic circumstances.

The speaker's use of pathetic proof, per
se, and in its relation to the other
aspects of speech with consideration of
the dramatic circumstances.

The analysis of the speaker's use of logical
proof is concerned with the following:

1.

2.

An identification of the enthymemes and
the premises from which they are drawn
18 madOe 4

An evaluation of the speaker's use of
the enthymematic reasoning process, per
se, and in its relation to the other
aspects of the speech with consideration
of the dramatic circumstances.

III.

58

3. An identification, analysis, and evalua-
tion of speaker's use of those Aristote-
lian precepts which pertain specifically
to the establishment of logical proof in
forensic speaking is made. The evalua-
tion is made by considering them in rela-
tion to the other aspects of the speech
and with consideration of the dramatic
circumstances.

4. An identification of the issue with which
the speech is involved in terms of Ari-
stotle's four possible issues of foren-
sic speaking, (see page 44) and an identi-
fication of the subjects of forensic
speaking (see page 45).

The Analysis of the Structure of the Orations

Includes:

A. An identification of the parts of the oration.
B. An identification of the speaker's use of the
narration to establish either pathetic or

ethical proof.

C. An evaluation of the speaker's use of the nar-
ration to establish either pathetic or ethical
proof, per se, and in its relationship to the
other aspects of the speech with considera-
tion of the dramatic circumstances. (This
evaluation is treated under either ethical or
pathetic proof.)

CHAPTER III

ANALYSIS OF THE ORATION 0F HERMIONE
FROM THE WINTER'S TALE

 

This chapter is devoted to a detailed rhetori-
cal analysis of Hermione's oration, applying the Aris-
totelian principles which are set forth in the fore-
going chapter. The analysis includes: 1) a review
of the dramatic setting in which the oration is de-
livered; 2) an analysis of the structure of the ora-
tion; 5) the identification of the artistic and non-
artistic proofs which are used; 4) the identification
and evaluation of the enthymemes presented, and 5)
an evaluation of the ethical and pathetic appeals

which are made.

Dramatic Setting

Polixenes, King of Bohemia, has been visiting
at the court of his life-long friend, Leontes, King
of Sicilia for nine months. When Polixenes announces
that he must return to his kingdom, his host pleads
with him to stay longer. 'When his request leaves
Polixenes' plans unaltered, Leontes urges his wife,
Hermione, to speak for him. Hermione's grace, charm,
and clever petition win the debate, and Polixenes

59

60
agrees to extend his visit. As Hermione and Polix-
enes are enjoying each other's company, Leontes no-
tices from.a distance the intimacy that exists be-
tween his wife and his friend. His mind dwells upon
it. He gives the couple by his command leisure time
together. His imagination, piqued by jealousy, grows
until he is convinced of Hermione's infidelity and
convinced that the child she is carrying is Polixenes',
not his own. He relates his suspicions to Camille, a
faithful lord of the court. Camille attempts to per-
suade his king of the absurdity of such a suspicion,
but Leontes' mind remains adamant. He instructs
Camille to poison Polixenes. Camilla agrees for the
moment, but only for the purpose of evading the king's
company long enough to inform.Polixenes of the danger.
This being accomplished, Canillo and Polixenes leave
the court that night for Bohemia. To Leontes, their
abrupt departure confirms Hermione's guilt. He open-
ly accuses her of being an adulteress and a traitor
by conspiring with Camille to take his life. Her-
mione and the court are aghast at his charge. To
convince the court that he is right, Leontes sends
two messengers to the oracle at Delphos to obtain
Apollo's sanction of his actions. There is an in-
terim of twenty-three days before the two messengers
return, during which time Hermione gives birth to a
daughter in prison. Paulina, a lady of the court,

61

takes the child to Leontes, hoping that the sight
of the newly-born might oust from the king his
jealous obsession. Leontes, upon seeing the child,
denies that it is his. He orders that the babe be
burned. Antigonus, Paulina's husband, pleads for the
life of the innocent. Leontes responds by lessening
the severity of his first order, and commands Anti-
gonus to take the child into the wilderness and there
to leave her. Antigonus reluctantly agrees. When the
two messengers arrive from Delphos, Leontes calls a
court of justice, over which he presides, to try Her-
mione upon the charges of adultery and conspiracy.
Leontes opens the court by announcing his desire for
justice to be accomplished. Hermione is brought in.
The officer at Leontes' command reads the indictment,
and the queen begins her oration of defense.

The following manuscript of Hermione's oration
is annotated only to indicate the parts (structure)
of the oration and to identify the speaker's use of
enthymemes and the premises from which they are drawn.
These and the other aspects of the analysis are treat-

ed in detail later in the chapter.

No

.

exaa Hausa eonooonnw was con» no: 99500 H

.oo Men» as .esoapow swabs ado oHonom

 

enfiofio canton an wean» ppm \.mo>aeoos ow om

.pa mmeanxo H as .Haenm accomemfisu penance wsaom

 

.NMHmwepaH osaam «cmuafisw pose hemjmw

05 noon common Adena pa euaeuha Scam noSoo pans pom

 

aenpo on whom he uo.H¢oaHpmou 0mm

 

mmw .coupendooe ha epoHneApsoo Joan;

 

mmnp use on pass Hen o» as H pens eosam

szHsmmm H

.unwaa he hows ham on .huouee
heaven each» sou Eon» can use Heeasoo mango .poenese
one» e no oocsaweaae one modem one on haeapnoo .onoashem
some .noao mama happen eeodduufidoaao he wanes “cement
onscreen on» «oneness ashes he» .mdam one oaoa smacks»
son are no shad on».hese ems» on oaaasao no“: wsaaaaecoo
one .euflemom no mean .eencxaaom mods haepasms msappfisaoo
ma .aoeaeap swan no noawfieaae onenonsooe each one use»
aeaaaoam mo mafia .eoumooq hepaoe on» on aeosd .esofishom

- mmOHmmo

ecospoaeee one eaom
mmezomu

20H6<mo m.MZOHSmmm mo BmHmoszmi QMBdBozzd 24

.hpasnnueoac
so neaen_eaeahmpam

ea.“
IKsE Am one .Auoeu

aaspaoov swan AH
no women eaoahnpam

uflefieaevm

messenpos

mannuseae women on
0.5 Elwomq D59

HsmHHoo wesmospsm.

zwunanoUIIOOSI
dHUfiOQe

mdeueneod

mnemqsese canoe or
Hy cemeeun sums and
my meoodeHHeu
amwon we oouuwnmosd
secs «Us nonemowsm
swab escapees.

mu

‘

memo scammedwon oHcmfis who «Manama

HmcsdHo ed madnesomh\ Mmfit 3% Home. demo woos.
fired Herod aHHH coca do do so. am when HHHo
mew: does so oosstondc so encode. pm «use.

Wm H as now csmsme» avuow pm Home

ewes UHenouw own madness. «seem: ne<ead and
stw.o do come unco¢e¢OWe. mos doUOHn Be

b HoHHoa on ems HomsH can. amped one

b Sopeow ow cro «snobs. a macro mHsm.m nocmvaem.
awe Bowman «0 e someHsH nsHsoe. mode ewesownm

so some. use «new mom was. pee canoes .weeo

pane mHemmo do echo and more.\ mos Heme. H venue we
Hoe mesons.

be H acumw mHHeH. aWHom H soc a.enanou

lawn a newHeedueo wees so no apps.

H
H ammoeH

Ho Home can oosuowenoo. numb oewose onHNenoa

and osHM ante H enema mom.

nose do Moss nosed. mos H see as Home memos.

m

mos Seaweed no do no“ space Us oeso.

bamsaobwswowcwpawoa

wouzapnuol obwfiqu
Solo canon ob
ocuoowuon.

woncdpnpdo annual
3656 cream 05
ovuoonuou

m¢
suwv tuna oaoosbdoa mo unasdaosnim
.mmdo «wanna.n we nvwopw Gram” HH.0JMIMMMU9MOSQ
Hm» Gonna 0H wosocfiu on as non ca auww
evpd an HsoHnnwsm. Upwaos‘n do «So woman»
on DHH «Una 500w Bo. pan 8% nona.u¢ on w»:
oaw HM. ave: 5H MWmdoa

bwozemm

H 50.08 woman woe
ewma paw on drama aOHQoH 4900a Inbwoa
beam Havnmoboo do mausmpw aspn «How 9H9
arm: «0 voHHOfla pa wwwma.

mmwzHozm
evpn.m daco obofimvm

850cm: .«Hu 9 mwwam. mud. son ago do So.

hwozamm
Rafi iuHH 50¢ 01: Hw.

mmmzHozm
Iowa «395 Bumawomm 0H

MWHaw aoaon no Ba 95 has. ow Hugpu. H Baud non
_MMpHH nowaoiHommo.\ wow wowuxofimm..

mmuv 1305 H EB noofiuoa. H mo cobwcmm

It;

mm

Nbawwaoao 60000 on H H0400 3H8 00 H5 500000 50 doncwuoa.
HV mums Aconepuu
Hnodv. 059 my pupa spar 0500 n ana 0% H040 pm awmsd 000030

HON”.
b Han wao 300 Hdunu 0 H040 040: «005.
m0 950 50 cavow. nu HoswmoHH 005305000»
msvpow 50¢ do 5040 0050 H «Upsw 500 6005 H5 30

woaw auuodoawosoo 950 Hsmunaaacmo

 

80 M0: 930 «01900 «00¢ HWHoamu 13000 H040 Una mmowo.
@400 uwboo Ha oosHm avonw. H003 ms Hpr5n~ nuooHH

8:00 HMfmpu «05000\ 201. Hod cosmVHHmoH.

 

Naurwi030 60000 05
oduoodpofl H ~00: 00d 30: Ha window“ «500m: pd do 0903.0

wow 80 n0 wHM,Uoiu nHH H r30: 0% we

 

Hm ¢Wp¢ opBHHHo 1mm 05 roaomn and»
>50 10% :0 Hown Hofiw oocaa. n30 moan «SoamoHdom.
sowdubm 50 3000 «an: H. 0H0 Hm50090¢.
hmozamw
H0: w=0i 0» 5pm novadcaon 9- H00 w501
swpd H0: Undo cbmoadpwob no 00 pa .0 0000500.

mmwKHozm
mHH.

wonficnupdo H05 amonw n Hmrmcpmo «Una H caaoauapua 50¢»

050503030 00000 05
000000005.

w005000H40 0505M!
3050 00000 05 0055:
000 00003050 Anna
0000005 00050v.

00
.RH H000 000500 05 050 H0<0H 00 N050 0000mm.
.EW005 H.HH H00 00mm.

hMozamm
0050 0000050 000 BR 000050»
H05 500 0 0000000 0% 00H000500.
>50 H 050 00003.0 00. 00 M05 0000 0000 0HH 05030::
85000 00 «050 0000 000 003000 0000 0HH 00505»
25005 00 005% 00500050 3000 0505 040HHOu 000.00
65% 0000 5005 0005 0000 050. H000 00 H000HH.
20 000500 00505m 00.1305005 00 050000.
3000 0003050H 05 0500 0505 00.I|00 0505
m50H0 HooH 050 0500000. H5 #5000 0000000 00000m0
hook 000 50 H000 0505 0000 .

mmmzHozm
WWW. 00000 M050 0500000»

650 05m 05005 H05 105H0 000m50 30 0005 H 00mm.

.meao 005 H000 00 50 005800MMM»
.H50 00005 050 0030000 00 3% H000. wo50 004050.

H 00 m040 H000» 000 H 00 000H H0 momm.

'lr

WW0 W500 500 50: H0 105Mh\ .RM 000050 “ck
WW0 050 000000005000 00 3M 0000. 0008 500 000005mm.
H .5 33:0. 0:2 23 unwaofiocmk 000 005.0 8333.

00000.0 3000 55H5000HH. 00 0003 SH d000mm.

m0HHOm50

m00003230.00000 00
0000000HH0H 00 000:

0000 numb“
0500

u00Hs

ma
.HW. 00000000 30Hw H0 000 3000 00000000 30500.
m0H00 050 00 350000»\ 0MN00H0 00 0400M.M000
0000H003.0 0 00053000»\ 00000 H3300000 000000
H00 000H0u0000004HHnM0 003000h 10H05 .Hobmm
00 10300 00 0HH 00000000\ 0H000HH. 0500000

 

0000 00 00H0 0H000. H. 000 0000 0H0. 000000

H 0040 m00 000omm00 00 HH3H0.\ 20:. 3M HHomm.

 

aoHH 30 $000 0H000H0m0 H 0040 0000 0HH<0.

9000 H 0005H0 0000 00 0wfiw\ 000000000 0000000.
050 000 0000 0000» 3000000 30 300" 00 HH00.

H 00H00 H0 000 0 0000:. 050 000 3000 000050.

£0H00 H 005H0 0000. 00 H 000HH 00 0000033.0

 

0000 050300000 0HH 000000 0H00000m 0H00

050 100000050 m00H050000 00000. H 00HH.Mo5

 

.600 00m000 000 000 H01. 0050 0000500 0HH.

 

H 00 00000 30 00 000 0000Hou

>00HH0 00 3% 050m0~

mm
Zobnvawumuwo wwoom”

a can 0 H0»
Swanson a mo WHQB «We Hpo

moaswoso Hm ospmdom MOHRHoBou GHnBoHoumu opBHHWoGMUMHMn
msduoowu boondom n HopHocm «wanna» Hun Hbaooou

deHw vomonnob» man «We wpbm nappy Hpqo dwcwocn mu noun
HH «Una ivwow Hm Homd do boa Henna.

69

Structure

 

An analysis of the structure and arrange-
ment of Hermione's oration reveals that the speech
contains all of the parts which Aristotle has
treated in Book III of The Rhetoric, and that the
use of these parts is in harmony with Aristotelian
precepts. The proem or introduction, due to the
dramatic circumstances, has been shifted to a source
other than the speaker. Aristotle has said that
the function of the proem is to reveal to the audi-
ence the nature of the subject matter that will be
treated in the speech. The indictment accomplishes
this in a succinct and dramatic way. Hermione's
speech begins with the "statement" which reveals the
point of view that she maintains throughout the
speech. She frankly admits the futility of plead-
ing ”not guilty" and states that she finds solace
in her belief that the gods will defend the inno-
cent. According to Aristotle, a "narration" may
be included in the statement part of a speech. A
short narration does follow Hermione's reference
to the gods. It's brevity also coincides with
Aristotle's precepts regarding the use of the narra-
tion in forensic speaking: ”The defence needs less
narration . . . unless your story will bear on the

contention . . . it was no injustice or the like.”

70
In addition to its brevity, Hermione uses the narra-
tion to point up the disgrace and injustice involved
in her having to defend her honor publicly. Hence,
the content of the narration is also in harmony with
Aristotelian precepts. The "argument" is the third
part of an oration; it may contain elements of refu-
tation. Both argument and refutation are to be
found in Hermione's speech. Aristotle, it will be
recalled, formulated four precepts by which the
use of the epilogue should be governed. Hermione's
closing statements seem to fulfill these four pre-
cepts adequately: She makes the audience "well-dis-
posed to her by placing a higher regard upon her
honor than upon her life. She makes the audience
"ill-disposed" to Leontes by merely mentioning that
he might take her life. She magnifies her case and
minifies his case by pointing up that Leontes would
be a traducer of justice if he condemned her without
having sufficient proof of her guilt. Through a
treatment of the above subjects, she puts her audi-
ence into a sympathetic state of mind as she simul-
taneously refreshes their memories.
This portion of the analysis has demonstrated

that the parts and the use of the parts of the oration
as they were conceived by Aristotle are effectively

incorporated into Hermione's oration of defense.

71
Before passing into another phase of the
analysis, it should be mentioned that a mode of non-
artistio proof is used in the forensic scene.
Leontes, it will be recalled, sent two of his lords
to obtain the oracle's confirmation and sanction of
his action. The oracle's message is read directly
following the queen's speech, and it serves as wit-
ness to the validity of her arguments. Hermione in-
corporates the oracle's testimony into her speech by
her closing statement:
You honours all,

I do refer me to the oracle.
Apollo be my judge!

 

LogicalfiProof
It will be recalled that Aristotle formu-
lated nine lines of arguments which pertain to for-
ensic speaking in particular. It will be demonstrated
that Hermione incorporates two of these lines of argu-
ment in her speech. The two are as follows:

One procedure is the use of those argu-
ments with which you would clear yourself of
any injurious suspicions no matter if the sus-
picion has been uttered.

Another is an open counter on definite
issues; you either deny the alleged fact; or you
deny that what you did was unfair; or you say
that it was not disgraceful, or much out of the
way.

It will also be recalled that Aristotle had stated:

1Aristotle, 32. c t., 5. 15, p. 226.

72
"expediency, justice, and honor and their opposites
are the subjects” with which a forensic pleader
should concern himself. It will also be demonstrated
that Hermione's arguments are largely concerned with
the subjects of justice and injustice, honor and dis-
honor.

Hermione's oration contains a complex enthy-
mematic chain of reasoning which serves to establish
her innocence by the weight of ethical proof more
than by the logical proof. The ethical proof as-
pects will be dealt with in detail later.

The arguments which Hermione offers in her
defense may seem somewhat tempered and limited in
subject matter. It is obvious that she is speaking
for the most part to her husband, Leontes, and here-
in lies the reason for her speaking as she does.

Every other person in her audience knows she is inno-
cent and knows that she is the victim of an.unwar-
ranted spasm of jealousy suffered by Leontes. Keep-
ing these circumstances in mind, the analysis will
proceed by identifying the enthymemes and indicat-
ing the premises from.which they are drawn. Comments
upon the relationships of one line of argument to
other portions of the speech.will be made whenever
such a comment might point up the unity of the speech.

The first enthymeme, appearing at the very

73
beginning of the oration, is as follows:
Since what I am to say must be but that

‘Which contradicts my accusation, and

The testimony of my part no other

But that which comes from myself, it shall

scarce boot me

To say "not guilty”: my integrity

Being counted false, shall as I express it,

Be so received.

In reality, the above is not an argument of
defense in the strict sense of the word. It is a
means by which Hermione announces the fruitlessness
of pleading her innocence to all those who know her
to be innocent and to her husband-judge, who is con-
vinced of her guilt before the trial begins. Never-
theless, the enthymeme contains sound rhetorical
reasoning. The bases of the enthymeme are two-fold:
it is drawn from.a certain sign and from a maxim.
The certain sign is the obvious fact: her testi—
mony refutes her accusation. The maxim is based on
a generalized conception: i.e. if a person's charac-
ter is considered false, then what he says will like-
wise be considered false.

Hermione's second enthymeme is based on
probability--her belief that the gods will defend
the right and will guard the innocent.

. . . But then, if powers divine

Behold our human actions, as they do,

I doubt not then but innocence shall make

False accusation blush, and tyranny

Tremble at patience.

It might be mentioned here that in.Elizabethan tunes

74
such a belief was pervasive among the people. Due
to the scarcity of law courts and judges, it was not
an uncommon occurrence for an offended party to

2 This practice

challenge the offender to a duel.
was not thought to be wrong or unjust to either
party because of the belief that God would defend
the person who was right, and that He would see the
unjust punished. This argument, then, would have
held even more weight as an argument in Elizabethan
times, because its substance reflects the religious
beliefs of that period.

The premises of the queen's next enthymeme
are difficult to classify. The enthymeme is as fol-
lows:

You, my lord, best know
What least will seem to do so, my past life
Hath been as continent, as chaste, as true
As I am now unhappy.

In one sense, the enthymeme appears to be
based on a fallacious analogy, i.e., the fact that
she is "now unhappy" seems to have little to do with
the fidelity of her past life. There is, however,
some implied reasoning within the enthymeme that is

not accounted for by this explanation. Hermione is

drawing a parallel between the fidelity of her past and

 

 

ZShakespeare's En land: An Account of the
Life and manners gg—Eis K,e (B vol§.: on on: 6x-
fbrd University‘Press, l§%§) Vol. I, p. 590.

 

75
her abused state of innocence in the present. Her
unhappiness testifies to the truthfulness of her
past life as it simultaneously evinces her sorrow in
the present. The enthymeme also exhibits some
characteristics of a maxim. For example, a maxim-
like belief regarding the consistency of a person's
actions over a period of time is also implied within
the premises of the enthymeme, relating it to a later
enthymeme which is concerned with the subject of
honor:
I appeal

To your own conscience, sir, before Polixenes

Came to your court, how I was in your grace,

How merited to be so; since he came,

With what encounter so uncurrent I

Have strain'd to appear thus: if one jot

beyond

The bound of honour, or in act or will

That way inclining, harden'd be the hearts

Of all that hear me, and my near'st of kin

Cry fie upon my grave!
The basis of this enthymeme is two-fold: one pre-
mise is based on the certain sign: “before Poli-
xenes came to your court, how I was in your graces.”
The other lies in the realm of probability. It is
concerned with the same'maxinelike notion of a per-
son's maintainance of a consistency of character or
actions which was previously referred to. In other
words, if up to the time of Polixenes' visit, Her-
mione had been true, why should her fidelity be

questioned while he was visiting the court?

76

Honor-enot to preserve her life, but to free
her honor from the stain of falsb accusation--is
Hermiene's main concern in her speech. She states
this desire twice within the speech, using asser-
tions which are void of logical substantiation:

‘ . . . for honour,

'Tis a derivative from me to mine,

And only that I stand for.

Later, near the close of the oration, she adds,
”. . . no life, I prize it not a straw, but for
mine honor, which I would free."

The preservation of oneis honor was a moot
issue in Shakespeare's time, and Hermione's concern
for her tainted reputation would have been accepted
by Shakespeare's viewers as a sound and a necessary
point. The prevelance of the theme of honor in
other Shakespearean plays reflects the pervasive-
ness of the concern which Elizabethans exercised
over the subject of one's personal honor: Hotspur
in ESSEX IX was portrayed as the man of honor; Fal-
staff, when contemplating the dangers of warfare in
‘figggy X, rejected the doctrine of honor because it
could not restore a cut-off leg or bring a man back
from hell; Hamlet had to bring Claudius to a state
of confession to preserve his honor and to restore
the honor of his mother; Othello killed Desdemona
to defend his honor and the honor of manhoed, in

general; Richard II was more distressed over losing

77
his honor than he was about losing his throne to
Bolingbroke, etc. Hermione's argument or her con-
cern for defending her honor, although she employs
the logical (enthymematic) reasoning only once while
treating the subject, would have been considered an
argument from the Elizabethan point-of—view by the
'mere unsubstantiated assertion: " . . . but fore-
most to me is honor."

The three enthymenes reviewed up to this
point are in harmony with.Aristotle's first precept
concerning the ”lines of argument” which one should
follow in forensic speaking (means of dealing with
prejudice). It will be recalled that Aristotle in-
structed the forensic pleader to use "those argu-
ments with which you would clear yourself of any in-
jurious suspicions.” Hermione's first argument
(enthymeme) dealing with the futility of pleading
”not guilty" establishes her frankness and her accept-
ance of the situation in which she finds herself.
She has nothing to hide, and she adopts this point
of view by her first utterance. Her second line of
argument, wherein she acknowledges her belief that
the gods will aid the right, augments the weight
or effectiveness of her opening indirect statement
of innocence. The enthymeme on the subject of honor
further adds to her attempt to clear herself “of any

injurious suspicions.” The subject of honor is used

78
frequently during the remainder of the oration, and
through this repetitive usage, Hermione effectively
incorporates Aristotle's instructions throughout
the remaining portions of her oration..

During the argumentative dialOgue between
Leontes and Hermione, the queen uses two refutative
enthymemes by bringing up an objection.to the accusa-
tions pressed upon her by her husband. They contain
no lOgical attributes in themselves, but they serve
to motivate Hermdone's entrance into the main issue
of her trial, the alleged adultery with Polixenes:

For Polixenes,

With whom I am accused, I do confess

I loved him as in honour he required,

With such a kind of love as might become

A lady like me, with a love even such

So and no other, as yourself commanded:

Which not to have done I think had been in me

Both disobedience and ingratitude

To you and your friend; whose love had spoke,

Ever since it could speak, from an infant,

freely

That it was yours.

Her argument on this point is offered in the form of
an enthymeme based on a certain sign and on analogi-
cal reasoning. Hermione first states that she loved
Polixenes honorably. The theme of honor recurs; and
though it is used in a slightly different sense, it
ties this argument in with the one previously treated
(her honorable actions during Polixenes' stay at

court) and with her two assertions regarding honor--

one appearing near the beginning of the speech and

79
one at the close of the oration. Her reasons for
loving Polixenes "honorably” are two-fold: 1) her
husband had'commanded her to love him.(the certain
sign), and 2) because of the example of love which
had existed between the two men from the time of
their boyhood (analogical reasoning). Because
Polixenes had given ”freely” of his love to her
husband, she naturally would return that love as
Leontes' honorable wife.

Hermione's argument exerts more influence
if one is acquainted with the concept of true
friendship in Elizabethan days: the friendship be-
tween two men was thought to be a higher form of
relationship than the love between a man and a wo-
man. Unlike sexual love, it transcended the physi-
cal and entered into the realm of the spiritual.3
For Hermione to justify her love for Polixenes be-
cause of his friendship with her husband, it seems,
would have been acceptable argumentation in the
eyes of the Elizabethan viewers.

The speaker's next three enthymemes are
drawn from the premises of refutation. She, through
objection, refutes the charge of conspiracy with
Camillo:

 

3Mary Crapo Hyde, Pla ritin for Elisabe—
thans, (New York: The Columbia University Press,

I515), p. 156.

80

Now, for conspiracy,
I know not how it tastes; though it be dish'd
For me to try how: all I know of it
Is that Camille was an honest man;
And why he left your court, the gods themselves,
Wotting no more than I, are ignorant.

She likewise refutes Leontes' accusation regarding
her alleged knowledge of Camillo's departure. In
answer to her husband's death sentence, she con-
atructs the following refutative enthymeme based on
a counter-syllogism:

Sir, spare your threats:

The but which you would fright me with I seek.

To me can life be no commodity:

The crown and comfort of my life, your favour,

I do give lost; for I do feel it gone,

But know not how it went. My second joy,

And first-fruits of my body, from his presence

I am barr‘d, like one infectious. My third
comfort,

Starr'd most unluckily, is from my breast,

The innocent milk in its most innocent mouth,

Haled out to murder; myself on every post

Proclaimfld a strumpet: with immodest hatred

The child-bed privilege denied, which 'longs

To women of all fashion: lastly, hurried

Here to this place, i' the open air, before

I have got strength of limit. Now, my liege,

Tell me what blessings I have here alive,

That I should fear to die?

In the above, Henione states that life is no
longer worth living, substantiating her assertion
with six reasons drawn from certain signs. These
six reasons contain six injustices which have been
unwarrantedly committed upon her honor or upon her
person. After enumerating these six reasons or

injustices, Hermione effectively concludes her argu-

ment by asking her husbandajudge, why she should be

81
afraid of death? The foregoing argument constitutes
the logical climax of the speech and the emotional
climax as well. The latter will be demonstrated in
the analysis devoted to the speaker's use of pathe-
tic proof.

Hermione's last enthymeme is drawn from the
premises of probability:

If I shall be condemn'd

Upon surmises, all proofs sleeping else

But what your jealousies awake, I tell you

'Tis rigour and not law.

In the above she simply reveals to Leontes
the source of the trouble between them, and she
argues that her punishment would be unjustified if
she were to be judged and condemned on the "sur-
mises" of jealousy, and not by the judgmentof law.

It will be recalled that in Aristotle's
second precept concerning the lines of argument which
should be followed in forensic speaking, he instruct-
ed the speaker to make "an open counter on definite
issues.“ Hermione's method of voicing her defense
is also in line with this precept. She speaks open-
ly and effectively on both charges; and she further
admits that she loved Polixenes, but, using Aris-
totle's own words, she argues that her love “was not
disgraceful or much out of the way." The substance

of Hermione’s arguments are also in harmony with

Aristotle's conception of what should constitute

82
the subjects of forensic speaking. It is evident
from the foregoing analysis that Hermione's argu-
lento have been largely concerned with the subjects
of justice and injustice and honor and dishonor.

In regard to an evaluation of the enthy-
mematic reasoning process, it can be stated that
the reasoning appears to be rhetorically-sound. With
further analysis, it also becomes evident that the
use of legical proof in Hermione's oration has been
subordinated to the speaker's main purpose of re-
futing her accusation by the establishment of ethi-
cal proof. The enthymemes are drawn largely from
premises dealing with honor and dishonor; Hermi-
one's belief in the goodness of the gods, and jus-
tice and injustice. The substance of these rhetori-
cally-sound enthymemes, then, and their effective
use in the oration serve to establish Hermione's
ethical proof as well as to present logical reasons

for argument.

Ethical Proof
Emotional appeals and ethos-establishing
elements are especially hard to distinguish as sep-
arate entities. This point is verified by Thonssen
and Baird when they say:
It is apparent that the distinc-
tion between emotional and ethical proof is

not always clear; and in some instances it
may be virtually nonexistent. Ethos~ and

83

.pgthgg have, indeed, much in common.4

Keeping the above in mind, the procedure
for this analysis will be to comment upon the use of
certain methods and utterances by which Hermione es-
tablishes her ethical proof. At times the specific
point under consideration is related to the general
theme of her speech.

In Hermione's opening statement, transposing
Shakespeare into the layman's vernacular, she says:
"It's useless for me to plead 'not guilty' because
my testimony refutes my accusation; it will be held
false as I am held false.” By a complete directness
of expression and a frank recognition of the true
circumstances confronting her, Hermione thus indi-
rectly establishes an element of her ethical proof
by her first utterance. In her following statement,
wherein she acknowledges her belief in the gods and
their vigilance in guarding the wronged, she states
in effectively personified form: "innocence shall
make false accusation blush, and tyranny tremble at
patience." There are at least three distinguishable
ethos-producing elements inherent within this state-
ment. Foremost is the simple assertion manifesting

her belief in the goodness of the ”powers divine.”

 

4A. Craig Baird and Lester Thonssen, Speech
Criticism, (New York: The Ronald Press Company,
1948), p. 386.

 

84
Secondly and thirdly, in her generalization regard-
ing the ability of ”innocence" and "patience," with
the aid of the gods, to stand their ground against
"false accusation" and ”tyranny," she subtly suggests
that she is being falsely accused and that she is
patiently withstanding her burden. Certainly, these
last two utterances would evoke an emotional response
from her auditors, and in addition, they are con-
tained within an enthymeme based on probability.
Thus, the discretion--the good taste, if you will--
with which she states that she has been wronged and
that she is forebearing her predicament reflects
the character of a brave, tolerant, and judicious
woman.

Hermione addresses her judge~husband, plac-
ing her past life before him. She refers to her
past life with him by simply stating that it ”is
more than history can pattern though devised and
play'd to take spectators." The foregoing phrase
reflects Hermione's refusal to put their life on
display and her refusal to enter into a theatrical
rendition of it for the benefit of her auditors.
Through the use of such restraint the speaker's
dignity is again reflected, and implicit within
the statement is the personal reverence which she

maintains for the love that had existed between

85

than. Hermione continues her narration in this vein
by merely mentioning their relationship as husband
and wife: that she is the daughter of a ”great king,"
and the mother of his ”hopeful” prince. It is evi~
dent that this narration cculd have easily contained
an emotional tirade, and the absence of such a dee
vice operates an ethos-producing circumstance.

Hermione now enters into the main theme of
her oration and states the main argument by which
she attempts to refute the accusation confronting
her:

. . . for honour,

'Tis a derivative from me to mine,

And only that I stand for.
She reminds her husband of the honorable place she
had occupied in his eyes before Polixenes came, and
she affirms she acted "honorably" during his nine
months stay at the court. She adds to this affirma-
tion the self-imposed punishment which she will
bear if she is not telling the truth.

. . . if one jot beyond

The bound of honour, or in act or will

That way inclining, harden'd be the hearts

Of all that hear me, and my near'st kin

Cry fie upon.my grave!
The above definitely has pathetic proof elements
within it, but the way in which it is used estab-
lishes ethical proof as well. Hernione's willing-

ness to receive censorship and punishment, a punish-

86

ment which would be administered by all those who
are dear to her, augments her ethical appeal.

While engaged in refutation Hermione remains
calm, and she politely denies his accusations. Of
her own accord, she refutes her alleged adulterous
relations with Polixenes. She states she loved him
"honorably" as would have been expected of her.
Again, of her own volition, she denies the con-
spiracy charge. She states her opinion of Camille,
"an honest man," and adds that she is totally unin-
formed as to the reason for his abrupt departure.
Leontes, becoming angered by her denials, presses
the point of conspiracy further. At this point,
Hermione tries to reconcile his husband's erroneous
thoughts by giving him an opportunity to admit he
is wrong. Politely, she says:

Sir,

You speak a language that I understand not:

My life stands in the level of your dreams;

Which I'll lay down.
Leontes, however, is in no mood to be reconciled.
He snatches up the word "dreams," using it in a
context which.implies the meaning of nightmare, and
proceeds to enlarge upon the igndminy of her crime,
ending his tirade with a sentence of death. Hermiv
one, now realizing the incorrigible state of her

husband's mind, refutes the punishing-power of his

edict by arguing that life is no longer meaningful

87

and that death would be a balm to her sorrows. Al-
though the speaker's argument is decidedly pathetic
in nature, the metaphorical expressions which she
incorporates in the first three minor premises of
the argument indirectly add to her ethical charac-
ter. Hermione argues:

To me can life be no commodity:

The crown and comfort of my life, your favor,

I do give lost: for I do feel it gone,

But know not how it went. My second joy

And first fruits of my body, from his presence

I am barr'd like one infectious. My third

comfort,‘
Starr'd most unluckily is from my breast
The innocent milk in its most innocent
mouth,

Haled to murder: . . .
Through the use of the phrase, "The crown and cam-
fort of my life,” Hermione demonstrates that she
values the love of her husband above all other things
in life: and thereby, she manifests an element of
good will to her judge and to her audience. Her
”second joy" is likewise his joy, and by this expres-
sion she demonstrates that her values are synonymous
with his. By referring to her newly-born as ”My
third comfort" she infers that the child was fathered
by Leontes. In addition, the phrase, "The innocent
milk in its most innocent mouth,” indirectly declares
her innocence. The restrained and subtle references

to the plight of the child also offer both ethical

and pathetic appeals in that they stress the wrong

88
done to the ”innocence."

In the closing portions of her oration, Her-
mione reiterates that freeing her tainted honor is of
more importance to her than saving her life. Realiz-'
ing that her openness and frankness of speech and her
exposition on honor have not altered Leontes' obses-
sion of her guilt, she braves to touch upon the crux
of the dispute. She tells him that Justice will not be
accomplished by a judgment which is piqued by jeal-
ousy. Such a pointed declaration would by no means
pacify the attitude of her judge. Up to this potnt,
Hermione has spoken directly to her husband, but she
knows that her arguments have been ineffective in his
eyes. Inadvertently perhaps, she broadens her range
of address and speaks indirectly to all of the court.
To Leontes, this pointed statement was also ineffec-
tive. In the minds of the sympathetic court, however,
Hermione's statement would have been considered a
brave act: to accuse the king of unjust actions
piqued by jealousy would have been a fatal move for
any member or the court to make. The queen ends her
oration by addressing the court and by referring her
judgement to the wisdom of the oracle.

Hermione's establishment of ethical proof is
in harmony with Aristotle's conception of its use with-

in a speech. Her address is convincing. She has ren-

89

dered an impeccable impression of herself: her char-
acter, her virtue and her integrity shine through or
are reflected by the majority of her utterances. She
has shown good will toward her husband up to the point
of forgiving him for publically disgracing her. She
had, up to a point, persisted to put Leontes into the
”right frame of mind." When she knew she had failed
in this, she spoke to augment the favorable attitudes
of her other auditors.

When considering the place or use of ethical
proof in the overall effectiveness of the speech, it
appears to be the predominant element. Although Her-
mione's arguments (enthymemes) are legicallyusound,
they contain the ethical elements which have just been
treated. Hermione's main theme is honor: ". . . only
that I stand for;" and arguments have been invented
to demonstrate, mainly, this theme. A minor theme in
the oration in injustice, but this theme is conveyed
to her hearers by the use of enthymemes and arguments
which again reflect or establish her ethos. Her proof,
then, has been predominantly established through an
ethical appeal which has inherent within it elements
of “logos” and ”pathos." The latter element will be

demonstrated in the following portion of the analysis.

Pathetic Proof

 

Upon a cursory examination of the oration, it

90
appears that Hermione's use of pathetic proof is
restrained-~restrained in the sense of comparison with
what it might have been. Reasons for this restraint
are evident, however. It will be recalled that that
Hermione already has the sympathy of her hearers, with
the exception of her judge-husband; that her lack of
emotional presentation adds to and is in harmony with
her personal dignity and ethos. The dramatic circum-
stances leading up to her trial; the birth and dis-
posal of her child and Hermione's concomitant grief:
and the queen's weakened physical condition-~all these
have made her auditors, previous to the time of her
speech, deeply sympathetic to her plight. With such
an aura of emotion surrounding the dramatic situation
of which the trial scene is the climax, it can be
stated that Hermione's pathetic proof was largely
established before her oration was ever delivered.

V Considering the foregoing, it could be generally
stated that almost every utterance made by Hermione is
colored with emotion. Therefore, for the purposes of
this analysis, only those utterances which contain a
more obvious attempt to establish pathetic proof are
treated.

It has been set forth in the previous state-
ment of the criteria that the examination of a speaker's

use of pathetic proof would be concerned with the

91
following: 1) an identification of the specific emo~
tional reaction evoked by the speech; 2) an identifi-
cation and analysis of the means by which the speaker
has produced this emotional reaction, and 5) an evalu-
ative effort to determine to what extent the establish-
ed pathetic proof augments the overall effectiveness of
the speech.

The predominant emotion Hermione evokes from
her hearers is that of pity. Other emotions or states
of feeling contributing to this emotion of pity are:
fear for Hermione's life; the futility and hopeless-
ness of her situation: the disgrace surrounding her
accusation, and injustices which have been thrust upon
her person and her child.

Hermione's first "more direct" attempt to
establish pathetic proof is made when she says:

My past life

Hath been as continent, as chaste, as true,

As I am now unhappy.
She, again, intensifies her pitiable state, when she
states, that she prizes life as she weighs grief.
Arguing her theme of honorable actions during Poli-
xenes' stay, she adds further weight to her argument
by the following:

. . . if one jot beyond
The bound of honour, or in act or will
That way inclining, harden'd be the hearts

Of all that hear me, and my near'st kin
Cry fie upon my grave}

92
Perhaps this last technique could be termed a negative
or reverse use of pathetic proof. In other words,
Hermione knows that what she is proposing to her hear-
ers and relatives is diametrically-opposed to their
sympathetic states of mind. Because of their ardent
concern for the queen's welfare perhaps they would
react more strongly and more spontaneously to this
indirect mode of pathetic appeal than they would to
a more direct one.

At the termination of the first refutative
dialogue, Hermione suggests the injustice which is
being done to her:

More than mistress of

Which comes to me in the name of fault, I

must not

At all acknowledge . . .

In the answer to Leontes' death sentence is to be
found Hermione's most potent and most pretentious use
of pathetic proof. And yet, in a sense, it cannot be
considered pretentious because it is obviously a
straight-forward enumeration of the events which have
led up to the trial and which have caused the queen
to no longer hold any regard for life. It has been
mentioned that Hermione's use of the metaphorical ex-
pression, "The crown and comfort of my life”: ”My
second joy,” and "My third comfort,“ has added to her

ethical appeal. The queen's source of evoking an

emotion of pity within her hearers partially arises

93

from the use of these same expressions. They repre-
sent the meaning of her life: their absence erases that
meaning. Hermione's enumeration of the six reasons
for rejecting life, adding the opening and concluding
statement of the argument, constitutes the emotional
climax of her oration:

The crown and comfort of my life, your favor,

I do give lost: for I do feel it gone,

But know not how it sent. My second joy

And first-fruits of my body, from his presence

I am barr'd like one infectious. My third com-

fort,

Starr'd most unluckily, is from my breast,

The innocent milk in its most innocent mouth,

Haled out to murder; myself on every post

Proclaim'd a strumpet; with immodest hatred

The child-bed privilege denied, which '1ongs

To women of all fashion; lastly, hurried

Here to this place, i' the open air, before

I have got strength of limit.

One of the most potent pity-evoking statements
in the above concerning Hermione's loss of her hus-
band's love is:

YOur favor,

I do give lost; for I do feel it gone,

But know not how it went.
It is a frank and open confession of an utterly-con-
founded, helplessly-bewildered women. The above six
reasons, in addition to their pity-evoking power,
state six injustices which have been committed against
the queen. At this point, then, the sources of pity
and the claims of injustice are identical. The style
employed in this passage adds much to the emotional

appeal of Hermione's utterances: "I am barr'd like

94
one infectious;” " . . . starr'd most unluckily";
". . . the innocent milk in its most innocent mouth";
“. . . hailed out to murder"; ". . . with immodest
hatred,” etc.

In the closing part of her oration, Hermione,
by mentioning the injustice which would be committed
if she is to ”be condemn'd upon surmises" and not
proof, suggests the probability of her death and
thereby produces within her auditors, an emotion of
fear. By placing her life in the hands of the pre-
sumably just wisdom of the oracle, Hermione concludes
her speech with another utterance colored with emotion.

When considering the evaluation of Hermione's
use of pathetic proof as it augments the overall
effectiveness of the oration, the dramatic circumstances
and characterization must be included. It has been
mentioned that the circumstances surrounding Hermione's
speech have established her pathetic proof before the
oration was delivered. The characterization of Her-
mione produces, in the mind of one who reads the play,

a picture of a dignified, intelligent, and virtuous
woman, who has nothing with which to refute her accusa-
tions except her own attributes. It seems significant
that no one example of a purely pathetic appeal can

be found in the speech. All the emotion arises either

directly or indirectly from the statements which

95
Hermione uses to reveal the helplessness of her situ-
ation; which narrate her past life with her husband;
which acknowledge her belief in the gods and reveal
the high value that she places on her personal honor;
which enumerate the injustices which have been commit-
ted against her reputation, her person, and her child,
etc. When one considers the character and the drama-
tic circumstances, however, the absence of a direct
and planned use of pathetic proof is explainable.
It is also judicious. An ostentatious and purely
pathetic appeal would have been out of place and in-
effective-~ineffective to the degree of damaging the
speaker's ethos. The restrained use of pathetic proof,
then, has made Hermione's speech decidedly more effec-

tive, and hence, more persuasive.

anclusion

 

This chapter demonstrates that Hennione's ora-
tion contains many evidences of Shakespeare's con-
scious or unconscious use of Aristotle's persuasive
precepts. It shows that the speaker‘s use of artis-
tic proof has included all three Aristotelian modes
w—the legical, the ethical, and the pathetic. One
instance of inartistic proof is also cited. It demon-
strates that two of the nine precepts which Aristotle

formulated in regard to "lines of argument” to be

96
applied in the forensic speaking in particular are
found to be an important part of the method by which
Hermione attempted to establish her innocense. It
also shows that Hermione‘s oration contains all the
parts that Aristotle considers, and further, that the
use of these parts are also in accordance with his
precepts. It can therefore be affirmed that Her-
mione's oration does contain rhetorical speaking in
the Aristotelian sense, as Kennedy has stated; and
that the structure of the oration is likewise in har-
mony with Aristotelian precepts. Since its Aristo-
telian attributes are established, Hermione's oration
can serve as an adequate criterion to which the remain-
ing eleven orations can be compared and by which they

can be evaluated.

CHAPTER IV

THE ANALYSES OF THE REMAINING ELEVEN ORATIONS
The Format

 

The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate
that the Aristotelian rhetorical criteria which are
applied to Hermione'soration from The Wihter's Tale,
are also applicable to the remaining eleven orations
with which this study is concerned. These analyses
are reported in annotated manuscript form using the
following legend.

Enthymemes (lagos)
Ethical (ethos)s . . . . . . . .

Pathetic at
Both ethicaIa n3) ’’’’’’’’
pathetic e e e e e e e e a e

Passages or utterances which are underlined
with the solid line contain elements of logical proof;
underlining with spaced periods indicates the presence
of ethos-producing elements, and underlining with a
spaced dash designates portions of the speech which
contain pathos-producing elements. Since the sources
of ethical and pathetic proof are often identical,
the combination of a period and a dash is used to indi-
cate a passage wherein both ethical and pathetic proof

elements are found. The passages or utterances under-

97

98
lined are explained by marginal annotations. For
example, an enthymeme (underlined with a solid line)
is designated as such in the margin, and it is fol-
lowed by an explanation of the premises from which
the enthymeme is drawn. Similarly, ethical and
pathetic proof elements are designated as gghgg and
pathos, respectively, as well as by the underlining
technique which is illustrated in the above legend.
The annotations concerning 53293 are made in terms of
good will, character, and competency. Sometimes in-
terpretative remarks are included in these annotations.
The annotations concerning pathos treat the emotion
which is evoked by the speaker and also include some
interpretative remarks. The orations are centered
on the width of the page. The left margin is used to
indicate the structure of the oration; the speaker's
use of legical proof (the enthymemes and their respec-
tive premises); the speaker's use of Aristotelian
"lines of argument" (means of dealing with prejudice);
the forensic issue with which the oration is con-
cerned; and the speaker's use of the forensic sub-
jects of honor, justice, expediency, and their oppo-
sites. The right hand margin is devoted exclusively
to annotations dealing with ethical and pathetic
proofs. The utterance of the main speaker are double-

spaced; those of the minor speakers, which are not

99

analyzed, are single-spaced. The slash (/) will be
used to indicate the end of a section of a passage
which is under discussion. The slash will be placed
in the next space following the end of the section
and two blank spaces will be used to set off both the
section and the slash from the passage that follows
it. For example: ”New, by my mother's love, I make

a vow,/ it etc."

Aegeon's Oration from ThevComedyof Errors
Setting: Aegean, an old merchant from the city of
Syracuse, has been searching for his family, two mem-
bers of which had been separated from him by a ship-
wreck some eighteen years before. His search brings
him to the city of Ephesus. In that city he is seized
by the authorities and is brought before a court of
law where he learns that there is a state of enmity
existing between his home city of Syracuse and Ephesus.
Because of this enmity a law had recently been passed
forbidding traffic between the two cities. The unin-
formed Aegean finds himself a captive under the new
law. Being unable to pay the required ransom to free
himself, Aegean is sentenced to death. Solinus, the
Duke of Ephesus, before pronouncing a final judgment
requests that Aegean relate the reasons for his sojourn

to Ephesus. The proem of the oration is assumed by

100
the Duke as he states this request and Aegean's state-
ment follows:
Summary of Analysis: The analysis of the structure
of this oration reveals that the parts of a speech
present are the proem, which is shifted to a sburce
other than the speaker, the statement, and the epi-
logue. The narration is used to establish pathetic
proof. The forensic issue treated in the speech is
”that the act did less harm than is alleged." One
means of dealing with prejudice (lines of argument)
is used by Aegean: to clear himself of suspicion.
There is no use of nan~artistic proof in the oration.
The speaker's use of ethical proof is indirect-~it
arises mainly from the narrative part of the oration.
The speaker's use of pathetic proof is predominant.

No use of logical proof is to be found in the oration.

.emas was new esea
nan no scanneaane
as cadwo «nonpm

.Qdammecamsn
escapsoaomcoo .psep
leafiao a was on was»
numewwsn «monpm

.emws was new o>oa
can one owdaassfi can
so osHu> floss meosam
0: pang :H nonesseno
ea: upooamoh «manna

.msans
on cases on Bosx on
cases can scanner 0:

“Ha“: meow «nonum
.hpaa
mo soapose "monuem

HOH

.enaaou.h$ mo.emnmsmoshnse use

smsw ms.3mam
.pmem womcmn.pm mumow wa.emsm msmaw mam ma¢
.fiame.m..amsmaw Fenian. WigwammEB

ows&_mewmm w wowswow mamamawamm.hw
Wewemawcw mowems.hwo.uwam ma.pm>wH.H.am£.£may
.pep soon as: spa pan can .ma.hm ms¢

.0& wow mam woman unmams.s.owcm

me: use «asap H was empoashm cH

"l'l"|l|‘|"l"‘l"
I'l'll'i‘iii'itill'I'

IIII'II'II""'|'|""I

pme.h& mam».mmempms.hms.pmams.emu.umnm .pa
«MdmsMwmmmcm MumAMmlhm Mammm.mplwldmgw
pmnmmmaldmam.M>M£lumwlnmsmolstm Mafiawam m
ZOWUM<

.mduonmm on unease son» ensue pans sou os<

.oaon cranes has Esau pmpeuaeoec don» ha;

ensue any .uoaan Ga amen andeSoeAhm .HHeB
mxbn

.mooao capenpam
neaapepme a»
soapeaasn mo euD

.QOdpehhez
sopowoaaa a“
can» amen need

van was onus
"enema cannohom

.naaoaa
tune no «Hausa:
aseao on apnea

Ismas «a snag

paoEouaum

aeohm

 

«pmwsom wepepoas<

NOH

soon 00» ausas «became H mcaaflassb

.easpsc «shapes eson hSO new escapes haaeu one:
“Hg 0H0 ”coma“ 0Hp§£ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C C O O O O O O
s epoeamoa «eonum .ehon scan as» no cacao hansea no: gen“! ha

.ndam ha oceans a» a: unwaaan was apnwson H
.aaam mauveoowe egos encased anon» nah .emane

«exuas span .msfisu ease asetasn a node 0
.aanssa «Ha emu one:

can no“: nomense peae>aaen new cases houses 4

some a: unesammsn
Megan on» no haosas .dsn essnlmaem can a“ use asses hues page

on» nannaaeno an: ass
was as He suspend . .uose: hp asp e.nmasmswuefic on no: vHsoo ad

a anew one open»
new a ma“ henna an» exua on one esp .ewssape mes coast .osd
asooon as men use so . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
naausoaosa as neonum «eso- hauoow as» we segues asuhon 4

osdoen one pan wnoa seen nos 0:» van spans
ones H opens ve>fiaaa omen one soon end

.08 MCHBOHHOH son now nadnu>oam coma new
.aaap Gases page useanefisso wsfinaeaa one
hens: wGHpCasm as pmosas .maomaez enamem

.uHo anodes Has no: ass cocoons ha Eons Scam

.uesswpsao new»
Isaaezuusoflepspm

|"l'|l||"'lll‘|'||l|
'||||'|'l|||llll'lll|
I'||'-|l|l'l|ll"|l|
"l'll'l'IIlli'l'll'I'II
'|"|'||"|||I"II'I|
Il'll'|||l'|'l'||ll|'
'l||||l|'ll'|||'l|'
III'II'|||I'|'III|I'III

.haam “swam Hawaflem mnm Namawhm>mmm msm Mam
no couuoao «manpmm

memos ness Gaspon pen as man nomsoa cam
"and: ado no eonspnCa sawsau has e>aw
mean wsaheQOIncablmhssHs on» enamem
c.aasn as can Esaaepfiom Soap esweea 4

.nasona esea e3

.cescapaoo soap
usnaszupseaepspm

.aah season on page .sH unwaaeu on has;

3m ems: om slam mom pm Hm an an a: swam Msmnm om mam

"llr‘l'||"""l"

.oonp caused no: nwsonp .thQ has as has
“an “no xsean no: an “ass vac .paetaou .maz
MMDQ

$an lllllllllll lllllllll
Mo CoauoEa “magnum ~eaoa as new as pea .OIn.esdo menu eae.nsm

padcfiucao mafia
asssaznunesoueum

mo soapoEe

oE nacspaOQEH use «aospoan nan pepmd

.oasa pseudo he 90% one .hon umemaSOh ha
zomomd

.zos Han» ooh» ecu seep do s.HHacon has: has;
Hang us epwafin on asapem an» 0E on

.90“ pmosoaAOm son» 80:» no exam on» now anus
MMDQ

mmeMIKMmmmlmm.mmmmmww.wmm.mwwmlmwmm.wmwmwfiwmw

.hpwm lllllllllllllllllllll
«monuem as sexsp one: eeanp has» pawns ado dfi was

.ooasapsoo o>ap
uaaaszspceaovepm

.HO

boa

|'|'|"'l""||||ll'|
l"'ll||'l|'l'||l'
'|||"|"'|'"'l"
"|'|'|l'|ll|’||"l|l
"||I|"|"I|I|I||'I-l'
|||'|-|||III|I|II|II
'|l||l'|"'|'|"l'|'
‘|||"'||'|l|'|||||l-||
||||"l||l||"I"l
'll"l-"I|||"l"|'
"|'|||"Il'l||ll"

|||||||l|'|||'|ll||"l

.hpao IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
soaposo «magnum .exHH was once nan oeanpseesoppa nan page

aswoaaom

.nessupsoo soap
tenaszupseSepepm

108

Antiphglus of Ephesus' Oration
‘from The Comedy aTTErrors

 

 

Setting:_ The setting ofihis oration is intricately in-
volved with a series of mistaken identities. The Syra-
cuse merchant, Aegean, father of identical twins whose
names are both Antipholus, is in Ephesus looking for
his sons: for the identical twins whom he had bought
to be companion-servants to his boys, whose names are
also identical; and for his wife. The family had been
separated eighteen years before as the result of a
shipwreck. Although none of the characters of the play
are aware of it, both sets of identical twins with
identical names, and the mother and father are all in
Ephesus. Naturally complications arise. The first

of these complications occurs when Adriana, wife of
Antipholus of Ephesus, sends their servant--the iden-
tical twin, Dromio of Ephesus--to summon the master

of the house to dinner. Dromio, instead of meeting
his own master, chances upon the unmarried Antiphalus
of Syracuse, and insists that he respond to his "wife's”
call. Meanwhile, Antipholus' servant, Dromio of
Syracuse, has been sent on an errand. Antiphalus of
Ephasis, thinking this Dromio to be his own servant,
severely beats him for his impudence. Adriana, in!
patient for her husband's arrival, also chances upon

Antipholus of Syracuse and asks hin.for the gold chain

109
that her real husband had promised her as a gift.
She persuades the bewildered man and his servant,
Dromio of Syracuse who has Just returned from his
errand to come home for dinner. While they are din-
ing the real Antipholus of Ephesus with two guests,
Angelo, the goldsmith, and Balthazar, arrives at his
home. He is ordered away from his own house by the
servants who are behind a locked door. Furiously be-
wildered, he dines with his friends and a courtesan.
He instructs Angelo to bring him the gold chain, which
he new plans to give to the courtesan instead of to
Adriana. Utterly confused by the strange circumstances,
the strangest being called by name by people he has
never seen before, Antipholus of Syracuse sends his
servant, Dromio to arrange for passage out of the city.
Dromio, while en route, is confronted by Angela, who
gives him the golden chain and instructs that he take
it to his master. When later in the day, Angelo asks
the real Antipholus of Ephesus for the price of the
gold chain, Antiphalus rightly denies having received
it. He is arrested by an officer of the law. Dromio
of Syracuse, his errand accomplished, comes upon the
scene and is sent by Antipholus of'Ephesus to Adriana
for money to bail him.out of jail. When Dromio returns,
he meets his real master, Antipholus of Syracuse. He

is surprised to see him free, but he, nevertheless,

110
gives him the money. The courtesan appears, demanding
that Antipholus of Syracuse give her the gold chain
which he is wearing around his neck in payment for the
diamond ring that she had given to Antipholus of
Ephesus at dinner that day. Naturally, he refuses to
do so, and the courtezan goes to Adriana informing her
that her husband is insane. Adriana and Luciana, her
sister, take Dr. Pinch, a quack doctor, and his asso-
ciates to Antipholus of Ephesus. The unjustly-treated
husband beats the doctor, but he is finally overpower-
ed by Adriana's cohort and locked in his own house.
On their way to obtaining passage out of the city,
Antipholus of Syracuse and his servant run into Angelo,
who notices the golden chain around Antiphalus' neck.
A quarrel follows. Adriana and Luciana enter and join
in theconfusian. Antipholus of Syracuse and Dromio
flee to a near-by priory, finding refuge under the
protection of a Lady Abbess. During this fray, Anti-
phalus of Ephesus and his servant have escaped from
their prison. As the Duke of the city is talking to
the discouraged Aegean in the street, Antipholus of
Ephesus enters and interrupts the Duke with a plea

for justice. The following speech is his plea:

.aoanaoe
pseuomfioa .esean
e we: on pen»
upmowmfim «monum

I‘

HHH

.pwsn as e92 passe son» was {on 2:683

mMDQ
as: men mafia one pane
chem

.05 :0 Gross» mmoHeEenm n

muons ago an dawneaameea o:

“manna“ Ma unwaen use someones one s“ aosm

0E p.h50nonmao can vomdna Span Dana

.auas he on on as on on.>em son» Eons enm

~eae£p smack was» museums .eosaaa pecan .eoapmfih
mammmmm mo mbuommHBz¢

.aafioaa use .msaanaaps4 can he can H
.epon 0E exea noon Susan no such on» nmeasb

zommm¢
.eofipwsm ms.pmrmwusms..memp.amu.pmam m can» pang
uaoan on» new no>o «emma.hmp exam m .mhaoe moon

.0 his... .H {as

soap c:s..mamw emu Gm memo

9mm ne>m

.aonp can H.0mamm.wmom memv.em«maMm.omp

"ceasesfi as madam .0 «exam nsoaoeaw peas .eoapmaw

mammmmm mo mbuommHBz¢

.houon
luau «nooh
lflfiu OHMQOQOE

usesopepm

.eoapnsw «noon
ins» camsoaom

aeohm

 

"umwaom neueponmfl

mHH
“aesaap seam men «an» use as n.xooa deans nmmw

.mwa mamas eco axes pnwfia ammons ha paenH<

.eaH madman Sufi: megaboam acmenlhpeon hoz

.mmws no pooumo as» nods penaSpme nonuaaz

«Nun H pens oene>ns as H .oweHH m2

mbmmmmm mo monommHBz<

.Eezp Spemasno haumsw defines on» man» uH
usaosmaou noon one home ~usaos wensnnea o
r oqmwz<

unusap eHasam anosnmfim spam on mHHea an» pom
.uans so oeon has .heo so MooH H has ne.ez
dz¢HODH

aHanuHs es ascends an emHeH «H was» ad

Haas as Human om .penpowou asap nap maples

saunas HE use an anaemhs «whoa meow he .02
«zaHmad

was none pecan .swsos .hem «uHseu msoaeanm d

mMDQ
.omson ha CH papmsom muOHaen spas can eHHQB

.08 can: shoot an» pone one .0359 peoam amen MHAB
mammmmm mo manommHHz¢

memes eaoshnodm

eonp.sgc.m

soapaanaz

.mmaceoHHom ;; nHH
no HHHB poom

ma emcee eaoa eHnnaa a use .aepuae he: .emas he pee as has an» mm
s use napoaaeno . . . . . .

no emecnoom a some .muwam ha.aw me.£mah mowaem nu am as
nausa on Seen means . . . . . . . . . .
spoons omen» «manpm wamHWHm mnw axommon H ”Haaeu some

.u.caapea ego: Spas on «unease caspaeo ham
sea: amassed ha use» use mhmnm @H@ w

.neoamua as spas as pecans can em

scans on» say mum:.smn.H..msmn% mn.pmm..momfl%
.saaeo or» eo>aoooa sen do has mane H pane
stop as sees» ansneHow censuses man» can shone
.mesoneow wasp.hmamsmo.uwn.sw ws¢
.Ew:.poE.H.pwewpm an» m«. mewn.xmom mp.pmer w
.aenpanp weasoo pan on use .ecoo pacaan ado
.AonpowOp asap can H one Aenenpasm open;
.ecapcemnom on» on pH msahn Op wCHnHanm
.aHsno a Seven am a» as spas penned on;

«can» as some was on new .pH mnecpas cHsoo

anon Spas ©.xoan no: a: one: .eaenp apHEanow page

.eanpe scan
team a» coupes
Ines an» no can

.eossnp
Isoo sowusaaez

\ vHH
MoMuMsM awn MuleMQMslem MoMmloM

noeemep H Eons «eoenw swam molnmdmwm Mam

"|ll"lllllll'

«aenpemOp mason span «sea ha use as uHoH enema

l"lll""'|lllll'llll

.HuHQ Ho lllllllll
omsom e "monpwm nonpoMOp HHe some .u.ememmam mas H .pso mafiao

.eE wswoempso .eaosp. as .eosu a: Saws pad

.aeHsa ha mcHHoeH .mahe enHE :H mcHusm .pq<
«neasncoo a as Has no xoou .npaomaom

.ebeHe usaHoHCAea «Hap «sea neon wcwsaH a

.nopeas waHxOOHnaasnn .ueheIIOHHon .huee: 4
.AoHHeunessuaom e use .aanan onenceehnp 4
.xcenepcdoa s .Haopeca ence d

.cHaHHH> neoeHnseeH mamas: a .nosfim eao unmsoan hone

Eon» spas w:0H< .meuaaeueucoo eHH> Ho

.oesaH»
tsoo soupsaasz

nHHJ

«was» ea sounded epaoaapna us page .hna =.nenpaaaoo
mmpm no: use new en»:
llllllll Illlllllllll «esmeH saucepan
.HenuHB as uenuasn so» oeHsH ea was» now .
l l l I l llllllllllllllll .ueaHabsH
aseseem ea mHen an .cfieno on» see aspen H ea soapsnsoos
llllllllllllllllllll esp moans nods
.pceEheoHfisen «as no phase hnp same menu pecan nope aaz ness-H Ho he»
have: no eases l.l l lllllllllllllll Indoa demo noses
a «mafia «magnum unHHsssNonoe omen» canvas ease noses H tswss Ho snag
Mbmmmmm mo mbqommHHZd

.oHoenHE hp 0500 oa.som .xsfinp H .eoaens Beam

.osos soaps was» open e.Ha sch cos» ee<

«do» no phase ha wean H .nanseaenp p24

«pass on» so pa eaosaaom unaHH no» hound

.Eag Ho sauna on» can So» emeHsoo so» naeem

onHa He made enema .naasu on HHHB H .neoHeem

Hdeommz onomm

.Moea nan ozone Guano on» see oHaaoQ omega

.er3 :H can an can: use ”whoa he .oen em soapeusmem

quwz<

«as no .oenp Ho Geese a nose on can usm
MMDQ

.sso e.aooH as: use .oson a. pop scene or page
see and: «mouse: H use use» .epsss ea .eaoH as
ohmszs

llllllllllllllllllllll .naaoneau «noon
.mofiuaawfiesw useaw use .mesdnm neon omen» pom none causeaom

oHH i

.oea Mason no .nepea HHe one so» xaan H
.aoepan muons: on» ease as .owsaspm an nee» .hn;
mMDQ

.aoeao mach cam on H as .eweHH ha .oaSm ma
z4mmemboo

«one: henna on» as house Ban soap pn.sem
mama

.90: 90 can H mnap man noonH ha .059» mHH.
mammmmm mo mDHOmHHBz<

.wsaa pan» U.£oueam pawnHH ha Beau use uuHu em
z¢NmHmDoo

.osHuceasom asp as .eaenp he: ans pecan en .aHm
mammmmm mo onomQ

«50% he» pans .nsanam .wcahan pens meason

eaen anEmnHow on» mafia: us woman on hen do»
«hHuHoo an useHa no: uHsos an .nea one: on HH
“Seen o>sn anos on eye: .aHn cause: so» anon «H
.oso e.eanHo Ho Madam e>s£ Has no» .maanp H

117
Summary of Analysis: The structure of this oration
is incomplete because of the dramatic circumstances
and the purposes of the playwright. The parts pre-
sent are the proem, the statement, the narration
which is used to establish ethical proof, and an argu-
ment in the form of refutation. The forensic issue
of the speech is ”that the act was not committed.”
The forensic subjects present are Justice and dis-
honor. The speaker uses two means of dealing with
prejudice (lines of argument): 1) he attempts to
clear himself of suspicion, and 2) he openly attacks
the charges made against him. There is no use of
non-artistic proof in this oration. The uses of the
artistic modes of proof are scant; the ethical made
of proof is slightly predominant. There is but one

enthymeme drawn from the realm of probability.

Tamora's Oration from Titus Andronicug
Setting: Titus Andronicus has returned to Home after
a successful war against the Goths. With him he
brings as captives Tamara, the Queen of the Goths,
and her three sons. Even in his great hour of tri-
umph as he is being cheered by the Roman populace in
the streets, he is mourning the deaths of his sons.
In retribution, he demands the life of Tamara's eld-
est son. The following is Tamora's address to the

vengeful conqueror, pleading for her sonflslife.

poeHHepsa no hoauuem
Iaoo e.eaoaaa «mOSpm

.naeu can han we
usowuoao

opanaae esoaoae>
use some as made»
lea scavenge: hen ho

houses exp "nonpm
.muam
H0 GOdpoBo .mOflpdm

.eoanw .msuse
you wsaaeem canoes

cam .cease>on oped
n.aenpofi «eonpm
.»p a

efloofio 0>Hv

sane a an be
”a. N
Haas eoow .nowem

mHH

Huessoaaoo use mafia aom unwa% on M« .o

 

 

.0':...:...."-"""'l-"""ill
O O 0.. .0000

womsdo u.hmpssoo macs» Ga mmsaoo pandas» mom

-l:::.'-'-l ..:::'l"" -i. I-‘ -‘i
O O 0 e

. . .

.monpam .nueewpm on» ad o.nepnwseae on use. ha ness udm

'EEI""'. -.."i ' ‘
. O . . O .

\.ex0h seaom NS» on one e059 0» eeapmuo

.':.'.'-:....:Il"l'l‘""-'
.00.

.saspem use mnnssaap has huapseen 09

:'|.':.........:l"lll'lelll"llllll'l
O O .00

.esom. on unmsoan one es pass .90: npeoamwsm

0 e e e e e 0 e e

\weE on neon me on 0» new ha xsanu .o

 

 

e e 0 e e e e e e e e

.eeSp op seen no>o one; econ hm» Q“ was

I'
"l.."||"l"""llllell

\«som so: 90% scammen ma mason e.no£poe d

l'll'l'l’ellll'llllll‘l‘"

.oenm H mason on» eds .mSpHB esoH90poH>

.aomemumom msmfimsmw. «shampmsm ma&om "hapw

<m02¢9

INe Heaaeaam no
woman eaeahnusm

uneaswh<

.OOHP
leans“ «ween
cDSu causeAem

soapeaaaz

.Awsasoueoa Hue
$woaenev edged
INo Heaaaaem no
oeman efieahnpcm

.ufiea
Ismhulpaeaepupm

EOORW

 

“INHAoe vepaposmm

othh cad hpwm
Mo coupoao ”monpam
HHHB coom «nonpm

.monoa mo

cannunppa ox» aw on:
avow on» GM HOHHOD
no: upooauon «monpm

- - .manu ma
roan manoaswha uco>

us“ on bpfiaana a.
hp copappanoEov u”

mHH ;

i ' I i i I g i ' I ' ' . . .
O C O O O C O O O O O O O O O O C O 0

.com agontpupaw ha upmam .mspae caponlooahsa

. O O I 0 o o I O O O 0 o 0 O o O O O

\umwnan Gaga m.thHHno: ma hoaoE 900mm

0 O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O

\"HSHHohoE mnaon CH non» Bog» yuan 35mm

0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o

wmvow on» no ohdpdc 03p hues Dunc sonp pmfl?

 

.Uooan Spa: 980» ha» #0: :fiapm .uSOHCOQUmm

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

\.omonp ca a“ pH doafinp a“ hpoaa one;

 

 

.ofimoaamm

.aanda no
woman ofioshnpnm

.mcaaonaoh
adoawoadnu x
hpaaanunogm no
vomun oaoatham
=.c.fimapm¢n

a“. DO“ 03.“:
«Gamma cauflohom

.AmQH:0uaoh Hue
sameaanuv .amaa

120

Summarl of Analysis: The analysis of the structure

of this oration shows that the parts present are the
preem; the statement which is followed by a brief
narration; the argument, and the epiIOgue. The for-
ensic issue with which the speech is concerned is "that
the act (action) was justified.” The forensic sub-
ject of justice or injustice is-also present in the
oration. There is no use of non-artistic proof. The
pathetic mode of proof predominates. The use of the
10gica1 and the ethical modes of proof are fairly
equal in their intensity. All, however, are inter-
dependent upon one another. The premises from.which
the enthymeme are drawn are invented examples, proba-

bilities, and one maxim.

Friar Lawrence's Oration from The Tragedl of
‘Fomeo and Juliet

 

Setting: Romeo, Juliet, and Paris, a kinsman to the
prince of Verona who was once betrothed to Juliet,
all lie dead near the Capulet family tomb. Romeo was
of the house of Montague; Juliet was of the house of
Capulet. These two families of Verona had long been
enemies. When the news of the three deaths spread,
the members of the two warring houses gather at the
scene of the tragedy. The reasons for the young
peoples' deaths are unknown. Chaos reigns until the
Prince of Verona announces that nothing will be done

until the true causes of their deaths are known. At

121
this point Friar Lawrence, who had discovered the
bodies, offers his exposition of the situation. His

oration which follows answers the unanswered ques-

tions and simultaneously clears his own name of sus-

picion.

was

ness who» one: menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
emssoon eaaoom munch .poca poaazh .aaanhe sow pom Una .aonk mom
03”. on“. ”OH“ e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
thus awash 038 «had mung aon% BechweUahn ousfiukoa on» o.SMHcsm
.msaoh sass new . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
massas mcaosom noon Sudan h oaapns emons .hsotmaoov n.uHsnhB as;

e>c£ modaassm u.oeeom . . . . . .
one m.pe«H5h «monpm hsclemaahnda Q.Hopn sacs» can “Soap neaahsa H

O O O C C O O O O O O O O O O O O

"emW3.Hmmwpwaw m.wosow as: .oaon 0903p gonm cad
«newflwb.pwnw mp.vmmwas:.us .osev ehonp .ooEom
O‘Hoxwoam e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 0 e e
e as monopoofioo nan .oawu nzoauou s m as won on no: mH

«gunmen can own 6H0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
«as upooaueh ”nonpm madcap u even mhmnm ha mom aweapn 09 HH«3 H
WUZWED<Q m<Hmm

.manu dd sonx whom son» punk coco us has coma

. moszm
HH ”3°C” 03 ”.50 e,e e o e e e e o
a eocuam on» on ..ewswxw . wnWE. mu ease coo Honk:
epaaes on mnesavuen n ma o o v .m. . .
.fin an ecu .cao. mmmsm mam momomsw mp.nmom ”scans H anon es<

lam” mung“ on EOHSS . .
“E‘HHMU O o M e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e o
soapaawocen xssQMunmn nomads Humoaac «an» Ho .08 umaaaws ones :9 9

hp U0Hd0>ooH 0““ Ho 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

. 08 e
mimmmwno no hufipwopnw eoaaa was eafip on» ma consensus um . m m
son nan "monum .mmmem m©.om mama..mumpaehw on» Ea H

Wozmmbdq m<Hmm

.monpe
anHndpue 0»
:oaushhds ho ems

.Goan
IaALaZIuceEopdum

.Aea
hnv,=nop»«asoo

pom as: nos ego:
nonmma camsesom

EOOHR

 

"mmHson nepspomm«

.nafi mac mcficsea
uaflek a no acaussaa:
eHmEHn a Monaco e:»
on was madam .uoesao
an .thm on» «moans

.8“:

manouaenflp masses
as: one has» mcafidm
Ins .oas nos newsman
ops: fiasco em .90»
louaano man no poonma
capenpaQEhm .oHnwmcoan
sea a mHaeboa "monpm

.ewausnas ecfipmevcaflo
on» ho aeozefivomnoo
on» ho Hummus“ pom ma
on pump was nowpuosu
e>ons eas escaped

a“: scammed on pump
CH amends Hsoanuo man
on up“ 0» ages» Eon»
magmaaafi you when
uses was no eczema:
one .moaafiash Ages»
aeospen cocoa no a»
luaananuom on» 3am on
:oHQS a mafia Smsoanp
eesdoen was e>oa ma

nma
ewoma.ama.cm£w .omomp.nmumom NE.Unnwsmem
mnWHmhwpwow wcm anewHwom wn.mnhmum may

.smom msmaw vamuwow wE.ewow bownr m£.wsm

“emamo.umswnm momow m.mowpma.omp.owfim mam Wamom

.m>mnw m.bomnmn.sm£.emuw mom m&mu.0m mam£.ow
.mnmfim «swe.mwnm ma.osom mompmn.emsmnm mn.pmnw
.omEmm.om mawk.H.o&Hmzwo$ .umpmow wo.Ewom mnw

Mom mo.pmwmom3.pm mom nvmmmmpmH.H.n¢
momhmo.xwom mm.£wams.“mowpmm.mmfimemam w

swam wswhm m.moprm mm..Mom m mpmm.cm£&
“Hmommmn.flmab mam mdmob mmmnm mamo.h& mH.Am
newmmpmam mnmomm.mmnm fiomw.am£.vmh.o&

mums omom mumsmu.om mam mxmom mams.£mwb mz¢

aom mp.omm_wL€mc.cmnm ."mfimam Mumsmo.ow
emanMom mom mownmwm m>m£.nmsmk.ums.vnmumsmom

amen aomw.hmfimm.mm mwmfim mam mpwmom mp..mom

.monpe

handguns. on
godpaasan go cub

.conp
usnpazupceaepepm

.sanuausw no uaomeco
haeHo on wcapaaeppa
ea eco caches: hcoE
Iapuep a Ga eozaocw

on ecceuH>e mo ocean
canon no hnspcoe
ueamfioo who» a p.ama
upshobahw d cw omwoc
1 mp season w:«om
.980» on» mafipaea
how condom Haowwoa
oaofi a monso>Ca e>dn
vasoo on «humoaon
muoeauoh «nonpm

.e.»ooaeos ”coda
son sunnmasno "soaps

#NH

mam»..mn..mom.m mums..som momsmsmomm..m
muma.nmo.h& mom upmsmu.hw mn.cMaMAMOMHm
mwmp.nm mnwsm m«..m:L .\mhmHmm.mm mendm hem
.omamtmus an» ms.um..nmomx.H..mnm ma¢
.mamamom mo.emcmamam mam unmemn.pm ma..mdm

ow mom mHmOL mpmnmamem mom mnm mc¢

M2,.” is“...
.mamp.emu.amam ma.oMamm.omu.em«ma.s.nmnm mam
«emcmwmam me3.cm>mem mo.meL mHmp.hmem mc¢
.dpmom memo.pmn.ompmompmo.H.oma..mo&dh mam
.mrm .omsmm.omsm mam mnm.m mamom and

mum mamfimpms.emem mwmamama.nm£.mm
omam mnm mam uemsmam mama..mamo.H.cmnh %sm
"mesom ms.emom msmom mamamsmohcmo.H.Hmsw
Hmom ms.sm mammmfim mom momx.om mamcmos
mumsm>.mmvmamaaw Wmn.5mnm Mom mxmu.om m.e&dm
mmamam Mom mo.hmon memawoma.emp.p¢

suede on «pace
nsmns ho coda

.eswoaadm

, .uuecpan
"Mocha oauuauas
Izod we on: on»
now aoapaaanenm

.GOHp
sensualpcoEepdum

mmH

.hcoE«umep

.2 no 3322. on»

o» unefiual a as chad . . .
nan useumo on "manna

0 e e 0 e e e e o e 0 e O OgOHOfiQnflfln
.saa pmonopeo no nsowas on» cusp uo manning

126

Summary of Analysis: The structure of this oration

is composed of a proem, a statement which is followed

by a lengthy narration, and an epilogue. The narra-

tion is used to establish ethical proof. The forensic

issue of the oration is "that the act was not commit-

ted" (by me). The Friar uses one means of dealing with

prejudice (line of argument):
There is a preparation for the use of non-

to clear himself of sus—

picion.
artistic proof. The speaker's use of ethical proof is

predominant. There seems to be little or no evidences

of the use of the other two modes of artistic proofs.

Mowbray's Oration from The Tragedy of
Richard II

Setting: Bolingbroke, a relative of the King and son

of the venerable Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, has accused

Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, of treason on two

points: 1) that he illegally used the king's funds--

money which should have been paid to the king's sol-

diers, and 2) that he was responsible for the death

of the Duke of Gloucester, uncle to Richard. The

following speech is Mowbray's oration of defense de-

livered to King Richard and other attending lords.

.ooCooon

Ina mag spmemwdn exsn
tea on» no prneasm
e59 .AOHas m.s¢E

on» no coauuo
lacs“ cu eebww
exsnea xaaam
.madfim s nosn "moflpm

.uepspaappa csHpmHano
esom masopoa new

on wanesaaa on: .o.
ch .soapaaea nooHn
lashes can ensues EH3
use: on weax esp new;
u.sneon enuaaeposndno
upooHHea «mozpm

.mmmam moms..mamsms

bud

.pmomcmo.hm m damnmmmh.vmam madam mnw

“mmomcmom numemnmam mam mp.hmsm m memamnmam

umswam mow mam w mmmomom msdp.mm mpmem mehflR

.hmn.em mwmmmam mama»

mumdm£.mmp.om md.ka.em w
Mdmmgo:

ms» dwmownw
stmwmawom ”smnw

.IOHad eon» 0» H nmoHaseH mad noeean eehm
«son» and on «hdnnsoz noonndo aso ma om

"Hsou uanpns he Ho enonfihau wcHaoouans one
euHHaHpnsn aoa .SHS eweHHPH

.Bo> a oxafi H .034 n.09uaoon he hp

acom u.ae£poan m.ponpsH he aH
.aHoz n.50cwCHx ha has

“once one meme ago ems

on ad
.aonpoan he on eye;
Haaunamsa ahaantos
Qm<mon

.amam m msmm.om mpm£.cma.cmom mam mom wow
.eoomn awn cm momcmsm msmu.emom «smn.H.Hmaw
.msme.om «awn» «Hmpwa.a.nmam mam mam mq¢
”swam mam waba.cm:m mm

mewemom wa.pma..m
Mdmmaoz

=.eupnassoo
no: em; pod esua
”enema onceaoh

:.dedHao
Ana: hassHso
peas: «uses

lumps Ho esHH
psoaepapm

:.hnsdHao
anI HassHao
pens: «psofi

.Iswae Ho oan

Booam

,

”nuance neuauoqmm

.eHoHHen seapoaano
eHn nHaopep zoans
aoamaeusoo a «mofipm
omen

Inns 0» vesadam eoao
on Eons sea one was
accuses» Ho EH: wcH
Insooa ea pan» sea as»
He aenpsu on» woodman
SH vHos 0» eHnu ma on
:IaopOdaano Ho mafia
vacanwsa "mogpm

.ceHhu wzaop no: «H
e: scant pom eEHao

a neemaoo on muecmcu

-Haas man an vegans

Induce ea hououasno Ho

humane: nan "monpm

.Smep.nnsmpwow5m

"cmomc.mmn.nmpma.om

mma.

«gouaaap eucaocewec pmoE cam p:wo&ooa d

.aHaHHH> a mo asoonma on» Bosh mosema uH

apeHaomma push on» how we mumsmm.h& ma.nm£w
.uw mam w mam£.H.pma.amomnma.mnomamu.amow
vmwmom meOMHm mam mum mammmom mam m
mnmswnwam «hm momamoms.umam m «pm mam
mHmom wowewaw hE.Hm>.nmom mamp.mmsmamam ¢
.mmmH.nmow mow memn&m ma.hmH.H.vm©.emcm
awow wa.om mompwm.ow9mamomom mnw
.Mommmomsm wo.owom mHmom waaawow wow
.omaw mapp.nw huwv.cworm.hw wowomHWow
ewmmwmaw mam wa.ow wdm mpmcwawg.stm w
as new ..msm mump.:mom womamam mow
momsmm.om mem:.H.pmam momnm
.pmsmoma.amem m wo.nmvamBma.cmmm

umom mfi.cw mam mwmfim mwmomomom wfi.pmzm mom

:.hfififid¢o
anal hflfidaao
noes: apnea

lama: no snag
pneasmad

Copraawz

oflpdev
m.aeune050Ho Am

one aupQHeoeaa
Ho ems any H
"EH: pends a
unwsoan aedmea
on» no noapupsm
lea Geno “pace
lawns Ho emaq

mma

.uan saoe cosh» .saocsoz .esd
mmamon

.emaw n.xHoHaoz Ho 0x59 0:» anon ha assoc Sousa
«emu hp eaooon HHsnm eosoalexafi a en 05
HZD<¢

.com ado» sch .xHomhoz Ho exam 0:» Ease HH.e;
“names pH chest was aan poH .eHosfi pooc
.UeeHn on nanofi on ma was» man @909006 550
“neoawa on psaaevsHocoo ue>HmaoH apownom
«coauuoca deem co» memes eOHHsE meem
«asaoanhna on stOSp .enanonoha on edge

"oOOHn wnappeH psoanB aeHono nan» ewasm n.poq
use hp ooHsa on anoEOHpcew veaocHxlnpaa;

demOHm
.ham mamhm mzm mwmmms.om mnmcmmm£.amow
mmsm m mepmemn.pmo& mumememk.emmmn.:m

oaomom mam ma.pnamn&dmo.vmomn.pmem mam mH.:m>w

.h‘p O O O C 0 O C O O O C O

teenage an Ho pecans .ms&chcom HaHOH a HHemmE opoam o9
.sosoaap . .H..p.s as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ansoecapHsaau was soap .uoom n.sopaaap wsaseesae>o anu com:
-.ssc.s .ss as saws.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
nova ecceoocca can mmmm.h& sion Has: thsewsdnoaoch pad

”“0“.” 0” Homuo m.“ 0.3 O C C C O C O C 0 O C C O O C . .
pens page ans «soaps «sconce Haas mHeHop H caoums as gonna

atonH

e e e e e e a e e e a a

.n9 MO “Gap-hp bile! e 0 e O a o 0 e e O a
lemon 6 «nonpmp .essnu ME 959 exs «apoam nH ewcano pom #59 anew
Mdmmaoz ,

 

.eSsp nunsaooH exsfi usoHH «swam can as o>Hu
uncovenpas en pupa ewam

 

 

 

gmon I I lllll I I

. owned awn» censuses ness;

thnfig .Ho leellelellellellellelvellelvellellellOllele'esllellellellellellellelraH
coHpoEe «monpcmn mOOHptpaeon was pap .ohdo use EHsn o: mean: one

‘Il'I-lllllle‘
.C...

 

e e e 0 e e 0 e e e e e e e e O 0 e

queens n.50ce> m.aopsaHm Spas Hsom on» on ceoaeam

O C O C O O O Q C O

 

.wQHx man on ooaaaw meson UOHHan par .U.£oaoaBH .

 

 

 

 

 

‘Hfld “HS ”a .HHH ”Hg ealenlelleIlOlIOIIO‘OIO 0 e 0 e a all. e e 0 e e e
eaomen homo: wsfippsm .o>an no: pHegm 5039 can u.aso:o£n«o anc 09
“end" .ogogufimgfi ”an 0'.'OIC-O'O'O'O'.I.‘OIOIC'O'C'.I.II..IOIIIOQIICI'
hp egos venuHHpapme euwapm,w9 sons mepwH pan» nudes Ho epHmmeQ
W.“ ”9 HeHm.pAHH OHDUQ ele'ellell.elelele‘ellellellellellelleleclellOllell
nausea was «monpm .eSa: swam be 959 “mono hunt he ago one

C O O O O . O C C 9 O O O O O O O O O 0

«cause a pod p53 apcwsEoo uHann son» eHHH ha

 

 

‘l"!l"1"ll"l"lil1‘

l'l’lr‘llr'lrlrLI-L- P ' by! .I ’h b '

.900“ map as .cwwwsw>0u swamp .voan» H HHonwz
Mdmmgoz

.9009 o: «H enema apap at stop Bonn» .xHOHnoz
Qm<mon

.saama can soc canons H ”can coconeono
«can: .hnadm anon;

szdw

nooeawmam Ed H

immune ebapupsmom

.sononnao
nus homo: «noun
tape causesom

eAhOGOQ H0 #900
acoo ccnuenuuHHm
en» so vouenv
uneasmha he»
laden one coapoen
:no no women e806
uhnpse e>ap¢usmom

consanscom

endow was huaa
Ho mmoapose "nonuam
.0503» hocon «nonpm

.efionp nonon 23 Ho
noHpsaonaHo and soap
Isssaanoo s "monpm

.eaonp homes

HnH

‘t‘

.hmp.ea new Wamcmn.ocaw. .oonH as need amass

a e e e e e e e e

 

 

\szop ea. oHHH ha. fins .05 Bosh pfionog ones
«owo.cw rowm.£wow mowHw we.nw mswcm£.obaw
\asw.mts w.wow a ss.swtwsw saws....w
.pwomo.mwxw.msmphmmswuhsmp.s.cm mowem b
\.msmo.omumwmm.hm bamH.ompme mum mam we»
“Hmrm web». mcmwmamsmem mumeomn.nw
mammmd.nmawu.Hmpwom mawnmowu.pmewsm.mnw

.cwmw.amec.Mswv.h» .\newew wa.:&Hmom m find

eswcHHQm

.honon

ho umoofioo GUS»
nonunHHm any so
semen eSthnpnm

.aaxaa.no
women eaoahnpam

.aade no

women eaoshnpam
.useasmpa aopasoo
no names eaes

132
Summary of Analysis: The structure of this oration
is composed of a proem, a statement, a narration which
is used to establish ethical proof, an argument in
the form of refutation, and an epilogue. The forensic
issue treated is ”that the act was not committed.”
The forensic subject is honor. Two means of dealing
with prejudice (lines of argument) are used by Mow-
bray: l) he "meets calumny with calumny,” and 2) he
openly refutes the two charges brought against him.
No use of non-artistic proof is present in the oration.
The speaker establishes his case predominantly through
the use of the ethical mode of proof. Some pathetic
proof elements are present, but they arise mainly
from the use of the other two modes of proof. The
premises from which the enthymemes are drawn are
maxims, with the refutative enthymemes based on objecn
tion and ccunter-argument.

The Earl of Worcester's (Thomas Percy)
gration from HENRY IV, Part I

 

 

 

Setting: In Richard II, Northumberland (Henry Percy,
brother to Worcester) Worcester, and Hotspur (North-
umberland’s son) had aided Bolingbroke's usurpation
of the throne. The throneless Richard had said of
Northumberland:

Northumberland, thou ladder wherewithal

The mounting Bolingbroke ascends my throne,
The time shall not be many hours of age

155
More than it is, ere foul sin gathering head
Shall break into corruption: thou shalt think
Though he divide the realm, and give thee half,
It is too little, helping him to all;
And he shall think that thou, which know'st the way
To plant unrightful kings, wilt know again,
Being ne'er so little urged, another way
To pluck him headlong from the usurped throne.
The love of wicked men converts to fear;
That fear to hate, and hate turns one or both
To worthy danger and deserved death.

Richard had foreseen and foretold the divi-
sion of loyalties which occurs at the time of Wor-
cester's oration in Henry IV. Bolingbroke, now Henry
IV, distrusts the houses of Worcester and Northumber-
land because of their treasonous actions toward
Richard, even though they were the means by which he
gained the throne. WOrcester, Northumberland, and
Hotspur feel that they have been neglected and mis-
used because they have not received their expected
rewards. They have raised an army against Henry IV
and his two sons Prince Hal and John of Lancaster.
The King, wishing to settle their differences peace-
ably arranges a parley with‘Worcester wherein he asks
the reasons for the pending conflict. Worcester's

oration of defense follows the King's question.

vnH

.pH mason on end ems: «HQ :« HaH doaHHenem
mm<smq<m

«cos» .vH meaoo com «pH unwsom no: e>e£ Sow
Nmzmm GZHM

nomawmwn.nw£m wo.hmn.emu.pmwswu no: open H

.wmmumam wv.H..mow mmw5w£.pvadv spa;

eHHH HE Ho vaotwsH on» Gaspaopao oH

OQODOC e e e e e e e e e e e e e 0 e e e e eve e

cause was we needed pcopcoo HHoB e vHsoo H apnea :so ecHE pom
neHHHeeqs hHwGHaeeu . . . . . . . . .
a nHaepoa «mozpm «oonH ha ”03 spam

mMBmMOmOB

wmeEHp :aoncs oSp on Hefinonafi venomous Ho
acepaom a one .aeeu Ho hwavoam d

.aoeuefi neHenHo as eaoa on on va<

auanH Haynes: was aHaH s e>Hm can 50H anon;
nasws nae ucoficono pan» 2H e>os and

when consonnalHHa Ho posh nmaaasno anH
aazxcs cHawa sch HHHB pr on so» Hen pang
.HH.: nos an «an» .esoa as .HH.s no: an page
«Heepu erCemas CH mnEHH 6H0 aso Swaps OH
.eoaoa me money hmao aso uHop a: enaa va<
apnea» use wepaoooo o>an now .uer oh so: n¢
aspen nose mom: veoa.waso:n H use 50h page
HHoI nos aHu. Haepneoao; Ho oaoH he .Boc com

Nmzmm OZHM

.noHoam
case Ho HHonaH£
aseHo on apnea

unwaa Ho ecwq

pnoaepapm

aeeam

 

«mmHaom nopsuoqmw

.mcfix man on menu
uHamonHe an: menpasfi
op mcHhap use a mo
unaeppa eneoch hHw:H
IEeon sccheHa HHaHaH
nae auoech .asoHo

ma eHhum anallepmmp
meow ans noueHoa one
poaahcoo mcheuaoanu
on» ecu moasfiamofl

Ho season was» on

ceH ebaz noun: mason
lfiocu ens .A>H hazom
wcHM kocv exoanmsHHom
nonmacan can» on» on
veeaeuxe eoco case:
Hanan was gonna Anna:
uoomv UH: emu uHHaooa
hepueoaog :ofipmhas:
.np nmsoans "moans

wna
nomam...ms.smcm.w..omomsms.wmnmsms.ewe.sma.pmsw
newsmawgmn.sm sumo.smsw mums» mam we» mew
.mn.om mamsm mow ..msmp.emp.Hm mawwwam mnw
mememsm mam Hamamn.ems..mamn.smh.smmmomn.smnm
”cmn.amn.vms.amempmam we..mHmumE.nmk.pw
“H..m memcmsmom mam mnmtmu.om mcmcmom
wcwomom mfi.ums.emamg.am mam3.5mh.umh.cm£©

65

as
mnwfim mam New memuma.vms.«mewp.unvmamomm.nm

mvmsm wzmm.nmaw mhmk.emp cm mow mowa

seemn.H.uwn.emHmHm mo.mmsmu.hw mow mom

.mn: HAM msmh.Hm mmmhmom mam

O .

pecan

new ”the..s
mvmom mfi.amom momEmEma.pmsm m we» mn¢

memsmn.amo.Hma.Ums..mamnws.amaw msmsmm.mm

«eased

auoaeno aeoaem
Hmzmm moszm

women oaeahnuce
as an eHsoI wad
Icoauea Ho :Hano
menuHHnspue an»
Hooam Heoaon
n4 .nerHaHOH
Ho amazon an»
psons pawsoan
.aGOHpoa ako awn
nausea» .>H as
Iaem pan» usaon
an» meanHnspne
scavenge: nan»
emcee eso ch

.eonpe
nafianupm. on
scavenge: no cap

A.w:HM on» omen
sec on mass on»
Ho wcHeHsa on»
mcaen pee enHm

:.ueHHHums

as. and on»:
«enema cannoaom

ceausaasz

onH .

om ms.nmnm wow ms.hm mew wqmem mn¢
«mommmomom ms.nw mp.£wum wsmh.pmmwow
deems.swow mess.aw.m w.m.s.s new mswm.ow

w.mom ”HMOwsm mn.om momnmomo.xoop sow
.nmwMDmdmnw MHMH.Hm whmtm wamu.aoam and
«mumc.aw£.emsmem @Hw m:MstW mH.ku page
mama.£mHmH.hmomHms.uw£.am wamH om
we e o e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 0.605ng
Gay on» nHon pen» mesa: msoaasapsoo on» end Inoo :oapaaasz
.0 O O I O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 0
:mon nan son can» neondaoHHSo msHEeee one A.oaoc ha
laseHo ea aeupsa
one .emoaasm
Hence Hsebea op
. . . . no eacodgdcwaccw
nose cQ< use hpum epaoxe:
e e e e e 0 e08. m.“ HHOdeFaH“: .Ho
neon a swap p emonasa on» pump
. . ... . .H. 33 .93: .3

emote e! anp 09 aheposoz apso
upcaoa eroauHa¢

.n»=e>o amen

. . . . . . Ho soapspeaa

.mnmfim mymwmuhrm¢.amom.msmw.wmdpad on mHmHo.hcw . taeuna can can:

.mfiwu.nmpmab m wo.umumzmsw mnm mums pen;

.mnmx.umomnm mnm bums.pmnb mmmom mam mums pen;
.moh mo.Hmo% mumnmemaw mo.umomm.a.
«memn.hmom mo.wm«meMomu.omsmamH.

O O

momam mamnm ma.pmm unma.amo

mamumamzmq.Hm fiovexsn aunds Ho uses eza

5H

.omHamaopse homcSOH finch :« an op Ghosw

such» was SpHaH HHs Ho scapeHOHp end
.eocecopGSOo msoaomcsn .emems vaaxnfi Hm
HHomQSOh uncaswd common open Hdoeasoh so» mm
anaea nose hp neeoamo wasps or kneaena

memo» mammewm mdmw.oMHma.nws..m£me wsmh.mm mam
wHw mp..mxmm.hmewam mow ”cmomowsm hams.e%

wwfip MHmsw:.£er mam mmemomHmam wo.nmew mow
wnwfiw wswm.awow wawo.ums.pwawn.ewow Mam mowe.pwnw
xmsm m memam mn.om wswvwem msm wn.3mam
«Mums.pwo.mwomamo.cmc.ubomawmm mam mummy

”wwwm w.momowo.omp..mHmm.ewpmemnw msmp.m¢

esonHnm

.aocon use Home
queQKe «spoon
«can camaeaom

.uosafipnoo :oHu
ncaaaununoSeuapm

158
ngmary of Analysis: The proem of this oration is
shifted to a source other than that of the speaker.
The remaining partsmd‘the oration are the statement,
the narration which is used to establish ethical proof,
and the epilogue. The forensic issue treated in the
oration is “that the act was justified." The forensic
subjects are expediency and honor. The speaker uses
two means of dealing with prejudice (lines of argu-
ment): 1) he attempts to clear himself of suspicion,
and 2) he treats openly the main issue of the conflict.
No use of non-artistic proof is found in the oration.
The speaker's use of ethical proof is decidedly pre-
dominant. The narration is in a sense used as an
enthymeme to establish logical proof. There seems
to be no use of the pathetic mode of proof.

The Lord Chief Justice's Oration
from HENRY IV, Part II

 

 

Setting: The seemingly ne'er-do-well Prince Hal is
now England's king. The death of Henry IV has just
occurred. Prince Hal for the first time appears be—
fore his brothers, John and Clarencg.and the Lord
Chief Justice in his robes of sovereignty. The offi-
cer of the law is rather fearful of the new king be-
cause of an incident which occurred between him.and
the prince in the youth’s frivolous past. During his

associations with the patrons of Boar'swhead Inn,

159
Falstaff, Bardolph, Poins, etc., the prince was brought
before the Lord Chief Justice's court for a minor
offense. He had struck the judge in the face and was
put into prison for a short time. Because of this
incident the Lord Chief Justice is rather tense when
Henry V appears. The King observes his reaction and
touches upon the "indignities" which the judge had
once administered to him. The Lord Chief Justice

responds with his oration of defense.

OeH

can #63» uddOboH on . . . . . . . . . . .
noavdaasn on» smacane .nmpmemewm.H.emnk waax an» Ho emaafi one
.cepsoexo hHepHHon . . . . . . . . . . . .
use thoQo .hHadoHo wewflmmwn.nms.BMH we noted was hpnewss any
UH “gov-hag.“ 0:9 :HO 0 e e e e e a e e e e e
pneaepspm on» "nonpm .emsmm.h& memamh.op neuaon mueanwan know

.AmHmehcmEWOm mam mow Warn.ewB.H.neHH£3
are» mHm wo.dmamsMpmHmH&dm «mm wa..p:<
"me.am momp.hmH.amsmm.amn.mm mwmam use

ismsm.w mama.cm momsms..ns..m...m..amsm w
HOHHme mmHmo mmoa

«Coppowaou was .enpeg :H u.£nak on was» hez
«heme man» as; wensHmsm He has: epsanoasa one
aanaQ on ones hdzwsoa was .exsnea .epsa ~pd£3
was dogs oHeH 50h meauanwaoca peeaw om
pewaom memo: paeaw ha Ho eocaam a pSwHE Rom
~oz

mZHM

 

.eE one: on ensue push 0: Spa: Humemsfi anow

 

.mapana meanness on H Ha aceaamms as H
HOHHmDh mmHmo axon

.po: so» e>oH H confines .stnp H .eas new
«peas So» was AeOHpmsw
Hoano whoa esp ouv «as no haemnsap- xoOH HHa so»
>_Hmzmm wZHM

.ncnpe

finest: 3
scavenged no cap

OUO>HOPGH .Snifi
esp Ho noapupfiu
tea demo apnea

unmaa Ho snag

non»
neaaazuuneaepapm

.eoHpusH «noon

Inna ouoseaom
.thHHnenoam no
woman eaenhnpsm

aeoam

 

«pmaaea newshound

HeH
escapesuHm HaHHsasm . (I:
capse>ca He eHnane .eenHaemHe com a HD on HHeeasOH eHonem
n« on p59 .HHeu . ill
38H: uneven use e: eopanHn hHemeeH on usaH Haheaese sees asoh eem
mean: spas oozeew>o

w

 

 

 

 

 

epoaecoe on men on aeecsmoam £058 on thcwHe ate afieh aaem
'IMOCOPOQEOO “modem?“ AHH’OIM .0 OMOQOHQ USU nfiOfifidH 039. 30m 01m
.>_haaem .ll
as hpdaonpds «mane» ence on» oxen
neppowenlmHsec u.H

“m C C .
eecHam Ho noHpanweeea \.

a use hpeuam Heaemaea

u.wcam on» new caeesoe

ItaHHB meow Ho flown
Imeaaxe as

 

.munmsonp Hshoa such

hoe ecoeem d :H

O I I O

coaumemm.

nwcHxaoB 950m #002 end

do» us shame on .0908

 

 

 

emeH Hahoa pmos a

 

 

«moflpm mcomaem asomwo hmeMWm mam JeJem

.HHHB eoom eaosm one paan and
«meeaeeu m.m:Hx aesaou

was 90H vac on ad

.hsz

on» moaasw puns

 

 

 

 

Baa Ho amazoe on» QHAp OB

 

 

 

 

 

.neaen Hausa afloh soaH eeHuusn step xesHm OH
uIaH e.m:Hx to: 03» II .1:
Ho pneaeeaomae on» apnwso: as moeaeee use» you son a open oH
new aheenoe sewn on» Ir,
ueHon on pen» mepdpu .ecwHaww on» so: maaaser aeoecepnoo Sch em
myoeeaaena on uneaswaa
nan» sweeps» "manna

.HHH one: econ onp‘mm. \.mom mumsaom mam mc¢
.hpWAmzmsm ma.om huh mHmn.ewam m

.HHHB ooom “u.wnax .amnmaw msmh.om memnmumo.cm ma..memam£&
“OBHOH egg flpfig “5°80: . . O . . . . C O . O C . . C . . . .
Icahn one! apneaepaa “economnsn He uses hsep ha.cH 08 Meshes end

.eHQwae ufifino?
[me do women
eEeaanam

.eHmadKe
vendors“ no
woman eaaahnpnm

pnesfiwa<

shone
uaeoaxe «neon

inns canneaom

. .Haes uoow
«canswcax man no
noapacmoeea «monpm

.mth
can He pceaeeaomce
was deepen can now

naeecoe commeaaHe as
use huaaonusa m.w:HM
on» He fioauacwoeea

s asaswd .ncoapea
can hHHpesn on common
near as epsou.£eHnB

mma

 

O O O O O O O O

.HpcwHeae>om m.eweHH h no amenaem Hm

.mmsHH he oSdeeQnHa page once ope: H puma

one 50H as an
.eecaaeeamcee oHoe ”any aepwfl
\uGOm asoh wGHeQeHHe

mmwue prom :H xsean .wcHx a

 

«mm eeaeucen

 

 

when Anson snow

as new.
.MMem MSOH wqaxap es

echmEH Gena emfl

=.e.«uapusn
can pee an»:
«enema canceaom

.HpHHHnanonm no
woman eaoahnpsm

esweHHnm

143

§ummary of Analysig: The proem of this oration is

to a source other than that
the statement, the

shifted of the speaker.
of the speech are

The other parts
establish ethical proof,

narration which is used to

and the epilogue.
”that the act was ju

The Lord Chief

The forensic issue

the argument,
stifled.”

treated in the oration is

The forensic subject is injustice.

s a means of dealing with p

y attacks the charges made

Justice use rejudice (line

of argument): he openl
against him. No non-artistic proof is used in this

use of the ethical mode of proof is

oration. The

1 mode of proof is used to

predominant. The logica

some extent; there seems to be no evidences of a use

of the pathetic proof. The premises from which the
nvented examples and pro-

enthymemes are drawn are i

babilities.

Shylock's Oration frgm
THE MERCHANT OF VENIQE

Bassanio, a gentleman of Venice, needs funds

Portia of Belmont. He

Setting:

to court the beauti

friend, Antonio,

ful heiress,

a wealthy merchant, to

goes to his
ask if he might borrow three thousand ducats from him.
1 of his

The generous Antonio, who at the moment has al

assets tied up in merchandise and ships on the high
seas, nevertheless agrees to lend Bassanio the money.
tom of never lending or borrowing

Antonio breaks his cus

144

money on interest and becomes a patron of Shylock, a

Jewish money-lender. The Jew and the Christian

Antonio have long considered each other as being
despicable because of their different religions and

their differing philosophies regarding the practice

of usury. By way of jest, Shylock agrees to loan

Antonio three thousand ducats without interest if he
will sign a bond stipulating that the forfeit for

failure of payment be one pound of flesh, which he

may cut from any part of the merchant's body. Bas-

sanio refuses to let Antonio enter into such an agree-

ment, but Antonio, confident that his investments will

be lucrative, signs Shylock's bond. Bassanio success-

fully woos and wins Portia, and as a result, he has

an enormous amount of wealth at his disposal. Antonio,

however, receives news that his ships have been lost.
When Shylock's bond is due, the merchant has no money.

The Jew, acting within the just limits of the law,
one pound of Antonio's

demands payment of his bond:
The Duke of

flesh. The case is taken to court.

Venice tells Shylock that he expects him to relent

from his unnatural purpose. The Jew replies:

ova

1

.mmwpeomms new «eaHas aueflp :Hsucoe poccmm

.emoc on» .H nwcHe emamlwsn on» Cogs ashoSuo emm

An
«mwe s UHonon heap HH cs5 one page .eamw
«wwm wchsw s eon e>0H

one open“ see eEom

AH
\aeocan pa .>sn on

«no» doaosmss Sch ens span;

mmsese essmsonp so» e>Hw op vesseHm en H was

.usa s Spas eeHnsoap on eases he HH hmm

“pecans 55 ea pH .msm
«pen» Assess pea HH.H

wwwaeSmns pH ma .umm

«masons assumes» conga

.oHHH n.0Hcous¢

you euHs asem .th0
man so mesa on» we“
IvastHnHU hp emHas lllllllllllll
panB.neH£B meecesv \sEooeeAH n.the anew use so
nemsoecaexsm can CH

somepe amen "morpsm

epaoeoa on fish» .nmonlcOHsase Ho unmask 4

 

.pH have do» MM

"econ ha Ho uHeHQOH was one on» e>s£ o9

.san nuannsm ”no: see as sea
«emoaasm H pens Ho eesao seem

snore H

e.wmemmom open H

co eonsn wdaaoa

csoa HseaweHsasv

seHaEsHe we

tenepsa eons» so

eeesn eEefihnpam
.Aeaaa

tee ao.lfinh s he

cepspapoa wnaen

"eecsumESeaHe Hen

IHsasa so eeesn
weasoasea Hse
IHonscsV eHQEs
nHe eeusossu no
Ueusn eaeshnpcm
.HsHa» on» no
cases no messes
demo apnea
Ismas Ho oqu
uses
Inwaslpneaewsam
.IsH

.n» mp menses.
pen Ho seeders
lessee one ens
thHHnsnoam so
eomsp eBaEhnpcm

Beeam

 

"mmHaee eepsposmfl

wwa
.aelsss Hl_£le ease ease
MUOHMmm
.thesHe ha» Ho pceaase enp annexe

aswa mnHHeeHss sen» ascends on ad
0Hz<wm<m .

an on mason pen swim.

oH
.Hne

mmnp poHHoe H can»

.oaeosca saoplm
useH :«spaee s was

epsn cemeeH s asap enmm
.mmd HHHI H no: accuses on

mmmm

 

epHm H ase om

\ww.ecoeeo wcaon «Hannah .es.eeo a» .4

”msnn oHpspapeaH none on cHeHh usmm.
eeaeu He was

 

«enanlwsn neHHooI s .0: hmm.

 

 

 

 

«pile haseueeen muednhsn s 3: mm“

«was waHnsm s end? pogse en with

.mwaeenea an on season Esau o: uH eaenv mm.
«mummmmIH§0h 90H .Bez

 

...ns.on no ..sHH pH use: mm.
mmes on» on nHJMHMWa

aceHuusa Ho ssehpeHz

 

.noHueenno as
.no vessn saws

-anso opHp.pse.m

coHpsusHem

.eeamssne cease»
and seam» noun
nIsHe eaafihn»
Ice wnaoweHOH no
eeusn eseahgpam

.AneHssHeshs
codesu eHnsHHoap
access «eons»-
Iflseaae HeHHsHsm

va
epsese easesonw.KHm GH ”some hHepe HH
Moonwmm

.KHn mH one: masons vssmsomp ooanp hnp Hem
onsmmdm

.HHHs man lob one was useaewesn ops: 05 and

beneasepcoe sHsHm ens HoHan Has an3 psm

.ncsefi Henpash on one .mHeHHo 0905 o: exsz

.SOH neoemen on H .oHoHoaenp «vases snatch nHm

Inwaoeasn n.9snl neHns ssnplupsnu seamen 09 neon m4

amps: umoe wanp has on HHeB as has new

«cebsen Ho spasm esp spas coppeam eHs hens sen:

.emHo: o: oxsa 03 was ammo» stn HHonp was 08

sosHm :Hspnsoa on» vHQHoH HHeB es hsfi new

«nasH on» sou psoHn eke on» ones mesh 05 has

.HHos one ans :oHumesv ems HHew as use so»

«unease Has»: .Hn open eooHs case on» eHn ec<

meson on» non: ensue ow HHes as hsa new

"sea on» spa: meanness do» gnanp .50» thm H
onoez<

 

«eeHcp ooze mchm psomaen s essn menu vmeHsoa apes;
MQOHMmm

.pmaHH us epsz s we: ma eecoHHo Haosm
OHz¢mm¢m

 

«HHHx no: nHSOB on wcHnu on» sea was mopsm
MOOHNmm

aosoH so: on Hons awash» one HHHs cos HH. on
OHHHmmam

eeusn eEeEhnp
use eaHpsnsHem

.pcoa
IsmHsIHopssee
no woman eaoa

umnpce epapspsuem

.pceasmaslaeunsoe
no mess: oaeSmn»
use eprspsHem

.eesnapsoe coHp
uspsHeaIpCeadwa<

\.pH o>en HHHs H as. osHs ”Hp.

.emfion csHHep
tean94 enp CH eesa
sH Hsemns HseHSQe

asap oz .Hseams

Hsoagpe Ho eecemns

he mesa s eeseosm
on onshomo .meesspn
:sH eaom CH .meaos
Ho eeHone one ens
.ease nan eaoaa on
sees an uneaswas on»
«enoaasn m.xeethm Ho
thsHHHP mSOHapo on»
«scape so useafioo

med

npnwson hHHsee,mm
«EH: Ho masses H Seams .nmeHH Ho canon emw

«sch seamss H on em .«maso one nepsHm one.

MNBmCs HHH3 new emessHp Lens fipHB 0.

season em
mopsHsa aHenp peH was

.mHSOh as when as eesEfimm

 

.mmop aHonp poH «use;

 

vamp Hoes: Home amass hm;

wmeez Hack op Ben» haasfi .eoHH on Ben» 9mm

.mmm on has H HHsnn "Eezp uanOD 50h emssomm

.mmgsm anssHm :H was pecans :« on: 1mm

.moHse ccs mwov each was memes asoh exHH flewmw

emwsHm vomsneasm s mama sch macaw opus mmw

Hose: msHancea .meaea new one:
Monm> mo MMDQ

.mmOn ha e>s£ eHsoB H

sons sHanm som

“Hemp ease no: UHdolJW

 

.mMese s upsm mne>e ens spasm HHm :H eaum.

.oHnaHHHpmsH .H
Aeconv spa. on».
”enema canaeaom

.wwcHsomsoa Hse
IH OHscs was eHn
issue mousepsHv
usessmasuaepssoe
so cemsp oseahnu
use e>apsu5uem

.mpHHHnanoea
ens soaueonno do

med

 

 

.eHHH
n.0«flopsd HcH cmHs osmoHHQm
Adam .hpae on» me lllllllllllllllllllllllll .BsH
area on» wcwcasm «pH e>s£ H Hasnm «access upseEewcsn new ensue H on» we wcHeHns
noseac hp emHas llllllllllllllllllllll no: He seasons
panS Sean; neoscsv .eeHce> He sooaeee on» :H coacu on ea eaonH nemcce one ens
nemscesuexsm on» :H IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII HpHHHpspoaa seas

 

cexo>e seem “nonpsm wwsH Hach cogs oHH wee knee Sch HH eecsn eaeahnpam

150

Summary of Analysig: The structure of Shylock's

fl

oration is com

posed of a proem, a statement, an argu-

ment, refutation, and an epilogue. The forensic issue

"that the act" is justified

treated in the oration is
udice (line of

A.means of dealing with prej

(by law).
he treats Openly

argument) is used by the speaker:

and effectively the
roof is present in this

main issue of his trial. No non-

speech. Likewise,

artistic p

no use is made of the ethical mode of proof. The

'5 use of the pathetic proof is scant. Logi-

through which t

speaker

cal proof is the means
sh or prove his case.

he speaker

attempts to establi The pre-

mises of the enthymemes are drawn fromtinvented ex-

amples, probabilities, and refutative enthymemes

based on objection and counter-argument.

Isabella's Oration from MEASURE FOR MEASURE

 

e setting of Measure for Measure is the

Setting: Th
Vincentio, the Duke

morally-corrupt city of Vienna.

of Vienna, realizing that his laxity in enforcing the

laws of his city has been largely the cause of the
y of his subjects, revives a strict

pervasive immoralit
such a dras-

law. Fearing that

re-enforcement of the
m tyrannical on his

versal of policy would see
a his dukedom and its mainta
Wishing to spy

tic re
inance to

part, he leave
f high repute.

Angelo, an official 0
he dresses himself in the

upon his deputy, however,

151

attire of a friar and appears on the scene in time

to witness the arrest of Claudio, a young nobleman.

Claudio's crime is adultery; his fiancee, Juliet,

is soon to bear him a child. The nobleman, being the

first to be arrested since the revision of the law,

is sentenced to death. The dissolute Lucio, a friend

of Claudio's, goes at his request to ask Claudio's

sister, Isabella, a newly-entered novice, to plead

on his behalf. The virtuous Isabella--abhorring the

crime for which her brother has been condemned--never-
theless compelled by her fear of his death, agrees to

Lucio's request. The following is Isabella's plea

for her brother's pardon addressed to Angelo, the

stern deputy of the new law.

 

 

mmH

Hmooanw wnaboa eon» e»

Hm nebaem Aeoam<v

Bwo>omm
cheapoan he pd“ wad
.323 33 on n: pea :5.“ accumup oo H
.aeeu llllllllllllllllll
one mafia «mospwm «can on o.fl€oo£oo ea aospoan a open H
«Hamm4mH
whoppas on» “HHo;
.aenpomn non wcHMaaw oumwz<
'OoH ”HHHDHWCO we.“ llololelel'ellOIle'elelelleIlo'e'e'o'
no emcee no: one eWOH .uoc HHHB one HHH: ands». has ad
“‘£ cg ”mogmgovpg H.“ IOICIOIOIO'O'.'OIIIO' IOIOIO'OICIO .'.l.l.'
no udoocoo no: noosp as H was» pan .oaon no: page H scans 90m
'op “HOD. m.“ ogm ”an”. O'O'O'OIIO'O'O'OII lle'e'eIIOIO'OIIOIIO'OIIOIlO-l
OeHa mHao>oA “hpaa mamas H van» pan uoaoHa oHsos H moan: pom
"gOnfipOE. “magnum IO'C'OIO'CII'CIOIO'O'O'O'Q'CIC'CIOIOIOIC'O'C'C' .QOHOHQ
meowpmsn Ho BOHD on» noes cHsonu enameo puoe cad Imdu no HHeuaen
O‘H.pO‘-H.CH~O ”SOSDHHP lollellellolo'en'ele'e'elle'o'e'ello'olel'el wCHH“.Ho upgoa
no: uHeo>oA «mospm .aonpe on H woos peg» eoa> a ma eaona towns no onaq
dqqmmde
prsm anon n.9ans «HHoa
oqmwz¢
.05 use: 950:0: adoh pan.omwwHw
.muaa lllllll
mo :oHpoSc «nonpum .QSonog mach on AOszm Hsmoos a Ed H aeoam
dqqmmde

f

«agape» oouapo:Q¢

 

an

 

 

 

.onnpwn .honos on» no ebeHam nos non nobwen noanon ond _ .thHHnwnonn

HnHHoneE one oHpnow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . no oonwn oEeE

non auooHuen «monpm «EHn noonam uanE 50% pan» annu oo H «new Immune «mowoq
<HHmm4mH

.hoofioa on .neoHaE

OHmbzn _ .noHuau

«oHo mooon on pun: Inuomupnofiouapm
dqqmman

name H .5“: on
"pH enameo onmnOp e eadu enoa nuHs uon oHnoo now
.an d oeen oHnonm 50% HH «oHOo oop end no»

.dnnofioa no eonomnw nw unsow mHn non: wnan .an enouon nsoo HoonM
one HHHs ooow Ho “EHn peonpne .nHaww

nonmonnxe “monpm EHn op «om no.0 non p. e>Hw AaHHonemH on ooHenv

.hpnn onoan

“0 EOHDOEO "nonpdm e e e e e e e e e e e o'elelle'elenle'ellellellol

.ka Hanonon anon nee: nepeomtl.nonp .nonponn e on: H

on» non sandman .I.I;I.I.I.I;|;I.I.|al

non eHaopon "monum HsaH ono>om ann an: o

aHHenemH .

.nopoo on» Ho ow ueH onn
.onooon nH eonepm onHH omons upHnaH esp enHH OB
.nOHuonnm Ho nonnao knob on» one: enHz
nonoo on pH one o.nEeonoo e.pHnah hn0>o .hna coon
«pH Ho noaoa on» won one .pHnah onp nsoonoo Iannoo aeonm

.ouannppa

anumHano a "you

Ioaaono non Ho noon
tea HnHHoaoE on» no
nonmennxo no "monpm

.HoapnooIHHom ond
oonoHpaa no: muooHHom
.oonounom m.nenponn
non Ho noHpaunHoA
ernow a nHama “monpm

.ueHnw Mon 90
nOHmmonnKe mnoHpnop

Ienmnn nu «monuam

oHHHs ooom no

nonmonnKm .nHawo

mmonoHpnow ”monpm
.mHmmnHen

n.0Homn< oanop mnom
soon on» enHEnepoo o»
wannEoppa Ho unwoa
Hem .oxnpon opHHon
.oHpnow hno> «monpm

 

[ll

omH

qonoa n.0monh enp Lon

«onosm oepnmoo any non .nsono m.won onp

.mwnoH.
.mH p osoHHon .HHoa. \uwHema soap pH HHwo Hen

.noononSAp m.HonmamS
O O C O

C O O Q C O O

 

 

 

 

goaok w xoomm oo own» .H

«on .hna wepwH 008
anmman

.oHoo 00» end no» AmHHonme on oonnv
0H 0wa
.opwH coo me_ “ooonounom m.om
oqmuzn

."I“e1“u‘{

«EH; on mH enHE mm

"In'a'"u‘l‘ln'"l'l"u"}”"nlv

mmwoaon menu an3 o.ncnOp one: pmmen QSOH om HH

.wwonk on oHnos one oo onn a». oo do» uans pnm
<qum<mH

 

 

.oo ponnwo H penp
oqmwzn
onnos no» HH .noh no t .
«HHmman

.pon HHHs H pans .xooH

 

 

.p. 0o #02 HHHB H
OHM¢Z¢

 

one

 

uoz

 

.thnue

Ho eHnHoanm
on» mnH>Ho>nH
abuHHHnwnonn no
ocean oEoShnunm

mono amonm on can» anoEOLoo ozAmanomaen HnOHMOH

lend no ocean eHm
mIEdKo oouno>nav

pnosnmna neunnoo

no oomon oaoshnp

Ino o>Hpapnuem

.AHwOHona one hp
IHHHnwnonmv pnea
Inwnm neunnoo no
oomwn oEthnp
tno e>Huaanem

.AapHHHpaponev
uncanwnd nopnnoo
no ocean 0508

p m zhnpoo o>Hpepsnom

.oonannoo noapau
unmannpnoaepeum

 

mmw

Hme< .meH<

 

 

 

«HHmman
.eonoz nno» opmsk unn no» ond
aseH on» Ho ”Hemnou e ma nonponn Ano»
OHmoz<
.nHe> on» n.0nenp “EHn £050» .»< AeHHenamH on oondv
0HODH llllllllll
.nmon

.nonOmHnn a
InuoHQHen onu »uHm .lzl;l.lxl.l.l.l;l;l.lxl.l;l.l.l.l.l.l.l l

 

 

 

 

 

 

aunoHuoEo «nonpom .emonw a e 0» onozu. puns Hop oHnot H «02
0H5.“ . e'elle'ellele'ellele'e'elellellellellolle'ele'elellell

IHonoE on on unenwnH «mnnp on non pH oHnon HHenumH one; no o
'HHHB .HOS mg. HmmooHQKo o'cl-e'e'ellelele'elelele'ellelle'eII-O'o'

 

 

 

hHuoonHonH "monpm .honopon ano» on: H no>won on oHsoB H
anmman

.onow on «no» hoam
oqmwz<

 

 

.nnepn om noon e>en non oHnmm.

O O O O O O O 0.. I O O O C .

 

. .mm» oxHH ~on pnn “EHn oxHH unHHn e>an oHnos no»
.onnuan oHponpanS»u . . . . . . . . . . . .
non euooHHeA "monpm

 

 

.on me no» one .no» no noon on: on HH

 

 

omeoo honefi m4

eno an3 Son» oEooem

ooonw a ooom om “Hen

 

 

.AOHQEd

awe oeuneanv
pnofinwaa nepnnoo
ono nOHpoonno

no oeuen enoahnp
In. eprdpnhom

3.0xaumHs a
.eonanouHE o nab:
pod on» «pnea
Inmao no enHH
.eHnEaNo

oeunean no no
ocean eEeE»npnm

.oon
nannoo noHpap
Inventpneaepapm

 

1 00H

 

ammnonno man non eons span pens an "H on;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.eHoHH amm» annuon aonoH »E ooow .ooow. \wmebHem macaw nno 0»

'09 find houoahdno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o .

naHumHnno non nHom nopmHnHE oo 03 non» poenmon meoH an3
cl“ mpOOHrHQF H50” e e o e o e e e e o e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

m. .HOSDOHQ. .HOH Gobwofl ObeHom 03 HHdfln WCWMNOW WO'HWOIH. ”SW HHWE’OB
HHoHOOGOO “mogvm e e e e e e e e 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e

.npaoo m.no£ponn mnonopHx nno 90% ne>m .npooo no“ oennnenn non n.0m

“0 “do.“ “0 ARC-hp e'e'ell0|ellellelle'ellenlellenllelelle'o'e'elele'elle'eIOI I
"nooonm m.uenp .o Hsonnosoe
ddqmmde

 

 

lone «nonpam «SH: enamm qEHn onwnm

oaonnoEop eHo none on «aHn anB mnnp on oHnone H
anow »S no anenponn .naSeon »E on one:
”nonponp nno» naeonoo H non .BaH on» ma pH
noHaE nHaH .unopnoo no» em
oqmw24

.oowfi son nwfi oxHH

 

.enHH ano» anuHs onumonp HHH non» »Mnos on<

Mono nmw no no» emonn pnm

 

«swap.cm_&anp qo

355w? ,3 as an 3 SE; am a

 

ownvnn
.mHeHHon o nouonnwno .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

anannno non muooHH .09 no» oHnos Rom \.»ooaen on» uno o nom
'0“ HSHHo-HOE DD. 0“ 0 e e o e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e o
.e>HwAOH on omen “mmwp obmn amen ownpne> on» paw E as u e
'MCHHHHB m-QDHEO o e 0 e e e e e e e e e e e 0 0H. e ofim o H.3 que<
mnHmn «nonum

 

 

Moono uHeHnOH one: 0903 van» mHnoe on» HHe .hna

.AHpHHHnanonnv
unoanmne nepnnoo
no ocean eaoa
Ihnune obHuupnmem

.mwanonaon
HwOH OHanaJeHn
IEwKo oopne>nHv
pnennmna nopnnoo
no oomwn oaoahnp

Ino o>Hpounuem

.HpHHnnmn

Iona onw eHnSa
[Ne HeoHnoumHn
no oomon oaoahnp
uno o>Hpaanem

non

muooHHon

 

bmH

“meson pcoHHooao mH on .o .nnonnsm pan» .on on<

 

.oonopnom mHn mo>Hw pan» nmnHH enp on umna no» om
dqqmman

.pnopnoo on “tonnoBIOp moHo nonponn nno»
mooHHeram om .nonpona poo on non mo>HH
.mnonk HnoH ono manosmna anon» pana EHn oo onn
«HHdw nouns oHnos eonoHHo o.mnHamHo a nOHna
.sonx non oo H oeonu thn H non» pom
mooHumnn 30:» H non; HHa Ho neon pH 30:» H
OHmbzn
.thQ oEon Bonn no»
«HHmman

.ono on .o>HH hon» one .an

.moonweo o>Hmmooonu on open on son onn

.nnon ona o.nouwn on on mmonmonn nH om on<

.oe>Hoonoonson mmenmeHEon hp no .son peanm

.uHH>o oanpnh pans atone panp .mman a nH exooq

.uennonn a exHH .onu «onoo ma pans Ho ouon mono»

.osto me. son «oooo eHn non o.no3mnw oam

omanncn 90Hoo on» eHo pens puan on» nH

.HH>o pan» oo on oonao non own Hnoa omone

«snon noun on nmsonp .oaoo soon so: span ysH one
oqmwzn

.enam HHos .Ha AaHHonamH on osnnav
oHonn

 

.pH ooppHEEoo e>on HnaE m.onon9

oouon oaoahnunm

.oen
Iannoo noHuop
unmemnpneaopapm

goooonHn ma
non» Shun nueH
oHo pod on»:
"onmmH OHunenom

.noE nonpo

owosH 0» pnwnn on»

o>wn non oo nos uwn+

nonHon non no aH
cpoonHonH ond .hu
lHnH>Ho HnHHonoE

a nH HoHHon non Ho

nonmonQKo .monpm

.upnos
noHo wnHonoonmsmonuo
enn oomonfioo onw
moHQEnHo oopno>nH
non noHns Ho noppma
soonnsm ens .monun

.»pHnon+nw no noHpno
IoNo anonon .oHnHm
Inonmon a nH HoHHon

 

ononnwn»p mH pH unn

 

mmH

 

m mmeHm

O O O I. O O O O I C. O O O O O O O C

.ona mnmnw no oxHH .oonommo Heman mHm

O O O O O O O O O I 0 O O C O O O O .

no>won ann ononon aonnp oHpmwpnoH n n

 

 

 

oonnmmn umos m.on non; Ho unenoan umoz

.Hpnaonusa nonnp oHsan. a on among

. O O O O O O O O O O O C C O O

 

«non ononn .nws pnn .oHpn»E pHOm .onu none

0 O O O O O O O O O I C C O C .

 

xoo ooHnwnm one .oHnaowoosnn

pHon mnonnannm one .annm hnp anB nonpan none

0 O O O O O O O O

.on» .pu.pHHnm

anonuom HnHHonos \Hnoonnnu unn manpoz

onoonnnp nom nopoon aHn omn oHnoa

noOHHHo »uuon awanHon »no>o no@

0 . 0 O O I O I O O I . O C C 0 O O C . O 0 .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uoHno on no.on oHnoB oboe .mooo HHeeEHn e>Oh on

noonnnp nos paenm oHnoo
qumm<mH

 

 

.onwm HHoz m.»mna

AuHHonaaH on oonmov
OHQDn

..pn¢Hm a .oxHH uH can 09

.npmnon.pm. m..unaHm. a eban ca

 

 

 

.Huann
Ionona ona eHnaa

Ixo oopnean no
oomwn oEoE»nunm

.HpHHnn
uononm onu oHnEd
nNo oounoan no
ooman ononhnunm

coon
Iannoo noHpau
unuemapnoaouapm

.aHnwn no

eEonQnm onp mH nos
non .ooo pan» noHHon
non Ho nOHmmonnno
no .nwaw

=.oomonH
on o» pmoH non

non noHumHnno
non Ho nOHmnonn
sno poonHo

 

omd

Nos nonn mmtham omen» pnn no» oo »n3
0Hmuz¢

.p. no anon upon» .0 oomH>o pnn Aoonnv
OHODH

O C O C C O C O O O C O O O O C O O O

.HnonnmaHn pan an nunoHom on an noHna

O C O O O O O O C O O O O O O C C O C O O

.onok oHnoHono a pnn m.nHopnoo on» nH pans
nHHmman

.panp .0 ones “Hnnm .pnwnn .n un.:onH
oHonn

.noHuanaHonn Hnom mmoH on» nH pnm

. O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O C .

.Eonu nH pH mHu. umanwe ant pooh wen non pwonw

«HHomnno anB nonnonn nno anoB ponnwo o3
nqamman

HBHn nHB onm nopoon hwnm noonnv
Bmo>omm

.p. o>Hoonon H mwnHEoo m.om
upnoHon HHHB on
Hnonot EHn on .an 0» .o AuHHonamH 0p oonnV
OHoDH

.Hupnos nwnoH mo>HomEonp HHo oHnoa

.mnooHnm nno anB .ons «moo: oHowno onp onofi an

.EHHoE no
oomon ofioehnpnm

.aHnaa no
oomwn oaoa»npnm

.oon
Iannoo nOHpap
InHomlunofiopapm

 

00H

«on eann «sow
oqmnzn

.pnopmHmnon »H .xoan.nwnw wonow wE.ooom
IopHHon .wonpm

.no» oanp HH.H son xwaw

«Humm4mH

.Bonnonlou nwaa once "on annpen HHHB H
OHmwzn

nooonm . . . .

unoprn a "monpm .xowp nnnp .onOH ha. oHnnou
nHHmman

.HHoB 50»
.pH an3 nooonp onnoo »E pan» .emnoe nonm

uHu. ona .mxwonm onm AeonnV
oqmozn

onwh

O O O O O

 

.oHHH m.nonuonn »S umnHmwn

onwnou nno» nonn pnmnonu. a onnom pon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.pH poH
.eHn mH ma nonm .emoanHHnw Hannpwn 4
oennpon 0Hponpannhn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
non cmHa gnoaonmnn mmoHnoo pH HH
xnanu alsnopod

 

 

 

.anoH. m. nonponp »E oxHH m

zonx npoo uH. .uans annoy nno» xma ono

.anB

O O O O O C

Inano Ho omonneao
non epooHH

 

.ononp xoonm

O O O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

non «wonpm uncoon nno» on. on \dmou. on». .o o0H> on» mono pan»

.mones nH HoHH .HHompH nH. onHoHooE Mo oon a no» npom

'09 “on “O COHmm0aHQ e e e e e e e e e e e e 0

Ike nu .nHemo .nonpm .mnonpo oxHH nne pH nwnonp. .thnonpno oenooom
«HHmman

onMOHHnm

.HHHHHD
Ianonn ona eHnnd

sHo oopnoan no
oommn onoahnpnm

.thHHnanonn no
oeman oEoE»npnm

 

.
oomonu _
EonH hHo>HpooHHo mnOmaon one moHnEa

Ike no mnOHpaann HoHHanwn muno>nH
one pnn .oonopoo onnOm on man onm HmH
oopnoenwnd pno>nH on »pHHHnd
non »n oopwnpmnonoo mH »onop
lonsoo m.wHHonemH «pnoafioo . . . . .
.HHHs ooow "monum Honda nnono
«Humman

HHwBo “HHo: mHH. «on on
OHODH

n.nwow momx.nm>mom
AaHHopaMH on oonsv

.BonnoEOH on on oSoo «HHo;
OHmuzn

.mowomsmp.mmHmvmn.ow
oopQOflUov 00H“ ”UCHEO O O O O O 9 O O O O O O

.omomp.nmumo.omu.nm>mom we.nw mn.Hwawm.vmnw
mnMHan mnmp.anb mnm
onohann nH HeHH womm.nm mown.nmanm mnm

Ion non Ho nOHmmonQNo
no «HHHB ooow "monpm

mamnm momHm>.»mnmm.o¢
may...“ «as» memo? .ame

.oHom oopmop on» no uoHon anon nun: poz

«Humman
.omHo HHa o.nnea own no» AwHHonomH op oonnV
.HHHB oHoDH
ooom "monpm .

.nm».anb mnmnm mHmnm mowwmn.pmnm

mpmHm momm.anw MH¢
<nnnmsmH

162

Summary of analysis: An analysis of the structure of

this oration reveals that the parts of a speech pre-

sent are the proem, the statement, an argument in the

form of refutation, and the epilOgue. One of the

forensic issues with which Isabella's speech is in-

volved is "that the act did less harm than is alleged."

The speaker uses two means of dealing with prejudice

(line of argument): 1) she attempts to clear her-

self of suspicion, and 2) the act was a mistake,

”a mischance". No use of non-artistic proof is to

be found in the oration. The speaker's use of ethi-

cal proof is predominant. Logical proof is also used

a great deal. There are few elements of pathetic

proof incorporated into the speech. The premises

from which the enthymemes are drawn are invented and
historical examples, probabilities, maxims and refu-

tative enthymemes based on counter-arguments.

Othello's Oration from THE TRAGEDY
OF OTHELLO ‘mw

Setting: Othello, the black-skinned Moor, held in

high esteem for his vaour in the Venetian wars

against the Turks, is raised to the rank ofgeneral

by the Senate of Venice. The Moor is greatly ad-.

mired by Brabantio, a wealthy and powerful senator,

and he is often invited to the senator's home. Des-

demona, Brabantio's only daughter, is enraptured by

 

165
the nobility and striking simplicity of the dark man.
The tales of adventure which Othello relates to Bra-

bantio kindle Desdemona's fascination into a deep

sympathy, admiration, and love. Their differences of

race and color vanish. They are secretly married.

When hearing of the union, Brabantio accuses Othello
of seducing Desdemona by witchcraft, and he orders

the Moor to appear before the senate council. The

following is Othello's oration of defense delivered

in the council-chamber of the Venetian Senate.

 

 

omH
pen» neoHo pH . . . . . .
ones on moanz .mEneno pen; .
on .ooHeonon mH . . .
nouoeneno Ho emonnoQo no>HHoo oHep. o.neHnne>nn. onnon. e. HHHB H
anéHewe
.eonpm .oonoHpeQ mnOHoenw. nno» »n.

wmwnw wens. .o>0H. Ho omnnoo oHonz WE. Ho

.mo» \. HHom»E LOH woneome. nH

omneo he. ooenw. H. HHenm. oprHH onOHononu onn

.oHupep. one. HHonn. Ho mpeow 0p. enHepnoQ nenu. ones

.xeon.H. nee. oHnos. peonm. eHnm mo. oprHH onn
.noHoHoe

.oHoHH. oopnop onu nH .nOHpoe amoneoo nHonB
e we »onopoQ . . . . . .. .

IEoo mHn mueow oomn o>en .honp .oopmes mnooE oan once non HHHB

Iwne one nepoe . . . . .

aneno eHn Ho .nuHQ .eneo». no>oe oen. enHE Ho. mane omorp oonHe non

poere oHnEnn

e mHeo>on .eorum .ooeoQ. Ho omean. uHom on»

nsHa. pmoHn. oprHH one

anooer »E. nH. H .Se oonm \. ones. on

.pcopa. «Hg» .npam

enHonoHHo wE. Ho pnonH one oeon .»no> one
.nooer Ho noo
Ineo one nopoeneno
Ho mmonnoQo .eonum

.non ooHnneE o>en. H ..onnn. .onnn. pmoE eH .um
.nounwneo m. nen oHo man .»e3e no..ep e>en. H .uena
.mnouHone

\aenopeen ooom. oo>onQQe one oHpon Hno>. »HH
op ooonouno poeron
one HHH! ooom .eonpm .mnHoane. onono>on one .onenm

..pnoqu.umon
OHHmmBo

.oowneno

eH on nOHnI

ank nonmeH on»
no noeppe poonHo
.pnoanmne Ho enHH

.noHOHane Ho
HHerHn neeHo on
.unoenmne Ho onHH

noonQ

"HQHnom oouwmvnnd

 

a“?

QHnmpnnoo nHonp

 

mmH

wnpooHOHHe Hn0e on Hnoe en
noHpeonv nHeH none one .peoncon hp pH oaeo no
HenOHuooHHe e.oHeS wnnoh man nonHOQ one anonnm
momnnoo ooonOH one poonHonH Hp noh oHQ
“xeomu .oHHonpo .pem

moanzmm 9mmHQ

.EHn uenHeme noHonQ oo mnHEoom nnoooa Ho
eooonHHoxHH HOOQ onethnen anp oeonp nenH.
neon uno>o once one nHeunoo onoa pnoan;
.HoonQ on mH .ean nono> OB
mxbm

.non nOQn uanOHS om
.puoHHe ean 09 oonnnnoo neno once nuHs no
.oOOHn onp no.0 HanoSOQ eonnpKHE che nuHs gene
.nHeme nono> OHOHononp H .on oHnonm man kn;
.HHon wannno Ho eoOHpoenQ use onHH OB
no>Hno 09 pass one nonspen Ho eoHnn HHe pnnHew<
Ana oHnoo on noHpooHnoQ eeoHnoo HHHt Hene
.uooHnoQEH pmoE one o.EHeE pnofiomonm e eH pH
Hno HOOH on o.neoH one pens nuHB o>0H nH HHeH oe
Inmanp hnopo .vHoono .hnunnoo Ho .eneom Ho
.onSHen My opHQe nHulonm one «HHoenon we o.nenHm
coHpon no: page poHsv one HHHpa on pHnHam no
uoHon no>on nooHeE 4

oHeznmnmm

unwummwew mHm m0? w
tlwempws.owmwemo.ew w wnwowomowQ.nwnw wow
00:0 Hdhspwg “ o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o o o
IIOHmeE hpanE pens one noHuennnnoo pen;

 

.oonnHunoo EoonQ

 

on

.oHHonpo .uH Ham
anon

.on E n one on<

 

 

D O O O

u>oH m.moaH nHaH ”Hap cH

oannu oHo H 30m

0 O O O O O O O

pnomoAQ HH.H when obenm finch

 

O O O

 

o» HHpmeH om

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .manoeeon

.eHoHHon one .oooHn HE Ho mooH> on» meoHnoo oo H HeonOHene one
nopoeneno nermHnno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thHHpeQOHQ no
an muooHHon “eonum nobe n on me mHSAp ed .0500 one HHHH omwH _ooeen onoshnpnm

.ooeHQ on» 30:: neon no» “Eonp pononoo .unoHonn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oaqmmao
.noann enoaoomoa nouom
MMDQ

.oonooonnH .oHHH ha nOQ: HHeH nopm
mwfi .HO uGoEfimHanwumo . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . o . . . .l. ohCOE
on» nH oHe one you oonounoe HSOH poH pan .Hene oxen tho poz uHuuou e.enoE
IOGHGEO OHDGGOHmeSG . . . . . . . . . o . . . o o . . . o IOUMOQ .HO hHHH
lflfi an :Hdme ouahun each Ho UHon CU H OOHHHO onp «Mafia» 0&8 IHDeQOHQ on» no
ISOEOU OMHH mHS Ufiw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c . woman— oEthSPCmH

pnoBHnHOQQe mnepHHHS apnOQon non nH HSOH as onHH oo sch HH
0H5 as 0>Hw 09 mqu o o o o a o o . o o o o o o o o o o o o o o CHOOHQ OHDNHP
ImnHHHHB mHn one QHnm "nonpeH non oAOHon on H0 erQe non 90H o unannon Ho coon
uphnoo nHonu Ho nonnes . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e Ho own on»
on» on me hHHumop enos .HneppHmem on» 0» HoeH onp nOH onom noH nOHpehernm

nooeom o>en on mean . . . . . . . .
smcHHHH: mHn “nonpm .eo nooomon co H pnonopapm

 

50H :

.pwo.pm:mo.:mmm mamp.mmwmam2wo.om».um wcw

.MOpoam mcfiosv mmmomomm.onp mm3.£osmln.xaomm on pawn he was pH
'OpHQ @0390 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O 0
ca .:o>ao£ £050» avaon owes: mHHHS cam .mxoon .mofihhasv swsom
omnfid O O O O O O 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O
ammocopwcmo 90 00:0» .oHUH muhomow wad pmw> mapped no aaonofla
'0.“ C“ ”Np-“3 OMHOQOO O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O
.naoHo ma o>apmhhac "hLOpuHS .mHobanp m5 ca occupgom on¢

on» go oampm age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .x.
.oumap voow Ho ho .oocogp :oHpQEovon ha no .hnobaam on vHom v24
uxaogn a ad and gofiu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .z.
uaom a mu hocopoaaoo .oom uCOHOmCH on» ma noxmp wcfion ho
”HS HGO>°H O O O O o o O O O O I O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Ome has» .sowogn maumov psocHEEH 039 .H meadow. npvaopnupawn Ho
«hopowpwzo

Mo poomma canes: .UHoHQ va vooak mp mucovfiooa mcH>oE no

a “ova—”“0“ AOanfiom a O O O O o O O 0 O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0
ma ohHH was on nexus .moocano muonpmumfiu umos no oxamm H Canyon;
on ”DonetHgoHOQH ”Do-“u. O O O I O O o 0 O O 0 O O 0 I 0 O O I O 0
Izopoanc: esp «monpm up“ Han» 0E ovwn on pan» usages hpo> as» 09

wwwm mummmn.h& mowh.2m>m mnwsmgmp.pw mam w
.AouomnaSO .n.mmmm c>a£ H page
”Hg “0 O’Hspdg O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
obfiuunon can on .moflduaom .moMofim .moanumn any
nofimfipmou oaaonpo pom

.mamh.om mamm.5mnm

nHoQ nonuwh m.wcoa owfim wfi.hm Nymum mam ma.vm:m«mmm5m mawpw
newnoa pan» cowpanfia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Iva pmag on» «monpm .oa uopfi>cfi ago .05 uo>oH gonna“ pom

oqqmmeo

.hoomm adownpo

nufiHnapao op
cofipahnac Ho om:

cod»
nappaZIuCoaopaum

 

m2

m momnmAmn.amsm.. npmam CH ..voam ozm
UHAoB a «swan ha. AOH .ofi o>aw.

.ococ .wcHon. HAoun .hz

Hmwmamum mammmwm mdbu

«mmwmm.Hm. cam
.ov.A0HHSm .AHSOH .ha umi4
oxOApm HdmumoApmHm. 050m .90 xaoam ch H Con$
wAwop Aofi Ho .Aon .oHHsmon. UHU .copHo .v:<

announce. vHu .H «.hHo>HpcoucH. .po: .adm

.mAmom wcanoEom. van

.mumHmm omaSHAwHHQ. he HHd oHdos H pane
MAmos. umocAwo Ho .AomwAp m Aom EOAH .saAc oe
.mas HdAfiuwc m 2H pap . .
OAOH ad: UofimAdm on mcwos .voow ocsom Una ..Ason pcwHHa. a .ooco x009
mpHEUd o: "AopowAdno . . . . .
Ho humane: "monpm .mcH.>Aomno. H noHns ..omAfiooch ha .9: Afiopoa
Awe hco.oAm. anB van

..GH.www oEoo UH.onm

.flo.pw.mm.HU. o.pm.w:. £H.H.3 £Um¢oo onm .md. A.o>o.

mow a;
.o.oco£p .Ao.£ .Bon oHsos m.AH.dHHauomson .onp HHHu.m .udm
..omeoaH. HHwSOHAom «no

Eovmon .UHsoz
Ado: .ou n.H£H. ..on©Hsonm .AHonp nu.aocon .kOA
mdmos. omo.£3 Gas and ..

w on
Hw¢£m0m0Anpa¢. one

.HOOAQ HaoHspo
anHnmpmo on

on» mHoOAwm hp. .HOOAoAB QOHpaAAac H0 on:

.cosAHpqoo COHp
uaAAazIHAoSopapm

 

mwa

.MOOhQ Hwoanpo
no onESmaHndpmo man on mafia
haaddpow advacnoop nepos no hwam
one .wcHanE Hwaawapo mpa mapdmon
omas man coco! on Soar? hp nudes
cowoaaa on» ma pa mascoapcoe
haonoe mdm .Eafl pmaawwa unwaopn
omnaflo 059 no pcofipaopp Soao aw
uaao>op sawma pmahonopas one: any
we omd was "mofipm
.pna
adpdpacpoafim 080m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
mo pafimoh on» pa: .9“ mmonHB no: pod “woaa on» mvfioo chem
a“ pa pan» and ..opo . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .
.aoapahaaod .hnprEmm .com: c>a£ H \pmaponopws \onp aw wano mane
noafi woman ma OPOH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
hang» pan» momoaomav .Eonp hpaa dad on» man» has coped H and
and gfinmpgsoo “Hosp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ca nonmohwmd on» ma .o.mmam can H anomaac on» you 08 co>oa onm
“Homsfin “nuance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
on .saawa "nospm noxamm H and: man» comp \.non co; cafioz pan» 6:4
.wpo»n wfi.amow mp.smn.aw£.£mdmp.pwn.owsmnm .

H
.coagagae .pog were” wapp.cm.wpw W van w w“..ma..wwm wqw

-v. gnu hnpaa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .

uahm n.¢aoaoc .os o.xcanp. on». “:aa 4 nos» no: come.cwnvco>aon p¢ne

'm0p “0 opflpfifloo-HQ O O 0 O O O o O 0 o O 0 O O O O I O O O

IQdIIoASudC man no c.3ma; 03m poh .pa Ugaon no: can onm 6.3m“: onm

pooama o>apwaoonoaa

aw an0>0h «mofipm

«mdwawam mfimpmcm3.mm3m...m5wawam wary“

.mmocnaa
«mocha capuap
Ipancoa mo ocoa
a mo omfi on»
how coapahamonm

oswoaaam

ecoscauaoo soap
uanhdzunnoSupapm

   

170

The analysis of the structure

§ummar1 ofFAnalysis:
's oration shows the
the narration which is

of Othello parts of the speech to

be the proem, the statement,

tablish ethical proof, a
"that the act was not

used to es nd the epilogue.

treated is

The forensic issue
0 means of dealing with

committed." Othello uses tw
prejudice (lines of argument): 1) he attempts to
on and 2) he directly attacks

clear himself of suspici

the charges made against him. There is within the
speech a preparation for the use of non-artistic
The speaker's use of ethical

proof: a witness.
His use of logical

proof is decidedly predominant.

The speaker seems to make no

proof is not great.
use of the elements of pathetic proof. The premises
of the enthymemes are drawn from the realm of proba-

bility.

glcibiades' Oration
a famous general of
The soldier is sen-

from TIMON OF Arrays

Setting: Alcibiades, Athens, comes

to the aid of a soldier
0 death by the Athenian Se
The soldier had f
feeling that the sen-

and friend.

tenced t nate for killing a
man in self-defense. ought valiantly

for the state, and Alcibiades,

is unjust, intervenes. The following oration is

tence
life of his frie

nd, addressed

the general's plea for the

to the Senate of Athens.

ma pmnp nepoaauno
d Ho «H aoxeomm one
.emHe wafizphao>o epona
updaea man menaan

on: one oapwhocon
.mdosuafi> .o>ean a

ma copapomoo ma pawn
uneven 0&9 .aoxaoam

. on» was unaccowoo
05» £909 you mocha
Haoanpo moofiooam
nowadays: enp "nonpm

.thpOSpoa

no :oHpSoeKo Houao
Ines one Gwdocon a Ca
neboaaon en pan» mpuew
Imam oon Eeoaa ens
.uaopaoae nan apnea

IeHano on hamfinp ma“
Ixaoaw hm .eHQoen :H
coow on» on mamoaoa
0:3 ago me Haemaafl
maae>oa on «mospm
.HHas eoow "monpm

and

.nwawo.om w.mowow mowpmpwmwn.awn.wwawew
Inwawww wam wow mhwn.nwamt.awn.cw wswnm£.:¢
unmowewarow mpwc.pmaw mam mama.om Wee mow
“wowppaw wamamo.gm
.mcwnm mumk.mw£.wwwmpmm..maw m ma.ew
.m.mpma.ewnwam mo.omom mdwnmar womu.emomp.ow
gmdmo.umam ma.£mam3.nrww mam mpmH.oQOemm.£mam
momam mom ma.om3..mcmE.Hm mnwamm.a.qmmm
hwam£.ewa.om mzwpwow wow m8wp.mmumewa.uw
.hmHmswo.pw mow mpmewhw wow

.BwH o

 

mama.e:<

 

 

gm mo..mpwaw

 

O
‘

on» ma awed nos

«Campaao .Boz

moemzmm ammHm

momamom ms» mp.:mammmm&om mam unmamom “nmomom
mmD<HmHoq¢

.Ao>au
laohmo mood ma
90V 2.60moHH6

«a can» Span
wood can poses»:
«05mma ownfiehom

.monpe eofinonm op
coapenaa: no cab

soap
Imaawnuuaeaepauw

.sauafi no
woman ofiefihgpnm
.coHoHQeSu ho

Haemaan nudeao
“usefidwaa mo oaau

Eooam

"mmfiaom oeuwponmfl

“Haas soom

magmocoaah v

on Ma m4
sap pen» . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
moapwawnamcoamon on» qupeom was». one .Aowaa ma: o>e£op own ems
woapoce Ho capwoeo . . . . . . . . ... .
.hamdow>no Use .coE

a“ moduaa> noon mcfi
numaooaaam mo efinwawo

.mHadeo

aha
"mofipm ..OE.CMVUMQMM ...Hmflowww ..Homufla... “Cwflw ..mmwhmzn.h<.a
mmmmHmHUQ<
.Aan on pop .asoaw> on ma
«aaoao xooH and» macaw

moe<zmm 9mmHk

owCo>ea oe
exae pocfluo 50H

It.wama.hw
mmm¢HmHoq¢

"HHH how OMHH oamuwn o

p nap. aafloo can;
.Haax m5 ooaohco one

.uHH>e on mwcoat MH

.Aewcdo ova“ pa wcaan ca
quaaon man on weaknndfi was aouean no.0: 6:4
.mHmmoHoaao .p

Coaaua man exaa Eon undo mam
mwaoas was .ezuaepp

voooca flown? «hsoaap no omen
mcHHHoaaasv new one .apom opca

aoaswswamcws MQHAQ oe
o.ascpwa won» “a no .mcawo node xoou e>a£ mayor 950M
unwag xooa veep hams cw exaa o» moapaapm
.Hoomawm d poanpm oop omaeocd sow
moedzmw BmmHm

.owEmwmm.cm mowoma.umn.cm£

"mow mam mmmnmo.vmo.om

scape»
nswoAIpaoafiwad

“

ccHuaaevacOo mono ca
Headpa: oHpenuanshm
mHn muoeHHoA .monum
.tho

no coHuoEo .morpam
Aaouoaawzov

.thseo :H HoHHop «Ha
Ho conmoamNo pooh
IHocH ca .pcoEHHQeoo
a no 5909 on» :H who»
venom esp op venue»
0N0 HHHk coom «monpm

 

.pcessmna eHn whom
node on coconge pae>
ncH op HpHHHne mHn an
venueHHces mH nexaodm
a no on“ oozemHHHoucH
Ho HoCeueQEoo «monum

A.e>one

xenon on pnohhe has
lpcoswehh on» :H OmHa
unemeamv .uoemmea

:oHoH 0mm

an

..HpoHQE.H. mH. nomad. cH on oh

\.unsh. umoe me. .Hoaea._Hn

 

pom

.pmsw .pnosoaHNe .n.ch .mH .pram .H ..HHHx. OH

 

 

.eoCeHeo CH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

woOOHn uHoo :H mmoccmaa cEeUcoo pounce on;

.L\. .ooow .HHHsHHpHm. on ..uwoam emu doh m4

 

 

.mUHOH ME. 0. \. mCHAoHHDm CH. on EocmHB HH

.emo5n can ..can» pom.H3 mcoaH :HHB condo oH

 

 

 

 

.coHH esp Gaza cHeuoeo egos mud on» cad

. . . . . . . . . .Am
.uH magma mcHawop HH .oEo: um Hope pone

pceHHw> oaoE ope CoEos Comp .h&£. wvwonnd

.0 O O O O C I O O C O O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o: ewa .umzk .mcthop can .cH asonb £05m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on cheap HH \w.hocwcmsmoa usopoB
.m+woa:p aHonp use .thonv .meoh can ueH tom
up..coas meoHn «.mpwoanu HHa easoco no: omfl.

 

 

.oHuuen on mo>HomEenp omomxe nos ocou on ms;

.cHapmwo. a. 0.xH.H .xm.oom .H .HH

one EHNaE no
women oEeahnpcm

.EHHaE no
woman oEthnpnm

.HnoHoEdHe
uepao>cH eofinpv
poofiswawanopqsoo
no woman eEeE
IHSHCe e>Hpapsuom

AoHQEuNe
concechv .uer
usmnanaepnsoo

u no woman egos
Immune epHpausuem

wbH

nmsooe one: pan» .mooH on one; cheap HH

“aoGOmHaa hson> mHn women one .EH: ncsoac nopHo page

ch a was on "popoHa spoke a n.0m

«Ev. 39H; hpcoHa Sosa oou coma was om

.HHHQ moe¢zmm onomm I l
“monpwm IOIIIOlOIIIOIOI'OIIO'O|O|O|OIIOI|OIIO|OIOIIIOIO|OllOIO'O I

OHOHUHOM WMUCHHOB

Ho GoHpoEo

 

 

 

 

 

”so-HOpr on“ pcopog o'e'oIo'o'elelleluellelellelle'elle'ole'ellelll
taco Ancdocouoo aomv HHomEHn aeom wnlowolfiMoWww Woleom_Hom
.vCOH-H.“ ”Hg 9H0“ Oer.“ ...Io'elellololle o e e e e e o e e o o O
IHoB cso mHn mcH>ahn .moHEwco Msm%lnw WcmstvmwMMlcw mHNHm.WGM
MtHOfiOdeflO “gopmHMQOQ ol- ollo o e o o o o e o o o e o o e
Aaoxaogm aowv "monpm .epoaom AHmH onoo no: .moaOH he .mem H
mmadeHoH<
«pan» m.u«n;
mOB¢ZMm BmmHm
oOMHH MHQ MOM AODHFD HCOHowhhdm a 0L0;
.Eenp 85HDC¢NHm one coEeoooowH pd

Eonu commoa on one
AnEHKwS was onEdNov
cocovH>e one mpceadwao
pco>cH op mpHHHna ”Ha
ha nonmapmaosoo mH
hocopemsoo m. noxwomm
on» onHe .Aaepowaano
no homeconv eEHAo
n.oceHaH mH£ CH oe>Ho>

 

econ eoH>aom m.om
mmdemHoqd

Hch> SH

.ch> CH ozpmeap 50M
mOB<ZMm onomm

 

.man ana oano on» psp aneg

 

IGH mucoEeHo 0:» Ho wmnmmw poc mH vamp :mE mH on; pom

.eoHumsH "poem
upon oncoaom
.pcoa

Iowaasaepcsoo no
women efieahnu
Ice e>Hpapsuom

.23

IHHHDmDoaav psoE
nomad aopasoo no
women oEthnp
use o>prpSHom

w.eaoah£p
use nHowonOH

on» cons poem
Ichcoov wGHcon
Idea HaonoHace

.opwH
pmsncs mHnu LeHHSm on
woeoon mH ocoHaH mHs
HH oHHH m.aeHoHom on»
do HHHHHpsH Ho con
umoaoxe ca ”monpem

.maOpdaom

exp nawsop HHHB

ooom Ho GonmoaQKe as
Ome «H pH .ocoHpH
wcHoHHHaoemlmHem .mso
tandem a mo popoaaano
emu meopoa “monpm

.Aexdoam
0:» one oceHhH

mbH

.oaoE on pH owns «moHv ea
moedzmm 9mmHm

«BmH now can 0;

 

 

.oHHH mHn seH can ease on osHpo MHz» an oH

 

 

\.mcanpea ooom mHn com: .50» on masocon HE

 

HHe .moHaOHoH>NE used HH.H .HHHHSOow

 

o>0H memo ccopo>oa 950» to:& H you qwc¢

 

«noon Ev. :Hon one an op mpaomoo hE oxmw

 

.soh o>oE op epoE .pohlloco: on open :H 09 find

 

much too HpHa

Ho :oHpoBo «monpwm
.oceHaH mHn you
soaaom one hxpogfihu
uHs upoeHHea “monpm

eEHp cso mHn eme£opsm panE End pana mHs nmdona

 

IIEHn :H apnea has pom pom HH .mcpoH hE

.HpHHHnanoam no
woman osoafiflpcm

.pnea
Ifiwaalaepndoo

no women eEthnp
use opHpapsuem

O|OIOIOIOIO'OIO|. llllllll 0' II II .vosg‘nugoo ”Ho-"pa“

.pa oH eoHe open psmHs om House c am
mamaHmHoqa

.moHo om
moeazmm HmmHs

.msopewoeo xcHao mHn one HSOH one when mHm
.ms on c.aaoHGH me. umGOHpoaH anAono odd
nowaapso pHEEoo op nsocx Goon nun om

hadm thmwon pan» dH “EH: eaooaepo OH

nswemupnoadmad

opfimvcowov US“
noxwomm noon 90H tha
Ho QOHuoEe "mozpem
.hHwfl

Ion u.aouw:em on» no
as: on» GH mooH>aom
an mHHwooa "monpm

.oceHaH mHn MOH naeo
Inoo mHn use ASOHmb
mHn moueaumcofieo hone

uenHmnoo mHn “monpm

.oecseo

3:00 on» aoH uexo>o
anew Ho GOHuoEo Macao
vacuum esp one nononm
soon too pHoc aqu

mo coHooEo «monpwm
.aenweHm ouHH

com pop .pcoumHmaoQ
.pCoHpoQ a «mozum

 

.mnAOH h:

mod

.ao>e pom eenp :chmn e;

«pooHHo CH asoHoamm pan .ooaoz 309 CH mHH.

«nomad ado camp 50% on
moe<zmm BmmHm

.dmh.um mama.mwcwor WE

 

«ooaaw CoEEoo £05m coHCov on one 05m 09

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

omen om opoam oHsoSm H on ouHe pom UHsoo pH

mo pomnoh man owe azoh pun xcHzp poficwo H
me<HmHoH¢

Huang

moa<2flm QmHmE

.moocwanfioaoa 950% on 05 HHwo
mmqumHoH<

mOB<zmm QZOUMm

 

 

 

.om on non pmsE pH «On on pH umsm
mMQ<HmHOH<

.Aonpocd nHHHQm can» oooHn :30 mHn mpHeMLOH om
.aonponn no oceHaH .

"enumaonan ado Ho pneHen no

.HmaHH
IHownoamv pace
Ismnwlnopqsoo no
woman caveman
nae o>Hpau5Hem

.noHuoonno no
ocean eEeEhnp
nae e>dep5Hem

.UeSQHpcoo GoHp
nonsmomnpqudmn<

be

.HHpmcmoam oopsoexe on Hngm om
.pHaHQm aso
HHosm on no: .ocd .ncoEemosn aersteB poo ocouom
.oonu chpzoo moonu< .ocHnm .mmao 03» pound HH
moadzmm emmHm.

 

 

 

gmmms evanem on» meer pamw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.Nmnmz anCaD «omuuoo Ado» anqmm

Hoe annwm

mmm<HmHoH¢

.ucosfimaalnounsoo
no comma esoamnp
use opHuaHSHem

178
§pmmary of Analysis: The structure of Alcibiades'
oration is incomplete because of the dramatic purposes
of the playwright. All the parts of a speech, the
proem, the statement, the narration, the argument and
refutation are present, with the exception of the epi-
10gue. The narration is used to establish ethical
proof. The issue of the speech is "that the act did
less harm (or is less offensive) than is alleged.”
The forensic subject treated is justice. Alcibiades
attempts to combat prejudice (line of argument) by
clearing himself of suspicion. No use of non-artistic
proof is found in the oration. The speaker's use
of legical proof is the predominant means through
which he attempts to prove his case. He also incor-
porates the ethical mode of proof effectively into
his speech. Very little use is made of the pathetic
proof. The premises from which the enthymemes are
drawn are probabilities, maxims, analogical circum-
stances, and refutative enthymemes based on objection

and counter-argument.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The purposes of this chapter are four-fold.
First, the results of the analyses of the orations
executed in Chapter IV are summarized topically.
These eleven orations are then compared to Hermione's
oration for evaluative purposes. Second, Kennedy's
conclusion that Hermione's oration represents the
best of the forensic speeches is by this method also
subjected to evaluation. Third, the techniques used
by Shakespeare in his orations and the changes that
occurred in the structure of the orations as the play-
wright's career progressed are also considered within
the framework of the foregoing methodolOgy. Fourth,
evidences for or against Kennedy's conclusion, "He
[Shakespeare] perfected the revival of the ancient
rhetoric in poetic,” are presented through a compari-
son of the results of these analyses with Kennedy's
own conclusions regarding the quality of the forensic
orations in each of the four periods of Shakespeare's
career.

It will be recalled that every part of a
speech advocated by Aristotle is found within

179

180

Hermione’s oration: the proem (which is shifted to
a source other than the speaker); the statement, the
narration, the argument, the refutation, and the epi-
10gue. The use of these parts is in harmony with
Aristotelian precepts of 33513 and with his precepts
dealing with forensic speaking in particular. The
narration is used to augment fiermione's establishment
of ethical proof, and the epi10gue accomplishes all
of the four objectives which Aristotle advocated.
Hermione uses two of the means of dealing with pre~
judice: she constructs those arguments which would
clear her of suspicion,i and she wages a direct
attack upon the charges with which her trial is con-
cerned. The forensic issue of her oration is "that
the act was not committed." The forensic subjects
are honor and justice. hermione prepares for the in-
corporation of a mode of non-artistic proof in her
oration by transferring her source of judgement from
Leontes to the oracle. The oracle's message serves
as a witness to the validity of her arguments. All
three modes of artistic proof are used effectively.
Hermione's innocence, however, is established largely
through the use of ethical proof, the logical mode

of proof serving as the vehicle through which the
ethical proof of the speaker is established. The

premises from which the enthymemes are drawn include

181
maxim, analogy, example, certain sign, and probability.
Refutative enthymemes are based on objection and
counter-argument. Pathetic elements of proof are
arrestingly present in the oration. The speaker's
use of pathetic proof, however, is not direct. An
emotional response of pity arises naturally within the
auditors because of Hermione's seemingly hopeless
situation.

The results of the structural analyses of the
remaining eleven orations from Chapter IV, treating
each part of the oration topically, are considered
with the foregoing summary in mind.

Aristotle's concept of the function of a proem
is recalled:

The superlative function of the proemlis]
to make clear the end and object of your work.
And hence, if your matter is plain and short, a
proem really should not be employed.1

Every oration, nevertheless, has a proem.

Four out of the eleven of these proems are shifted

to a source other than the speaker: Aegeon's proem
is assumed by Solinus, the Duke of Ephesus; Henry V
introduces the subject upon which the Lord Chief Jus-
tice must defend his actions; similarly, Henry IV asks

Worcester why he forces the kingdom to "doff our easy

 

1Aristotle, The Rhetoric of Aristotle, trans-
lated by Lane Cooper, (New‘York: ’Kppleton-Century-
Crofts, Inc., 1952) p. 223.

l

182
robes of peace," and the officer of the law in The

Winter's Tale, reading the edictment against Hermione,

 

introduces the objectives of her oration. Three out
of the seven remaining orations seem to have incom-
plete proems when they are evaluated in light of Aris-
totle's precept, howevera Antipholus of Ephesus, for
example, states that the "end and object" of his
speech is ”justice." His proem is incomplete because
he does not make clear the source or the nature of

the injustice or to whom it was done. The oration is
addressed to the Duke, who knows nothing of Antipho-
lus' plight. The absent information is not supplied
until the statement following the proem proper. Ta-
mora's proem is emotionally-succinct: ". . . rue the
tears I shed, a mother's tears in passion for her son.”
This proem could be interpreted, however, that she is
sorrowing for her ill-fated son or that she is shed-
ding tears with the hope that someone will pity her
and her son. There is no clear indication that a plea
for his life will be the subject of her oration. The
proem of Friar Lawrence's oration is an eqmvocal indi-
cation of what is to follow:

And here I stand, both to impeach and purge
Myself condemn and myself excuse.

The proems in the orations of Mowbray, Shylock, Isa-
bella, Othello, and Alcibiades fulfill Aristotle's

precept. Isabella's and Othello's proems are the

185
most complete. The others are adequate to the drama-
tic circumstances, 1. e., the speakers' auditors know
ahead of time the subject matter of their speeches.
The four proems which are shifted to sources other than
the speaker also adequately accomplish their purpose.

In consideration of the statement part of an
oration, Aristotle has said that there are essentially
two parts to a speech: "Necessarily, you state your
case and you prove it."2 The statement of an oration,
then, contains the speaker's contentions which must
be substantiated or proven sometime during the interim
of the speech.

Every oration analyzed has a statement, and
all but two of these statements adequately accomplish
their purpose of stating the case. The two orations
which contain weak statements are those of Tamora and
Worcester. Tamora's statement does not "state" her
case when her statement is related to the remainder
of the oration. In it she says that as Titus' sons
were ”dear" to him, so is her son "dear" to her.

That statement is an argument; it does not contain

the contentions which she attempts to "prove" in the
remaining parts of her oration. Worcester's state-
ment is also deficient in this respect. In his state-
ment he says that he has ”not sought the day of this

dislike." The argument he then advances relates the

 

2Ibid., p. 220.

186
king's misuse of him and his house as the reasons for
their organizing a formidable army. The discrepancy
between the statement and the argument no doubt is
indicative of the villainy which he and his fmnily are
promoting.

Eight of the twelve orations combine the state-
ment with other parts of the speech: Tamora's and
Mowbray's oration combine the statement with the nar-
ration, and the argument; in the orations of the Lord
Chief Justice, Alcibiades, and Friar Lawrence the sources
of statement and narration are synonymous; Shylock's
statement is identical with his argument, and in the
oration of Isabella, the statement is composed of
argumentative dialogue (refutation). Kennedy in his
classification of the forensic orations has indicated
that Isabella’s speech is not sufficiently public to
be considered a pure oration. The dramatic situation
wherein Isabella seeks to obtain the attention of the
adamant judge, Angelo, and to persuade him to recon-
sider the death sentence that he has levied upon Isa-
bella's brother produces this unusual statement-argu-
ment (refutation) combination. Hermione's statement
and narration intertwine: statement, narration, state-
ment. The four orations in which the statements and
the narrations appear in a relatively pure form are

those of Aegeon, Othello, Worcester, and Antipholus.

187
In the latter the narration is interrupted by refu-
tation. The statements of Mowbray, Alcibiades, Shy-
lock and Hermione are the most effective. When con-
sidering the Aristotelian function of a statement,how-
ever, it appears that Hermione's statement is superior
in terms of completeness, candor of speech, and purity,
i.e., the statement is not directly combined with the
other parts of the oration.

The only two speeches which do not contain a
narration are those of Shylock and Isabella. The use
of the narration in the remaining ten orations is ex-
tremely varied. In length, the narration ranges from
three lines to three or more pages. In relation to
the speech as a whole it varies from a means to intro-
duce an enthymeme to being the whole substance or argu-
ment of the speech; and as it has been demonstrated
in the treatment of the statement, the use of the nar-
ration also varies in its combination with other parts
of the speech. The one distinguishable constant fea-
ture of the narration is that it is used to reveal
the character of the speaker, and in most instances,
it aids in the speaker's establishment of ethical
proof.

It will be recalled that Aristotle has said
the following concerning the use of the narration in

forensic speaking:

188
The defence needs less narration . . .

unless your story will bear on the contention .

. . it was no injustice, or the like. Further,

speak briefly of events as past and gone, except

when representing them as present will excite

pity and indignation.3

The procedure which is followed in summarizing

the use of the narration in the twelve orations is to
group the narrations according to their use in the
orations and to compare their use to Aristotle's fore-
going precept. The narrations in the orations of
Aegeon, Antipholus, Friar Lawrence, Worcester, Othello,
and Hermione are all used in one degree or another as
arguments. All of these narrations--with the excep-
tion of Hermione's and, to a lesser degree, Othello's--
contain the main substance of the speeches. Also,
they are all lengthy, when their length is proportion-
ally compared with the other parts of the speech. The
use of these narrations is, however, to a greater or
lesser degree in harmony with Aristotle's precept. The
theme of Aegeon's narrative is "that the act did less
harm than is alleged." It is also highly successful
in evoking an emotional response of pity from the
auditors. It is the longest of all the narrations,
but its length is necessary for the dramatic purposes

of the play. The speech occurs at the very beginning

of the play, and it serves to inform the audience of

 

3Ibid., 3. 16, p. 230.

183
the background events which have produced the unique

situation in The flamedygf Errors. Antipholts' narra-

 

tion attempts to describe to the Duke the injustices
which have been thrust upon him. The purpose of the
narrative in Friar Lawrence's oration is to clear him
of the suspicion of murder. Worcester's narration is
used as an argument to justify his and his family's
actions against Henry V. Through narration, Othello
proves that he wooed Desdemona in a natural way. Her-
mione's narration is a combination of argument and a
means by which she evokes both "pity" and "indigna-
tion" from her audience. Mowbray's short four-line
narration can also be considered, in an indirect way,
argumentative. The narration consists of a selfucon-
fession concerning the pleader's once planned attempt
to murder the father of his forensic opponent. Indi-
rectly, through ethical appeal and inference, the
narrative adds weight to the more relevant points of
argument that Mowbray advances. The narrations in the
orations of the Lord Chief Justice and Alcibiades are,
as has been previously stated, synonymous with the
statements of the speeches. They also contain ele-
ments of argument. Their use, too, is in harmonvaith
Aristotle's precept concerning the use of the narra-
tion in forensic speaking to "depict character":

The narration should depict character;

and it will do so if we know what imparts char-
acter (ethos). One thing that will give this

190
quality is the revelation of moral purpose; for
the'quality of the ethos is determined by the
quality of the purpose revealed, and the finality
of this purpose is determined by its end.

The narrations of Aegeon, Mowbray, Friar
Lawrence, the Lord Chief Justice, Othello, Alcibiades,
and Hermione reveal either directly or indirectly that
the speakers have acted or are acting with a moral
purpose in mind. In his statement Aegeon says that
he will tell his tale of woe so "that the world may
witness" that his "end was wrought by nature, not by
vile offence." The narration of Mowbray reveals the
speaker to be.a man who once erred, but whose return
to the path of good-living was prompted by a moral
purpose. Friar Lawrence gambles his reputation to
tell the grieving relatives of the circumstances sur-
rounding the deaths of Romeo, Juliet, and Paris. The
Lord Chief Justice tells Henry V that his actions in
the past situation under discussion were executed in
the name of the king and for the purpose of defending
the king's laws and his honor. Honest Othello wishes
the Senators and his wife's father to know that he
wooed and won Desdemona in a natural way. Alcibiades'
narration reveals that he is acting in the interests
of a friend. Hermione succinctly narrates the rela~

tionships of her past life in an attempt to show

 

41mm.

191
Leontes the absurdity of his suspicions. When con-
sidering the impeccable character of the speaker, the
narration could be interpreted as a disguised effort
to protect Leontes from being the tragic victim of
his own jealousy. There are certainly many character
traits, evidences of extended good will, and demon-
strations of the competencies of the speakers present
in the narrations. These elements of ethical proof,
however, have been treated in detail on the annotated
manuscripts in Chapter IV.

The narrations of Antipholus and Worcester do
not depict the Speakers as being motivated by a moral
purpose. The setting of Antipholus' oration is comic,
and all serious situations and considerations which
the speech recalls or advances are to the audience
extremely humorous. Worcester's oration is a twisted
account of the past. His actions and the actions of
his family, which threaten the safety of the king and
his throne, are obviously not motivated by a moral
purpose. The context of Tamora's narration in itself
reveals no moral purpose; but such a purpose is inferred
because she is pleading for the life of her son.

When considering an Aristotelian evaluation of
the use of the narration in these twelve orations, it
appears that the narrations of Aegeon, the Lord Chief
Justice, Othello, and Hermione are superior. Aegeon's

narrative is the least effective because of its extra-

192
ordinary and seemingly unnecessary length. As has
been previously stated, however, the dramatic purposes
of the playwright require a complete account of past
events. Again, it appears that Hermione's narration
meets and fulfills the requirements of Aristotle's
precepts most completely. Her narration evokes "pity"
and ”indignation" from her auditors; it simultaneously,
in a subtle way, attempts to guard Leontes from.making
a great mistake, and depicts the speaker's character
in terms of patience, magnanimity, virtue, showing her
to be one who in good taste declines an opportunity
to be indignant or to be emotionally and pretentiously
persuasive.

Table 4 summarizes the structure of the ora-
tions, showing the relationships of the structural
parts of the orations, and indicates in which orations
the narrations are used to establish ethical proof.
Some evaluative comments as to the quality and effect-
iveness of the use of the parts are also included in
this table.

Before dealing with the argument and refuta-
tion parts of the orations, it is necessary to define
what is meant by these terms. The term argument is
used in this portion of this summary in two senses:
it refers to those arguments advanced by the speaker

which employ elements of logical proof, or it refers

 

 

 

7’ OE” ‘E‘FTE ORAW‘TOITS

 

 

 

 

 

 

4*

 

 

 

 

a .» , . .. —
wxny, inn argument . n “far: a,: .,
annexer xreem L’Q(#)Uflt * ’ - ,u # Reidthinn epilogue
1 ' '
. ., fl .. - .. ‘ 4 ~ ‘1 :5 .A, L; v . 1,: '\ ‘1‘,“{1 (“1!") |,( I". a Q , f‘l()"5 ——————— mm m not c.11- m T? +‘ ’1‘?) 3w .
\ frit‘ (J‘ (‘)\ | '1 t1??!i 1 “v - J g ( (J 3 K \(E eh" I (11(T' LI {h ) I J : 5 B” a db" u p, 3 Ali:
/‘ l I" ") 'i‘ vi'J -. '
n . -. _ -‘ “1‘ _ _ U“ _ ', . | 3., .- ,. ,.‘- “I: , .4‘1 .- -. L- _ .. 'e _'.1 _
w~ » , i u r ('dsmnflt?) csgc;»~» slum afgdmefib“"1hfl'r 9%“DiQEH “13$ narration occurs Wlbflln narra- no enilorue
' r L "7) i) ‘ 1 fit L 5 “v I") ' j ‘ VI I 5’ \; (I; \J J 1 .5“ \ . g -- ~ ~ .~‘~ 1 ‘4 . ) . ... . . J-
, w L j J ’ .33 "r" x {‘le r3 ..‘u 1 w: n "if: . prawn/cf: (1 IleffeCtiVB tion (.Lneffec tine)
' :5 i “ \ y i ; a _
)1 () Hr ) I i )1. xi of?" ‘7 1 '0; 0'1, huff—'3}; 19.,19}
.".-~~ - -..I,‘ ~ ~ , J
q o \ v I _' L _ " _ 'I _ .’ q.L. ‘

‘ i Q +- :— ‘ /'\ NU.) ‘ .\ ”5‘ {"2 "$2". (‘1‘?) :3 T" P] Eyelflfii‘ (1:, 8 ’11] COInE) in_6d WL tl’l b {la torment) -mans-WIO- effec t1 v0
{11'1“qu 5".) ,“.:_' 3; I, " , ’ , 71 “iii" Virgil.“ ‘ L ' , a, ,‘ ‘ w .5__ ( ff "i": A) ... "

" ‘ ' x ' ‘ " on new; ‘nrcwuzces start??? and narra ".110'3 e . eh JJ—‘Vu

—; \ \(‘ty‘sk‘r‘ .4 . w ' L

 

 

‘ . ~ ' L- ‘ ————— ..-—1.» r4- .

, .(.aslcq w« L if ndmbfnsd.flltn SLHLBmRFtS -~-*—-* weak
I '7‘ n V W “('5‘ :-» ( 1‘ \‘F:\ ‘ ( ,\;r. ., “flj til rl )Prq-
( I [ll ) Lt”; 1 7. .- ...‘. n ..i .-- 14L _ V 1 . ‘ {..V / 457‘” 5.... *- ‘rp) \
h '1 ‘ t2 OJ‘(‘\’“I“(' ‘ 9.1100 RC. \ emu .I-i
I . , . l.“
LLWWV'QHCH {_‘, 9 ”3” ) g; ..JH ~ A

\ ‘ D ‘3 r ' ‘ H “ '9‘ ‘ ‘ ' .
‘ 7’ 1 5 L‘ fa “31“ ” H.‘«”'EI‘LQJ :L: 1 I (J 31%;“ (47".‘1;; £2390" coma. LLBG Ni. th Stabfilnenfi separate (eff-‘36... CffCC'bi‘Vfi
~ \" {V} "2'3 ‘7‘ ‘ I ‘f‘ " ", “ 3 3.1T" '3 )l I) "9‘ )"' , a k . *- ) ,
mehlly ELMWI;US 1 a t c cw ybkp; fitfiflw (effgcbzgg) and ngprgbion (effective thE)
Ct:'1r;;‘»-,.:‘i (14.5%: , ""Ti

 

a
,u

v ‘ <"f- ’3" (3 t3“. :3 ’a'; 6', 1‘

:4; 'r . "i 3‘ ’tr: C?
. ,.‘ «7- ' ,5 3‘ , 'i
(\ (,‘n/ L;.)l."‘uk’3/

sr: . ' 1.": .n "1” r: i. <7 ( "3. n a 0 n g run (A. 8
a . a .r x
m“'- “' of speech;

.-
‘
(“P
n
’“5.
A‘
I
,4»..—

.5 fl.“ 1“ e . .3
£..'-~\)ull).)1"5"t1

dunes some ethcs

In

I - 1 _ n 7
Y“: W Y‘ 'f'l 1; V3 g‘)‘
l - ' ; - ~ .

ume nt 3 pro-
(ineffective)

combined with narration
(ineffective)

—--_-.~-‘

weak

 

Ter 1&01wi

(Hiiei‘ Jusiyice

~ .’ 1"
cosmosnd of Mia“
\

Ins-3:9 (ccvav r trs}

- 4,1 F ,. ,1', .0 A,‘ .
COmULdfu Wluh narra—

titan

(“Omb ‘2 ”16d w l t?) S i‘ a .

J I
r
fincflfi athtg ‘effc

separate (effective)

--II.'-—-‘fl

effective

 

 

Shylock

91m :02! rats, (Sari) 65 -

L-‘

dusts)

camblued with argument
(lagically effective)

 

na-wvfiwm

combined with statement
(logically effective)

arises out of argument
(legically effective)

effective

 

isabells

_ e .. .. "- 3“ ,.
composed oi cia-
. ,f -
in we (finannlnte)

combined with arvument

CL)‘

and refutation

-~v-.-I.-l-Gl

combined with statement
(effec;ive)

combined with statement
and argument (effective)

composed of dia-
logue (adequate)

 

Othello

ascqrate
(effective)

gggorote (effective)

aspirate; produces
(effective)

 

e thos

V

---W-I.E.~'

effective_

 

 

Alcibiades

ssmnxrate
fiéhefifiulte)

combined with narration

(effective)

combined with statement;
produces ethos (effective)

interrupted by refutation
(effective)

arises from the argu~
ment (effective)

no epilOgue

 

Hermione

shiftcd(can~
plate)

intertwin.s with narrsa

tion (effective)

 

intertwines with

statement;

produces ethos (effective)

 

interrupted by refutation
(effective)

 

arises from the argu-
ment (effective)

 

effective

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

195

 

 

 

_r.

194

to that part of the speech which can be clearly dis-
tinguished as "the argument" of the oration. Refer-
ring to argument in the later sense, Aristotle has
said that refutation is a part of the argument. When
the term refutation is used, it refers to dialogue
which contains specific arguments that are drawn from
legical premises (counteruarguments) or refutative
statements based on objection.

Of the twelve orations, eight contain a sec-
tion which can be identified as "the argument." This
section in five out of the eight orations contains
both argument and refutation; one of the eight con-
tains only refutation, and two of the eight contain
only argument. These eight are the orations of Anti~
pholus, Tamera, Mowbray, the Lord Chief Justice, Shy-
lock, Isabella, Alcibiades, and Hermione. The latter
four are decidedly superior to the first four in that
the arguments advanced by the speakers contain more
elements of logical proof.

Table 5 illustrates that the speakers of the
third and fourth period of Shakespeare's writing
career use more elements of logical proof than do
the speakers from the first and second periods.

When considering an evaluation of the speakers'
use of lOgical proof, Hermione's oration again appears
to be the best of the four. Shylock's use of logical

proof is cleverly executed. He invents his arguments

 

'- .— ._‘ r"
4 9"
- 3‘...) c"

' , ...... —- - \ - «A ‘v- A -~~ n—w- ~71 - ~‘ " v -* (1 H} ,x, " 7.“:1 Vs '71:-
s 5HRNATFOE Us Wrw TLEJENTw 0H LflwTCAL PROOF D.ED by THE

“h
f-o fv' '3 '1 v-x -,-f\4-Y'1 ff ‘\"1"‘"‘Tfiw (j
"W MAN 7.11- <3 {i}?- v.) Ji- \ Ch. ’{R batik:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7." 1'3. *1 a: 7» 1231‘}, .517"? T if} i . =3 "a T‘IE‘: m‘fl 4‘ “F5 1‘? ”in? "4. a: {7“ i 7! Nil": 13""! 997.1 ?_Z-}';:F“13.RIT1€B 3 3795 d? awn
;P Wnthvmswafi a? Esfnssrivm
" "' In: tam hu- #
dismnls3 L Ofixhglifiitfl finglnfiy uh ’Maxims Refutative
‘9V‘Ql“ v5 inspntsd Analogicsl EnthYmemes: Refutative Enthy“
[Zimns 'al h1namwepaj Bassaning Objection Inanes: Counter-
Vi _b _N _... m “
argument
13 s, "a "' , n Ii T
t: 5:. 0 Q 0
fr gs, g’f 2°, fir“, 7‘1 O O O
-..!Q r A“... \fi) :3 O O .3“
(:3 ('3

I f ‘1 i 1
Antiphulus ,1 0

cf Ephesus

o
3.4
5,»:
i...l
O
O

3" ‘N

U

H:-
C

Tamora

 

Period II

( D
O
14>
O
K) 0

3‘0

0

o

o
0000
OO
00
00

he Lard
hief Justice

an
4:)
O

 

{trier ill
invented 7 7

Isabella 17 7 historical l

a:
:3

O

N)
O
O

Othe 1- .1. r.)

(0
03 O 03
O

Alcibiades 10 4 O

Hermione ll 5 10

Total 65 24 10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

196
and reasons effectively from them, but the villainy
of his contention negates all the proof-proving power
that would otherwise be inherent within such argu-

Isabella and Alcibiades for the most part
They argue

ments.
are also forced to invent their arguments.

effectively and persuasively, and unlike Shylock,
their ethical attributes operate in their favor.
Their use of IOgical proof or argument and refutation
is inferior to Hermione's, however, because she has

available tangible evidence from which she draws many.

of her enthymemes. It is significant that Hermione

is the only speaker out of the twelve who incorporates

into her argument enthymemes that are drawn from the

premises of certain signs. These signs are ten in
number.
Aristotle has said in regard to the function

of the epilogue in fOrensic speaking:

The epilogue is made up of four elements.
(1) You must render the audience well-disposed to
yourself, and ill-disposed to your opponent; (2)
you must magnify and depreciate (make whatever
favors your case seem more important and whatever
favors his case seem less); (5) you must put the
audience in the right state of emotion; and (4)

you must refresh their memories.5

Three of the twelve orations have no epilogue.
Because of the dramatic purposes of the playwright,

Antipholus' and Alcibiades' orations are terminated

51bid., p. 240.

197

during the refutation. The end of Isabella's speech
is pure dialogue; technically-speaking, it cannot be
considered an epilogue even though it is labeled as

such on the annotated manuscript. For the sake of

completeness, however, the ending of her oration is
examined in light of Aristotle's precept. During the
termination of her speech Isabella renders her small
audience "well-disposed to" her and "ill-disposed to"
her opponent, and to some extent she puts her "audi-
ence into the right state of emotion." The remaining
nine epilOgues are considered in Table 6.

Table 7 summarizes the forensic issues with
which the orations are concerned in terms of Aristotle's
four possible issues of forensic speaking, the foren-
sic subjects found in the orations in terms of Aris-

totle's three subjects of forensic speaking, and those

lines of argument which he advocated a speaker should

use when "dealing with prejudice."

In Aegeon's oration the forensic issue is

probably more clearly interpreted as "the act did less

harm than is alleged." That "the act did no harm"

can also be inferred from the context of his state-

ment, however. The issues in the orations of Isabella

and Alcibiades are variations of the issue "the act

did less harm than is alleged." Isabella argues that

because the act was a mistake, and because there are

 

TABL . 6

THE USES OF THE EPILOGUE

ll

 

 

' 52‘.

9930’

O
,

. « J...
Vr' (if: I,
L
.U

7.8119")

'fi

4.
i
as
fieoreu
. -‘- .
WHRt fa-

.1] «j
q

0
".1; 1 arm-r5,
I

3. I 7:3.
O

a 0 a?»
Ca .7" "‘1
:3 1'1 '3 31'}

5‘

at“)

E ‘17" WQI'W‘?~

the 9
D 391
’3‘ SE30». .t.
\ O
,m

I“ r

V

P
LDC)“.

L"

A

f

_.‘l

In”

0"
~.I_
.1.
% ma

V‘

l

’)

C!

;. x a
(M P)

,
.1 7‘6. 8 {'5
O

J:
\J ’
D,
p

Q
.1

ii.

.3
ofmonen

.2

I

a
in.olirit,a

r4
emotion.

Render
well-

3
TIC) ‘PS
2‘" v

3

P11 it t‘rw. .9
{fan ‘

 

Speaker-~Epilogue

Aegeon:

But here must end the story of my life;
And happy were I in my timely death,
Could all my travels warrant me they live. ies no Yes to

 

Tamora:
Thrice-noble Titus, spare my first~born son, Yes ho Yes "

b4
73
If

 

Mowbray:
Then, dear my liege, mine honour let me try:
In that I live, and for that will I die. Yes No Yes Yes

 

Friar Lawrence:

. . . and, if aught in this

Miscarried by my fault, let my old life
Be sacrificed some hour before his time

Unto the rigour of severest law. Yes Yo We: no

 

Worcester:

Whereby we stand opposed by such means,

As you yourself have forged against yourself
By unkind usage, dangerous countenance,

And violation of all faith and troth

Sworn to us in your younger enterprise. ho, . 3o

 

The Lord Chief Justice:

After this cold considerance sentence me,
And as you are a King, speak in your state
What I have done that misbecame my place,
My person, or my liege's sovereignty.

 

 

Shylock:
I stand for judgement-uanswer. Shall I have ii? To Yes To _es

 

Othello:

. . . Upon this hint I spake:

She loved me for the dangers I had pass'd
And I loved her that she did pity them.
This only is the witchcraft I have used.

Here comes the lady; let her witness it. Yes Y,

4

‘1
m
UZI

F<
o
(,4
a
m

 

Hermione:
Therefore proceed. \
But yet hear this; mistake me not; no life,
I prize it not a straw, but for mine honour,
Which I would free, if I shall be condemn'd
Upon surmises, all proof sleeping else
But what your jealousies awake, I tell you
'Tis rigour and not law. Your honours all,

I do refer me to the oracle.
Apollo be my judge!

+4
('9
’20

Yes Yes Yes

198

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

199
many who committed the crime that have not been con-
demned to death for it, her brother's "act did less
harm than is alleged." Alcibiades, arguing that his
friend was forced to fight to defend his honor and
forced to murder in self-defense, contends that "the
act did less harm than is alleged." The orations of
Antipholus, Friar Lawrence, Mowbray, Othello and Her-
mione clearly treat the issue, "the act was not com-
mitted." Tamora, Worcester, and the Lord Chief Jus-
tice attempt to prove that "the act was justified,"
and Shylock attempts to prove that "the act" is "justi-
fied."

More than one forensic subject is incorporated
in three of the orations. Antipholus tells the Duke
of the dishonorable actions which his wife and the
goldsmith have committed against him, and he pleads
for justice. Hermione states that her honor is more
important than her life, and she warns Leontes that
justice will not be accomplished if he judges her
solely by the evidence which his surmises have con-
jured. Worcester argues that he and his house were
forced because of a damaged honor and for the sake
of expediency (self-protection) to oppose the king
by force. The Lord Chief Justice argues that his
actions in the past were both just and expedient, and

that it would not be just to punish.him for them.

\

\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

s V 1"” C; - r A ‘TA‘ mm 4 3R «TLCTORS
A __—e.
v+===================z:;f '9
3,, j. '. f . 1T3?" _.., * 1 .7 :1 :f», Té’ij‘re e Ifi“:‘=‘;"6 n :4 '3 ff: Salli j €353 ts Line 5 Of Argument Baal? n5 W3. th Pre 3115.106
.. e T [I .;, ’1"): i'z 5+: ~. -,. “ -_ .f Jr: :33} (3. ,7. my. j 31%;? at“ EX? 3- To Clear T Wage an To ”Mae 1;, To Argue "The
-~ ' ’ n " " ‘ " ' ‘ 7 r - w 0 -t . . . 1 '
'2 a - ;m n W vi za~ n4 gdwfl‘ \os dicncy Oneself of ()SnRefutation Calumny ACt was A Mis- ”
, A]"3gufi - ‘-fi%1»393 THSL'Y‘ed Tnjuatice SUSQEClOH ngbmnwes Made with Calumny” take A Mischance
£8030 ?:~ ? 3* if?“ fl";“ib1e X68
V -
~ , x? in?“ ".v 33 1 : E g )\ 1 a I (A. 5 ..V 3. h ;‘ i it: '-
— - " w " ' ‘ J
‘7 . ._ 7y! C'- ‘7' ‘ '
fifitifihmlflfi ' 16‘ '9' XEE YGS
’3

aoi E$f3}l”f33‘$

 

 

TEWWPQ

1..

M
C?-

t'.

 

 

“V f: i".
1 . , a». , i - t)
fihsiazv lgwiraru:e

 

 

 

 

a , 1‘ ,,
fish) N H 33:4; if
D

l3

J)
M
(I
m

 

Va 9:; 'V6 :1
Moruester ~m - a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sh:]§:"h 1:68
Isabella Yes

_—— Othello Yes

_—¥ Alcibiades . . Yes

 

 

. ' as Y
Hermione Y es

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

201

Mowbray's oration treats the subject of honor exten-
sively. Tamora, Shylock, Isabella, and Alcibiades
all treat the subject of justice in their arguments.

Every orator with the exception of Tamora in~
corporates one or more of Aristotle's lines of argu-
ment into his speech, and it can perhaps even be in-
ferred that Tamora "clears" herself "of suSpicion"
because of the fact that she is pleading for the life
of her son. Aegeon, Friar Lawrence, and Alcibiades
use only one means of dealing with prejudice: they
construct those arguments which would clear them of
suspicion. Antipholus, Worcester, Othello, and Her-
mione use those arguments which would clear them of
suspicion, and they also wage an open counter-attack
on the charges brought against them. Mowbray refutes
his opponent's accusations and also labels his foren-
sic enemy as a "recreant" and a "liar." The Lord
Chief Justice and Shylock incorporate only one line of
argument: they construct counter-arguments to combat
the charges brought against them. Isabella attempts
to clear herself of suspicion, and further argues that

her brother's act was "a mistake," "a mischance."

 

The orations of Shylock, Mowbray, the Lord
Chief Justice, Isabella, Othello, Alcibiades, and
Hermione are superior to the other orations studied
in their use of the three artistic modes of proof.

Shylock's oration is the least effective as a serious

202
forensic speech because his lack of ethos obliterates
the possibility of classifying him as an Aristotelian
forensic pleader. Regardless of his negative ethos
and of th- low-caliber Cigtrst of his argunchts, his
orat on is a lasternicce sf "invention"; an} it must,
for this rrasnn, be rate/.1 with the supcriqr orations.
The [arm:(31icf Justice's cration cases to be superior
to Mowbrsy's spccch of defense both in terms of struc-
ture and if“. the: use of ethical anti? legion}. proof.

The divisimniznwi‘figc sonarent rslationships of the

i

A

carts of the oration can is clearly seen. The judge's
argumsnts are cleverly and effectively invented and a
good deal of good will, respect, and competency arises
from them. Mowbray may be accused of speaking too
long and too intcnsively upon the subject of honor to
be in good taste. It must be recognised, however, that
honor to an Tlizabethan audience was a paramount con-
sideration, and further, that lonor is the only argu-
ment he has. It i if icult to rate the orations of
Isabella, Othello, and Alcibiades individually with
any sort of system in mind. the speeches of both
Isabella and Alcibiades are, it seams, of an rcually
superior ouality when the superimposed dramatic situ-
ations“ not considered. The presence of the rakish
comic, Lucio, who is continuously throwing "aside"

c0mments to suouort Isabella's morale, detracts some-

 

 

j

205
what from the speaker's pathetic appeal or proof. The
fact that the speech is "not sufficiently public" to
be considered a pure oration (a great deal of dialogue
interrupts the flow of the oration) also lessens to
some degree its oratorical qualities. On the points
of logical and ethical appeal, however, the two ora-
tions are, in the writer's opinion, equally superior.
Othello's oration is outstanding because the speaker's
ethical proof is established by the use of the narra-
tion, and for the most part, established with little
logical substantiation. The oration of Hermione, as
Kennedy has observed, however, is the best. Hermione
uses the three modes of artistic proof more concen-
tratedly than the other speakers do; and Table 5 indi-
cates that the lOgiCal premises from which her enthy-
memes are drawn are based on more tangible evidence
(certain signs) than are the premises of the enthy-
memes which the other speakers incorporate into their
orations. The detailed rhetorical analysis of Her-
mione's oration has demonstrated that the speaker's
use of the three modes of artistic proof is complemen-
tary and interdependent. This usage has been parallel-
ed, but not equaled in the other orations. It will be
recalled that Hermione's oration was determined to be
superior in structure and also in the use of the parts

of the oration. Kennedy's conclusion, then, that

204
Hermione's oration "achieves the introduction of the
rhetoric in poetic according to the best classical
tradition" can be substantiated by the evidence made
available through the analyses of twelve forensic ora-
tions.

The stated third objective of this chapter is
to note ”the techniques used by Shakespeare in his
orations" and to note "the changes that occurred in
the structure of the orations as the playwright's
career progressed.“ Concerning these points the fol-
lowing may be stated.

The oration is used both in comic and in seri-
ous situations by Shakespeare. When it is used in a
humorous situation or when it is used as a vehicle to
produce humor, its oratorical effectiveness is obvious-
1y impaired. The subject matter, the structure of the
orations, and the techniques of persuasion used by the
speaker are determined, it seems, to a large measure
by the dramatic purposes and circumstances of the
play, and by the "character" of the character speaking.
The above statement is partially verified by recalling
that in four of the orations the proem was shifted to
a source other than the Speaker himself, and that in
three orations there was no epilogue. The varied use
of the narration also illustrates this point. It will

be recalled that the narrative is used at times as

205
the whole substance of the speech, and at other times
as a type of argument. In the case of Tamora's ora-
tion, it is used merely to introduce an argument.
The most consistent similarity in the orations is the
pervasive use of the narration as a means to estab-
lish ethical proof. In regard to the use of the parts
of a speech in general, it can be stated from the
analyses executed that Shakespeare's concept of the
structure of a speech is as flexible as is Aristotle's.
The parts are varied and adapted to meet the particu-
lar speaking-situation and the dramatic needs of the
play. No rigid plan or pattern is followed. It has
been shown, for example, that in some instances the
source of the statement-narration-argument is synony~
mous (Tamnra's and Mowbray's orations):

It is interesting to note the primacy of ethi-
cal appeals in all of the orations, with the exception
of three wherein the dramatic purposes of Shakespeare
were obviously conceived with other things in mind
(Antipholus, Worcester, and Shylock). The use of
ethical proof in five orations is clearly dominant,
and in four others it is strongly present. Such a
trend, however, is not surprising when it is recalled
that many of Shakespeare's "dramatic agents" are
characters with strong ethical attributes.

Two of the orations in the first period,

those of Tamora and Aegeon, are the only speeches of

206

the entire group of twelve wherein the use of pathetic
proof is predominant. In the orations of Antipholus,
Friar Lawrence, Worcester, the Lord Chief Justice,
Shylock, Isabella, and Othello little or no use is made
of the pathetic elements of proof. Of the remaining
orators, Mowbray uses the pathetic appeal more appar-
ently than do either Alcibiades or Hermione. The
pathos of Alcibiades' appeal might be said to be less
intense than the pathos in Hermione's oration. The
important point is not this relationship, however,
but the fact that the use of pathetic proof in these
two instances arises for the most part from the issues
being debated and not from a conscious effort on the
part of the speaker. Such a restrained use of pathe-
tic proof, when considering the naturally-emotional
nature of drama, speaks in favor of the alleged "con-
scious or unconscious use" of Aristotelian precepts
of persuasive speaking.

Mowbray, Tamora, the Lord Chief Justice, and
Shylock are the only speakers in the first and second
periods that incorporate any significant use of logi—
cal proof. Mowbray and the Lord Chief Justice use ele-
ments of lOgical proof to establish their ethical"
proof; Tamora's use of legical proof is used to estab-
lish her pathetic proof; and Shylock's use of logical

proof stands by itself. In the third and fourth

207
periods, Isabella's and Alcibiades' use of the logi-
cal method of proving their contentions is predominant;
Othello uses it to establish his ethical proof as does
Hermione. When considering the foregoing, it seems
that whenever a speaker's character is not sufficient-
ly reCOgnized as being above reproach the speaker is
forced to prove his case by relying mainly upon the
logical mode of proof. The orations of Shylock, Isa-
bella, and Alcibiades illustrate this point. But when
the speaker‘s character is known to be reliable or
above reproach the 10gical means of proof is used
simply to augment the speaker's character or ethical
appeal. The orations of the Lord Chief Justice, Mow-
bray, and Hermione can be cited as examples of this
point. It is significant that Friar Lawrence and
Othello, whose means of proof were mainly in the'ethi-
cal mode, incorporate little, and in the case of the
Friar no use, of the logical mode of proof into their
orations.

In regard to the premises from which the enthy-
memes are drawn, it can be stated that in all cases,
With the exception of Hermione who reasons to some
extent from the premises of certain signs, the argu-
ments are "invented" to establish logical proof, or
they are invented to be used as a springboard from
which the speaker reasons to establish logical proof.

The total number of times that the premises are

208
derived from probability is twenty-four; from the ex-
ample, twenty-one. Ana10gical reasoning is employed
eleven times as the basis of an enthymeme, and the
maxim is used thirteen times.

Kennedy's observations concerning the struc-
tural change which occurred in the forensic orations
as Shakespeare's writing career progressed are vali-
dated by the analyses made. Regarding the first
period, the structure of Antipholus' and Aegeon's
orations are "simple" and they are "artificially
set" into the context of the play. Aegeon's oration
is purely and distinguishably statement and narration
followed by a weak epilogue. The oration of Anti-
pholus is a speech of display written for the sake of
dramatic resolution and humor. Its structure is a
clear-cut proem, statement,and narration which is
interrupted by much refutation and which ends in
chaos. Tamora's oration is composed largely of "arti-
ficially set," pathetic argument with three lines
devoted to an emotional proem and one line to an emo-
tional epi10gue. Regarding the structure of the
second-period orations, the oration of Friar Lawrence
is much like the structure of Aegeon's apeech: there
is a short proem and statement followed by a lengthy
narration and a brief, weak epi10gue. Worcester‘s

oration contains basically the same design. The three

209
remaining orations of this period, however show signs
of improvement. The structure in the orations of
Mowbray, Shylock and the Lord Chief Justice contain a
combinational use of the parts of a speech. (See
Table 4) The outline becomes less discernable as
more logical proof and forensic procedure are incor-
porated into the orations.

The third period orators are Othello, Isa-
bella, and Alcibiades. Isabella's oration because of
its "non-public" nature has no definite statement or
epilogue. The argument and refutation are the clearly
distinguishable parts of the structure. The struc-
tural outline of Othello's oratiOn is subdued by the
use of transitional devices. Even though the flow
of his oration is interrupted by dialogue, there is
a nice harmony between the parts of the speech. The
epilOgue, succinct though it be, seems to emerge from
the narrative unnoticed, effectively concluding the
speech. The structural outline of Alcibiades‘ cra-
tion runs smoothly and unpretentiously until the
refutation concludes the oration by Alcibiades banish-
ing the Senators for their ingratitude.

Hermione's oration is the only oration ana-
lyzed from the fourth period. It has been demon-
strated that it contains all the parts of a speech.
It has also been.mentioned that the statement and

narration intertwine to produce a different, but

 

910
effective method of stating those points which are
to be proven or refuted. A similar combination of
parts occurs in the argument part of the oration
wherein Hermione resumes her statement, but uses that
statement in an argumentative or refutative way.
The epilogue emerges effectively and dramatically
from a refutative enthymeme based on counter-argu-
ment. When analyzing the oration of Hermione one is
conscious of a total effect of ethical appeal or
proof-~one is not conscious of the structural parts
which produce that effect.

A review of the structure of the orations of
the first period and a demonstration of the absence
of lOgical proof coincides with Kennedy's conclu-
sions regarding the rhetorical quality of these ora-
tions. The results of the analyses of the second-
period orations also coincides with Kennedy's claims.
He states that Mowbray's oration is an example of
Shakespeare's "maturing sense for the use of argu-
mentative rhetoric." It seems, however, that the
Lord Chief Justice‘s oration and Shylock's oration
could also be considered as examples of that "matur-
ing sense." or the third period Kennedy states:l
"Whenever Shakespeare's hand touches the oration .

. . the maturity of his genius creates a work of

finished rhetorical art." A question as to exactly

211

what Mr. Kennedy means by "a work of finished
rhetorical art" arises. Othello's oration seems
to meet this standard, but the loose structure of
Isabella's speech and the incomplete ending of Alci-
biades! oration-~incomplete, admittedly, for the
sake of plot purposes-~do not appear to be in agree-
ment with Kennedy's assertion. If he is referring
to the speaker's use of legical and ethical appeals,
the results of the analyses would be in harmony with
his statement. But the incompleteness present in
the structures of both orations does not coincide
with his claim: "a finished work of rhetorical
art." In regard to Hermione's oration in the fourth
period Kennedy has stated: it is "the best of
Shakespeare's art, both in rhetorical quality and in
dramatic integration." The summary of the analyses
as it has been previously stated has provided evi-
dence to substantiate his evaluation of its rheto-
rical quality.

The analyses of the orations give rise to
a question which should be mentioned in the conclud-
ing portion of this chapter, however. This question
pertains to the orations in the second, third and
fourth writing periods. Perhaps the maturing drama-
tic purposes of Shakespeare; the nature of the

dramatic situations in which the orations are

212

delivered; the character attributes of the speaker,
and Shakespeare% increasing ability in oratorical
composition and in dramatic integration of the ora-
tions into the plot of the play exerted more of an
influence upon the development of an "Aristotelian"
quality in his orations in terms of structure and
in terms of the quality of the persuasive rhetoric
employed than Kennedy assumes. These things would
play their part whether or not Shakespeare was di-
rectly or indirectly familiar with Aristotle's
Poetics.

This question first appeared when the Lord
Chief Justice's oration in the second period was
being treated. The dramatic setting is important
in this speculation. It will be recalled that Prince
Hal has just appeared in the sovereign robes of King
Henry V. The king notices the disturbed mien of the
judge. He, with tongue-in-cheek, declares: "How
might a prince of my great hopes forget so great
indignities you laid upon me?" The fearful judge,
thinking the king to be in earnest, speaks in his
own defense. In the Opinion of the writer this
oration is, perhaps in a different sense, of as high
calibre as the orations of the third period. The
proem of the oration is composed of a dialogue be-

tween the Lord Chief Justice and the King; it is

215
complete and adequate to the situation. The combined
statement-narration is open, concise, and effective,
and through it, good will is extended. The argu-
ments are cleverly and effectively invented, and they
produce ethical proof in terms of good will, respect
and recOgnition of the king's power, and indirectly,
they express a concern for the king's personal safety.
The Justice's competency as a speaker is also demon-
strated by the arguments he constructs. Table 6
shows that the epilogue of the oration fulfills
Aristotle's four-point precept. The outstanding
quality of the Lord Chief Justice‘s oration makes
the writer hesitate to accept completely Kennedy's
conclusions without further analysis. The dramatic
purposes of Shakespeare have caused this, the ora-
tion of a very minor character, to be of a high
rhetorical quality, both structurally and arguments-
tively. The scene in which the oration appears is
included in the play to reveal a magnanimous aspect,
of the new king's character; to inform the audience
that Prince Hal has given up his past loyalties to
Falstaff and the other patrons of Boar's-head Inn
and that he has given up the frivolous pursuits of
his past life; and to give the new king an oppor-
tunity to admit publicly that the Lord Chief Jus-
tice was right and that he was wrong. Thus the ora-

torical excellence would be called for whether

214

Aristotelian precepts were being consciously mastered
and used by the playwright or not.

A consideration of the other orations in
the second, third, and fourth periods is made with
this same possibility in mind. In regard to Friar
Lawrence's oration of the second period, the speech
appears in the last scene of the last act, nearly
at the end of the play. Kennedy, in his classifi-
cation of the forensic orations, refers to this
speech as "exposition of situation: In defense of
himself." It is obvious, however, that the oration
is the vehicle through which the resolving action of
the play is terminated. Its dramaturgic function
explains the total absence of emotional and 10gical
proof and the use of the narration to relate the
unknown facts behind the deaths of Romeo, Juliet,
and Paris. In the case of the oration of Mowbray,
the speech is sufficiently effective to pique King
Richard to action. He decides to banish both Mow-
bray and Bolingbroke instead of letting one or the
other of them die in a duel because the repercussions
of that duel might expose his guilt concerning the
death of his uncle, Gloucester. Mowbray, it will
be recalled, is accused of plotting the death of
Gloucester. In figggy’ll, Part I, Worcester‘s oration

is entirely unsuccessful because he is a villain.

 

215
His argument is pure narrativ because such a means
of presentation is the most succinct way of reveal-
ing to the audience his and his family's reasons for
opposing the king. Shylock's oration is particularly
interesting in this speculation. He is a villain
and he is a shrewd villair. Fis means of proof can
only be through the use of IOgical persuasion. The
substance of his arguments demonstrates the low,
sometimes obscene, aspects of his character. The
rhetorical techniques used in this oration are of
as high a calibre as far as "invention" is concerned
.as those techniques employed by Isabella and Aloie
biades in the third period, yet this play is one of
the second period, and the period wherein Kennedy
has stated that "Shakespeare's maturing sense for
argumentative rhetoric" is revealed. It is in the
third period that the orations occur which have
been described by Kennedy as finished works of
"rhetorical art."

Yet it seems that the difference between the
oration of Shylock and those of Isabella and Alci-
biades lies not in the quality of the rhetoric
employed, but instead in the ethical qualities and
purposes of the characters and of the arguments
they are advancing.

When considering the superiority of the

rhetoric in the orations of the third and fourth

 

216
periods, it appears that the dramatic purposes of
Shakespeare and the dramatic situations in which the
orations are delivered account in part for the excel-
lency of these oratorical achievements.

Alcibiades' and Isabella's orations are logi-
cally inferior to Hermione's because these speakers
do not have the concrete evidence to incorporate
into their legical proofs that Hermione has. Alci-
biades' oration is, according to the results-theory-
criterion of evaluation, unsuccessful because Shake-
speare must give this character a strong motive for
organizing armed aggression against the city of
Athens. Isabella's oration ends in dia10gue to give
the audience ironical suggestions of Angelo's inten—

" her in return for the life

tions of "propositioning
of her brother--an all-important element in the plot
of the play. Structurally, in other words, Her-
mione’s oration is to a large measure superior be-
cause the dramatic situation allows her to crate in
a relatively uninterrupted manner. The oratorical
setting is more public and more formal than are the
dramatic settings of Alcibiades' and Isabella's
speeches.

On the other hand, the lengthy narration of

Othello's oration is used as a means through which

the audience can grasp the innocence and child-like

 

217
quality of the love of the Moor and Desdemona. A
knowledge of the essence of their love increases the
tragedy of their lives. Because they both possess
an innocent and a child-like faith in each other
and in people in general, Iago's ignominious schemes
are successful.

Obviously an analysis of Kennedy's two re-
maining classifications of orations would have to
be made before this kind of speculation could assume
any sort of validity. Its latent import seems, how-
ever, to warrant its inclusion in the concluding
portion of this study.

To conclude: Kennedy has observed that the
orations from Shakespeare's third and fourth writing
periods contain logical and persuasive speaking; he
has cited the oration of Hermione as being "the
best of Shakespeare's art"; he has stated that the
structure of the orations becomes more and more sub-
dued as more and more skill is devoted to feeling
and expression, and that "the structure of Shake-
speare's orations reveals their fidelity to the best
classical tradition." (In the term, classical, Ken-
nedy includes Cicero, Quintilian, and WiISOn, in
addition to Aristotle.)

This study has applied Aristotelian rhetori-

cal precepts to twelve orations in which there is no

 

 

218

question of authorship. The results of the analyses
of these orations are in agreement with Kennedy's
conclusions with the exception of his claims regard-
ing the rhetorical quality of the orations in the
second and third periods. In the writer's opinion,
some of the orations of the second period can be
equated in quality with the rhetoric in the third-
period orations. Also, Kennedy's claim that Shake-
speare's improved and refined use of rhetoric in the
second, third, and fourth periods became progress-
ively better because of some knowledge of, or acquaint-
ance with, Aristotelian poetic theory is questioned
in the speculation previously advanced.

Whether Shakespeare knew of Aristotle's
Poetics or Rhetoric is still the paramount question
to be solved before research of this nature can hold
much scholarly significance. The purpose of this
study, however, is to expand and substantiate the
endeavors of Kennedy, who has contended that in the
latter plays of Shakespeare there are evidences of
a "conscious or unconscious use" of Aristotelian
rhetorical theory. The analyses of the twelve for-
ensic orations regardless of the foregoing specula-
tion does provide evidence to substantiate at least
partially the concluding statement of Kennedy's

study: "He [Shakespearel'perfected the revival of

 

 

219
the ancient rhetoric in poetic."

SUggestions for Further Study: This study is in

 

many ways incomplete. One of the reasons for ana-
lyzing the dramatic passages which Kennedy has class-
ified as forensic orations was that this type of
speaking would be more likely to contain persuasive
rhetoric than the deliberative or the demonstrative
orations. This study is successful in that it has
found positive indications of that predetermined
goal. It is incomplete because an analysis of only
the forensic orations does not provide the necessary
evidence to draw any definite conclusions regarding
the entire scope or validity of Kennedy's work.
Kennedy's conclusion that "He perfected the revival
of the ancient rhetoric in the poetic" refers to all
of the orations in Shakespeare's plays. There are,
then, more avenues of analysis remaining. The de-
liberative and the demonstrative (epideictic) ora-
tions must also be considered as the forensic ora-
tions have been before Kennedy's conclusions can be
satisfactorily validated.

The question of style arises at this point
of consideration as it did in Chapter II of this
study. It has been mentioned that Kennedy's with-
drawal from an Aristotelian consideration of the
style of the orations he treated produces a weakness

in his work. Various sources have indicated that

 

220

Shakespeare's use of style becomes less ornate and
more refined during the latter periods of his writ-
ing career. At this same time, his use of rhetoric
is distinguished by Kennedy as being Aristotelian.
During the analyses of the twelve orations, notice-
able differences in the style employed by a speaker
of the first and/or second periods and the style
used by the speakers in the latter periods was evi~
dent. As a hypothesis, it seems reasonable that
there is some relationship between the refinement
of Shakespeare’s use of language, and the increas-
ingly persuasive power of the rhetoric in the ora-
tions of the latter periods. The third book of Aris-
totle's Rhetoric has much to say regarding style
Which could be applied for analytical purposes to
Shakespeare's orations: the desirable rhythm,
iambic (the same rhythm.in which.much of Shakespeare's
verse is written-~iambic pentameter or blank verse);
the use of similes, metaphors, and analogies; clear-
ness of style or "purity of style"; "faults of style,"
etc. Perhaps a study could be made to prove or dis-
prove the foregoing hypothesis. Such a study would
provide another testing-ground for Kennedy's conclu-
sions.

Still another possible field of study would

be to analyze some Shakespearean passages in an

221
attempt to determine what specifically are the simi-
larities, differences, and relationships existing
between a rhetorical element anda.poetic element.
Research would have to be done to define these terms
in light of present knowledge. The works of C. S.
Baldwin; Chapter II, "The Criticism of Oratory,"

from The Rhetoric of Alexander Hamilton by Bower Aly;

 

 

"Rhetoric and Poetic" by H. H. Hudsor (The Quarterly
Journal of Speech, lO:l45-lS4),"Rhetoric and Poetry

in Julius Caesar" by Ronald Frye (The Quarterly Jour-

 

nal of Speech, 37:41-48),and "The Most Fundamental

Differentia of Poetry and Prose" (Publications 3;

 

Modern Language Association, 19:250, p. 950) would

 

be helpful sources in determining a definition of
what constimums a rhetorical and a poetic element.
The definitive criteria would have to be established
and then applied to the Shakespearean passages.
Passages from Shakespeare's "better" works would be

the legical material to use in such a study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rooks

Aristotle. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Translated
by Lane Cooper. New York: AppIEton-Century-
Crofts, Inc., 1952.

 

Baird, A. Craig, and Thonssen, Lester. Speech Criti-
cism. New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1948.

Baldwin, Thomas Whitfield. William Shakspere's small
Latin & lesse Greeke. 2 vols. Urbana: UniverSity

of Illinois Press, 1944. Vols. I & II.

Cooper, Lane. The Poetics of Aristotle. Its Meaning
and Influence. New York: Longman, Green & Co.,

m7.

 

 

 

Craig, Hardin. An Interpretation of Shakespeare. New
York: The Dryden Press, 1918. 1‘ ‘_—

Crane, William G. Wit and Rhetoric in the Renaissance.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1957.

Croll, Morris Wm. "Introduction,” Euphues: The Ana-

tom of Wit; Euphues and His Enjland by John Lyly.
Edited_by Harry Clemon and Morris Wm. Croll.

London & New York, 1916.

Daiches, David. Critical Approaches to Literature.
Prentice-Hall'lnc., 1956.

Herrick, Marvin Theodore. The Poetics of Aristotle in
England. New Haven: YaIe University Press, 1955:

Howell, Wilbur Samuel. LOgic and Rhetoric in England
1500-1700. Princeton University: The Princeton

University Press, 1956.

Hyde, Mary Crapo. Playwriting for Elizabethans. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1919.

Joseph, B. Elizabethan Acting. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press, 1951.

222

 

225

Kennedy, Milton Boone. The Oration in Shakespeare.
Chapel Hill: The University BT’NErth CaroIina

Press, 1942.

Miriam, Sister Joseph, Shakespearels Use of the Arts
of Language. New York: Columbia'University

Press, 47.

Shakespeare's England: An Account of the Life and
'Eanners of his Ave. B vols. London: Dxford Uni-
versity Press, 1916. Vol. I.

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shake-
speare. Edited by William 11313 Wright: ‘Uaa:
Bridge Edition. Garden City, New York: Double-
day & Company, Inc., 1956.

 

Periodicals

Clark, Donald L. "Ancient Rhetoric and English Re-
naissance Literature," Shakespeare Quarterly,II,

1951.

McBurney, James. "The Place of the Enthymeme in
Rhetorical Theory," abstract of a Ph. D. Disser-
tation from Speech Monographs, III, 1956.

Richard, Ivor Armstrong. ”The Places and the Figures,"
The Kenyon Review, XI, Winter, 1949.

Wagner, Russell. "Thomas Wilson's Arte of Rhetorique"
in a letter to the editor of The Quarterly Journal

of Speech, XVI, June, 1929. ,

"Wilson and His Sources," The Quarterly Jour-
na1 of Speech, XV, November, 1929.

Unpublished Materials

Aristotle's Rhetoric. An outline prepared by H. A.
Wichelns, Cornell University.

Dollarhide, Louis Edgar. "Shakespeare's 'Richard III'
and Renaissance Rhetoric." Unpublished Ph. D. dis-
sertation, University of North Carolina, 1954.

Wade, James E. 'Nediaeval Rhetoric in Shakespeare."
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University Library,

St. Louis University, 1942.

 

 

224

Wagner, Russell. ”Thomas Wilson's Contributions
to Rhetoric," Pa ers in Rhetoric. Edited by
Donald C. Bryant, Washington University, St.
Louis, 1940.

Wallace, Karl. "Early English Rhetoricians on the
Structure of Rhetorical Prose," Papers in Rhe-
toric. Edited by Donald C. Bryant, Washington
University, St. Louis, 1940.

 

 

 

)

.

 

 

 

‘ 9

c...
r:
m
A
R
B
L
V.
r. n
S
R
E ;
V
N
U
E
A
L_
D
G
fl

 

Ll