English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article focuses on two selected instances that reveal in an especially poignant manner the methods employed by Aristides to tackle Plato’s attack on oratory in his speech  In Defence of Rhetoric.  First, it looks at how Aristides is at pains to turn Plato’s reproach in the  Gorgias  that rhetoric is not an art into an advantage by trying to transfer to oratory the idea of divine inspiration that in Platonic dialogues such as  Phaedrus  and  Ion  is connected with poetry. A self-admonitory passage that Aristides uses to finish up an excursus on his experience of divine intervention during his numerous stays at the sanctuaries of Asclepius and Serapis is subject to special scrutiny: it turns out that a sufficiently early manuscript, which has been dated to the 11th c. AD,  viz.  Parisinus graecus 2950, yields a useful variante (unfortunately misread by Behr in his critical apparatus) that vividly depicts Plato’s role as the driving force behind the previous iatromantic excursus. Second, Aristides’ idea of two kinds of rhetoric is explored, with a special focus on a passage where two hitherto neglected manuscripts,  viz.  Marc. graec. 424 and Ath. Iv. 163 (both 14th c. AD) alongside two other textual witnesses yield a variante that brings out to the full the meaning of an otherwise rather pointless remark: Aristides states that Plato justly  slandered  rhetoric (κακῶς instead of καλῶς εἰρήκει), if one takes into account that he slandered not the true, but the apparent one. Overall, the article shows that the scope of  In Defence of Rhetoric  is not destructive criticism. In harmony with a general tendency of the Second Sophistic, Aristides rather aims at claiming Plato, “the father and teacher of the rhetoricians”, as a representative of his own discipline.

millennium

Ein Plädoyer für die Redekunst: Die Platonkritik des Aelius Aristides in  Zugunsten der Rhetorik  und ihre Bedeutung im Lichte zweier  variae lectiones