



Produced by Distributed Proofreaders




﻿
Rhetoric and Poetry in the Renaissance

A Study of Rhetorical Terms in English Renaissance Literary Criticism

By

Donald Lemen Clark, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of English in Columbia University

1922




To my Father and Mother




Preface



In this essay I undertake to trace the influence of classical rhetoric on
the criticisms of poetry published in England between 1553 and 1641. This
influence is most readily recognized in the use by English renaissance
writers on literary criticism of the terminology of classical rhetoric.
But the rhetorical terminology in most cases carried with it rhetorical
thinking, traces of whose influence persist in criticism of poetry to the
present day.

The essay is divided into two parts. Part First treats of the influence of
rhetoric on the general theory of poetry within the period, and Part
Second of its influence on the renaissance formulation of the purpose of
poetry. This division is called for not by the logic of the material, but
by history and convenience. A third phase of the influence of rhetorical
terminology I have already touched on in an article on _The Requirements
of a Poet[1]_, where I have shown that historically the renaissance ideal
of the nature and education of a poet is in part derived from classical
rhetoric.

No writer today, who would treat of the criticism of the renaissance, can
escape his deep indebtedness to Dr. Joel Elias Spingarn, whose _Literary
Criticism in the Renaissance_ has so carefully traced the debt of English
criticism to the Italians. In going over the ground surveyed by him and by
many other scholars I have been able to add but slight gleanings of my
own. In this field it is my privilege only to review and to supplement
what has already been discovered. But whereas others have called attention
to the classical and Italian sources for English critical ideas, I am
able to show that in addition to these sources, the English critics were
profoundly influenced by English mediaeval traditions. That these
mediaeval traditions derived ultimately from post-classical rhetoric and
that they were for the most part later discarded as less enlightened and
less sound than the critical ideas of the Italian Aristotelians does not
lessen their importance in the history of English literary criticism.

In so far as the text of quoted classical writers is readily accessible in
modern editions, I offer my readers only an English translation. For
quotations difficult of access I add the Latin in a footnote. In the case
of those English critics whose writings are incorporated in the
_Elizabethan Critical Essays_ edited by Mr. Gregory Smith, or in the
_Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century_, edited by Dr. J.E. Spingarn,
I have made my citations to those collections in the belief that such a
practice would add to the convenience of the reader.

The greatest pleasure that I derive from this writing is that of
acknowledging my obligations to my friends and colleagues at Columbia
University who have so generously assisted me. Professor G.P. Krapp aided
me by his valuable suggestions before and after writing and generously
allowed me to use several summaries which he had made of early English
rhetorical treatises. Professor J.B. Fletcher helped me by his friendly
and penetrating criticism of the manuscript. I am further indebted to
Professor La Rue Van Hook, Dr. Mark Van Doren, Dr. S.L. Wolff, Mr. Raymond
M. Weaver, and Dr. H.E. Mantz for various assistance, and to the Harvard
and Columbia University Libraries for their courtesy. My greatest debt is
to Professor Charles Sears Baldwin, whose constant inspiration,
enlightened scholarship, and friendly encouragement made this book
possible.




Contents



Part First:  The General Theory of Rhetoric and of Poetry


I. Introductory
  1. The Distinction between Rhetoric and Poetic

II. Classical Poetic
  1. Aristotle
  2. "Longinus"
  3. Plutarch
  4. Horace

III. Classical Rhetoric
  1. Definitions
  2. Subject Matter
  3. Content of Classical Rhetoric
  4. Rhetoric as Part of Poetic
  5. Poetic as Part of Rhetoric

IV. Classical Blending of Rhetoric and Poetic
  1. The Contact of Rhetoric and Poetic in Style
  2. The Florid Style in Rhetoric and Poetic
  3. The False Rhetoric of the Declamation Schools
  4. The Contamination of Poetic by False Rhetoric

V. The Middle Ages
  1. The Decay of Classical Rhetorical Tradition
  2. Rhetoric as Aureate Language

VI. Logic and Rhetoric in the English Renaissance
  1. The Content of Classical Rhetoric Carried over into Logic
  2. The Persistence of the Mediaeval Tradition of Rhetoric
  3. The Recovery of Classical Rhetoric
  4. Channels of Rhetorical Theory

VII. Renaissance Poetic
  1. The Reestablishment of the Classical Tradition
  2. Rhetorical Elements

VIII. Theories of Poetry in the English Renaissance
  1. The Rhetorical Period of English Criticism
  2. The Influence of Horace
  3. The Influence of Aristotle
  4. Manuals for Poets 5. Rhetorical Elements in Later English Classicism



Part Second: The Purpose of Poetry


I. The Classical Conception of the Purpose of Poetry
  1. General
  2. Moral Improvement through Precept and Example
  3. Moral Improvement through Allegory
  4. The Influence of Rhetoric

II. Medieval Ideas of the Purpose of Poetry
  1. Allegorical Interpretations in the Middle Ages
  2. Allegory in Mediaeval England

III. Rhetorical Elements in Italian Renaissance Conceptions of the Purpose
     of Poetry
  1. The Scholastic Grouping of Poetic, Rhetoric and Logic
  2. The Influence of the Classical Rhetorics

IV. English Renaissance Ideas of the Purpose of Poetry
  1. Allegory and Example in Rhetoric
  2. Allegory and the Rhetorical Example in Poetic
  3. The Displacement of Allegory by Example


Index of Names





Part One

The General Theory of Rhetoric and of Poetry




Chapter I

Introductory



By definition the renaissance was primarily a literary and scholarly
movement derived from the literature of classical antiquity. Thus the
historical, philosophical, pedagogical, and dramatic literatures of the
renaissance cannot be accurately understood except in the light of the
Greek and Roman authors whose writings inspired them. To this general rule
the literary criticism of the renaissance is no exception. The
interpretation of the critical terms used by the literary critics of the
English renaissance must depend largely on the classical tradition. This
tradition, as the labors of many scholars, especially Spingarn, have
shown, reached England both directly through the publication of classical
writings and to an even greater degree indirectly through the commentaries
and original treatises of Italian scholars.

The indebtedness to the Italian critics is well known and has been widely
discussed. Although the present study does not hope to add to what is
known of the influence exerted on the literary criticism of the English
renaissance by the Italians, it does propose to show the English critics
to have been more indebted than has been supposed to the mediaeval
development of classical theory. For this relationship to be clear it will
be necessary to review classical literary criticism and to trace its
development in post-classical times and in the middle ages as well as in
the Italian renaissance. Only by such an approach will it be possible to
show in what form classical theory was transmitted to the English
renaissance.

As the restoration of the Stuarts to the throne of England inaugurated a
new period in English criticism, during which English critical theories
were largely influenced by French criticism, this study will stop short of
this, restricting itself to the years between the publication of Thomas
Wilson's _Arte of Rhetorique_ in 1553 and that of Ben Jonson's _Timber_ in
1641. Throughout this period the English mediæval tradition of classical
theory was highly important, losing ground but gradually as the influence
first of the rhetoric newly recovered from the classics and then of
Italian criticism produced an increasingly stronger effect on English
criticism. I hope to show that the English critics who formulated theories
of poetry in the renaissance derived much of their critical terminology,
not directly from the rediscovered classical theories of poetry, but
through various channels from classical theories and practice of rhetoric.
The tendency to use the terminology of rhetoric in discussing poetical
theory did not originate in the English renaissance, but is largely an
inheritance from classical criticism as interpreted by the middle ages.
Both in England and on the continent this mediæval tradition persisted far
into the renaissance. Renaissance English writers on the theory of poetry
use to an extent hitherto unexplored the terminology of rhetoric. This
rhetorical terminology was derived from three sources: directly to some
extent from the classical rhetorics themselves; indirectly through the
influence of classical rhetoric upon the terminology of the Italian
critics of poetry; and indirectly, to a considerable extent, through the
mediæval modifications of classical and post-classical rhetoric.



1. The Distinction between Rhetoric and Poetic


Aristotle wrote two treatises on literary criticism: the _Rhetoric_ and
the _Poetics_. The fact that he gave separate treatment to his critical
consideration of oratory and of poetry is presumptive evidence that in his
mind oratory and poetry were two things, having much in common perhaps,
but distinguished by fundamental differences. With less philosophical
basis these fundamental differences were maintained by nearly all the
classical literary critics. It is important, therefore, to review briefly
what the classical writers meant by rhetoric and by poetic, and to trace
the modifications which these terms underwent in post-classical times, in
the middle ages, and in the re