Theology, canonicity, and abbreviated enthymemes: Traditional and critical influences on the British reception of Aristotle's Rhetoric

Abstract

This essay argues that the construction of the 18th and 19th century British rhetorical theories and canon was strongly influenced by the debates between Catholic (or Anglo‐Catholic) traditionalists and Protestant critics over religious hermeneutics, by examining three specific cases, the Phalaris controversy, definitions of the enthymeme, and the reception history of the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. The major figures discussed are Richard Bentley, William Temple, John Gillies, Edward Copleston, Sydney Smith, Richard Whately, James Hessey, and William Hamilton.

Notes

Research for this study has been supported by many sources, including a fellowship at the Tanner Humanities Center of the University of Utah, a Rocky Mountain MLA Huntington fellowship, and a First Year Assistant Professor grant from Florida State University. An NEH Summer 2002 Seminar, “The Reform of Reason,”; which I co‐directed with Jan Swearingen, provided an opportunity to revise this essay, and I owe thanks to both the NEH and the fifteen seminar participants. I also owe thanks to several libraries, including the Bodleian Library, the British Library, Cambridge University Library, Folger Shakespeare Library, Huntington Library, Rylands Library, St. Deiniol's Library, and the ILL staffs of Montana State University and Florida State University libraries. I also would like to thank Marilyn Faulkenburg, Thomas Miller, Christopher Stray, Jan Swearingen, and Karen Whedbee for many useful comments.