P. has given us a succinct and elegant survey of the history, form and social role of epideictic throughout Antiquity. P. is no stranger to the study of rhetoric, and his substantial book of two decades ago, La rhétorique de l’élogue dans le monde gréco-romain (1993), presented a comprehensive study of epideictic that has been considered magisterial by its reviewers (cf. CR 45 [1995], 50–2). The present volume is arranged along similar lines, offering first a chronological survey of the rise of epideictic, followed by thematic examinations of its form and social context, but it is a very different book in comparison with its predecessor. First, P. presents his synthesis concisely in 120 pages, versus the almost 800 (in two volumes) of the earlier work, and the current book is in English (its genesis lies in a seminar delivered in the USA in 2012). The fundamentals of P.'s ideas remain little changed, although he takes account of the burgeoning studies in epideictic during the past 20 years, and concludes with a chapter that responds to some of the recent advances in the study of epideictic, and sketches some avenues for future research. The combination of succinctness, engaging prose style and survey-like synthesis of epideictic's genesis, form and function, make the book an indispensable introduction to the subject for Anglophone students and scholars alike, while its concluding chapter lays down some promising themes for more established scholars to explore. Those who are seeking detailed, close readings of individual speeches should look elsewhere; the scope and brevity of the book do not allow for such treatment.
In his preface, P. notes that ‘every encomium is at once a literary work, a moral problem, and a social rite’ (p. ix). This comprehensive approach, which recognises the practical as well as the theoretical aspects of epideictic rhetoric, determines the nature of the book as a whole. P. draws not just upon extant examples of such speeches, but the works of theoreticians, and comments and criticisms of epideictic found in other ancient authors to answer two main questions: why did epideictic develop as it did; and what was its function in ancient society?
Chapter 1, ‘The Unstoppable Rise of Epideictic’, charts the development of epideictic as ‘display oratory’ that swiftly became focused on the praise of living individuals, and was theorised into the third genus of oratory (after forensic and deliberative) at the hands of Aristotle. The frequent re-evaluation and modification of Aristotle's scheme by later theorists and practitioners reveal the vibrancy of a genre whose conventions were at once the subject of codification and debate. The chapter largely focuses on the explosion of Greek epideictic in the Roman period (La rhétorique de l’élogue had also dealt primarily with the Second Sophistic), and its role within the education system, but also dwells on the separate development of Latin praise rhetoric in judicial and funerary settings in early Rome. Late Antiquity (during which imperial panegyric flourished like never before, and which has been the subject of extensive study over the past couple of decades) receives perhaps too swift an overview in a single paragraph. The rapidity with which P. must treat 700 years in fewer than 30 pages does not prevent him from offering some observations on the causation of such developments (the pax Romana of the empire no longer required rivals to ‘rip apart an adversary or cow an assembly’ but to lavish praise on the emperor and local leaders, p. 28, for example), but these are broad assessments, and there is little space for more detailed contextualisation. What should we make, for example, of the fact that the first true encomium was addressed to a Cypriot king (Isocrates’ Evagoras)? It is also a sign of the rapidity of this chapter (as well as later ones) that engagement with secondary literature (which P. rightly notes has greatly expanded in the past two decades) is confined to the endnotes, and even then is dealt with lightly. None the less, these are full enough for the curious reader to follow up with profit.
Chapter 2, ‘The Grammar of Praise’, moves away from chronology to a thematic analysis, cataloguing the topoi that developed as the themes and subjects that an orator could address in any given type of epideictic speech. P. argues that far from being a scholastic exercise of categorisation, the development of schemes of topoi reflects a shared ‘horizon of expectation’ (p. 62) of society's moral and philosophical ideals. The chapter offers a clear synthesis of the schemata of several theorists (Quintilian and Menander Rhetor for example) but also illustrates the dynamic nature of these topoi: theorists had different views, and orators themselves picked and chose what suited their immediate needs best, so that this chapter presents a more comprehensive guide to composing such a speech than any single ancient theorist.
Chapter 3, ‘Why Epideictic Rhetoric?’, addresses the social and political functions of a genre that, P. notes at the outset of the chapter, is often held in lesser regard by modern audiences than deliberative or judicial rhetoric. Personal glory for the orator, the opportunity for communal celebration, or to offer advice, are set against the few ancient charges that praise requires flattery and therefore lying. It is a recurring theme of each of these sections that epideictic serves to unite orator, addressee and audience, whereas other genera, particularly judicial, seek to separate or condemn (especially when attacking opponents). A brief comment dropped into the middle of this chapter is of great importance for P.'s methodology and his attitude to his sources: our preserved texts ‘more or less reflect the speeches actually made’ (p. 82). The vast scale of some later panegyrics may suggest otherwise,Footnote 1 but this comment is testament to the positivist approach that P. takes to his material in the first three chapters which, none the less, is challenged by some of his ‘New Approaches’ of Chapter 4.
‘New Approaches in Epideictic’ (Chapter 4) offers an eclectic mix of several avenues for further exploration set out in varying degrees of detail. One of the most significant is the possibility for ironic readings of speeches under the guise of ‘figured speech’, which raises the prospect that epideictic may include hidden meanings that run contrary to their ‘surface’ message. This approach perhaps is not as novel as P. suggests: it was the subject of a substantial article by another Frenchman more than 30 years ago, albeit applied to rhetoric as a whole and not specifically epideictic (B. Schouler, ‘Le déguisement de l'intention dans la rhétorique grecque’, Ktema 11 [1986], 257–72). But it also raises the question to what degree we can rely upon the theorists, whose testimony forms the basis of so much of the previous three chapters, not least because they little discuss the phenomenon of ‘figured speech’. Are the societal values that P. suggests they advocate through their idealised speech in fact merely a sophisticated superstructure to disguise censorious criticisms of rulers, cities, or individuals?
As the study of epideictic expands, and scholars inevitably intensify and limit their studies to distinct periods or subgenres (a focus such as imperial panegyric in Late Antiquity is currently enjoying), a book such as this, which offers analysis of the genre as a whole over such a broad temporal span, and in such a readable and erudite form, is a very welcome reminder to keep the bigger picture firmly in view.
