— Do you teach public speaking classes?- I hear this question more often than others.
- Yes, but what exactly are you interested in?
- Well… oratory.
- Yes, I already heard that. But which aspect exactly?
- But these are public speaking, right?
- And this too... Are you going to speak publicly?
—Actually, no. If only for work... But it seems to me that it would be useful for me to learn public speaking.
—And for what purpose exactly? You have some kind of goal, right?
—My communication with colleagues is not very good. And if I am not afraid to speak even in front of an audience, then, I think, I will be able to speak out more boldly at work.
- And if you are not afraid, how will you feel?
- Well... confidently or something.
— So, you would like to be more confident in communication?
- Yes! Exactly.
Such conversations are not uncommon for me, I can even say that this is exactly what a typical request sounds like from a person who wants to gain confidence in communication. It is not uncommon to encounter more specific wording: “I need to prepare for a presentation, isn’t that what you do?", "I have a speech coming up next week in connection with the transition to new position, and I’ve never performed in front of so many people before... Can you prepare me?”
It so happened that oratory, in the understanding of most people V modern world associated with public speaking. It is not surprising, because initially (since the time Athenian democracy) oratory skills were mastered by those who wanted to speak at public meetings, trials, and political debates. In democratic Greece and republican Rome, orators, as a rule, were the main characters in the political arena. The greatest orators of antiquity are Pericles, Lycurgus, Quentilian, Cicero, Demosthenes, Julius Caesar. Next to each of these names you can put “statesman and political figure.” Meanwhile, several centuries have passed... in general, the word “millennia” would not be much of an exaggeration. What is oratory today, how does it differ from rhetorical skills and how is it related to eloquence?
The difference between oratory (which the orator possesses) and rhetorical skills (which the rhetorician possesses) is primarily etymological: the first concept is of Latin origin, and the second is of Greek origin. In some dictionaries you can even find the following definition of rhetorician: “a rhetorician is an orator in ancient Greece..." In essence, we are talking about synonyms:
- Speaker(from Latin orare - to speak) - the one who makes a speech, as well as the one who has the gift of making speeches, eloquence.
- Rhetorician(Greek rhetor - speaker) - an orator, as well as a teacher or student of a school in which eloquence was taught.
True, the concept of “rhetor” somehow did not take root, and today this word can only be found in an ironic context: a rhetorician is someone who pronounces beautiful, but pompous and empty speeches. But the word “rhetoric” has become widespread:
- Rhetoric is the science of oratory, of eloquence.
- Oratory is eloquence.
In Russian translation, oratory, or oratory, is nothing more than eloquence is a word that may seem outdated to many. Dictionaries offer the following synonyms for it: oratorical talent, eloquence, gift of speech, gift of speech.
It’s interesting that in the Russian language, the word “orator” has, first of all, the meaning of “one who makes a speech,” but for a person with the gift of speech, there was no separate word... But this doesn’t change the essence, does it?
What kind of person can be called eloquent? Let's turn again to dictionaries and encyclopedias...
Eloquent:
- glib;
- one who can speak freely, smoothly and well;
- one who is good at making speeches and persuading people;
- the one who has a good tongue.
By the way, the phraseological unit - “the tongue is well suspended” is borrowed from French. This image is based on an analogy with the tongue of a bell, the sound of which depends on the quality of its suspension. But let's return to eloquence itself. Where is there even a word about the audience, the audience, the podium and the stage? Sometimes it takes a lot of skill to convince one single person, on whom... a lot depends! And it doesn’t matter whether it concerns your personal life, a new business project or a successful deal.
The modern world has made its own adjustments to the understanding of rhetoric and oratory:
- Rhetoric is the science of effective speech communication.
What goals does modern rhetoric pursue in teaching those who wish to speak oratory?
- She teaches ethical speech behavior, suggests not only assimilation of norms speech etiquette , but also manifestation in speech of a respectful and tactful attitude towards the interlocutor or audience.
- She means development of speech culture, development of the qualities of good speech- its correctness, logic, richness, expressiveness, accessibility, accuracy.
- She provides productivity and effectiveness of speech. What means to choose in a specific situation and what techniques to use to achieve your goals? How to convince another person, gain his favor and trust? How to correctly formulate your thought so that you are heard and understood exactly the way you would like? She explains how best express and justify your own point of view, How exert a persuasive influence on communication partners.
- Of course it shapes public speaking skills at all its stages - from preparing a speech to interacting with the audience. And this, as you can see, is only one, not the most significant aspect of oratory...
Eloquence has never been reduced only to the ability to “speak beautifully.” This wouldn’t be enough for you, would it? Speech, as Hegel wrote, amazingly powerful remedy, and one cannot but agree with this. Very strong, very effective... if you know how to use it. Effective speech- one that helps you achieve your goals.
What will these goals be? Get joy and satisfaction from communication? Feel confident in front of an audience? Find the most accurate and succinct words to express your thoughts? To win people over or keep them at a distance? Only you know about this.
The ability to convincingly express one’s thoughts, to persuade and win over a large audience has always been considered very valuable quality for a person. Success in many areas of activity depends on. For some, this skill is inherent in their nature - they are considered natural speakers. Others have to learn it, especially if their position or personal goals require it.
There is even a whole science called rhetoric. It's like this scientific discipline, which studies the patterns of formation, perception and transmission of high-quality speech and good text. In ancient times, this term was used only in its literal meaning. Rhetoric was thought to mean speaking well in public. Later, this concept expanded and began to imply the skill and theory of influencing, purposeful, harmonizing speech.
The term itself came into Russian from Greek. The most suitable synonyms for it would be “eloquence” and “oratory”. Even at the beginning of the emergence of this discipline, two approaches regarding the perception of oratory began to clearly appear. Proponents of the first direction believed that rhetoric is the skill of persuasion. They believed that the main thing in eloquence is the content, the idea. A striking example is the rhetoric of Aristotle. In this movement, a good speech was considered to be one that brings effect, convinces, wins recognition (sympathy, sympathy, consent) of the audience and encourages certain actions.
Others focused on the style and form of speech. For them, rhetoric was simply the art of decorating speech. Well-known representative and the founder of this school is the ancient rhetorician Isocrates. Adherents of this trend understood good speech as a lush, decorated speech built according to all the rules of aesthetics. Persuasiveness here also influenced the evaluation of the syllable, but was a secondary and by no means the only criterion.
Modern neo-rhetoric has become a harmonious unification of the “literary” and “logical” schools. The results obtained in the “literary” direction are still used today. Moreover, the aesthetic qualities of speech have priority for some rhetoric researchers. However, for most, logic still dominates.
Currently, it is traditionally divided into two divisions: private and general rhetoric. Private focuses on the features of individual communications related to the conditions of communication and different areas human activity. General rhetoric is the science of the rules and universal principles of constructing high-quality, good speech, which do not depend on the specific area of speech communication.
Traditionally, the art of speaking beautifully and convincingly is taught to future lawyers and businessmen in universities. However, if a person works in another field, nothing prevents him from finding free time and engage in self-education. Business rhetoric, one of the most practical subsections of this interesting science, will certainly be useful to each of us in life, especially in these difficult times.
Ticket No. 1
When did the art of eloquence begin? The subject of rhetoric.
Even in the early era of the development of public life in Greece, oratory occupied an important place.
With the development of statehood, especially after the Greco-Persian wars, when in the 5th century. BC. as a result of the political struggle, the influence of the democratic party increased, the activity of the popular masses intensified inner life Greek advanced city policies. In this regard, the art of oratory - eloquence - also developed.
The art of oratory first received practical application in Sicily. Aristotle calls Empedocles of Agrigentum the father of rhetoric and teacher of the sophist-orator Gorgias.
In Sicily, the main types of oratory had already emerged, which became widespread in Athens in the 5th century. BC. This is first of all political eloquence, glorified by the names of Themistocles and mainly Pericles. Evidence has been preserved from ancient poets who speak of Pericles as an Olympian whose eloquence was like thunder and lightning. It was no less common judicial eloquence.
The third type of oratory is epideictic, solemn eloquence, in which Gorgias was especially skilled. Epideictic eloquence was used in the delivery of funeral orations, as was practiced, for example, at the annual memorial celebrations in honor of fallen soldiers during the Greco-Persian War.
These three types of oratory did not develop independently of each other.
The science of oratory was created - rhetoric. The creators of rhetoric are considered to be the sophists, who had one goal - to persuade. This was called "making a worse argument seem better."
According to civil duties, each person was required to appear in court and plead his case in person. Inexperienced litigants often turned to the help of orators, who would compose for them a defensive speech that would be suitable for the person speaking in court. It goes without saying that the task of a logographer - a writer of speeches for others - was not an easy one; he was to a certain extent a dramatic writer.
In all the diversity of types and kinds of works of literature, rhetoric studies a certain aspect of verbal creativity - argumentation.
But the subject of rhetoric is not limited to any specific categories of verbal works - only oratory, sermons, journalism, mass information, although rhetoric primarily studies works of precisely this kind. Argumentation is contained in scientific, philosophical, and even artistic works. Rhetoric studies any works of words that contain argumentation. The peculiarity of rhetoric is that the study of literary works is not a goal for it, but a means.
The subject of rhetoric is the work of a word that has not yet been created, but which is yet to be created.
Thus, we can talk about the following meanings of “rhetoric, eloquence, literature”:
1) rhetoric is a science, rules; eloquence - art, ability;
2) while logic deals with thoughts, grammar deals with words, rhetoric serves beauty and harmony, an elegant presentation of thoughts and words, strives to convince, prove, teach the mind, engage the imagination, touch the heart
3) eloquence as an art is necessary for “all sciences”
The ability to speak in public has been a useful skill at all times. People who have excellent public speaking skills will always be in demand by society and will be able to find work. It's no secret that there are few such people; they always stand out among others. They turn out to be successful leaders, politicians, businessmen, journalists, writers, teachers, since in many professions knowledge of rhetoric plays a vital role. The purpose of this public speaking course is to provide everyone with the opportunity to learn free online materials, lessons, exercises, techniques and rules for mastering the basics of rhetoric.
What is rhetoric?
This is a word that has ancient Greek origin ( Greek rhetorike), and literally means “ oratory" What is “oratory”? And how to develop your abilities for it?
Each of us has had the opportunity to speak in public at least several times in our lives. And, for sure, no one doubts that To be fluent in public speaking, you need to know and be able to do a lot. One could say that the ability to speak in public reflects our intellectual development and our social skills.
Martin Luther King's famous speech
By definition Big Soviet Encyclopedia, « oratory speech"is a type of monologue speech used in a situation where the speaker addresses a large audience with the aim of persuasion or suggestion. Oratory is often identified with eloquence, so a good speaker must be well-read and have competent speech, be able to express your thoughts clearly. But the speaker also needs to be able to cope with his anxiety, control his diction and have a well-trained voice. In addition, it is important to master speech improvisation, be able to answer questions, maintain contact with the audience, pronounce the text with the necessary intonation, and much, much more.
Most of the skills described, which together form public speaking, can be learned. To do this, it is important to work on yourself, to realize, analyze and correct the unsuccessful moments of your own and others public speaking, and most importantly, train your skills in practice. Our training will help you work through all of these difficult steps towards developing excellent public speaking skills.
Want to test your knowledge?
If you want to test your theoretical knowledge on the topic of the course and understand how suitable it is for you, you can take our test. For each question, only 1 option can be correct. After you select one of the options, the system automatically moves on to the next question.
Online Rhetoric Lessons
The public speaking training posted on this website is an integration of many techniques described by public speaking experts. Each of the lessons involves the development of a specific skill that contributes to the development of your public speaking abilities. Naturally, each person can master these skills differently, so try to pay attention to those lessons that seem most useful to you.
Video
In this section of the training on public speaking skills, you can watch videos of famous speeches by outstanding speakers: Martin Luther King, Steve Jobs, Vladimir Lenin and others. Also here you can find videos from various competitions, presentations and speeches of people to investors. In addition, the section contains video lessons from leading experts in the field of public speaking.
4 rules of rhetoric
- First rule. Start any speech with a strong desire to achieve your goal.
- Second rule. Try to always prepare for your performance.
- Third rule. Show confidence even if you don't feel confident.
- Fourth rule. Practice more (this is true for any other skill).
These four rules of public speaking are essentially the foundation of any good speech. If you do not set yourself the goal of achieving great success in rhetoric, but are only trying to prepare for a specific speech, then they may be useful to you.
If you are planning to take a more detailed approach to studying the art of oratory, then we will be happy to provide you with useful and interesting information in the lessons on our website.
We wish you success in mastering the art of public speaking!
Introduction.
Rhetoric is the art of eloquence.
1) On the need for eloquence in ancient society.
2) Orators of Ancient Greece
a) Sophists - the first teachers of eloquence
b) Socrates, Plato, Aristotle - philosophers, rhetoricians
c) Development of theoretical rhetoric (Demosthenes)
3) Roman eloquence.
a) Cicero - “tribune of all times”
b) rhetoric of M. F. Quintilian.
111. Conclusion.
1. Dale Carnegie's popular works are very great place assigned to the importance of the ability to speak. He wrote “... the greatest successes in business world fell to the lot of people who, in addition to their knowledge, also had the ability to speak well, persuade one to their point of view and advertise themselves and their ideas.”* He considered these qualities more important than knowledge of Latin verbs and a diploma from Harvard University. D. Carnegie is convinced that almost every person can give speeches quite successfully if he has self-confidence and an idea that passionately excites him. He also believes that speaking in public is an art. In his works, Carnegie convincingly proves that oratory has helped a huge number of the most ordinary people achieve colossal success in life, make a dizzying career. Mastering the art of public speaking can give a person the confidence he needs to maximize his latent abilities. The ability to speak is the basis of human communication and depending on how much a person succeeds in this, his opportunity to become a leader lies.
There is a whole science that aims to teach a person the art of eloquence. This science is called rhetoric (Greek Teche cretopike - the art of eloquence). It arose, like many other sciences, back in the era of antiquity. In this work we will talk specifically about ancient rhetoric and outstanding speakers of antiquity.
Inherent southern peoples natural sociability and innate oratorical abilities, as well as the absence in ancient times of other means of mass communication (written documents could be distributed in very limited quantities) were the reasons that in antiquity the living word had much higher value, than now, especially since possession of it was the most important and most in an effective way achieving authority in society and political success.
Ancient Greece is considered the birthplace of eloquence, although it was already known in Egypt, Assyro-Babylonia and India. In the lands of Hellas, there was a belief that eloquence is an art. In the 5th century BC, cities were common in Hellas - states in which slave-owning democracy developed. They created a special atmosphere for the flourishing of eloquence. The supreme body in such a state was the people's assembly, to which the politician addressed directly. In order to win over the people, it was necessary to present your ideas in the most attractive way. Public decisions were not only political, not only political issues, but also judgment was carried out.
At the same time, there were no prosecutors, and anyone could act as a prosecutor. The accused defended himself, convincing the judges of his innocence. The number of judges in Athens was, for example, 500, and in total up to 6,000 people took part in deciding the fate of the accused. Under such conditions, those who possessed the gift of speech and knew how to win over listeners found themselves in a more advantageous position.
Thus, the social life of Ancient Greece was such that a politician had to speak in council meetings and at public meetings, a commander - in front of the army, a private person - in front of the court, as well as at festivals, friendly meetings, funerals, which were quite crowded. In such conditions, eloquence becomes necessary for every person.
The first textbook of rhetoric was probably written in the 5th century BC. e. by two Sicilian Greeks from Syracuse, Coracus and Thisseus, an unsurvived work. The first achievements of artistic eloquence were transferred from Sicily to Athens by Gorgias. Soon the first paid teachers appeared - sophists (from the Greek Sophistes - artist, sage) who not only taught practical eloquence, but also composed speeches for the needs of citizens.
The sophists achieved a special art of eloquence, or more precisely the “senior sophists,” in the 5th century BC. It was at this time that a school of philosophers and educators emerged in Athens, who created an unprecedented cult of the word.
They masterfully mastered all forms of oratory, the laws of logic, the art of argument, and the ability to influence an audience. Hellas produced many famous rhetoricians, of whom in the 5th century BC. The following were especially well known: Dinarchus, Hegesitus, Hyperides, Gogius, Isocrates, Iseus, Escinus, Philocrates.
The popularity of sophist teachers was unusually great. They traveled all over Greece, speaking to listeners and helping those who wanted to master eloquence. The sophists gathered inquisitive youth, giving them “lectures” and holding conversations with them. They saw the purpose of their theoretical studies, and especially oratory art, in preparing people for practical activities. As a rule, the sophists were revered and rich people. Many of them carried out diplomatic missions, for example Hippias and Gorgias, it is known that Prodicus was engaged in government activities, Protagoras drafted laws. According to legend, the most famous of the sophists, Gorgias, was given a golden statue for his speech at Olympia, calling the Greeks to unanimity in the fight against their enemies. But there is also information that Goriy erected this statue for himself.
The sophists paid great attention not only to the practice, but also to the theory of eloquence. It was they who laid the foundations of rhetoric as the science of oratory. Calling eloquence (rhetoric) art, the ancient Greeks put specific and definite content into this concept.
By the 5th century BC. e. When the culture of monologue was fully developed, when its types were clearly understood and considered obvious, then the task of the speaker is threefold:
explain (something)
induce (to a certain thinking, decision, and even more so action)
bring pleasure to the listeners.
According to the sophists, the goal of the speaker is not to reveal the truth, but to be persuasive. And, as Gorgias, for example, believed, only a skillfully composed speech can convince, and it does not matter whether it corresponds to the truth or not. According to this opinion, the meaning of the word sophistry is a deliberately false conclusion. The sophists knew how to destroy the opponent's argument with ridicule, and to respond to his ridicule with dignity. A true orator, according to Gorgias, must be able to praise and condemn the same thing. During the time of the Sophists, rhetoric was the “queen of all sciences.”
The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (about 470-399 BC) spoke out against the Sophists' position on the relativity of truth. For Socrates, absolute truth is divine, it is above human judgment and is the measure of all things. Socrates condemned sophist orators for their desire for success, for their readiness to convince the public of anything by the power of eloquence. He considered it unacceptable to charge for lessons, as the Sophists did, arguing that “the sale of wisdom is tantamount to the sale of beauty.”
These thoughts of Socrates were expressed to his students by Plato (about 427-347 BC) in the famous dialogues “Gorgias”, “Sophist”, “Phaedrus”, the central character of which was Socrates. In his writings, Plato comes to the definition of a sophist as an imaginary sage, and sophistry as imaginary wisdom. He said “The duty of an orator is to tell the truth.”*
To the rhetoric of the sophists, which Plato does not consider science, he contrasts genuine eloquence, based on knowledge of the truth, and therefore accessible only to the philosopher. This theory is expounded in the dialogue Phaedrus, which presents a conversation between the philosopher Socrates and the youth Phaedrus. Its essence is as follows.
Before you start talking about any subject, you need to clearly define the subject. “In any matter, young man,” Socrates addresses Phaedrus, “to discuss it correctly, you must start with the same thing, you need to know what exactly is being discussed, otherwise continuous mistakes are inevitable.”
Further, according to Socrates, it is necessary to know the truth, that is, the essence of the subject: “First of all, one must know the truth regarding any thing that is said or written, be able to determine everything according to this truth; the true art of speech cannot be achieved without knowledge of the truth... Who does not know truth, but chases after opinion, that art of speech will apparently be ridiculous and inexperienced."
The dialogue speaks clearly and clearly about the construction of speech.
In the first place, at the beginning of the speech, there should be an introduction,
in second place is the presentation,
on the third - evidence,
on the fourth – confirmation and additional confirmation, refutation and additional refutation,
collateral explanation and indirect praise.
What is valuable in Plato’s theory of eloquence is the idea of the impact of speech on the soul. In his opinion, the speaker “needs to know how many types the soul has.” In addition, Plato said: “Eloquence is the art of controlling minds.”
Plato's thoughts on oratory were brilliantly developed by his student Aristotle (384 - 322 BC), who spent 20 years at the Academy as a teacher.
The greatest thinker of antiquity, Aristotle, first approached the science of eloquence as a researcher. Written in 335 BC. e. “Aristotle's Rhetoric is an analysis of the language, style and structure of speech of the orators of that time, whose skill can still be recognized as exemplary.
In the first and second books, the thinker, analyzing the primary role of language, wrote that if speech is not clear, it does not achieve its goal. Explaining his thought, Aristotle continues that speech should not be hackneyed, that is, consisting of overused words. Speech should be distinguished by beauty and nobility. Aristotle considered clarity and intelligibility of speech as the primary condition for the success of oratory.
It is obvious that the main thing for Aristotle, as for the sophists, is the persuasiveness of speech. However, if the truth was not essential for the latter, then for Aristotle, as for Plato, the reliability of what is said in speech is important. Aristotle devotes a lot of space to logical proofs that convince the listener of the truth of what was said.
However, according to Aristotle, it is impossible to use only reliable knowledge. It is not always available to humans. Wanting to convince people of something, we often use various examples from life, we present judgments of a probable nature and draw from them, although not entirely accurate, convincing conclusions. Such conclusions are not absolutely reliable, but they claim to be plausible, that is, they are true for the most part and deserve trust. These conclusions speak of the truth as it is accessible to the prover, and they are made in good faith.
In the third book of Rhetoric, much attention is paid to style. And in this case, Aristotle still put clarity in the first place.
“The virtue of style is clarity... Style should be neither too low nor too high, it should correspond to the subject of speech...”*
General requirements Aristotle’s approach to style – clarity, accessibility, artlessness, softness, grace, nobility. The basis of style, the philosopher wrote, is the ability to speak correctly. And this requires skillful placement of words in the construction of a phrase, precise designation of the characterized objects, except for a few, obliges the correct use of genders of names -
-male
-female
-average
coordination of singular and plural numbers, etc.
“A style is full of feeling if it is presented in the language of an angry person when it comes to an insult, and in the language of an indignant and restrained person when it comes to things ungodly and shameful, if things that are praiseworthy are spoken of with admiration, and things that excite compassion are spoken of modestly, similarly in other cases.”* A style will have the proper qualities, as Aristotle believed, if it is full of feeling, if it corresponds to the true state of affairs. The latter happens when important things are not spoken of lightly and trifles are not spoken of solemnly. Otherwise the style seems buffoonish. The style of speech depends on the subject of presentation: one should speak about praiseworthy things with admiration, about things that arouse compassion, with humility.
Aristotle's rhetoric touches not only the area of oratory, it is devoted to the art of persuasive speech and dwells on the ways of influencing a person with the help of speech.
Simultaneously with the development of theoretical rhetoric, its highest flowering was achieved in Greece in the second half of the 5th-4th centuries BC. e. practical eloquence in the person of Demosthenes and other orators subsequently included in the canon of ten ancient orators.
Demosthenes (c. 384-322 BC) is the first star of the oratorical elite, he is actually the head of the school of orators, Great master ancient public word. The following have survived to our time: 61 texts of speeches, 56 “speeches” to speeches and several letters of Demosthenes. Some of his speeches, for example, “On the criminal embassy” (343) and “For Xenophon on the crown” (380), have more than a hundred pages. This is an indication that these speeches lasted more than 2 - 3 hours, attracting an attentive mass of people.
Demosthenes' speeches are rich in a variety of factual material, containing many personal observations and characteristic details noticed in the thick of life. In his judicial speeches, Demosthenes often became a writer of everyday life, from whose gaze, it seemed, not a single trifle escaped. Either ironizing over unlucky people, or exposing the decline of morals, Demosthenes the orator appears to the public not only as a moral teacher, but also as a public judge and political leader.
A resourceful polemicist and deep psychologist, Demosthenes knew how to make people listen to himself in any situation and listen to the end.
As is generally accepted, he did not shine in the judicial speeches with which he began his brilliant practice as a lawyer, Demosthenes, however, was particularly distinguished in his political speeches, most often directed against the continuous invasions of the invading troops of the Macedonian king Philip 11. In such speeches, Demosthenes often recalled “glorious ancestors” of the Athenians, calling to honor their memory and follow their past civic exploits. The speaker appealed to the listeners to the sense and consciousness of the honor of a citizen of a free republic. Bold and lampooning in style, filled with anger and patriotic dignity, these speeches inspired the Athenians to great deeds, left a deep mark on the spiritual life of the Athenian state, and entered the history of political struggle under the common name “philippics.”
The Athenian tribune used direct appeal to “citizens” willingly and skillfully. He did not leave any remarks addressed to him unanswered, and did not get lost when political passions flared up and the atmosphere became tense. His appeals came from the deepest conviction of his own rightness and, of course, the awareness of his personal influence on public opinion. The ancient orator's frequent appeal to the “citizens of Athens” and the instant reaction of the temperamental, if not exalted, mass of people were proven methods of psychological influence on the audience. Such techniques of eloquence, as one might think, kept the listeners in suspense, in a state of co-creation, and sometimes like-mindedness, and activated the thinking of those gathered.
As one might assume, Demosthenes' oaths or his calls to God made a great impression on the listeners, especially the ordinary ones.
(to the gods) So, for example, as if interrupting the smooth flow of his own speech, the speaker says: “No, I swear by Zeus” or “I swear by the gods, I will frankly tell you the whole truth and will not hide anything.”*
On rare occasions, Demosthenes did not appeal to the authority of the gods. Appealing to them was a method, as one can narrow down his speech from the texts, of psychological influence on those gathered who worshiped their gods. It was obviously designed for an external effect, to which ancient rhetoric attached considerable importance.
Demosthenes’ speeches are reasoned, clear in presentation, the phrases in them are usually short, filled with pathos and passion. He said: “It is not good when they shout with a great voice, but it is great when they speak well.”*
It is known that speakers of different generations not only of Hellas, but also far beyond its borders, learned from Demosthenes’ speeches, especially in Rome.
Demosthenes, the pinnacle of ancient Greek eloquence, is the sharpest weapon of political struggle and at the same time a phenomenon of high spiritual culture. Without this eloquence, it is impossible to imagine not only oratorical practice, but also the ancient theory of rhetoric developed in those days.
For this theory, what is especially noteworthy in the past is the enormous importance that was attached to the word, capable of affirming both the beautiful and the ugly, both the truth and the lie.
Assessing ancient Greek rhetoric in its practice and theory, we can say that it is a remarkable phenomenon of ancient civilization, especially its civil life. Ancient Greek eloquence, which developed along with other arts, is not only a huge achievement of the spiritual culture of Hellas, but also a primary indicator of its socio-political maturity. His experience and traditions, as well as his theoretical basis and principles, however, did not remain within Athens and the ancient Greek city-states in general. Along with achievements in the field of culture, especially philosophy, legal views and aesthetics, ancient Greek rhetoric penetrated into other countries.
The culture of ancient Greece, including achievements in the field of rhetoric, was creatively adopted by Ancient Rome. The heyday of Roman eloquence occurred in the 1st century AD, when the role of the People's Assembly and courts especially increased. During this period, Rome puts forward a large group of brilliant orators led by the great (after Demosthenes) tribune of all times, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 AD)
It was he who considered Demosthenes to be the head of the best rhetoricians in Greece and called on his contemporaries to learn from him the art of public speech. Honoring Demosthenes, Cicero independently developed the art of oratory, especially the skill of judicial speech, where he, admittedly, significantly surpassed the “teacher.”
Cicero is the greatest ancient Roman orator, politician, and writer. His name even became a household name. Of his rhetorical works, three books are of great importance: “On the Orator,” in which the author shows an ideal, comprehensively educated orator-philosopher,
“Brutus, or On Famous Orators” is a history of eloquence, “The Orator” is a work in which the question of the best style is developed and one’s own ideal is theoretically justified. These are monuments of ancient humanism that had a huge influence on European culture.
What are Cicero's views on oratory? The author complains that eloquence. Among all the sciences and arts, it has only representatives. And this is no coincidence, in his opinion, true eloquence is something that is more difficult than it seems.
“It is necessary to acquire,” he writes, “a wide variety of knowledge, without which fluency in words is meaningless and ridiculous; it is necessary to impart beauty to the speech itself, and not only by selection, but by the arrangement of words; and all the movements of the soul with which nature has endowed the human race must be studied to the finest detail, because all the power and art of eloquence must be manifested in order to either calm or excite listeners.”*
Cicero believed that the basis of oratory is, first of all, a deep knowledge of the subject; if behind the speech there is no deep content, assimilated and known by the speakers, then verbal expression is empty childish chatter.
In all three treatises of Cicero, the question of the relationship between rhetoric and other sciences, in particular philosophy, is constantly raised. And he always steadily comes to the principle of subordinating all sciences to the main oratorical goal. One question divided philosophers and rhetoricians: is rhetoric a science? Philosophers (Socrates, Plato) argue that rhetoric is not a science. Rhetors argued the opposite. Cicero offers a compromise solution: rhetoric is not true, i.e. speculative, science, but it represents a practically useful systematization of oratorical experience.
The responsibilities of the speaker are as follows:
find something to say
put what you found in order
give it verbal form
commit it all to memory
pronounce.
Cicero adhered to the classical scheme established in the ancient world, according to which a five-part division of the rhetorical process was proposed. Rhetorical process -
-ALL THE WAY FROM THOUGHT TO SOUNDING PUBLIC WORD
In addition, the speaker’s task includes:
win over listeners
state the essence of the matter
establish a controversial issue
strengthen your position
refute the enemy's opinion
in conclusion, to give shine to your positions and finally overthrow the position of the enemy.
Cicero demonstrated deep insight into the essence of oratory, creating an oratory theory based on his rich experience. A brilliant theorist, he generalized and comprehended the views of theoreticians and practitioners of eloquence.
Roman theories or concepts were also developed by Marcus Fabius Quintilian (c. 35-95 AD), a great orator and teacher of rhetoric. He is the author of twelve books of Rhetorical Instructions. Quentilian's work is systematic and strictly thought out. It takes into account all the experience of classical rhetoric and summarizes the relevant experience of a teacher of rhetoric and a trial lawyer. This is the pinnacle of the study of oratory. Neither before nor since there have been works that would provide such a thorough theoretical and practical analysis of eloquence. Quitilian talks about the upbringing of a future speaker, classes at a rhetoric school, discusses the study of grammar, philosophy, art, law, analyzes exemplary speakers, writers, poets, talks about the system of government, gives recommendations for reading works of art and brilliant speeches.
In his essay, Quintilian poses the question: “What does it mean to be eloquent?” - and answers: this is nothing more than the ability to express in words what we think about and communicate it to listeners. And rhetoric is the science of the ability to speak well and the power to persuade. Therefore, the words must be clear and pure, correspond to our intention, they must be correctly and simply located. But speaking correctly and clearly, according to Quintilian, does not yet mean being an orator. The speaker is distinguished by grace and beauty of speech. However, the decoration must be in accordance with the subject and purpose of the speech, it is necessary to take into account the interests and reaction of the audience (listeners). He considers the beauty of speech a living image of things and the recreation of living pictures, passions, because detailed description more tangible than a simple message.
The pinnacle of oratory, according to Quintilian, is the ability to speak without preparing, and this requires knowledge and a variety of skills.
111 If for the Greeks the main thing in rhetoric was the art of persuasion, then the Romans valued more the art of speaking well. With the fall of Rome, the development of oratory stopped. The era of the Middle Ages - the era of maracobesia and scholasticism - naturally did not give rise to and could not parody speakers like Demosthenes and Cicero. This era did not require conviction and evidence. Faith in the dogmas of the church, blind admiration for authorities - that’s all that was required of an educated person of that time.