Ball State University
English 695
Sp 2009

Guide Questions 2: Medieval Transformations in Rhetorical Theory and Practice

1. What were the socio-historico-political features of medieval society that most impacted the theory and practice of rhetoric? Where was rhetoric practiced in the middle ages? by whom and why?
    
2. At what time and in what ways do the classical traditions transform themselves in the middle ages?
    
3. In the middle ages, what phase did the ongoing conflict between philosophy and rhetoric enter?
    
4. What main rhetorical innovations happened in the middle ages?
    

5. Why is Augustine of Hippo an important rhetorical figure?  How is he related to the Christian preaching tradition, and how did that tradition (Ars praedicandi) later develop through the middle ages?
    

6. What is the Ars poetriae and how is it related to grammar and rhetoric?
    

7. How did the Ars dictaminis develop as the first systematic theory of writing?
    

8. An alternative view on writing instruction in the middle ages
    

9. What was the impact of rhetorical theory and study on universities? and vice versa?

1. What were the socio-historico-political features of medieval society that most impacted the theory and practice of rhetoric? Where was rhetoric practiced in the middle ages? by whom and why? 

Early--to 8th century--fall of Rome, decline of Roman education, loss of contact with ancient roots of rhet. theory and practice

Implosion of literacy, leisure, contact--

·       schools declined; libraries vanished; monasteries become islands of literacy in totally oral, increasingly non-Latin world

·       Standard of living dropped steeply; no communal leisure to discuss, debate exc. in small upper levels of soc.: nobility, church

·       Population spread out; urban centers declined in importance; critical mass for discourse (law, politics) lost; most people serfs

Middle--to 11th century--Reorganization of society around Church-State axis

·       clergy had to be educated, had to teach and preach

·       church and state both rigidly hierarchical -- no free play of ideas

·       complete reshaping of classical ideals to medieval Christian and secular realities

dialectic, moral philosophy 

preaching/apodeictic nature of Scripture proofs/needs for communication through letters/need for reconstructing education

Where was rhetoric practiced in the middle ages? by whom and why?

·       (Related to above)

·       Churches and monasteries--Preachers, secular and monastic; teachers of clergy; church had control of education, esp. in early m.a.

·       In the courts--legal, monarchic, Ecclesiastical--in power centers generally--by     Notaries, secretaries, clerics, scribes, all kinds of officials

·       In education--in early liberal arts curriculum (trivium); in university lectures, disputations

2. At what time and in what ways do the classical traditions transform themselves in the middle ages?  Transitional period/early middle ages; later middle ages

IN TWO SECTIONS—

1) LATE ANTIQUITY/ TRANSITIONAL PERIOD OF ENCYCLOPEDISTS (5th to 11th centuries)

2) CONTINUATION OF CLASSICAL ARTS THROUGHOUT MIDDLE AGES

1) Late Antiquity/Transformational Period Of Encyclopedists

Situation at outset

END OF CLASSICAL PERIOD (4^TH-5^th cen. AD), the 4 ancient traditions of discourse “Eloquence is one…” à

Aristotelian/philosophical

·       Logical, theoretical; carries on perspective of Greek philosophy in defining, categorizing, showing interconnection, theorizing argument, etc.

·       Potentially universal application to human activity and discourse—law, politics, culture
 

Ciceronian/legal

·       Provided basic instruction and inspiration for wide variety of humane discourse

·       Practical in its legal base

·       Found in Trivium as prep for dialectic

·       Continued by encyclopedic tradition

·       Quintilian provides full educational program for Ciceronian oratory

Grammatical

·       Stressed language at base of study and practice; first in Trivium; merged with rhetoric often in classification, curriculum (style elements: figurae)

·       Represents the side of language study that emphasized correct "speaking" or writing and the study of literature—the “critical” or receptive part of discourse, based on imitatio, occasionally bordering on interpretation of literature

Sophistic ("Second")

·       Display tradition, emphasized in pagan culture; totally focused on medium of rhetorical display, audience approval; declamatio is foundation and probably the root of the popularity of display rhetoric (too many students, not enough jobs…)

THE AGE OF ENCYCLOPEDISTS

Link to "Major Authors of the Transitional period" 

Classical world disintegrating in West; culture and learning threatened by social upheaval, inability of society to pass on its heritage in education

Classical tradition first carried on by those who had traditional education, sometimes even Greek language: C. Fortunatianus, Martianus Capella, 5^th cen; Boethius, 6^th cen; Cassiodorus Senator, 6^th cen; Isadore of Seville, 7^th cen

Broad stream of learning becomes contained in encyclopedias: M. Capella's De nuptiis, Cassiodorus's Institutiones.  Why?

Major project of the encyclopedia movement: establishment of the Seven Liberal Arts as the accepted curriculum for the new age: M. Capella is first (pagan); Cassiodorus is first Christian encyclopedist
 

Further developments in succeeding centuries: Isadore 7^th cen, Alcuin 8-9^th cen, Rabanus, 9^th cen.

Reading:

2) CONTINUATION OF CLASSICAL ARTS THROUGHOUT MIDDLE AGES

(From Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages, ch 3)

CONTINUATIONS THROUGH LATER M.A (12^th-15^th cen.)> the Classical Tradition continues as the Three Arts of Discourse develop

Aristotelian Trad:

·       Survives in "old translations" by Boethius--but not the Rhetorica

·       Provided tools for debate, "disputation”; also, tools for developing theology dialectically (in later period)

·       Most popular works: Topica and De sophisticis elenchis on dialectical reasoning and disputing--Book IV of A's Topica on how to carry out disputation, and De soph. elenchus. on recognizing and defeating logical fallacies in opponents

·       Ethica, Politica also in demand

·       Rhetorica trans. 1270 by William of Moerbecke, became most popular version (sponsored by Aquinas and mandated in his schools) but never caught on in major university curricula until later MA, if then

·       Rhet not used as part of arts of discourse, but rather as background and support for study of ethics and politics--100 manuscripts of Rhetorica exist, but use patterns indicated by MS binding show usually R associated with Ethics and Politics--never accompanies any dialectical works

·       Aristotle just didn’t have the reputation as a theorist on discourse that Cicero did—that bias proved hard to overcome

Ciceronian Tradition

·       Not "our" Ciceronian tradition here--but De inventione and pseudo Ad Herrenium (frequently bound together and referred to as the "six books" of rhetoric by Cicero)

·       Cicero universally recognized as  magister eloquentiae even if not studied deeply

·       Number of commentaries on De inv and Ad Herr (hundreds, if not thousands) indicate pervasive scholarly interest in C’s eloquence

·       De oratore known in fragments but not popular—no commentary is known to exist in middle ages

·       Northern E turned to dialectic, but southern E/Italy retained Ciceronian tradition as living and active; it infused theory of Ars dictaminis and legal rhetoric, and was instrumental in sparking Renaissance Humanistic movement later Italy (Petrarch)

·       His popularity seemed to decline as Universities and Aristotelian dialectic gained ascendancy after 1150

·       Only Cicero's works are translated into vernacular tongues in M.A. (13^th cen. Fr + Ital)

Quintilian

·       Just about unnoticed from time of Augustine through 12^th century--existed in mostly mutilated texts

·       Study of Q. flourished at Chartes under Bernard, Thierry and John of Salisbury, and Q praised in John's Metalogicon (12^th cen.)  But humane studies and ed. theory declined as study of dialectic rose

·       MA knew Quintilian, but he became more irrelevant as logic and dialectic became more important intellectually (exception of Bernard/Thierry/John)

·       Q. out of picture in from 12^th to early 15^th century when full text of Institutio recovered at St. Gall (1416); when new attitudes toward society and intellectual life emerged in 15^th century, the Institutio was in place to catalyze them

Grammatical and sophistic traditions

·       Not a strong influence through MA, although the Latin textbooks, Donatus’s Ars major and Barbarismus and Psriscian’s Institutiones grammaticae continued to be widely used along with newer manuals

·       Exercises of the Second Sophistic—the progymnasmata of Hermogenes and declamations—occur infrequently, but may have been absorbed into grammatical instruction without separate notice; the moralized Declamations of Seneca were popular and continued to be so into the Renaissance

Summary

Ancient traditions existed side by side with newer discourse genres through the middle ages; Cicero was magister, Aristotle not a main player in broad discourse studies until late in the period.  Translations of Aristotle and commentaries of Cicero were a main feature of intellectual endeavor after 11^th century (Cicero’s reputation resting mainly on the Ad Herrennium).  Generally, the middle ages had its own agenda, and when scholars grew beyond that in the 14^th-16^th centuries, the Classical auctores and works regained some of their original shape and impact

3. In the middle ages, what phase did the ongoing conflict between philosophy and rhetoric enter?

·       As classical rhetoric fragmented, philosophy built on a dialectical method mounted in popularity as focus of study; rediscovery, new translations of Aristotle fuel dialectical theory/practice

·       Rhetoric subsumed under larger idea of philosophy; it is often combined with dialectic as one (lesser) component of the whole range of discourse arts

4. What main rhetorical innovations happened in the middle ages?

·       Three main Artes—Dictamin (letter composition), Poetriae (verse and prose composition), Praedicandi (formal peaching)

·       Sub-movements = writing theory textbooks (Dictamin); linguistics, general theory of composition (Grammar)

5. Why is Augustine of Hippo an important rhetorical figure?  How is he related to the Christian preaching tradition, and how did that tradition (Ars praedicandi) later develop through the middle ages?

(From Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages, ch 2)

Augustine, De doctrina christiana :  A.’s synthesis of Cicero and Christian purposes “remakes rhetoric” (Murphy), rescuing it from the futile and excessive teaching and practice of the Second Sophistic and putting it at the service of the gospel. Books I-III on biblical interpretation (generating content); Book IV on communicating that content

·       Retains Classical forms--completely in Ciceronian trad/Isocratean origins--education, practice in connection continuously w/ ancients--thus Classical

·       But Christian purpose now foremost as gospel provides new message--shift in emphasis to Audience from Speaker, and to Message from Form (Sophistic’s ethos: “Medium is the message”; A’s Christian rhetoric ethos: “The medium serves the message”); A. separates form from matter, and matter is more important

·       Major features of Book IV:

combines the levels of style (Ad Herennium) with Cicero’s “duties” of oratory: subdued style àteaching (doctere); moderate style à pleasing (delectare); grand style à persuading, moving (movere, flectere)

A. refocuses rhetoric away from “stylism” (content doesn’t matter) and toward the truth of the gospel; thus the general purpose of persuasion becomes persuasion of some phase of truth; all styles, all duties revolve around this central goal

 

 

 

·       Augustine establishes Scripture (Old and New Test.) as the main material of Christian rhetoric or preaching, and the main means of proof (apodeictic); thus, any imitatio in Christian training is diverted from pagan models to Scriptures

o      he answers attacks from pagans that Scriptures are “unpolished” and second-rate with detailed examples from Paul, OT prophets

o      he shows how Scripture writers observe “decorum” or kairos , Paul especially

·       Augustine puts the arts of discourse in Christian perspective by stressing

o      natural eloquence as sufficient for preaching (but artificial techniques as further means to help fellow believers)

o      role of Holy Spirit as “inspirer” of Christian orators, even making up human weakness with power of the Word (a preacher can deliver a sermon prepared by another if he lacks skill to write one himself; Christians can profit even from a hypocrite since the message is effective, not the orator)

o      the unity of the persuasive enterprise (“eloquence is still one…”); all style levels and “duties” aim at persuasion and should be included in every sermon

Other observations:

·       Augustine challenges Quintilian on vir bonus dicendi peritus (a rhetorician is a good man speaking well); a “bad man” as speaker is not desirable but he can be a good orator and persuader, even of the gospel

·       Augustine assumes Paul is the model of natural eloquence; yet Paul was probably as thoroughly trained in Greek arts of discourse as Augustine is in Roman. Paul models Isocrates’ ideal “speaker with a purpose,” uniting talent, training, and practice 

·       As fully as A. claims Ciceronian oratory for preaching and teaching the Church, his program is not adopted in any significant form for almost 800 years –why?  Was the necessary training too extensive? Did the “message become the medium”?
 

Rhetoric and Preaching: From Genesis to the Ars praedicandi

Preaching – an important practice in the Judeo-Christian cultures; ancient and early medieval preaching traditions included

·       prophetic (Moses, Jeremiah, et al)

·       rabbinical/liturgical

·       John the Baptist

·       Jesus

·       Paul and the Apostles

·       Christian homiletic

 

Judaism and Christianity are religions with roots in persuasive speech

·       God “preached” in the Garden of Eden—guess who didn’t listen

·       Jewish worship and teaching based on exposition of Scripture

·       Jesus and the Great Commission “Go into all the world…”—a specifically persuasion-based injunction

·       Paul’s missionary vocation—an interconnection with classical Graeco-Roman rhetoric

·       Strong community basis of Jewish and Christian preaching differs from Graeco-Ciceronian approach to oratory; preaching is for the good of the community, not the speaker

 

Augustine sees the utility of the developed Classical tradition for the preaching needs of the Christian church—for education and exhortation

But his syntheses in De doctrina and De catechezandis fail to spark a movement— Preaching remains untheorized for 800 years after Augustine;  Why?

·       Christian rejection of Classical culture and corrupt human formalisms

·       “Laser beam focus” on the content of the gospel rather than style or form

·       Concept of “the speaker” did not fit with Graeco-Roman model, where speaker was elevated in importance

·       Concept of “the good of the hearers” also differed from G-R paradigm

Pope Gregory the Great (6^th cen.) and Rabanus Maurus (9^th cen.) write about preaching and training preachers, but neither builds a preaching theory

First precursors to a new art of preaching emerge in 11^th and 12^th centuries: Guibert of Nogent and Alain de Lille

·       Guibert is still concerned with biblical interpretation as a way to get material for a sermon together, but he does indicate that sermon creation is an important process and should be attempted systematically

·       Alain’s book is mostly a collection of model sermons, but first chapter sets up the art perceptively, beginning with first ever formal definition of preaching: “manifest and public instruction in faith and morals, zealously serving the information of mankind, proceeding by the narrow path of reason and the fountain of authority” (Murphy 307)

·       Main features of ars praedicandi already seem “stabilized”: divisio (divisions), auctoritas (authorities), and correspondentia (correspondence between parts); he coins term forma praedicandi or form of preaching

 

True theoretical perceptive art of preaching develops rapidly after 1200—fully established by 1220; Why, after such a long period of non-theory?

·       Growth of universities? possibly

·       More likely a critical Western European “discourse community” of writers willing and able to theorize what had been going on in practice for many years

 

Three writers make important contributions to the establishment of the new art:

·       Alexander of Ashby, English Augustinian monk, De modo praedicandi  (The Mode of Preaching) c. 1200.   Concepts of divisions, subdivisions, and proofs; arrangement of a sermon in to four parts; and teaching on addressing mixed (learned and unlearned) audiences. Fully preceptive, with examples attached. Assumes a “standard form” exists and should be taught.  First fully preceptive treatise since Augustine.

·       Thomas of Salisbury, Summa de arte praedicandi ("Overview" of the Art of Preaching) c. 1220.  Fully unites Ciceronian theory (Rhet. ad Herennium as source) with preaching theory--the preacher must make use of the persuasive possibilities in rhetoric (first such statement since Augustine). Highlights important points of preaching theory: varying narrations with "significations" and division of the theme (a means of invention).  Lays out 6 part plan for a sermon;

o      opening prayer

o      protheme or antetheme, an introduction of the theme

o      theme, statement of Scriptural quot.

o      division, statement of parts of the theme

o      development of divided parts

o      conclusion

Scripture remains dominant, with rhetoric the "prime vehicle" for taking it to the people; ars praedicandi is fully formed and in use by this time and fully reflected in Thomas's Summa

·       Richard of Thetford, Ars dilatandi sermones (Art of Amplifying Sermons) c. 1245. Assumes full development of the art and offers a specialized treatment of one aspect, amplification of themes.  Uses common "eight modes" Very popular, must have been a practical aid to many preachers; indicates the specializing tendency when a theoretical art has been fully developed an in use

 

After 1250, ars praedicandi is stable as a specialized rhetorical art, focused on a single purpose and consciously applying all previous theory that it found useful.  Many typical artes exist; best known is Robert of Basevorn's De forma praedicandi 1322. 

Ars praed. continues into the early modern period as a vital tradition, with influence even on Reformation practices; only replaced by Ciceronian models of the Humanist Classical tradition

6. What is the Ars poetriae and how is it related to grammar and rhetoric?

Mixing the Arts of Discourse: “Preceptive Grammar”: Grammar and Rhetoric from late antiquity through the middle ages

(Murphy, RMA, chap. 4)

Grammar has very different meaning for ancient and medieval scholars:

The art of speaking correctly (ars recte loquendi) and the interpretation of literature (ennaratio poetarum), NOT merely correct usage and basic syntax as conceived of today.  As we will see, in the middle ages, several other interests developed within grammar that united it with forms of rhetoric in a complex interconnected web of discourse arts.

Rhetoric was always tied to public discourse, and its tradition was preceptive. It furnished guidelines or precepts for the future creation of discourse, mostly oral but using writing as a technology to support it.

Grammar always began the study regime in ancient and medieval schools—students would learn their letters, words, and declensions. Later they would read the simpler writings and emulate them (imitatio).  Donatus’s Ars minor and Ars maior were the two common beginning Latin textbooks

Older students would study advanced grammar using the Institutiones grammaticae of Priscian (early 5^th cen) and would progress to more complex literary models. Literary study became immensely detailed -- Grammar also taught the identification and use of figurative language—  Broken down into schemes, tropes, and metaplasms, these strategies of diction, syntax, and metaphoric representation assumed a huge role in the arts of discourse for Roman orators (usually drawing on Book IV of the Rhetorica ad Herennium), medieval grammarians and rhetoricians, and Renaissance humanist scholars and educators. 

An important tension always existed between grammar and rhetoric—where one stopped and the other began. Quintilian complains of grammarians in 1^st century Rome encroaching on the more advanced territory of the rhetoricians; and he tells them to “back off.”  But as rhetoric lost its cultural anchor in the public practice of oratory—as the Roman era transitioned into the middle ages—the confusion of the two arts of discourse became easier. They were both much more theoretical “book based” subjects when Latin ceased to be the first language of its learners and public speaking became less possible.  Confusions often revolved around the doctrine of figurae or figures of speech, which Donatus had divided into “figures of grammar” and “figures of rhetoric,” but unsystematically.  This particular crossover concern never got “straightened out”—

Until about 1200, grammar meant what was basically found in Donatus and Priscian: close attention to correct language: its parts, its constructions, vocabulary, syntax, etc.  It meant studying literature as a gauge of correctness to see how auctores used language, to emulate in one’s own speaking and writing. 

Around 1200, for reasons that are not well understood, grammatical scholarship began to develop rapidly and seek new directions.

First step was the publication of a new advanced textbook to replace Priscian—the Doctrinale of Alexander of Villedieu This offered an update to Latin structure and diction—it was still “traditional grammar” that defined ordinary, correct usage; its inclusion of extensive teaching on Latin metrics and figurae suggest that these facets of language use had become even more embedded into the Ars grammatica.

The Graecismus of Evrard of Bethune followed in the mould of the Doctrinale as a new rendition of older material, but with its own new emphases; Evrard also treats the figurae, but divides them into “permissive, prohibited, and preceptive”; the assumption here is that the main stream of traditional grammar was often including preceptive material that could aid verse composition

At this time (early 13^th cen) grammarians began to branch into novel directions, leaving traditional “grammar” in the hands of Donatus (his books were still used as beginning texts), Alexander and Evrard: the Ars rithmica, the Ars poetriae, and “Speculative Grammar”

The Ars rithmica: a special extension of grammatical teaching on rhythmic language that offered guidelines for composing rhythmic prose (yes, that’s rhythmic prose). A major work in this area is the Summa artis dictaminis of Thomas of Capua. Rhythmic prose is a composition that is organized around the number of syllables and consonance of sounds (resembles characteristics of  English prosody or verse more than Latin verse, which was quantitative according to vowels). Ars rithmica is especially important because of the close connection with the Ars dictaminis (as Thomas’s title implies).  The “artistic” approach to dictamen of the French scholars gave that concept a more general “prose writing” meaning; and the theory of prose writing was heavily involved with rithmus. The Ars rithmica covered the theory and practice of rhythmic writing in general, and this thus applied to prose writing of various sorts; letters and hymns were often named as some major products of this preceptive art.

Most well-known and popular branch of the “grammatical revolution” was the sudden flowering of the Ars poetriae at the end of the 12^th cen. “A much discussed and little understood movement,”  but one with intriguing ties to the rhetorical preceptive tradition.

First production is the “Versificator’s Art” by Matthew of Vendome at the end of the 12^th cen.  It is a generalized treatment, but, as Murphy explains, still tells us some valuable things about 12^th cen grammar masters; “that they were interested in beginnings and ends of poems, that they toyed with ways to change words (permutatio), that they respected existing genres, that they taught the tropes and figures, that they looked to Cicero as well as to Horace for methods of description.” (168)

Geoffrey of Vinsauf’s “New Poetics” is the best known of these books; written about 1200 he offers advice in verse to those wishing to produce elegant verses. He is concerned with invention and disposition of material, with amplification and abbreviation, and with ornamentation—traditional areas of Ciceronian oratorical theory. He also wrote a prose version of his teachings known as the Documentum.

The implicit union of rhetoric and grammar in Geoffrey is made even more specific in Gervase of Melkley’s book “The Art of Versification”; this text seems to have relied on Geoffrey but Gervase specifically says in the preface that writers should seek help and advice from Donatus, Horace, or Cicero, whoever can help, and that it is a “moot point whether elegance is gained more from grammar or rhetoric.” (173) 

So, medieval grammarians of the 13^th cen sought to extend their body of theoretical knowledge and preceptive practice to all modes of composition—verse, rhythm, and prose and various combinations of these; oral composition is also included from time to time.  The high tide of this movement can be seen in the treatise by John of Garland that sought to unify all strands of preceptive teaching in one place—the Unified Field Theory of medieval writing instruction. The concept was too large to work out in practicality—

The most ambitious of all of the grammar pioneers were the speculative grammarians or modistae. Here, grammar joined forces with philosophy to confront some fundamental problems of language: How do words mean? What is the significance of the parts of speech? What is the nature of language itself? Is there a universal language?  These questions were tackled, among many, by Martin of Dacia and the English philosopher and alchemist Roger Bacon; their inquiry comes close to what today we would call theoretical linguistics.  The modistae demonstrate the willingness of medieval grammarians to think in unfamiliar ways and to explore the implications of their studies. 

Although speculative grammar had a small but consistent group of scholars who propagated it throughout the middle ages after the 13^th cen., the ars poetriae did not gain a large following as a preceptive undertaking and lost momentum after the mid 13^th cen.  Why this happened is also unclear, just as the origins of the movement were.  Probably, the theoretical unity of the several arts was too hard to hold together in the face of the practical and diverse uses of writing.  After a while, scholars and lay persons became more interested in composing or reading a good manual on letter writing or on preaching than in theoretical speculations on how various genres could be unified and taught with a single set of precepts.  Cicero’s tradition was more flexible and applicable to these specialized arts than that of Donatus and Priscian. 

So the end of the middle ages (15^th cen)  sees the continuing ancient rhetorical tradition doing just that—continuing, and influencing specialized applications of preceptive theory in letter writing and preaching.  Grammar was still preeminent --  The history of preceptive rhetoric was to take a bold new direction soon, however, as new classical texts and new social conditions would reinvigorate the tradition of eloquence.

7. How did the Ars dictaminis develop as the first systematic theory of writing?

A uniquely medieval invention; first "writing theory" in West designed to produce written texts

Many major public figures wrote letters in ancient world, especially Cicero, but as a by-product of their rhetorically-based literacy; Letter-writing theory proper begins with Julius Victor, 4^th cen AD Roman rhetorical theorist; letter theory added as afterthought to his Ars rhetorica; letters seen as "informal discourse"

Cassiodorus Senator (6^th cen.) Wrote thousands of letters in the classical, Ciceronian artistic style, including official correspondence; his collection, Variae, hugely popular in middle ages--but no theorizing of letters as separate entities

Early middle ages: (6^th to 10^th centuries) Formula letters or patterns to copy for formal or legal documents were common, but not theory based; need for flexible "art" to respond to many demands of feudal society was clearly needed by 11^th cen.

First preceptive tradition grew out of teaching at Monastery of Monte Cassino; monk Alberic produced two works that lay out groundwork for new epistolary theory based on Ciceronian rhetorical teachings: Dictaminum radii and Breviarium de dictamine

These are first theoretical teaching works to focus on writing as writing, not speaking; they stress the colores or figurae, and emphasize importance of the beginnings of letters; A. changes Ciceronian  exordium  into salutatio and captatio benevolentiae (he coins this phrase, which becomes standard), "greeting," and "securing of goodwill"; beginnings of letters assume greatest importance from this point on. Relatively little theory is produced about the other standard parts of a letter, the narratio, petitio, and conclusio. 

Alberic's innovations:

·       Connection of rhetoric to letter writing

·       Standardization of parts of a letter

·       Emphasis on salutation and intro. sections, with distinction between social levels

·       Recommendation of use of figurae

·       Inclusion of model letters and official forms

·       Implication of connection between rhythmic prose (cursus) and letter writing

Common terms reflect the maturing and elaboration of the art.

After Alberic, the art developed quickly and is full-blown by early 12^th cen. 

Several strands of writing theory linked to practice develop:

In Italy, the Ars dictaminis becomes connected with public documents, the "notarial" arts; theory is direct and focused solely on useful, practical letter-writing purposes and occasions. "Dictatores" or letter writing specialists are secular and business-oriented.

Examples of works from this strand: Hugh of Bologna's Rationes dictandi prosaice and the anonymous treatise Rationes dictandi, both written in Bologna in Italy in the early 12^th cen.  Guido Faba is the most successful "Dictatore."

Later treatises become extremely formulaic and separated from theory, e.g., Lawrence of Aquilegia's Practica

The traditional, artistic/Ciceronian approach begun by Alberic is continued mostly in France, at Orleans, where Dictamen was united with grammar to represent the study and practice of written composition in general, in prose and verse.  Style is usually stressed, along with teaching on the figurae. The cursus is considered integral to the art.

Pons of Provence wrote a treatise that included model letters but also theory on arrangement of discourse

Writers like Geoffrey of Vinsauf and Matthew of Vendome combined theory of letter writing with verse composition, emphasizing style (elocutio) and including large sections on the figurae.

Ars dictaminis continued to be popular in various forms throughout Europe into the Renaissance. It was replaced by the wholesale return to Ciceronian principles advocated by Humanists: imitation of master models (Cicero himself), a knowledge of literature as background, a focus on artistic, non-formalistic composition.

8. An additional View on Writing Instruction in the Middle Ages

9. What was the impact of rhetorical theory and study on universities? and vice versa? 

·       Of Ciceronian trad--not much until later MA, Renaissance

·       Of various new developments, quite substantial--Dictamin, Poetriae, Praedicandi all developed significantly in University settings (esp. Paris, Oxford: Praedicandi; Bologna: Dictamin)