Alex Damm, «Ancient Rhetoric as a Guide to Literary Dependence: The Widow’s Mite», Vol. 97 (2016) 222-243
This essay applies conventions of ancient rhetoric to the analysis of the literary sequence of Mark and Luke’s Gospels. With an eye on basic and more advanced rhetorical handbooks, I outline two significant rhetorical conventions for improving upon literary sources: clarity (perspecuitas) and propriety (aptum). When we ask whether the evangelist Mark has applied these principles to the adaptation of Luke's Gospel (following the Griesbach Hypothesis), or whether Luke has applied these principles to the adaptation of Mark (following the Two-Document and Farrer Hypotheses) in the pericope of the Widow's Mite, we find that the latter scenario is more plausible.
AnCiEnT rHETOriC AS A GUiDE TO LiTErAry DEPEnDEnCE 223
i. Classical rhetoric: its relevance for Suggesting Literary Dependence
Over the last century or so, there have been recurring, albeit infre-
quent, efforts to bring rhetorical techniques and principles to bear on
addressing the synoptic problem. Part of the reason for the infrequency
of this study is that rhetorical treatises (whether Aristotle’s Rhetoric or
Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria) do not really speak about how rhetor-
ically to improve literary sources. Such treatises focus on how to com-
pose one’s work effectively without regard to sources; how to compose
a text effectively in and of itself 3. indeed, this is the aim of rhetoric:
to persuade, entertain or instruct an audience, to “speak well” (or write
well), in the words of Quintilian. To this end, rhetorical treatises like
handbooks and progymnasmata present, at varying levels of sophisti-
cation, a number of “activities” through which an author must work;
these include effective invention of material, arrangement of material,
and expression of material. The treatises also discuss effective expres-
sion or style, for example the importance of expressing oneself in terms
that are clear, correct, ornate and appropriate 4.
Significantly, in recent years there has been growing recognition
that some rhetorical principles might serve as standards for suggesting
how an author approached the task of improving his or her literary
sources. While i was initially investigating this topic, i had the oppor-
tunity to hear a scholar suggest that the progymnasmata provide ar-
guable standards for effective adaptation of literary sources. This schol-
ar’s work demonstrated that it was plausible to use progymnastic
insights as a yardstick for measuring which among the Gospels, in ancient
rhetorical terms, had more likely improved the others 5. Building on this
scholar’s application, i sought in my dissertation to develop a more
encompassing application of ancient rhetoric to the synoptic problem 6.
3
DAmm, Ancient Rhetoric and the Synoptic Problem, xvii-xix. For ancient hand-
books which introduce rhetoric, see Aristotle, Rhet. (LCL, trans. FrEESE); [Cicero],
Rhet. Her. (LCL, trans. CAPLAn); Quintilian, Inst. (LCL, trans. BUTLEr). Arguably
the best overviews of the rhetorical tradition are H. LAUSBErG, A Handbook of
Literary Rhetoric. A Foundation for Literary Study (ed. D. E. OrTOn; Leiden 1998),
and J. mArTin, Antike Rhetorik: Technik und Methode (HAW ii.3; münchen 1974).
4
DAmm, Ancient Rhetoric and the Synoptic Problem, xvi, 5 (quoting Quinti-
lian, Inst. 1.Pr. 9), 5-8, 68.
5
m. SCHUFEr, “Evaluating Luke 22,54-71 as Emulation of mark 14,53-72”,
paper presented at “Luke and Mimesis. imitations of Classical Literature in Luke-
Acts”, institute for Antiquity and Christianity, Claremont, CA, 14 march 2003.
6
DAmm, Ancient Rhetoric and the Synoptic Problem, xxxv-xxxviii.