Plato’s Apology as Forensic Oratory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_14_4Keywords:
forensic oratory, Plato, Apology of Socrates, genreAbstract
This article recasts Plato’s Apology of Socratesas a piece of forensic oratory. By examining the rhetorical topoi utilized by Plato, I intend to demonstrate how Plato pushes the boundaries of the genre of forensic oratory to-ward the creation of a new discursive practice: philosophy. The article first examines the concept of “genre” in connection with forensic oratory. Drawing upon the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, Tzvetan Todorov, and Andrea Nightingale, the article establishes a consonance between these scholars’ conceptions of genre and what other scholars have defined as the “genre” of forensic oratory.The article then takes up the question of why Plato’s Apology traditionally has been excluded from this genre. I argue that certain views concerning the presumed historicity of speeches awarded the label of “forensic oratory” need to be reexamined, as there is no clear evidence that the Athenians required historical accuracy of the speeches we now classify as forensic oratory. By removing the requi-rement of historicity, we gain a more accurate picture of what constitutes forensic oratory and why Plato’s Apology deserves membership in this genre. The article then examines in detail various rhetorical topoi in the Apology. I argue that by manipulating and reworking such topoi, Plato expands and redefines the genre of forensic oratory to include the new discursive practice of philosophy. The article reveals how Plato’s redefinition of the boundaries of forensic oratory transformed a criminal defendant’s speech in a court of law into the sine qua non of the philosopher and the philosophic life.
Downloads
References
BARTLETT, R. (2008). Masters of Greek Thought Audio Lectures. Chantilly, VA, The Teaching Company.BLYTH, D. (2000). ‘Socrates’ Trial and Conviction of the Jurors in Plato’s Apology, Philosophy and Rhetoric 33.BURNET, J. (1924). Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, and Crito. Oxford, Oxford Clarendon Press.BRICKHOUSE, T.C.; Smith, N. D. (1989). Socrates on Trial.Oxford, Oxford University Press.CARAWAN, E. (2007). Oxford Readings in the Attic Orators. Oxford, Oxford University Press.CHROUST, A. H. (1957). Socrates: Man and Myth. Notre Dame, Notre Dame University.DARKOW, A. C. (1917). The Spurious Speeches of the Lysianic Corpus’, diss. Bryn Mawr.de STRYKER, S.J.; SLINGS, E.; SLINGS, S. R. (1994). Plato’s Apology of Socrates. Leiden, EJ. Brill.GAGARIN, M. (1997). (ed. and comm.) Antiphon – The Speeches. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.GUTHRIE, W. K. C. (1971). Socrates. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.KAHN, C. (1996). Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The philosophical use of a literary form. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.KENNEDY, G. A. (2007). (trans. and comm.) Aristotle “On Rhetoric”: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press.LEBECK, A. (1971). The Oresteia – A Study in Language and Structure. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.MORRISON, D. (2000). “On the Alleged Historical Reliability of Plato’s Apology,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 82.MORSON, G. S.; EMERSON, C. (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin – Creation of a Prosaics. Stanford, Stanford University Press.NIGHTINGALE, A. W. (1995). Genres in Dialogue. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.PORTER, J. (1997). “Adultery by the Book: Lysias 1 (On the Murder of Eratosthenes) and Comic Diēgēsis” In: CARAWAN, E. (2007), p. 60-88.PRIOR, W. J. (2001). The Historicity of Plato’s Apology. Polis 18.20. See, e.g., Lysias12.1-5: “It does not seem to me to be difficult, oh men [who are] jurors, to begin my prosecution but rather to conclude what I am saying. For so great and so many are the things committed by my opponent that not even by lying would I be able to accuse him of things more terrible than what happened, nor if I wanted to speak the truth would I be able to say everything . . . .(Οὐκἄρξασθαί μοιδοκεῖ ἄπορονεἶναι, ὦ ἄνδρεςδικασταί, τῆς κατηγορίας, ἀλλὰ παύσασθαι λέγοντι• τοιαῦτα αὐτοῖςτὸμέγεθος καὶ τοσαῦτα τὸ πλῆθοςεἴργασται, ὥστεμήτ’ ἂνψευδόμενονδεινότερα τῶν ὑπαρχόντων κατηγορῆσαι, μήτετἀληθῆ βουλόμενονεἰπεῖν ἅπαντα δύνασθαι . . . .).” I am grateful to Scott Arcenas for his use of the term “rhetorical soul-searching” in describing this passage.21. The thoughts presented here were inspired in part by R. Bartlett’s, 2008,Teaching Company lectures, Masters of Greek Thought.
SEESKIN, K. (1982). Is the Apology of Socrates a Parody?. Philosophy and Literature 6.STOKES, M. C. (1997). (ed., trans., and comm.). Plato – Apology of Socrates. Warminster, Aris and Phillips.TODOROV, T. (1978/1990). Genres in Discourse. (trans. C. Porter). Cambridge. First printed as Les genres du discours. Paris, 1978, Editions du Seuil.
USHER, S. (1976). Lysias and His Clients. In: CARAWAN, E. (2007). p. 27-36.VLASTOS, G. (1971). (ed.). The Philosophy of Socrates. Garden City, NY, Cornell University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 John Roger Tennant
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
