The Herreium’s Defense of Example

The Herreium’s Defense of Example

The Anonymous author the Herrenium begins with a bold refutation of the contemporary styles of rhetoric as well as a defense of his more unorthodox ones in order to safely proceed while using them.

His main argument is that examples should be created from the rhetors own imagination, and not quoted from some other reputable source.  He begins his argument by setting up the opposition and conveying the wisdom.  He then knocks it down.  The author’s first claim relates to modesty.  The Greek rhetors feel they are too humble to come up with examples when a plethora of beautifully written excerpts are at hand.  He uses an example of an Olympic runner who merely discusses former great runners, rather than run himself.  This example works two ways.  It is a simple analogy to help the reader understand the futility and absurdity of the rhetoric’s current norm. It also proves itself.  By being an effective original example, it bolsters the argument for using effective original examples.  He then becomes slightly offensive and accuses the traditional thinkers of an plagiaristic impudence.

His next argument is even more effective.  It creates a distinction between the notion of example and testimony.  While both are used to make a point they are not the same.  Testimony is used to verify truth and therefore must come from a reputable source.  Example is used to clarify truth and need only make sense in and of itself.  Here he plays somewhat to logos, claiming the truth of an example can stand alone without the backing of a particular ethos if it makes good sense.  To this author, this is a more artful pursuit. 

The author makes that clear that explication through allusion does not impress him. “Now if to discern what is written artistically proves tour mastery of the art, then a far better proof of this mastery is to write artistically yourself…The facile chooser of examples will not necessarily with skill himself.”  This notion still affects our modern day rhetoric.  Last week in her introduction for an upcoming paper, one of my literature professors forbade the use of quotations beyond ten percent of the paper.  She, like this anonymous author, is interested in original thought, not regurgitation.  The art of the rhetor lies not in bringing together good points to teach, but in coming up with original ones to add to the common knowledge.

His final point on the advantage of examples is there universality. Because they can stand alone logically they are not constrained by petty matters of dissonant contextual situations.  In translations from examples taken from different cultures, the point is often inaccessible to foreign cultures.  In addition, the foreigner quoted may lack the regional ethos achieved elsewhere.  This not only a nuisance but legitimate detriment to matters of truth.  The conditionality cultural examples lead to don’t mesh well with efforts toward absolute truth.  If an example and therefore an argument only functions regionally it cannot be a universal absolute truth.  The example however, noble in its individuality, can be understood without context and is therefore the more universal and powerful rhetorical tool.