What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric?

Rethinking the History of Muslim Oratory Art and

Homiletics
Author(s): Philip Halldén
Source: International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Feb., 2005), pp. 19-38
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3880080
Accessed: 28-04-2024 09:01 +00:00

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3880080?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to International Journal of Middle East Studies

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Int. J. Middle East Stud. 37 (2005), 19-38. Printed in the United States of America
DOI: 10.1017.S0020743805050038

Philip Hallden

WHAT IS ARAB ISLAMIC RHETORIC?

RETHINKING THE HISTORY OF MUSLIM
ORATORY ART AND HOMILETICS

But about this same time, we were exposed to an even stranger kind of rhetoric, the rhetoric
of the Middle Eastern world. .... This was a rhetoric that seemed to play by none of the
rules that had come down to us from a tradition of rhetoric that had been practiced by the
reigning nations of the Western World for over 2000 years. And then there is the distinctive
rhetoric of the Oriental world. .... But those are rhetorics that we still have to study and
analyze and codify.
-Edward P. J. Corbett, Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student (1990), viii.

The purpose of this essay is to provide a critical assessment of the field of study concerned
with the history of Arab Islamic rhetoric and to propose new points of departure and
lines of inquiry. The central aim is to identify some of the issues that need to be adressed
further in future studies in the field. In the course of this endeavor, more general issues
concerning the history of "rhetoric," in its different shades of meaning, will also be
touched on.
The field shows a curious lacuna. In fact, studies of the history of Muslim rhetoric
in the sense of oratory and preaching are surprisingly hard to find. According to Merlin
Swartz, no serious effort has been made to date to survey the existing body of medieval
Islamic preaching and homiletics:

This is particularly surprising since a number of leading scholars have devoted considerable effort
to the study of Arabic rhetoric over the past century and a half. This neglect of the homily raises
the inevitable question: Why this failure to devote serious study to an obvious example of Arabic
rhetoric?'

The question raised by Swartz is indeed important. Why is it that studies that claim to
be about Arabic or Islamic rhetoric have practically nothing to say about the history of
preaching and public speech in general? As Swartz states, there is probably no single
or simple answer to the question, though, he tentatively suggests that it "may reflect
a perception.., .that the medieval homily does not represent a level of achievement
sufficiently significant either in form or content to merit serious study."2 In the following
pages I will suggest that the heart of the matter lies elsewhere.

Philip Halld~n is a Researcher in the Department of Theology and Religious Studies, Lund University,
SE-223 62, Lund, Sweden; e-mail: philip.hallden@teol.lu.se.

? 2005 Cambridge University Press 0020-7438/05 $12.00

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
20 Philip Hallden

"RHETORIC" IN ARABIC: AL-BALAGHA OR AL-KHATABA?

In the dictionaries, two different words are generally given as translations in Arabic for
the word rhetoric: al-balagha and al-khatiiba. As metarhetorical concepts,3 these terms
are prefixed by 'ilm (episteme/scientia) orfann (techne/ars), as in the compounds 'ilm
al-balagha and fann al-khataba. (The reverse order, fann al-balagha/'ilm al-khataba,
also occurs.) In most studies explicitly concerned with Arab Islamic rhetoric, al-balCgha
tends to be in focus. One can safely say that al-balagha has received far more scholarly
attention than al-khataba. Of those to whom Swartz refers as leading scholars in the
field (A. F. Mehren, S. A. Bonebakker, W. Heinrichs, and others), few if any are in
effect treating al-khataba at all. Also significant is the fact that the Encyclopaedia of
Islam has no entry for al-khataiba, while there are extensive entries on al-balagha and
on the classical subdivisions that constitute 'ilm al-baliigha.4 According to Heinrichs,
"rhetoric" is a term that has to be taken with a grain of salt in the context of Arab Islamic
traditions, "but closest to rhetoric is the 'science of eloquence' ('ilm al-baligha)."5 Thus,
as convention would have it, the name "Arab Islamic rhetoric" refers primarily to 'ilm
al-balaigha, a discipline cultivated in scholastic fashion by 'Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani
(d. 1078), Abu Ya'qub al-Sakkaki (d. 1228), Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rahman al-
Qazwini (d. 1338) and Sa'd al-Din al-Taftazani (d. 1390). Not least important is al-
Qazwini, whose Talkhis al-miftah and al-Idah have been used as textbooks up to modem
times and also constitute the main reference in August Mehren's Die Rhetorik der Araber
as well as in more recent studies by William Smyth and Herbjorn Jenssen.6
In those cases where al-khataiba is mentioned at all, it tends to be presented as a foreign
discipline, belonging to the tradition of philosophy (falsafa) and of interest primarily
to such figures as al-Farabi (Alfarabius, d. 950), Ibn Sina (Avicenna, d. 1036) and Ibn
Rushd (Averrods, d. 1198). See, for instance, the following remark in William Smyth's
"Rhetoric and 'Ilm al-Balagha: Christianity and Islam" (1992):

[A]longside the tradition of 'ilm al-balagha there was a tradition of cilm al-khitaiba (the science
of discourse) which was directly linked to the Greek tradition.7

Roughly the same distinction can be found elsewhere-for instance, in Georges

Bohas, Jean-Patrick Guillaume and Djamel E. Kouloughli's The Arabic Linguistic Tra-
dition. According to their terminology, al-khataiba is "'Greek' rhetoric," and al-baliigha
is "Arabo-Islamic rhetoric," although the authors admit that there al-khatdba also has
a non-technical meaning, which is simply "oratory art."8 The distinction between 'ilm
al-balkigha andfann al-khataiba thus seems to be based on the assumption that while the
former constitutes an integral part of the Islamic theological sciences proper ('uliim al-
din), the latter belongs to the tradition of philosophy (falsafa) and therefore is not really
representative of Islam. Taken together with the fact that the philosophers al-Farabi, Ibn
Sina, and Ibn Rushd have often been criticized by shari'a-minded authorities within the
Sunni tradition, this may perhaps lead to the conclusion that al-khataba is something
foreign to Islam.
It is of course true that al-khataiba was commented on by the philosophers. They were
commenting on the works of Aristotle in general, not least the part called Organon, of
which the book on rhetoric constituted a part.9 The great names of medieval Muslim
philosophy all left commentaries on Aristotle's book on rhetoric, which was translated

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 21

into Arabic at some point during the first centuries of the Islamic era.'0 In this context,
we also come across the exotic loan word rituriqa, next to the following elucidation
in Arabic: ay al-khataiba (i.e., oratory)." However, two points should be kept in mind
when considering these issues. First, the shari'a-minded theologians and preachers, who
dismissed philosophy as incompatible with religion, did not give up public oratory just
because the philosophers were commenting on Aristotle's book on rhetoric in terms
of al-khataba. It should not be overlooked that from the Arabic root kh-t-b, terms and
concepts of central importance to the institution of Muslim preaching are derived, such
as khutba (sermon) and khatTb (preacher, orator). Second, it should not simply be taken
for granted that al-baligha, in contrast to al-khatiiba, would somehow constitute a
"native" and completely unique system of "rhetoric" that is peculiar to Muslims and free
of foreign influences.

THE SCOPE AND CHARACTER OF 'ILM AL-BALAGHA

Nowadays it is not uncommon to find the term 'ilm al-baligha used as a name for the
study of eloquence in general, whether in poetry or in prose, as well as in the written
or in the oral modes of expression. In the wider sense, cilm al-balagha may thus be
understood as belonging to the "literary sciences" ('ullim al-adab). Often it is also
discussed in relation to the notion of "literary criticism" (al-naqd al-adabT). It should
not be forgotten, however, that cilm al-baliigha was originally a science designed to
facilitate the exegesis of the Qur'anl2--hence, the long-standing interest in the issue of
the so-called i 'jiz al-Qur'an, or "the inimitability of the Qur'an," or, more precisely, the
capacity of the Qur'an to frustrate all human efforts to imitate or surpass the eloquence
of God. In this respect 'ilm al-baligha can be referred to as an Islamically motivated
kind of rhetoric. But before jumping to conclusions, it may be worth the effort to take a
closer look at some of the categories and concepts that are traditionally discussed within
the science of al-balkgha.13 On the basis of the influential systematization provided by
Muhammad ibn cAbd al-Rahman al-Qazwini (d. 1338), the science has subsequently
been classified into the following main parts:

'Ilm al-ma'ant (the science of meanings)

'Ilm al-bayan (the science of clarity [of language])
'Ilm al-badT' (the science of ornamentation)

The translations given in parentheses are of course preliminary. My suggestions can

be compared with Mehren's: "Begrifflehre" ('ilm al-macani), "Darstellungslehre" ('ilm
al-bayin), and "Tropenlehre" or "Versch6nerungslehre" (cilm al-badt').14 The point is
that these subdivisions correspond to divisions found in Western systems of rhetoric,
as well. The distinction between cilm al-bayiin and 'ilm al-badT', for instance, has its
counterpart in the distinction between the art of tropes and the art of figures (schemata).
In Western traditions, the latter were in turn subdivided into figures of speech (logos)
and figures of expression or thought (dianoia); in Latin terms, figurae verborum and
figurae sententiarum, respectively. This also has its equivalent within the tradition of' cilm
al-balWgha, where a corresponding division between al-badic' al-lafzi and al-badic al-
ma'nawt is made. There is no room here to go into detail concerning the catalogue

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
22 Philip Halldin

of figures. Suffice it to say that many are easily recognized, as they have counter-
parts in Western systems of rhetoric: alliteration (jinds), antithesis (tibaiq), comparation
(muqabala), hyperbole (itnib), and so on.
Further, in the 'ilm al-ma'inm-part of 'ilm al-balagha, there is inter alia an interesting
dichotomy between informative utterances and performative ones, in terms of khabar
(jumla khabariyya) and insha' (jumla inshia'iyya). The basic point is that, on the one
hand, we have those kinds of utterances before which it is appropriate to ask about
their truth value and, on the other hand, utterances to which such questions would
be inappropriate (i.e., orders, wishes, commandments). The dichotomy may remind
the modern student of the so-called Speech Act Theory developed by John L. Austin
(1911-60) and John R. Searle (b. 1932). But however suggestive the similarity may
be, the dichotomy is already anticipated in the works of Aristotle and more gener-
ally in later Hellenistic rhetoric and philosophy.15 The following passus in Aristotle's
De interpretatione (On Interpretation) will serve as an example:

Yet every sentence is not a proposition; only such are propositions as have in them either truth or
falsity. Thus a prayer is a sentence, but is neither true nor false.16

The dichotomy can be found elsewhere in the Aristotelian corpus and was known in
Arabic sources long before the science of al-balagha was systematized by al-Sakkaki,
al-Qazwini, and others. It was familiar to al-Jahiz (d. 869) and Ibn Qutayba (d. 889),
as well as to Ibn Wahb (10th century), author of "The Demonstration of the Modes of
Expression" (Kitab al-burhan wujuh al-bayan).'7 Another instance that would suggest
a Greek influence on 'ilm al-balagha is the concept of muqtadii al-hal (the require-
ments of the situation),'" which quite evidently corresponds to the concept of kairos
(circumstance) or aptum in Latin rhetoric. Taken together with other significant con-
cepts such as fasaha (fluency, purity of language), bayiin (clearness, eloquence) and
badT' (ornamentation), the student familiar with Western rhetoric is reminded of the
so-called four virtues of eloquence as expressed in Latin terms: puritas, perspicuitas,
ornatus, aptum.19 The parallels are there to cast serious doubt on the implicit or explicit
claim that al-baligha (in contrast to al-khatiaba) would somehow constitute a unique
kind of rhetoric peculiar to Islam.
As has been demonstrated by Jenssen, Western students of 'ilm al-balagha have
tended to focus on the parts called 'ilm al-bayin (the science of metaphors) and cilm
al-badT' (the science of ornaments) while leaving aside the cilm al-mac'in (the science
of meanings). This may seem curious in view of the fact that, according to Jenssen,
Muslim scholastics considered 'ilm al-ma'anT the most important of the three parts of
'ilm al-balagha.20 Mehren motivated his exclusion of the 'ilm al-macilm-part from his
Die Rhetorik der Araber by maintaining that the subjects treated in this part belong
to what, from a European perspective, is grammar and logic rather than rhetoric.21
Thus, Mehren confined rhetoric to meaning the study of tropes and figures. Jenssen's
observation is important. But there is one further problem-namely, for those interested
in "rhetoric" in the sense of public oratory and preaching, it is not enough to have the
lacuna of 'ilm al-ma'anm filled. This is the point at which we will have to turn to a
discipline that has been even less studied by Western scholars of Arabic rhetoric: the
science or art of public speech ('ilm orfann al-khataiba).

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 23

RHETORIC (FANN AL-KHA TABA) AS A DOXOLOGICAL

KNOW-HOW FOR PREACHERS

Though the philosophers were obviously interested in the science of al-khataba, within
the context of the Aristotelian Organon, it is important to bear in mind that the art of
public speech has been practiced without the need to theorize about it having been felt.
Without doubt, the word in Arabic for rhetoric in the sense of public speech is al-khatdiba
rather than al-baltgha. Derived forms, such as khutba (sermon/speech), khitaib (public
discourse), and khatTb (preacher/orator), are part of the common vocabulary among
Arabic-speaking Muslims. To the philosophers in the medieval Muslim environment,
however, this practice of al-khatciba was something for the rational mind to reflect
on-and, indeed, sometimes to criticize, as well, much in the same way that Plato, and
in some instances Aristotle, had criticized the sophists and the poets.22 To the more
traditionally minded Muslim preacher, on the other hand, al-khatcaba would instead be
an art to be learned and perhaps to reflect on theoretically, as well, but in that case in
a manner slightly different from that of the philosophers. The art of public speech has
thus been understood, from the pious preacher's perspective, as part of a tradition that
goes back to unsurpassable models, whom the preacher could try to imitate, such as
the Prophet Muhammad himself and some of his contempories and followers. While
the philosophical attitude rests on the assumption that logic is universal and superior
to rhetoric, the ordinary preacher's attitude would characteristically be that tradition,
including the canon and models of religious rhetorical practice, is superior to human logic
and has to be imitated and transmitted. The art of public speech becomes a doxological
knowledge in contrast to the philosopher's epistemical knowledge. The main purpose
in studyingfann al-khataba, from this perspective, thus has to do with the practical and
salvational purposes of preaching based on the sunna of the Prophet. As an indication of
this attitude, it is significant that the rules regulating the Friday sermon (khutba al-jum'a)
actually differ according to the rite or "law school" (madhhab) to which the preacher
adheres-that is, whether the preacher belongs to the Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i, Hanbali, or
some of the Shi'i schools of law.23 Consequently, the art of public speech in the Islamic
context is subject to "jurisprudence" (fiqh), whose experts stipulate the proper conduct
or decorum for public speech on the basis of the shari'a.

Language, as seen by the legal profession [fiqh], is no longer the abstract process of pure
thought as the philosophers saw it. Instead it is a set of actions conducted in the open and
subject to the same criteria as all the other actions constituting the recommended behavior of the
Muslim.24

In other words, the proper procedure of public speech as a formal act is to be found
in Islamic law. Rather than an object for philosophical reflection, the art of public
speech becomes part of what may be called a "ritual" knowledge or "know-how"
(techne/ars). Every instance of speech behavior can potentially be considered this way,
in relation to religiously defined "stipulations" (ahkaim) and "customs" (sunan), to use
the terminology of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). In extension, this also means that
the distinction between what is lawful and what is aesthetically pleasant or effective
becomes blurred---or, ideally, that this difference does not count, because shari'a should
function as the definer of decorum in human behavior generally. This is a subject
area that has in effect hardly been noticed by Western scholars of Arab Islamic rhetoric.

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
24 Philip Halldin

SOURCES FOR THE HISTORY OF ISLAMIC ORATORY ART

AND PREACHING

Although I will attempt no survey here, I will suggest some preliminary points of
direction in terms of potential sources for future studies. Given the state of research, one
of the first priorities in future studies in the field should be to survey the source material
more thoroughly.
To begin with, one should not overlook that there are some recent works on the
subject in Arabic, such as Ahmad M. al-Hufi's Fann al-khataba (1996), Ibrahim al-
Badawi's Fann al-khataba (1994), Muhammad Samir al-Shawi's 'Ilm al-khataba (1993),
Muhammad Abu Zahra's al-Khataba: usuluha--tarikhuha azhari 'usuriha 'inda 'al-
'irab (1934), and Muhammad 'Abd al-Ghani Hasan's al-Khutab wa-l-mawa'iz (1980).
In addition, some biographical or encyclopedic works are available, such as Mu'jam al-
khutaba', a dictionary of Shici scholars and preachers edited by Dakhil Sayyid Hasan;
S. S. 'Abd al-Fattah's Ghara'ib al-khutab wa-'aja'ib al-khutaba' (1994); and Ahmad
Zaki Safwat's collection of speeches and sermons from the first heroic centuries of
Islamic civilization, Jamharat khutab al-'arab fi 'usur al-'arabiyya al-zahira (1985).
Further, homiletical instructions from educational institutions such as al-Azhar, as well
as more personal books on the subject by more or less famous preachers, such as the
late CAbd al-Hamid Kishk's Ilafursan al-manabir (To the Knights of the Pulpits, 1990)
should not be overlooked.
As some of these book titles bespeak, many of these Muslim authors tend to focus
on models from the "golden" era of Islamic history, such as the Prophet Muhammad
and his companions, the great caliphs, and other famous preachers and orators. Hence,
these sources are often characterized by an endeavor to reform and adjust the present
state of Muslim preaching in accordance with these models. Thus, they tend to be more
or less prescriptive or normative, offering rules and guidelines for the modem preacher.
Although these books could be questioned on these grounds, or considered secondary,
they may be well worth consideration. On the one hand, they provide information on the
history of Islamic rhetoric from a contemporary perspective, with further references to
primary sources. On the other hand, they can be treated as primary sources in their own
right, given that the historian of Islamic rhetoric has an interest in the latest stages of
its development and the concepts, ideas, and mentalities that surround the subject today.
Perhaps it goes without saying that all sources should be studied from an empirical, rather
than from a normative or confessional, perspective. Accordingly, the same procedure
should be applied when it comes to older sources, such as the works by the famous
preacher and homiletician Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 1201). Quite a few collections of Ibn al-
Jawzi's sermons exist, several of which have also been published.25 To some extent,
Ibn al-Jawzi's production has also been studied (by Swartz, Hartmann, and others).
Besides the collections of sermons, Ibn al-Jawzi also left works of a more theoretical
or homiletical nature, the most widely known of which is his Kitab al-qussas wa-1-
mudhakkirin ('The Book of Storytellers and Those Who Remind'). The book was edited
by Swartz (1971), and it could be added that the continuous research by Swartz is a very
important contribution to the field of Islamic rhetoric.26 Another positive contribution
made recently is Jonathan P. Berkey's Popular Preaching and Religious Authority in
the Medieval Islamic Near East (2001). Not least important is Berkey's discussion of

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 25

the sources of Islamic preaching in the period. Other recent works of importance are
Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo (2002), by Boaz Shoshan, part of which contains
valuable references to homiletical material attributed to preachers from Cairo and its
surroundings in the Mamluk era,27 and Khalil Athamina's study (1992) on the emergence
and socio-political impact of the early preachers that are collectively known as qussas.
A source of special interest, mentioned by Berkey, is the Kitab al-rawd al-fa'iq fi al-
mawa'iz wa-l-raqa'iq (The Splendid Garden of Sermons and Edifying Tales), attributed
to a certain al-Hurayfish (or al-Harfush), an obscure figure, who is supposed to have
lived and preached among the Lumpenproletariat on the outskirts of Cairo in the later
part of the 14th century.28 Some of the works mentioned by George Makdisi in The
Rise of Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West (1990) may also be of
importance concerning the history of Arab Islamic rhetoric.29
Collections of sermons attributed to preachers from different times and geographical
locations constitute one important category of sources. Of course, it cannot be taken for
granted that these sources contain sermons that were actually delivered. The sermons
have come down to us in written and polished form. A quite well-known example
would be the Diwan al-khutab attributed to Ibn Nubata (d. 984). Nevertheless, the
collections are important, not least because they have often served as models in the art
of preaching. Not a few of these collections are attributed to famous Sufi preachers, such
as al-Muhasibi (d. 837) and 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (1077-1166).30 In addition, there
are the collections attributed to Shi'i authorities, such as Ibn Babawayh (d. 991) and
the famous Nahj al-balagha that contain sermons and letters attributed to 'Ali. These
collections cannot all be enumerated here, but the ones attributed to Mahmud ibn 'Umar
Zamakhshari (d. 1144) and to Ibn 'Abd Rabbihi (d. 940) should also be mentioned, since
they have-at least, in part-been edited, studied, and translated by Western scholars.31
As concerns early individual preachers and orators and their reputation, the list presented
in the Fihrist by Ibn al-Nadim (d. 987), as well as the scattered references given in
Kitab al-bayan wa-l-tabyin by al-Jahiz (d. 869) and cUyun al-akhbar by Ibn Qutayba
(d. 889), are also worth considering.
Another category of sources is represented by the prescriptive textbooks, or what can
be called normative handbooks in the ethics of preaching. Ibn al-Jawzi's Kitab al-qussas
wa-l-mudhakkirin could fall into this category. Another important example is the Kitab
adab al-khatib (The Book of the Preacher's Etiquette) by Ibn al-'Attar al-Dimashqi
(d. 1324), recently edited by Mohamed Ibn Hocine (Esslimani).32 This book, which
represents a strictly Sunni perspective, can be seen as a particular instance of the genre
of "books of etiquette" for different professions (judges, teachers, secretaries, and so
on).33 The book also resonates with particular areas within the vast literature of Islamic
jurisprudence (fiqh), especially concerned with the behavior of preaching and public
speech. This kind of literature should also be more thoroughly studied when it comes to
rules and regulations for public speech. In addition, information concerning preachers
and the art of preaching is scattered in a wide variety of source material, including
chronicles and biographical literature and the works of famous Sunni authorities such as
Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 1257), al-Ghazali (d. 1111), Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328), Ibn Qayyim
al-Jawziyya (d. 1350), Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 1511), and others.34
Another, quite different source that should at least be mentioned in passing is the Kitab
al-burhan wujuh al-baann (The Demonstration of the Modes of Expression), written in

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
26 Philip Hallden

the mid-10th century by Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ibn Sulayman ibn Wahb.35 It might be argued
that this book more properly belongs to the tradition of 'ilm al-balaigha, but in view of
the fact that the author's intention is to deal with several modes of expression available to
man (from logic to poetry), and that the book has been described as an "attempt to apply
Greek, Mu'tazili and Imami doctrines to Arabic rhetoric,"36 it might be of importance
to the historian of Muslim oratory art and preaching. Perhaps it could be argued that
this book, as well as its famous precursor, the 8th-century Kitab al-bayan wa-l-tabyin
by al-Jahiz, was written at a time that neither the division between al-balagha and al-
khataba nor the dichotomy between religious piety and philosophy had crystallized. The
famous book by al-Jahiz also contains much valuable information concerning individual
preachers active in the 8th century, as well the author's reflections on the genesis of the
khutba (Friday sermon) and on oratory art more generally.37

FROM CLASSICAL RHETORIC TO RHETORIC AS ELOCUTIO IN

WESTERN TRADITION

Let us now return to the question of why Mehren focused exclusively on the parts
concerned with tropes and figures within 'ilm al-baliigha. This neglect is all the more
interesting as it may hold a clue to why students of Arab Islamic rhetoric in general have
neglected not only the 'ilm al-ma'cmn-part of 'ilm al-baligha, as Jenssen has observed,
but also one of the most significant examples of rhetoric in Muslim environments: the
art of preaching and public speech (fann al-khatitba). Why did Mehren and his followers
focus on the art of tropes and figures? What was the actual reason for their neglect of
'ilm al-ma'cinT and fann al-khatiiba?
The meaning of the term "rhetoric" is of course not to be taken at face value.38 In
the classical tradition of rhetoric, the subject has traditionally been characterized by a
fivefold division of parts or areas of interest: the invention of the appropriate arguments
for what one has the intention to say (inventio); the arrangement or ordering of the
arguments in a purposive manner (dispositio); stylistic matters or the art of embellishment
(elocutio); the actual performance (actio); and techniques for memorizing the speech
(memoria). This is familiar to the historian of rhetoric. In common parlance of the
19th and 20th centuries, however, the term "rhetoric" has often been used in a more
restricted and, at the same time, blurred sense, referring to phenomena that belong to
the category called elocutio in Latin rhetoric. As a consequence, "rhetoric" tends to be
merged with poetics to form what can be called literary aesthetics or stylistics.39 This
notion of rhetoric became increasingly dominant in Western Europe from about 1500.40
A landmark in this development was the epistemological reform associated with Petrus
Ramus (1515-72) and his co-worker Omer Talon. According to these two men, students
of rhetoric were to restrict themselves to matters of style and delivery, as inventio and
dispositio were more properly handled by philosophers.41 In the following centuries,
this "ramistic" redefinition of rhetoric eventually came to be taken for granted in the
scholarly circles of Western Europe, not least in Protestant milieus:

[T]he divorce between rhetoric and dialectic was compatible with the Puritan ideal of preaching
from axioms, "plaine delivery of the Word without painted eloquence," as one seventeenth-century
divine put it. In sum, the Protestant Reformation, and not some purely theoretical issue, is what

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 27

explains the nature of Ramus' achievement and why Ramus was so important for so long to so
many.42

In other words, "rhetoric" was increasingly conceived of as an art concerned with

how to communicate and, if needed, to embellish a Truth, which was to be found and
established outside the rhetorical domain. Though this did not necessarily amount to an
intentional degradation of rhetoric, it is instructive as a starting point for an emerging
conflict between an earlier humanism (taking the Ciceronian controversia and the five-
part system as its model) and a new kind of scientific rationalism.43 An important step
was thus taken in the direction of what can be characterized as a platonizing tendency44
that was to culminate in the 17th century when Descartes and others began to fore-
shadow a completely scientific language purged of rhetorical investments.45 Henceforth,
"rhetoric" tended to mean either flowery language or simple demagoguery. At the same
time, a culture of intimacy was beginning to develop, eventually blossoming in the
Romantic era. It is no accident that a new discipline called aesthetics was formulated
as a response to these currents, influenced by Alexander G. Baumgarten's Aesthetica
(1750) and Immanuel Kant's definition of art as an autonomous and disinterested activ-
ity. Although the Romantics' interest in poetry and other purely aesthetical expressions
of culture can be understood as an an attempt to defend art against the onslaught of
scientific rationalism, it was nevertheless based on the presupposition that the artist's
work is clearly differentiated from (and even subordinated to) science and philosophy.46
Moreover, the Romantic era was characterized by a deep suspicion toward rhetoric-a
suspicion that many poets and artists tended to share with the "rationalists."
Evidently, Mehren's pioneering work Die Rhetorik der Araber was written in the
context of these developments. The shortcomings of his work, as demonstrated by
Jenssen, and the fact that later studies of Arabic rhetoric have shown so little interest
in the medieval homily, as observed by Swartz, can be explained as consequences of
the contemporary conception of "rhetoric" prevalent in Western Europe during the 19th
and 20th centuries.47 The definition of rhetoric as a system of tropes and figures was
common knowledge (doxa) at the time. Hence, it would come as little surprise that, when
they were looking for an equivalent to rhetoric in Arabic sources, Western scholars in
the 19th and 20th centuries found that it was the system of tropes and figures within cilm
al-balagha and nothing else that should be studied.
Unfortunately, the exclusive focus on 'ilm al-balhgha in Western scholarship has not
only neglected the tradition of oratory art (fann al-khataiba); but it has also sometimes
resulted in indadequate comparisons. The problem can be illustrated by taking a closer
look at one of the few attempts that have been made to compare Islamic rhetoric with
its Western counterpart. As indicated in the title of his essay, Smyth explicitly tries to
compare rhetoric in the "Christian" West and the Islamic 'ilm al-baligha. His point of
departure is that, in the Islamic context, rhetoric is translated as 'ilm al-balaigha. Scholars
have referred to this science as rhetoric because of "the specific points of coincidence
between the art of persuasion and the study of eloquence."48 Smyth, however, is careful
not to take their similarity for granted:

Although both disciplines [rhetoric and 'ilm al-baliigha] cover many of the same topics, each fits
into its particular tradition differently. In the West rhetoric is linked to political notions of debate
and dialogue, whereas 'ilm al-baliigha reflects the very important concern for hermeneutics and

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
28 Philip Halldcn

textual aesthetics. The two disciplines are quite similar, however, in the way that each plays an
absolutely central role within its respective tradition.49

There is no reason to reject this general characterization of the subject as compared

with rhetoric in the "Western" sense. What there is reason to reject, however, is the
adequacy of the comparison. In view of the well-attested significance of public speech
and oratory art in Muslim history there is something wrong with a conclusion that gives
the impression that there is no "rhetoric" in Islamic tradition other than the concern for
interpreting the tropes and figures, while rhetoric in the Christian West is characterized
by dispute and difference of opinion.50 Part of the problem is that Smyth does not
provide any clear definition of the word "rhetoric." Instead, he oscillates between two
different meanings that can be broadly characterized as "literary" in the case of 'ilm
al-balagha, and "parliamentarian" in the case of Western rhetoric. In the latter case,
the word "rhetoric" highlights the practice of public speech and the Ciceronian ideal of
controversia, while in the first case, the word is taken to refer to the study of metaphors
and figures (rhetoric as elocutio). The problem is that this probably has more to do
with a fluctuation in the meaning of the term "rhetoric" in Western tradition than with
inherent cultural differences between East and West. Another problem is Smyth's explicit
conflation of "Western" and "Christian." Whether dispute and difference of opinion are
characteristic of the Christian West is certainly open to question.5' More likely, preaching
and propagation of religious norms came before "public debate" in most traditional
societies and thus are not peculiar to Muslim behavior. Modem ideals of democracy
and parliamentarian norms were as absent in pre-modern Christian societies as in pre-
modern Muslim societies.52 Moreover, debate and dialogue are not unheard of in Islamic
history, though one may have to look beyond 'ilm al-baliagha and fann al-khatiaba to
find their traces. Aristotle's book on the art of dialectical disputation (Topics), the art
that in medieval Europe constituted the third subject within trivium, alongside grammar
and rhetoric, was translated into Arabic in the 8th century, and in the following centuries
the art of disputation became the practice par excellence in Muslim legal studies and
theology.53 There is also a quite extensive literature on "the art of argumentation" (adab
al-jadal) that should be taken into account.54.

THE COMMON HERITAGE: LATE ANTIQUITY

Neither 'ilm al-baliigha norfann al-khataba is the result of completely "native" traditions
peculiar to Arab Islamic culture. In both cases, pre-Islamic traditions of rhetoric and the
educational systems of late antiquity certainly played a significant role. The influence
of Greek rhetoric on the two variants of Islamic rhetoric does not, however, amount to
saying that Arab Islamic rhetoric is simply an amalgam of traditions that somehow are
the property of Western culture and civilization. On the contrary: the notion of a more or
less continuous Western tradition, tracing its origins to antique civilization in Greece, is
problematic. The presupposition that ancient Greece was a "Western" society has lost its
former credibility, and this should be taken into serious consideration when it comes to
the history of rhetoric. "Greek" culture itself (both ancient and classical, to say nothing
of its Hellenistic permutations) was the product of a composite of influences, some of
which emanated from the East (ancient Babylon, Egypt, etc.).55

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 29

The societies in the lands around the Mediterranean during the centuries prior to
Islam, during what is referred to as the period of late antiquity or, in terms of the history
of rhetoric, the "Second Sophistic,"56 were societies where professional rhetoricians
practiced their art as itinerant performers and teachers, traveling from one urban center
to another in the eastern Mediterranean and Near East, converging at such places as
Antioch in Syria, Gaza in Palestine, and Alexandria in Egypt. These itinerant performers
and teachers of rhetoric were invited by local rulers and municipal governments to
deliver orations at public celebrations or to teach young men the art of rhetoric, then
part of the traditional enkyklios paideia (rounded education). In several respects, this
structure continued well into the 7th and 8th centuries. Archeaological and other evidence
suggests that the Arab conquests did not result in any major break in continuity in the
eastern Mediterranean provinces in matters of architecture and administration."5 Cultural
traditions may be less stable than buildings, but as long as the apparatus of state and
cities lasted, at least some remnants of classical education, including rhetorical training,
must have been known and available in some form. The subject should be re-examined
in the light of the new advances and results in modem scholarship on late antiquity.58
The linguistic and cultural pattern in the eastern Mediterranean in late antiquity was
extremely complex, and the traditions of Christian and Jewish preaching also formed
part of the background against which Islamic preaching would emerge and define itself.
Furthermore, it tends to be overlooked that Semitic culture had already been represented
by Arabs in the region since at least the Nabataean period, which ended in A.D. 106.59
One important case of special interest to the historian of rhetoric is presented by the city
of Gaza in Palestine, where there was a lively school of Christian rhetoricians and poets
as late as in the 6th century.60 Other, similar examples from about the same time are
found at Berytus (Beirut) and in Alexandria and Antioch, two very important cities in late
antiquity.61 In general, the era was characterized by attempts to reconcile philosophy
and rhetoric and by attempts to assimilate "pagan" rhetorics into the culture of the
now dominant religion (Christianity). Later, these developments were taken further by
Muslim rhetoricians and philosophers.
The written sources of the period attest to a high frequency of translations to and
from Greek and the different languages of the Near Eastern region, especially Syriac.62
That many religous, philosophical, and literary works were quickly translated from
Greek into Syriac is a well-proven and established fact, but this process also happened
in reverse more often than is usually realized.63 This was the case with, for instance,
St. Ephrem, whose works were translated from Syriac into Greek and later frequently
cited in Greek monastic literature. As Averil Cameron says, contemporaries may not have
felt the distinction between "Greek" culture and "Semitic" culture with the same force
as we do.64 One problem lies with the terminology traditionally used when discussing
these matters. "Syriac" denotes a language, not a culture or an ethnicity:

[T]hose who spoke Greek were not necessarily any less Syrian or "Semitic" than those who used
Aramaic. Once that is admitted, however, the very notion of Syriac culture as a separate entity is
called into question.65

To take things a bit further, it is important to realize that the bulk of philosophical thinking
and learning produced in late antiquity was not the work of figures that might be termed
Westerners: "[yet this]... Hellenism was not of necessity Greek in origin...."66 This

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
30 Philip HalldMn

does not mean, however, that one has to subscribe to the theory that late antiquity was
somehow an Oriental world. At least according to al-Azmeh, this would simply be to
construct an Orientalism in reverse. Rather, it is a matter of perceiving the world of late
antiquity without resorting to trans-historical nominatives, such as Islam or Hellenism,
or the Orient and the Occident.67
Whatever the terminology, traditions in culture and learning of late antiquity continued
in some form or another in the lands of Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and Iraq after the Muslim
conquests, though they successively came to be expressed in new idioms, the most
important of which was the new language, Arabic. In the field of rhetoric, it meant that
the old traditions came to be adapted to the special needs of Muslim preachers, just as
the ancient tradition of pagan rhetoric had once been adjusted for Christian purposes.
Although the practice of public speech and preaching in Islamic contexts also had roots
in traditions stemming from the Arabian peninsula (as practiced by the pre-Islamic kiihin,
poet, or khatTb, such as the the famous Quss ibn Sacida al-Iyadi),68 the art of speech as
such was studied theoretically in terms of existing paradigms in the urban areas of the
eastern parts of the Mediterranean, now part of the Islamic caliphate. In turn, this surely
must have had repercussions on the practice of oratory art. Moreover, the Hellenistic
influences had already penetrated the peninsula prior to the rise of Islam and perhaps
had a greater impact on pre-Islamic Arabian culture than has traditionally been assumed
to be the case.69
One important issue for future studies to deal with is the extent to which the exer-
cises known as progymnasmata, associated with Aphthonius, Theon, Hermogenes and
Nikolaos, and other influential teachers of rhetoric in late antiquity, continued in Islamic
environments.70 According to Frank D'Angelo, the progymnasmata of Aphthonius cer-
tainly did have an influence on Arabic traditions of education.71 However interesting this
observation may be, it is unfortunate that he gives no evidence or references to actually
support it. To substantiate this would be an important task for future studies. Further, it
would be interesting to compare the texts attributed to medieval Muslim preachers in
the region of Syria and Palestine with preachers and orators in the same area prior to
Islam, such as, Chorcius (in 6th-century Palestine).72 Just as important to scrutinize more
closely is the relationship between Muslim traditions of preaching and the rhetorics and
homiletics of the later Byzantine Empire. The culmination of later Byzantine rhetoric is
often thought to have taken place during the 11th and 12th centuries, with names such as
Gregory Pardos (Gregory of Corinth) and Zigabenos.73 These rhetoricians can be seen
as late exponents of a "Greek" tradition formulated in late antiquity by Hermogenes,
Aphthonius, and Menander, but they may also have been influenced by Arab Islamic
traditions of rhetoric as well as by contemporary Muslim preachers and orators. At
least, the possibility cannot be ruled out without further investigations. Of particular
interest in this context is the often noted tendency in contemporary Byzantine oratory to
compare the Byzantine emperor with the prophet king David and the so-called 'Davidic'
eloquence of the period.74 In reality, this may not be as "unparalleled in the history of
rhetoric" as is sometimes thought,75 in view of the fact that Old Testament figures such
as David and Adam, as presented in the Qur'an, are also common in medieval Islamic
sermons.76
These issues concerning the relationship between Islam and Byzantium are all the
more important because the new interest in rhetoric in Western Europe during the

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 31

Renaissance is often portrayed as dependent on the influence of Byzantine intellectuals,

coming from the East to the West.77 Two 15th-century figures are often mentioned
as having special importance in this process of transmitting knowledge: George of
Trebizond, a Byzantine intellectual who was invited to Venice and came to spend the
rest of his life in Italy as a teacher of rhetoric, and Aldo Manuzio, a famous Venetian
printer and collector of Greek manuscripts. This account of how the traditions of rhetoric
and philosophy were eventually rediscovered during the 15th and 16th centuries may
seem a bit simplified. In particular, it tends to reaffirm that the history of rhetoric and
philosophy has always been a "Western" affair, though the continuity was temporarily
broken during the Middle Ages. Thanks to people such as George of Trebizond and
Aldo Manuzio, the heritage was eventually restored to its rightful owners, so to speak.
Considering the possibility that the Byzantine culture of the time was in turn influenced
by Arab Islamic traditions, the picture may be more complex. In the light of new
theories and evidence concerning the extent of translations from Arabic into Greek
during a period stretching from about the 10th to the 13th century, the old thesis of the
"Byzantine Renaissance" as the result of internal developments within the Byzantine
Empire (Lemerle) has increasingly been rejected by a younger generation of scholars.78
This of course should be taken into account when considering the influence of Byzantine
teachers of rhetoric on the development and redefinition of rhetoric in Western Europe
during the Renaissance. It is a well-known fact that scholarly and intellectual develop-
ments in Western Europe went through several stages of influences from the East from the
12th century onward. Somewhat schematically, this development can be differentiated
in two phases. The first, from about the 12th century to the 14th, was characterized by
an interest in philosophy, including the Arabic version of Aristotle's book on rhetoric
together with Muslim philosophers' commentaries.79 The second phase, stretching from
about the time of the Renaissance onward, was characterized by a broader interest in
Arabic thought and literature in general. By this time, collections of Arabic books and
manuscripts had been acquired by the libraries of Europe, and professorships in Arabic
had begun to be established in Paris, Leiden, Rome, and Oxford.80
As concerns the Byzantine "connection," it is probable that there were places of
worship at an early date for Muslim captives and others in the Byzantine capital of
Constantinople, well before the Latin conquest, and that were qadis and preachers in
these communities, as has been suggested by Clifford Bosworth.81 In the early 11th
century, the Friday sermon (khutba al-jum'a) held in Constantinople is said to have
been pronounced in allegiance with the Fatimid caliphs of Egypt.82 Correspondingly,
Christians from the Byzantine Empire and other parts of Europe could live in Muslim
areas, protected by the institution of aman, or safe conduct, for limited periods of time.
This allowed for the colonies of Italians, Greeks, and Franks in the coastal towns of
Egypt and Syria and in Seljuq Anatolia.83 Furthermore, there were the regions called
thughiur in Arabic-that is, frontier areas between the Muslim-dominated areas and the
domains of the Christian state of Byzantium. These areas acquired a mixed population
from Umayyad times onward. One of the Byzantine emperors, Leo the Isaurian (ca.
685-741), the defender of Constantinople, actually sprang from one of these regions of
the thughir, and according to Arabic sources, he was able to express himself eloquently
in both Greek and Arabic.84 Thus, according to Bosworth and others, Arab-Byzantine
relations had significant moments of peaceful intercourse and diplomatic, cultural, and

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
32 Philip Hallden

commercial contact. Whereas the Muslims had a contemptuous attitude toward the
Christians of Western Europe, they were inclined to regard Byzantium as a civilization
on an equal footing with their own."8 Although some sources attest to this positive view
of the inhabitants of Byzantium (in contrast to the "barbarians" of Western Europe),86
Bosworth tends to ignore that some Muslim circles showed a phil-hellenistically moti-
vated contempt for the Byzantines, especially those circles associated with the Abbasid
caliphate in Baghdad during the 9th century. According to the picture presented in
some of the sources pertaining to this milieu, the Christian rulers and inhabitants of the
Byzantine Empire were clearly different from and inferior to the "Greeks" of antiquity,
who had produced such authorities as Plato and Aristotle. The perspective is aptly
summarized by Dimitri Gutas:

The Byzantines were portrayed as deserving of Muslim attacks not only because they were infi-
dels-this was the theme already present in Muhammad's alleged letter to Heraclius-but because
they were also culturally benighted and inferior not only to Muslims but also to their own ancestors,
the ancients Greeks. The Muslims, by contradistinction, in addition to being superior because of
Islam, were also superior because they appreciated ancient Greek science and wisdom and had
translated their books into Arabic. This superiority is even transferred to Islam itself as a religion;
the Byzantines turned their back on ancient science because of Christianity, while Muslims had
welcomed it because of Islam. Anti-Byzantinism thus becomes philhellenism.87

As discussed by Gutas, this anti-Byzantine (and anti-Christian) propaganda of the

early Abbasid rulers is reflected in sources particularly associated with such figures
as al-Jahiz and some of the Mu'tazilite theologians, who tended to use it in their
intellectual battles against Muslim adversaries who dismissed "Greek" philosophy.88
Another particular case in point is the later historian al-Mas'udi (d. 956), according to
whom the Greeks descended from Japheth while the Byzantines descended from Shem
and simply "imitated" the glory of the former:

Both in their spoken and written language the Byzantines follow in the footsteps of the Greeks,
though they never reached their level either in the essential purity or absolute eloquence of the
language. The language of the Byzantines is inferior in comparison with that of the Greeks and its
syntax, in the way in which it is expressed and in the customary manner of address, is weaker.89

The main reason for this decadence, according to the Muslim perspective, is the religion
of Christianity. Henceforth, the signs of philosophy and learning were effaced, and the
heritage from the ancient Greeks corrupted. In continuity with their pre-Islamic Sassanid
rulers, the early Abbasids actually regarded themselves as the upholders of a glorious
heritage of learned culture that the Christians had tried to efface. In Sassanid times, this
perspective constituted part of an imperial ideology that also claimed that the wisdom
of the ancient "Greeks" stemmed from Zoroastrian sources.9() In any case, it is clear
that some of the early Christian emperors (Justinian, for example) did persecute people
associated with pagan philosophical traditions and closed the academy of Plato in Athens
in A.D. 529, and that some of those philosophers were given asylum in Sassanid realms
during the reign of Chosroes I Anushirwan (r. 531-78) and his successors. This also led
to an upsurge of interest in the ancient wisdom of antiquity that was to continue under
Muslim rulers in the area. In particular, it led to the important "Translation Movement"
from Greek into Arabic that marked the early years of the Abbasid caliphate, as Gutas

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 33

writes, and that was later to have repercussions on intellectual development in Western
Europe.

CONCLUSION

The historical development that underlies the fluctuations in the meaning of the term
"rhetoric" in the West constitutes an interesting problem in its own right and should be re-
examined in the light of evidence from Arabic sources. What impulses actually produced
the developments within rhetoric, philosophy, and science from the Renaissance onward
is still very much an open issue. It is not unreasonable to think that the tradition of
rhetoric, as well as that of philosophy, was more carefully preserved and cultivated in
the Muslim East than in the Western parts of Europe. A more careful examination of how
the reinvention and subsequent redefinition of rhetoric in Western Europe came about
in the Renaissance would perhaps also offer a clue to why the pioneers in the field of
study concerned with "rhetoric of the Arabs" proceeded the way they did. Whatever the
case may be, the term "rhetoric" has been deployed in this context as referring mainly
to a system of tropes and figures, which constitutes part of what is known as 'ilm al-
balagha in Arabic. This exclusive focus has led to an almost complete neglect of the art
of public speech and preaching, normally called fann al-khataba or 'ilm al-khataba in
Arabic. This is confusing and unsatisfactory. It obscures the fact that the art and practice
of public speech (al-khatjaba) has constituted a significant element in Arab Islamic
culture. Moreover, it has sometimes resulted in inadequate comparisons regarding what
would constitute the difference between "Western" and "Islamic" rhetoric. The reasons
underlying the tendency to identify Arab Islamic rhetoric with al-balagha, at the expense
of al-khataba, are manifold and complex. It probably has to do with an assumption that
'ilm al-balagha constitutes a kind of rhetoric that is more specifically "Islamic" or native
to Arab-speaking Muslims, in contrast to fann al-khataiba, which is thought to be part
of a "Greek" philosophical tradition. At the same time, it has to do with philosophical
currents and developments in Western Europe from about 1500 onward, which were
to produce a significant redefintion of rhetoric that tends to reduce it to a concern for
literary tropes and figures. The results of this development are evident in the work of
Mehren and other 19th- and 20th-century scholars and writers, who seem simply to have
taken for granted that the equivalent to rhetoric in Arabic would have to be the system
of tropes and figures within 'ilm al-balagha. This also explains why Mehren and his
followers neglected the 'ilm al-ma'amn part of 'ilm al-balagha, since that part does not
easily fit such a narrow concept of rhetoric.91 The fact that there has been so little interest
in this subdivision of 'ilm al-balagha as well as in the medieval homily among Western
scholars of Arabic rhetoric, as observed by Swartz, can thus in part be explained as a
consequence of the contemporary conception of "rhetoric" prevalent in Western Europe
during the 19th and 20th centuries.92 The definition of rhetoric as a system of tropes
and figures was common knowledge (doxa) at the time. Hence, Western scholars in the
19th and 20th centuries, when they were looking for an equivalent to rhetoric in Arabic
sources, found that it was the system of tropes and figures within 'ilm al-balagha and
nothing else that should be studied.
One of the main conlusions to be drawn from this essay is that neither 'ilm al-balaigha
norfann al-khataba is without influences from Greek sources. This means that there are

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
34 Philip Hallden

no grounds for arguing that the former rather than the latter would constitute a particular
Arab Islamic rhetoric. Furthermore, it means thatfann al-khataiba should be taken into
account in studies of Islamic rhetoric, in the sense that the subject has constituted a
significant element in the tradition of Islamic preaching and homiletics. Thus, fann al-
khatiba should not be confined and isolated to the tradition of Greek philosophy and
the commentaries on Aristotle's Organon. As perceived from the Muslim preacher's
perspective, fann al-khataiba would rather be a doxological "know-how" wherein the
proper procedure of public speech as a formal act is regulated in accordance with Islamic
law and ethics. This is a subject area where much remains to be done. One important
task would be to survey the sources and to formulate the proper questions from the
perspective of social and cultural history. One source that may be of particular interest is
the recently edited Kitab adab al-khatib (The Book of the Preacher's Etiquette) by Ibn
al-'Attar al-Dimashqi (d. 1324). By examining this source and others more closely, we
may come up with valuable findings concerning the ideas and mentalities surrounding
the institution of Muslim preaching, as well as interesting clues as to the history of
rhetoric in general. There are no reasons to suppose that the formation of an Islamic
art of preaching and public speech would be radically different and discontinuous from
earlier systems and models of the art current in the same geographical area. A most
important task is to identify evidence for possible influences from the progymnasmata
tradition, associated with Aphthonius and other teachers of rhetoric in late antiquity,
on the development of Arab Islamic rhetoric, irrespective of the traditional bifurcation
between 'ilm al-balagha and fann al-khatiiba. To accomplish this, closer cooperation
between specialists from different disciplines is needed.

NOTES

Author's note: I gratefully acknowledge the support and generosity of The Birgit and Gad Rausing
Foundation for Arts Research and the Crafoord Foundation, without which the present study could not have
been completed.
1Merlin Swartz, "Arabic Rhetoric and the Art of the Homily in Medieval Islam," in Religion and Culture in
Medieval Islam, ed. Richard G. Hovannisian and Georges Sabagh (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1999), 36.
2Ibid.

3To distinguish "rhetoric" in the sense of empirical or normative study of oratory art from the practice in
itself, the term "meta-rhetoric" is sometimes used. "Meta-rhetoric" is thus designed to refer to the practice of
speaking or writing about rhetoric-what it is or what it should be: see George A. Kennedy, A New History of
Classical Rhetoric (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994), 3.
4By the classical subdivisions, I mean 'ilm al-bayin, 'ilm al-badi', and 'ilm al-ma'inT. The entries in
Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.) are more specifically as follows: badi', baliigha, baydn, and al-ma'ani
wa-bayimn.

5W. P. Heinrichs, "Rhetoric and Poetics," in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, vol. 2, ed. Julie Scott
Meisami and Paul Starkey (London: Routledge, 1998), 651.
6William Smyth, "Rhetoric and 'Ilm al-balagha: Christianity and Islam," Muslim World 82, 3-4 (1992);
Herbjorn Jenssen, The Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language: Preliminary Investigations into al-
Qazwini's Talkhis al-Miftiih (Bergen: Centre for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 1998). See also Margaret
Larkin, The Theology of Meaning: 'Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani's Theory of Discourse (New Haven, Conn.:
American Oriental Society, 1995); and the introduction in Helmut Ritter, ed., Kitab asrar al-balaghah li-'Abd
al-Qahir al-Jurjani (Istanbul: Matba'at Wizarat al-Ma'arif, 1954). In matters concerning the classical sources
of the science of al-balagha, see also August Ferdinand Mehren, Die Rhetorik der Araber (Copenhagen:
Verlag Von Otto Schwartz, 1853), 3-13.

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 35

7Smyth, "Rhetoric and 'Ilm al-balagha," 253, n. 24.

8 Georges Bohas, Jean-Patrick Guillaume, and Djamel Eddine Kouloughli, The Arabic Linguistic Tradition
(London: Routledge, 1990), 104, 113.
9In accordance with the conventional view of their time, the medieval Muslim philosophers treated the
book on rhetoric as well as the one on poetics as parts of the Organon. This is the so-called context theory,
which may seem unfamiliar to modem philosophers, for whom the organization of Aristotle's works in the
Bekker edition has been standard: see Deborah Black, Logic and Aristotle's "Rhetoric" and "Poetics" in
Medieval Arabic Philosophy (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1990) 1, passim.
10For editions of the Arabic translation, see M. C. Lyons, ed., Aristotle's "Ars Rhetorica": The Arabic
Version, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Pembroke Arabic Texts, 1982); and Abd al-Rahman Badawi, ed., al-Khataba:
al-tarjama al-'Arabiyya al-qadima/Aristutalis, Dirasat Islamiyya 23 (Cairo: Maktabat al-Nahda al-Misriyya,
1959). For editions of the commentaries by the Muslim philosophers, see, for example, J. Langhade and
M. Grignaschi, trans. and ed., Deux ouvrages inedits sur la rhetorique (al-Farabi), Recherches de l'institut
de Lettres Orientales de Beyrouth 48 (Beirut: Dar al-Machreq, 1971); Abd al-Rahman Badawi, Talkhis al-
khataba/Ibn Rushd (Beirut: Dara al-Qalam, 1960); Charles E. Butterworth, trans. and ed., Averrois' Three
Short Commentaries on Aristotle's "Topics," "Rhetoric," and Poetics," Studies in Islamic Philosophy and
Science (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1977); Muhammad Salim Salim, ed., Kitab al-majmu'
aw al-hikma al-'arudiyya a'ani rituriqa/Ibn Sina (Cairo: Maktabat al-Nahda al-Misriyya, 1950); Muhammad
Salim Salim, ed., rev. I. Madkour, al-Shifa: al-khataba, vol. 1, pt. 8 (Cairo: Imprimerie Nationale, 1954).
In addition, three works of particular importance to the philosophical tradition of the khatitba have recently
been published by M. Aouad: Averroes, Commentaire moyen a la Rhetorique d'Aristote, texte 6tabli, traduit
et commente par M. Aouad, 3 vols. (Paris: Vrin, 2002); M. Aouad, "La doctrine rh6torique d'Ibn Ridwan
et la Didascalia in Rhetoricam Aristotelis ex glosa Alpharabii," Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 7 (1997):
163-245; and M. Aouad, "La doctrine rh6torique d'Ibn Ridwan et la Didascalia in Rhetoricam Aristotelis ex
glosa Alpharabii (Suite)," Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 8 (1998): 131-60.
11Lyons, Aristotle's "Ars Rhetorica," 1.
12In regard to the theories of al-Jurjani in the context of contemporary exegetical and theological concerns,
see Larkin, The Theology of Meaning, and Djamel E. Kouloughli, "L'influence mu'tazilite sur la naissance et
le d6veloppement de la rh6torique arabe," Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 12 (2002): 217-39.
13The overview is primarily based on the systematization of the influential systematization provided by
al-Qazwini. For further references, see Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language.
14Mehren, Die Rhetorik der Araber, 18-19, 20 ff, 97 ff, respectively.
15See Black, Logic and Aristotle's "Rhetoric," 33, 52-57, 73, passim.
16Aristotle, On Interpretation, pt. 4, trans. E. M. Edghill; available online at: <http://classics.mit.edu/
Aristotle/interpretation.html>
17Bohas et al., Arabic Linguistic Tradition, 107. See also Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture:
The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society (London: Routledge, 1998),
132; P. Shinar, "Ibn Wahb," in Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed., suppl., Fascicules 5-6 (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1982), 402.
18For muqtada al-hail, see Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language, 41, passim.
19According to tradition, this system was first formulated in Greek by Theophrastus: see Jorgen Fafner,
Tanke og tale. Den retoriske tradition i Vesteuropa (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzels Forlag, 1991), 68 f.
20Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language, vii, passim.
21Mehren, Die Rhetorik der Araber, 19 (see also 6). Comment in Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the
Arabic Language, 10.
22For further details and discussion, see Philip Halld6n, Islamiskpredikan pa ljudkassett: En studie i retorik
och fonogramologi (in Swedish), Lund Studies in History of Religions, vol. 13 (Stockholm: Almqvist and
Wiksell, 2001), 90-95.
23For further references and details, see idem., 95-100.
24Michael Carter, "Humanism and the Language Sciences in Medieval Islam," in Humanism, Culture and
Language in the Near East. Studies in Honor of Georg Krotkoff, ed. Asma Afsaruddin and A. H. Mathias
Zahniser (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 34.
25See, for instance, Hilal Naji, ed., al-La'all li-lbn al-Jawzi (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 1994), and
Ahmad 'Abd al-Tawwab 'Awad, ed., Mawd'iz Ibn al-Jawzi al-musamma al-Yaqita (Cairo: Dar al-Fadila,
1994). Further references can be found in Swartz, "Arabic Rhetoric."

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
36 Philip Halldin

26See ibid.; and Merlin Swartz, "The Rules of Popular Preaching in Twelfth-Century Baghdad, According
to Ibn al-Jawzi," in Pridication et Propagande au Moyen Age: Islam, Byzance, Occident, ed. G. Makdisi,
D. Sourdel, and J. Sourdel-Thomine (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1983). See also the seminal
study by Angelika Hartmann, "Les ambivalences d'un sermonnaire habalite, Ibn al-Gauzi (m. en 597/1201),
sa carriere et son ouvrage autographe, le 'Kitab al-Hawatim," Annales Islamologiques 22 (1986): 51-115.
27Boaz Shoshan, Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), esp.
9-22.
28A1-Hurayfish and the collection of sermons atrributed to him are currently the focus of a research project
I am currently preparing. The project was initiated in January 2003 with the support of the Swedish Research
Council.
29See esp. the chapter on oratory in George Makdisi, The Rise of Humanism in Classical Islam and the
Christian West (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1990), 148-52. The works presented and discussed
by Makdisi here are mainly as follows: al-'lqd al-Farid by Ibn 'Abd Rabbihi; Diwan Khutab by Ibn Nubata
al-Fariqi; Fihrist by Ibn al-Nadim; Subh al-a 'sha ina 'at al-insha' by al-Qalqashandi; Kitab al-sina'atayn by
Abu Hilal al-'Askari; and two biographical dictionaries by Ahmad al-Isbahani.
30The sermons of al-Jilani have been studied to some extent by Jean-Claude Vadet, "L'eloquence d'un
sermonnaire hanbalite du XIIe siecle, Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani," in Makdisi et al., Predication et Propagande
au Moyen Age.
31See C. Barbier de Meynard, trans. and ed., Les colliers d'or: allocutions morales de Zamakhshari (Paris:
Imprimerie nationale, 1876); and A. Wormhoudt, trans. and ed., Adab al-Minbarfrom the Iqd al-Farid by Abu
Umar ibn Abd Rabbihi, Arab Translations Series 106 (William Penn College, 1989).
32Mohamed Ibn Hocine Esslimani, ed., Kitab adab al-khatib (by Ibn al-'Attar al-Dimashqi) (Beirut: Dar
al-Gharb al-Islami, 1996).
33See, for instance, Adab al-kiitib (for secretaries) by Ibn Qutayba (d. 889), Kitab al-adab al-kabir (for
rulers and their staff in general) by Ibn al-Muqaffa' (d. 756), Adab al-mu'allimin (for teachers) by Muhammad
ibn Sahnan (d. 870), Adab al-wazir (for ministers), and Adab al-qadi (for judges) by al-Mawardi (d. 1058).
34Works by these mainly Sunni authorities that may be of particular interest are, for instance, Kitab
al-mawa'iz ft al-ahadith al-qudsiyya and Maqamat al-'ulama bayna yaday al-khulafa' wa-l-umara' by al-
Ghazdli; Fawa'id al-fawa'id by Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya; and Sawn al-mantiq wa-l-kalam 'an fann al-mantiq
wa-l-kaliim by Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti.
35The book, which was formerly attributed to Qudama ibn Ja'far, is available in several editions. The
latest--and to my knowledge, the most complete--edition is Abu Husayn Ishaq ibn Sulayman ibn Wahb
al-katib, al-Burhan ujuh al-bayan, ed. A. Matloub and Khadija al-Hadithi (Baghdad: Jamiat Baghdad,
1967).
36Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, 132. See also Shinar, "Ibn Wahb"; and Bohas et al., Arabic
Linguistic Tradition, 107.
370n the geneaology of the khutba as conceived by al-Jahiz, see Marie-H6l1ne Avril, "Genealogie de la
hutba dans le kitdb al-baydn wa al-tabyin de GCdhiz," in Bulletin d'ltudes Orientales. Langue et Litterature
Arabes, vol. 46 (Damascus: Intitut Francais de Damas, 1994).
38For a recent attempt at definition, see G. Ueding, "Was ist Rhetorik?" available online at: http://www.uni-
tuebingen.de/uni/nas/definition/rhetorik.htm (last viewed 25 November 2002).
39This is not to say that "bellelettristic" concerns were absent from rhetoric in antiquity and the Middle
Ages. See Fafner, Tanke og tale, 68 f, 87 ff, for discussions of this tendency in earlier periods, as well. Also
according to the Fafner (ibid., 245), it was in the middle-16th century that the interest really shifted from
rhetoric to poetics.
40Ibid., 245. For a detailed study of this particular moment in the history of rhetoric, see Kees Meerhoff,
Rhetorique etpoetique au XVIe sihcle en France, Studies in Mediaeval and Reformation Thought 36 (Leiden:
E. J. Brill, 1986), and later works by the same author.
41Thomas M. Conley, Rhetoric in the European Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994),
128-30.
42Ibid., 133.
43It should be added that there were important precursors to Petrus Ramus and Omer Talon in their critical
attitude towards the traditional five-part system of rhetoric-for instance, Rudolf Agricola (1443-85) and Juan
Luis Vives (1493-1540). See the works of Meerhoff for further references.
44Conley, Rhetoric, 143-44.

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 What Is Arab Islamic Rhetoric? 37

45Fafner, Tanke og tale, 304.

46Ibid., 367 ff.
47Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language; Swartz, "Arabic Rhetoric."
48Smyth, "Rhetoric and 'Ilm al-balagha", 242.
49Ibid., 243.
50Ibid., 254.
51Ibid.

52For a discussion of this problem in general, see Marshall G. S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, Vol. 1:
The Classical Age of Islam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 97, passim.
53Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, 61-69.
54See, for example, al-Baqillani's debates with the Christian clergy at the Court of Basil and his book al-
Masa'il al-Qustantiniyya (The Questions of Constantinople). Further references in Yusuf Ibish, The Political
Doctrine of al-Baqillani (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1966). The same al-Baqillani, who is an
important point of reference concerning this particular subject, is also known to have written a commentary
to al-Ash'ari's Adab al-jadal (The Art of Argument). For studies on the subjects of muniizara and jadal in
Muslim theology, see J. van Ess, "Disputationspraxis in der islamischen Theologie. Eine vorldlufige Skizze,"
Revues des Etudes Islamiques 44 (1976): 23-60; G. Makdisi, "Dialectic and Disputation: The Relation
Between the texts of Qirqisani and Ibn 'Aqil," Milanges d'Islamologie (dedi6 a la memoire de A. Abel) 1
(1974): 201-6. See also E. Wagner, "Muntzara," Encyclopaedia oflslam, 2nd ed., vol. VII (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1993).
55Walter Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influences on Greek Culture in the Early
Archaic Age (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992).
56Conley, Rhetoric, 59 ff.
57Averil Cameron, The Mediterranean World in Late Antiquity A.D. 395-600 (London: Routledge, 1993),
188.
58For a general orientation in the field, see G. W. Bowersock, P. Brown, and O. Grabar, ed., Late Antiquity:
A Guide to the Postclassical World (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999), with a chapter on
Islam written by H. Kennedy. Another important work of reference is A. Cameron, B. Ward-Perkins, and
M. Whitby, ed., The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol. XIV. Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, A.D. 425-
600 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Of particular interest is also Sulayman Bashir, Arabs
and Others in Early Islam, Studies in Late Antiquity and Islam 8 (Princeton, N. J.: Darwin Press, 1997), and
the sequence of works on the pre-Islamic Arabs and their relations with Rome and Byzantium by Irfan Shahid.
See, for instance, Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century and Byzantium and the Arabs in
the Sixth Century (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1989 and 1995, respectively). On the survival of the
urban infrastructure of the late antique Near East into the Islamic period, see Paul Wheatley, The Places Where
Men Pray Together: Cities in Islamic Lands, Seventh Through the Tenth Centuries (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 2001).
59See Cameron, Mediterranean World, 184 f, and, more particularly, the studies by Shahid.
60See Robert E. G. Downey, Gaza in the Early Sixth Century, Centres of Civilization Series 8 (Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press, 1963); and Carol A. M. Glucker, The City of Gaza in the Roman and Byzantine
Periods (Oxford: B.A.R., 1987).
61Cameron, Mediterranean World, 132.
62Ibid., 9.
63See Ibid., 140 ff, 182 f, and, more specifically, Sebastian Brock, "Greek into Syriac and Syriac into
Greek," in Syrian Perspectives on Late Antiquity, ed. S. Brock (London: Variorum Reprints, 1984).
64Cameron, Mediterranean World, 182-83.
65Ibid., 184.
66From the manuscript of a keynote speech by Aziz al-Azmeh, "Islam and the History of Civilizations,"
presented at the Nordic Middle East Conference, Lund University, Sweden, 25-28 October 2001 (Tidskriftfior
mellanrsternstudier, no. 2 [2002]: 82).
67Ibid.
680ratory was one of the fields in which the pre-Islamic Arabs were reputed to have excelled, but we know
much less about it than we do about poetry. The semi-legendary Quss ibn Sa'ida al-Iyadi is regularly held
up as the greatest orator of all time: see Charles Pellat, "Kuss b. Sa'ida al-Iyadi," in Encyclopaedia of Islam,
2nd ed.

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
38 Philip Hallde-n

69Glenn Warren Bowersock, "Islam and Hellenism," in idem, Hellenism in Late Antiquity (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, 1996).
70Progymnasmata-that is, preliminary exercises in rhetoric and composition based on textbooks such as
that by Aphtonius (4th-century A.D.). Through these exercises the student was introduced to composing in a
wide variety of genres: fable, narrative, refutation, comparison, characterization, description, and thesis. See
Anders Eriksson, "Afthonios-Viisterlandets ldirare," Rhetorica Scandinavica 24 (2002); and idem, Retoriska
Ovningar: Afthonios' Progymnasmata (Nora: Nya Doxa, 2002). Several of the progymnasmata texts have just
recently been translated into English: see George A. Kennedy, Progymnasmata: Greek Textbooks of Prose
Composition and Rhetoric (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003).
71Frank J. D'Angelo, Composition in the Classical Tradition (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2000), xiii.
D'Angelo's observation is repeated in Eriksson, Retoriska Ovningar, 28 f.
72Concerning Chorcius, see, for instance, Robert Browning, "Education in the Roman Empire," in The
Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. XIV Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, A.D. 425-600, ed. A. Cameron,
B. Ward-Perkins, and M. Whitby (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 860.
73Conley, Rhetoric, 66 f.
74Ibid., 68.
75Ibid.

76See, for example, Jonathan P. Berkey, Popular Preaching and Religious Authority in the Medieval Islamic
Near East (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001), 48.
77Conley, Rhetoric, 111 f.
78See Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, with further references.
79Concerning the rediscovery of the Aristotelian corpus in Europe, see Majid Fakhry, Averroes, Aquinas and
the Rediscovery of Aristotle in Western Europe, Occasional Papers (Washington, D.C.: Center for Muslim-
Christian Understanding, 1997), and other works by the same author. See also Charles E. Butterworth and
Blake Andr6e Kessel, ed., The Introduction of Arabic Philosophy into Europe (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994); and
Lyons, Aristotle's "Ars Rhetorica," xvi, on the importance of the Arabic version of Aristotle's Rhetoric.
80See the contributions in Butterworth and Kessel, Introduction of Arabic Philosophy, more specifically the
article by Hans Daiber (ibid., 65).
81Clifford Edmund Bosworth, "Byzantium and the Arabs: War and Peace Between two World Civilisations,"
in C. E. Bosworth, The Arabs, Byzantium and Iran: Studies in Early Islamic History and Culture (Aldershot:
Variorum, 1996), xiii, 3.
82Ibid. Bosworth is here referring to historians of the Mamluk period, al-Maqrizi and Ibn Taghribirdi.
83Bosworth, "Byzantium and the Arabs," 5 f.
84Ibid., 13. For Arab-Byzantine relations during this period, see also the many studies by Marius Canard.
Most are in French, but some have been translated into English-for instance, "Byzantium and the Muslim
World to the Middle of the Eleventh Century," in The Cambridge Medieval History, IV. The Byzantine Empire,
Pt. 1.

85Bosworth, "Byzantium and the Arabs," 17.

86See, for instance, al-Qurtubi's famous book The Classes of the Nations, as discussed in Bosworth,
"Byzantium and the Arabs," 17.
87Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, 84-85.
88Ibid., 85-87, passim.
89Cited in ibid., 89. (al-Mas'udi, Muruj al-dhahab.)
90Ibid., 25, passim.
91Jenssen, Subtleties and Secrets of the Arabic Language.
92Swartz, "Arabic Rhetoric."

This content downloaded from 94.32.214.69 on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 09:01:42 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms