Isocrates. “Antidosis.” Isocrates with an English Translation in three volumes Ed. and Trans. by George Norlin. Perseus Digital Library. N.d. Tufts University. Web. 24 January 2014.
I found this copy of “Antidosis” on the Perseus Digital Library; it is listed under Isocrates through the Greek and Roman Materials, but it is not easy to find through the search bar. The Greek and Roman Materials archive has both the Greek version and the English translation, which, while not necessarily helpful to students, adds a certain gravitas to the work itself. The website breaks up the piece by paragraph, with footnotes following just below. The footnotes make it an excellent reference for close reading. The text is searchable by keyword, but it is not very “skimable” because of the small flashes of material available at one time.
Isocrates. “Antidosis.” University of Mary-Harlan Baylor Library. N.d. University of Mary-Harlan Baylor. Web. 24 January 2014.
This copy of “Antidosis” is a downloadable Word document. I found it by searching “Antidosis full text” on Google, and UMHB hosts this copy for educational use through Perseus. The format of the piece makes it easy to save and revisit, and the Ctrl+F function is available for the document to search for key terms. While the document and the search locations both say that the text comes from Perseus, there is no indication of a translator or a collected volume for this work, contrasting the ease of downloading the document with less identifiable credibility.
Isocrates. “Antidosis.” Isocrates with an English translation. Ed. George Norlin. Archive.org. N.d. Internet Archive. Web. 24 January 2014.
This is the same translation by George Norlin that is hosted on the Perseus Digital Archive, but this version is in one continuous body of text from Norlin’s entire book, not just this piece. This means that in order to find “Antidosis,” a reader must use the Ctrl+F function and scroll down to the piece. The piece is also in one continuous piece of text rather than broken up by paragraph. The full page of text makes this version better for skimming than for close reading. While the keyword search is helpful, the fact that a reader may have to scroll through multiple instances of a keyword to even get to the right piece of writing makes this version very cumbersome.
Benoit, William. “Isocrates and Aristotle on Rhetoric.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 20.3 (Summer 1990): 251-259.
William Benoit, in his article “Isocrates and Aristotle on Rhetoric” (1990), suggests that comparing Isocrates’ and Aristotle’s views on rhetoric can give a fuller picture of the role of rhetoric during their overlapping teaching years. Benoit begins by describing the philosophies of the Sophists and Plato—Isocrates having often been considered a Sophist and Aristotle having been a student of Plato—in order to locate Isocrates’ and Aristotle’s philosophies as similar, though not identical, compromises between these two extremes. His purpose is to further explorations into the philosophical relationships between the prominent Classical figures in order to add to previous scholarship comparing Plato and Aristotle and Plato and Isocrates, but never Aristotle and Isocrates. Benoit writes to academics in the rhetoric field already involved in analysis of Greek and Roman rhetors, contributing to existing conversations surrounding the philosophical and epistemological theories of the time.
Livingstone, Niall. “Writing Politics: Isocrates’ Rhetoric of Philosophy.” Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric 25.1 (Winter 2007): 15-34.
Niall Livingston, in his article “Writing Politics: Isocrates’ Rhetoric of Philosophy” (2007), claims that while Isocrates’ career cannot be neatly identified within modern disciplinary bounds, his views on philosophy and education are still systematic and sophisticated. Livingston examines the definitions and connotations of the word philosophia within Isocrates’ work, delineating its use to mean the general act of thinking; the contemporary movement to systematize education; Isocrates’ particular brand of education, which far exceeds that of his competitors; and finally the product of Isocrates’ superior teachings, which only initiates can fully comprehend. Livingston’s purpose is to further the rhetorical analysis of Isocrates’ work without anachronistic expectations of Isocrates as a rhetorician, examining his writing for internal evidence of Isocrates’ intentions for political discourse and the power of education. Livingston writes to and in response to other academics who have expressed frustration at Isocrates’ ambiguity or who have dismissed his work as “non-Rhetoric” (as opposed to Plato) because of his refusal to define himself.
Rummel, Erika. “Isocrates’ Ideal of Rhetoric: Criteria of Evaluation.” The Classical Journal 75.1 (1979): 25-35.
Erika Rummel, in her article “Isocrates’ Ideal of Rhetoric: Criteria of Evaluation” (1979), asserts that Isocrates’ unique criteria for rhetoric are what make him an influential figure in the study of Greek classics. Rummel cites Isocrates’ own writing that rhetorical works should be judged on purpose, style, and content, situating him in a complex relationship with relativism and the work of the Sophists, the traditions of poetry and music, and issues of morality and ethics in political discourse. Her purpose is to unpack some of the complicated dynamic created by Isocrates’ profession as a rhetoric teacher and his sympathy for the pragmatic common citizen, demonstrating just how nuanced Isocrates’ career was. Rummel writes to an academic audience of classicists, establishing a range of potential impetuses for scholarly response through her emphasis both on Isocrates’ culturally rooted pragmatism and his unique philosophy.
Haskins, Ekaterina. “Choosing between Isocrates and Aristotle: Disciplinary Assumptions and Pedagogical Implications.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 36.2 (Spring 2006): 191-201.
Cahn, Michael. “Reading Rhetoric Rhetorically: Isocrates and the Marketing of Insight.” A Journal of the History of Rhetoric 7.2 (Spring 1989): 121-144.
