Primary Sources
Longinus. On the Sublime. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. The University of Adelaide Library. eBooks@Adelaide, 31 Oct. 2012. Web. <http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/l/longinus/on_the_sublime/ 25 Jan. 2014.>
This is an excellent digital version; the website is easy to navigate and provides a helpful table of contents for the text. There is also the option of downloading as a file. I would highly recommend this version of the text.
Longinus. On the Sublime. Trans. H.L. Havell. Ohio State University Libraries. London and New York, Macmillan and co., 1890. Web. 25 Jan. 2014. <https://archive.org/details/LonginusOnTheSublime>
This source, although from the late 1800s, is quite readable. Also, the cite provides the option of downloading it as a pdf file or full text article—it even allows for a download on a Kindle. Overall, a nice digital version if one was looking for an older translation of the text.
Longinus. On the Sublime. Trans. A.O. Prickard. Cornell University Library. Oxford at the The Clarendon Press, 1906. Web. 25 Jan. 2014. <https://archive.org/details/cu31924014233450>
This source was good, although not quite as easy to read as the other two (although there is a zooming function, which can enhance the quality a bit). There is also the option of downloading the file—in pdf format or on a Kindle.
Secondary Sources
Carson, Jamin. “The Sublime and Education.” Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40.1 (Spring 2006): 79-93. Web. 26 Jan. 2014.
Jamin Carson, in the article “The Sublime and Education,” suggests that the aesthetic notion of the “sublime” should be used as an educational tool because it has the ability to strengthen students’ “aesthetic sensibility”—and gives students a concrete “concept” and “word” about the sublime and about beauty (79, 84). Carson develops this idea by first providing an overview of three different theories of the sublime—from thinkers Longinus, Edmund Burke, and Immanuel Kant—and then by showing how the concepts of transport (for Longinus), terror (for Burke), and infinitude (for Kant) that these thinkers develop can be practically applied within educational settings. Carson’s purpose is to outline specific ways that a seemingly “aesthetic” concept, like the sublime, can have practical applications within education in order to show that aesthetics need not be confined only to “aesthetic” subjects, like art and literature, but can also influence subjects, such as math and science. Carson’s article is written to a specific audience—namely, for instructors who desire more knowledge about how to apply an “artistic” theory to a “non-artistic” academic subject.
De Jonge, Casper C. “Clever Composition. A Textual Note on Longinus, On the Sublime 40.2.” Mnemosyne, 65.4/5 (2012): 717-725. Web 26 Jan. 2014.
De Jonge, Casper C. “Dionysisus and Longinus on the Sublime: Rhetoric and Religious Language.” American Journal of Philology. John Hopkins University Press, 133.2 (Summer 2012): 271-300. Web. 25 Jan. 2014.
Casper C. de Jonge, in his article “Dionysius and Longinus on the Sublime: Rhetoric and Religious Language,” asserts that Longinus’ concept of the “sublime” is deeply embedded in Augustan ideas regarding rhetoric and religion and also that On the Sublime maintains strong connections to the works of Longinus’ contemporary, Greek rhetorician Dionysius. De Jonge develops this idea through a detailed examination of the ways in which “hupsos” (meaning height or the sublime) functions within different texts, particularly drawing attention to the similarities between the ways hupsos was used in Longinus’ and Dionysisus’ texts—in regards to composition theory and religion. De Jonge’s purpose in the article is to emphasize the similarities, as opposed to the differences (as most critics have done), between Dionysius and Longinus in order to reimagine the “intellectual context” in which Longinus’ text exists. De Jonge’s piece is written for a fairly specific academic audience that would be interested in reconsidering the ways in which Longinus’ On the Sublime has come to be understood within the academic community.
Innes, D.C. “Longinus and Caecilius: Models of the Sublime.” Mnemosyne, 55.3 (2002): 259-84. Web. 26 Jan. 2014.
Macksey, Richard. “Longinus Reconsidered.” MLN Comparative Literature.
John Hopkins University Press, 108.5 (Dec. 1993): 913-934. Web. 25 Jan. 2014.
O’Gorman, Ned. “Longinus’s Sublime Rhetoric, or How Rhetoric Came into Its Own.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 34.2 (Spring, 2004): 71-89. Web. 25 Jan. 2014.
Ned O’ Gorman, in his article, “Longinus’s Sublime Rhetoric, or How Rhetoric Came into Its Own,” argues that Longinus’ On the Sublime (or of Peri Hypsous) represents a major shift within the history of rhetoric because the text suggests that rhetoric is an end in itself and not a means to an end—therefore, rhetoric avoids a teleological purpose and refuses to be legitimatized. Gorman proves this idea by mapping out the rhetorical goals of major historical figures—such as Aristotle, Isocrates, Gorgias, and Cicero—and reveals, through a linguistic discussion of Longinus’ notion of height (hypsos) and ecstasy (ekstasis) precisely how Longinus creates a new vocabulary for rhetoric and elevates rhetoric as an end in its own right. Gorman’s purpose is to provide critical attention to a text that he feels has been historically ignored, while also questioning Longinus’ notion that rhetoric needs not be legitimatized in order to suggest that rhetoric, in contemporary academia, must, by necessity, be justified so as to not be “kept out of reach” and “monumentalized” (16). Gorman’s article can be of importance for both scholars who seek to understand Longinus’ text within the historical context of rhetoric, for those who want to know more about the aesthetic development of the “sublime,” or for rhetoric instructors who question the importance of legitimatizing rhetorical study in academia.
