Search

The Horn Collection (MS Gen. 1824) comprises a fifteen-box, un-indexed collection of papers, drafts, notes, and miscellaneous items of David Baynes Horn, former Professor of History at the University of Edinburgh. This wideranging collection contains numerous items that will be of interest to historians of rhetoric, logic, philosophy, and education. At the time of his death in October 1969, D. B. Horn, Professor of Modern History at the University of Edinburgh, was engaged in writing a full-length history of his university. The University Court (Senate) had given Horn "two years leave of absence to write a full-scale History of the University of Edinburgh" according to his letter to the Edinburgh Town Clerk, dated 4 March 1968. Horn had earlier completedA Short History of the University of Edinburgh, 1556-1889, which was published by the Edinburgh University Press in 1967. In his letter to the Town Clerk, Horn described the parameters of his plan: "In the first instance, I would limit myself to the period when the Town Council acted as patrons of the University, that is down to 1858." Horn had made significant progress in the last twenty months of his life toward his goal of publishing a full history of his beloved University. Judging from the draft materials, Horn appears nearly to have completed the project. His papers and miscellaneous items will be of particular interest to those tracing the history of the teaching of rhetoric and belles lettres in eighteenth and nineteenth century Britain. The broader purpose of this bibliographical essay is to highlight those materials in the Horn collection that may be of value to the scholars interested in the general academic context of enlightenment rhetoric in the Scottish universities. The collection (MS Gen. 1824) was deposited in the University of Edinburgh Library by way of the good graces of D. B. Horn's daughter, Dr. Hazel Horn. It appears that Dr. Horn provided an initial deposit of her father's papers after his death in October, 1969, and in 1977 passed along a "further large instalment of [her] father's notes and papers for his history of the University. . .[which] will clearly be of value and benefit to many scholars" ("Letter from Mr. Charles Finlayson, Keeper of Manuscripts, to Dr. Hazel Horn," 7 October 1977). D.B.

Robert Watson, historian, minister, and professor, delivered a series of lectures on rhetoric and belles lettres in Edinburgh from 1752 to 1756, between the time Adam Smith and Hugh Blair delivered similar public lectures. Watson's unpublished manuscript lectures are described and discussed here for the first time and are compared to the lectures on rhetoric and belles lettres of Blair and Smith. Watson's lectures demonstrate a practical, moral rhetoric which, in its emphasis upon critical understanding and analysis of literary texts, provides additional evidence for an emerging "belletristic rhetoric" in eighteenth-century Scotland.

One of our most influential composition texts is Rhetoric: Discovery and Change. In it, Young, Becker, and Pike distinguish between classical and contemporary "domains of rhetoric"; in accordance with this distinction they differentiate Aristotle from Carl Rogers. In her article, "Aristotelian vs. Rogerian Argument: A Reassessment" (CCC, May 1979), Andrea Lunsford disputed the validity of the distinction, virtually "baptizing" Aristotle as a Rogers of his time. However, upon closer examination, Young, Becker, and Pike's perception of differences between Aristotle and Rogers can be confirmed. Furthermore, there is justifiable reason for maintaining Young, Becker, and Pike's distinction as a service to our students who need help in sensing when it is appropriate to confront "opponents" and when it is more advantageous to strive for change through mutual acceptance and understanding by each party of the other's views. The classical tradition in rhetoric, developed by Aristotle and modified by the Roman rhetoricians Cicero and Quintilian, was designed for use chiefly in law courts, political meetings, and religious ceremonies. The underlying principle of Aristotle's Rhetoric is that man is a rational animal, capable of using logical reasoning as the basis for argument.2 The strategy Artistotle uses to analyze rhetorical transactions is focussed, therefore, on the processes of logical reasoning-rational men using reasonable means (enthymemes) in exhorting or dissuading (deliberative oratory), in praising or blaming (epideictic oratory), and in accusing or defending (forensic oratory). The Rogerian strategy is based upon a different set of conditions and assumptions. Since Rogers is writing primarily from the context of patientclient therapy, his communication theory is applicable especially to rhetorical transactions outside of the advocacy situation. Young, Becker, and Pike, the principal proponents of a Rogerian-based rhetoric, point out that the Rogerian strategy "rests on the assumption that a man holds to his beliefs about who he is and what the world is like because other beliefs threaten his iden