Abstract

The phenomenon of »sophistic« rhetoric has been intensively discussed in philosophical as well as philological research. The present paper approaches the topic from an ancient historian’s perspective. It asks how we can identify »sophistic« rhetorical strategies in real public speeches and compares possible indications of such approaches with those rhetorical strategies which, from a contemporary point of view, were definitely »democracy-affine«. Thus, it is not about the attitudes of philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle, but about the widespread public perception in classical Athens. As an example of sophistic-labeled rhetoric this paper examines the forensic speeches of Antiphon of Rhamnus. It concludes that such a differentiation of rhetorical strategies, as it is insinuated by those contemporaries, is inadequate. Antiphons’ arguments correspond to the democratic common sense to a considerable extent. Divergences from the latter are only partly due to the reception of »sophistic« philosophical items and correspond only partly to the widespread critique of the sophists.