I think it is great that while we as English students are studying ancient texts that we are actually getting a history lesson as well. I have definitely learned a lot about the time period of the texts we are studying and that makes me feel smart! And I like to feel smart. Doesn't everyone?
I like the Conley book because he gives a history of the time as well as the subject we are studying. For example, when he discusses the Second Sophistic, he gives us clues to help us associate it in terms of a bigger picture...not just, here's a date...this is what X did...that's all. He tells us that the Second Sophistic is really related to a bigger picture...the fall of the Roman republic. That lets me know its importance and, even though the fall of the Roman empire is a pretty negative idea, it makes me reconsider the meaning of the word "Sophist". I have interpreted the term with a negative connotation thus far in the course. Conley claims the term and the idea of the Second Sophistic has been "widely underestimated and misrepresented in standard treatments of the history of rhetoric" (59).
It seems to me that the Sophists were finally being taken a bit more seriously during this time period of the Second Sophistic. With all the advancements made in educational practices, such as those of the "enkyklios paideia", it seems only natural that the Sophists would fall right into place as teachers for those students who could afford their teaching. I think it's great that the Sophists held their ground during times when they were thought of as swindlers and crooks--becuase now, with a change in standards of education--they fit right in.
Maybe I am over simplifying the historical periods we have studied; nonetheless, the idea of the Second Sophistic has helped me change my negative ideas of the Sophists.
Apparently Francis Bacon was not just an influential rhetorician...he was a painter as well. This is Bacon's self portrait, painted in 1984. Some more of his paintings can be found HERE.
