ABSTRACT
The ars dictaminis was generally used in deliberative and forensic discourse; the ars notaria more specifically applied to forensic settings. The ars notaria differed from the ars dictaminis in degree instead of kind. The ars dictaminis ultimately sought a solution in a rigid formalism intended to freeze discourse in intersubjectively transmissible formulae to reduce ambiguity and misinterpretation. The ars dictaminis recognized several important facts about the nature of discourse, facts that seem particularly pertinent in view of the "intermediate age" of written discourse which has dominated for the last 2000 years. Many of Robert Henryson's other figures reflect points of mutual interest between the ars dictaminis and ars poetriae. Henryson's use of the formulaic elements of political and legal documents is ample. Henryson's fables suggest that even with such understanding an unwitting person could be duped or beguiled by duplicitous officers of the court.
