ABSTRACT
The relationship between history and criticism in the study of public address is a perennial issue intimately connected with the nature, scope, methods, and purposes of rhetorical analysis. In recent years, thought on the issue has taken a notable turn, as both a cause and consequence of the remarkable upheaval in rhetorical scholarship since the late 1950s. The present disjunction between history and criticism is best seen against the traditional view that the study of history is an indispensable aspect of the process of rhetorical criticism. The dissatisfaction with conventional rhetorical analysis vitiated the traditional connection between history and criticism at almost every turn. This interpenetration of intrinsic and extrinsic factors is pronounced even in the one area in which they have been presumed to be most distinct-the study of rhetorical effect.
