“Did Augustine Win?” Another Look at an Old Question about the Contra Fortunatum

Abstract The article examines Augustine’s rhetoric, and specifically his strategy of commenting on the responses of his opponent, throughout the Contra Fortunatum. Taking into account both the dialectical and the rhetorical dimensions of the debate, we regard this study, with its narrow focus on only one aspect of Augustine’s rhetoric (the continuous comments on the opponent’s responses to create a powerful subtext that permeates the debate), as the beginning of a more in-depth investigation of the rhetorical devices used by the two participants in the debate. The aim is to complement BeDuhn’s compelling case for the dialectical superiority of Fortunatus’s arguments in the debate with some perspectives on Augustine’s rhetorical tactics, and to argue that Augustine may have lost on the basis of his arguments, but still may be regarded as “winning” on the strength of his rhetorical strategies. The handful of studies on the Contra Fortunatum to date have, like BeDuhn’s, focused on the content and Manichaean background of the debate, but investigations of the rhetorical devices employed by the participants are, to our knowledge, absent. The question of whether Augustine won does not have a simple answer, but we believe that this and future studies of the rhetorical devices employed by the two participants in the debate will provide an important additional perspective on Augustine’s claim in his Retractationes that he won the debate.