Brunetto Latini's Influence on Modern Political Science
By James Arrowood

Reading and studying Brunetto Latini’s Li Livres dou Tresor has revitalized my interest in political science. It was through Latini I finally found the nexus between rhetoric and writing and political science. I have read modern political theorist who eloquently and passionately wrote of political ideas that shaped our world today, but none that I can recall have linked the art of rhetoric with governance as well as Brunetto Latini.

Latini’s political contribution was subtle, and intermingled within his encyclopedia dou Tresor, which inadvertently, buries the significant political theory aspect behind a silly medieval book of knowledge which includes a palimpsested version of Aristotle’s ethics and Cicero’s rhetoric. Nonetheless, the relevant political theory contributed by Latini is evident in the section on governance in Book III of dou Tresor.

Latini’s passion for good governance is inspirational, and should inspire political science departments to incorporate Latini into modern political science curriculums. Currently, the modern political theory class at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock teaches Machiavelli, Marx, Rousseau, Hobbes, and Locke. These influential philosophers had a greater direct affect on modern politics than Latini, but it is interesting to wonder how or who taught them to write so well. It is quite possible that the rhetoric in Latini’s dou Tresor influenced both their writing and ideas. Yet, none draw corollaries between their marvelous rhetoric and the field of political science like Latini.

Today, in political science class, students read and discuss great political theorist, but instructors neglect teaching students how to convey their own political ideas into speech or written discourse. I have witnessed students sink into their desk and avoid class discussions because many are unsure how to word their thoughts in a manner that will persuade their audience.

Current political science courses operate on the “banking” concept theorized by P. Friere. I am not an opponent of the banking concept of learning because much of the information students learn in political science must be “deposited” into their minds. On the contrary, most political science teachers do indeed allow students a forum for collaborative and creative expression in their classrooms. Class discussions often yield a number of perspectives on a number of political issues. Often these discussions turn into aimless classroom debates where students argue points of view, attempting to persuade classmates, and demonstrate their understanding of the subject matter in front of the teacher. Class debate is a step in the right direction, but the political science department lacks praxis for students to fine tune their persuasive speaking and writing skills.

Latini draws the connection between rhetoric and writing and political science through emphases on letter writing. Dante quoted Latini in the Divine Comedy in Canto XV, "He listeneth well who noteth it." Known as “the man of letters,” Latini perfected the art of persuasive letter writing, and demonstrated this by successfully making Florence a hub of political power during the middle ages on account of his skillful treaty writing. This is the kind of practical genre intensive writing that students should be practicing as political science majors.

Political Science departments need to inject into their curriculums a dose of practical writing exercises. Not one time during a political science class was I required to write a piece of legislation, or practice legal writing, or study a peace treaty and practice mediatory writing, nor did I write a speech as if I were a speech writer. Granted, I was able to write a lot of political commentary, but I was never instructed on persuasive techniques that are vital to writing in the political commentary genre, which is actually persuasive writing.

Some may say that this is what the Rhetoric and Writing Department is for. That political science majors should take rhetoric and writing classes in order to pick up writing skills, speech classes to learn speech skills, finance classes to learn financing skills, and so forth. But who is forcing students to choose electives in rhetoric and writing? Furthermore, is the message the political science department sending to students this, that the real world practical skills necessary for government are available in all departments other than Political Science? I was advised by the political science chairman to take a persuasive writing course because I mentioned that I was interested in attending law school. But what about those interested in public administration? Are they advised to take classes in business administration? Brunetto Latini would advise otherwise.

Latini wrote, “Cicero says that the most important science relative to governing the city is rhetoric, that is to say, the science of speaking...” Rhetoric also includes the science of writing. Granted most political science courses require students to write essays to mirror the knowledge deposited throughout the semester. But, there is a lack of practical genre intensive writing such as political speech writing and treaty writing, and there is no organized debate. There is no study of campaign rhetoric versus midterm rhetoric, which should be mandatory for students in order to produce more informed citizens, who are able to read between the lines when they read or hear political rhetoric.

I took a tour of the UALR Bowen School of law about a year ago, and I had the opportunity to speak at length with a second year law student about the admissions policy and prerequisites needed to get in to law school. He mentioned how law schools aren’t necessarily dependent on political science majors to fill the student body. Instead, they prefer an applied science major, supplemented by a broad range of other academic disciplines, and not primarily a political science major. Could this be attributed to the lack of instruction on rhetoric in the political science curriculum?

With this said, I am still confident in the UALR Department of Political Science. I only recommend that more of a focus be placed on writing across the curriculum. Essay writing during a test, which seems to be the preferred type of writing in the department today, is not a practical form of writing in the real world. A genre intensive approach would benefit students in more ways than one. One, students learn through writing. Moving away from traditional essay writing and book report writing will supplement the current “banking” approach, and offer a creative environment that will enhance a students experience in the degree program. Two, practical writing experiences prepare students more for careers in government than essay and book report writing. Also, a genre intensive approach will open up doors to other careers in government. Three, writing increases analytical skills by forcing students to utilize their cognitive juices while composing. Students who are more analytically sound have a greater chance of moving on to graduate schools, law schools, and become more successful in their careers, ultimately, making the political science graduate more appealing than what it is today.