Here’s the book I was thinking of, Oxford’s encyclopedia of rhetoric: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195125955.001.0001/acref-9780195125

Here’s the book I was thinking of, Oxford’s encyclopedia of rhetoric: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195125955.001.0001/acref-9780195125955 https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/978019512... The handlist of rhetorical terms, while not as exhaustive has a ton of great knowledge as well and covers all the key bits: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520273689/a-handlist-of-rhetorical-terms https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520273689/a-handlist-of-rhe... And yes, it’s more common to just call these things figures of speech these days. But rhetoric was a rather sophisticated and complex field of study back in the day. Its lost its luster and is rarely formally studied these days expect in very small circles, presumably of politicians and other important speechifiers. The latins abd medievals really had developed it into quite the art. They went so far as to distinguish the speeches sonic effects from its emotional ones, both of which were seperate from its logical import, and all of which were controllabe to degrees by the deployment of certain figures. Technology has made these arts wither in a way as a lot of the impetus for their practice was driven by the need to keep the memory sharp—its easier to recall a set of several repetable rythmic figures than a freeform prose speech wihout fixed patterns—similar techniques were used in the recitation of oral myths—these days we dont need these “wetware” techniques as much since we have so many other technological memory supports.