The Stylistic Expression of Irony in Galen’s Polemics

The article presents an analysis of excerpts from Galen’s works in which he ridicules and defames his opponents using various types of irony and a wide range of stylistic devices for its expression. Public medical disputes were part of the "agonistic" culture of the Second Sophistic, and thus were conducted using rhetorical tools characteristic of judicial oratory, where victory depended not only on logical arguments but also on the oratorical skill of mocking and discrediting opponents. Thanks to the classical Greek education he received in his youth, Galen was well-versed in ancient rhetorical theories and confidently applied them in practice to engage in polemics with his opponents. The author examines different types of irony, such as wit, mockery, derision, and sarcasm. Depending on the context, Galen employs varying degrees of irony – from false self-deprecation to personal insults against his opponents – resorting to different stylistic devices such as hyperbole, paradox, antithesis, and rhetorical questions. The frequent use of superlative adjectives, derogatory comparisons, and lexical fields related to stupidity, empty talk, ignorance, madness, and shamelessness is noted, along with proverbs well known to the audience. Irony often carries a philosophical subtext, extending beyond medical disputes and touching on ethical issues. Thus, it serves not merely as a stylistic embellishment but constitutes an essential part of Galen’s polemical strategy aimed at asserting his own authority. It reflects his views on science, philosophy, and a society where intellectual debates required not only knowledge of the subject but also wit and, at times, ruthless criticism. The novelty of the study lies in expanding scholarly understanding of the role of medical debates during the Second Sophistic era and filling gaps in the study of rhetorical techniques in the language of medicine.