Why did Renaissance writers emphasize the control of gesture so frequently?

Several Renaissance writers emphasized gesture in the delivery of public speaking, because they realized bodily movements to be effective in communicating intention, desire and emotion. The traditional Renaissance writers believed that rhetoric involved five processes: Invention, Disposition, Elocution, Memory, and Pronunciation. The first four processes dealt primarily with verbal communication, but the pronunciation of rhetoric included how to use the body when speaking. This attribute of public speaking was so important that renaissance authorities urged public speakers to observe and model their movements based on theatre actors.

A standard rule in performing gestures was that the movements must come natural and that every performer has a distinct way of gesturing. John Bulwer, a well-known Elizabethan writer, believed that the rhetorical speaker needed to evoke passion to communicate and evoke it in his audience. Following this claim, Bulwer wrote Chirologia and Chironomia, which compiled descriptions of various gestures which go back to ancient Greece and Rome with lots of illustrations showing how movements of the arm, hand, and fingers, fuse with the spoken word effectively. Bulwer cited Quintilian as the first Roman orator to compile an art out of the subject of gestures and to state that gesture must attend upon every flexion of the voice.

The control of a speaker’s gesture was very formalized. When speaking, one was only to use the right hand, because the left was a sign of inferiority or fault; but I think left handed people are smarter ;). Their reasoning was that the left hand was associated with falsehood and theft, and if a person was caught stealing, their left thumb would be branded.

As a performer, I have taken away a good amount of knowledge about how people in the Renaissance viewed public speaking and acting. They joined the two arts to create a passionate and emotional message that was very persuasive and believable. Their attention to body movements has impacted me the most, because, as I learned in Nonverbal Communication, 60-90% of all communication is nonverbal and it is the most convincing. So far the Renaissance has been my favorite historical period to research, due to their reinstitution of performance arts in the main society. What do you think about the Renaissance practices and the influence they have had on performance studies?

How did performance serve as a way of achieving and maintaining social status?

Performance in the Medieval period was mainly a communal event to glorify Jesus. An example of annually occurring performances was the Corpus Christi celebration in several English towns throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. During the day of celebration, the town would gather for a large feast, followed by a communal procession that would go through the streets. The procession consisted of several gilds each giving a performance derived from the Bible. The Corpus Christi play cycle helped to represent and define the community to the outside world, by gathering visitors and sometimes nobility.
The structure of the town was visually characterized on Corpus Christi Day. In the procession, the local gilds would go all out by lavishly decorating the wagon they would perform in front of and by wearing their nicest clothes. The gilds were divided by trade and were usually given a specific Bible story to perform that coincided with their profession. For instance, the Carpenters gild would reenact Noah and his journey in the arc. Through this string of performances on the street, the community would become aware of the gilds, and subsequently, compare the performances to distinguish the best and most prepared. The play cycle functioned in an egalitarian manner, where change and social mobility were openly accepted to give the newly appointed gilds a good chance at gaining social recognition.
The most excellent plays would bring honor and superiority to the gilds for their hard work and promote encouragement to perform the following year; however, the gilds that underperformed might not have made it back to the festival. I believe that the participants in the Corpus Christi day sought to obtain honor for their gild, but also to represent their community on a more regional scale. In this respect, the festival brought the members of an urban community together to show off for the visiting onlookers. This feeling of 'communitas' is a great way to maintain the social status.
This cult-like ritual in the Medieval times fed the soul of those who participated in the celebration, as well as influenced their social standing. I think that Corpus Christi day was kind of like the way that Americans celebrate the Super Bowl. It is a wide day of participation, where people from all over come to achieve greater social standing. The participants dress up in uniforms that promote their community and ultimately aim to make it stronger with giving the better performance. Plus, people all over the country, whether they favor a team or not, will have a huge feast just to join in on the celebration.
But, that's just me. What do you think?