<p>This article analyzes the use of analogical devices – such as metaphors, comparisons, and argumentation by analogy—in four contemporary French eloquence contests: Concours Lysias, Prix Mirabeau, Fleurs d’éloquence, and Les Libres-parleurs de Montreuil. It argues that the type and frequency of these rhetorical tools reflect the underlying conceptions of “eloquent speech” promoted by each contest’s institutional and educational context. For instance, legal pleadings in Lysias rely heavily on precedent and a contrario arguments, while Fleurs d’éloquence emphasizes aesthetic and didactic uses of metaphor. In contrast, Montreuil’s speeches focus on expressive, narrative-driven analogies, and Mirabeau’s contestants often adopt a playful, ironic tone. The study concludes that analogy serves as a key indicator of how each contest balances logos, pathos, authenticity, and performance, revealing how eloquence competitions recontextualize and renegotiate social discourses in contemporary France.</p>