![]() ![]() I preface the details, however, by a few more general considerations. The meaning of life is well-written and witty it has four chapters, about three pages on Further reading, a brief Index and a dozen (quite unneeded). This is what I shall do in the main part of this paper. It is at any rate probable enough to justify an attempt to follow out its consequences by treating the differences between Dionysius and Plutarch, in default of other evidence, as Plutarch's constructions, to be explained in terms of his literary purposes and methods. A careful reading of the two texts side by side tempts me to call it certain, so exact and frequent are the echoes. It was held and defended by Hermann Peter, Mommsen, and Eduard Schwartz. I start from the hypothesis that the Life is, in its essentials, a transposition into biographical form of the historical narrative in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, Books V to VIII. I am concerned in this paper with Plutarch's treatment of the story of Coriolanus, not with the historical truth of the legend or with its development before Plutarch's time. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |