Through an examination of the context of Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 6 (Mor. 803b), the A. demonstrates that Plutarch did not criticize Ephorus of Cyme, Theopompus of Chios and Anaximenes of Lampsacus because their battle speeches ("logoi parakletikoi") lacked of fidelity to the generals' actual speeches on the battlefield. Rather, he criticized them because their battle exhortations did not display the stylistic balance expected in the political rhetoric in the I century ACE. After some remarks on the grounds of Plutarch's criticism, and on the features of style and content of the battle speeches of Ephorus, Theopompus and Anaximenes, the A. offers a new interpretation of the much discussed "parodountes" in Diod. XI 35, 2, and makes concluding remarks on the theory of speech in the V and IV centuries B.C.
Plutarco sulle arringhe dei generali nelle opere storiche di Eforo, Teopompo e Anassimene (Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 6, Mor. 803b = Ephor. FGrHist 70 T 21 = Theopomp. FGrHist 115 T 33 = Anaxim. FGrHist 72 T 15)
Giovanni Parmeggiani
2012-01-01
Abstract
Through an examination of the context of Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 6 (Mor. 803b), the A. demonstrates that Plutarch did not criticize Ephorus of Cyme, Theopompus of Chios and Anaximenes of Lampsacus because their battle speeches ("logoi parakletikoi") lacked of fidelity to the generals' actual speeches on the battlefield. Rather, he criticized them because their battle exhortations did not display the stylistic balance expected in the political rhetoric in the I century ACE. After some remarks on the grounds of Plutarch's criticism, and on the features of style and content of the battle speeches of Ephorus, Theopompus and Anaximenes, the A. offers a new interpretation of the much discussed "parodountes" in Diod. XI 35, 2, and makes concluding remarks on the theory of speech in the V and IV centuries B.C.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
