A spouse to Persius and Juvenal breaks new floor in its in-depth specialise in either authors as "satiric successors"; specific person contributions recommend unique views on their paintings, and supply an in-depth exploration of Persius' and Juvenal's afterlives.
• presents precise and updated assistance at the texts and contexts of Persius and Juvenal
• bargains tremendous dialogue of the reception of either authors, reflecting the most leading edge paintings being performed in modern Classics
• includes a thorough exploration of Persius' and Juvenal's afterlives
Read or Download A Companion to Persius and Juvenal (Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World) PDF
Best ancient books
Those essays, by means of specialists within the box from 5 international locations, research Plutarch's interpretative and creative reshaping of his old resources in consultant lives. various essays deal with literary components akin to the parallelism which renders a couple of lives a unit or the topics which unify the lives.
Theophanes the Confessor (d. 818) was once a Byzantine abbot who fell sufferer to the Iconoclastic persecution. The Chronicle that is going lower than his identify, written in Greek, is the following translated in complete for the 1st time, including an creation and statement. It presents a special resource for the historical past of the Byzantine Empire to advert 813, in addition to the heritage of the Persians, Arabs, Bulgarians, and different neighboring peoples.
The tale of incense is likely one of the so much exciting in either japanese and western tradition. From the 1st millennium BC to the latest it's been wanted and valued on a par with helpful metals or gem stones. even though incense used to be a luxurious, it was once ate up in prodigious amounts by way of the traditional global, in temples and at funerals, but additionally in inner most houses.
- Reproducing Rome : motherhood in Virgil, Ovid, Seneca, and Statius
- People of the Earth: An Introduction to World Prehistory
- Empire and Order: The Concept of Empire, 800–1800
- The Governor and His Subjects in the Later Roman Empire (Mnemosyne, Bibliotheca Classica Batava Supplementum)
- The Impact of Imperial Rome on Religions, Ritual and Religious Life in the Roman Empire: Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop of the International Network ... June 30 - July 4, 2004 (Impact of Empire)
Additional resources for A Companion to Persius and Juvenal (Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World)
Laert. 30, 33, 37, 62–3; Numenius frag. 27 = Eusebius, Praep. evang. ). There remains, to be sure, the question how, if their scepticism was as thoroughgoing as the peritrop¯e arguments imply, Arcesilaus and Carneades could at the same time hold what have been thought to be positive views about a criterion for practical life (cf. ). ), and in any case it is right that an interpretation of Academic Scepticism, whatever its details, should leave an awkward tension between the theoretical arguments for doubt and suspending judgement on the one hand and the exigencies of practice on the other.
43: Protagoras ait de omni re in utramque partem disputari posse ex aequo et de hac ipsa, an omnis res in utramque partem disputabilis sit. For Protagoras as the first to say this we turn to the other reports (Diog. Laert. , Guthrie (1969) 182 (who, however, also gives a variant version in a footnote) and Capizzi (1955) 287. For why only two, and what does it mean for two arguments to be opposed? The more natural assumption (supported by the Senecan report) would be that according to the thesis any number of arguments can be given on behalf of each member of the contradictory pair p and not-p, for any p.
Even Plato himself is not as careful as he should be on this point. While he puts in the “for . ” almost invariably while reporting or describing Protagoras’ doctrine (not only at 170a, but at 152b, c, 158a, and all through 166c–167c, where the repetition gets almost tiresome, and then again at 171e–172a; also at Crat. , in the “exquisite” argument at 171a), thereby inadvertently vitiating his own polemic. On reading this I want to ask: can we be satisfied with a simple diagnosis of inadvertence if Plato is so conscientious in reporting Protagoras’ doctrine?