The paper deals with reconstructing what is known on the observations by the ancient scholars concerning Iliad 10, seeking to highlight the relevance and implications of this discussion for ancient criticism and the history of philology. The hypothesis is advanced that the initial scholium of Il. 10 does not contain doctrine based on a Pergamene source, but does preserve a trace of a polemic between the Chorizontes and Aristarchus: the suggestion put forward is that the former had argued in favour of the expunction of Il. 10, believing that it did not belong to the unitary plan of the Iliad, whereas Aristarchus espoused the opposite idea and thus emphasized the cases of consonance between Il. 10 and the rest of the Iliad, as emerges from the scholia.
The case of Book Ten and the unity of the Iliad plot in ancient scholarship
MONTANARI, FRANCO
2010-01-01
Abstract
The paper deals with reconstructing what is known on the observations by the ancient scholars concerning Iliad 10, seeking to highlight the relevance and implications of this discussion for ancient criticism and the history of philology. The hypothesis is advanced that the initial scholium of Il. 10 does not contain doctrine based on a Pergamene source, but does preserve a trace of a polemic between the Chorizontes and Aristarchus: the suggestion put forward is that the former had argued in favour of the expunction of Il. 10, believing that it did not belong to the unitary plan of the Iliad, whereas Aristarchus espoused the opposite idea and thus emphasized the cases of consonance between Il. 10 and the rest of the Iliad, as emerges from the scholia.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
