Abstract
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. 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. This has long been the common view. It was held and defended by Hermann Peter, Mommsen, and Eduard Schwartz. A careful reading of the two texts side by side tempts me to call it certain, so exact and frequent are the echoes. 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. This is what I shall do in the main part of this paper. I preface the details, however, by a few more general considerations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
