Abstract
How much of our conception of the Tragic is there in the tragedies of Aeschylus? The name “Tragedy” has in itself no “tragic” implications, and Aeschylus lived before the days of tragic theories. So far as we can see, the thing was largely in his hands to make what he liked of it. Was what he made of it Tragedy in our sense—in substance, I mean, not in form? Was his conception of the “tragic fact” (as Bradley calls it) fundamentally the same as ours or even Aristotle's? Or, rather, did he aim at being “ tragic” at all?
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 callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: 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.
