Abstract
This article offers a fresh analysis of the tone and argumentative strategies of Orations 2–4 of Aelius Aristides. It suggests that they are a more hostile and destructive exercise than is normally allowed for and that the recent critical consensus that they represent essentially an effort to reconcile philosophy and oratory needs substantial revision; these Orations testify instead to the continuing awkwardness of Plato and philosophy as components of the Greek cultural heritage in the Imperial period, as well as to the ambition of Aristides' own strategies of self-presentation.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have