Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The Composition of the Stichus.

  • W. B. Sedgwick
Copyright
References
Hide All

1 But it seems to have occurred also in Ἀδ. á; cf. Ter. Ad. 5. 3. 17.

2 See Lindsay, , Anc. Eds. of P., pp. 55 ff.

3 E.g. much of I. ii., II. i. (Running Slave motive), II. ii., III. ii., IV. i., IV. ii., V. (all). In my opinion everything, except the scenes absolutely necessary for the plot, shows signs of being from P.'s hands. As this is an early play, it seems as if the prominence of the Roman element is no sign of lateness as many argue (the Roman element had been prominent in Naevius). So the M.G. has an exceptionally large number of Roman passages; the Cist. not so many; but see I. i. 57–77, I. iii., and most of II. i. (N.B.—These are the only plays known to be early.) To my mind the signs of earliness are—(1) a certain verbosity, (2) lack of lyrical metres, (3) frequency of archaic forms (?), (4) comparative lack of skill in handling the plot.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Classical Review
  • ISSN: 0009-840X
  • EISSN: 1464-3561
  • URL: /core/journals/classical-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 1 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 52 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 12th June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.