No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The focus of my thesis is this question: in what ways are Plutarch's <i>Lives</i> moralising texts? My contention is that the <i>Lives</i> are moralistic, but it is a moralism which does not simply affirm the norms of Plutarch's society and Plutarch's own value-system; rather it is, in some <i>Lives</i> at least, exploratory and challenging. A second contention is that the Lives must be read in the pairs in which they were published. The first part of my thesis includes a theoretical analysis of the place of moralising within the ancient historiographical tradition, and an exposition of Plutarch's own statements as regards his work - key passages for our understanding of ancient conceptions of historiography and biography. The central chapters contain close readings of three problematic Plutarchan texts, the <i>Phocion Cato Minor, Lysander-Sulla</i> and <i>Coliolanus-Alcibiades</i>. The second part of my thesis seeks to place Plutarch's work within the context of the second-century world. In this section, I examine Plutarch's <i>Lives</i> of Julius Caesar, Galba and Otho alongside the biographies of the same figures by Suetonius: even when dealing with Roman sources, Plutarch brings to bear upon his material a moral outlook which is drawn, partly at least, from the age of Classical Greece, in particular from Plato. Throughout the <i>Lives</i>, Roman figures are evaluated by means of Greek ethical concepts. This self-confident response to Rome is seen also in the very structure of the <i>Lives</i>, in which Greek figures are paired with Roman; a final chapter analyses this paired structure and demonstrates, by a detailed study of the <i>Pyrrhus-Marius</i> that no <i>Life</i> can properly be understood without its partner.

No description available.

No description available.

The thesis concerns the manuscript history of Lucretius’ <i>De Rerum Natura </i>between the work’s composition in the mid-first century BC and its rediscovery by Poggio in 1417/18. The thesis develops the arguments proving the descent of the Poggianus from O (s.IX), thereby rendering the Italian manuscripts mere <i>codices descripti</i>, and therefore focuses upon three related ninth century mss O, Q and S (= GVU). The thesis bolsters knowledge about the direct and indirect transmission of Lucretius’ <i>DRN</i> with a view to establishing a more secure basis for the editing and textual criticism of the poem. The first chapter outlines the major details about OQS, attempting to reconstruct their origins and individual histories from being written until arriving in their current locations. Various loose ends regarding the citation of codices and lections in printed editions and (by hand) in the margins of a number of such books, are tidied up. The chapter then treats the relationship of the Italic mss to OQS. The second chapter summaries the utility of the indirect tradition for <i>DRN</i>. On the basis of a complete <i>apparatus fontium</i> for the work (published online), and a survey of all mentions and citations of Lucretius, from the mid-first century BC to the early fifteenth century AD, an evaluation of such witnesses is provided. The c<i>apitula</i> interspersed throughout the poem and the <i>indices</i> of them preceding Books IV-VI repay close study. I argue that they originated as marginal jottings from two readers of Antiquity, seemingly intended only for their own benefit. On the basis of a full collation of all corrections in O (totalling over 2,000 items and published online), six later hands are distinguished. Of these, only one (that of the Irishman Dungal) is shown to have used another manuscript as he worked, albeit not always. The <i>modus operandi </i>of each of these various annotators is analysed thoroughly. Some 28 marginal jottings in a Carolingian hand can be found spread throughout Q. Chapter 5 briefly treats their role and surveys the few other notes that entered Q prior to the Renaissance (pre-Q²). A revised reconstruction of the archetype’s foliation is attempted, along with a succinct discussion of scripts of preceding phases of transmission.