The authenticity of 'Prometheus bound'
Author(s)
Bibliographic Information
The authenticity of 'Prometheus bound'
（Cambridge classical studies）
Cambridge University Press, 2007
- : pbk
- Other Title
-
The authenticity of "Prometheus bound"
Available at / 1 libraries
-
No Libraries matched.
- Remove all filters.
Note
Originally published: 1977
"This digitally printed version 2007" -- T.p. verso.
"Paperback re-issue" -- Back cover.
Includes bibliographical references (p. [366]-379) and indexes
Description and Table of Contents
Description
Prometheus Bound was accepted without question in antiquity as the work of Aeschylus, and most modern authorities endorse this ascription. But since the nineteenth century several leading scholars have come to doubt Aeschylean authorship. Dr Griffith here provides a thorough and wide-ranging study of this problem, and concludes: 'Had Prometheus Bound been newly dug up from the sands of Oxyrhynchus... few scholars would regard it as the work of Aeschylus.' After a preliminary assessment of the external evidence, Dr Griffith examines minutely the idiosyncrasies of metre, dramatic technique, vocabulary, syntax and expression to be found in the play, applying the same tests to other plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides in order to provide a control for his methods. In his final chapter he discusses how the conditions surrounding the ancient transmission and cataloguing of texts may have led to the ascription to Aeschylus.
Table of Contents
- List of tables
- Preface
- 1. The problem
- 2. External evidence
- 3. The lyric metres
- 4. The recitative Anapaests
- 5. The Iambic trimeters
- 6. Structure and dramatic technique
- 7. Staging
- 8. Vocabulary
- 9. Style and syntax
- 10. Alternatives to Aeschylean authorship
- Appendixes
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Subject index
- Index of Greek words discussed
- Index of passages cited.
by "Nielsen BookData"
