Abstract
Anyone who has read my bookGreek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle(Oxford 1974) (hereafter ‘GPM’) and has also read Professor A. W. H. Adkins' bookMerit and Responsibility(Oxford 1960) (‘M&R’) will have noticed that the two books differ substantially in their approach to the history of Greek moral values and in some of the conclusions which they reach. Adkins' critical review ofGPM, entitled ‘Problems in Greek Popular Morality’,CPhlxxiii (1978) 143–58 (‘Problems’), explains very clearly why he findsGPMin many respects inadequate or misleading, and it has greatly helped me to understand my own disquiet at the influence exercised by the presuppositions, methods and conclusions ofM&R. My purpose in this paper is not to offer a review ofM&Rtwenty years too late, nor to attempt a rebuttal, point by point, of the criticisms ofGPMcontained inProblems, but to examine one major issue: how should the portrayal of moral evaluation on the tragic stage or in epic narrative be used as evidence for the history of Greek moral values?A very important proposition is stated inM&R127: ‘A drama is a practical work; it involves action. People appear on the stage and behave as they do in real life.’ With this proposition I agree, subject to three provisos, of which one limits its application and two amplify it. The limiting proviso is obvious.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory,Linguistics and Language,Archeology,Visual Arts and Performing Arts,Language and Linguistics,Archeology,Classics
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. (Im)politeness in the Iliad: The Pragmatics of the Homeric Expression ἀγαθός περ ἐών;Trends in Classics;2018-12-19
2. Values;The Homer Encyclopedia;2011-09-15
3. Bibliography;New Surveys in the Classics;2011
4. Bibliography;The Talking Greeks;2005-05-12
5. Epilogue;The Talking Greeks;2005-05-12