![]() |
Wiener Studien Band 129/2016Zeitschrift für Klassische Philologie, Patristik und lateinische Tradition
|
![]() |
Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Austrian Academy of Sciences Press
A-1011 Wien, Dr. Ignaz Seipel-Platz 2
Tel. +43-1-515 81/DW 3420, Fax +43-1-515 81/DW 3400 https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at, e-mail: verlag@oeaw.ac.at |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
DATUM, UNTERSCHRIFT / DATE, SIGNATURE
BANK AUSTRIA CREDITANSTALT, WIEN (IBAN AT04 1100 0006 2280 0100, BIC BKAUATWW), DEUTSCHE BANK MÜNCHEN (IBAN DE16 7007 0024 0238 8270 00, BIC DEUTDEDBMUC)
|

Wiener Studien 129/2016, pp. 7-24, 2016/08/05
Zeitschrift für Klassische Philologie, Patristik und lateinische Tradition
Literary criticism is considered to have originated in archaic Greek rhapsodic tradition advanced mainly by two persons, Xenophanes of Colophon and Theagenes of Rhegium. The popular theory, greatly supported by the authority of Rudolf Pfeiffer, runs as follows: Xenophanes once ceased to recite Homer and began to criticize his views; his attacks induced another reciter, Theagenes, to invent methods of protecting the poet. Thus the art of interpreting literary texts came into being. Various aspects of this scheme were criticized but the attempt to fully deconstruct it by reconsidering all the evidence was never made. Through a detailed analysis of testimonies this essay examines the possible origins of ‘rhapsodic philology’ and suggests a more realistic model.