Ammianus and Cicero

This passage has been frequently discussed, usually either as a methodological statement or in order to elicit hints about the historian and his opinions. In consequence, the first sentence has been the primary focus of attention.' Much of the older scholarly opinion on Ammianus, though it assigned to his History great value as a reliable source of information and assigned to the author some merit for his lively narrative and characterization, nevertheless dismissed him as an incompetent and derivative stylist. In the words of one of his critics, ... schreibt wie er kann, nicht wie er will.2 While over the past twenty-five years the complexity and skill of Ammianus as a writer have come to be better appreciated (and in parallel his manipulativeness as a historian has been much explored),3 the hangover of the older opinion persists in inhibiting a full recognition of his literary qualities. In this paper I propose to approach the epilogue as a purely literary statement in which Ammianus presents himself as a master historian who implicitly associates himself with his own masters, most especially Cicero. In consequence, the emphasis of the discussion will shift from the first to the second sentence

Art · Cicero · Epistemology · Literature · Statement (logic · Classical Antiquity Studies · History · Organic Chemistry Synthesis Methods · Philosophy

• The Siege of Amida and Epic Tradition

  Neil W Bernstein•Mnemosyne•2019

  Incluir item

• The Ghost of Cicero’s Letters

  Cristiana Sogno•Journal of late antiquity•2014

  Incluir item

• Il tesoro di Cipro

  Open Access•Lorenzo Calvelli•Il tesoro di Cipro•2020

  Incluir item

• Cicero and Roman Education

  Open Access•Giuseppe La Bua•Cicero and Roman Education•2019

  Incluir item

• The Treatment of Narrative in Late Antique Literature

  Michael Roberts•Philologus•1988

  Incluir item

• Rhetoric in Classical Historiography

  T J Luce, A J Woodman•Rhetoric in Classical Historiograph…•2003

  Incluir item