Koinoi Nomoi

For a number of years now, Aelius Aristides' Roman Oration has enjoyed a well-deserved reputation among historians of antiquity.1 However, this has not always been the case. Despite describing it as 'the best general picture of the Roman Empire in the second century,'2 not even the prestige of the Russian scholar M. Rostovtzeff was sufficient to defend the Roman Oration from the disdain of his colleagues. The flowery prose of the Greek sophist seemed to most scholars at the time as pointless as it was ponderous, for which reason quotes from the Roman Oration were few and far between. This began to change from the 1960s onwards, when it was discovered that the Second Sophistic was not only a worthy object of literary but also social study. This revival of literary studies at the end of the twentieth century heralded an awakened scholarly interest in Aristides' oration.3 An important factor for its historiographical renaissance has been the incorporation of 'narrative' as a category of historical analysis. For this reason, the Roman Oration is nowadays considered a magnum opus not only as regards ancient rhetoric but also with respect to the narrative construction of the Roman Empire,4 and should thus regain its rightful place as 'the best general picture of the Roman Empire in the second century'

Aesthetics · Art · Harmonization · Political science · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Classical Antiquity Studies · Law

• Captiva sub pede

  Open Access•Pablo Rodríguez-Valdés•Dialogues d histoire ancienne•2025

  Add to list

• Roman and Local Citizenship in the Long Second Century CE

  Myles Lavan, Clifford Ando•Imperial and Local Citizenship in…•2022

  Add to list

• Governing by Dispatching Letters

  Juan Manuel Cortés Copete, Juan Manuel Cortés-Copete•Political Communication in the…•2017

  Add to list