No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
The argumentum of contr. 2. 4 reads as follows (quoted from my own provisional text, which I hope will be published in some years):
Abdicavit quidam filium. Abdicatus se contulit ad meretricem. Ex ilia sustulit filium. Aeger ad patrem misit; cum venisset, commendavit ei filium suum et decessit. Adoptavit puerum <pater>. Ab altero [pater] filio accusatur dementiae.
1 Sénèque le rhèteur, controverses et suasoires (Paris, 1902Google Scholar; new edition Paris, 1932); The Elder Seneca, Declamations (Loeb, 1976)Google Scholar.
2 In accusing his father of dementia, the son would blame his disinherited and departed brother for his immoral life in a brothel and question whether the grandson was really the son of his brother, at the same time sneering at his mother, the meretrix; cp. §5 or 10.
3 Having deprived aliquid of imbecilli, both Bornecque and Winterbottom find themselves forced to add something of their own, but neither addition suits the context very well.
4 L. Annaei Senecae Oratorum et rhetorum sententiae divisiones colores (Vienna 1887, Hildesheim, 1963)Google Scholar.