Craig A. Gibson

in Interpreting a Classic

Published by University of California Press

Published in print December 2002 | ISBN: 9780520229563
Published online March 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780520927308 | DOI:

Show Summary Details


This chapter argues that the practice of excerption is the best way to explain the apparent “gaps” in coverage in Berol. 9780. The discussion begins by studying F. Leo's hypothesis that explained why Berol. 9780 does not meet the expectations of some scholars as a commentary on Dem. 9–11 and 13. It then addresses the literary and physical “fragments” of Didymus, before it studies his reputation in ancient and modern scholarship. The next section looks at the criticisms of the theories of H. Diels and W. Schubart on Didymus' commentaries on Dem. 9–11 and 13.

Keywords: Didymus; excerption; gaps; coverage; Berol. 9780; F. Leo; H. Diels; W. Schubart; fragments

Chapter.  8316 words. 

Subjects: Classical Literature

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.