3 ms·
Victor Davis Hanson made a similar point in the book "Who Killed Classical Studies": every significant text has been analyzed in depth, and the remaining texts
by akuchling 11y ago
Victor Davis Hanson made a similar point in the book "Who Killed Classical Studies": every significant text has been analyzed in depth, and the remaining texts still being found are minor. (Even if a new play by Aeschylus or book by Livy turns up, it's not likely to change what we know very much.) The historical picture is pretty complete; and the archaeological details being found are mostly refining that picture, not overturning it.
Counterargument: the Antikythera mechanism. There could well be more archaeological surprises, or analyses that open up an entirely new aspect.
- jthnews 11y agoYes, a lot of classical scholarship stands the test of time and, once done, need not be redone. On the other hand, a classicist's job has always involved more interpretation than discovery. A brief look at the classical scholarship from 100 years will probably convince you that interpretation is the kind of thing that needs to be updated from time to time.