Representation and Self-Representation in Imperial Greek and Latin Dialogues

This paper argues that Methodius of Olympus’ 3^rd century CE dialogue, the Symposium; or On Chastity, revolutionizes the traditional setting and characterization of the literary Symposium by placing it in an allegorical space and time, and peopling it with historical figures who, against their allegorical backdrop, serve a purely symbolic role.

The Encomium of Demosthenes included in the manuscripts of Lucian’s works is an unusually layered dialogue. At different layers within the dialogue appear different characters and both the layering of reported speech and the multiplicity of speakers are directly supportive of the content.

Through the comparison between selected Hermetic texts and Plutarch's De E apud Delphos, I intend to analyze the use of “revelation dialogue” that – as a literary and dramatic device – discloses the specific relation between man and divine.

Plutarch presents many different versions of himself not only across the corpus of his dialogues, but even within individual texts. This paper examines Plutarch’s self-presentations in two such texts, De E apud Delphos and Amatorius. I argue that by provocatively juxtaposing older and younger versions of himself in these dialogues, Plutarch invites his reader to locate points of difference and continuity between them.

Understanding the nature of the personae in his dialogues is essential to interpreting Plutarch’s thought. He appears as a character in The E at Delphi, Sympotic Questions, The Dialogue on Love, and Reply to Colotes). He did have specific objectives for his appearances and offers hints for interpreting them. The dialogue form opened up possibilities for “interpretative pluralism” (cf. König 2007 42, 50, 2008; Kechagia 2011, “aporetic,” 99).

Lucius Annaeus Seneca (ca. 4 BCE - 65 CE) retains some elements of the dialogic form for didactic purposes in his De ira but dispenses with the inefficiency of multiple interlocutors and their sustained points of view. Rather, Seneca presents opposition with imaginary interlocutors as it arises in the argument.