intro
S. Luria,in Rheinisches Museum, lxxviii. (1929) p. 94, has suggested that the Parallela and the De Fluviis Bernardakis’s ed. vol. vii. pp. 282-328. are parodies after the manner of Lucian’s True History; and both Hercher and Hartman have expressed the opinion that both works are by the same anonymous author, chiefly because it is difficult to imagine thato such fools as the author of each discloses himself to be could ever have lived ! The confusion that the author (ingeniously?) introduces, the forced simplicity of his glaring misnomers, his many references to authorities that Hercher Plutarchi libellus de fluviis (Leipzig, 1851). Schlereth, however, has severely criticized Hercher’s conclusions. On the sources of De Fluviis see Atenstädt, Hermes, lvii. pp. 219 ff. has attempted to show never existed,Yet Müller receives them all as Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum. It has not been thought worth while to include in the notes the references to Müller, since no additional information is to be found there. All the references, however, will be found in the recent Teubner edition. all have been thought to suggest that the Parallela is a parody of the comparisons in the Lives; but J. Schlereth, in his excellent dissertation De Plutarchi quae feruntur Parallela Minora (Freiburg, 1931), has with great learning and acumen attempted to disprove this thesis.It must be noted that many of the points which Plutarch has selected for comparison in the Lives, that is, in the so-called Συγκρίσεις, are very tenuous, not to say inept. They would lend themselves readily to parody. On the Σύγκρισις see further F. Focke, Hermes, lviii. pp. 327 ff. His work may be consulted by anyone who may be curious about the sources, the language, or the purpose of the Parallela Minora.
