The manuscripts of the eight extant Latin tragedies identify the plays as the Marci Lucii Annei Senecae Tragoediae. Since nobody of that name is known, modern scholars believe the dramas to be the work of Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger, the well-known philosopher, orator, and politician. Clearly, the tragedies were written during Seneca’s lifetime: internal references to earlier poets, most notably Ovid, indicate that the dramas cannot have been composed prior to the second decade C.E., and the plays must have been written by 96 C.C., when Quintilian quotes Medea, one of the tragedies.
It is remarkable, however, that Seneca himself never mentions the plays, since there are certainly passages in them that could be used to illustrate points of his philosophy. There are at least two possible explanations. In the early Roman Empire, playwrights were sometimes exiled or executed for lines construed as directed against the emperor; thus, Seneca’s silence may be simple prudence. But if anyone could safely attach his name to dramas, surely it would be Seneca, the emperor’s tutor. And although Herrmann offers Seneca’s modesty as an explanation, Seneca is not averse to referring to his other writings. The evidence for equating Seneca with the author of the tragedies seems circumstantial.
2. The author of the passage makes which of the following claims about the eight extant Latin tragedies?
A:There is only circumstantial evidence that the plays were all written by the same author.
B:Scholars have persistently attributed the plays to Seneca despite evidence that some of them may have been composed prior to his lifetime.
C:Evidence in the manuscripts of the plays identifies them as having been written by Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger.
D:The plays contain some lines that have been construed as being directed against the emperor.
E:The plays contain material that could illustrate certain aspects of Seneca’s philosophy.
E가 너무 명확하게 나와있어서 답으로 고르긴 했는데 A, D가 왜 안되는지 정확하게 설명을 할 수가 없습니다.
A : 8개의 비극이 한 사람이 썼다는 증거는 지금 circumstantial 증거 밖에 없는 것 아닌가요?
D : 둘 째 문단에서 the plays가 왕을 까는 내용이 있어서 Seneca가 silence 했을 수도 있다는 것을 설명하는 것 아닌가요?
미리 감사드립니다.