I'm curious if Melzer addresses Discourses on Livy or only The Prince. In an introductory political science course at my college's Straussian department, The Prince was read early as an example of esotericism, and that reading was (implicitly) proof that we should read other texts esoterically.
My understanding is that Discourses on Livy is far less esoteric, though. It doesn't surprise me that particular works are esoteric, but does Melzer successfully advance an argument that entire bodies of work or even an entire era should be approached that way, without needing to evaluate each text on its own?
Comments
I'm curious if Melzer addresses Discourses on Livy or only The Prince. In an introductory political science course at my college's Straussian department, The Prince was read early as an example of esotericism, and that reading was (implicitly) proof that we should read other texts esoterically.
My understanding is that Discourses on Livy is far less esoteric, though. It doesn't surprise me that particular works are esoteric, but does Melzer successfully advance an argument that entire bodies of work or even an entire era should be approached that way, without needing to evaluate each text on its own?