Paul De Man‘The Return to Philology’ in The Resistance to Theory(Manchester 1986) 21–26; Jonathan Culler ‘The Return to Philology’ Journal of Aesthetic Education 36 (2002): 12–16; Edward W. Said ‘The Return to Philology’ in Humanism and Democratic Criticism (Basingstoke 2004) 57–84.
TurnerPhilology10–11. To characterize the ambition of Alexandrian scholars as ‘To decide which words in competing manuscripts were really Homer’s’ gives the impression of an enterprise of historical reconstruction comparable with modern scholarly editing. This conflation was already under attack in the eighteenth century (see F. A. Wolf Prolegomena to Homer 1795 trans. Anthony Grafton Glenn W. Most and James E. G. Zetzel [Princeton nj 1985] 190–191); and it has become even less tenable in the light of more recent work on the literary-critical and Aristotelian priorities of early Homeric scholars. See for instance N. J. Richardson ‘Literary Criticism in the Exegetical Scholia to the Iliad: A Sketch’ in Oxford Readings in Ancient Literary Criticism ed. Andrew Laird (Oxford 2006) 176–210; and Francesca Schironi ‘Theory into Practice: Aristotelian Principles in Aristarchean Philology’ Classical Philology 104 no. 3 (2009): 279–316.