bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
A Curiosity in Seneca
Authors: Bolton J. D. P.
Published: February 2009

Thus the passage is printed in the Teubner edition of Seneca's Dialogues by E. Hermes, who, on the strength of Aen. 8. 702 f. (‘et scissa gaudens vadit Discordia palla, quam cum sanguineo sequitur Bellona flagello’), adds a note on the quotation ‘versus sunt Vergilii a Seneca licenter mutati’.

Now the imputation to Seneca of such gross alteration of Virgil can only be supported if we disregard or eject the evidence to the contrary. As only the last five words are actually Virgilian; as Seneca himself says ‘aput vate nostra?’; as out at the beginning of the second line may introduce a second quotation (so Rossbach); and as est, which Gertz secluded, has a part to play if the lines are by different poets, it is safer to take a step backwards and dispose the passage thus:
The Greek Novelists
Authors: Jackson John
Published: February 2009

If only from a sense of duty, I have filled the evident lacuna, so as to safeguard the κα⋯ and furnish some little excuse for the copyist (ζ⋯σα κατώρυγμαι, βοηθεῖτε Reiske, ζ. τ⋯θαμμαι, β. Hercher). There remains, however, the melancholy fact that Callirrhoe was consigned to her living grave as a consequence, not of ⋯γων⋯α in any known or imaginable sense of the word, but of a profound swoon produced by a kick from Chaereas; whose foot, says Chariton in his best manner, εὐστ⋯χως κατ⋯ το⋯ διαφρ⋯γματος ⋯νεχθε⋯ς ⋯π⋯σχε τ⋯ς παιδ⋯ς τ⋯ν ⋯ναπνο⋯ν (I 4). I have therefore restored a common word for ‘unconsciousness’ (the sense is almost technical enough to deserve a place in the dictionaries): cf. II 5 γενομ⋯νην δ⋯ με ἄ φ ω ν ο ν ⋯ξ αἰφνιδ⋯ου πτώματος ἔθαψαν οἱ γονεῖς πολυτελ⋯ς, I 2 ἄφωνος εὐθὺς ἦν κα⋯ σκ⋯τος αὐτ⋯ς τ⋯ν ⋯φθαλμ⋯ν κατεχ⋯θη, I 4 fin. Καλλιρρ⋯η μ⋯ν οὖν ἄφωνους κα⋯ ἄπνους ἔκειτο νεκρ⋯ς εἰκ⋯να π⋯σι παρ⋯χουσα, and so frequently. The same change is imperative at Xen. Eph. III 6 σκηφαμ⋯νη δ⋯ ⋯φων⋯ᾳ (*: τῇ ⋯γων⋯ᾳ cod.) κατειλ⋯θαι, ⋯κ⋯λευσεν αὑτῇ τινι τ⋯ν ὕδωρ ⋯νεγκεῖν. The confusion is simple and occurs, for instance, at Max. Tyr. i, where Markland restored διαφων⋯ας for διαγων⋯ας. As for the sequence ⋯φων⋯ας … ἔρρηξε φων⋯ν, neither the author nor his readers could have even been aware of it: the weakness which deters the modern from the equivalents of ἔδωκεν ⋯ποδο⋯ναι (Lys. XX 7), συν⋯πεμψε παραπ⋯μψοντας (Luc.VH. i 27), παμμ⋯γεθες ⋯λ⋯κον, ταρτ⋯ρειον τ⋯ μ⋯γεθος (Philops. 24), χωρ⋯α δ⋯σιππα πρ⋯ς τ⋯ν ἵππον (Plut. Crass. 19), δυσδ⋯οδον ἔχει τ⋯ν π⋯ροδον (Polyb. V 7, 10), ⋯ποκατ⋯στησαν εἰς τ⋯ν ⋯ρχα⋯αν κατ⋯στασιν (XXIII 17), στελλομ⋯νῳ βασιλεὺς ⋯π⋯στειλεν (Procop. t. iii p. 96, 10–12 Haury), and all their numberless analogues, was to the Greeks foolishness. On that point the judgment of Chariton was as sound as that of Pascal.
Geometrical Method and Aristotle's Account of First Principles
Authors: Lee H. D. P.
Published: February 2009

The object of this paper is to show the predominance of the influence of geometrical ideas in Aristotle's account of first principles in the Posterior Analytics— to show that his analysis of first principles is in its essentials an analysis of the first principles of geometry as he conceived them. My proof of this falls into two parts. I. A consideration of the parallel between Aristotle's and Euclid's account of first principles. II. A comparison between the general movement of thought in the Aristotelian ⋯παγωγ⋯ and ⋯π⋯δειξις and in the δι⋯νοια and ν⋯ησις of the Platonic dialectic.
The Legal Background of Two Passages in the Nichomachean Ethics
Authors: Lee H. D. P.
Published: February 2009

The two passages in question are I. the discussion of Justice in Bk. V. chs. I-II, and in particular the definition and subdivisions of Corrective Justice (ch. II 1130b 30–1131a 9); and II. the discussion of the voluntaryand προα⋯ρεσɩς in Bk. III chs. II-II. My object is to show that each is better understood if it is seen in the light of contemporary legal ideas and practice.
The Attack on Isocrates in the Phaedrus
Authors: Howland R. L.
Published: February 2009

The most famous and successful teacher of rhetoric at Athens in the fourth century was Isocrates, and he claimed for rhetoric an educational importance which Plato considered to be unmerited and misleading. He made rhetoric the basis of his whole educational system and claimed to teach his pupils to become not only good rhetoricians but good citizens. Plato attacked both aspects of this theory of education. In the Gorgias he exposed the claim of rhetoric to be considered valuable as an instrument of education by showing that rhetorical excellence had no necessary connection with moral excellence. In the Protagoras he exposed the inconsistency of those who claimed to teach men to be good citizens—to teach πολιτιк⋯ τ⋯?νη—without an absolute standard of moral values. Even if we believe that in the Gorgias and the Protagoras, as in other dialogues, Plato is representing faithfully the constructive views of the historic Socrates, we can hardly believe that he was unaware of the contemporary relevance of those views, and it is significant that he thought fit to publish them in the form of an attack on a teacher of rhetoric and an attack on a teacher of <ολιτικ⋯ τ⋯ϰνη At any rate it is reasonable to suppose that the Athenian reading public would expect to find such a contemporary relevance and that they would interpret these attacks as being, in some measure at least, directed against Isocrates.
Anth. Palat. VII, 729
Authors: Rose H. J.
Published: February 2009

This pretty little work of the obscure Tymnes has recently been examined by A. Wilhelm in the course of a learned attempt to explain the puzzling phrase πολλ⋯ πολλ⋯ν (if that is how it should be divided and accented). With the result of his research in general I am not now concerned and the interpretation of this epigram does not greatly affect the value of his conclusions; but it seems worth while to point out what I believe to be the right explanation of a curious and much-emended phrase in the second couplet.
Dislocations in the Text of Thucydides
Authors: Richards Herbert
Published: February 2009

If all the passages of Thucydides in which transposition of words has been plausibly suggested were added up, the total would be by no means insignificant. But careful consideration has convinced me that transposition is required in a far larger number of cases than anyone, so far as I know, has yet thought, and that the transposition is not seldom of a rather surprising kind. Very often it is not a question merely of making a few words which adjoin one another exchange places. A word, two or three words, a clause, a whole sentence has to be moved, sometimes to the line preceding or following, sometimes three or four lines away, occasionally six, eight, or even ten. This is, I am convinced, the true solution of many notorious difficulties in the text of Thucydides. One or two cases of this had struck me years ago. I noted them and thought little of it. But more recently I observed, or thought I observed, quite a number of such cases in Books 4 and 5, and minute study of the other books seems to show that the same thing is true of them also.
On Certain Readings in Sophocles
Authors: Jackson J.
Published: February 2009

The following paper contains a few suggestions which have occurred to me from time to time. As it was written under appreciable difficulties—Want of access to a library being the chief—it is possible that at whiles I may have simply repeated the criticisms of others. In that case, I can only express my regret for the involuntary depredation.
Two Difficulties in Pindar, Pyth. V
Authors: Rose H. J.
Published: February 2009

The following lines (15 sqq.) are a famous crux:

τὸ μὲν ὅτι βασιλεὺς

ἐσσὶ μεγαλᾶν πολίων

ἔϰει συγγενὴς

ὀφθαλμὸς αἰδοιότατον γέρας

τεᾷ τοῦτο μειγνύμενον φρενί.

The reading is that of all MSS., save for the necessary correction αἰδοιότατον for αἰδοιέςτατον, which will not scan. I have purposely left it without punctuation. The core of the difficulty of course is the word ὀφθαλμός Farnell, it seems to me, has made it abundantly clear that this cannot be literal, for, apart from the oddity of the epithet συγγενὴς in such a context, to take it as meaning the actual physical eye of Arkesilas (or anyone else) involves giving ἔϰει the impossible meaning ‘sees’. But the metaphorical meaning is not much easier. A person or group of persons can be the ‘eye’, that is to say the most precious part, of something, as the Emmenidai were the ‘eye of Sicily’, Ol. ii, 10, Amphiaraos the ‘eye’ of Adrastos' army, Ol. vi, 16, the eldest or only son, or even the presence of the master, the ‘eye’ of the house (Aesch., Choeph., 934, Pers., 168–9), a child the ‘eye’—we should perhaps say ‘light’—of his mother's life, Eurip. Andr., 406, and perhaps, for the interpretation is not too certain, a chosen band of Athenians the ‘eye’ of Theseus' land, Aesch., Eumen., 1025. In these instances we may I think acquiesce in Groeneboom's remark on Pers., loc. cit., that ‘eye’ is used to signify the most precious or noble part of something, its glory (dat iets het kostelijkste, het edelste, de glorie van dit of dat is).
The Disorderly Motion in theTimaios
Authors: Vlastos Gregory
Published: February 2009

So much has been written on this vexed issue, that one hesitates to reopen it. Yet one has no other choice when one finds scholars accepting as generally agreed a view which rests on altogether insufficient evidence. I propose, therefore, to examine the main grounds on which recent authorities interpret the disorderly motion ofTm30a, 52d–53b, and 69b as a mythical symbol. They are four:

I. That theTimaiosis a myth;

II. The testimony of the Academy;

III. That motion could not antecede the creation of time;

IV. That motion could not antecede the creation of soul.
Sappho Fr. 16. 6–7L–P
Authors: Most G. W.
Published: February 2009

π⋯γχυ δ' εὔμαρες σ⋯νετον πóησαι | π⋯ντι το⋯το, sang Sappho (Fr. 16. 5–6 L–P); but, to judge from the controversies which have marked the scholarly discussion of her poem in the sixty-five years since its first publication, her confidence was at least premature. Some problems can indeed be considered to have been settled, either through new finds or through gradual consensus: thus the man of line 7 is Menelaus, not Paris, and few today would see in the poem merely an affirmation of exclusively feminine as opposed to masculine values. But to the twin questions of the function first of the story of Helen in the poem, and especially second of the words with which Helen is introduced — ⋯ γ⋯ρ πóλυ περσκ⋯θοισα | κ⋯λλος ⋯νθρώπων 'Eλ⋯να (6–7) — no satisfactory answer has yet been found. The strictures of Fränkel and of Page on this passage are well known; yet even where their judgements have not been simply taken over, the explanations that have been offered for these two distinct but closely connected problems fail to convince.
Critias and Atheism
Authors: Sutton Dana
Published: February 2009

One of the best-known fragments of a lost Greek drama is Critias' fr. 43F19 Snell, an extended rhesis from the play Sisyphus in which the protagonist narrates how once upon a time human life was squalid, brutal, and anarchistic; as a remedy men devised Law and Justice; this expedient served to check open wrongdoing but did not hinder secret crimes; then some very clever man hit upon the idea of inventing gods and the notion of divine retribution; thus secret criminality was stopped by fear of the gods.

The prevalent understanding of Critias' motives is largely determined by the commonest interpretation of this fragment. Some authorities think the notion of divine justice as merely a human device designed to serve a socially utilitarian purpose is Critias' own invention; others regard this passage as wholly or in part a réchauffé of the ideas of others, such as Protagoras, Democritus, or Diagoras of Rhodes. With few exceptions, it has until recently been thought that Critias was, if not a sophist himself, at least a cynical disciple of Machtpolitik who differed from similar thinkers such as Thrasymachus and Callicles only in that he translated ideas similar to those these figures are made to express in the pages of Plato into brutal political action.

A handful of authorities have dissented from this view on the grounds that it is dangerous to attribute to a playwright sentiments placed in the mouths of his stage-characters (although to be sure, as we shall see, the theory that the views expressed in the fragment were the poet's own has ostensible ancient authority in the doxographic tradition). Recently the prevalent interpretation of fr. 19 Sn. has been subjected to additional criticism in two articles by German writers that may well be harbingers of a major reappraisal – long overdue, in the present writer's opinion – of Critias' beliefs.
The King's Peace
Authors: Cawkwell G. L.
Published: February 2009

Nothing about Xenophon's Hellenica is more outrageous than his treatment of the relations of Persia and the Greeks. It was orthodoxy in the circle of Agesilaus that Theban medizing, barbarismos, had sabotaged the plans for a glorious anabasis (IV. ii. 3, V. ii. 35, III. v. 1 f.) and recalled him to the defence of his city (by the very route, ironically, taken by King Xerxes in 480 — IV. ii. 8 — the would-be avenger in the footsteps of the would-be enslaver). Not until the Thebans woo and win the fickle favour of the King (VII. i. 33 ff.), does anything like detail emerge. In the regrettable interlude, the less said the better. If the third speech of Andocides had not survived, there would have been some tangled theorizing about a note in Didymus (FGrH 328f 149), especially as regards ‘the ambassadors who in Sparta consented’, but sober historical judgement would never have transgressed so far from the text of Xenophon as to postulate a Peace Congress in Sparta as well as in Sardis in 392. Likewise, the merest chance of epigraphic survival assures us that the oaths, which the ‘Athenians and the Spartans and the other Greeks’ swore in 387/6, ‘the King swore’ (G.H.I. 118 lines 10 f.) — and so on. If we did not have the reflection of Ephorus in Diodorus, albeit a mirror cracked and blemished, we would be sadly astray in 375 and 371. When, however, the despicable Thebans become the King's favoured power, disgraceful scenes unfold. ‘Pelopidas very much had things his own way with the Persian; he could say that the Thebans alone of the Greeks had fought on the King's side at Plataea, that they had never afterwards campaigned against him, that the Spartans were at war with them because they would not join Agesilaus…etc.’ (VII. i. 34). A Persian is found at Thebes reading out the contents of a Royal Rescript, after displaying the Royal seal (ibid. §39); at Sparta twenty years before, such details had been left to the imagination.

The cause of Xenophon's method in this matter is not for the moment under discussion, but rather the consequence, viz. our uncertainty about what precisely the King's Peace said. There was a document, inscribed on stone pillars and displayed in the national shrines (Isoc. IV. 180, XII. 107). If ever a copy turns up, what can we expect to find? The measure of our uncertainty was provided by Wilcken, who produced a curious hypothesis which found little sympathy; that he could do so shows the state of the evidence. Some effort of the imagination is needed, and those who gravely disapprove of conjectures of what might have been the case need read no further. At the end one can be sure of very little. Conjectures, however, have been uttered, en passant, elsewhere. What may prove to be a chorus of disdain has begun. A formal confession may be welcome.
The Ceyx Legend in Ovid, Metamorphoses, Book XI
Authors: Griffin A. H. F.
Published: February 2009

The saga of Ceyx, king of Trachis, begins at Met. 11.266 and continues to 11.748. Ceyx' adventures form the longest single episode in the Metamorphoses (482 verses), slightly longer than the Phaethon legend (432 verses, Met. 1.747–2.400). Three metamorphoses take place in the course of the Ceyx narrative. The first is that of Ceyx' brother Daedalion who is transformed into a hawk. The second transformation occurs in the course of the exiled Peleus' visit to Ceyx when a wolf attacks Peleus' cattle and sheep and is eventually turned into stone. The third metamorphosis is that of Ceyx and his wife Alcyone into halcyons.

The linking together of these three metamorphoses was entirely an Ovidian invention: it had never been done before. It is therefore important to see the Ceyx story as a whole, as it was put together by Ovid. Attention naturally concentrates on the most interesting episode in it – the Ceyx–Alcyone – but the Daedalion and Peleus episodes are integral parts of the narrative and not separate legends. The story is framed by the contrasting transformations of the two brothers. The fierce and bellicose Daedalion becomes a bird of prey (Met. 11.344). The gentle and uxorious Ceyx becomes a happily paired halcyon (11. 741–8). It is ironic that we first meet Ceyx when he is mourning the transformation of his brother into a bird, since the same end awaits him. The brothers' characters are very different but their fates are similar. Ceyx' dealings with Peleus (11. 268–409) bring out the king of Trachis' hospitable, peace-loving, godly and husbandly qualities and give us a rounded and detailed picture of his personality to balance the developed character-study of his wife Alcyone which is to follow. The spotlight passes from Ceyx to Alcyone at Met. 11. 410.
The Scope and Genre of Velleius' History
Authors: Starr R. J.
Published: February 2009

When first confronted by theHistoria Romanaof Velleius Paterculus, it is easy for a reader to assume on the basis of the title and the surviving part of the text that it is a history of Rome, albeit a short one. In the following discussion I intend to demonstrate, first, why that initial assumption should be rejected and, secondly, how the work fits into the tradition of Roman historical writing.
Curtiana
Authors: Bailey D. R. Shackleton
Published: February 2009

The text of Quintus Curtius benefited greatly from Conrad Müller's edition of 1954 (Munich, with translation by H. Schönfeld). In particular, his thorough investigation of Curtius' rhythms enabled him to settle many hitherto doubtful points. Problems remain, unsolved or undetected. In Curtius, as in other prose texts, scribal omissions are a prolific source of corruption, sometimes productive of interpolation. Most of the following notes postulate corruptions of this type.
The ΕΙΣ ΒΑΣIΛΕΑ again
Authors: Jones C. P.
Published: February 2009

Among the works of Aelius Aristides is preserved an address to an unnamed ‘king’. The prevailing view in this century has been that it is addressed to a third-century emperor, and was attributed to Aristides in error. In an article published in 1972 (JRS 62 (1972), 134–52), I argued that the speech was genuine, and was delivered by Aristides in 144 before Antoninus Pius. In a recent article in this journal (CQ N.S. 29 (1979), 172–97), Stephen A. Stertz has undertaken to rebut this view, and advances a novel one: the speech is a school exercise written in the third or perhaps the fourth century, and does not refer to any particular ‘king’, not even necessarily a Roman emperor. Rather than attempt to answer all of Stertz's arguments, I have selected as samples one each from several diverse fields.

Manuscript tradition. In his first paragraph, Stertz suggests that the manuscript tradition of the Eis basilea itself impugns its authenticity. ‘The oration is entitled єἰς βασιλέα in three manuscripts and єἰς τόν αὐτοκρ⋯τορα in another. It has been pointed out that in the former group of manuscripts the title is not preceded by the words ⋯ριστε⋯δου λόγος, thus casting doubt on Aristidean authorship' (172). The accompanying footnote refers to Keil's apparatus ad loc, and the reader might infer that this argument is borrowed from Aristides’ foremost editor. What Keil said was: ‘Titulus εἰς βασιλ⋯α STC (ubi cum prima haec sit Aristidearum, praemittitur ⋯ριστε⋯δου λόγος): єἰς τòν αὐτοκρ⋯τορα U et in indice D m(anu) recentiss(ima).’
Marius Maximus and Ausonius' Caesares
Authors: Green R. P. H.
Published: February 2009

The disappearance of the imperial biographies written by Marius Maximus is one of the more frustrating losses of Latin literature, for various reasons: the well-known testimony of Ammianus, the interest (and frivolity) of Marius Maximus' attested contribution to the Historia Augusta, his importance, much in dispute, to the writer of that work, the lack of information on much of the period he covered, and, not least, the fascinating role assigned to him by modern scholars, remodelling a previous duality of sources, of bad biographer in contrast to the good Ignotus. It has recently become common practice for the evidence of Ausonius' (so-called) Caesares to be used in the search for this biographer. The suggestion goes back to a dissertation of F. della Corte in 1956/7, and was taken up in his edition of Ausonius' works by Pastorino, and discussed in the following year by Cazzaniga who, though uncertain about the dependence of Ausonius on Marius Maximus, does misleadingly assert (perhaps echoing Momigliano) ‘e certo che l'ultima epigramma tocca Elagabalo, che chiude la silloge’. More recently, della Corte has returned to the question and sketched a possible model for the growth of the whole extant collection of Ausonius' Caesares, on the basis of the manuscript tradition. The same volume contains a contribution to the question by S. d'Elia and includes, by a felicitous piece of editing, an extended footnote in which d'Elia is able to comment on the relevant part of della Corte's paper.

Meanwhile, outside Italy, there have been parallel and independent developments.
Catvllvs and Horace on Svffenvs and Alfenvs
Authors: Frank Tenny
Published: February 2009

Alfenvs Varvs of Cremona, a quondam friend of Catullus, studied law with the great Seruius Sulpicius—some of whose lectures he published—served to the advantage of Vergil as land commissioner in Cisalpine Gaul, became consul suffectus in 39 B.C., and provided Horace with the point of a joke. He seems also—hence this note—to have been the versifier whom Catullus calls Suffenus in c. 14 and 22. If he is, we have here a somewhat rare instance of Horace's adapting to his own use a suggestion from Catullus.
Scipionic Forgeries
Authors: Fay Edwin W.
Published: February 2009

Latin ‘plvs.’—To begin somewhat remotely, I am not satisfied with the current explanation of Lat. plus. As regards pleores, to pass over Cuny's mistaken derivation in MSL. 16. 322, the explanation from plēyōses is correct— IE. plēyo. (in Arm. li, ‘full’): plēyos–:: Sk. návya: compv. návyas, cf. pánya: pányas and távya: távyas. IE. plēyes also appears, not only in Sanskrit as prắyas and (from plēyen) in πλε(í)–ων (after suplv. πλεῖ–στος: Av. fraē–šta), but, by a quite rigorous phonetic, in O.Norse fleiri, from a primate flaiz-an <flā–(y)iz– <plē–yes–; cf. Lappish sājet ‘sow,’ borrowed from a North Germanic verb-stem sā–ya <IE. sē–ye/o This leaves the o-grade stem IE. plōis high and dry, for Lat. ploes–, if admitted, will come from plōyes (cf. aes <ayes). Like minus, and in point of usage even more strikingly than minus, plus is a neuter substantive. I start for plus, as Brugmann once did (cf. IF. II. 93), from IE. plewes (cf. Lat. iūs <iewes: iouestod), root p(e)leu in πολū After plūs came plūres plūrimus as from minus came minores minimus. The evidence of Festus' plisima | plurima is not evidence for plōis. It is not possible, under the same circumstances, for IE. ói to have yielded Latin ū and ī. Accordingly, if we do not merely correct plisima to plusima, after Varro LL. 7. 27, we may restore haplographic or haplologic pl[us]is(s)ima (double superlative like postremissimus). Or in view of the equation πλεȋ–στος – Av. fraē–šta I would reconstruct plisima from plei-soma—subsequently changed, after plūs, to plūrima.
Modern Greek Dvandva Compounds
Authors: Mavrogordato John
Published: February 2009

I have not had the advantage of seeing H. C. Muller's treatise on word-composition in Greek (Leiden, 1896) referred to in his note on Greek Dvandva compounds in the January issu of the Classical Quarterly. But I venture to add a fee more words, chosen without special research, to confirm the curious facility, which he notes, of mediaeval and modern Greek in the formation of these compounds.
Augustus and his Legionaries
Authors: Hardy E. G.
Published: February 2009

In the Monumentum Ancyranum Augustus makes some interesting and, if we can unravel them, undoubtedly important statements, from which certain deductions seem possible as to the number of his legionary soldiers, the rate of mortality among them, their length of service and the provisions made for them after their dicharge. Quite early in the Monument (I. 16–19) we get the following general assertion: ‘About five hundred thousand Roman citizens were bound to me by the military oath. Of these, after the due expiry of their service, I settled in colonies or sent back to their own municipia somewhat more than three hundred thousand. And to all of them I gave land purchased by myself, or in lieu of land sums of money out of my own resources.’ From the place of this statement in that part of the record relating to his earlier career we might be tempted to infer (a) that the five hundred thousand legionaries were those who formed his armies at the time of Antony's collapse, and (b) that the discharge of three hundred thousand of them, whether planted in colonies or sent back to their domiciles, took place at one and the same time. With regard to the second point, we shall see presently that the vague and indiscriminate statement made here is cleared up by a later passage (III. 22 sqq.), from which it appears that the assignation of land belongs to two distinct schemes of colonizations, separated by sixteen years, and that the restoration of discharged soldiers to their municipalities, to whom alone the words ‘pecuniam pro agris dedi’ are applicable, belongs to a still later date.
Leonidas of Tarentum
Authors: Gow A.S.F.
Published: February 2009

THE surviving century of epigrams by this tedious writer was edited with a commentary by J. Geffcken in 1896, and they were included in A. Veniero's Poeti de l'Antol. Pal. (1905) and A. Olivieri's Epigrammatisti Gr. d. Magna Grecia (1950?), but the inquirer who is not content with Geffcken's explanations or with his frequent silences will rarely find satisfaction in Veniero, and Olivieri's comments are almost exclusively translated from Geffcken. I have not a great deal to offer by way of supplement, but as a preliminary it may be worth while to consider the five epigrams which have been held to throw light on the poet's date, and first A.P. 6. 334, on which the authorities rely with varying degrees of confidence for placing his birth in or before 315 B.C.
Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus 334–6
Authors: Booth N.
Published: February 2009

All editors have taken the words to mean ‘thou wouldst anger a very st ne’. So did the scholiast.
The Eunuch Bagoas
Authors: Badian E.
Published: February 2009

THE stage of Alexander's great drama is thronged with minor characters playing their walk-on parts or acting as heroes or villains in their own little scenes. Their names, often unknown to–or ignored by—our main sources, have been gathered with monumental diligence by Berve, who has provided a basis for some akribeia in a study traditionally befogged with generality and prejudice. In this country the study of Alexander is necessarily under the spell of Tarn's masterly work, based on a thorough discussion of the sources. To agree or to disagree, we must always come back to him; and disagreement, in the main, has been confined to details.
Palatine Apollo Again
Authors: Richmond O.
Published: February 2009

Mr. Bishop's article in C.Q., xlix (vi. 3/4). 187–92 on Palatine Apollo calls for an answer from me, since I am still alive to give it, though my own study dates from 1910 and was published in J.R.S. for 1914, pp. 193–226. So far away is this publication, and my offprints have for so long been exhausted, that scholars of my generation need to go to university libraries to refer to it, and recent generations do not know it at all. From Lugli's book on Rome they do not gather the details which convinced Boni that I was right, because he omitted some of the most cogent from mention.
Persius 1. 107–10
Authors: Anderson William S.
Published: February 2009

Persius places these words in the mouth of his interlocutor, who states one of the traditional arguments against satire in the contrived manner typical of our poet. The passage may be translated: ‘What need is there to rasp upon tender little ears with biting truth? Be careful that the thresholds of the great do not perhaps grow cold towards you; here there is the nasal sound of the canine letter.’
A Hellish Note
Authors: Landels J. G.
Published: February 2009

Vocem in v. 514 is generally taken to mean ‘voice’ on this basis there are two possible interpretations— (a) that Allecto shouted through the bucina, or (b) that two actions are implied, an alarm call on the bucina followed by a shout, (a) is, owing to the structure of this type of instrument, physically impossible; this may or may not be regarded as an objection, (b) presents less difficulty, but it seems strange that, if two actions are involved, Vergil should have joined cornuque recuruo syntactically with the wrong one of the two; in sense it would belong with pastorale canit signum.
ΕΦΟΔΟΣ and Insinuatio In Greek and Latin Rhetoric
Authors: Bower E. W.
Published: February 2009

The rhetorical treatises of Aristotle and Anaximenes, in discussing the introduction of a speech, recognize that a speaker may encounter prejudice on the part of his audience for some reason or other; perhaps because of his own character or reputation, or because of the nature of the case he is pleading, or because his opponent has already won their approval. Anaximenes describes a speaker in this situation as and he and Aristotle give advice on countering such if they have arisen (Arist. Rhet. 3. 15; Anax. Rhet. ad Alex. 29 fin., 35 init., 36 init.). Rather more than two centuries later we find the early Latin rhetoricians expounding the doctrine of insinuatio for dealing with such a situation; they distinguish between principium, the ordinary direct introduction, and insinuatio, the ‘subtle approach’ (Caplan, in his Loeb translation of the ad Herennium, p. 13).
Some Textual Reassessments in the Teubner Menander
Authors: Arnott W. Geoffrey
Published: February 2009

Sixty years have now passed since Lefebvre first published the Cairo papyrus of Menander (Fragments d'un manuscrit de Menandre, Cairo, 1907), and Körte's still authoritative third Teubner edition (Menandri quae supersunt, pars prior, Leipzig, 1938, reprinted in 1955 with addenda by Thierfelder) appeared almost exactly halfway between then and now. It laid the coping-stone on the labours of many scholars, of whom four rose head and shoulders above the crowd:
A Link between Two Manuscripts of Aristotle'sDe Partibus Animalium?
Authors: Huby Pamela M.
Published: February 2009

The value and date ofVaticanus graecus1339 (Bekker's P), which contains many of the works of Aristotle, have been much disputed. Here I want only to argue that at the beginning of theDe Partibus Animalium, the first work it contains, it is closely related toParisinus graecus1853 (Bekker's E), the great tenth-century manuscript which is one of our major authorities for many of Aristotle's writings.
Notes on the Orphic Hymns
Authors: West M. L.
Published: February 2009

Each of the Orphic Hymns is headed in the manuscripts by the name of the deity to which it is addressed, and in most cases a specification of the kind of incense to be used: thus 2 Only the first hymn lacks a heading. It is preceded in the manuscripts by a poem in which Orpheus addresses Musaeus and teaches him a prayer to a multitude of gods
Metrical Statistics of Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica
Authors: Garson R. W.
Published: February 2009

The appearance of a new and modern Teubner text of Valerius Flaccus, eliminating much consecrated chaff, is greatly to be welcomed. Its editor, E. Courtney of King's College, University of London, kindly lent me his text in typescript several years ago, so that my metrical statistics might be published at about the same time.
Masks on the Roman Stage
Authors: Beare W.
Published: February 2009

The statement that masks were not introduced on the Roman stage until after the time of Terence is still repeated by editors (e.g. Menaechmi, Thoresby Jones, 1918, p. 19; Menaechmi, Moseley aria Hammond, 1933, p. 19) and has the support of Pauly Wissowa (Bieber, s.v. ‘Maske’, 1930) as well as Daremberg and Saglio (Navarre, s.v. histrio); it may, in fact, be regarded as generally accepted. Yet so long ago as 1912 A. S. F. Gow (J.R.S. ii. 65–77) put forward strong arguments on the opposite side; his article, though mentioned with respect in Bursian (1936, pp. 51 ff.) and referred to by Schanz-Hosius (i. 149), has not yet been satisfactorily answered, so far as I am aware. Gow did not claim that a final solution of this problem could be attained on our present evidence, but he did show that the orthodox position is open to attack. I hope to prove that the arguments in favour of the early use of masks are even stronger than he claimed.
The Postponement of Interrogatives in Attic Drama
Authors: Thomson George
Published: February 2009

As Headlam remarked more than thirty years ago, ‘It is a strange fact that the order of words in a Greek sentence has never been clearly appreciated.’ The emphatic word is placed at the beginning of the sentence, or as near it as the structure of the language permits. That is the general law, which I have discussed at length in my edition of the Oresteia. My object in this article is to make an exhaustive study of its operation in a limited field.
London Manuscripts of Cicero, de Divinatione, and Asconius
Authors: Lockwood J. F.
Published: February 2009

Neglect of the ‘codices deteriores’ has caused the ascription of a considerable number of readings in Cic. De Diuin. to the conjectures of scholars of the fifteenth, sixteenth, and later centuries, though manuscript evidence, in some cases of a much earlier date, is to be found. Even if the presence of such readings in the manuscripts is due to conjecture and to no other cause, credit for priority should be given to the manuscripts. The following notes are restricted to the evidence of the London MSS.
Greek Theories of Art and Literature Down to 400 B.C.
Authors: Webster T. B. L.
Published: February 2009

Greek art and literature follow parallel courses through the long period from Homer to Euripides. Homer and Euripides, Dipylon vases and the latest white lekythoi are as far apart from each other as it is possible for works in the same medium to be. The distance can only be explained by a similar change in the views of artists, writers, and their public.
The Eagles and the Hare
Authors: Edwards W. M.
Published: February 2009

The construction assumed for the first sentence in this passage is that adopted by Verrall and Headlam, apart from some differences in detail. It seems unlikely that ἰδών can refer to what precedes, as some have thought; for it can hardly be supposed that the poet, who is using speed and economy (a point often neglected by critics), would pause to tell us that the great Seer merely ‘sees’ two distinctively coloured birds which ‘have appeared near by in a conspicuous station’ compare Homer's method (B321). Also it would involve us in the doubtful construction Ατρεϊδας έδάη λαγοδαίτας for ‘he knew the Ἀ. to be the λ.’ (or vice versa); the nearest parallel to this would appear to be Xen. Anab. 1. 7. 4 οἴους γνώσεσθε τοùς ἄνθρὡπονς, where the adjective makes some difference.
The Spartan Rhetra in Plutarch Lycurgus vi B. The Eynomla of Tyrtaios
Authors: Wade-Gery H. T.
Published: February 2009

Plutarch concludes his chapter on the Rhetra (Lye. 6) with six lines of Tyrtaios:

φο⋯βου ⋯κο⋯ςσαντες Πυθων⋯θεν οἴκαδ' ἔνεικαν1

μαντε⋯ας τε θεο⋯ κα⋯ τελ⋯εντ' ἔπεα

ἄρχειν μ⋯ν βουλῦς θεοτιμ⋯τους βασιλ⋯ας

οἷσι μ⋯λει Σπ⋯ρτας ἱμερ⋯εσσα π⋯λις

πρεσβ⋯τας τε γ⋯ροντας, ἔπειτα δ⋯ δημ⋯τας ἄνδρας

πὐθε⋯αις ῥ⋯τραις ⋯ντααπαμειβομ⋯νους.

These lines are quoted to confirm Plutarch's statement, that the Kings who added the last clause to the Rhetra (what I have called Clause III, α⋯ δ⋯ οκολι⋯ν, etc.) ‘persuaded the city [to accept this addition] on the grounds that it was part of the God's command'. On Plutarch's view, the two Kings added an extra clause to an oracle, and justified their action by alleging that Delphi had authorized the clause. It is not immediately obvious how Tyrtaios’ lines confirm this view. The Delphic utterance whose substance is given in lines 3–6 approximately paraphrases parts of Clauses I and I I (γερωσἰαν σὺρχαγ⋯ταις … τοὺτως εἰσφ⋯ρειν … δ⋯μω δ' ⋯ντααγορ⋯ααν ἦμεν), but where is Clause III ? The burden has to be borne by the one word εὐθε⋯αις: ‘the Kings and gerontes shall initiate business, the demos shall reply with undistorted rhetrai’ or ‘shall respond to the rhetrai without distorting them’ (according as we take the dative ῥ⋯τραις as instrumental or as a true dative). If εὐθε⋯αις is given enough weight, the oracle which Tyrtaios quotes may be held to forbid the ‘excessive amendment’ against which Clause III was (in Plutarch's view) aimed.
The Tablets of Zeus
Authors: Solmsen Friedrich
Published: February 2009

Professor Fraenkel in his recent very illuminating article on ‘The Stars in the Prologue of the Rudens’ (C.Q. xxxvi. 10 ff.) has explained how a Greek poet at the end of the fourth century could describe the stars as the messengers of Zeus and as his regular and, so to speak, professional informants on the sins and evil deeds of human beings. He also comments on the idea that the sins are recorded in Heaven (eorum referimus nomina exscripta ad Iovem) and says—rightly as I hope to show—that this idea ‘though more familiar to us from Semitic sources is a genuine Hellenic belief’. Following Friedrich Marx, he quotes a fragment from Euripides' Melanippe (506 N.2).
Notes on The Corpus Tibullianum
Authors: Maguinness W. S.
Published: February 2009

Delia is being carefully watched and the door is locked to keep her in and her lover out (lines 5–6). It is hardly reasonable to suppose that she has in these circumstances been left in possession of the key; it is presumably in the custody of the ianitor. According to Ovid(A.A. iii. 643), what girls in this situation did was to have a duplicate key (adultera clauis) fabricated for use when occasion offered.

The Delphin Ed. note ‘Par. pro fixo habet fcdso’ may, of course, record what is merely a correction. Falso may, on the other hand, have arisen from a gloss on a reading ficto in a manuscript prior to those extant, which could easily have degenerated to fixo. This reading would sufficiently improve the sense of the passage to merit consideration, for lines 17 ff., while couched in general terms, clearly refer to the situation in which Tibullus and Delia are placed and describe the kind of behaviour by which they are to merit Venus' aid.
Notes on Plotinus, Enn. I–III
Authors: Bury R. G.
Published: February 2009

Enn. I. vi. 1. (p. 87, 1. 6) 9 π⋯ν μ⋯ν γ⋯ρ ἄμορφον, πεφυκ⋯ς μορφ⋯ν κα⋯ εἶδος δ⋯χεσθαι ἄμοιρν ⋯ν λ⋯γον κα⋯ εἴδους εἴδονς αἰσχρ⋯ν κα⋯ ἒξω θε⋯ου λ⋯γον. It is strange that no one seems to have questioned ἒξω θε⋯ου λ⋯γον which, after ἄμοιρν ⋯ν λ⋯γον is merely tautologous: and what point is there here in ‘divine reason’? Since, in these chapters on ‘beauty’, Plotinus has the Phaedrus much in mind, it is natural to suppose that what he wrote was ἒξω θε⋯ου λ⋯γον borrowed from Phaedr. 247 A.
The Phokaians in the Far West: an Historical Reconstruction
Authors: Bosch-Gimpera P.
Published: February 2009

Thefar west in Hesiod's world is confused, and probably reflects a dim knowledge drawn from the Phoenicians in Sicily, where the Greeks bought Tartessian silver. Beneath myths and traditions we may discern a few historical facts: the dynasty of the Tartessian kings, the Phoenician wars with King Geron of Tartessos (about the turn of the ninth to eighth centuries), followed by the ‘Phoenician Thalassocracy’ and a Tartessian attempt to establish direct commercial relations with Sardinia.
The Peace of Callias
Authors: Cary M.
Published: February 2009

The peace concluded between Athens and Persia at the close of the Persian Wars (c. 449 B.C.), and usually known as the Peace of Callias, has been the subject of a new investigation by Wade-Gery, which is clearly destined to serve as the basis of further discussion of its problems. In the present article I shall confine myself to one point of special interest arising out of a novel clause which Wade-Gery reads into the treaty and formulates, exempli gratia, as follows: ‘In the area west of Sardis inhabited by Greeks, the King shall send no functionaries nor exercise any authority: his sole right shall be a yearly tribute of a fixed amount based on the survey of Artaphernes in 493.’
Priscus of Panium, Fragment I b
Authors: Thompson E. A.
Published: February 2009

Although students of the fifth century A.D. have not been slow to recognize the merits of the ͉στορ⋯α Βυζαντιακ⋯ of Priscus, few efforts seem to have been made to under-stand this historian's methods of composition. The purpose of the present note is to indicate that the literary fashions of his time have exercised an unfortunate influence on at least one part of Priscus' work.
Horatiana
Authors: Campbell A. Y.
Published: February 2009

cum prorepserunt primis animalia terris,

mutum et turpe pecus, glandem atque cubilia propter

unguibus et pugnis, dein fustibus, atque ita porro

pugnabant armis, quae post fabricauerat usus,

donec uerba, quibus uoces sensusque notarent,

nominaque inuenere; dehinc absistere bello,

oppida coeperunt munire et ponere leges,

ne quis …

uoces and sensus are not in pari materia; indeed, uoces notare is nonsense, as Gow says. The defect was first pointed out by Housman, J. Phil. xviii, pp. 5–8; his remedy was to transpose one word and read donec uerba, quibus sensus, uocesque, notarent, nominaque inuenere. I doubt if any scholar not already familiar with Housman's note could understand his Latin here without considerable analytical effort; and I cannot but think that Housman was for once demanding from a pair of commas a cabalistic virtue hardly resident in the seal of Solomon. Admittedly he supplies a long list — one page and a half—of illustrative dislocations; but in my opinion two objections remain. In the first place, ‘interlacing’ (as our Platonists now term a form of what Plato called hyperbaton) of the clauses A B in the form A B A B is quite frequent in Latin verse; but A B A B A is rare in the extreme, not to be found in Horace, not perhaps in any Latin author except Lucretius. Secondly, the insertion of uoces, ‘expressions’ generally (cf. Gow), in such a way as to disrupt the pair uerba nominaque ‘verbs and nouns’ would be awkward, and for Horace anomalous, in the most lucid of contexts; here it makes confusion worse confounded.
Robert Maxwell Ogilvie
Authors: Long Anthony
Published: February 2009

Professor Ogilvie, co-editor of Classical Quarterly since the summer of 1976, died suddenly at St Andrews on 7 November 1981. He was forty-nine. His untimely death is a grievous blow to his family, his colleagues at St Andrews, and an unusually wide circle of pupils past and present, friends from many walks of life, and classical scholars. At a remarkably young age Robert Ogilvie achieved distinction as a Latinist and Roman historian, a humane man of letters, a don, and a schoolmaster. He was a brilliant lecturer, an educationalist passionately convinced of the good in Greek and Roman life and literature. The demands which others made on him were heavy, and he demanded much of himself.
‘The Customary Meanings of Words were Changed’ – Or were they? A Note on Thucydides 3.82.4
Authors: Wilson John
Published: February 2009

All editors and translators that I know of render the first part of this passage along the lines of ‘They changed the usual meanings of words‘. Thus Weil and Romilly talk of ‘le sens usuel des mots’,1 Stahl of ‘usitatam vocabulorum significationem’,2 Bloomfield of ‘the accustomed acceptation of names’;3 the most popular modern English translation gives ‘words... had to change their usual meanings’,4 and the best-known modern commentary the phrase in my title – ‘the customary meanings of words were changed’.5 The passage is widely quoted, not only by ancient historians but also by sociologists and philosophers; and one suspects the excitement of this translation to be at least a part-cause of the passage's fame. Comparisons are made with modern propaganda, Orwell's 1984, and so on. But this translation must be wrong; unfortunately for generations of believers, though fortunately for the reputation of Thucydides, who would otherwise be saddled with a nonsensical piece of writing.
The Parabasis in Aristophanes: Prolegomena,Acharnians
Authors: Bowie A. M.
Published: February 2009

In this article, an introduction to a proposed more comprehensive treatment of the subject, I wish to discuss the contribution that the parabasis makes to the understanding and interpretation of Aristophanes’ comedies. The study of this part of the plays has in the past concentrated upon two main areas: firstly, its role in the development of comedy, including questions about its original position in the dramatic structure and its relationship to other elements such as the parodos and agon; and secondly, its role as the repository of Aristophanes’ personal views.1I shall touch but incidentally on the first of these, though my argument will have some bearing on it; to the second I shall return at the end. My aim is to consider an aspect of the parabasis that has not so much been neglected as dismissed as non-existent: the relation between the contents of the parabasis and those of the rest of the play. It is generally agreed that the parabasis deals with matters that are irrelevant to the dramatic action, but I wish to argue that it has a significant role as the focus of the most important themes in the play: far from breaking up the unity of the play, the parabasis provides indications as to where that unity is to be found, besides giving hints about the meaning of the play and the nature of Aristophanic comedy generally.2
The ‘Choriambic Dimeter’ of Euripides
Authors: Itsumi Kiichiro
Published: February 2009

The ‘choriambic dimeter’, or ‘wilamowitzianus’,is favoured by Euripides. Aeschylus does not use this colon,1while Sophocles, as explained below, restricts it to a few stanzas and occasional sequences. But Euripides has at least one ode composed of ‘chor dim’ standing κατà στίχoν with glyconicin all of his middle and later plays except Tro2‘Chor dim’ has a strong affinity with glyc. They not only mix within an ode but make strophic responsion with each other. P. Maas regards ‘chor dim’ as an anaclastic variant of glyc:and indeed some scholars give the name ‘glyc’ to the colon.4
A Pyrrhic Victory: Gorgias 474b-477a
Authors: Mackenzie Mary Margaret
Published: February 2009

Crime pays, says Polus at Gorgias 473. Socrates, on the other hand, maintains two propositions in the face of universal opinion:
Teuthis and Callimachus, Aetia Book 1
Authors: Hollis A. S.
Published: February 2009

A most pleasing recent advance in our knowledge of Callimachus’ fragmentary poems has been the recognition that an elegiac piece, part of which appeared as P. Oxy. vol. 1 no. 14, belongs to him and, one presumes, to the Aetia. Powell (Collectanea Alexandrina, p. 131) already thought of Callimachus as the author, others of Nicander (hence Gow-Scholfield doubtfully included the fragment in their edition, p. 220). Evidence that the author was of some standing is provided by the fact that a scholiast on Nicander, Theriaca 386 (P. Oxy. 2221 col. 11, 17–20) quoted line 4 of the fragment1 (though the additional letters at the start of the line have defied restoration and may be corrupt).2 Great progress came with the publication by M. Gronewald (ZPE 15 [1974], 105 ff.) of P. Mich. 4761, which preserves, almost though not quite perfectly, the beginning of lines 5–15 (underlined on the accompanying text), wherein P. Oxy.