bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Of dogs and men: Archilochos, archaeology and the Greek settlement of Thasos
Authors: Owen Sara 
Published: April 2013

This article involves a case-study of one of the most generally accepted literary accounts of a Greek settlement abroad – the Greek colonisation of Thasos. Here, according to the generally accepted account, we have an eye-witness, Archilochos, son of theoikist, who actually settled on Thasos not during the first Greek settlement but during a subsequent wave of settlers. He didn't like it much – he calls it ‘thrice-wretched’ (228W), the settlers were the dregs of Greece (102W), the island looked like the back of an ass (21W), it wasn't pretty like Sybaris in Italy (22W), and the Thracians were described as ‘dogs’ (93aW). Fighting between Greeks and Thracians is portrayed (5W).The archaeological evidence for the first period of Greek settlement on Thasos is scarce, but what there is has been marshalled in support of this literary model. Archaeology's main role has been to be used in chronological disputes. The orthodoxy dates the Parian colonisation to 680 BC, arguing that the Delphic oracle concerning the foundation of Thasos has Archilochos' father asoikist.The subject-matter of several of the poems has allowed Archilochos' poetry to be dated to 650 BC, and therefore the colonisation of Thasos to a generation before. Pouilloux (1964), indeed, has used the archaeological evidence from a house in the lowest levels of Thasos town to argue for this early date for the Parian settlement, seeing the ‘Thracian’ (and distinctly un-Cycladic) character of many of the finds as indicative of a certain amount of interaction between Parians and Thracians in the first generation of the colony.
Lucretiana
Authors: Watt W.S. 
Published: April 2013

1.192–3 huc accedit uti sine certis imbribus annilaetificos nequeat fetus summittere tellusDoes anni go with fetus (rather than, as everybody seems to take it, with imbribus; ‘fixed rain-showers in the year’, Bailey)? TLL 6.638.60f. adduces Sisenna, Hist. 100 fetum omnem … eius anni; Columella 10.256f. uersicoloribus anni / fetibus; Pliny 12.83 annuo fetu (for annus itself in the sense of anni fetus see OLD 8). Certis will then mean ‘reliable’, ‘assured’.
Hiatus in Vergil and in Horace'sOdes
Authors: Trappes-Lomax John 
Published: April 2013

Our discussion will be primarily concerned with hiatus and prosodic hiatus in Vergil; emendations will be proposed atE. 3.6;A. 4.235; 7.226; it will also be suggested that some of the hiatus-free readings to be found in Carolingian and later MSS deserve consideration. Emendations will also be proposed at Horace,Odes1.28.24; 3.6.10. In order to evaluate Vergilian innovation and Vergilian influence, we will need to give some brief account both of his predecessors and of the other Augustan poets.Vergil's immediate predecessorsComedy of course has its own rules, and a full discussion would be irrelevant; however it will be seen that some aspects of comic versification can be used to illustrate later practice. The fragmentary Latin poets are also excluded; what little we have of them has been exposed not only to the ordinary accidents of transcription but also to accidental misquotation; it is thus hardly possible to draw any certain conclusions.
Alcman 58 and Simonides 37
Authors: Easterling P. E. 
Published: April 2013

ALCMAN 58 (D. L. Page, Poetae Melici Graeci) = 38 Bergk; 36 Diehl.It is not Aphrodite, but wild Eros plays like a boy (or ‘like the boy he is’), coming down over the tips of the galingale flowers: don't touch them!There are no serious textual variants; Bentley's παῖς looks a certain supplement. The context in which the fragment is quoted (Hephaestion 13. 6, p. 42 Consbr.) is a discussion of the cretic; the lines are cited as a metrical example, without reference to their meaning.Meineke's comment on the passage was sensus non plane liquet, but it is tempting to go further, because this is the earliest extant reference to Eros at play, an idea that was to be interestingly influential in later poetry.
Discordant Muses
Authors: Barchiesi Alessandro 
Published: April 2013

Quaeritis undeis a good opening for a book of theFasti(5.1). The question and answer form here exemplified is basic to the poem, even if in the classic Callimachean form from which Ovid draws his inspiration it is the poet who asks the questions – and this in fact happens with the exhortationdicitein line 7. But thisquaeritis undehas also, I believe, an allusive value: it opens another book of elegiac poetry, Propertius' second book, where it is the more remarkable as an opening in that as far as we know it is the earliest example of a direct address to the reader in Roman poetry.The purpose of this allusion becomes clear if we take a wider look at the two contexts. In the first elegy of his second book Propertius inserts a celebrated negation of theMusenweihe:non haec Calliope, non haec mihi cantat Apollo (2.1.3)while Ovid, on the contrary, is just about to consult Calliope and her sisters. The allusion offers other points of interest if we consider the subsequent development of Propertius' poetics.
A note on the structure of the pieces numbered 1–25 in Propertius Book 2
Authors: Camps W. A. 
Published: April 2013

This note offers an answer to the problem of apparent disorder in Book 2 of Propertius by disclosing a principle of order that underlies it. The observations that follow tend to confirm the internal unity of some elegies, to indicate the divisions to be perceived at some points between one elegy and the next, and to suggest the probability or otherwise of some conjectured transpositions. They may also aid interpretation by suggesting what movement within an elegy was intended by the poet to be felt.The area of observation has been restricted to Elegies 1–25 because it is possible to show that within that area an identifiable principle of composition has been applied consistently. It cannot be assumed without further consideration that a principle found to be applicable within the defined area is applicable outside it, even in this book, still less in the other books of the Elegies.
Be alert (your country needs lerts): Horace,Satires1.9
Authors: Henderson John 
Published: April 2013

Who is that man with the handshake? Don't you know …He is an onlooker, a heartless type,Whose hobby is giving everyone else the lie.Laudatur et alget. The Fifties had faith: ‘This satire is nowadays the most popular of all and still read in many classical sixth forms where one otherwise shuns theSermones.’ The Sixtiesknew: ‘This poem … will always be a general favourite’; yes, I bear witness, who lent an ear to the L. A. Moritz track for J.A.C.T.'s showcase ofLatinitasback in the golden age of vinyl (I still do:ego uero oppono ∣ auriculam, 76f.). (…) The Ninetieswonder. ‘Perhaps the most straightforward and immediately appealing of the ten poems, and perhaps the most delicious example of Horace's brand of ironic humour.’
Livy's Preface
Authors: Moles John 
Published: April 2013

Few of the many treatments of this famous preface seem to recognise the need for close reading of the text. The present paper sets out to remedy this deficiency in the hope of achieving three main aims: (1) to demonstrate the coherence and power of Livy's argument, as well as the subtlety of its exposition and the richness of its language; (2) to resolve certain specific problems; (3) to further the continuing debate on important general questions in ancient historiography.Facturusne operae pretium sim si a primordio urbis res populi Romani perscripserim nee satis scio nec, si sciam, dicere ausim, (2) quippe qui cum ueterem turn uolgatam esse rem uideam, dum noui semper scriptores aut in rebus certius aliquid allaturos se aut scribendi arte rudem uetustatem superaturos credunt.
Strategies of tension (Ovid, Heroides 4)
Authors: Casali Sergio 
Published: April 2013

For StefaniaThe Amazon's sonTwo things distinguish Phaedra's from the other letters in Ovid's Heroides. In the first place, Phaedra's is not a letter without consequences. On the contrary, it will have a decisive effect on the addressee. But above all, Phaedra's letter is important just as a letter. The very fact of Phaedra's writing a letter touches a fundamental point in the story, and a controversial one. In the Heroides problems of communication are important in themselves, but, after the gratuitous letters by Penelope, Phyllis and Briseis, this is the first (and it will remain the only one) in which the complication always caused by an epistolary intrusion into the body of the story is superimposed on a pre-existent problem. Phaedra's declaration of her love to Hippolytus is a crucial point, a turning-point for the various tragic treatments of the history. Ovid adds problem to problem.
Plato's movingLogos
Authors: Pender E. E. 
Published: April 2013

Words move, music movesOnly in time; but that which is only livingCan only die.Words strain,Crack and sometimes break, under the burden,Under the tension, slip, slide, perish,Decay with imprecision, will not stay in place,Will not stay still.T.S. Eliot,Four quartets(Burnt Norton V)The poet gives voice to the action of words as they reach out to attain expression. He observes the dangers inherent in this effort: words can break, can become simply unintelligible. Such broken words can no longer function within the fixed constraints of grammar and thus ‘will not stay in place, | Will not stay still’. A.J. Greimas inStructural semanticsdefined an ‘actantial’ model of language:If we recall that functions in traditional syntax are but roles played by words – the subject being ‘the one who performs the action’, the object ‘the one who suffers it’ – then according to such a conception, the proposition as a whole becomes a spectacle to whichhomo loquenstreats himself.
Two Conjectures
Authors: Lee A. G. 
Published: April 2013

The inhabitants of Tomi are angry with Ovid because he has so often expressed his hatred of their country. The poet defends himself by saying that it is only the country, not its inhabitants, that he detests. Do not they themselves complain about the unpleasantness of their surroundings? Did not Hesiod complain about Ascra, his own birth-place?esset perpetuo sua quam uitabilis Ascraausa est agricolae Musa docere senis.Strictly speaking Hesiod did not say that Ascra was ‘always to be avoided’, though this is a natural inference from his words in Erga, 639–40:νἀσσατο δ᾿ ἄγχ᾿ Ἑλικῶνος ὀιӡυρῇ ἐνὶ κώμῃ”Ασκρῃ, χεῖμα κακῇ, θέρει ἀργαλέῃ, οὐδέ ποτ᾿ ἐσθλῇ.The variants offered by the dett., miserabilis, mirabilis, mutabilis, point to the conclusion that the archetype was here difficult to make out. I suspect that the original was uitiabilis, the word here having the force of uitiosa. Lucretius (VI, 1231) has aerumnabile in the sense of aerumnosum; cf. the use of perniciabilis and lacrimabilis.
The Magi in Pliny
Authors: Jones W. H. S. 
Published: April 2013

In neither Lewis and Short nor the old Forcellini is there a single reference under ‘Magus’ to Pliny, and yet the word occurs in the Natural History about one hundred times; this work in fact is one of our primary authorities for Magism.The story of the Magi has been dealt with ably in Pauly and Hastings, and there is an interesting note by A. D. Nock in The Beginnings of Christianity (Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake), pt. I, pp. 164–88. The writer thinks that Apion was Pliny's authority. The Magi were originally a local tribe of the Medes, but later they grew to be a priestly caste, as did the tribe of Levi among the Hebrews. The Magian religion appears to have been introduced among the Persians by Cyrus. It contained much priestcraft and esoteric knowledge, but whether in these early times fraudulent ‘magic’ took part in it is a matter of dispute. Herodotus speaks of Magian incantations, but a fragment of Aristotle declares that Magism was innocent of wizardry. The honourable priesthood of the Magi, however, began from the first to give a name to dishonest deceit and quackery.
The Second Capture of Sestos
Authors: Woodhead A. G. 
Published: April 2013

In the ninth chapter of his Life of Cimon, Plutarch tells how Cimon, appointed to allot the spoils from Sestos and Byzantium, set the prisoners on one side, and the material booty on the other. The allies, invited to choose between the two, chose the latter as being much the more attractive in value, and Cimon's division was laughed at as ridiculous. But later, when the ransom money for the prisoners came in, the tables were turned, and the Athenians, thanks to Cimon's device, were seen to have had the best of the bargain after all.This story, which is repeated by Polyaenus, originally came from Ion of Chios, who said that Cimon himself told it to him at a dinner-party, and that he (Cimon) thought it one of the cleverest things he had ever done. The prisoners and booty, which he was allotting, came from Sestos and Byzantium. Now the information from Herodotus and Thucydides is that Sestos was besieged at the end of 479; when it fell is another problem to which I shall return. Byzantium was certainly captured in the summer of 478. But the commander at Sestos, when the Athenians were the backbone of the Hellenic forces (the Spartans having sailed home), was Xanthippus, the father of Pericles: while the commander at the siege of Byzantium was the Spartan Pausanias, the victor of Plataea. Subsequently Pausanias himself, as a refugee from Sparta, seized Byzantium and had to be driven out of it again by the Athenians in 477. On this occasion the Athenian forces, made up of the contingents of the new Delian Confederation, were commanded by Cimon. Are we to understand from this passage of Plutarch that, on this same campaign, Cimon also captured Sestos, and that Sestos had, like Byzantium, fallen into the hands of Pausanias since its original liberation?
Unconscious Iterations
Authors: Jones W. H. S. 
Published: April 2013

I often write a letter or paragraph, and on revision throw my MS. away in disgust and vexation. Some word, perhaps one of my ‘pet’ words and nearly always a trivial one, has occurred in possibly three out of four sentences. On the first occasion my conscious mind chose the word intentionally; on the other occasions my unconscious mind thrust the word into places where my conscious mind would have rejected it.Some years ago I began to be on the watch for similar phenomena in Greek and Latin authors. The thought occurs at once that unconscious repetitions would be revised by the writer, and so would leave no trace in our extant MSS. But the fact remains that there are such traces. Fifty years ago many of them were collected and commented on by A. B. Cook in the article mentioned above, but his passages and mine have nothing in common, nor are his conclusions quite the same as mine.
Two Synods of the Delian and Peloponnesian Leagues
Authors: Jones A. H. M. 
Published: April 2013

In their speech dissuading the Athenians from the Corcyraean alliance the Corinthians are represented by Thucydides (1, 40,5) as saying: The significance of this passage for Corinthian policy has often been noted, but its bearing on that of Sparta seems to have been ignored. The occasion to which allusion is made is evidently a formal congress of the Peloponnesian League; the language is explicit—the Peloponnesian cities are divided in their vote, Corinth does not record her vote against Athens, but speaks on her behalf. From the detailed account of the preliminaries of the Peloponnesian war we know the procedure of the League. A complainant first applied to Sparta (1, 67), the Spartan assembly voted (1, 87), and if its vote were favourable, the Spartan government summoned a congress of the allies (1, 119), whose vote was taken (1, 125). If this vote were also favourable, the League took action. The machinery was evidently so designed that Sparta could not be committed to a war without her prior consent, nor could she commit the League to a war without the agreement of the majority of its members.
On the date of the ‘Timaeus’ of Plato
Authors: Skemp J. B. 
Published: April 2013

In an article in the Classical Quarterly (January and April 1953), Mr G. E. L. Owen sought to show on grounds of style and content that the Timaeus and Critias probably precede the Phaedrus and certainly precede the Parmenides and the Theaetetus. His arguments need to be balanced by certain considerations which may be stated here very summarily:1. ‘Stylometry.’ It is true that Cornford took no account and Taylor little account of Billig on Platonic clausulae (Journal of Philology, 1920) or of Kaluscha's work (Wiener Studien, 1904). But the most that either of these scholars can be said to have established is the priority on ‘stylometric’ grounds of Timaeus and Critias to Sophistes, Politicus and Philebus. They do not prove (and Kaluscha does not support) the priority of Timaeus and Critias to Parmenides and Theaetetus.
The Melian Dialogue and Perikles' Last Speech
Authors: Andrewes A. 
Published: April 2013

The Melian Dialogue is too eccentric to be explained solely in terms of its immediate context. It will here be maintained that it represents primarily a stage in Thucydides' struggle to reconcile his admiration for the Athenian empire with his feeling that empire was somehow immoral. This essay is thus necessarily concerned with his general views on empire; for which the last speech assigned to Perikles is important evidence.I. THE DIALOGUE AND ITS CONTEXTThe Dialogue falls into two parts which overlap. The first, dealing with the reasons why Athens found it necessary to suppress the independence of Melos, ends roughly at v, 105, 2: it is this part that seems so remote from real life and raises the main problems. The second, roughly from v, 102, dealing with the prospect that Melos might be saved by Spartan help or by mere luck, is comparatively plain sailing: the possibility of Spartan intervention is a real topic, in no sense out of place at such a conference.
Notes on the ‘Aetna’
Authors: Goodyear F. R. D. 
Published: April 2013

ll. 21–3. quis non periurae doluit mendacia puppis,desertam vacuo Minoida litore questus,quicquid in antiquum iactata est fabula carmen?23 in C β et C (supra lin.) et in S.I have yet to see a satisfactory explanation of l. 23 above. Scaliger's crimen has been unjustly ignored. If combined with the variant et it gives a good sense: ‘and whatever ancient crime is now a hackneyed tale’. For antiquum crimen Gorallus compares Mart. Lib. spect. VII, II, vicerat antiquae sceleratus crimina famae. For quicquid adjectival cf. Hor. Carm. II, 13, 9–10, et quidquid usquam concipitur nefas / tractavit, for iactata fabula cf. Ov. Am. III, 1, 21, fabula, nec sentis, tota iactaris in urbe, for quicquid et introducing a generalizing statement to end a list cf. l. 84.
S.E.G. IX, 63 again
Authors: Lloyd-Jones Hugh 
Published: April 2013

In the last number of these Proceedings (no. 189, n.s. 9, p. 2) Miss Joyce Reynolds discussed this well-known inscription, which is dated in A.D. 2/3 and is incised below a relief of a man reclining on a couch, cup in hand. It was found in the Sanctuary of Apollo at Cyrene in 1925; for a bibliography, see Miss Reynolds's article. The text she prints at the beginning reads as follows:(ἔτους) λγ´ ἐπὶ ἱερἑως Παυσανἰα Φιλίσκω φύσει δὲ Εὐφάνευςvacat παυσαμένων πάντων τῆς ἀνείας Λούκιος ᾿Ορβιος Λουκίου πυλοκλειστὴς τὸνλυσιπόλεμονἡνίκα Μαρμαρικοῦ λῆξεν πολέμοιο κυδοιμὸς γήθησεν Βάττου πολλὰ πόλις μερόπωντῆμος ἀν[α]γλύψας κατακείμενον ἡδυπο 〈πο〉 τοῦντα Λεύκιος εἰνοδίωι θῆκε παρὰ προθύρωικλεῖ[δα] πύλης διέπων 'ωραι φίλαι οὗ χάλις ἔοχεν Παυσανίαν ίερῆ καιρόθ̣ι παυσάμενονThe last sentence raises acute difficulties. It has driven Adolf Wilhelm and Louis Robert to the desperate assumption that we have here one of the rare cases of a spondee standing in place of the penultimate dactyl of a pentameter. Wilhelm read καιρούς and Robert καιρῶν both imagined that the words meant the same as ἀνιῶν παυσάμενον. The authority of these two eminent scholars should not prevent us from seeing that the suggestion is ridiculous.
Intestacy in Roman Society
Authors: Crook John 
Published: April 2013

The purpose of this paper is to defend a sound old doctrine against a brilliant, amusing and superficially plausible attack by Professor Daube. The doctrine is that propounded – admittedly in an extreme form – by Sir Henry Maine, that Roman society had a ‘singular horror of intestacy’, a ‘passion for testacy’; in his Gray Lectures of 1966, summing up a rather fuller case made in Tulane Law Review, 1965, Professor Daube claimed to demonstrate that the evidence for this doctrine was ludicrously inadequate and the notion in any case a priori absurd. His judgement has been endorsed, with some corroborative arguments, by Professor Watson, and has achieved the approval of Professor Brunt.According to Daube the case in favour of the view that Romans usually made wills and had a dread of dying intestate consists of the following ‘chief’ arguments: that in the Twelve Tables a person who has not made a will is called intestatus, and the negative form of the word implies that it is the exception; secondly that, in Plutarch's famous story, the elder Cato said that one of the three things he regretted in life was to have spent a single day ἀδιάθετος, and finally that in Plautus' Curculio a man is cursed with the words intestatus vivito. With these three arguments Daube has – and gives – a good deal of fun, claiming, in the upshot, to have blown them all sky-high and thus to have demolished the entire positive case for the old view.
Stesichorus: The ‘Sack of Troy’ and ‘The Wooden Horse’ (P. Oxy. 2619 and 2803)
Authors: Page Denys 
Published: April 2013

A. Frr. 1+47col. iThe poem represented in P. Oxy. 2619 is self-evidently the work of Stesichorus, presumably his Iliou Persis. From the fragments as originally published not a single complete line or sentence could be reconstructed; the style and structure were, as Mr Lobel said, ‘quite unrecognisable’. There was really nothing to be done; it was a great disappointment.To this gloomy picture Mr Barrett, with extraordinary ingenuity and skill, succeeded in restoring two quite substantial patches of bright and clear colour. He joined fr. 47 to the second column of fr. 1, and frr. 30 and 31 to fr. 15(b), in each place creating an intelligible context for seven consecutive lines. The texts of these two pieces as restored by Barrett read, with only slight modifications, as shown on pp. 47 and 50.
Tibullus and the Alexandrians
Authors: Bulloch A. W. 
Published: April 2013

Horace once described Tibullus, in a letter addressed to the elegiac poet, as ‘silently strolling through the healthy woods, pondering on the problems that matter most’ (Ep. 1. 4. 4–5 taciturn silvas inter reptare salubris ∣ curantem quidquid dignum sapiente bonoque est), and this is a view of Tibullus which underlies, in some form or another, most modern approaches to his poetry. After all, Tibullus is singularly dedicated to his concerns of love and the countryside, expressed with directness and simplicity in a style which is, as Quintilian says (x 1. 93), particularly ‘polished and elegant’ (elegia quoque Graecos provocamus, cuius mihi tersus atque elegans maxime videtur auctor Tibullus).Of his own activity as a poet, and how he saw himself in relation to other writers, he says very little. At 2. 4. 13 ff., in one of love's despairs, he exclaims:nec prosunt elegi nec carminis auctor Apollo:illa cava pretium flagitat usque manu.ite procul, Musae, si non prodestis amanti:…ad dominam faciles aditus per carmina quaero:ite procul, Musae, si nihil ista valent.