bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Some Cucurbitaceae in Latin Literature
Authors: Todd F. A. 
Published: February 2009

Blockhead or or Baldhead?(i) Petron. Sat. 39. 12: ‘in Aquario (nascuntur) copones et cucurbitae’.(ii) Apul.Met. I. 15: ‘nos cucurbitae caput non habemus ut pro te moriamur’.Cucurbita in its literal use is the name of many varieties of the numerous family of Cucurbitaceae, as one may learn, e.g. from Plin. Nat. Hist. xix. It is also the name of the cupping instrument called by Juvenal, xiv. 58, uentosa cucurbita, for which see Mayor's note ad loc. For other metaphorical uses of the name, Forcellini and the Thes. Ling. Lat. cite only the two passages quoted above; of these two, Lewis and Short cite only the former. Lexicographers and editors,1 comparing the one passage with the other, concur in the view that the cucurbita is the symbol of stupidity, and that a stupid man may be called a cucurbita, as in Petronius, or be said cucurbitae caput habere, as in Apuleius. At first sight their interpretation of the Apuleian phrase is plausible, for it makes tolerable sense in the context and appears to be supported by such modern expressions as ‘pumpkin-head’ and Kürbiskopf and κεχλι κολοκνθνιον, all of which liken the head of a stupid man to a pumpkin or other gourd which, though bearing some resemblance to a human head, encloses not a brain but an insensate mass of pulp and seeds. But ‘to have a pumpkin-head’ and ‘to be a pumpkin’ are prima facie very different, for the latter equates the man himself with the cucurbita, whereas it is only qua substitute for a head that the cucurbita can typify stupidity; and when it is further observed that in the Petronian passage cucurbitae so interpreted accords ill with the context, it becomes clear that some other explanation must be sought.
The Stars in the Prologue of theRudens
Authors: Fraenkel Eduard 
Published: February 2009

Arcturus is a very suitable person to tell us the ὑποκεíμενα of the play. During the night preceding the action he has produced the storm which is to bring about thedénouementof the plot (11. 66 ff.):illorum navis longe in altum abscesserat.ego quoniam video virginem asportarier,tetuli ei auxilium et lenoni exitium simul:increpui hibernum et fluctus movi maritimos.nam Arcturus signum sum omnium acerrimum:vehemens sum exoriens, cum occido vehementior.
Plato On Truth And Falsity In Names
Authors: Luce J. V. 
Published: February 2009

In Cratylus 385 b-c Plato argues that if statements () can be true or false, names (),2 as parts () of statements, are also capable of being true or false. From Aristotle onwards this view has often been challenged,3 and R. Robinson put the case against it trenchantly when he wrote:4This argument is bad; for names have no truth-value, and the reason given for saying that they do is a fallacy of division. No one in the dialogue points out that it is bad. … Nevertheless it is fairly probable that Plato saw or at least felt that it is a bad argument, quite different in quality from those he later produces against the nature-theory.
A Slip by Cicero?
Authors: Davies J.C 
Published: February 2009

Atque illo die certe Aricia rediens devertit Clodius ad se in Albanum: quod ut sciret Milo ilium Ariciae fuisse, suspicari tamen debuit eum, etiam si Romam illo die reverti vellet, ad villam suam, quae viam tangeret, deversurum (Pro Milone 51).THIS passage is interesting in that its argument runs counter to the main picture which Cicero had earlier presented of the movements of Milo and Clodius before they met on the Appian Way in January 52 B.C. In an earlier passage (27) Cicero says: ‘Interim cum sciret Clodius–neque enim difficile erat id scire–xiter sollemne, legitimum, necessarium ante diem XIII Kalendas Februarias Miloni esse Lanuvium ad flaminem prodendum, quod erat dictator Lanuvii Milo, Roma subito ipse profectus pridie est, ut ante suum fundum, quod re intellectum est, Miloni insidias conlocaret.’ Cicero remains true to this latter version in all the relevant arguments concerning the motives and movements of Clodius and Milo. Milo had legitimate business at Lanuvium, and hence a legitimate reason for being on the road at the time of the affray; Clodius′ presence is explained by Cicero as due solely to the desire to place an ambush for his enemy at a convenient spot, i.e. in front of his farm, and for this reason he had set out from Rome a day before Milo, when his presence was really required in Rome
Hektor in Boeotia
Authors: Macurdy Grace H 
Published: February 2009

‘The Thebans have also a grave of Hektor, son of Priam, beside a spring which is called the Spring of Oedipus, and they say that they brought his bones from Ilium in consequence of the following oracle:“Thebans who dwell in the city of Cadmus,If you wish your clan to dwell with noble wealth,Bring to your homes the bones of Hektor, son of Priam,From Asia and by the command of Zeus worship him as a hero.”’
Merops Aliaeqve Volvcres
Authors: Thompson D' Arcy W. 
Published: February 2009

In his last ‘Gleanings from Glossaries’(C.Q., XX. 105, 1926)Lindsay quotes, andascribes in part to Donatus, the Servian scholium on Verg. G. IV. 14: meropes rusticae fbarbarost appellant… sunt autem uirides earum pennae, et uocantur apiastrae quia apes comedunt.Lindsay obelizes barbaros, ‘because there is no other record of birds called by this name, except Probus' scholium: Meropes dicuntur aues quas in Italia uocant barbaros, etc.’ After quoting the Berne scholium, ‘Meropes tGalbeolif, ut putat Tranquillus,’ andIsidore's statement, ‘Meropes, eosdem et tgaulosf,’ Lindsay comes to the conclusion that these latter words ‘must, each of them, contain a portion of the truth. And isnot the whole truth that Donatus wrote galbus or galuus?’ He goes on to say: ‘Now Ihope that someone with more courage will say: The barbaros of Servius Danielis and of Probus onGeorg. IV. 14 is a corruption of galbos.’ For my part, I take my courage in both hands and assert that it is nothing of the kind.
Notes on Catvllvs
Authors: Frank Tenney 
Published: February 2009

CATVLLVS LXVIII. 157 contains a crux in the last word which has continued to defy editors. In ending his long elegy to Manlius, Catullus showers his gratitude upon him and all who have served him in his first efforts to meet Lesbia:Sitis felices et tu simul et tua uitaet domus, in qua nos lusimus, et dominaet qui principio nobis terram dedit auferta quo sunt primo omnia nata bona.
Interpretations of Propertius
Authors: Bailey D. R. Shackleton 
Published: February 2009

oscula suspensis instabant carpere palmisoscula et alterna ferre supina fuga.It has been held that ferre is here to be taken for Φέρεσθαι oscula ferre is a fairly common phrase; I have met with it in twenty-two other passages down to Apuleius, in eighteen of which the meaning dare (as distinct from carpere) oscula is certain and in two more (Ov. Met. 7. 729, Am. 3. 7. 48) it is appropriate. The two exceptions are Ov. Her. 15. 101 non tecutn lacrimas, non oscula nostra tulisti and ibid 16. 253 f. oscula si natae dederas, ego protinus ilia / Hermiones tenero laetus ab ore tuli. Neither offers a true parallel to the use attributed to Propertius (in the second passage the notion of stealing kisses previously given by a third party makes a difference), and in both the sense ‘bear away’ is made unmistakable by other words (tecum and ab ore). As a matter of usage, then, it is justifiable to assume the meaning ‘give a kiss’ for this phrase, unless something else is plainly indicated. Further, the Propertian lines gain in point by the contrast (of word rather than fact, it is true) between carpere ‘snatch’ and ferre ‘bring’.
The Days for Consulting the Delphic Oracle
Authors: Parke H. W. 
Published: February 2009

Our chief evidence for the days on which the Delphic oracle could be consulted comes, as is well known, from a passage in the Quaestiones Graecae of Plutarch (Moralia, 292 E). He is explaining the name of the Delphic month Bysios, which he derives from the verbs for inquiry (πυσтι⋯νтαι, πυνθάνονтαι), and adds the comment:⋯ν т⋯ μην⋯ γ⋯ρ тούтῳ χρησтήριον ⋯γίγνεο, κα⋯ έβδóμην таüтην νομίζουσι тο⋯ θεο⋯ γενέθλιο, κα⋯ πολύϕθοον ⋯νομάζουσι, οὐ δι⋯ тò πέттεσθαι ϕθóïς ⋯λλ⋯ πολυπευθ⋯ κα⋯ πολυμάνтευтον οὖσαν. ⋯ψ⋯ γŰρ ⋯νείθησαν α⋯ καтŰ μ⋯να μανтεῖᔞᔦ тοῖς δεομένοις, πóтεπον δ' ᾰπαξ ⋯θεμίσтευεν ⋯ Пυθία тο⋯ ⋯νιαυтο⋯ καтŰ тαύтην т⋯ν ⋯μέραν, ώς Кαλλισθένης κα⋯ 'Ạναξανδρίης ίςтρήκασι.
Parmenides' Reference
Authors: Austin Scott 
Published: February 2009

First in the aether Parmenides places the morning star, which he believes to be the same as the evening star…[the moon] always looking towards the sunshineI shall not be concerned with the truth or falsity of these ascriptions, only with the fact that they are just the sort of thing that Parmenides could have said. Nor is an interest in Parmenidean reference new in the literature: Furth calls him a ‘hyperdenotationist’, and the word is apt on almost any interpretation.
Notes on Epictetus, Lucian, and the ‘Edict of Ptolemy IV’ (B.G.U. 1211)
Authors: Zuntz G. 
Published: February 2009

(i) In Epictetus‘ chapter on Providence (1. 16), the eighteenth section contains an evident corruption: ταντα επ’ εκαοτον επνειν εδει και και νον μεγιστον υμνονεπνμνειν…The duplication of cannot be genuine. It is not an iteration of the kind which heightens the effect of a passage: it just falls flat. Wilamowitz, in his Lesebuch, printed in the first place. This is an improvement, but I doubt whether this conjecture really settles the point. The duplication is stressed, and not eased, by the noun and Epictetus is hardly likely to have followed the verb by the homophonous synonym At one of the two places, then, the scribe missed the original verb by duplicating the other. I believe that consideration of the context can show what the original was and from which place it was ousted.
Tacitus And Verginius Rufus
Authors: Shotter D. C. A. 
Published: February 2009

In his historical writings, Cluvius Rufus evidently found cause to criticize Verginius Rufus for his conduct on a particular occasion‘Scis, Vergini, quae historiae fides debeatur; proinde, si quid in historiis meis legis aliter ac velles, rogo igmoscas’.From his reply, it is clear that Verginius automatically understood Cluvius to be referring to an event to which he himself (Verginius) attached great significance:‘Tune ignoras, Cluvi, ideo me fecisse, quod feci, ut esset liberum vobis scribere quae libuisset?’
Verres and Judicial Corruption
Authors: Marshall Anthony J. 
Published: February 2009

One of the most important pieces of evidence which we possess concerning the judicial rights of Roman provincials, particularly their status in relation to the governor's tribunal, is provided by Cicero's brief outline of those provisions of the lex Rupilia, the Sicilian provincial charter, which dealt with judicial administration. The passage reads as follows:Siculi hoc iure sunt ut, quod civis cum cive agat, domi certet suis legibus, quod Siculus cum Siculo non eiusdem civitatis, ut de eo praetor iudices ex P. Rupili decreto, quod is de decem legatorum sententia statuit, quam legem Rupiliam vocant, sortiatur. Quod privatus a populo petit ant populus a privato, senatus ex aliqua civitate qui iudicet datur, cum alternae civitates reiectae sunt; quod civis Romanus a Siculo petit, Siculus index, quod Siculus a civi Romano, civis Romanus datur; ceterarum rerum selecti iudices ex conventu civium Romanorum nr000ni solent.
Campanian Chronology in the Fifth Century B.C.
Authors: Rutter N. K. 
Published: February 2009

The establishment of the Campanian nation (Diod. 12. 31. 1).Carthaginian expedition to Sicily (Livy 4. 29. 8).(Coss. T. Quinctius L. f. PoenusCincinnatus, Cn. Julius Mento: 43 1/30 B.C.). Insigni magnis rebus anno additur nihil turn ad rem Romanam pertinere visum, quod Carthaginienses, tanti hostes futuri, turn primum per seditiones Siculorum ad partis alterius auxilium in Sicilian! exercitum traiecere.
Celer and Nepos
Authors: Wiseman T. P. 
Published: February 2009

Asconius 63 (Clark), commenting on the pro Cornelio: Fuerunt enim plures Quinti Metelli, ex quibus duo consulares, Pius et Creticus, de quibus apparet eum non dicere, duo autem adulescentes, Nepos et Celer, ex quibus nunc Nepotem significat. Eius enim patrem Q.Metellum Nepotem, Baliarici filium, Macedonici nepotem qui consul fuit cum T. Didio, Curio is de quo loquitur accusavit …Cicero and his scholiast refer to ‘duo Metelli, Celer et Nepos’ but like Asconius do not specify their relationship. Celer himself, followed by Cicero in correspondence with him, calls Nepos his frater, but since both bore the praenomen Q., this cannot be the whole story. Celer's career shows that he was the elder, yet Nepos senior, according to Asconius, entrusted his feud with Curio not to him but to Nepos iunior.
The Dating of theCiris
Authors: Lyne R. O. A. M. 
Published: February 2009

Once we have accepted that theCirisstems from neither Virgil nor Gallus, but was written by a post-Virgilian poetaster, the obvious task for us is to try and formulate some more specific idea of the date of the poem. I think that it has been sufficiently proved that theCirisis not only post-Virgilian, but post-Ovidian in origin, including as it does unquestionable imitations of that author. But this, to date, is really as far as we have got. It is the purpose of this paper to put forward the thesis that the author of theCirislived late enough to know and be influenced by Statius and other poets of the later first century A.D.Now of course any theory that theCirisknew and used Statius and other Silver poets is rendered highly unlikely if it can be maintained that Suetonius considered it, with the otherminora, a genuine Virgilian work. And so we are brought back again to the famous list in the DonatanLife:deinde Catalepton et Priapea et Epigrammata et Diras, item Cirim et Culicem, cum esset annorum XXVI. cuius materia talis est. pastor fatigatur aestu; cum sub arbore condormisset et serpens ad eum proreperet, e palude culex provolavit atque inter duo tempora aculeum fixit pastori. at ille continuo culicem contrivit et serpentem interemit ac sepulchrum culici statuit et distichon fecit:
Phrasal Abundantia in Cicero's Speeches
Authors: Davies J. C. 
Published: February 2009

In the course of a wider study of stylistic development in Cicero's speeches1 an examination was conducted into the clausal and phrasal structure of a chronological cross-section of the speeches. The examination revealed some clearly distinguishable developments in the orator's maturing style.This paper is restricted to an examination of one aspect of his stylistic development, namely his use of abundantia of phrases. The term abundantia has a long history, but in Cicero's rhetorical treatises it is almost synonymous with amplitudo and copia.
Ruined by lust: Anacreon, Fr. 44 Gentili (432PMG)
Authors: Brown Christopher 
Published: February 2009

We generally think of the poetry of Anacreon as coming from an entirely different world from that of the iambists, but among the extant fragments there is some indication to the contrary. With fr. 44 Gentili = 432PMGiamb. 5 West, an epodic passage, we find Anacreon closest in form to the iambists. Here is the text with the full context from theEtymologicum Magnum(p. 523. 4; after West):τò δ κνύςα ώς λÉγι ‘Hgr;ρωδιανòς ν τ καθολικ (1. 251. 7, 2. 901. 20 Lentz), εί μν πί τοű ϕυτοű, συγκοπή στιν πò τοű κóνυςα, οίον “χαμαίςήλοιο κονύςης” (Nic.Th.70). εί δ πί τού παρɛϕθαρμÉνου καί ρρυσωμνου, οÙ συγκοπή οτιν, λλ' πò τοű κνύω, ϕ' οǘ κνύος ϕθορá οȋον “κατà κνύος Ȅχευεν, φίλωτο δ κáρηνα” (Hes. fr. 133.3/5 M—W). γίνεται κνύςα, ώς παρà’ ΑνακρÉοντι ν ίáμβωκνυςή τις ñδη καί πÉπειρα γίνομαισ διà μαργοσύνην.
On the Manuscripts and Text of Euripides, Medea: II. The Text
Authors: Diggle James 
Published: February 2009

νδνουϲα μν Φυγι πολιτν ὧν Φκετο ϰθόνα, αὐτ τε πάνταξυμΦέρουϲ' 'Iάϲονι.12 πολιτν Π1 codd. et Σ bv: πολίταιϲ V3, sicut coni. Barnes ϰθονοϲ Π1 gE; δ Stob. 4. 22. 30The two Sophoclean passages by which Page supports his plea that 'πολιτν stands for πολίταιϲ…, being attracted by the following ὧν into the genitive case’ do not inspire much confidence, since both (as he acknowledges) are capable of being explained differently. Further, as a recent writer has remarked, ‘on cherche en vain la raison qui aurait pu inciter Euripide … à écrire πολιτν à la place de πολίταιϲ Le vers n' aurait rien gagné à cette substitution, sinon une obscurité inutile’ (G. Roux, REG 85 [1972], 40).
A Crux Criticorum (et interpretum) In Seneca the Elder's Controversiae (2. 4. 12)
Authors: Håkanson Lennarth 
Published: February 2009

The argumentum of contr. 2. 4 reads as follows (quoted from my own provisional text, which I hope will be published in some years):Abdicavit quidam filium. Abdicatus se contulit ad meretricem. Ex ilia sustulit filium. Aeger ad patrem misit; cum venisset, commendavit ei filium suum et decessit. Adoptavit puerum <pater>. Ab altero [pater] filio accusatur dementiae.
Elections Under Tiberius
Authors: Shotter D. C. A. 
Published: February 2009

The first point that Tacitus makes is the confusion that surrounded these elections. Tiberius' policy was in no way as well denned here as it apparently was in the case of the praetorship elections:De comitiis consularibus, quae turn primum illo principe ac deinceps fuere, vix quicquam firmare ausim: adeo diversa non modo apud auctores, sed in ipsius orationibus reperiuntur.
Enniana, I
Authors: Skutsch O. 
Published: February 2009

Ennius began his Annals with a prayer to the Muses:(I.V.) Musae quae pedibus magnum pulsatis Olympum.In this he differs from his predecessors. Livius in his Odusia had substituted Camena for Homer's Μοῦσα, and the ‘novem Iovis concordes sorores’ to whom Naevius addresses himself in the Carmen Belli Punici also bore the name of Camenae, as we may infer with some confidence from Naevius' epitaph: ‘Immortales mortales si foret fas flere Flerent divae Camenae Naevium poetam.’ The mysterious Carmen Priami likewise speaks of the Camenae: ‘Veteres Casmenas cascam rem volo profari.’ For general reasons it seems unlikely that before Ennius' time the Romans were altogether unfamiliar with the name of Musae. Evidence, however, to show that they knew it is not available. Nevertheless, even if the name Musae was known, in invoking their patronage for his poem Ennius is making a departure from the habits of earlier poetry, of which he is both conscious and proud. In the beginning of the seventh book he speaks with scorn of his predecessor Naevius: ‘scripsere alii rem Versibus quos olim Fauni vatesque canebant Cum neque Musarum scopulos…’ Now the reign of the Muses begins, and the grave virus of the Saturnian line is driven out by the munditiae of the hexameter.
The epistolary mode and the first of Ovid's Heroides
Authors: Kennedy Duncan F. 
Published: February 2009

In April 1741 there appeared a slim volume entitled An Apology for the Life of Mrs Shamela Andrews by a certain Mr Conny Keyber, whose name is generally supposed to conceal that of the novelist Henry Fielding. Shamela, to give the book its more familiar title, was a parody of Samuel Richardson's epistolary novel Pamela: or Virtue Rewarded, which had been published to great acclaim the previous year. In a series of letters purportedly sent to each other by the main characters, the story unfolds of the honest servant-girl Pamela, her efforts to avoid seduction by her master Mr B., and her eventual marriage to him. Fielding's chief target was the morality of the book (Pamela's virtue contains a disturbingly large element of self-interest), but in passing he drew cruel attention to some of the pitfalls of the epistolary form as a vehicle for narrative. One passage in particular deserves quotation, from Letter VI, which Shamela writes to her mother at (so we are duly informed at the top of the letter) twelve o'clock on Thursday night:Mrs Jervis and I are just in Bed, and the Door unlocked; if my Master should come – Odsbods! I hear him just coming in at the Door. You see I write in the present Tense, as Parson Williams says. Well, he is in Bed between us, we both shamming a Sleep, he steals his Hand into my Bosom, which I, as if in my Sleep, press close to me with mine….
Lucretius, DRN 5.44 Insinuandum
Authors: Farrell Joseph 
Published: February 2009

This passage has occasioned, if not proelia, at least divergent interpretations, not to mention instances of tergiversation. In 1910 Cyril Bailey modelled his first rendering of the lines closely on that of H. A. J. Munro: ‘But unless the breast is cleared, what battles and dangers must enter into us in our own despite’; ‘but unless the heart is cleansed, what battles and dangers must then find their way into us in our own despite’. But a reprint of Bailey's translation in 1921 produced the following change: ‘…what battles and perils must we then enter into despite our will’. What changed Bailey's mind?The explanation appeared years later in Bailey's great edition and commentary of 1947. In his note on the passage (p. 1328), he cites objections to Munro's interpretation that had been raised by C. N. Cole and W. R. Hardie. In this paper I will examine these objections and present my own interpretation of the passage, which amounts to a qualified vindication of Munro.
A Delicacy in Plato's Phaedo
Authors: Young Charles M. 
Published: February 2009

Plato's striking figure of the ‘child in us’ at Phaedo 77e5 takes on an added lustre when viewed in the light of the theory of explanation Socrates develops between lOObl and 105c7.Socrates' theory aims to explain why certain objects have certain properties: why something is beautiful (στ…κσλν, 100c4) or tall (100e5–6), or when a body will be sick (νοσσɛι, 105c3) or alive (ζῷν ἔσται, 105c9–10). Explanation is called for, Socrates thinks, when an object has a property its title to which is insecure, in the sense (to judge from 102b8–c8) that the object's having the property is not guaranteed by its being what it is. Thus Socrates wants an explanation, for example, of a person's being tall (102cl–9) or – the case of especial interest in the Phaedo – of a body's being alive.
Vergil, Aeneid 1.607–9 and Midas’ Epitaph
Authors: Janko R. 
Published: February 2009

Aeneas ends his first speech to Dido as follows:quae te tam laeta tuleruntsaecula? qui tanti talem genuere parentes?in freta dum fluuii current, dum montibus umbraelustrabunt conuexa, polus dum sidera pascet,semper honos nomenque tuum laudesque manebunt,quae me cumque uocant terrae.A number of parallels have been cited for 607–9, notably Eel. 1.59f. (an adynaton) and the positive statement (about Daphnis) at Eel. 5.76ff., which even ends with the same line:
Aeneid 8.573 and Callimachus’ Hymn to Zeus
Authors: Mayer Roland 
Published: February 2009

In his final words to his son, Pallas, Evander interposes a prayer:‘At uos, o superi, et diuum tu maxime rectorIuppiter, Arcadii, quaeso, miserescite regis…’Of recent commentators, C. J. Fordyce alone is bothered by the reference to Evander's Arcadian origin; he reckons that it alludes to his exiled condition and so establishes a claim on Jupiter's mercy. That may be so, but it is worth suggesting that this is rather a piece of Virgil's Callimachean learning. For at the opening of his first Hymn Callimachus had rejected the story that Zeus was born on Crete in favour of Arcadia (6–7, 10). The Arcadian birth-place was known to Cicero (De natura deorum 3.21,53: principio Ioues tres numerant…ex quibus primum et secundum natos in Arcadia). Yet Cicero is less likely to be in Virgil's mind than Callimachus, from whom he derived so much learned detail. Evander then is appealing to Jupiter as a fellow Arcadian, docte.
Notes on Pighius and Valerius Maximus
Authors: Fowler D. P. 
Published: February 2009

(1) Horace, Janus, and Pighius' ActaIn PBSR 54 (1986), 213–28 Andrew Lintott dusts down the fragments of the Acta Urbana published by S. V. Pighius in 1615 and universally supposed today to be a forgery. Lintott himself, after a most learned discussion, concurs, but one senses a wistful longing for the fragments to be genuine. The purpose of this note is to offer another reason why sadly this is unlikely.