bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Xenophanes, Fragment 3
Authors: Bowra C. M. 
Published: February 2009

Athenaeus, xii. 526 a, quotes three elegiac couplets of Xenophanes on the luxurious ways which the men of Colophon learned from the Lydians. Since the lines lack theological or metaphysical interest, they have not received so much attention as other fragments of Xenophanes, and few attempts have been made to unravel their exact meaning. But it is rash to hurry over anything written by Xenophanes, and these lines are in their way as interesting as anything else that he wrote. For they show what he, a penetrating and serious critic, thought about one aspect of the impact of East on West, of barbarian on Greek, and they contain his only known judgement on historical events. On examination they raise more questions than are usually found in them. They may be quoted as Diels printed them:⋯βρоσ⋯νας δ⋯ μαθ⋯ντες ⋯νωφελ⋯ας παρ⋯ Λνδ⋯ν,⋯φρα τνρανν⋯ης ἦσαν ἄνεν στνγερ⋯ς,ἤϊσαν εἰς ⋯γоρ⋯ν παναλоνργ⋯α φ⋯ρε' ἔχоντες,оὐ με⋯оνς ὥσπερ χ⋯λιоι εἰς ⋯π⋯παν,αὐχαλ⋯оι, χα⋯τῃσιν ⋯γαλλ⋯μεν' εὐπρεπ⋯εσσιν,⋯σκητоῖσ' ⋯δμ⋯ν χρ⋯μασι δεν⋯μενоι.
The Metaphorical Sense of ΛΗΚΥΘΟΣ and Ampulla
Authors: Quincey J. H. 
Published: February 2009

The application of λἠκɛθος ànd its derivatives and the Latin terms ampullae and ampullari to the turgid or elevated style of poetry or oratory has provoked such a variety of explanations amongst modern and ancient commentators that it would be a tedious business to examine them all in detail. The ancient commentators on Horace, Ars Poetica, 11. 93–7interdum tamen et vocem comoedia tollit,iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore;et tragicus plerumque dolet sermone pedestriTelephus et Peleus, cum pauper et exsul uterqueproicit ampullas et sesquipedalia verba…were not even in agreement on the question of the precise correspondence of the two words, for while Porphyrion said that proicit ampullas was imitated directly from the ληκθειος Mοcomflex;σα of Callimachus, Pseudacron's note makes no reference to ληκɛθζειν at all, but merely connects the metaphor with the inflated appearance of the Roman ampulla. And though modern scholars do not question the fact that the two words do correspond in some degree, there has been a wide divergence of opinion on the derivation and meaning of the metaphor. Ritter and Wilkins, for example, held that the meaning ‘paint-pots’ was indicated by the conjunction of ληκθοɛς with pingere in one of Cicero's letters to Atticus, and that in Horace, Epistles 1. 3. 12–14
Aeschylus Agamemnon 1223–38 and Treacherous Monsters
Authors: Campbell A. Y. 
Published: February 2009

In C.Q. XXVI. 45–51 I contended that in Aesch. Agam. 1227–30 Cassandra describes Clytemnestra in terms of a Greek proverb, the proverb of the Treacherous Hound; and I restored the passage thus:—νεŵν δ' ἔπαρχоς 'Ιλ⋯оν τ' ⋯ναστ⋯τηςоὐκ оἶδεν оἵα γλŵσσα μισ⋯της κνν⋯ςλε⋯ξασα κα⋯ σ⋯νασα φα⋯δρ', оἷоν δ⋯κоςΑτης λαθρα⋯оν δ⋯ξεται κακῇ τ⋯χνῃ.
Philo: in Flaccum 131 (M. 2 p. 536)
Authors: Box H. 
Published: February 2009

(Lampon) προεστὠς τοȋς ⋯γ εμόσιν, ⋯πότε δικάζοιεν, ὑπεμνηατίζετο τ⋯ς δίκας εἰσάγων ὡς ἔϰων τάξιν, εἶτα τ⋯ μ⋯ν ⋯πήμειΦεν κτλ.The words ὡς ἔϰων τάξιν do not give a satisfactory sense. The MS which Cohn-Wendland-Reiter designate A adds τοιάνδε after τάξιν. The methods of A's intelligent scribe are sufficiently exposed by Reiter. When through inadvertently omitting part of a sentence he could not understand the text, he freely altered and inserted words so as to make it intelligible. A man who was capable of this procedure was capable of inserting τοιάνδε after τάξιν in this passage. We may confidently say that τοιάνδε is based on no authority, an arbitrary addition of the scribe for the sake of making ὡς ἔϰων clear.
Huts and Farm Buildings in Homer
Authors: Knox Mary O. 
Published: February 2009

These seem to be regarded as quite a different type of building from houses.The terminology used of them is to a large extent distinct. The only case of extensive overlapping has probably a special stylistic reason.The main words involved are κλισίη (soldiers' hut or herdsman's cottage), αύλή (yard or farmyard), μσσαυλος (animal enclosure), and σταθμός/–οί (the whole complex of farm buildings). The evidence is scanty: in the Iliad there are a number of passages relating to soldiers' huts, and a few mentions of farms in similes and in the Shield section. In the Odyssey there is Eumaeus' farm. This is virtually all. There is also, inevitably, a dearth of archaeological evidence for country buildings, since the remains of these are apt to be less noticeable, and often less durable, than those of large settlements.
Anth. Pal.9. 235: Juba II, Cleopatra Selene and the Course of the Nile
Authors: Braund D. 
Published: February 2009

Who is the author of this poem and what is its historical context?Gow and Page are convinced that the author is Crinagoras. Manuscript authority, in the person of the so-called ‘corrector’, supports the attribution. Yet, at first sight at least, the attribution of this poem to Crinagoras raises something of a problem. It does so because the poem evidently relates to what seems to be a contemporary marriage linking the royal families of Egypt and Libya respectively: if the author is indeed Crinagoras, what marriage can this be? Only one such marriage is available: as Gow and Page accurately observe, ‘It is generally agreed that this epigram refers to the marriage of Cleopatra Selene and Juba II’.
Sophocles, Electra 610–11
Authors: Lilley D. J. 
Published: February 2009

That both parts of the sentence refer to the same person is now generally agreed; it is not so much that a change of subject would be, as the commentators are wont to say, ‘un-Sophoclean’, but simply that it would be awkward and clumsy. But to whom do the lines refer?D. B. Gregor (C.R. lxiv [1950], 87–8) argues for Clytaemnestra, but despite the apparent force of some of his arguments (e.g. that the clause refers to Clytaemnestra because it is she who picks up Electra, in 616, picks up Clytaemnestra's of 615; but could still be Electra's) I cannot agree. He adds too that the reference to echoes the motif of Electra's speech, but it is just as much the motif of Clytaemnestra's speech, in fact more so. Finally, the first part of the sentence, it is true, could be asserted by the chorus on the strength of some such gesture as the heaving of the bosom, but I cannot see how they could then deduce that Clytaemnestra ‘no longer cares whether justice is on her side’
Some Observations on Propertius 1. I
Authors: Cairns Francis 
Published: February 2009

Propertius' account of this myth contains two major difficulties of syntax and interpretation:(a) modo (line 11). When the word modo means ⋯ννοτε μ⋯νand stands in the first of two co-ordinate clauses it requires an answering modo or its equivalent in the second clause. Et and etiam are not satisfactory equivalents. So the necessary second modo—or equivalent—is here absent.(b) ibat uidere (line 12) is the sole account of Milanion's activities in connection with the hirsutae ferae. As such it appears obscure and abrupt.
ΚΛΕΟΣ ΑΦΘITON and Oral Theory
Authors: Edwards Anthony T. 
Published: February 2009

In a recent article Margalit Finkelberg raises the question of whether or not the phrase κλοσ ἄπ;θιτον atIliad9.413 is indeed a Homeric formula:λετο μν μοι νóατοσ, τρ κλοσ ἄπ;θιτον ἔσταιHer purpose is to ‘test the antiquity of κλοσ ἄπ;θιτον on the internal grounds of Homeric diction’ (p. I).1 Proposing to use specifically the analytic techniques of oral theory, she argues that this phrase does not represent a survival from an Indo-European heroic poetry, as has been suggested from the occurrence of its exact cognate,śápos;rdvas áksitam, in Vedic poetry. To this end Finkelberg presents a precise and carefully organized argument. I briefly summarize its two branches as follows:(1) It is the formulae that comprise the oldest stratum of Homeric diction, and so it is here that one would find survivals of Indo-European poetic diction. κλοσ ἄπ;θιτον ἒσται (which Finkelberg correctly argues to be the complete phrase), however, cannot be judged a Homeric formula by the criterion of repetition since it is a unique phrase in Homer. Nor can it be judged a formula by the ‘functional’ criterion since the better attested κλἒοσ οὒ ποτ óλεῖται expresses the same essential idea in the same metrical shape.(2) A unique phrase such as that in question might nonetheless be ancient. The development of the use of ἄπ;θιτοσ, first to modify concrete nouns, and only later with abstracts, however, would indicate that its use with κλοσ is late. The demonstration that κλοσ ἂθιτον ἔσται is a ‘formulaic expression’, moreover, argues that it was coined for this specific context inIliad9 by analogy with other Homeric formulae, and so does not preserve an Indo-European formula.
Anaximander's Rings
Authors: Bodnár István M. 
Published: February 2009

Anaximander is the first philosopher whose theory of the heavens is preserved in broad outlines. According to the sources the celestial bodies are huge rings of compressed air around the earth, each visible only where it is perforated by a tubular vent through which the fire contained in it can shine. Greatest and farthest of them is the sun, next comes the moon and under them there is the ring (or possibly rings) of the stars. It is a common practice to put and answer the following questions:(i) ‘…why he should have placed the stellar circles or rings closer to the earth than are the sun and the moon.’(ii) ‘…why these lower rings of stellar ρ do not obscure the brighter but more distant bodies.’
Dilution of Oarcrews with Prisoners of War
Authors: Morrison J. S. 
Published: February 2009

At 10.17.6–16 Polybius relates how Scipio seized the opportunity offered by his capture of New Carthage in 209 B.C. to increase his fleet of quinqueremes by half as much again. There is a briefer passage on the same subject in Livy 26.47.1–3.Polybius says that the total number of prisoners taken was nearly ten thousand, from whom Scipio separated two groups: first citizens, men and women with their young children, and secondly craftsmen. He freed the former, and made the latter, numbering about 2000, public slaves of Rome. In Livy's account women and children are not mentioned; the prisoners are said to be ten thousand free men. As in Polybius, the citizens are said to have been set at liberty and the two thousand craftsmen made public slaves. In Polybius Scipio is said to have selected from all those not in the first two groups ‘the strongest, the fittest looking and the youngest and mixed them up with his own crews. And making the whole body of oarsmen (ναται) half as many again as before he succeeded in manning the captured ships as well as his own στε τοὺς ἄνδρας κστῳ σκϕει βραχ τι λεπειν το διπλασους εἶναι τοὺς ὑπρχοντας τν προγενομνων, for the captured ships were eighteen in number and the original ships thirty-five’. The corresponding passage in Livy is as follows: ‘the remaining multitude [multitudinem, a word suggesting a larger number than the two former groups together] of young inhabitants and of strong slaves he handed over to the fleet to increase the number of oarsmen (remigum). And [an increase was needed because] he had added eight captured ships to the fleet’.
Theocritus and Priapus' Ears
Authors: Giangrande Giuseppe 
Published: February 2009

Professor Trypanis has recently (Class. Philol.65 [1970], p. 51) suggested changing àνούαтον into àνούтαтον. Since the problem has not been dealt with atisfactorily by any commentator,1 I should like to clarify the matter by demonstrating that the text is sound: the adjective àνούαтον is, in fact, not only morphologically impeccable, but, in particular, singularly pointed. From the morphological point of view, theHintergliedούαтος is paralleled (and therefore supported) by δολιχούαтος (Opp.Cyn.3. 186), μονούαтος (A.P.v. 135. 1), and χρυσούαтος (Hom.,fr.17 Allen): these adjectives occur in hexameter poetry, and each of them is attested once, exactly as is the case with Theocritus‘ àνούαтος.The point brought out by àνούαтον is extremely felicitous: statues of Priapus could be either of an elaborate type, in which the god was represented as havingtwoprotruding physical features, namely his ears3 and hismentula, or of a more uncouth type, which consisted of a‘truncus dolatus’,i.e. atruncuswhoseonlyprotuberance was the‘mentula edolata’. The statue described by Theocritus belongs to the latter type: it is uncouthly hewn and devoid of one of the two protruding features {à½οÍαтοт), but (àλλà) it does possess the other one.
The Taciturnity of Aeneas
Authors: Feeney D. 
Published: February 2009

Aeneas' speech of defence before Dido (A.4. 333–61) is the longest and most controversial he delivers. Although by no means typical, it can open up some revealing perspectives over the rest of the poem.The exchange between the two, having as its kernel a dispute over obligations and responsibilities, requires some words of context. The early part of the book describes the establishment of a liaison between the refugee leaders, while revealing amongst the poem's characters a wide discrepancy of opinion over the nature of that liaison. Juno announces that she will arrange the marriage of the couple (125–7); after the ensuing marriage-parody of the cave-scene (165–8), Dido also calls what now exists a ‘marriage’:coniugium uocat, hocpraetexit nomine culpam(172). Fama too, moving around Libya, speaks as if Dido has taken Aeneas for husband (192). But the local King Iarbas regards Aeneas as a pirate who has carried off a successful job of plunder (217), while Jupiter looks down from heaven and sees ‘lovers’,amantis(221). Mercury is able to address Aeneas asuxorius(266).
An Acrostic in Vergil (Aeneid 7. 601–4)?
Authors: Fowler D. P. 
Published: February 2009

In any competition for monuments of wasted labour the collection of accidental acrostics in Latin poets published by I. Hilberg would stand a good chance of a prize. But amongst his examples of ‘neckische Spiele des Zufalls’ (269) is one I am gullible enough to believe may be more significant. In Aeneid 7. 601–15 Vergil describes the custom of opening the gates of war in a long anacoluthic sentence, the first four lines of which run:Mos erat Hesperio in Latio, quern protinus urbesAlbanae coluere sacrum, nunc maxima rerumRoma colit, cum prima movent in proelia Mortem,Sive Getis inferre manu lacrimabile bellum…
Konnos' figleaf?
Authors: Sommerstein Alan H. 
Published: February 2009

In Aristophanes' Wasps (673–5), Bdelykleon tells his jury-mad father that because the allied states are aware that the ordinary Athenian juror is an exploited creature, deliberately kept poor by the demagogues in whose hands the real power lies, σ⋯ μ⋯ν ⋯γο⋯νΤαι Κ⋯ννου ψ⋯φον, Το⋯τοισι δ⋯ δωρоφоρоῡσιν. The scholia see that Κόννου ψ⋯φον must mean ‘something worthless’, but they add on the authority of Kallistratos and Euphronios that Ar. has altered the original phrase:ΚαλλĺστραΤος παροιμ⋯αν φησ⋯ “Κόννου θρῖον”, παρ՚ ἣν παίζει Εὺφρόνιος δ⋯ ὅτι ⋯λέΧθη δι⋯ τ⋯ ⋯δύν τινα τ⋯ν Κόννον εἶναι. … ψ⋯φον δ⋯ εἶπε δι⋯ δι⋯ τ⋯ περ⋯ δικαστο⋯ λ⋯γειν. (Σ Wasps 675b+c ed. Koster)We cannot tell whether Euphronios was commenting on κóννον θριον or κóννον ψ⋯ϕον, since although he was writing before Kallistratos, the latter need not have been the first to cite the phrase κóννον θριον in connection with our passage; indeed, the credit for first noting its relevance may belong to Euphronios himself. I shall be reverting to Euphronios' interpretation of the phrase presently.
Notes on Seneca's Quaestiones Naturales
Authors: Bailey D. R. Shackleton 
Published: February 2009

‘In spite of the efforts of scholars to improve matters, the condition of Seneca's text remains in many places most uncertain or quite irrecoverable. Again and again one has to be content with conjectures which, while often giving the general sense of a passage, must not be taken as certainly Seneca's words’ (Corcoran).1. praef. 5 o quam contempta res est homo, nisi supra humana surrexerit! quam diu cum affectibus colluctamur, quid magnifici facimus, etiam si superiores sumus? portenta vincimus: quid est cur suspiciamus nosmet ipsos, quia dissimiles deterrimis sumus? Traditional punctuation: ‘… quid magnifici facimus? etiam si superiores sumus, portenta vincimus’
Melica
Authors: West M. L. 
Published: February 2009

The context shows that the intention of the lines was to bring out the surpassing beauty of a certain girl and its value to the chorus as a whole. When the Pleiades rise up the sky, they are followed by a star that far outshines them all: Sirius. In Alcman's image, then, the Pleiades should correspond to the chorus and Sirius to the girl. The point of opdpiaiis that the comparison is not chosen at random, but suggested by something to be seen during the current ceremonies: the Pleiades rise up the sky before dawn when we carry the plough, with Sirius down below them, and they seem like a rival group.There is no reference to Ortheia, and no rival chorus. We may translate: ‘For the Pleiades range themselves against us, before dawn, as we bear the plough through the ambrosial night, bringing Sirius up with them as they do.’
Ethiopians
Authors: Nadeau J. Y. 
Published: February 2009

It was natural and inevitable that his two Aethiopias, in the eastern and western extremities of the world, should be identified with the countries of the two dark-skinned peoples in the Far East and the Far West of the Ancient World: India and Mauretania.There was the difficulty that the real Aethiopia was in Africa, neither in the Far East nor in the Far West. Serious writers on geography tried to reconcile Homer and the geographical facts.I wish to excerpt from Strabo three theories concerning Aethiopia and the Aethiopians which will then be used to elucidate passages in Latin literature.
Emendations of Seneca
Authors: Bailey D. R. Shackleton 
Published: February 2009

10. 2. lugentem timentemque custodire solemus, ne solitudine male utatur.Reynolds does not mention Haupt's conjecture amentemque, which is certainly on the right lines. Bereaved persons may need watching because in the violence of their grief they may do themselves an injury (cf. Ben. 2. 14. 2 ut frigidam aegris negamus et lugentibus ac sibi iratis ferrum), and the same applies to madmen (cf. Macer, Dig. 1. 18. 14 nam custodes furiosis non ad hoc solum adhibentur ne quid perniciosius ipsi in se moliantur, sed sqq.) or to anyone suspected of suicidal inclinations (cf. Sen. Contr. 3. 5 minantem sibi ipsi (sc. filiam) custodio). It does not apply to persons afraid; they may sometimes be glad of company, but do not require surveillance. My only doubt is whether amentem, seldom used of actual insanity, is the right word. Perhaps dementem or furentem, which makes a better match with the participle lugentem.
On the Leidensis of Tacitus
Authors: Goodyear F. R. D. 
Published: February 2009

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to comment on certain remarks of E. Koestermann, and to examine briefly some passages adduced by K. Wellesley as evidence for the alleged independence of the Leidensis (hereafter L).In a paper in CQ N.S. XV (1965), 299–322, I attempted to demonstrate by various arguments that the readings of L are not such as to support the claim that this manuscript has authority independent of M. Those arguments may be summarized as follows: that the majority of L's readings fall into a pattern of systematic normalization, that they give virtually no help in solving really deep corruptions, that L is particularly unreliable in transmitting proper names, that many readings of L show clear signs of being derived from M, that few (if any) of the good readings in L could not have been extracted from the corrupt text of M, and that other fifteenth-century manuscripts of Tacitus contain good corrections, not inferior to corrections found in L. No defender of L has yet, as far as I know, answered the arguments I put forward, and E. Koestermann has not even understood them, for he writes as follows (vol. iii of his commentary on the Annals [Heidelberg, 1967], p. 21): ‘[Goodyear] legt den Finger darauf, daß die abweichenden Lesarten in L in ihrer Diktion stärker ciceronischen Charakter tragen, demnach eher als Konjekturen zu verstehen seien. Aber dies Argument ist nicht durchschlagend, da die späteren Annalenbücher … eine gemässigtere Tendenz aufweisen und damit näher an Cicero heranrücken.’
Tacitus, Germania 36.1
Authors: Gilmore G. D. 
Published: February 2009

The meanings collected by Mr. Lee (CQ 1968, 382 f.) seem very hard to extract from the Latin, neither do they seem to reflect the author's meaning. Surely the sense of the chapter is:The Cherusci ruined themselves with a long peace … when it comes to a fight, moderation and justice are … For example, the Cherusci were once virtuous and just, but now are called idle and foolish, and the success of the Chatti who conquered them has become prudence.
Pausanias and the Stymphalian Birds
Authors: Ling R. J. 
Published: February 2009

‘In Stymphalos there is also an old sanctuary of Stymphalian Artemis. The image is of wood, mostly gilded. On the roof of the temple there are also representations of the Stymphalian birds. It was difficult to discern clearly whether they were made of wood or plaster, but my examination suggested that they were of wood rather than plaster.’Pausanias' reference to the Stymphalian birds of the temple at Stymphalos was taken by the German scholar, Bliimner, to indicate that stucco reliefs were produced by the Greeks; and, despite the caution of Miss E. L. Wadsworth, 3 the inference that plaster was used for architectural sculptures of some form in Classical (or even pre-Classical) Greece has clearly been accepted by M. Cagiano de Azevedo and N. Bonacasa in the two great Italian encyclopedias of art.
The Virtues of Socratic Ignorance
Authors: Mackenzie Mary Margaret 
Published: February 2009

Plato's Socrates denies that he knows. Yet he frequently claims that he does have certainty and knowledge. How can he avoid contradiction between his general stance about knowledge (that he lacks it) and his particular claims to have it?Socrates' disavowal of knowledge is central to his defence in theApology. For here he rebuts the accusation that he teaches – and thus corrupts – the young by telling the jury that he cannot teach just because he knows nothing. Hence his disavowal of knowledge is important to Socrates. Why does he make this claim? And how then can he justify engaging in any philosophical activity at all?
The Sacrifice of Palinurus
Authors: Nicoll W. S. M. 
Published: February 2009

The account of the death of Palinurus at the end ofAen.5 raises to a higher level of importance a figure who has previously seemed very much a minor character in theAeneid. This is achieved partly by the narrative brilliance of Virgil's account of his destruction by Somnus, and partly also by the atmosphere of solemn mystery which surrounds his fate. This solemn note is first struck in the passage which directly prepares the way for Palinurus' death. AtAen.5.779 Venus, anxious that Juno's wrath may still prevent the safe arrival of Aeneas in Italy, appeals for help to Neptune. He reassures her. Aeneas will arrive safely. There is, however, one condition:unus erit tantum amissum quem gurgite quaeres;unum pro multis dabitur caput. (5.814–15)