bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The Problem of the Hecuba.
Authors: Spranger J. A. 
Published: February 2009

AugustWilhelm vonSchlegel, who did so much to rend the already torn artistic reputation of Euripides in the early nineteenth century, is singularly lenient in his criticism of the Hecuba.His adverse comment is limited to three points only: The first, that ‘the two actions of this piece—the sacrifice of Polyxena and the revenge on Polymestor on account of the murder of Polydorus—have nothing in common with each other but their connexion with Hecuba’; the second, that ‘the second half destroys the soft impressions of the first in a highly repulsive manner’; and the third, that it is ‘not very suitable that Hecuba should display such presence of mind in her revenge.’ In this leniency he differs from one of the latest modern English critics, Professor G. Norwood,2 who does not hesitate to condemn the play as ‘on the whole poor and uninteresting,’ ‘far below the best of Euripides' work’; and from his great predecessor, J. J. Reiske, who condemned the play on ten distinct counts, all different from those that form the basis of SchlegeFs own argument.
Notes on Sophocles and Thucydides
Authors: Powell J. U. 
Published: February 2009

Sophocles, Antigone 853–856, Jebb's text:προβᾶσ' ἐπ' ἔσχατον θράσουςὑψηλὸν ἐς Δίκας βάθρονπροσέπεσες, ὦ τέκνον, πολύ.
The Composition of Aristotle's Politics
Authors: Stocks J. L. 
Published: February 2009

In considering the question as to the order of composition of different portions of Aristotle's works it is necessary to start (as Jaeger did in his study of the genesis of the Metaphysics) with some idea as to his method of composition.On looking at the surviving works one sees at a glance that at some date and by some hand they have been carefully arranged as a continuous series. Internal references forward and backward are frequent. The author refrains as carefully as Euclid does from anticipating ‘earlier’ discussion the answer to a question which will arise ‘later.’ The forward references are merely promises that a question will be discussed. These multitudinous cross-references are so interwoven with the thought and the argument that there is little doubt that in the main they are due to Aristotle himself. On the other hand, the short transitional statements with which the ‘books’ as we have them close must always be accepted with some reservations. The book is a device of the ancient bookseller, not the unit of composition. Of course, where they could, the editors have made the ends of books correspond with important breaks in the argument; but wholly artificial book-endings do occur. There is, e.g., the end of N.E. θ, which corresponds to no important stage in the thought; and here the editor or bookseller has merely emphasized the artificiality of the division by inserting the wholly inappropriate clause, περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων ἐπὶ τοσοῨτον εἰρήσθω
Sun, Line, and Cave Again
Authors: Ferguson John 
Published: February 2009

I Want in this paper briefly to contribute two points to the elucidation of this famous passage, and apologize for the fact that my possessing the same name as one of its most illustrious interpreters may add confusion to the doxographic tradition.The first point is not an original one. It is simply to revive an interpretation given by Henry Jackson in an article which strikes me as the most profound and pellucid which I have read on the subject, and which is in some danger of being forgotten. Raven, about ten years ago, insisted as a criterion of interpretation that the entire passage should be viewed ‘as a single and indivisible whole’. This is precisely what Jackson does, though he concentrates his attention, as indeed does Raven, on the line and the cave.
Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1227–30
Authors: Campbell A. Y. 
Published: February 2009

Cassandra speaking.The first of these lines is not in dispute; the three which follow are notorious; they are subjoined as in the manuscripts, with punctuation to mark the ostensible construction:ε δ ἔπαρχος Ίλίοʊ τ άναστάτηςούκ οἶδεν οἶδ уλσσα μισητς κʊѵòςλέξασα καì κτείνασα ϕαιδρόνοʊς, δίκηνἄτης λαθραίοʋ τεύξεται κακῇ τύχῃ.
Aeschylus, Agamemnon 160-83
Authors: Beattie A. J. 
Published: February 2009

Tr.: ‘Zeus, whoe'er he be, if so to be called is pleasing to him, thus do I name him—I have naught, when I weigh all things in the balance, to count their equal, save Zeus if it behoves me to strike truly this vain burden born of anxiet‘He that at the outset was great, flourishing with all-conquering boldness, will not stay to accomplish anything; he, as soon as he was born, met his conqueror and is gone. But a man who willingly hails Zeua as victor will achieve wisdom in full measure—
The Text Of Aristotle's Topics and Elenchi: The Latin Tradition
Authors: Minio-Paluello L. 
Published: February 2009

The surviving textual tradition of theTopics and Elenchidown to A.D. 1503 includes, as far as we know:Greek texts: (a) a small papyrus fragment,c. A.D. 100; (b) over a hundred Greek manuscripts, fromc. A.D. 900 onwards; (c) the Aldine ‘editio princeps’, A.D. 1495; (d) commentaries, paraphrases, and scholia; notably: Alexander of Aphrodisias onTop., c. A.D. 200; John Italos on Top. 2–4, 11th century; Michael of Ephesus onEL, 11th century; Sophonias onEL., c.,. A.D. 1300; Leo Magentenus onTop., 14th century;
AmΦIΣbhthΣiΣ TiΣ (Aristotle, E.N. 1096b7–26)
Authors: Hall John C. 
Published: February 2009

E.N. 1. 6 may be divided into three approximately equal paragraphs. The first of these (A) contains four arguments against Academic positions associated with the phrase ‘Idea of the Good’. All these arguments also occur, together with others, in the Eudemian Ethics. The second paragraph (B) consists of the consideration and rejection of an objection to the whole or a part of A, and is new to E.N. The third (C), also new to E.N., consists of the putting forward and dismissal of two alternative answers to the question ;—answers different, presumably, to that or those rejected in A.My concern is with B. This paragraph is linked with A by the words , ‘a controversy can just be seen in what has been said’. These words, referring back to arguments that appear also in E.E., suggest to me that the objection Aristotle is about to discuss is one that had actually been brought against those arguments, after they had been delivered in their Eudemian or some other earlier form, by an opponent who might have belonged to the Academy, but might equally well have belonged to the Lyceum itself. For ease of exposition, I shall in what follows assume this to be the case, and shall refer to the author of the objection as the Objector. This assumption is not, however, essential to the main argument of this article.
Nerikos
Authors: Shewan A. 
Published: February 2009

The whereabouts of this ancient town is of interest in the Leukas-Ithaka controversy, but unfortunately there is little information on which to fix it. The data may be said to be one passage in the Odyssey and one in Thucydides. In the former, ω 377–8, Laertes is wishing he were young again,οἷος Nρικον εἷλον υκτμενον πτολεΘρον, κτν ἠπεροιο, Kεϕαλλνεσσιν νσσων
The First Scene of the Suppliants of Aeschylus
Authors: Sheppard J. T. 
Published: February 2009

To explain the meaning of the Prometheus the late Dr. Walter Headlam quoted the famous lines from theAgamemnon:‘ Sing praise; ’Tis he hath guided, say, Man's feet in Wisdom's way, Stablishing fast for learning's rule That Suffering be her school….’ ‘This,’ he said, ‘is the school in which Prometheus himself is being gradually taught the wise humility; at present he is still in the rebellious stage. And it is with this idea that Io is introduced into the Prometheus Bound; she, too, is an example of the seeming cruelty of Zeus; but it is a blessing in disguise, for she is to be the mother of the blessed Epaphus, and it is a son of Zeus by Alcmena, a descendant of her own, that is to set Prometheus free.’
Columba's Altus and the Abstrusa Glossary
Authors: Lindsay W. M. 
Published: February 2009

In the 'nineties the Celtic philologist, Whitley Stokes, told us in Common-room, that he once awoke muttering an incomplete stanza:Like an ogress making progressThrough the spare-ribs of a child.Could anyone complete it for him ? A former Newdigate prizeman, after reflexion, produced this:Stern endeavour will be everBy some welcome find beguiled,Like an ogress making progressThrough the spare-ribs of a child.
The Trial of Epaminondas
Authors: Cary M. 
Published: February 2009

The story of Epaminondas' trial has come down to us in two divergent traditions, which differ as to the occasion, the ground, and the result of the action. One group of authors, of whom Plutarch may be taken as the chief representative, gives the following data:(1) The trial took place after Epaminondas' first campaign in Peloponnesus— i.e. in spring 369 b.c.(2) The charge preferred against Epaminondas was that he had outstayed his term of office as boeotarch.(3) The trial resulted in his acquittal.
Tener Vngvis
Authors: Cameron Alan 
Published: February 2009

Opinion has long been divided as to the exact interpretation of the phrase de tenero ungui, the Latin version of a Greek proverbial expression The competing explanations are:A. ‘from the depth of her being’, penitus.B. ‘from her earliest childhood’, ab infantia; that is, presumably, from the time when the nails were still soft like those of a very young baby (though cf. E. W. Fay, A.J.Ph. xxix [1908], 205).
Ancient Scholarship and Virgil's Use of Republican Latin Poetry. II
Authors: Jocelyn H. D. 
Published: February 2009

There are signs that a list of parallelisms containing quite lengthy citations of republican works in prose and all kinds of verse, as well as remarks highly critical of Virgil, provided the material of Saturnalia 6. 2, Saturnalia 6. 3, and Saturnalia 6. 1. 55–65.1Whereas Macrobius transmits the uersus parallelisms practically without comment, the locus parallelisms have a certain amount of discussion clustered at the beginning and at the end. This is for the most part neutral and matter of fact but in 6. 2. 33 the harsh tone of an obtrectator makes itself heard: nee Tullio conpilando, dummodo undique ornamenta sibi conferret, abstinuit. The original list was excerpted very carelessly: in 6. 2. 29 the Virgil citation ought to continue for two more verses; in 6. 2. 7, 9, and 24 the Lucretius citations are likewise defective.
Sophocles, Oedipvs Tyrannvs 876–877
Authors: Henry A. S. 
Published: February 2009

I print the text as given in Pearson. I agree with Jebb and Sheppard that the strophe is sound, and therefore I would retain at 866–7. The problem now lies with the antistrophe, where with the manuscript reading at 877 we lack either or-to give proper responsion with 867.The manuscript text can be vindicated if we detect that simplest of scribal errors, haplography. Thus for 876–7 I would read
Dionysiac Drama and the Dionysiac Mysteries
Authors: Seaford Richard 
Published: February 2009

In Euripides'BacchaeDionysos visits Thebes in disguise to establish his mysteries there. And so, given normal Euripidean practice, it is almost certain that in the lost part of his final speech Dionysos actually prescribed the establishment of his mysteries in Thebes. In the same way theHomeric Hymn to Demetertells how the goddess came in disguise to Eleusis and finally (vv. 476–82) established her mysteries there. After coming to Eleusis she performs certain actions in the house of king Celeus, for example the drinking of theκυκεών, which have long been recognized as corresponding to ritual undergone by the initiands in the Eleusinian mysteries. It is the main thesis of this paper that just as elements of theHomeric Hymn to Demeterseem to derive from aἱερ⋯ς λ⋯γοςof the Eleusinian mysteries, so certain elements of theBacchaederive from aἱερ⋯ς λ⋯γοςof the mysteries of Dionysos, and that furthermore Euripides consciously alludes to the Dionysiac mysteries for a dramatic effect dependent on the religiosity of his audience, rather as Aeschylus alludes in theOresteia, on the principleμαθο⋯σιν αὑδ⋯, to the mysteries of Eleusis.This case will suffer from two drawbacks. Firstly there is the general scepticism about ritual patterns in drama arising as a reaction to the excesses of, for example, Murray and Cornford. This means that a far greater degree of probability seems to be required from suggestions of this kind than from the more traditional mode of speculation of, say, textual criticism. And secondly, it must be immediately and frankly admitted both that we do not know much about the mysteries of Dionysos and that most of what we do know is from the Hellenistic and Roman period. In the argument that follows recourse will sometimes be had to two assumptions. The first is to suppose a degree of continuity between the Dionysiac mysteries of the classical and later periods. This assumption is based firstly on the observable continuity of the mysteries: for example the antiquity of the Eleusinian ritual described by Plutarch, which will form an important part of my argument, is attested by Aristophanes and Plato. And it is based secondly on general considerations: conservatism is of the essence of those rituals in which a community such as athiasosperpetuates itself by the transmission of a ritual treasured as originally taught by their god. The second assumption is to suppose, on the basis of numerous observable similarities, an essential similarity between the Dionysiac mysteries and the Eleusinian, about which we are well informed even for the classical period.
Ο 'Αγαθός As ΌΔυνατός in the Hippias Minor
Authors: Weiss Roslyn 
Published: February 2009

This paper is an attempt so to construe the arguments of the Hippias Minor as to remove the justification for regarding it as unworthy of Plato either because of its alleged fallaciousness and Sophistic mode of argument or because of its alleged immorality. It focuses, therefore, only on the arguments and their conclusions, steering clear of the dialogue's dramatic and literary aspects. Whereas I do not wish to deny the importance of these aspects to a proper understanding of the dialogue – on the contrary, in a dialogue so heavily laden with irony and caricature, these aspects are necessarily more significant than they are in other dialogues – I do think there is something to be gained from concentrating on the arguments themselves. Although there can be little doubt that Socrates is up to something in the Hippias Minor, the task of determining just what he is up to can only be simplified by clarifying the arguments first.The Hippias Minor has traditionally been thought to contain two independent arguments, each having its own paradoxical conclusion. The first argument begins, it is said, when Hippias characterizes the two Homeric heroes Achilles and Odysseus as the true man (⋯ ⋯ληθ⋯ς) and the false man (⋯ ψευδ⋯ς) respectively. Through its discovery that both the false man and the true man have δύναμις, it results in the paradox that the false man and the true are identical. The second argument, on this view, leaves the subject of ⋯ ⋯ληθ⋯ς and ⋯ ψευδ⋯ς and compares instead all sorts of agents in intentional and unintentional action. Finding that the intentional agent is in every case better than the unintentional, the argument concludes that the intentional evil-doer is also better than the unintentional. Viewing the dialogue as thus containing two distinct topics treated in two self-sufficient arguments is perhaps not the best way to understand it.
Horace, Epistles 2. 2: Introspection and Retrospective
Authors: Rutherford R. B. 
Published: February 2009

The epistle to Florus (Ep. 2. 2) has usually been grouped with the epistle to Augustus and the Ars Poetica, partly because of its length, which sets it, like the other two, apart from the letters of the first book, and partly because of the common interest in literary theory which is manifested in all three. These poems have always been the subject of controversy; but 2. 2 has received less attention than the others, perhaps because the elegance and humour of the poem, which have been so often praised, have eclipsed the possibility that it may have something to say, especially about Horace himself, his personality and his changing allegiances to philosophy and poetry. The object of this paper is to offer a reading of 2. 2, not as a piece of autobiography, nor as a mosaic of conventional motifs, but as an examination by Horace of his own poetry and poetic aims, in which he is testing and criticizing his own achievement, and himself. In this he continues one of the most attractive and impressive practices of the earlier book of epistles.Horace here abnegates his role as a lyric poet, and this is generally taken literally as placing the poem quite precisely between the completion of Epistles 1 and Horace's resumption of lyric writing in the Carmen Saeculare and Odes 4. But more important is the way in which Horace in Ep. 2. 2 itself expresses a judgement about his own poetic ambitions. The philosophic themes of the Epistles and the more frivolous lyric subjects (‘iocos, Venerem, convivia, ludum’, 2. 2. 56) which he presents as the essence of his Odes, are both aspects of Horace's poetry and personality; the question is whether one should be considered more valid than the other in the poet's own mature judgement, whether Horace should in fact have outgrown either or both kinds of poetry. In this poem, then, it is important not only that he renews the renunciation of poetry and the gay life which he made at Ep. 1. 1. 10–11, but also that this decision is to some extent forced on him, and reluctantly made (2. 2. 55–7).
Remarks on Moschion's Account of Progress
Authors: Xanthakis-Karamanos G. 
Published: February 2009

The problem of man's early existence and of the value of culture is discussed in one of the post-classical tragedies, and the answer given is definitely anti-primitivistic.The longest and most remarkable of Moschion's fragments deals with man's development (fr. 6 N2/Sn., ap. Stob. 1. 8. 38) and runs to 33 well-constructed iambics containing throughout not a single resolved foot. It is uncertain whether Moschion belongs to the fourth or third century b.c. Nevertheless, his account is consistent with the conscious affirmations of progress which were widely attested in the fifth and fourth centuries b.c.
Ausoniana
Authors: Campbell A. Y. 
Published: February 2009

InC.Q. XXVII. 178–181 Mr. S. G. Owen has raised some interesting questions, but it may be doubted whether he has in every case discovered the correct solution.Panntalia 30, 6: quaeque sine exemplo in nece functa uiri. Mr. Owen's pronece removes the hiatus, but I think has no other merit. The sense ‘a death for a death,’ even if not necessarily or best represented by repetition of the same term, is at least not happily represented by such combination of euphemism with dysphemism; ‘in place of the slaughter of her husband, she finished her days.’ Read funere, and you get an expression characteristic of this school; Paulinus of Pella (whose poem is readily accessible in the Loeb Ausonius) applied it to death; patris de funere functi 236, ‘of my father's death,’ i.e. funere defuncti, cf. 241 defuncti patris. But Paulinus of Nola applied it also to a vicarious death, Christus … morte mea functus, carm. 31, 191 (35, 189 Migne). Both were pupils of Ausonius (the grandson unofficially).
Notes on the Oresteia
Authors: Thomson George 
Published: February 2009

The openings of the strophe and antistrophe do not correspond, and many unavailing efforts have been made, from Triclinius to Lawson, to bring them into conformity. But, as I have shown elsewhere (Greek Lyric Metre, pp. 117–18), the discrepancy appears to be intentional and appropriate. For other instances of the same thing see 709–10, 715–16 (ibid. pp. 113–14), and there is yet another in Cho. 422–4 (resolved iambics for lamentation, loc. cit. p. 88) = 443–5 (dochmiac in anticipation of the climax). In 1005 πρ⋯παρ (MSS) is not only better attested than προιθ' (Triclinius), but it makes a much better rhythm:τ⋯ δ' ⋯π⋯ γ⋯ν πεσ⋯ν ἄπαξ θαν⋯σιμον πρν⋯σιμον πρ⋯παρ ⋯νδρ⋯ς μ⋯λαν αἶμα τ⋯ς ἄν…
Euripides, Svpplices, 1114 Sq
Authors: Viljoen H. G. 
Published: February 2009

So MSS. For ϕερετε metri causa Scaliger proposed ϕερετι, an emendation rightly accepted by editors. In the preceding line καιδή conceals a corruption.Wilamowitz reads:και μήν παιδωμ ταδε δή.The change,however, is too violent to recommend itself on palaeographic grounds. In his notatio critica Murray says: Fortasse παισι.
The Decree of Syrakosios
Authors: Sommerstein Alan H. 
Published: February 2009

Our information about the Athenian politician Syrakosios is entirely derived from Ar. Birds 1297 and the scholia thereon. Syrakosios here figures among a long list of Athenians who are said to be nicknamed after various birds:δοκεῖ δ⋯ κα⋯ ψήɸισμα τεθεικέναι μ⋯ κωμῳδεῖσθαι ⋯νομαστί τινα, ὡς Φρύνιχος ⋯ν Μονοτρόπῳ ɸησί [fr. 26 Kock]· “ψ⋯ρ' ἔχοι Συρακόσιον. ⋯πιɸαν⋯ς γ⋯ρ αὐτῷ κα⋯ μέγα τύχοι. ⋯ɸείλετο γ⋯ρ κωμῳδεῖν οὕς ⋯πεθύμουν.” δι⋯ πικρότερον αὐτῷ προσɸέρονται, ὡς λάλῳ δ⋯ τ⋯ν “ κίτταν” παρέθηκεν
Cruces Propertianae
Authors: Morgan J. D. 
Published: February 2009

In classical antiquity Propertius' eloquence was renowned. His successor Ovid referred to theblandi praecepta Properti(Trist.2.465) and toblandi…Propertius oris(ibid. 5.1.15). Quintilian (10.1.93) stated that to his taste the mosttersusandelegansLatin elegist was Tibullus, butsunt qui Propertium malint. Martial (14.189) mentioned thefacundi carmen iuuenale Properti.Turn now from the opinions of ancient authors to those of some modern commentators as they try to elucidate various passages as presented in the extant manuscripts, and you encounter not the adjectivesblandus, tersus, elegans, andfacundus, but ‘strange’, ‘obscure’, ‘odd’, ‘slovenly’, and the like.A major reason for such striking differences of opinion should be evident. Ovid, to whom Propertius wasblandi oris, read a text separated from Propertius' autograph by at most a few decades. Modern scholars, however, must form their text from a few relatively late manuscripts, none earlier thanc.1200, in which Propertius' eloquence has been obscured by over twelve centuries of careless blundering and deliberate interpolation by a succession of scribes.A generally accepted example of deliberate interpolation in the Propertian archetype is found at 2.32.3-6:nam quid Praenesti dubias, o Cynthia, sortes,quid petis Aeaei moenia Telegoni?cur tua te Herculeum deportant esseda Tibur?Appia cur totiens te uia †ducit anum†?(ducitFLP,dicitN), where the name of some neighbouring town is required in the fourth verse to balance Praeneste, Tusculum, and Herculeum in the preceding three.