bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Four Lekythoi in Chalcis
Authors: Ure A. D. 
Published: May 2006

There are in Chalcis Museum four black-figured lekythoi of sixth-century date. Two, nos. 567 and 569, were mentioned by Professor Haspels in Attic Black-figured Lekythoi 28 f., but the others have not, as far as I am aware, been noticed. None of them fits neatly into any Attic group, though three can be loosely connected with the Dolphin class. One is certainly from Styra. The finding-place of the others is not recorded, but there can be no doubt that they are from sites in Euboea. The close resemblance between Attic and Eretrian vase-painting makes it difficult to distinguish Atticising work made in Eretria from Attic imports, while so far black-figured vases of the archaic period from workshops in Chalcis have not been recognised. Nevertheless a study of the four lekythoi now in Chalcis reveals affinities with the few vases that are already known to be of Euboean origin and indicates that they should be classed with them rather than with Attic.The first, no. 960 (ht. 19·5 cm.) is seen on plate IX. 1–3 (2 is from the same negative as 1 with the red and white retouched). The shape of the vase can be seen in the illustrations and needs no comment. On the shoulder opening flowers, black with a central petal in applied white, alternate with red buds. On the body a panther faces a grazing stag with one group of four fine dots between them and another beneath the body of the stag. Though the general appearance of the vase is not noticeably unlike Attic some unusual features can be observed. First, the three gently curving brush strokes which emphasise and embellish the ribs of the panther are not accompanied by incised lines. Though it is common enough to find incision and no paint on this part of an animal, it is only very rarely that we find paint with no incision. For parallels we have to turn to two of the Eretrian grave amphorae in Athens. Both the Wedding and the Herakles amphorae show important vestiges of an earlier unincised style of painting, for on the first the whole of the back of the vase lacks incision, on the second the whole of the foot. Some scenes show a compromise between the incised and the unincised, part of the scene, or even part of a figure, lacking the usual incisions. So here, in the case of our panther, though incision is used on the head, legs and hindquarters, the ribs are merely painted, without the incised lines to which the painting is normally only an adjunct. See plate IX.2 and compare the ribs of the panther with those of the completely unincised lions on the back of the neck of the Eretrian Wedding amphora, BICS vi pl. 1.1. Further, as has already been pointed out in this Journal, the markings in red that brighten up the bodies of Eretrian animals are shapely and ornamental, generally tapering downwards. Between the incised lines on the hindquarters of both the panther and the stag we have decorative markings of this kind, broader at the top, making a gentle curve and tapering to a point at the base, while the three on the ribs of the panther, though smaller, are also well shaped.
Addendum on the Statue of a Gallus
Authors: Gow A. S. F. 
Published: May 2006

In JHS lxxx go I reproduced the upper part of Montfaucon's engraving showing the statue of a Gallus, which I (and others) supposed to be lost. I am indebted to Mr C. C. Vermeule for drawing my attention to his ‘Notes on a New Edition of Michaelis’ in AJA lix, from which I learnt (p. 89) that the statue was in the Earl of Pembroke's collection at Wilton, and that it was of Severan or late Antonine date. Mr Vermeule's reference to Michaelis enabled me to trace its history a little farther back.In 1731, twelve years after its publication by Montfaucon, Cary Creed reproduced it in a volume of etchings after sculptures in the Pembroke Collection, and inscribed the etching ‘Attis, Cybele's high Priest Cloathed as a Woman it is grav'd in Montfaucon without the Head my Lord having bought it before with ye Mazarine Collection’. It is hardly plain whether head or torso or both came from the Mazarin Collection, but the head crowned by a Phrygian cap is plainly alien. Lord Pembroke kindly told me that the head was much restored, and that with it the figure was 5 ft. 9 in. in height.
Decision and Responsibility in the Tragedy of Aeschylus
Authors: Lesky Albin 
Published: May 2006

In the paper that I read to the Third International Congress of Classical Studies in London in 1959 I tried to delimit the sphere of human reflexion and freedom of decision, as opposed to the sphere of divine intervention, in Homeric poetry. The conclusion I reached was that there was a mutual and often indissoluble fusion of these two spheres. In trying here to say something about the significance of personal decision in the dramas of Aeschylus, I am in fact continuing my inquiry in a different literary genre. But the problems are basically the same: in both cases the question is what significance the poet ascribes to the personal decisions of the human agent within the frame-work of a basically God-governed ‘Welt-bild’, how the limitations upon his freedom are defined, and what degree of responsibility is thus entailed.I began the previous paper with my thanks to Bruno Snell, who was the first to clarify these problems of free human action with which we are faced in epic poetry, and I must now begin by thanking him again. Professor Snell, in his book Aischjlos und das Handeln im Drama, which appeared in 1928, emphatically placed the personal decision of the human agent in the centre of his interpretation of Aeschylus; he even went so far as to regard a decision based on free choice as the most important element in the development of a genuinely tragic conflict. I cannot enter upon the history of these problems; however, I should like to emphasise the importance of the question and the interest it has recently aroused in scholarly discussion.
The Progress of Greek Epigraphy, 1952–53
Authors: Tod Marcus N. 
Published: May 2006

Once more, and for the last time, I attempt briefly to review the epigraphical progress of the last two years, so completing a survey which began in 1906 (YWCS 1906, 69 ff.) and has appeared in this Journal since 1913 (XXXIV 321 ff.). In view of the superlative value of the annual ‘Bulletin Epigraphique’ of J. and L. Robert and of the welcome revival of the SEG under the editorship of A. G. Woodhead, my own work may well be deemed superfluous. To the successive editors of the Journal, who have treated me with unfailing generosity, to all scholars who have lightened my burden by sending me copies of their works, and above all to those who have encouraged me by their expressions of interest and appreciation I offer my heartfelt thanks. The present bibliography follows the same lines as its predecessors; books and articles which I have not seen are marked by an asterisk.The ranks of Greek epigraphists have suffered serious losses in the deaths of F. M. Abel, J. G. C. Anderson, W. H. Buckler, R. Herzog, L. B. Holland, J. G. Milne, M. I. Rostovtzeff and A. Vogliano. Appreciations of the character and achievement of A. Wilhelm we owe to J. Keil and L. Robert, and of J. Hatzfeld to C. Picard.
False Statement in the Sophist
Authors: Bluck R. S. 
Published: May 2006

Various attempts have been made to find a satisfactory alternative to Cornford's explanation of what the Sophist has to say about false statement, and in particular to his interpretation of the passage in which the statements ‘Theaetetus is sitting’ and ‘Theaetetus is flying’ are discussed. The difficulty with Cornford's view is that he wants to find the explanation of truth and falsity entirely in the ‘blending’ or incompatibility of Forms, but that in the examples Socrates chooses, while Sitting and Flying may be Forms, Theaetetus cannot be. Hence Cornford has to say, ‘It is not meant that Forms are the only elements in all discourse. We can also make statements about individual things. But it is true that every such statement must contain at least one Form’. Unfortunately, when talking about the ϵἴδων συμπλοκή at 259e, the Stranger seems clearly to envisage a blendin g of ϵἴδη with each other:. How can this be reconciled with an ‘example’ in which only one term stands for a Form?I do not propose to discuss in detail the various solutions that have been offered, but to set forth my own interpretation of the whole passage. This may be regarded as to some extent a ‘blending’ of what has been said by Professor Hackforth and Mr. Hamlyn, but a number of points arise which deserve further discussion, and it may perhaps be hoped that such a σύνθϵσις as this may prove to be .
Characterisation in Greek Tragedy
Authors: Garton C. 
Published: May 2006

The editorial introduction to a Greek play will often include a section on the characters, in which their various traits are collected into a series of sketches. There may be sketches not only of the main characters but of minor, anonymous personages together with a sort of collective sketch of the chorus, and they are commonly made without fuss or discussion of critical theory. There has, of course, both here and in general books on the tragedians, always been room for differences of interpretation: as to whether, for example, Pentheus is moral or prurient. It is round such differences that discussion revolves, and the arguments have been heated enough. Why is the Aeschylean Agamemnon made to tread the purple carpet? Professor Thomson suggests that it is by reason of Clytemnestra's irresistible feminine charm. But since this charm, so far from being explicitly attested, is only an inference from three lines of dialogue; since the king has said a little earlier (in Thomson's own translation):Seek not to unman me with effeminateGraces and barbarous salaams agapeIn grovelling obeisance at my feet—from which any susceptibility to Clytemnestra's charm seems singularly absent; since, moreover, he has brought with him a concubine who is—of many chattels the elect flower,—one might be tempted to maintain that even if the charm is accepted as a help towards interpretation, there must be other reasons also for Agamemnon's acting as he does. Very well, you may say, modify the sketch to suit your taste.
The Struggle for the Tripod and the First Sacred War
Authors: Parke H. W. , Boardman John 
Published: May 2006

The purpose of this article is to try to show that the legend of the rape of the Delphic tripod by Herakles became associated as symbolic with the First Sacred War and that this association is a chief factor in the great popularity of that subject in late archaic art.We should begin with the First Sacred War itself, an event whose historical importance is inadequately matched by the quality of our literary sources. The earliest account of it occurs in Aeschines' speech against Ktesiphon (iii. 107 ff.), where he introduced the subject because it provided the theological justification for the line which he had taken when attending the meeting of the Delphic Amphictyony in the autumn of 340. So it is not a simple narrative, but a tendentious statement, carefully designed to bring out the points which suited the orator's case. At the same time it has real value as historical evidence, because it is based to some extent on an ancient stele, a memorial of the war, to whose text Aeschines had referred in his original speech at Delphi. A copy of the inscription was read to the jury, and the extant speech contains quotations and paraphrases of portions of it.
ΛΗΚΥΘΙΟΝ and ΑΥΤΟΛΗΚΥΘΟΣ
Authors: Anderson Graham 
Published: May 2006

In recent years there have been several attempts to find support for a sexual interpretation of ληκύθιον ἀπώλεσεν at Aristophanes Frogs 1198–1248. It would add real point to the discomfiture of Euripides and his predictable prologues if his heroes were to lose their virility every time they lost their lekythia. But the matter has been hotly contested, and the linking of this problem with the mysterious αὐτολήκυθοι of Demosthenes liv 14–17 has compounded confusion in both passages. I shall discuss them separately in the first instance.ITwo main objections are advanced by Jeffrey Henderson2 to a phallic lekythion in the Frogs: apart from the absence of unequivocal literary parallels, the context does not call for it, and the standard shapes of lekythia do not resemble male genitals anyway.
Herakles at the Ends of the Earth
Authors: Pinney Gloria Ferrari , Ridgway Brunilde Sismondo 
Published: May 2006

Representations of Helios in his chariot rising above the sea begin toward the end of the sixth century B.C., with a small series of black-figure vases, mostly lekythoi. Five of them have been interpreted as illustrations of the myth of Herakles and the Golden Bowl of the Sun. In Pherekydes' version of the story, Herakles, vexed by the burning rays, threatened Helios with his arrows, and obtained the god's golden vessel to sail the Ocean to the land of Geryon. Although the correspondence of the picture to the story is not literal, in fact largely limited to the cast of characters, such an interpretation is plausible for four vases.On the lekythos in Athens by the Daybreak Painter, Herakles is crouching on a spur of ground which seems to emerge from the waves; he looks at the Sun in apparent awe. The scenes on the skyphos by the Theseus Painter in Taranto are akin to the Athenian piece: on one side Herakles rushes up the steep ground, on the other he sits on the rocky outline, his right hand gesturing toward the Sun. On a third vase, a lekythos in Cambridge, and on a fourth in Oxford, both Herakles and Athena are depicted on either side of Helios; on the Cambridge lekythos Herakles is actually striding toward the Sun, lifting the bow in his right hand. Only in this case can Herakles' attitude be taken as a threat; on all four vessels, however, the hero and the Sun look at each other, as if an exchange were to take place soon, and so are shown as the actors of the scene.
‘Epoiesen’ on Greek Vases: Other Considerations
Authors: Robertson Martin 
Published: May 2006

Professor R. M. Cook has performed a valuable service by raising again the question of the meaning of this word in this context. He finds that the weight of argument goes against the view that it means ‘fashioned with his own hands,’ in favour of its implying ownership of the workshop from which the vessel issued. In the end I disagree with Professor Cook, but the evidence is difficult to evaluate and appears contradictory, and certainly does not justify an unquestioning acceptance of the first interpretation. There are perhaps a few more general observations to be made, and a few points on which his remarks require modification.1. The position of those who interpret the word as ‘fashioned’ is not always quite so unquestioning as he seems to suggest. Beazley wrote in Potter and Painter in Ancient Athens (1944): ‘Two explanations have been offered for the epoiese-signature. One, that it gives the name of the potter, the man who fashioned the vase; the other, that it gives no more than the owner of the establishment from which the vase came. At one time I held it more prudent to adopt the second explanation: but I now believe that, in general, the first explanation is the right one: Ευφρονιος εποιεσεν means that Euphronios fashioned the vase with his own hands.’2. Professor Cook writes that he knows only three vases which bear the same name with both egrapsen and epoiesen: two by Exekias and one by Douris.
The oath at A.P. v. 245.3
Authors: Keaveney Arthur , Madden John A. 
Published: May 2006

An epigram in the Greek Anthology (A.P. v 245) by Macedonius Consul goes as follows:The oath here (line 3), τρισὶν ὥμοσα πέτραις, has no precise parallel in antiquity and has, accordingly, puzzled commentators. Emendation was one solution.
The origins of the Greek lexicon:Ex Oriente Lux
Authors: Szemerényi O. 
Published: May 2006

1. For more than two thousand years research into the origins of the Greek lexicon had been understood and carried on in the spirit exemplified but also mocked in the Platonic Kratylos. The revolutionary change came in the early nineteenth century when after many inspired guesses Franz Bopp (1791–1867) finally and definitively proved in 1816 that Greek, in company with many European languages, derived, like Indian and Iranian, from one prehistoric ancestor, the whole family being dubbedIndo-Europeanby the well-known physician and physicist, Dr Thomas Young, in 1813, three years before the publication of Bopp's work. But the first true etymologist was August Friedrich Pott (1802–87) who with the two volumes of hisEtymologische Forschungen, published in 1833 and 1836 respectively, laid the foundations of Indo-European, and therewith also Greek, etymology.Throughout the nineteenth century, and even down to our own days, the main emphasis has been on the IE origins of the Greek vocabulary.
Androtion F 6: τότє πρῶτον
Authors: Chambers Mortimer 
Published: May 2006

Androtion, FGrH 324 F 6, and Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 22, seem to differ about the date when ostracism was introduced in Athens. But the words τότє πρῶτον in the text of Androtion have been attacked as unsatisfactory Greek. I hold that, on the contrary, they are perfectly acceptable and idiomatic.For reference, I cite the text of Androtion, which is quoted in the lexicon of Harpocration, and of Aristotle.Harpocration, s.v. Ἵππαρχος … ἄλλος δέ ἐστιν Ἵππαρχος ὁ Χάρμου … περὶ δὲ τούτου Ἀνδροτίων ἐν τῇ β̄ φησὶν ὅτι συγγενὴς ἦν Πεισιστράτου τοῦ τυράννου καὶ πρῶτος ἐξωστρακίσθη, τοῦ περὶ τὸν ὀστρακισμὸν νόμου τότε πρῶτον τεθέντος διὰ τὴν ὑποψίαν τῶν περὶ Πεισίστρατον, ὅτι δημαγωγὸς ὢν καὶ στρατηγὸς ἐτυράννησεν.
Who was the teacher of the Pan Painter?
Authors: Sourvinou-Inwood Christiane 
Published: May 2006

The study of the relationships between artistic personalities is considered by some a futile self-indulgence in irrelevant art-history. Beazley's lexicographical work provided a prosopographical, and therefore also chronological, framework for the use of the evidence provided by Attic vase-painting. Additions and further refinements are necessary, as Liddell and Scott Supplements are necessary. But the investigation of relationships between artists, such as the exploration of teacher-pupil connexions, is frequently believed to provide no more than a sterile piece of information of narrow interest. This view is, I think, wrong, for an investigation of this type can also shed light on problems of a wider interest at three levels.Firstly, the understanding of the groupings of artists by workshops, and of the relationships between workshops, is relevant to the study of Athenian social and economic history, since vase-manufacture was one of Athens' most important craft-industries. The study of the ‘Origins’ of an artist, with which I will be concerned here, can sometimes—especially if these origins are complex—throw some light on the early phases of the career-struct ure of Attic vase-painters. Thus it could also provide an example, of however limited validity, of the early structure of a classical Athenian craft-apprenticeship.
Meniskoi and the Birds
Authors: Maxmin Jody 
Published: May 2006

Mentior at si quid, merdis caput inquiner albis corvorum, atque in me veniat mictum atque cacatum Iulius et fragilis Pediatia furque Voranus.Horace, Satires I, viii, 37–9.The years following the liberation of Greece from Turkish rule in 1833 witnessed what was perhaps the greatest display of industry on the Athenian Acropolis since the Periclean building programme. In 1837 the Greek Archaeological Society was founded for the purpose of carrying out a systematic if unscientific excavation of the Acropolis down to the classical level. The excavators sought first to clear the area of the Turkish buildings and accumulated débris which cluttered the surface, and then to work on the partial restoration of the ancient buildings: the Parthenon, the Propylaea and the Erechtheum.
Tragic form and feeling in theIliad
Authors: Rutherford R. B. 
Published: May 2006

These hours of backward clearness come to all men and women, once at least, when they read the past in the light of the present, with the reasons of things, like unobserved finger-posts, protruding where they never saw them before. The journey behind them is mapped out, and figured with its false steps, its wrong observations, all its infatuated, deluded geography.Henry James,The Bostonians, ch. xxxixThis paper is intended to contribute to the study of both Homer and Greek tragedy, and more particularly to the study of the influence of the epic upon the later poets. The current revival of interest among English scholars in the poetic qualities of the Homeric poems must be welcomed by all who care for the continuing survival and propagation of classical literature. The renewed emphasis on the validity of literary criticism as applied to presumably oral texts may encourage a more positive appreciation of the subtlety of Homeric narrative techniques, and of the coherent plan which unifies each poem. The aim of this paper is to focus attention on a number of elements in Greek tragedy which are already present in Homer, and especially on the way in which these poets exploit the theme of knowledge—knowledge of one's future, knowledge of one's circumstances, knowledge of oneself. Recent scholarship on tragedy has paid much more attention to literary criticism in general and to poetic irony in particular: these insights can also illuminate the epic. Conversely, the renewed interest in Homer's structural and thematic complexity should also enrich the study of the tragedians, his true heirs.
Evidence for the Date of Herodotus' Publication
Authors: Fornara Charles W. 
Published: May 2006

In this paper I contest the usually accepted terminus for the date of the publication of Herodotus' Histories, namely, just prior to the production of the Acharnians in February 425. I argue instead that Herodotus survived the Archidamian War—basically a return, this, to the position taken until the middle of the last century, especially in Germany, before the work of Schoell, Kirchoff and then Meyer and Jacoby. Further, I suggest that he published at a date close to 414 B.C. or, at least, that his Histories reached the Athenian public at around that time. Since even the orthodox date for his publication (426 or so) figures in the constructions of modern scholars merely as a literary curiosity devoid of significance—such are the preconceptions dominating our notion of Herodotus' ‘era’—a reconsideration of this question needs no apology if it serves the purpose of directing attention to a matter vitally affecting our interpretation of this author.First, a general observation. In seeking for external evidence to establish the date of the publication of Herodotus' Histories, we need to distinguish between possible and certain echoes of Herodotus in the works of others. The question must constantly be asked whether any allusion we have isolated presupposes and requires the knowledge of Herodotus' work on the part of the contemporary audience. For otherwise we could be misled by a coincidence or we could reach a false conclusion because some point of specific knowledge eludes us. Of the latter the famous parallel in the Antigone of Sophocles (909 ff. with Herodotus iii 119) provides a notable example. If Herodotus had been just a little more strict with himself in avoiding allusions to his own time, who would not suppose that his work had been published prior to 441? What we require, therefore, is material which is calculated to evoke Herodotus himself—the special characteristics of the man and his Histories—so as to leave in no doubt a general familiarity with his work on the part of others.