bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Greek Chronography in Roman Epic: The Calendrical Date of the Fall of Troy in the Aeneid
Authors: Grafton A. T. , Swerdlow N. M. 
Published: February 2009

The last chapter of Politian's first Miscellanea dealt with the amica silentia lunae through which the Greeks sailed back to Troy (Aen. 2.255). He argued that the phrase should not be taken literally, as a statement that Troy fell at the new moon, but in an extended sense, as a poetic indication that the moon had not yet risen when the Greeks set sail. This reading had one merit: it explained how Virgil's moon could be silent while the Greeks were en route but shine during the battle for the city (Aen. 2.340). Yet Politian's effort to identify the phase of the moon described by Virgil was anything but clear:Non igitur aut sera fuerit aut pernox luna, tum nec lunae quidem omnino coitus, sed tempus arbitror potius quamdiu illa non luceret.Accordingly, though his arguments were sometimes repeated by commentators and teachers, they won little assent from scholars who occupied themselves seriously with the passage. In his Adversaria Turnebus took silentia lunae as referring ‘ad noctis taciturnitatem…non ad interlunium’. In the first chapter of his De rebus per epistolam quaesitis Giano Parrasio sharply criticised the fuzziness of Politian's explanation: ‘Ambages istae sunt, ambages’. More important, he quoted a line from the Little Iliad:νὺξ μ⋯ν ἔην μέσση, λαμπρ⋯ δ' ⋯πέτελλε σελήνη.This he rendered ‘Nox erat intempesta, nitebat et aurea coelo Luna’, and inferred from it that the moon had been up when Troy fell. In his Virgilius collation scriptorum Graecorum illustratus, finally, Fulvio Orsini published a scholium on Euripides' Hecuba, one which quoted both the line from the Little Iliad and an analysis of it by the Peripatetic Callisthenes. He too took the line as refuting Politian.
The epitaph of Publius Scipio
Authors: Moir K. M. 
Published: February 2009

Quei apice insigne Dial(is fl)aminis gesistei | mors perfec(it) tua ut essent omnia | brevia, honos, fama, virtusque | gloria atque ingenium. Quibus sei | in longa licuiset tibe utier vita, | facile facteis superases gloriam | maiorum. Qua relubens te in gremiu, | Scipio, recipit terra, Publi, | prognatum Publio, Corneli.ILLRP311For you who wore the distinctive cap of a Flamen Dialis, Death cut everything short — honour, fame and virtue, glory and intellectual ability. If you had been granted a long life in which to use these advantages, you would have far surpassed the glory of your ancestors by your achievements. Therefore Earth gladly takes you in her arms, Scipio — Publius Cornelius, son of Publius.
Three Ambivii
Authors: Syme Ronald 
Published: February 2009

I. The name earned early notoriety from L. Ambivius Turpio, the actor who performed in all the plays of Terence. It appealed to Lucilius:quid tibi ego ambages Ambivi scribere coner?Also to Wilhelm Schulze, duly citing the Lucilian reference. In the sequel the nomen failed to enlist proper regard. Three persons bore it, diverse in life and rank: a tavern keeper on the Via Latina, a gourmet writer, a procurator governing Judaea. To the first and to the third, erudition in the recent time denies recognition; and the second through inadvertence misses his place and period. The Ambivii call for redemption. The venture will lead along circuitous or devious paths, ‘per ambages’, in the pursuit of names and identities. From that operation various instruction accrues on the flank.II. First, a casual notice in the criminal record of a family of the better sort at Larinum. Cluentius and his slaves, so it was alleged, had made an assault on ‘Ambivium quendam, coponem de via Latina’ (Pro Cluentio 163).Traditional texts remained content with that name. Not so long ago recourse to manuscripts produced ‘A. Bivium’. It was adopted in two standard editions. Had editors given a thought to nomenclature, they might have conceived some disquiet. Absent from the repertorium, the nomen appeared to lack attestation. In itself no bar, to be sure. The dense forest of local Italian nomenclature carries plenty of unique specimens. Reassurance could be sought from ‘Bivellius’ and ‘Bivonius’.
Nestor's War Effort (Stat. Ach. 1.422)
Authors: Williams Rachel 
Published: February 2009

Here in the Achilleid Statius catalogues the contributions of Greek towns to Agamemnon's expedition against Troy. Every item of equipment is appropriate to its origin. There is one puzzle, however: why is it that murorum tormenta are the peculiar contribution of Pylos and Messene? O. A. W. Dilke (1954) suggests that the proximity of classical Messene to Mt Ithome would have reminded Statius of the siege of that place by the Spartans in 464–59 b.c., when they were aided by the Athenians, experts in siege warfare. This solution is undoubtedly ingenious but, based as it is upon association, it places this last entry in a quite different category from the previous entries: all the preceding items have been very definite products of their places of origin. K. von Barth (1664), while noting the not unparalleled anachronism, attempts to account in another way for the siege-engines: ‘quia ibi silvae crassissimas arbores habent’. But there is no evidence to support this: Messenia features neither in the pages of Theophrastus (Περ⋯ Φυτ⋯ν Ἱστορία) or Pliny (N.H. 16) as a source of quality timber, nor in the poets as an area which is characterised by the stoutness of its trees.These theories pay insufficient attention to the verb tendunt, the vox propria for exerting a strain on rope, making it taut (cf. Stat. Sil. 3.2.26f.: ‘stuppea tendite mali | vincula’).
Adnotanda in Latin Prosody
Authors: Postgate J. P. 
Published: February 2009

The statement in the second-and-third edition of Sommer's excellent Handbuch der lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre (1914), p. 462, that the oldest scansion is diūtius, to say nothing of the unqualified assertion in our current grammars and dictionaries that the u in it and in diutissime is long or the regrettable silence of the principal editors of Plautus upon the subject, is of itself sufficient warrant for a brief discussion. The relevant facts are these:1. Though diu is common enough in verse of all kinds, the comparative is not attested for any but writers in iambics, while the superlative appears to be confined to prose.
The Poet's Defence (I)
Authors: Rudd Niall 
Published: February 2009

In A.J.P. lxxvi 1955 I attempted to show that, contrary to the theory of Professor Hendrickson, Horace's fourth satire is what it purports to be, namely a defence against hostile criticism. The aim of the two present articles is to examine how that defence is handled.The poet had, it seems, to contend with two main charges, one relating to spirit and the other to form. The first said in effect ‘Your work reveals a malicious nature’; the second ‘Your verses are meagre and prosaic’. Let us take these charges separately. In reply to the former Horace answers:1. ‘The writers of Old Comedy and Lucilius branded criminals’ (1–7). As I hope to show later, Horace is not finding fault with their practice; on the contrary he is by implication claiming the same right for himself.
‘Ancient Notae’ and Latin Texts
Authors: Lindsay W. M. 
Published: February 2009

The abbreviation-symbols of the Romans, found in ancient uncial MSS., may be roughly divided into three classes:(1) Those peculiar to juristic writing, e.g. R.P. ‘res priuata’ (any case), Q.D.R.A. ‘qua de re agitur.’ They are properly called ‘notae iuris.’ They abound in the famous Verona MS. of Gaius(uncial, ‘fifth century’).(2) A few used in histories, etc., e.g. R.P. 'respublica' (any case), Q. ‘Quintus’ (any case). Valerius Probus, who compiled a manual of ancient Notae, calls this class ‘notae publicae’. They appear in such MSS. as the codex Puteanus of Livy (uncial, ‘fifth century’); and since they have been transferred into modern editions of the Latin historians, etc., no one is at a loss to interpret them nowadays, although they puzzled mediaeval scribes.(3) Symbols of ordinary words of frequent occurrence in any type of literature, e.g. Q. ‘que.’ It is this class which is the subject of this article.
Leaders of Men? Military Organisation in the Iliad
Authors: Van Wees Hans 
Published: February 2009

At a time when the Greek army is on the verge of annihilation, the Iliad tells us, two warriors have detached themselves from the fight. Idomeneus, having accompanied a wounded man back to the ships, and Mērionēs, on his way to fetch himself a new spear, meet at the former's hut. They stand and talk for a while, assuring one another that they are afraid of nothing and no-one, and finally decide to plunge into battle again, though only after discussing at some length whether to go to fight in the centre or at the left of the front line. At first sight their behaviour might not seem particularly strange, but when one realises that the poet has told us more than once that these two are the leaders of the Cretan contingent, some four thousand warriors strong, one may begin to wonder. How could a poet, if he had even the slightest notion of what armies and battles were like, let these men behave as if they were alone on the field, leaving the fight for trivial reasons, re-entering it when and where it suits them, not even bothering to return to their own leaderless countrymen? Such doubts have led scholars to argue that, in fact, the poet did not have the slightest notion of what he was talking about.Some seek to show that epic society is vague and unreal — ‘Homeric kings are like the king and the prince in Cinderella — they reveal nothing about any social structure in the real world’ — and have suggested that the historian may dismiss it as literary fiction.
Notes on the Text of Aristophanes' Peace
Authors: Sommerstein A. H. 
Published: February 2009

Cobet, in his second discussion of ⋯γορεύω and its compounds, maintained that these verbs in Attic formed all tenses except present and imperfect from ⋯ρ⋯, εἶπον, εἴρηκα, εἴρηµαɩ, ⋯ρρήθην, save that forms with -αγορευ- were optionally used to distinguish certain alternative meanings. Thus ⋯πηγόρευσα etc. (Dem. 40.44, 55.4) could be used in the sense ‘forbid’, but not in that of ‘weary’ or ‘give up’; προηγορευµένα (Xen. Mem. 1.2.35) could be used in the sense ‘proclaimed’, but not in that of ‘foretold’ ‘or’ ‘said previously’; προσαγορε⋯σαι etc. (Pl. Phd. 104a, Polit. 288c; Xen. Mem. 3.2.1; Anaxilas fr. 21.4; Dem. 39.38, 40.1; Lyk. Leokr. 9, 18; and several other fourth-century instances, to which add one much earlier, [Aesch.] Prom. 834) could be used in the sense ‘call, name’ but not in that of ‘greet’. These distinctions, he believed, did not break down until about the time of Alexander. Hence his rejection of the aorist καταγορεύσῃ offered by the MS. tradition in Peace 107.But καταγορεύειν too is a verb with two clearly distinct ranges of meaning: ‘tell, declare’ (as here, Clouds 518, Eur. Med. 1106) and ‘denounce, accuse’ (as Hdt. 3.71.5, Pl. Rep. 595b).
Land tenure and Inheritance in Classical Sparta
Authors: Hodkinson Stephen 
Published: February 2009

‘The problem of Spartan land tenure is one of the most vexed in the obscure field of Spartan institutions.’ Walbank's remark is as true today as when it was written nearly thirty years ago. Controversy surrounding this subject has a long tradition going back to the nineteenth century and the last thirty years have witnessed no diminution in the level of disagreement, as is demonstrated by a comparison of the differing approaches in the recent works by Cartledge, Cozzoli, David and Marasco. Although another study runs the risk of merely adding one more hypothesis to the general state of uncertainty, a fundamental reassessment of the question is required, not least because of its significance for the historian's interpretation of the overall character of Spartiate society. Through the introduction of a new perspective it may be possible to advance our understanding of the subject.In Section I of this essay I shall attempt to review several influential scholarly theories and to examine their feasibility and the reliability of the evidence upon which they are based. Section II will begin to construct a more plausible alternative account which is based upon more trustworthy evidence. Finally, Section III will discuss a comparatively underemphasised aspect of the topic, the property rights of Spartiate women, which suggests a rather different interpretation of the character of land tenure and inheritance from those more usually adopted.
The word of the Muses (Plato, Rep. 8.546)
Authors: Ehrhardt Edit 
Published: February 2009

Ever since Proclus wrote his commentary on Plato's Republic, repeated attempts have been made to find a hidden number of cosmic significance in Rep. 8.546. For the Neo-Platonist it was natural to look for esoteric secrets in ancient works; among the men of the New Learning at the end of the Middle Ages there were enough astrologers and necromancers to ensure respect for the proposition; we are now again enamoured of irrationality. But the scholars who attempted such calculations around 1900 must have considered Plato himself a mystery-monger.In this article I propose: (i) to show why such attempts are mistaken, (ii) to discuss what early writers who mention the passage say about its meaning, (iii) to provide a mathematician's translation that fits the context, and to comment on it; for the currently accepted explanation is unsatisfactory.‘There is fairly widespread agreement that the geometrical number is 12,960,000 = 3,6002 = 4,800 × 2,700, but on the method by which this number is reached the widest divergence exists’ or, from an earlier, different guess: ‘…one can, so to speak, state a priori that Plato's number is a multiple of 19 ten thousands’, i.e. the text is approached with a ready-made answer in mind. There are three further objections to the conventional view, (a) It takes the text out of its context as if it had strayed from the Timaeus.
The composition of Callimachus' Aetia in the Light of P. Oxy. 2258
Authors: Hollis A. S. 
Published: February 2009

Rudolf Pfeiffer (Callimachus, ii.xxxvi–xxxvii) believed that, as a young man, Callimachus wrote four books of Aetia. To these the poet added in his old age a Reply to his Critics (fr. 1), and a slightly revised version of his recent occasional elegy, the Lock of Berenice (fr. 110, now including a nuptial rite which has survived only in the translation by Catullus, 66.79–88); this revised Coma became the last poem in Aetia book 4, to be followed by an Epilogue (fr. 112) which may mark a transition to the Iambi. Pfeiffer's theory generally held the field until the brilliant article of P. J. Parsons, in ZPE 25 (1977), 1–50. With the help of newly recovered papyrus fragments Parsons showed that a previously unplaced elegy celebrating a Nemean victory (fr. 383 Pf.) was connected to the story of Molorchus (frs. 54–9), who entertained Heracles before that hero killed the Nemean lion and instituted the Nemean Games; thus the poem belonged to Aetia book 3. Furthermore, various pieces of evidence converge (Parsons, pp. 46–8) to make it probable, if not wholly certain, that this substantial poem (some 200 lines long) stood first in its book. So it appears that, at least in the final form of the Aetia, books 3–4 were framed by two poems honouring the wife of Ptolemy III Euergetes, namely Victoria Berenices (Parsons' title) and Coma Berenices.Soon afterwards a further important advance was made by E. Livrea (ZPE 34 [1979], 37ff.), who perceived, on grounds of subject-matter as well as papyrology, that the poor man who sets a mousetrap in fr. 177 Pf. must be none other than Molorchus; note particularly the probable mention of Cleonae in fr. 177.37 Pf. = Supplementum Hellenisticum 259.37. Thus a new fragment of 38 lines accrued to the poem.These discoveries have some implications for the composition of the Aetia. Addition of a Coma Berenices (94 lines in Catullus' version) to a pre-existent Aetia book 4 could be countenanced easily enough, but, as Parsons says (p. 50), it would have required a much more radical, and therefore less plausible, revision for Callimachus to have added Victoria Berenices to a pre-existent Aetia book 3. Accordingly Parsons suggested that the original Aetia contained only books 1–2, united by the conversation with the Muses; then in his old age Callimachus compiled two more books, partly at least from poems already composed, and gave them a frame of two poems honouring Queen Berenice. Parsons' view has, I think, been widely accepted; Professor Lloyd-Jones wrote in SIFC 77 (1984), 56 ‘No-one has yet argued against the simple modification of Pfeiffer's theory of the two editions of the Aetia which Mr. Parsons based on this discovery. The first edition comprised two books only.’
Philosophical Imagery in Horace, Odes 3.5
Authors: Harrison S. J. 
Published: February 2009

The high moral tone of Horace's Reguhls ode (3.5) makes it unsurprising that the poet should employ the traditional imagery of philosophers, both in the speech of Regulus and in the final simile. I should like here to point out some instances which seem to have escaped the notice of commentators.This passage is intended to illustrate the lost ‘virtus’ of the prisoners in Carthage, who, Regulus claims, will be of no greater use to the Romans if ransomed since they were cowardly enough to surrender in the first place. For the first image of dyeing wool Kiessling–Heinze refer the reader to Lucretius 6.1074–7:purpureusque colos conchyli iungitur unacorpore cum lanae, dirimi qui non queat usquam,non si Neptuni fluctu renovare operam des,non mare si totum velit eluere omnibus undis.This gives the first hint that the image belongs to the philosophical tradition, though it does not seem to occur in the extant remains of Epicurus. This is confirmed by a passage of Plato, who at Rep. 429d ff. has an elaborate image taken from the dyer's art. The Guardians of the ideal city are to be carefully selected and prepared like wool for the dyeing process of education; then, as good wool keeps its colour after dyeing, so the Guardians will keep right opinions when they are taught them. The image is summarized by Socrates at 430a ff.:
Hyginus, Fabula 89 (Laomedon)
Authors: Griffin A. H. F. 
Published: February 2009

Neptunus et Apollo dicuntur Troiam muro cinxisse; his rex Laomedon uouit quod regno suo pecoris eo anno natum esset immolaturum. id uotum auaritia fefellit. alii dicunt †parum eum promisisse.The story that Neptune and Apollo together built the walls of Troy for Laomedon is well known from Homer. At the end of their year's service the perfidious king refused to pay the agreed wages. Ovid tells the familiar story in one of his transitional sections in the Metamorphoses. Hyginus' account poses the textual problem indicated above. H. I. Rose comments on ‘parum’ as follows: ‘procul dubio corruptum hoc neque arridet Schmidtii coniectura promsisse. fuitne partum equarum? hoc enim plerumque narratur, equos quos a Ioue accepisset promisisse Laomedontem mercedis nomine…sed Herculi; quod facile ad deos mercennarios transferri potuit; atque non equos sed equas fuisse tradit Apollod. II, 104’. Rose rightly rejects Schmidt's emendation ‘promsisse’. ‘Promisisse’ has every sign of soundness and the difficulty lies, as Rose sees, with ‘parum’. Rose's own conjecture ‘partum equarum’, however, will not do. Apart from the oddity of the expression, one would need a good deal more persuasion than Rose offers to accept that the well-known promise of Zeus' horses which Laomedon made to Hercules (Hom. Il. 5.648–51, Ov. Met. 11.213–15) was transferred from Hercules to Neptune and Apollo. There is no suggestion anywhere in the sources that Laomedon promised to give Neptune and Apollo the famous horses as payment for building the walls.
Suetonius' Dedication to Septicius Clarus
Authors: Morgan J. D. 
Published: February 2009

The recent revival of scholarly interest in Suetonius provides a good occasion to emend a long-standing crux in Joannes Lydus' description (De Mag. 2.6) of Suetonius' dedication of his Vitae Caesarum to his friend the praetorian prefect Septicius Clarus. The codex unicus Caseolinus (Parisinus suppl. gr. 257, s. X/XI) has Τράγκυλλος τοίνυν τοὺς τ⋯ν Καισάων βίους ⋯ν γράμμασιν † ⋯ποτίνων † Σεπτικίῳ, ὃς ἦν ὓπαρχος τ⋯ν πραιτωριαν⋯ν σπειρ⋯ν ⋯πì αὐτο⋯. The conjectures ⋯ποτείνων by J. D. Fuss and ὑποτείνων by I. Bekker do little to improve the sense, and although W. Kroll's προτείνων gives the meaning required by the context (cf. Aristophanes, Plut. 1019), προ- would not easily have been misread as ⋯πο-.For ⋯ποτίνων read ⋯νατείνων. For parallels compare BGU ii (1898), 613.3–4 'Ανέτινα ( = 'Ανέτεινα) βιβλ[ίδι]α τῷ λαμπροτάτῳ [⋯γεμόνι] in a papyrus from the reign of Antoninus Pius cited by LSJ, and several other passages, most of which I owe to the supplement to Preisigke and Kiessling's Wörterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden and to Dr Francisco R. Adrados of the Diccionario Griego-Español: Sammelbuch x (1971), 10527.5–7 ['Ανέτε]ινά σοι, κ[ύριε,]…⋯ναφόρ[ιον… of a.d. 152–3, P. Fouad iii (1939), 26.5–10 (cf. Sammelbuch v (1934), 8252.5–10) Οὗ ⋯νέτινάσυ ( = ⋯νέτεινά σοι)τῷ κυρίῳ βιβλιδίου…⋯ντίγραφον ὑπέταξα of a.d. 157–9, P. Oslo. iii (1936), 80.21 οὗ ⋯νέτιναν (read ⋯νέτειναν) βιβλιδί[ου…written sometime after March 7, a.d. 161, Sammelbuch iv (1931) 7472.3 'Ανέτεινά [σοι, κύριε ⋯πίτροπε, βιβλείδιον of a.d. 164, Sammelbuch vi.3 (1961) 9339.24–7 (cf. a second copy in P. Fouad iii (1939) 13.5–7) οὗ ⋯νετείναμεν τῷ [κρατίσῳ ⋯τρχιερεῖ Oὐ]λπίῳ Σερηνιανῷ βιβλιδίου…[…⋯] ντίγραφον ὑπετάξαμεν from a.d. 178 or a little later, P. Mich. xii (1971) 616.13–14 τ⋯ δίκαιά μου βιβλειδίῳ ⋯νγράψασ ⋯νέτεινα Νεμεσιανῷ ὅπωσ τα[⋯]τα διαπέμψηται[τῷ ⋯]πιτρόπῳ from ca. a.d. 182, P. Cornell 14.2–4 οὗ ⋯νέτει[να τῷ κρατίστῳ ⋯πιστρ]ατηγῷ Κλαυδίῳ [Ξενοφ⋯ντι βιβλδίο]υ from a.d. 180–92, Wilcken, Chrestomathie (1912) 461.3–5 О[ὗ ⋯νέ]τεινα τῷ λαμπροτάτῳ [⋯γεμόνΚ]υίντω[ι] Μαικίωι λαιτίωι βιβλιδίου…⋯ντίγραφον ὑ[ποτάξασ] from the beginning of the third century, and Sammelbuch v (1934), 8246.3–4 αἱ συνηγερούμεναι λιβέλλον ⋯νέτιναν (= ⋯νέτιναν) ⋯π⋯ τ⋯ν ἔπαρχον (the author should have written ⋯παρχικ⋯ν) ⋯ξουσίαν from a.d. 340.
Some Passages of Greek Tragedy
Authors: Pearson A. C. 
Published: February 2009

Evripides Rhes. 161 sqq. Dolon, having undertaken to visit the Greek lines as a spy, addresses Hector:οủκûν πονεεîν μèν χρή, πο;νοûνταμιαθòν φéρεαθαι. παντì γàρ προακε;íμενονκéρρς πρòς ἔργῳ τ⋯ν χáριν τíκτει διπγ⋯ν.
On Lvcretivs II. 355–360
Authors: Merrill W. A. 
Published: February 2009

356 nonquit O, oinquit Q, linquit Q corr., oinquid G, noscit Lachmann. 359 adsittens OQ, adsistens Q corr.In the summer of 1919, in the high Sierra of California, I chanced to talk with a cattleman who had driven his herd from the lower valleys to the highlands for summer pasture. When he had arrived at his destination he found a cow missing. He retraced his route, and forty miles below he found the cow by the roadside.Her calf, by reason of its weakness, had been picked up by a waggoner and brought on, and the cow was found at the identical spot where the calf had been taken from the ground; the cow had found the place and had remained there for five days. The occurrence gave rise to a general discussion by the cattlemen present concerning the habits of these animals. When a cow misses her calf she will go by memory to the place where the calf was last seen by her, and will stay there for days; but she will graze and not go hungry herself. The cow will also search by smell; she can smell a herd or the odour left on bushes or that attached to footsteps for hours certainly, possibly for days. The calf also will stay for days where the mother left it. The bereaved cow will try to find her calf first by sight, then by memory, and lastly by smell.