TJHE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 449 ' summon ' or ' invoke.' With the simple px ; ' why bid them help me ?' These ace. of the person it means ' speak to' ; words, plainly implying that she had asked with an inf. added, ' to bid.' Two reff. are the gods to help her, would naturally be indeed given by L. and S. for the meaning altered when that appeal was excised. The ' invoke,' but in each case an inf. is added connexion with what follows now becomes and the meaning is ' bid.' Moreover, there clear : ' What use to appeal to the gods when is no question here of other helpers than they' have allowed me to be called impious the gods. It seems to me probable that for a deed done in their service ?' the original words were TL 8' aihav fv/t- M. A. BAYFIELD.
APHRODITE PANDEMOS AND THE HIPPOLYTUS OF EURIPIDES.
EURIPIDES, in the prologue to the Hippoly- to expiate his defiance of her, and the way tus, connects the story of his hero and of is prepared : Phaedra with the erection of a certain statue of Aphrodite at Athens, and with the title iXOovra yap viv T1IT04v es o\f/w Kal Ti\r] /uxjTrjpiiiiv The statue was evidently the Aphrodite i-irl IlavStWos yvjv irarpos evyevrjs Sd/xap 'Iwiro\vTo>, a title known to us from other I8ovs and on 'ImroAvro) would be alter- y»Js T^trSc, vaov KUTTJDISOS iyKa$iv, ever a distinction has been attempted, and Kal nyvSe crvv Sdfiapri vavaroXei ydova, it has been maintained that the sanctuary eviavviav tKhrffiov atveeras tpvyr/v, and cult of the Aphrodite Pandemos, pro- ivravOa Sr] o-revowa KaK-ireir\rjyfn,evri perly and officially so called, were different KtvTpois !pa>Tos fj rdkcuv' airoXXwai from the sanctuary and cult of the Aphrodite aiy%. (Vv. 24 foil.) iirl 'liriroXvTio. Materials for considering this question are given by Dr. Frazer in his Phaedra gave her Aphrodite a name, wd^e commentary on Pausanias (1. 22. 1—3). Oedv. But what name 1 Not «TT£ 'Iir7roAi5ro>. I do not propose to discuss it here, and will It cannot be meant that she published, by assume, for the present purpose, no more her own act and declaration, the very passion than this, that between the Aphrodite eirl which she desired to conquer, suppress, and 'hnroXvTto and the title Pandemos there was conceal. Not Pandemos ; for that title, how- for some reason a close association. This ever it be interpreted, has in this applica- much at least the passage of Pausanias tion no meaning and cannot be found in the (which, in my opinion, presumes the identity) words. Such is the difficulty. must be held to presume and prove ; nor It has been proposed to get rid of it by so indeed am I aware that it has been disputed. changing the text that the title meant (which What I propose to show is, that the story is assumed to be iirl 'ITTTTO\VTU>) shall not be told by Euripides is based upon this associa- bestowed by Phaedra, but by some one else. tion ; that he assumes his Aphrodite iirl Such is the principle of Jortin's emendation, 'ImroXuTO) to be at least an Aphrodite Pan- demos, representing the goddess in that aspect, and commonly connected with that 'linro\vTa> 8' ciri appellation; and that in this connexion of TO XOMTOV ovofidaovariv iSpva-Oai 6edv. thought is to be found the solution of a 'men hereafter skill name the statue certain difficulty which the story presents. the Aphrodite orl 'I?nroA.vT.' And on Hippolytus, says Aphrodite, is destined the same lines, though with more discre- NO. CXXXVII. VOL. XV. et o 450 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. tion and better taste, proceeds that of already kindled in her heart, was Meineke, wo/wifov, ' I, Aphrodite, gave the her own secret. Thus it was that name.' But not even this will pass. At the time when Aphrodite speaks, at the irirpav Trap' avrr]V IlaAAaSos, dramatic time of the prologue, the name y) 7 p y «rl 'lirrrokvTio has manifestly not yet been ipmcr' I/DOIT' IKSJJ^OV 'linroXvTU) S' Zm attached to the statue; the goddess may TO Xonrov u>v6fjui£ eviSpvcOai Oedv. intend that it shall be attached ; but this is not expressed by Theseus himself ovofi&acnxTiv and <5vo//.afov convert the senremove- d to Troezen, and Phaedra was com- tence inte a mere parenthesis, offensive in pelled to share the city and home of Hippoly- such a story and at such a point. In fact tus, so that her ' Love at Home ' in Athens this road leads nowhere; the conferring of became an idle figure, and its title a miser- the name «ri 'ITTTOXUTOI, as a name, cannot, able irony—a connexion of thought which from the nature of the case, be that which Euripides, with skilful touch, indicates by the poet has here directly in view. If any contriving, naturally and as if casually, to way is to be found, we must start afresh. repeat and echo the significant word The difficulty arises, as I think, from the fact that Euripides, repeating a legend 8 which, whatever it was, must have been Kal nyvSe crvv Sa/zapri vamrroXa )(06va familiar to his audience, has told it, as a ivua.vo'ia.v iK.b\jjx.ov alvicras vyrjv. poet in such circumstances would, allusively ; so that a certain point in it, though At Troezen the plan of Aphrodite went necessary and central, is not so much stated victoriously forward and her victims perished as implied. The legend did actually explain as the tragedy sets forth. Now when all how the statue came by the description «ri this came to be known, men drew from it 'ImroAura, and how the goddess came by the the lesson which Aphrodite meant to teach, title Pandemos; it derived both the de- that She is not of this place or of that place, scription and the title from a name conferred not by any title or any figure to be fixed on the statue by Phaedra in dedicating it. here or there, in Athens or in Troezen ; She But this name was neither hA 'lirxdkvTto nor is of all peoples, of all places and everywhere Pandemos. The name which Phaedra gave, at home, and Her power is everywhere under but which, with only too much reason, was heaven (w. 1—6), afterwards changed to another, was Aphrodite Endemos or 'Love at Home'. When Hippo- •jroW?/ fi.ev iv /JpoTotori KOVK a.vmvv[io% lytus had returned from Athens to Troezen, dea. KiKk-qixai Kvjrpis ovpavov r £ <^>(us 6p5vr«s vjXlov, rid of the passion with which Aphrodite TOUS p-iv o-e/3ovTas Tafia irpea-^eva) Kpavq, had afflicted her, endeavoured to propitiate, (TaXXta 8' oo-oi (j>povovPlato, and more interest than -and in the hope to cure herself of an epws the curiously frigid piece of fictitious history THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 451 attached to Pandemos in Pausanias : to wit, nor whatsoever others the ancients may that Theseus established the name and calt, have related, are relevant to the question, in conjunction with that of Peitho, to what, if anything, that title, or the descrip- commemorate his success in wooing and tion £7ri 'linro\.vTON THE FRAGMENTS OF THE MINOR TRAGEDIANS.
(NAUCK'S NUMERATION.) eKeWev IXajSes, oOfV airaxriv rjp rpitjttiv OT alOrjp ecStSous 6vr)Toi
Read TTVO&V KVTOpova>v THE 'DELIBERATIVE' INDICATIVE.
IN his paper upon ' Method in Study of tence; but none in the mood. The deliber- the Modes'1 Mr. H. C. Nutting posits as ation is in the question. One might as well ' a general principle ' of this investigation say that there is an ' interrogative indica- that other aspects of the speech-Jorm than the tive ' and cite as an example quis est 1 mode of the verb may be the essential features The truth is that quid ago f asks a question that convey to the hearer those ideas which it about a contemplated future action (that is generally felt to be the province of mode to should be or may be taken by the speaker); express, e.g., deliberation,2 taking as his text and it is this which the mood expresses or the mood in quid ago ? ' what am I to do ?' as Mr. Nutting thinks, fails to express. I have more than once pointed out the mis- The confusion, whether of thought or chief which is caused by the use of the expression, does not however matter so term ' Deliberative' for the mood in such much here, as it is at least doubtful whether sentences: and here is another example. the mood in these sentences is really indi- There is 'deliberation' indeed in the sen- cative at all. I have long suspected it of 1 Classical Review, Nov., pp. 420 sqq. being subjunctive. No doubt the Roman 2 The italics are Mr. Nutting's. of Classical times would not have regarded o G 2
