DOCSLIB.ORG

Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, Edited with Notes by R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, edited with notes by R. C. Jebb, Litt. D., Camb., [late] Professor of Greek in the University of Glasgow. Second Edition. London: Macmillan. 1888. J. E. Sandys The Classical Review / Volume 3 / Issue 09 / November 1889, pp 406 - 408 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00195940, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00195940 How to cite this article: J. E. Sandys (1889). The Classical Review, 3, pp 406-408 doi:10.1017/S0009840X00195940 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 128.122.253.228 on 29 Apr 2015 406 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. his conclusions, and it will repay any reader torical style, alien to that of Xenophon, (2) its to study them for himself. The fifth chapter affected and poetical diction, (3) its false discusses the Memorabilia. Here Dr. Hart- statements, (4) direct borrowing from the mann is a thorough-going follower of Schenkl HeUenica of passages which the writer has and Krohn, who used the knife with such either tried to make more definite and astonishing freedom. True he controverts particular, «r has spoilt by failing to under- in nine cases the excisions .or objections stand, or has deliberately changed in order of Schenkl, but he makes up for that to do greater honour to Agesilaus, (5) state- by many more of his own. He believes ments and observations not suited to the in an interpolator impudentissimus, who, time at which Xenophon must have com- editing the treatise after Xenophon's death, posed the piece, if he had done so. To this foisted in the parts which he condemns array of historical arguments are added as foolish or ill-written or false. This certain critical difficulties, and the use of was rendered all the more easy as the certain verba locutionesque insolentiora aut treatise, even as Xenophon wrote it, was suspecta. The upshot of it all is to show not consecutive, but had been continually that the Agesilaus is by a young declaimer added to during the author's life. The of the School of Isocrates. Dr. Hartmann sixth chapter contains emendations on the however feels that the very number of the text of the Memorabilia left after these arguments makes it the less certain that a excisions. The seventh chapter discusses reader will be convinced, for the detection the Oeconomicus. He rejects the suggestion of a weak point in any one shakes his confi- that it ever formed, or was intended to form, dence in all He appeals therefore finally to part of the Memorabilia, and defends his the finer sense of readers... qui enim non position at great length and with full SENTIT Agesilaum a Xenophonte non esse illustration. The eight chapter (pp. 188- scriptvm, eum nullis convinces argumentis. 213) again contains emendations on particu- The twelfth and last chapter (pp. 276-405) lar passages of the Oeconomicus. The ninth is devoted to criticisms and emendations of chapter discusses the old question of the the HeUenica. They are full both of the connexion between the Convivium of Xeno- strength and weakness of the critic; and, phon and that of Plato. He confesses that while they will often carry conviction, they the arguments which he here uses are not will also sometimes call forth opposition, new; and it will be enough to say that his and occasionally provoke a smile. It may position is that Plato's Convivium was pub- be safely said, however, that the book as a lished after that of Xenophon and was in- whole contains a mass of criticism on tended to refute and ridicule the presentment Xenophon of first-rate value. It certainly of Socrates contained in the latter's work. is entertaining, and has scarcely a dull page The tenth chapter follows (pp. 235-246) from end to end. And whether a reader with emendations on the text of the Conviv- agrees or disagrees with the author, he will ium. In the eleventh chapter—which has undoubtedly close the book with awakened the motto rts OXKTI TOV Oavovr airutTaveiv,—he interest in and a fuller knowledge of Xeno- restates the case against the genuineness of phon. the Agesilaus. This he rests on (1) its rhe- E. S. SHUCKBUEGH. SELECTIONS FROM THE ATTIC ORATORS. Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos, has Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, edited now been reprinted in a handy form that will with notes by R. C. JEBB, Litt. D., Camb., make it readily accessible to a still larger [late] Professor of Greek in the University number of students. It is superfluous at of Glasgow. Second Edition. London : the present date to praise the taste and Macmillan. 1888. judgment which have here been applied to the difficult task of selecting adequately TEACHERS of Greek have good reason for representative specimens of the earlier Attic rejoicing that a book, which has been Orators, or to dwell on the scrupulous pains before the public for the last nine years as a which have been bestowed on the explanatory companion volume ranging in size with the as well as the critical notes. In the new editor's brilliant and attractive work on the edition the latter, instead of being placed THE CLASSICAL .REVIEW. 407 apart before the text, are far more con- Oavovrmv. Vide Thuc. ii. 52.' In Dob- veniently printed at the foot of the page, spn's Oratores Attici, the same emendation is while the explanatory notes remain as ascribed to the French editor, Auger; but, before at the end of the book. as I have shown, it was an English scholar The few suggestions here offered for the who was the first to suggest it in a timid and removal of some misprints and other trifling tentative way, leaving Professor Jebb to inaccuracies will be almost entirely confined propose it afresh and to print it with confi- to the speech of Lysias on behalf of Manti- dence as part of the text.—In the explana- theus (Or. 16), that of Isaeus on the estate tory note on § 13, the Athenian expedition of Dicaeogenes (Or. 5), and the Aegineticus for the relief of Haliartus is by a misprint of Isocrates (Or. 19). attributed to B.C. 325, instead of 395 which In the explanatory note on Lysias 16§7, ovre is correctly printed in the former edition. Karaaraxnv irapa\a./36vTa, Prof. Jebb rightlAgainy , in the note on § 19 the apt quotation states that 'Bake reads Kara^aXovra, which iiri<j>6ov6s eort Kal Tct^«<os /3a8l£ei Kal fteya could hardly = refunded '; but it ought to <j>6(yytTai has accidentally been assigned to be added that this proposal, though Dem. adv. Gcdlippum, instead of adv. Pan- approved by Sauppe, was afterwards taenetum. retracted by Bake himself in favour of On Isaeus, Or. 5 § 17, ^ex/Zofw-pTvpuav is in XafiovTa, in his Scholica Hypomnemata, both editions misprinted ilrevSo/Mprvpiov, the V 162-3, published in 1862:—'re iterum modern compositor having thus made a simi- iterumque considerata, dubitare coepi an lar slip to that of the ancient copyist in the vere dixerim.' The work just quoted is well-known passage of Aristotle's Politics ii. little known in England, but English 12, as emended in Bentley's Phala/ris : ~Kap- scholars may turn with interest to the utvhov iSiov fief oiStv icrnv, irXr/v al Sticai rS>v preface of its second volume, published in \ffevSofiapTvpiS>v, K.T.X. In the next note (on 1839. They will there find an account i£aipe6euru>v rtav \j/~fj(jiiav), Dobree's emendation of the pleasant impression produced at is in both editions printed i^epaurOeuruiv, in- Leyden by the visit (in 1816) of Gaisford, stead of i£epa0£ur£>v. In the note on § 23, Professor of Greek at Oxford, and (in 1815) of the reference for av irpo<rx<i>prj<reiv should be Dobree, one of Professor Jebb's predecessors Thuc. ii. 80 (not ii. 8). in the Chair of Greek at Cambridge. Turning to some pages of greater literary In the text of § 15 of the same speech, interest in another part of the volume, I fxAXurra Ttjs rj/jLeripas <j>v\fjs &v<TTV)(r]<r(i<rr]s Kal notice in passing that, in the remarks on the irXaoTwv ivOavovrwv, the last word is influence of Isocrates on the Latin style of rightly altered into kvairoOavovrmv. In theCicero, Professor Jebb appeals, as before, to critical note, the editor says: ' hairoOavovrmv the passage of Cicero, ad Att. ii. 1, where he is my correction of ivOavovrmv,' adding that speaks of himself as ' using all the fragrant ' Markland conjectured evOa or hnaWa Oavov-essences of Isocrates and all the little stores T(i>v.' The authority for this statement, of his disciples'; but, to quote the courteous which unintentionally does a slight injustice criticism of Professor Wilkins, ' it ought not to Markland, is apparently the preface to to have been overlooked that in the words so Scheibe's second edition (the true date of admirably rendered Cicero is speaking of a which, by the way, is 1862 and not 1876, work written in Greek' (Introd. to De which is only the date of a reprint with a Oratore, p. 36 of first ed., 1879). On Iso- fresh title-page).
Recommended publications
  • Goneis in Athenian Law (And Perception)

    Goneis in Athenian Law (And Perception)

    GONEIS IN ATHENIAN LAW (AND PERCEPTION) David Whitehead Queen’s University Belfast [email protected] Abstract: This paper aims to establish what the laws of classical Athens meant when they used the term goneis. A longstanding and widespread orthodoxy holds that, despite the simple and largely unproblematic “dictionary” definition of the noun goneus/goneis as parent/parents, Athenian law extended it beyond an individual’s father and mother, so as to include – if they were still alive – protection and respect for his or her grandparents, and even great-grandparents. While this is not a notion of self-evident absurdity, I challenge it on two associated counts, one broad and one narrow. On a general, contextual level, genre-by genre survey and analysis of the evidence for what goneus means (and implies) in everyday life and usage shows, in respect of the word itself, an irresistible thrust in favour of the literal ‘parent’ sense. Why then think otherwise? Because of confusion, in modern minds, engendered by Plato and by Isaeus. In Plato’s case, his legislation for Magnesia contemplates (I argue) legal protection for grandparents but does not, by that mere fact, extend the denotation of goneis to them. And crucially for a proper understanding of the law(s) of Athens itself, two much-cited passages in the lawcourt speeches of Isaeus, 1.39 and 8.32, turn out to be the sole foundation for the modern misunderstanding about the legal scope of goneis. They should be recognised for what they are: passages where law is secondary and rhetorical persuasion paramount.
  • Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei Orationes Cum Deperditarum Fragmentis Post Carolum Scheibe Iterum Edidit Th

    Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei Orationes Cum Deperditarum Fragmentis Post Carolum Scheibe Iterum Edidit Th

    The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei orationes cum deperditarum fragmentis post Carolum Scheibe iterum edidit Th. Thalheim. Leipzig: Teubner. Mk. 2. 40. W. Wyse The Classical Review / Volume 18 / Issue 02 / March 1904, pp 115 - 120 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X0020944X, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X0020944X How to cite this article: W. Wyse (1904). The Classical Review, 18, pp 115-120 doi:10.1017/S0009840X0020944X Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 130.132.123.28 on 13 Jul 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 115 O.P.5 with the variant diuitum (-is O), and word ' emendare' which is used invariably is given as a variant in P.2'7: militum is the in the subscriptiones, is to be construed in reading of Rat.2 and a variant in P.10. 313 its most literal sense; and that view is, I furens: with Or. Boul. W. M. Rh. D.1 P.5 think, fully borne out by this MS. The (uel fremens) P,7: it is also given as a changes of the original text amount to variant in P.10 Lo.2 Z. 314 et: I noted this nothing more than insertions of omitted also from 0. Or. H. Trin. P.8 328 lines or words, and corrections of slips of retudit; so too O. and Or. (uel retundit).
  • The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones a Dissertation Submitted in Partial

    The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones a Dissertation Submitted in Partial

    The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: Alain Gowing, Chair Catherine Connors Alexander Hollmann Deborah Kamen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics ©Copyright 2015 Brandon F. Jones University of Washington Abstract The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones Chair of Supervisory Commitee: Professor Alain Gowing Department of Classics This study is about the construction of identity and self-promotion of status by means of elite education during the first and second centuries CE, a cultural and historical period termed by many as the Second Sophistic. Though the Second Sophistic has traditionally been treated as a Greek cultural movement, individual Romans also viewed engagement with a past, Greek or otherwise, as a way of displaying education and authority, and, thereby, of promoting status. Readings of the work of Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny, first- and second-century Latin prose authors, reveal a remarkable engagement with the methodologies and motivations employed by their Greek contemporaries—Dio of Prusa, Plutarch, Lucian and Philostratus, most particularly. The first two chapters of this study illustrate and explain the centrality of Greek in the Roman educational system. The final three chapters focus on Roman displays of that acquired Greek paideia in language, literature and oratory, respectively. As these chapters demonstrate, the social practices of paideia and their deployment were a multi-cultural phenomenon. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................... 2 Introduction ....................................................................................... 4 Chapter One.
  • Women and Property in Ancient Athens: a Discussion of the Private Orations and Menander Cheryl Cox University of Memphis

    Women and Property in Ancient Athens: a Discussion of the Private Orations and Menander Cheryl Cox University of Memphis

    Women and Property in Ancient Athens: A Discussion of the Private Orations and Menander Cheryl Cox University of Memphis There has been a great deal of discussion in the past two decades or so among social historians and anthropologists of the proposition that women in European societies, both in the past and in the present, have informal power at the private level of the household. Women’s interests were reflected and expressed in succession practices and in the management of the household economy. Central to the status of women was the dowry because of its place in the conjugal household and the negotiations over its use and transmission. A large dowry ensured the woman’s important role in the decisions of the marital household and thus helped to stabilize the marriage. Because the dowry, as the property of the woman’s natal kin, would ideally be transmitted to the man’s children, the man could become involved in the property interests of his wife’s family of origin.1 In a material sense, in classical Athens the wife’s dowry allowed for the cohesion of two households (oikoi): the oikos of her marriage and that of her natal family. The dowry in legal terms belonged to the woman’s natal family, as it had to be returned to her family of origin either on divorce or on the death of her husband and her remarriage. Much of the information we have for dowries pertains to elite families. Because the woman’s dowry could be inherited by the children, it was worth fighting for, especially if she had not received her full share (Dem.
  • Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius's Lysias Author(S): Kristine S

    Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius's Lysias Author(S): Kristine S

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by KU ScholarWorks Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius's Lysias Author(s): Kristine S. Bruss Source: Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 34- 57 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.2013.31.1.34 . Accessed: 04/03/2014 17:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and International Society for the History of Rhetoric are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 129.237.46.100 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014 17:03:51 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Kristine S. Bruss Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius’s Lysias Abstract: Dionysius of Halicarnassus’s account of ethopoeia at Lysias 8 is often cited as evidence of Lysias’s mastery of character portrayal, but the passage itself has received little in-depth analysis.
  • The Speech Against Leocrates. Edited by A. Petrie

    The Speech Against Leocrates. Edited by A. Petrie

    LYCURGUS The Speech against Leocrates Pitt Press Series LYCURGUS THE SPEECH AGAINST LEOCRATES CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS C. F. CLAY, MANAGER LONDON : FETTER LANE, E. C. 4 NEW YORK t THE MACMILLAN CO. BOMBAY ) CALCUTTA [ MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. MADRAS ) TORONTO : THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD. TOKYO ! MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LYCURGUS THE SPEECH AGAINST LEOCRATES EDITED BY A. PETRIE, M.A. PROFESSOR OF CLASSICS, NATAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE s. (UNIVERSITY OF AFRICA) ; FORMERLY LECTURER IN GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN ; SOMETIME SCHOLAR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE CAMBRIDGE AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1922 U PRINTED IN ENGLAND PREFACE Leocrates of Lycurgus has remained, in THEEngland, in comparative obscurity, not having 1 attracted an editor since John Taylor edited it at Cambridge, along with the Midias of Demosthenes, in 1743. Yet the speech is by no means without its merits. It forms, in many ways, an excellent introduction to Attic oratory for younger students. It is easier than Demosthenes, and there is no complex political situation to expound: the issue is simple and direct. And it has a greater variety of interest than either Demosthenes or Lysias. Its very fault of diffuseness, from the purely forensic standpoint, becomes, from an educative point of view, its great virtue. Lycurgus' excursions into ancient history, legend, and the poets, provide, in Livy's phrase, so many deverticula amoena where the student finds refreshment with instruction. The text of the present edition will be found to adhere, in the main, to that of Blass, whose critical commentary I have supplemented with those of Scheibe, Rehdantz and Thalheim.
  • The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 31:1 (1990:Spring) P.27

    The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 31:1 (1990:Spring) P.27

    GAGARIN, MICHAEL, The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 31:1 (1990:Spring) p.27 The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon Michael Gagarin 0NG MANY Antiphons known from antiquity, two fifth­ .Ncentury figures are sometimes thought to be the same person: Antiphon of Rhamnus, an orator and a leader of the oligarchic coup in 411, and 'Antiphon the Sophist', one of Socrates' interlocutors in Xenophon (M em. 1.6) to whom are often attributed the works On Truth, On Concord, and Politicus. 1 The separatist case has usually been based on the papyrus fragments of On Truth, but the most recent separatist argument, by Gerard Pendrick,2 deals almost entirely with the ancient tradition. He concedes that "the majority of ancient opinion is unitarian" (59), but he accords this fact little weight and presents instead a selective discussion of ancient authors who, in his view, support a separatist position. The purpose of this paper is to offer a more comprehensive assessment of the ancient tradition and to show that ancient opinion was more strongly unitarian than Pendrick implies. 3 As far as we can tell, the only separatist views expressed in antiquity were based on stylistic criteria alone, the inadequacy of which is evident, and a unitarian position is taken for granted 1 The partial listing in REI (1894) 2526-30 (ef Suppl. 1 [1903J 93f on the orator and Suppl. 4 [1924J 33-43 on the papyrus fragments from On Truth) gives 18 Antiphons, some of whom may be the same person.
  • The Agenda of Libanius' Hypotheses to Demosthenes

    The Agenda of Libanius' Hypotheses to Demosthenes

    The Agenda of Libanius’ Hypotheses to Demosthenes Craig A. Gibson F SCHOLARLY INTEREST AND ACTIVITY are an accurate indication, Demosthenes was alive and well in late antiquity. By the time of Libanius (A.D. 314–ca 393),1 readers of this 700-year- Iold classic were well served with secondary treatments of all kinds: rhetorical commentaries and handbooks, biographies of the orator, philological and historical commentaries, special literary studies, lexica to individual speeches (both alphabetical and non-alphabetical), and alphabetical lexica to the Attic orators as a whole. But outside the classrooms of the grammar- ians and rhetoricians, students of Demosthenes had no basic guide to the more than sixty items in this unwieldy corpus. It was to satisfy some such market as this that Libanius com- posed one of his earliest known works: a set of introductions, or “hypotheses” (Ípoy°seiw), to Demosthenes’ speeches.2 1 On Libanius’ life and writings see J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz, Antioch: City and Imperial Administration (Oxford 1972) 1–39. Bibliography for the years 1954–81 may be found in G. Fatouros and T. Krischer, edd., Libanios (Darmstadt 1983) 275–280. 2 Text: R. Foerster, ed., Libanii Opera VIII (Leipzig 1915) 575–681. References to the hypotheses here will append the modern number of the Demosthenes ora- tion, e.g. Hyp. 25.4 [59]. Libanius was not the only ancient scholar to compose hypotheses to Demosthenes. According to the Suda, Posidonius of Olbiopolis in the second century (S 2109, discussed under 2108) and the rhetor Numenius in the first (N 518) also wrote them.
  • Loeb Classical Library

    Loeb Classical Library

    LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY 2017–2018 Founded by JAMES LOEB 1911 Edited by JEFFREY HENDERSON NEW TITLES FRAGMENTARY GALEN REPUBLICAN LATIN Hygiene Ennius EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY IAN JOHNSTON • SANDER M. GOLDBERG Galen of Pergamum (129–?199/216), physician GESINE MANUWALD to the court of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, Quintus Ennius (239–169 BC), widely was a philosopher, scientist, medical historian, regarded as the father of Roman literature, theoretician, and practitioner who wrote on an was instrumental in creating a new Roman astonishing range of subjects and whose literary identity and inspired major impact on later eras rivaled that of Aristotle. developments in Roman religion, His treatise Hygiene, also known social organization, and popular as “On the Preservation of Health” culture. This two-volume edition (De sanitate tuenda), was written of Ennius, which inaugurates during one of Galen’s most prolific the Loeb series Fragmentary periods (170–180) and ranks among Republican Latin, replaces that his most important and influential of Warmington in Remains of Old works, providing a comprehensive Latin, Volume I and offers fresh account of the practice of texts, translations, and annotation preventive medicine that still that are fully current with modern has relevance today. scholarship. L535 Vol. I: Books 1–4 2018 515 pp. L294 Vol. I: Ennius, Testimonia. L536 Vol. II: Books 5–6. Thrasybulus. Epic Fragments 2018 475 pp. On Exercise with a Small Ball L537 Vol. II: Ennius, Dramatic 2018 401 pp. Fragments. Minor Works 2018 450 pp. APULEIUS LIVY Apologia. Florida. De Deo Socratis History of Rome EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY CHRISTOPHER P.
  • Way Back When

    Way Back When

    Way back when The Ancient Greeks invented the field of rhetoric, in which speakers called orators play upon both reason and emotion to persuade their audiences. The Greeks used oratory to inform political and judicial decisions, and also to develop and share new philosophies. Great thinkers presented their ideas in front of audiences, and orators often competed against one another in public contests for cash prizes, fame, and political influence! Greek orators were so well known for their abilities that even after Greece were conquered by Rome, wealthy Romans would send their kids to Greece to learn public speaking. The most famous Greek orators were the Ten Attic Orators, who lived in an around Athens during the 5th and 4th centuries B.C.E. (a time often known as the “Golden Age” of Athens). They were: Antiphon; Andocides; Lysias; Isocrates; Isaeus; Aeschines; Lycurgus; Demosthenes; Hypereides; and Dinarchus. Of these, the four most important were probably the following: Antiphon helped install an oligarchy, or government of the few, in Athens in 411 B.C.E., and was executed for treason when traditional Athenian democracy returned. Isocrates (pictured), who belonged to a school of orators called the Sophists, became rich by teaching rhetoric to wealthy students Lycurgus held a number of public offices in Athens and oversaw both public finances and public morals. Demosthenes overcame a speech disorder to become the most famous orator of all time. He often spoke on behalf of keeping Athens free from the clutches of a conquering king called Philip of Macedon. These fiery speeches were called Philippics.
  • Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the 'Founders' of Rome

    Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the 'Founders' of Rome

    Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the ‘Founders’ of Rome: Depicting Characters in the Roman Antiquities by Beatrice Poletti A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Languages Department of History and Classics University of Alberta © Beatrice Poletti, 2018 ABSTRACT In my thesis, I analyze Dionysius’s presentation of some of the most celebrated characters of Rome’s early past: Aeneas, Romulus, Numa Pompilius, L. Junius Brutus, and M. Furius Camillus. The thesis is composed of Five Chapters, an introduction, and a conclusion. In Chapter 1, I describe the background to Dionysius’s arrival in Rome, focusing on the literary milieu of the capital. In Chapter 2, I discuss Dionysius’s work and the ideas underlying the conception of the Roman Antiquities. In Chapter 3, I examine Dionysius’s account of the Aeneas legend. I deal with the legends of Romulus and Numa, respectively, at Chapters 4.1.1 and 4.2, and 4.1.2 and 4.3. My analysis of the stories of L. Junius Brutus and M. Furius Camillus occupies Chapters 5.1 and 5.2. I have chosen these characters for my study because of their significance in the Romans’ conception of their early past and their association with key events and institutions of Roman history, as well as the political meaning which their figures eventually acquired. By Dionysius’s time, all these characters (with the exception of L. Brutus) had come to embody the qualities and political virtues of the princeps. Aeneas was the progenitor of the Roman race as well as Augustus’s personal ancestor through his adoption into the gens Julia.
  • Loeb Classical Library Philo

    Loeb Classical Library Philo

    Loeb classical library philo Continue Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples and help! This article needs additional quotes to verify. Please help improve this article by adding quotes to reliable sources. Non-sources of materials can be challenged and removed. Find sources: Classical Library - News newspaper book scientist JSTOR (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Volume 170N Greek Collection in the classical library Loeb, revised edition of Volume 6 Latin Collection in the classical library of Loeb, second edition of the 1988 Classical Library (LCL; Named after James Lebe; /loʊb/, German: løːp) is a series of books originally published by Heinemann in London, United Kingdom, today by Harvard University Press, USA, which presents important works of ancient Greek and Latin literature in a way that makes the text accessible to the widest possible audience, presenting the original Greek or Latin text on each left page, and a rather literal translation on the main page. The editor-in-chief is Jeffrey Henderson, a William Goodwin Aurelio professor of Greek language and literature at Boston University. The history of the Classic Library of Loeb was conceived and originally funded by Jewish-German-American banker and philanthropist James Loeb (1867-1933). The first volumes were edited by Thomas Ethelbert Page, W. H. D. Rouse and Edward Capps and published by William Hinemann (London) in 1912, already in their distinctive (green for Greek text) and red (for Latin) hardcover bindings. Since then, dozens of new titles have been added, and the earliest translations have been revised several times. In recent years this has included the removal of bowdlerization from previous editions, which often reversed the sex of subjects of romantic interest to hide homosexual references or (in the case of early editions of Daphnis Longus and Chloe) translated sexually explicit excerpts from ancient Greek into Latin rather than English.