DOCSLIB.ORG

Greek Comic Fragments A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Classical Review VOLUME 50 NO. 1 2000 WEST’S ILIAD M. L. W (ed.): Homeri Ilias. Volumen prius rhapsodias I–XII continens (Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana). Pp. lxii + 372. Stuttgart and Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1998. Cased, £64.10 (Paper, £21.95). ISBN: 3-519-01430-0 (3-519- 01431-9 pbk). A better edition of the Iliad has long been needed. The readings of the OCT, which everyone trusts, depend more on Aristarchus’ recommendations than on MS tradition; it also prints without brackets dozens of lines introduced from parallel passages (‘concordance-interpolations’). H. van Thiel’s Iliad (Hildesheim, 1996), based on a judicious selection of medieval codices and many new scraps of ancient MSS (‘papyri’), exhibits the same peculiarities as his Odyssey (see Gnomon 66 [1994], 289–95). Those of West’s edition obtrude less, since W. aims both to remove weakly attested lines and to report the evidence from ancient scholarship. That he has not fully succeeded in either respect must not diminish our gratitude for the immense labour, knowledge, and text-critical acumen behind this edition. W. ’s Praefatio explains the transmission, largely rightly (but he thinks Homer wrote). Following van der Valk, he holds that Zenodotus was arbitrary and the majority of Aristarchus’ unique readings are wrong (p. 7); van Thiel explains their unacceptability differently, discounting them as marginal parallels (ZPE 115 [1997], 13–36). W. has gathered a mass of testimonia. As for MSS, he includes 840 (sic!) new Oxyrhynchus papyri; hence his numeration differs from van Thiel’s (his choice of codices and sigla are almost identical). The unity of the Roman and medieval vulgate becomes ever clearer. W.’s account of orthography may raise more hackles, but much of what he does is to report the progress of linguistics. One can disagree, not about the sequence of phonetic changes, but where Homer falls in relation to them; here a statistical approach helps, as does Milman Parry’s fundamental article ‘The Homeric Language as the Language of an Oral Poetry’ (HSCP 43 [1932], 1–50). But W. neglects Parry’s basic tenet that oral singers modernize their diction up to the point where metre prevents it, e.g. in diectasis. Hence the many inconsistencies of W.’s editing; hence his trust in ancient scholars who, unaware of oral poetry, contradict and in my view modify the paradosis. Thus W. prefers forms like τατι to the MSS’ τοτι, and prints βοξυα rather than the transmitted βψξυα, where the MSS support Parry’s principle. Puzzled (p. xxxiii) by the MSS’ preference for ξαιευ0ψτα over -ψτα, W.misses how the α remains when the root contains that sound (Parry, art. cit. 34). As W.knows, the alphabet of our Homer is neither the Ionic one in which the epics © Oxford University Press, 2000 Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Basel Library, on 10 Jul 2017 at 16:48:28, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1093/cr/50.1.12 2 were first written down, nor the Attic one without θ and ψ in which they were partly transmitted; in both E was used for ε and O for ο, written ει and οφ from c. 400. W. rightly abolishes the fourth-century use of εφ for εο with synizesis (but, alas, adds no synizesis-marks). Pace Aristarchus, he retains many augments; but Parry’s principle suggests that we should also restore them where possible—perhaps even against Hermann’s Bridge (as this remains unbroken only if we trust readings unique to Aristarchus, one wonders whether the latter built it). W. restores e.g. εµλε,once ΕΜΛΕ, but tolerates τυλει, ησευο, γρθταξ (1.570), λαυαν ωαυο (5.425) or δ# %δε (5.846). If there is no rule, then one should follow the MSS, but W. does not do that either. He puts ε%δθ for the past of ο&δα, because the MSS’ 'δθ is preceded by a hiatus, as if it had been unaugmented *ε(δθ (p. xxxiii); but such forms reflect diectasis with an early scriptio plena, e.g. υ0δ(ε) )*δθ. Again, W. reads ε+πµο-θξ (p. xxiv), but not `υσε-δθΚ or λϊµοΚ for λο1µοΚ (Myc. ko-wi-ro-); yet all entail contraction across a lost . Again, he prefers υερξθυοΚ (Aristarchus) to -ειυοΚ (the MSS), whereas -θ- is usual before e but -ει- before ο. For consistency, he would need to restore *2οΚ for unmetrical 3ψΚ, which he keeps (Parry’s principle requires εοΚ). He restores the old gen. *-οο where formulae once had it, putting e.g. 4Ιζ(υοο CC- rather than unmetrical 4Ιζ(υοφ; he does not consider whether Homer sang 4Ιζιυοφ,justas*7ο became 7οφ (2.325). Likewise one may reinterpret )πιδθν(οφ 8λσφεξυοΚ as )πιδθνιοφ λσφεξυοΚ,not-(οο λσ- (9.64), or ΜΦΛΟΟΣΗΟΧ (once *ΜφλεσηοΚ)as ΜφλοφσηοΚ. Since W.expels the article, e.g. at 3.18, he is reduced to daggering 1.11. 3νΚ cannot be Doric and should not have a rough breathing (p. xvii); there are no other Doric forms, and it had a psilosis, of Asiatic Aeolic origin, which persisted when the tradition passed to Ionic singers, just as they retained 4ννεΚ rather than replace it with *νεΚ. W. should have dared to print acc. υσ(Κ (p. xxxvi). Pace p. xxvii, Aristarchus was inconsistent in adding ξ-mobile to pluperfects, and one should not (cf. van Thiel, art. cit. 33). W.’s text, nicely presented save that the apparatus often spills over the page, rightly runs the individual books together. He defies all known MSS in bracketing some 68 verses (not to mention the whole Doloneia): 2.491–2, 525–6, 535, 547–51 (‘Attic’—but see M. Haslam in I. Morris and B. Powell [edd.], New Companion to Homer, 83), 674, 703, 742–4; 3.18–20, 144; 4.60–1, 159; 5.398–402, 487–9, 887; 6.334, 388; 7.135, 196–9, 315, 334–5 (‘Attic’), 371; 8.73–4, 185, 199, 421–4, 528, 535–8 (this is in ring-composition!), 557 (but 558 is ill attested and should go); 9.320, 416, 523; 10.147 (if absence from ‘rr’ damns a verse, the recentiores involved should be named and used elsewhere), 409–11; 11.540–2; 12.6, 14, 372, 426, 449. Inattentive readers will be misled by how W.’s brackets fail to distinguish such speculations (which are not necessarily wrong, merely hard to prove) from weakly attested lines, as Aristarchus deployed athetesis alongside omission. Yet W. wrongly retains c. 25 weakly attested verses: 1.358 (interpolated from 18.36), 375 (from 16); 2.62 (from 25), 2.839 (from 12.97); 3.272 (from 19.253), 319 (from 297, to supply a verb of speaking), 343 (from 4.80); 4.196–7 (from 206–7: Talthybius saw the wounding, and so does not need to be told as Machaon does), 450 (from 8.64), 461 (from 503); 5.378 (added to supply Aeneas’ name), 444 (from 16.711), 532 (from 15.564); 6.283 (to supply an object); 7.174 (from 119), 326 (from 367), 385 (from 327), 419–20 (a variant for 418, but botched, as W.’s conjecture to 420 acknowledges); 8.244 (from 15.376, cf. van Thiel), 380 (from 13.832); 9.95 (from 7.367), 695 (from 30); 11.801 (from 16.43). W.fails to signal that mechanical error probably caused omission at 1.486, 493; 2.141, Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Basel Library, on 10 Jul 2017 at 16:48:28, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1093/cr/50.1.12 3 644, 812; 4.55, 149–50, 484; 5.584, 669–70, 673; 8.263–5, 410, 429–30, 547; 9.44, 120; 11.215. As for choice of readings, W. standardizes some variations between repeated passages, which, I believe, reflect oral composition: thus he makes 4.205 conform to 195; 5.538 to 17.518; 5.757 to 872; 5.797 to 2.389; 5.883 to 458; 6.96 to 277; 8.116 to 137; 8.339 to 22.230; 8.353 to 202; 9.137 to 279; 9.151 to 293; 10.336 to 347. He adopts many readings unique to ancient scholarly editions, not all of which can be trusted: 1.124 (cf. The Iliad: A Commentary IV, 275), 142 = 309, 241, 424, 522; 2.144 (@Κ fits in Philodemus), 164, 264, 436, 579; 3.206 (read τε14), 362; 4.17 (αAυψΚ), 426, 527; 5.403, 542, 549, 656; 6.112, 266; 7.272; 8.349; 9.88, 132 = 274 (bis), 317, 393, 397, 564 (read λµα14 7 υε), 657; 10.54 (from 11.805), 169, 291, 341; 11.146, 314, 424, 564; 12.67, 465 (cf. op. cit. 83). I query the modern conjectures adopted at 1.453, 549; 3.22, etc., read βιβξυα (cf. op. cit. 260 and van Thiel, art. cit. 32 n. 39); 4.132 (I do not understand W.’s emendation); 11.413. Often the MS variants chosen are palmary (e.g. 2.210), but not always: 1.574, read τζ4; 1.581, ζBσυαυοΚ; 2.36, νεµµεξ; 2.204, 218; 2.462, 2ηαµµνεξαι; 801; 3.188; 3.295, 2ζφττ0νεξοι; 3.368, 393, 434; 3.442, omit η4; 5.272; 5.387, read υσιτ-; 5.567 (bis), 603; 6.226, ηγετι; 6.285, ζσBξ4 2υBσποφ; 6.484; 7.259, 284; 8.163; 9.58, 314, 383; 10.493, 2νβα(ξοξυεΚ; 10.579, where P.
Recommended publications
  • Die Quellen Für Die Nachrichten Der Alten Historiker Über Die Diadochenkämpfe Bis Zum Tode Des Eumenes Und Der Olympias

    Die Quellen Für Die Nachrichten Der Alten Historiker Über Die Diadochenkämpfe Bis Zum Tode Des Eumenes Und Der Olympias

    XIX. Die quellen für die nachrichten der alten historiker über die Diadochenkämpfe bis zum tode des Eumenes und der Olympias. (S. oben μ. 305). II. 1. Die unruhen in Babylon. — Erste vertheilung der satrapien. Ueber die wirren in Babylon unmittelbar nacb Alexanders tode haben wir einen ausführlichen bericht nur von Curtius (X 6—10) und Justin (XIII 1—4). Vergleicht man zunächst die ansichten und vorschlage der feldherrn über die thronfolg·e, so stellt sich ein merkwürdiges verhältniss heraus. Uebergangen sind bei Justin Nearclius, Aristonus und Python. Was Justin ferner unter Melea- gers namen anführt, findet sich bei Curtius zum theil als Ptole- maeus ansiebt, zum theil als die Nearcbs. Es kommt hinzu, dass Meleagers worte bei Justin einen innereu Widerspruch tragen. Denn zuerst eifert Meleager ganz wie Nearclius bei Curtius dagegen, dass man auf einen könig warten solle, der erst noch geboren werden müsse, obgleich doch thronerben da wären *). Er stellt es dann frei, den söhn der Barsine, wie Nearclius bei Curtius, oder Arrhidaeus zu wählen. Weiterhin führt Meleager bei Justin als 1) JustÌD 2, 6 ñeque expectandum dum reges nascerentur, cum iam genitis uti licer et. Curt. 6, 11 expectari nondum ortum regem et qui iam sit, praeter iri, nec animis Macedonum convenire nec tempori rerum. Brought to you by | Brown University Rockefeller Library Authenticated | 128.148.252.35 Download Date | 6/12/14 11:56 PM Zur zeit der Diadoclieu. 489 jrruud zur Verwerfung des solines der Roxane seine persische ab- kunft an, oline dabei zu bedenken, dass dieser grund ebenso gegen den sobn der Barsine spricht.
  • HOMERIC-ILIAD.Pdf

    HOMERIC-ILIAD.Pdf

    Homeric Iliad Translated by Samuel Butler Revised by Soo-Young Kim, Kelly McCray, Gregory Nagy, and Timothy Power Contents Rhapsody 1 Rhapsody 2 Rhapsody 3 Rhapsody 4 Rhapsody 5 Rhapsody 6 Rhapsody 7 Rhapsody 8 Rhapsody 9 Rhapsody 10 Rhapsody 11 Rhapsody 12 Rhapsody 13 Rhapsody 14 Rhapsody 15 Rhapsody 16 Rhapsody 17 Rhapsody 18 Rhapsody 19 Rhapsody 20 Rhapsody 21 Rhapsody 22 Rhapsody 23 Rhapsody 24 Homeric Iliad Rhapsody 1 Translated by Samuel Butler Revised by Soo-Young Kim, Kelly McCray, Gregory Nagy, and Timothy Power [1] Anger [mēnis], goddess, sing it, of Achilles, son of Peleus— 2 disastrous [oulomenē] anger that made countless pains [algea] for the Achaeans, 3 and many steadfast lives [psūkhai] it drove down to Hādēs, 4 heroes’ lives, but their bodies it made prizes for dogs [5] and for all birds, and the Will of Zeus was reaching its fulfillment [telos]— 6 sing starting from the point where the two—I now see it—first had a falling out, engaging in strife [eris], 7 I mean, [Agamemnon] the son of Atreus, lord of men, and radiant Achilles. 8 So, which one of the gods was it who impelled the two to fight with each other in strife [eris]? 9 It was [Apollo] the son of Leto and of Zeus. For he [= Apollo], infuriated at the king [= Agamemnon], [10] caused an evil disease to arise throughout the mass of warriors, and the people were getting destroyed, because the son of Atreus had dishonored Khrysēs his priest. Now Khrysēs had come to the ships of the Achaeans to free his daughter, and had brought with him a great ransom [apoina]: moreover he bore in his hand the scepter of Apollo wreathed with a suppliant’s wreath [15] and he besought the Achaeans, but most of all the two sons of Atreus, who were their chiefs.
  • The History of Egypt Under the Ptolemies

    The History of Egypt Under the Ptolemies

    UC-NRLF $C lb EbE THE HISTORY OF EGYPT THE PTOLEMIES. BY SAMUEL SHARPE. LONDON: EDWARD MOXON, DOVER STREET. 1838. 65 Printed by Arthur Taylor, Coleman Street. TO THE READER. The Author has given neither the arguments nor the whole of the authorities on which the sketch of the earlier history in the Introduction rests, as it would have had too much of the dryness of an antiquarian enquiry, and as he has already published them in his Early History of Egypt. In the rest of the book he has in every case pointed out in the margin the sources from which he has drawn his information. » Canonbury, 12th November, 1838. Works published by the same Author. The EARLY HISTORY of EGYPT, from the Old Testament, Herodotus, Manetho, and the Hieroglyphieal Inscriptions. EGYPTIAN INSCRIPTIONS, from the British Museum and other sources. Sixty Plates in folio. Rudiments of a VOCABULARY of EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS. M451 42 ERRATA. Page 103, line 23, for Syria read Macedonia. Page 104, line 4, for Syrians read Macedonians. CONTENTS. Introduction. Abraham : shepherd kings : Joseph : kings of Thebes : era ofMenophres, exodus of the Jews, Rameses the Great, buildings, conquests, popu- lation, mines: Shishank, B.C. 970: Solomon: kings of Tanis : Bocchoris of Sais : kings of Ethiopia, B. c. 730 .- kings ofSais : Africa is sailed round, Greek mercenaries and settlers, Solon and Pythagoras : Persian conquest, B.C. 525 .- Inarus rebels : Herodotus and Hellanicus : Amyrtaus, Nectanebo : Eudoxus, Chrysippus, and Plato : Alexander the Great : oasis of Ammon, native judges,
  • The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks

    The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks

    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2017 The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Eyal Meyer University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons Recommended Citation Meyer, Eyal, "The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks" (2017). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2473. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Abstract This dissertation explores the extent to which Persian policies in the western satrapies originated from the provincial capitals in the Anatolian periphery rather than from the royal centers in the Persian heartland in the fifth ec ntury BC. I begin by establishing that the Persian administrative apparatus was a product of a grand reform initiated by Darius I, which was aimed at producing a more uniform and centralized administrative infrastructure. In the following chapter I show that the provincial administration was embedded with chancellors, scribes, secretaries and military personnel of royal status and that the satrapies were periodically inspected by the Persian King or his loyal agents, which allowed to central authorities to monitory the provinces. In chapter three I delineate the extent of satrapal authority, responsibility and resources, and conclude that the satraps were supplied with considerable resources which enabled to fulfill the duties of their office. After the power dynamic between the Great Persian King and his provincial governors and the nature of the office of satrap has been analyzed, I begin a diachronic scrutiny of Greco-Persian interactions in the fifth century BC.
  • A History of Cynicism

    A History of Cynicism

    A HISTORY OF CYNICISM Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com A HISTORY OF CYNICISM From Diogenes to the 6th Century A.D. by DONALD R. DUDLEY F,llow of St. John's College, Cambrid1e Htmy Fellow at Yale University firl mll METHUEN & CO. LTD. LONDON 36 Essex Street, Strand, W.C.2 Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com First published in 1937 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com PREFACE THE research of which this book is the outcome was mainly carried out at St. John's College, Cambridge, Yale University, and Edinburgh University. In the help so generously given to my work I have been no less fortunate than in the scenes in which it was pursued. I am much indebted for criticism and advice to Professor M. Rostovtseff and Professor E. R. Goodonough of Yale, to Professor A. E. Taylor of Edinburgh, to Professor F. M. Cornford of Cambridge, to Professor J. L. Stocks of Liverpool, and to Dr. W. H. Semple of Reading. I should also like to thank the electors of the Henry Fund for enabling me to visit the United States, and the College Council of St. John's for electing me to a Research Fellowship. Finally, to• the unfailing interest, advice and encouragement of Mr. M. P. Charlesworth of St. John's I owe an especial debt which I can hardly hope to repay. These acknowledgements do not exhaust the list of my obligations ; but I hope that other kindnesses have been acknowledged either in the text or privately.
  • Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards

    Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards

    MARATHON 2,500 YEARS EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SUPPLEMENT 124 DIRECTOR & GENERAL EDITOR: JOHN NORTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLICATIONS: RICHARD SIMPSON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARATHON CONFERENCE 2010 EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 2013 The cover image shows Persian warriors at Ishtar Gate, from before the fourth century BC. Pergamon Museum/Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin. Photo Mohammed Shamma (2003). Used under CC‐BY terms. All rights reserved. This PDF edition published in 2019 First published in print in 2013 This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. More information regarding CC licenses is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Available to download free at http://www.humanities-digital-library.org ISBN: 978-1-905670-81-9 (2019 PDF edition) DOI: 10.14296/1019.9781905670819 ISBN: 978-1-905670-52-9 (2013 paperback edition) ©2013 Institute of Classical Studies, University of London The right of contributors to be identified as the authors of the work published here has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Designed and typeset at the Institute of Classical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory note 1 P. J. Rhodes The battle of Marathon and modern scholarship 3 Christopher Pelling Herodotus’ Marathon 23 Peter Krentz Marathon and the development of the exclusive hoplite phalanx 35 Andrej Petrovic The battle of Marathon in pre-Herodotean sources: on Marathon verse-inscriptions (IG I3 503/504; Seg Lvi 430) 45 V.
  • Sons and Fathers in the Catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233

    Sons and Fathers in the Catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233

    Sons and fathers in the catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233 ANNETTE HARDER University of Groningen [email protected] 1. Generations of heroes The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius brings emphatically to the attention of its readers the distinction between the generation of the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War in the next genera- tion. Apollonius initially highlights this emphasis in the episode of the Argonauts’ departure, when the baby Achilles is watching them, at AR 1.557-5581 σὺν καί οἱ (sc. Chiron) παράκοιτις ἐπωλένιον φορέουσα | Πηλείδην Ἀχιλῆα, φίλωι δειδίσκετο πατρί (“and with him his wife, hold- ing Peleus’ son Achilles in her arms, showed him to his dear father”)2; he does so again in 4.866-879, which describes Thetis and Achilles as a baby. Accordingly, several scholars have focused on the ways in which 1 — On this marker of the generations see also Klooster 2014, 527. 2 — All translations of Apollonius are by Race 2008. EuGeStA - n°9 - 2019 2 ANNETTE HARDER Apollonius has avoided anachronisms by carefully distinguishing between the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War3. More specifically Jacqueline Klooster (2014, 521-530), in discussing the treatment of time in the Argonautica, distinguishes four periods of time to which Apollonius refers: first, the time before the Argo sailed, from the beginning of the cosmos (featured in the song of Orpheus in AR 1.496-511); second, the time of its sailing (i.e. the time of the epic’s setting); third, the past after the Argo sailed and fourth the present inhab- ited by the narrator (both hinted at by numerous allusions and aitia).
  • Dares Phrygius' De Excidio Trojae Historia: Philological Commentary and Translation

    Dares Phrygius' De Excidio Trojae Historia: Philological Commentary and Translation

    Faculteit Letteren & Wijsbegeerte Dares Phrygius' De Excidio Trojae Historia: Philological Commentary and Translation Jonathan Cornil Scriptie voorgedragen tot het bekomen van de graad van Master in de Taal- en letterkunde (Latijn – Engels) 2011-2012 Promotor: Prof. Dr. W. Verbaal ii Table of Contents Table of Contents iii Foreword v Introduction vii Chapter I. De Excidio Trojae Historia: Philological and Historical Comments 1 A. Dares and His Historia: Shrouded in Mystery 2 1. Who Was ‘Dares the Phrygian’? 2 2. The Role of Cornelius Nepos 6 3. Time of Origin and Literary Environment 9 4. Analysing the Formal Characteristics 11 B. Dares as an Example of ‘Rewriting’ 15 1. Homeric Criticism and the Trojan Legacy in the Middle Ages 15 2. Dares’ Problematic Connection with Dictys Cretensis 20 3. Comments on the ‘Lost Greek Original’ 27 4. Conclusion 31 Chapter II. Translations 33 A. Translating Dares: Frustra Laborat, Qui Omnibus Placere Studet 34 1. Investigating DETH’s Style 34 2. My Own Translations: a Brief Comparison 39 3. A Concise Analysis of R.M. Frazer’s Translation 42 B. Translation I 50 C. Translation II 73 D. Notes 94 Bibliography 95 Appendix: the Latin DETH 99 iii iv Foreword About two years ago, I happened to be researching Cornelius Nepos’ biography of Miltiades as part of an assignment for a class devoted to the study of translating Greek and Latin texts. After heaping together everything I could find about him in the library, I came to the conclusion that I still needed more information. So I decided to embrace my identity as a loyal member of the ‘Internet generation’ and began my virtual journey through the World Wide Web in search of articles on Nepos.
  • New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature

    New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature

    PA 3061 PI 3 9005 0452 9776 3 ■P'' III New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS London Edinburgh Glasgow Copenhagen New York Toronto Melbourne Cape Town Bombay Calcutta Madras Shanghai HUMPHREY MILFORD Publisher to the University (2445) 3{ew Chapters in the History of Greek Literature RECENT DISCOVERIES IN GREEK POETRY AND PROSE OF THE FOURTH AND FOLLOWING CENTURIES B.C. EDITED BY J. U. POWELL and E. A. BARBER OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1921 PREFACE When Mr. Evelyn Abbott wrote with truth in his glowing preface to Hellenica (1879), 'We have not done with the Hellenes yet . ; we have not entered into full possession of the inheritance bequeathed to us', he had in his mind, as he goes on to show, the significance of Greek history and literature, rather than additions to our knowledge due to the discovery of new texts. But although some years were to elapse, his words in another sense have come true. Twelve years in 1 1 a new of Greek afterwards, 89 , epoch scholarship opened, not only in this country, but in others ; for in that year Professor Mahaffy published the first part of the Petrie Papyri which Professor Flinders Petrie had discovered, containing parts of the Phaedo of Plato and of the Antiope of Euripides, with fragments of Homer, and other pieces ; while the Trustees of the British Museum published Aristotle's ' Athenian Con stitution', the Mimes of Herondas, who had been hitherto little more than a name, and part of a new speech by Hyperides. Other discoveries followed ; six years later, in 1897, the British Museum pub lished the Odes of Bacchylides, and Messrs.
  • Astrocladistics of the Jovian Trojan Swarms

    Astrocladistics of the Jovian Trojan Swarms

    MNRAS 000,1–26 (2020) Preprint 23 March 2021 Compiled using MNRAS LATEX style file v3.0 Astrocladistics of the Jovian Trojan Swarms Timothy R. Holt,1,2¢ Jonathan Horner,1 David Nesvorný,2 Rachel King,1 Marcel Popescu,3 Brad D. Carter,1 and Christopher C. E. Tylor,1 1Centre for Astrophysics, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia 2Department of Space Studies, Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, CO. USA. 3Astronomical Institute of the Romanian Academy, Bucharest, Romania. Accepted XXX. Received YYY; in original form ZZZ ABSTRACT The Jovian Trojans are two swarms of small objects that share Jupiter’s orbit, clustered around the leading and trailing Lagrange points, L4 and L5. In this work, we investigate the Jovian Trojan population using the technique of astrocladistics, an adaptation of the ‘tree of life’ approach used in biology. We combine colour data from WISE, SDSS, Gaia DR2 and MOVIS surveys with knowledge of the physical and orbital characteristics of the Trojans, to generate a classification tree composed of clans with distinctive characteristics. We identify 48 clans, indicating groups of objects that possibly share a common origin. Amongst these are several that contain members of the known collisional families, though our work identifies subtleties in that classification that bear future investigation. Our clans are often broken into subclans, and most can be grouped into 10 superclans, reflecting the hierarchical nature of the population. Outcomes from this project include the identification of several high priority objects for additional observations and as well as providing context for the objects to be visited by the forthcoming Lucy mission.
  • The Gospel of Thomas and Plato

    The Gospel of Thomas and Plato

    The Gospel of Thomas and Plato Ivan Miroshnikov - 978-90-04-36729-6 Downloaded from Brill.com02/10/2020 03:36:56PM via University of Helsinki Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies Editors Johannes van Oort Einar Thomassen Editorial Board J.D. Beduhn – D.M. Burns – A.D. Deconick W.-P. Funk – I. Gardner – S.N.C. Lieu A. Marjanen – L. Painchaud – N.A. Pedersen T. Rasimus – S.G. Richter – M. Scopello J.D. Turner – G. Wurst volume 93 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/nhms Ivan Miroshnikov - 978-90-04-36729-6 Downloaded from Brill.com02/10/2020 03:36:56PM via University of Helsinki The Gospel of Thomas and Plato A Study of the Impact of Platonism on the “Fifth Gospel” By Ivan Miroshnikov LEIDEN | BOSTON Ivan Miroshnikov - 978-90-04-36729-6 Downloaded from Brill.com02/10/2020 03:36:56PM via University of Helsinki This title is published in Open Access with the support of the University of Helsinki Library. This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided no alterations are made and the original author(s) and source are credited. Further information and the complete license text can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The terms of the CC license apply only to the original material. The use of material from other sources (indicated by a reference) such as diagrams, illustrations, photos and text samples may require further permission from the respective copyright holder.
  • INQUIRY INYO the PURCHASING POWER OP the DRACHMA in ANCIENT Grebci

    INQUIRY INYO the PURCHASING POWER OP the DRACHMA in ANCIENT Grebci

    INQUIRY INYO THE PURCHASING POWER OP THE DRACHMA IN ANCIENT GREBCi . THE PURPOSE OP DETERMINING, IP POSSIBLE, THE MATERIAL CONDITIONS HCH PREVAILED IN ATHENS DURING HER EXISTENCE AS AN INDEPENDENT STA' ProQuest Number: 13850489 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 13850489 Published by ProQuest LLC(2019). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 ?RJSFACE» I have derived my information from the following sources: Aeschines - Against Timarchus; Against Ctesiphon. Andocides - Concerning the Mysteries. Pseudo—Andocides - Against Alcihiades. Aristophanes - Acharnians; Knights; Clouds; Wasps; Peace; Birds; Lysistrata; Thesmophoriazusae; Frogs; Ecclesiazusae; P lutus. Aristotle - Constitution of Athens; Rhetoric; Politics. Pseudo-Aristotle - Oeconomica. Athenaeus - The Deipnosophists. ■ Demosthenes - Speeches, XIV;XVIII;XXI;XXII;XXVII;XXVIII;XXIX;XXX;XXXI XXXIV; XXXV; XXXVI; XXXVII; XL; XLI; XLII; XLV; L; LIII; LIX. Diogenes Laertius - Lives of the Philosophers. Harpocration - Lexicon to the Ten Orators. ' Herodas - Mimes. Herodotus - History. Hesychius - Lexicon. Isaeus - Speeches, II;III;IV;V;VI;VII;VI1I;X;XI. Isocrates - Concerning the Team of Horses; Antidosis. Lucian - Dialogues of Courtesans. Lycurgus - Against Leocrates. Lysias - Speeches, III;XIV;XVT;XVII;XIX;XXIV;XXVI;XXXII.