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

Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners. By Clyde Pharr, Ph.D. (Yale), Professor of Greek in South-Western Presbyterian University. One vol. Octavo. Pp. xlii + 391. Two maps, ten plates, and numerous woodcuts. Boston, New York, Chicago: D. C. Heath and Co.; London: G. G. Harrap and Co. 8s. 6d. net.

Frank Carter

The Classical Review / Volume 36 / Issue 1-2 / February 1922, pp 24 - 25 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00015778, Published online: 27 October 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00015778

How to cite this article: Frank Carter (1922). The Classical Review, 36, pp 24-25 doi:10.1017/S0009840X00015778

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 130.126.162.126 on 14 Mar 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW that the pre-Doric tradition was based stone, and hence, on his view, a later on thicker timber than the pre-Ionic; addition. This reasoning ignores the and it is unfortunate that he entirely fact that all the chief carved members gnores Thermon. Moreover, in his both of ' Ceres ' and of the ' Basilica' anxiety to discredit the features of are of this softer stone; it also ignores Doric which suggest wooden originals, Koldewey's demonstration that the he overrates the evidence for the archaic structure of this frieze is on that canti- omission of triglyphs. He writes lever principle, which is repeated in the (p. 197): ' There is pretty clear evidence Propylaea of Mnesicles. Koldewey con- that some early entablatures had no siders and rejects the view that the triglyphs on the frieze (Cadacchio on frieze has been tampered with. Corfu, Temple in Syracuse, "Temple A fact that the manuscript was not of Ceres " at Paestum), and it is quite revised by the author should not be for- conceivable that the motive first ap- gotten, but one or two omissions must be peared as a painted decorative motive mentioned. The prehistoric Thessalian in the friezes.' It must be noted that buildings are ignored, except for an he is arguing not for the total omission allusion, unintelligible to the ordinary of the frieze member (' in Doric the reader, to ' some early megarons such frieze is seldom, if ever, omitted,'p. 294), as that of Dimini' (p. 203), but this but for the use of a smooth frieze with- slip would no doubt have been rectified. out triglyphs. For this the evidence More serious is Warren's silence about is far from clear. It is now known that the evidence upsetting the date of the Cadacchio had no frieze member at all Olympian Heraeum. (Warren seems to follow Railton's For the illustrations the editor is obsolete restoration); while for the chiefly responsible. They are mostly Temple at Syracuse there is no evidence good, but one or two are open to except the absence of regulae and the criticism. In particular, it is difficult close spacing of the columns. It is to believe that Warren would have possible that at Syracuse, as at passed Biihlmann's restoration of the Cadacchio, there was no frieze member Tiryns megaron (Fig. 37). Its pseudo- at all (abnormally close spacing makes Doric frieze is an embodiment of the difficulties similar to those of abnormally views which he most disliked. Nor wide spacing); or the intercolumnar should Fig. 58, with its obsolete ground- triglyphs may have been omitted. plans, have been borrowed from For the ' Temple of Ceres' Warren Anderson and Spiers. But the illus- argues partly from the absence of trations prepared under Warren's own regulae, but chiefly from the fact that direction (such as Figs. 86 and 94) are the triglyphs are inserted slabs of softer excellent. D. S. ROBERTSON.

HOMERIC GREEK: A BOOK FOR BEGINNERS. Homeric Greek: A Book for Beginners. Greek Book' on the basis of Homeric By CLYDE PHARR, Ph.D. (Yale), rather than Attic Greek. Dr. Pharr is Professor of Greek in South-Western a real enthusiast, and such are always Presbyterian University. One vol. pleasant reading. Octavo. Pp. xlii + 391. Two maps, The book consists of three parts: ten plates, and numerous woodcuts. (1) In the introduction (pp. xiii-xlii) Boston, New York, Chicago: D. C. Dr. Pharr states his case in favour of Heath and Co.; London: G. G. Homeric, as against Attic, Greek as a Harrap and Co. 8s. 6d. net. basic study ; (2) pp. 1-189 contain an •THIS is an interesting book. It is not, edition of Iliad I., with vocabularies as the title at first suggests, a study of and exercises; (3) the remainder of Homeric phraseology from a literary the book contains a grammar and a standpoint (on which, by the way, an vocabulary. interesting treatise might be written), It is naturally the introductory but an attempt to provide a ' First polemic that first arrests attention. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW There is much to be said for Dr. Pharr's The exercises for translation from contention. To begin Greek with English are a good and essential feature Homer has the following obvious ad- of the book. Though they might be vantages : We are in a world of simple perhaps improved. sentences, and we are able to plunge In the final portion of the book, at once into first-rate literature. Dr. Grammar, there is much to note. We Pharr further urges (1) that the irregu- must be content with a few main points. larities of formation in Homeric Greek P. 217 : a wrong account is given of are fewer than in Attic, and that Attic the formation of earaoros. The general forms are explicable from Homeric, principles of ablaut, of the thematic not vice versa; (2) that the vocabulary vowel (for which a convenient symbol acquired is better as an introduction to is used), and of sonant consonants, Greek literature generally. are correctly stated (pp. 220, 221) ; but If the alternative is (as Dr. Pharr the student is not told in what parts of seems to imply for American schools) the verb the different stems occur. In between Homer and dreary parasangs the note on p. 221 the origin of of Anabasis, let us have Homer by all fievdos, TtkvQos, is incorrectly stated. means. Fortunately it is not so. But it In § 668 it should have been stated may be questioned whether Iliad I.-VI. that nominative masculines in a are is the best portion to choose. Would really vocative. In § 800 add that the not Odyssey IX.-XII. (or, if this be too short-vowel subjunctive is limited to short, VI.-XI I.) prove a more interest- non-thematic tenses, and invariable in ing First Greek Book ? But there is these. In the syntax, case-usages would much to be said in favour of the estab- be better treated under the separate lished study of Attic. headings of the absorbed cases; there In the second part of the book the is no need to darken counsel by teach- beginner, after fourteen preliminary ing a boy that ev and.o-vv govern the lessons, embarks on the Iliad. The anno- same case. No mention occurs of the tation is very complete, leaving in fact vague-local genitive, or of the internal little to the initiative of the teacher. It accusative except under the mislead- would seem hardly necessary to reprint ing term ' cognate.' Other omissions at length quite so much of the O.T.; occur. The use of the article as rela- and Dr. Pharr's zeal for colloquial vigour tive and its limitations do not seem to betrays him at times into a lack of be explained, nor the generalising re. dignity in translation. ' But shut up Some of these omissions may be, in a and sit down ' (1. 565) is not precisely book for beginners, intentional. a model for students. There are some In conclusion, we may say that Dr. other points in the commentary that Pharr's book, in spite of minor imper- might be modified with advantage. In fections, does really represent a praise- 1.28 fir/ ov xpaio-fiT) should be explained. worthy attempt at a new method, and A long note on 115 might be omitted anyone teaching Greek on the ' epic with advantage, and much of that on system ' would find it, not indeed in- 246. On 307 it would be truer to say dispensable, but a saver of much labour. that the patronymic is in Homer vir- Nor must we omit a word of praise tually a surname. More might be said for the illustrations, whose charm is in criticism of details; but it has already not diminished by their fascinating been indicated that Dr. Pharr's notes err irrelevance. chiefly in the direction of superfluity. FRANK CARTER.

LATIN PHONETICS. Manuel de Phonetique latine. Par A. C. logy. Another Frenchman, to whom JURET, Professeur a l'Universite' this book is dedicated, the veteran Pro- 3e Strasbourg. Pp. 390. Paris: fessor L. Havet, is one of the few Librairie Hachette, 1921. persons who are as familiar with Com- A FRENCHMAN, Professor Meillet, now parative Philology as with Latin Litera- holds the throne of Comparative Philo- ture (and these are only two of the