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 Kaibel on the Antigone of Sophocles De Sophoclis Antigona, scripsit Georgius Kaibel. Göttingen. 1897. Pp. 2–27. Lewis Campbell The Classical Review / Volume 11 / Issue 09 / December 1897, pp 456 - 456 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00052008, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00052008 How to cite this article: Lewis Campbell (1897). The Classical Review, 11, pp 456-456 doi:10.1017/ S0009840X00052008 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 130.132.123.28 on 29 Jun 2015 456 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 894 iam iam non domus accipiet te laeta, as p. 72 when Bockemiiller alone is said to neque wxor | optima nee dulcis occwrrent defend suavis although Lotze and Grasburger oscula nati insists that wxor goes with had also retained it. On page 129 Heinze accipiet rather than with occurret (occwrrent), says verse 527 et membratim vitalem is the because domus is distributed into wxor and only verse in Lucretius where a word ends nati may well refrain from aesthetic critic- after two spondees which begin the line; ism. But no book of Lucretius has ever but 4, 1078 nee constat quid satisfies the been edited with the thoroughness which condition, which should have been expressed Heinze has shown, and for the understand- in different terms. ing of the poet little remains to be done. The editions which are to follow in this Naturally in a commentary of such extent series will be eagerly expected. It is there are many statements of opinion with fortunate for classical scholarship that there which readers will join issue, and all will is at least one country in the world where not always agree with Heinze in his inter- elaborate commentaries can find a publisher. pretations. There are remarkably few mis- prints, as for instance ne for ve p. 55; and W. A. MERRILL. errors in statements of fact are infrequent, University of California. KAIBEL ON THE ANTIGONE OF SOPHOCLES. Be Sophoclis Antigona, scripsit GEORGIUS pretation sometimes travels too far beyond KAIBEL. Gottingen. 1897. Pp. 2-27. the limits of the -action: but his main contention seems to me sufficiently made PROFESSOR KAIBEL has succeeded TJlrich out. He shows the difficulties, some of von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf in the Chair which were felt by Professor Jebb, of of Greek at Gottingen; and he inherits accepting various proposed excisions; he much of the originality, and perhaps some- defends the condensation of the language— thing also of the wilfulhess, of that eminent more like the poet than the interpolator; philologer. In this little monograph, and he indicates the ground of the error written in Latin, he disputes the opinion, which he combats, viz. a wrong conception which has been current since it was sug- of Sophoclean method and of the theme of gested by an obiter dictum of Goethe's, that the Antigone. The tragedy does not turn the last rhesis of Antigone (Soph. Ant. 891— upon an opposition of abstract principles, 928) has been interpolated by some inferior ideas or rights, as Hegel thought, but on poet. As I have always maintained the the conflict of two stubborn personalities. genuineness of the passage, I may be allowed Antigone is not a prophetess declaring the to welcome this able expression of a similar unwritten laws to which she makes her view, and to quote what I wrote on the appeal against her judge: but a princess, subject thirty-six years ago: ' Antigone, proudly maintaining the honours of her when brought face to face with death, in line against one of an alien house who is utter isolation from human sympathy, comes infringing them. I could wish that the down from the lofty tone she had assumed writer had not said that she would have in her first answer to Creon, and recognizes resisted any other action of the hated the simple fact that it was the strength of Creon. I do not think he dwells enough her affection which impelled her to defy the on the famous words, ovroi guvex/Deiv dXXa law. Her love for Polynices was wonderful, aviufuXeiv t<t>w. And he fails to appreciate passing the love that could be felt for a the justice of Aristotle's remark on the husband or a child.' There are several finesse of Haemon. But his pages, few as" points of detail in Professor Kaibel's paper they are, are full of suggestiveness, and with which I cannot agree. I see no need while in some particulars his views will of supposing a lacuna after v. 904 bear revision, his main drift deserves (tTt/iijo-a seem=i to me to bear the strain respectful consideration. upon it—'It was indeed an honour I paid you if considered rightly'), and his inter- LEWIS CAMPBELL..