History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age 0198143427, 9780198143420

Citation preview

HISTORY OF CLASSICAL SCHOLARSHIP F R O M T O

T

T H

H E E

E

B E G I N N I N G N

D

O

H E L L E N I S T I C

F A

T

H

G

E

R. PFEIFFER OXFORD

E

THIS volume is concerned with the foundations laid by Greek poets and scholars in the last three centuries RC. for the whole future of classical scholarship. It starts with a brief survey Of the pre-Hellenistic ages in Greece and a few hints ai the oriental background. T h e n the author makes full use of the available evidence, especially thai of the papyri, to demonstrate the fresh start m a d e by Hellenistic poets after 300 BC and to describe the essential achievements of five generations of creative scholars in Alexandria and of their cpigoni down to the age of Augustus. R u d o l f Pfeiffer (1889 1979) was Professor of Greek at H a m b u r g (1923) and Freiburg (1928) Universities, then Fellow of C o r p u s Christi College, Oxford from 1938 to 1951. Other publications include a complete edition of Callimachus.

O X F O R D U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS

1

.r. ."l

HISTORY CLASSICAL

OF

SCHOLARSHIP

H I S T O R Y

O F

CLASSICAL SCHOLARSHIP FROM T H E BEGINNINGS

TO

THE END OF THE HELLENISTIC

RUDOLF

AGE

PFEIFFER

O X F O R D A T

T H E C L A R E N D O N

PRESS

Oxford

University

Press,

Great

Clarendon

Oxford Athens Buenos

Auckland Aires

Delhi Kuala

Lumpur

Mexico

City

Taipei

All

rights

reserved.

without Within

the prior

the

purpose under

UK,

exceptions

issued

by the

sent

Designs

of Oxford

or review,

countries University

in Publication

0-10-814342-7

1 3 5 7 9

10

8 6 4 2

in Great

on acid-free Bookcraft Midsomer

Britain

paper {Bath)

dealing as

of the

by Ltd.,

Norton

for

Press,

Data

the

permitted of

licences

concerning should

above

available

means, Press.

or in the case

terms

Enquiries

in other

Oxford

Data

Printed

10S8, the

Agency.

Cataloguing

ISBN

Act, with

and

Department,

Library

University

of any fair

at the address British

reproduced,

or by any

in respect Patents

terms

be

or criticism

Licensing these

to the Rights

and

may

igo8

in any form

in accordance

Copyright outside

Ltd.,

of this publication

study,

York

IQ68

Books

in writing

VXORI CARISSIMAE SACRVM

Press

by

New

Press

or transmitted, are allowed

reproduction

reproduction

part

or private

Copyright,

reprographic

States

Inc.,

Sandpiper

permission

of research the

No system,

in

University

United Press

University for

Salaam Karachi

Warsaw

of Oxford

in the

es

Melbourne

Toronto

University

6DP

Singapore

Ibadan

edition

in a retrieval

Paris

Berlin

© Oxford

stored

Madrid

Nairobi

companies

Published

Special

Madras

mark

0X2

Bombay

Dar

Istanbul

associated

is a trade,

Oxford

Town

Kong

Tokyo

and

Oxford

Bogota

Cape

Hong

Street,

York

Bangkok

-Calcutta

Florence

Oxford

New

be

PREFACE A N enterprise like this

History

t h o u g h a d v e n t u r o u s a n d l e n g t h y needs

o n l y a b r i e f a n d m o d e s t p r o l o g u e . F o r t h e u n d e r t a k i n g as a w h o l e m u s t justify itself w i t h o u t i n t r o d u c t o r y recommendations and preparatory a r g u m e n t s ; apologies f o r i t s deficiencies w o u l d h a v e n o e n d . N o b o d y w i l l d e n y t o s c h o l a r s h i p , w h e t h e r i n its h i g h e s t o r i n its h u m blest f o r m , its o w n r i g h t , a n d as l o n g as o n e carries o n t h e d a i l y w o r k o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , o f t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m , o f historical reconstruction one m a y expect a p p r o v a l ; b u t to t u r n f r o m t h a t a c t i v i t y to reflection u p o n t h e p a s t o f s c h o l a r s h i p a n d u p o n t h e scholars o f b y g o n e d a y s m a y be d e e m e d i n o p p o r t u n e a n d unnecessary. Y e t , i f s u c h s c e p t i c i s m is b y a n y means t o be c o n v e r t e d , i t w i l l s u r e l y be b y c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h t h e v e r y facts o f h i s t o r y ; a n d t o m a k e t h e i m p o r t a n t facts v i s i b l e i n t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e is precisely o u r p u r p o s e . F o r i t was i n t h e course o f t i m e a n d t h e succession o f peoples a n d g e n e r a t i o n s t h a t t h e f u l l n a t u r e a n d t h e m a n y f o r m s o f s c h o l a r s h i p w e r e r e v e a l e d . T h e h i s t o r y o f classical s c h o l a r s h i p , t h e r e f o r e , is classical s c h o l a r s h i p i n t h e m a k i n g . A n d a b o o k r e c o n s t r u c t i n g its h i s t o r y u n d e r t h i s aspect c a n c l a i m t o be r e g a r d e d as a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f s c h o l a r s h i p itself. W e say ' i m p o r t a n t facts', because i t is o b v i o u s t h a t w e d o n o t w a n t t o k n o w w h a t is obsolete a n d past f o r ever, b u t w h a t is s t i l l e n d u r i n g ; w e w a n t t o e x p l o r e t h e c o n t i n u i t y o f knowledge, the

philologia perennis.

T h i s c o n t i n u i t y was m a i n t a i n e d n o t o n l y b y t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l p o w e r o f g r e a t scholars, b u t e q u a l l y b y t h e i r m o r a l p r i n c i p l e s o f a b s o l u t e h o n e s t y a n d u n r e m i t t i n g p a t i e n c e i n t h e p u r s u i t o f t r u t h . I n deference t o these p r i n c i p l e s I h a v e m a d e i t m y task t o c o l l e c t a n d i n t e r p r e t as f a r as possible a l l t h e p r i m a r y e v i d e n c e f r o m t h e o r i g i n a l sources; t h e m o s t r e l e v a n t passages w i l l be f o u n d i n t h e t e x t , n o t i n t h e notes. F o r t h a t a n d o t h e r reasons t h i s is h a r d l y a bedside b o o k a b o u t t h e lives a n d w o r k s o f scholars,

e n l i v e n e d w i t h anecdotes a n d j o k e s . B i o g r a p h i c a l d a t a ,

t h o u g h b y n o m e a n s d i s r e g a r d e d , are c o n f i n e d w i t h i n p r o p e r l i m i t s . I h a v e i n e v i t a b l y b e e n a b l e t o g i v e o n l y a s m a l l selection o f m o d e r n s e c o n d a r y l i t e r a t u r e , a n d I m a y o f t e n h a v e b e e n a t f a u l t i n selecting the w r o n g references; b u t I a m n o t q u i t e i g n o r a n t o f a l l t h e books w h i c h I h a v e n o t q u o t e d . F u r t h e r m o r e , I h a v e n o t a t t e m p t e d i n e v e r y case t o p i c t u r e w h a t dons c a l l t h e ' b a c k g r o u n d * , b u t o n l y w h e n t h e g e n e r a l

viii

Preface

Preface

ix

ideas a n d events o f t h e t i m e exercised a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e o n scholars o r

w h o w a s a classical scholar, a p r o f o u n d p h i l o s o p h e r , a n d a f a r - s i g h t e d

even c h a n g e d t h e course o f s c h o l a r s h i p .

h i s t o r i a n as w e l l , g a v e a v e r y n o b l e sketch i n a f e w pages o f his En-

A history o f scholarship should d r a w a t t e n t i o n t o w h a t was n e w a n d

tyklopadie und Methodologie derphilologiscken Wissenschaften ( p u b l i s h e d a f t e r

f r u i t f u l , d i s t i n g u i s h e r r o r f r o m t r u t h , a n d t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e passing

his d e a t h , second e d i t i o n 1886, p p . 3 0 0 - 9 ) . A q u i t e i n d i v i d u a l a n d b r i l -

d a y f r o m t h a t t r u e k n o w l e d g e w h i c h lasts f o r ever, t h a t is, as w e s a i d ,

l i a n t s u r v e y w a s c o n t r i b u t e d b y W i l a m o w i t z i n 1921 t o t h e

' p e r e n n i a l ' . B u t t h e d e a r t h o f p r e p a r a t o r y studies o f single p r o b l e m s ,

Einleitung in die Altertumswissensckqft, 'Geschichte d e r P h i l o l o g i e * ( t h i r d e d i t i o n 1927,

based o n f u l l d o c u m e n t a r y evidence, is a n obstacle t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t

r e p r i n t e d i 9 6 0 ) ; i t is a v e r y subjective r e v i e w o f classical scholars m a d e

o f s u c h a n a m b i t i o u s g o a l . I s h a l l s o u n d a w a r n i n g w h e n e v e r I feel

b y a g r e a t m a s t e r w h o calls u p t h e d e a d heroes o f t h e past f r o m t h e

c o m p l e t e l y i n c o m p e t e n t ; a n d as I used t h e e p i t h e t A d v e n t u r o u s ' i n t h e

o t h e r w o r l d a n d praises o r b l a m e s t h e m . W i l a m o w i t z a c k n o w l e d g e d a

first sentence o f t h i s preface, I sincerely h o p e t h e b o o k w i l l b e u n d e r -

d e b t t o t h e lectures o f O t t o J a h n ; b u t h e seems t o h a v e w r i t t e n a g o o d

stood a n d a c c e p t e d i n t h i s l i g h t .

d e a l o f his

T h e r e h a v e , o f course, b e e n e a r l i e r a t t e m p t s i n t h i s field since t h e days o f H e n r i E t i e n n e w h o w r o t e i n 1587 De

criticis veteribus Graecis et

History f r o m m e m o r y , a s t u p e n d o u s b u t n o t u n f a i l i n g m e m o r y .

So s t i l l m o r e w e i g h t s h o u l d b e g i v e n t o t h e sections d e v o t e d t o a n c i e n t a n d m o d e r n scholars i n h i s m a n y books o n G r e e k a u t h o r s t h a n t o t h i s

Latinis. B u t o n l y one r e a l l y c o m p r e h e n s i v e b o o k exists: J . E . S a n d y s , A History of Classical Scholarship, i n t h r e e v o l u m e s o f 1,629 pages. A d -

b r i e f g e n e r a l a c c o u n t o f e i g h t y pages.

m i r a t i o n is m i x e d w i t h e n v y w h e n o n e l e a r n s f r o m Sandys's b i o g r a p h e r

N i e t z s c h e , R i t s c h F s f a v o u r i t e p u p i l , i n t h i s c o n n e x i o n ; a t t h e age o f

1

I

c a n n o t refrain—pace

Wilamowitz—from mentioning Friedrich

History o n 1 J a n u a r y 1900, h a d t h e first

t w e n t y - f o u r h e seriously c o n s i d e r e d w r i t i n g ' E i n e G e s c h i c h t e d e r l i t e r a ¬

v o l u m e p u b l i s h e d b y t h e C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press i n 1903 (second

r i s c h e n S t u d i e n i m A l t e r t u m u n d i n d e r N e u z e i t ' . H e w a n t e d t o find

e d i t i o n 1906, t h i r d e d i t i o n 1921) a n d t h e second a n d t h i r d v o l u m e s i n

o u t t h e g e n e r a l ideas t h a t h a d i n f l u e n c e d t h e s t u d y o f a n t i q u i t y a n d t o

1 9 0 8 ; t h e t h r e e v o l u m e s w e r e r e p r i n t e d i n B o s t o n i n 1958. E v e n t h o u g h

d e m o n s t r a t e t h e l i n k s b e t w e e n classical s c h o l a r s h i p a n d t h e d o m i n a n t

that h e started t o write t h e

o u t o f d a t e i n m a n y respects, t h i s s t a n d a r d w o r k w i l l a l w a y s r e m a i n a n

p h i l o s o p h y o f e v e r y age. T h e r e a r e some r e m a r k a b l e notes o n t h i s s u b -

i n d i s p e n s a b l e reference b o o k , a n d n o subsequent w r i t e r o n t h e same sub-

ject

j e c t c a n f a i l t o b e g r a t e f u l f o r t h e r a n g e a n d t h o r o u g h n e s s o f its m a t e r i a l .

he d i d n o t w o r k i t o u t , b u t m a d e his w a y t o w a r d s h i s o w n f a t a l p h i l o -

B u t , as a w h o l e , Sandys's w o r k is r a t h e r a c a t a l o g u e o f classical scholars,

sophy. A b o u t t h e same t i m e a n E n g l i s h classical s c h o l a r w h o h a d h i s

century b y century, nation b y nation, a n d book b y book t h a n a real

o w n ideas a b o u t s c h o l a r s h i p a n d t h e f u n c t i o n s o f a u n i v e r s i t y , M a r k

1

i n h i s letters a n d p a p e r s b e t w e e n 1867 a n d 1 8 7 1 , b u t , o f course,

h i s t o r y o f s c h o l a r s h i p i t s e l f ; t h e r e is n o l e a d i n g i d e a , n o c o h e r e n t s t r u c -

Pattison, conceived the p l a n o f w r i t i n g the history o f l e a r n i n g f r o m t h e

t u r e , n o sober d i s c r i m i n a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t r a n s i e n t a n d t h e p e r e n n i a l .

Renaissance o n w a r d s .

G . F u n a i o l i , ' L i n e a m e n t i d ' u n a s t o r i a d e l l a filología a t t r a v e r s o i s e c o l i ' ,

i n spite o f his w e l l - k n o w n r e l i g i o u s b i a s , these f r a g m e n t s , especially o n

is m u c h m o r e compressed

2

Short History, b u t t h e Outlines

e v e n t h a n Sandys's

2

I n the end he completed only fragments; but,

t h e g r e a t F r e n c h scholars o f t h e s i x t e e n t h a n d s e v e n t e e n t h

centuries,

m a t e r i a l is p r e s e n t e d i n a l i v e l y p e r s o n a l style. A . G u d e m a n ' s

are e x e m p l a r y , because h i s studies i n d e t a i l a r e a l w a y s i n f o r m e d b y

of the History of Classical Scholarship (last e d i t i o n B o s t o n 1 9 0 2 ) , m u c h e n l a r g e d i n t h e G e r m a n e d i t i o n Grundriss der Geschichte der klassischen Philologie (1909 2 n d e d i t i o n ) is o n l y b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l ; b r o u g h t u p t o d a t e a n d

a n awareness o f t h e h i s t o r y o f s c h o l a r s h i p as a w h o l e . I n o u r o w n days

p r u n e d o f its i n a c c u r a c i e s , i t c o u l d b e a useful t o o l f o r f u r t h e r research.

his emphasis is, o f course, o n t h e s t u d y o f a n c i e n t h i s t o r y a n d m o s t o f

Besides these f a c t u a l surveys t h e r e a r e a f e w sketches b y g r e a t scholars

his c o n t r i b u t i o n s d e a l w i t h scholars a n d w r i t i n g s o f m o d e r n t i m e s , t h e

w h i c h are strong j u s t where w e f o u n d Sandys w a n t i n g : they g e n e r a l ideas, a r e d i s c r i m i n a t i n g , suggestive,

convey

stimulating. A . Bôckh,

N. G. L. Hammond, Sir John E. Sandys (1844.-1922) Cambridge 1935, pp. 8 0 ff. Sandys compressed the subject-matter of his monumental work into one volume for the classical student and the general reader in his Short History of Classical Scholarskip 1915.

n o o n e has d e v o t e d a n d is d e v o t i n g m o r e t h o u g h t a n d l a b o u r t o h i s t o r i c a l p r o b l e m s o f classical studies t h a n A r n a l d o M o m i g l i a n o . T h o u g h

u n i v e r s a l r a n g e o f t h e a u t h o r ' s ideas a n d k n o w l e d g e j u s t i f i e s t h e t i t l e o f his c o l l e c t e d essays:

1

t

2

Studi di Letteratura

antica I (1948) 1 8 5 - 3 6 4 .

3

Contributo alia storia degli studi classici.

1 F.Nietzsche, Werke und Brief'e, Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe; Werke ( * 9 3 5 ) 3 1 9ff.)4 4 0 with references to manuscripts and earlier editions. Memoirs (i 8 8 5 ) 3 1 9ff.Essays (1889) on the Stephani, Scaliger, etc. 3 1 0955)) 1 1 ( I 9^°) i s c e raP-11 4 6 3 - 8 0 'L'eredita dellafilologiaantica e

3

r

(1934)

pp.cxxf.,

1

il metodo storico'

x

Preface

xi

Preface

T h i s is a p e r s o n a l selection o f b o o k s w h i c h I h a v e f o u n d n o t o n l y i n s t r u c t i v e , b u t i n s p i r i n g ; l e c t u r e s , speeches, a n d p a p e r s are e x c l u d e d .

references.

T h e Bayerische

Akademie

d e r Wissenschaften

and the

British A c a d e m y were k i n d enough to vote me a n n u a l grants towards

T h e p r e s e n t v o l u m e is c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e f o u n d a t i o n s l a i d b y G r e e k

t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e expenses a r i s i n g f r o m t h i s p e r m a n e n t assistance. T h r e e

poets a n d scholars i n t h e last t h r e e c e n t u r i e s B.C. f o r t h e w h o l e f u t u r e o f

M u n i c h l i b r a r i e s , t h e B a v a r i a n State L i b r a r y , t h e U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y ,

classical s c h o l a r s h i p . I t starts w i t h a b r i e f s u r v e y o f t h e p r e - H e l l e n i s t i c

a n d t h e L i b r a r y o f t h e S e m i n a r f u r klassische P h i l o l o g i e , as w e l l as t h e

ages i n Greece a n d a f e w h i n t s a t t h e o r i e n t a l b a c k g r o u n d . B u t t h e n

B o d l e i a n L i b r a r y d u r i n g m y a n n u a l visits t o O x f o r d , w e r e l i b e r a l i n

f u l l use is m a d e o f t h e a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e , especially t h a t o f t h e p a p y r i ,

g r a n t i n g m e e v e r y f a c i l i t y . I t is i m p o s s i b l e t o m e n t i o n b y n a m e t h e m a n y

t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e fresh s t a r t m a d e b y H e l l e n i s t i c poets after 3 0 0 B.C.

O x f o r d a n d M u n i c h f r i e n d s f r o m whose

a n d t o d e s c r i b e t h e essential a c h i e v e m e n t s o f five g e n e r a t i o n s o f c r e a t i v e

t h r o u g h a l l these y e a r s ; b u t t h e r e is o n e t o w h o m I o w e m o r e t h a n

discussions I h a v e

profited

scholars i n A l e x a n d r i a a n d o f t h e i r e p i g o n i d o w n t o t h e age o f A u g u s t u s .

c a n be expressed b y w o r d s , E d u a r d F r a e n k e l . E v e r y o n e w h o is f a m i l i a r

B y t h e s i n g u l a r c o u r t e s y o f M r . P. M . F r a s e r I w a s a l l o w e d t o r e a d

w i t h h i s b o o k s a n d reviews k n o w s h o w i n t i m a t e l y he is a c q u a i n t e d w i t h

parts o f his f o r t h c o m i n g comprehensive w o r k o n

Ptolemaic Alexandria i n

t y p e s c r i p t ; I t h a n k h i m m o s t w a r m l y f o r t h i s p r i v i l e g e w h i c h has saved m e f r o m a variety o f errors.

t h e s c h o l a r l y t r a d i t i o n ; generous w i t h a d v i c e w h e n e v e r asked f o r i t , h e was also a c o n s t a n t d r i v i n g f o r c e b e h i n d t h e scenes. T h e d r a f t o f e v e r y c h a p t e r was r e a d b y M r . J . K . C o r d y o f t h e C l a r e n -

T h e A l e x a n d r i a n s c h o l a r poets a r e o u r ancestors, a n d w e s h o u l d a t

d o n Press. W i t h u n f a i l i n g p a t i e n c e a n d c o u r t e s y h e s m o o t h e d o u t o r ,

least t r y n o t t o b e u n w o r t h y o f t h i s n o b l e a n c e s t r y . ' T h e h i s t o r i a n m u s t

m o r e o f t e n , r e s h a p e d m y E n g l i s h ; f o r t h i s c o m p e t e n t a n d generous h e l p

become o l d i n order t o develop his a r t t o the f u l l

is o n e o f R a n k e ' s

he deserves t h e p r o f o u n d g r a t i t u d e o f t h e a u t h o r a n d o f t h e r e a d e r . I a m

m a x i m s ; t h i s is p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e o f t h e h i s t o r i a n o f s c h o l a r s h i p . O n l y

i n d e b t e d t o t h e s k i l l a n d v i g i l a n c e o f t h e P r i n t e r s , especially o f t h e

o n e w h o has p r a c t i s e d s c h o l a r s h i p a l l h i s life s h o u l d d a r e t o w r i t e a b o u t

Reader, a n d i n the r e a d i n g o f the proofs I enjoyed the h e l p o f a n ex-

its h i s t o r y . A s soon as t h e second v o l u m e o f G a l l i m a c h u s was p u b l i s h e d

p e r i e n c e d s c h o l a r , m y c o l l e a g u e Professor M a x T r e u , a n d , d u r i n g his

i n 1953 b y t h e C l a r e n d o n Press, I s u b m i t t e d t o t h e Delegates a p r o p o s a l

absence i n Greece, o f m y p u p i l D r . R u d o l f F i i h r e r . I s t a r t e d t h i s sec-

for a History of Classical Scholarship.

tion

5

*De n o n i n t e r r u m p e n d o p e r a e t a t e m s t u d i o ' is t h e subject o f o n e o f

o f t h e preface w i t h m y t h a n k s t o t h e Delegates o f t h e C l a r e n d o n

Press; I

finish

i t w i t h m y p a r t i c u l a r thanks t o t h e Secretary

to the

P e t r a r c h ' s latest a n d m o s t s y m p a t h e t i c ' L e t t e r e s e n i l i ' . B o c c a c c i o w a s

Delegates, M r . C . H . R o b e r t s , f o r h i s e n c o u r a g i n g i n t e r e s t a n d persistent

w o r r i e d a b o u t Petrarch's c o n t i n u o u s l y w o r k i n g too m u c h for his age;

support.

1

b u t his o l d f r i e n d a n d m a s t e r r e p l i e d t h a t t h e r e is n o reason t o a b a n d o n

M y first p u b l i c a t i o n i n 1914 bears t h e d e d i c a t i o n ' U x o r i c a r i s s i m a e

s t u d y because o f o l d age, a n d r e m i n d e d h i m o f t h e s a y i n g o f Ecclesi-

s a c r u m ' . I renew the words o f the d e d i c a t i o n w i t h still deeper feeling

asticus 18. 6 : ' C u m c o n s u m m a v e r i t h o m o t u n c i n c i p i e t . ' I h a v e a t least

for a l l t h a t she has d o n e f o r m e i n t h e course o f m o r e t h a n h a l f a c e n t u r y .

a t t e m p t e d t o take this advice a n d shall always be deeply grateful t h a t the Delegates i m m e d i a t e l y a n d graciously responded to m y appeal. B u t I advanced o n l y 'testudíneo g r a d u ' , u n t i l I c o u l d retire t o w o r k i n a sort o f

clausura

a n d o b t a i n e d t h e necessary s e c r e t a r i a l h e l p . I w a s v e r y

f o r t u n a t e t o find t h e assistance o f a y o u n g classical s c h o l a r , M r . S, E . A r n o l d , w h o is n o w , w h i l e p r e p a r i n g his d o c t o r a t e , i n t h e service o f t h e B a v a r i a n State L i b r a r y ; i n d e f a t i g a b l e a n d efficient, h e h e l p e d m e i n m a n y w a y s : a r r a n g i n g t h e vast a m o u n t o f m a t e r i a l c o l l e c t e d t h r o u g h decades, m a k i n g a c a r e f u l t y p e s c r i p t , a n d c h e c k i n g t h e i n n u m e r a b l e (with bibliography). A third volume of the Contribute and the publication of the Sather of 1961 are in prospect. Rer. sen. libr. xvit 2 ; reprinted in Petrarca 'Prose', La Letteratura Italiana, Storia

Classical

Lectures 1

(1955) * 156.

e Tesii

7

CONTENTS PART ONE PREHISTORY OF GREEK I.

SCHOLARSHIP

POETS, RHAPSODES, PHILOSOPHERS F R O M T H E EIGHTH TO THE FIFTH CENTURIES Scholarship not a separate discipline before the third century B.C. Survey of preliminary stages. The epic poet as his own interpreter. The attempt of the rhapsodes at continuing this self-interpretation. Xenophanes, rhapsode and philosopher, and the beginning of moral criticism. Theagenes the defender of Homer by physical allegory. No grammatical system of'cases* behind the artistry of lyric poets in the seventh and sixth centuries. Poets as interpreters in the early Attic comedy.

II. T H E SOPHISTS, T H E I R C O N T E M P O R A R I E S , AND PUPILS IN T H E F I F T H AND F O U R T H C E N T U R I E S Intermediary position of the Sophists: heirs of the rhapsodes, teachers of the future generations. The Sophists and the book. Short retrospect on the oriental background: archives and libraries in Mesopotamia from the third millennium onwards. Technical devices for writing from the East to Greece. The earliest Minoan-Mycenaean script. The Phoenician script. The new Greek alphabet. From oral composition and tradition to the written word and the reader of books. The part of the Sophists in this process, and the Socratic-Pl atonic opposition. Individual achievements of the Sophists and their contemporaries: Protagoras, Prodicus; Democritus* Movaitcd, and Herodotus on literature and language; Gorgias, Hippias, Critias. III. T H E MASTERS O F PHILOSOPHY IN ATHENS: SOCRATES, PLATO, A R I S T O T L E A conscious new method opposed to the empirical approach of the Sophists. Plato's sceptical attitude to poetry itself, and to the efforts of interpretation and literary criticism. Problems of language the central theme of the Cratylus. Study of language not hrurT^^q. Plato and the Academy. First large private library. Aristotle not the 'creator* of classical scholarship. Teleology as central idea, prior to empirical research. Aristotle neither editor nor interpreter. The rational order in literary art; permanent control of philosophical concepts by the analysis of reality. Some new fundamental linguistic terms; no separate branch of grammar. Antiquarian research in the grand manner with the assistance of pupils.

XIV

Contents

Contents

PART TWO THE HELLENISTIC AGE I.

T H E RISE OF SCHOLARSHIP IN ALEXANDRIA

87

Aristotle belonged to the world of the Greek city-state with its cultural unity; its disintegration, the split-up of Alexander's empire, and the establishment of new monarchies. A new generation of poets conscious of a definitive break, making a fresh start. From the revival of poetry to the preservation of the ancient literary heritage. Philitas' historical position : the first scholar poet of artistic perfection, tutor to Ptolemy I I , teacher of Zenodotus, the grammarian. Alexandria the cultural centre; meeting-place of the new poetical movement with the Peripatetic tradition from Athens. The organizations in the new capital: the Ptolemies and their helpers; the Museum and the Libraries. The 'bookish' age and its problems. II.

ZENODOTUS AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES

105

123

Cyrene and Egypt. The complete unity of creative poet and reflective scholar in Callimachus. His insistence on drawing from the original pure sources. The general TIivaKeç of the great library the model for all ages. The TToXviiaQir) of his prose books on antiquities, on language, and on anuVAristotelian literary criticism. Elements of interpretation in his poems and learned writings. Apollonius Rhodius, the poet of the Argonautiea, in his relation to Callimachus; as a scholar he provided the first example of Hellenistic /7ep£-literature, foreshadowing later commentaries. Rhianus* local epics and critical editions of Homer. Separation of scholarship from poetry in the second half of the third century : the poetical mannerism of Euphorion and the learned compilations of the Callimacheans, Hermippus, Istros, Philostephanus, and of the Peripatetic Satyrus.

ALEXANDRIAN SCHOLARSHIP AT ITS HEIGHT: ARISTOPHANES OF BYZANTIUM Aristophanes neither poet nor scientist. Critical text of Homer and Hesiod with critical signs, punctuation, accentuation. Edition of the lyric poets;

VII. PERGAMUM. SCHOLARSHIP AND PHILOSOPHY. A NEW ANTIQUARIANISM The Attalids and the cultural life of Pergamum; library, parchment. Crates of Mallos, Stoic allegorist and cosmologist; two monographs on Homer; opposition to Aristarchus. The definite place of linguistic studies in the system of Stoic philosophy; grammatical rules and terms strictly fixed. Crates' mission to Rome in 168 B.C. Writers on antiquities: Antigonus of Carystus, Polemo of Ilium, called aTT)\oKoira$, Demetrius of Scepsis.

*34

VIII. T H E EPIGONI: FROM ARISTARCHUS' PUPILS TO DIDYMUS 252 Dissemination and renewal of scholarship in the whole Greek world after the Alexandrian crisis of 145/4 - - Apollodorus of Athens: Chronicle in iambic verse, new system of dating; monograph on the Homeric Catalogue of Ships a description of heroic Greece with explication of local names; books 'On Gods' a study of Homeric religion with analysis of proper names; minor works on Attic and Doric comedy and on mimes. Dionysius Thrax, teacher at Rhodes; influence on Rome. Interpretation of Homer, other commentaries and treatises. The problem of the TVjfWJ ypaftfiartK-q under his name: its authenticity and its arrangement in the Byzantine manuscripts. Technical grammar the latest achievement of Hellenistic scholarship. Tyrannion of Amisos, Asclepiades of Myrlea, Philoxenus of Alexandria; their grammatical writings, their relations to Rome. Didymus of Alexandria compiler of commentaries on Greek poets, historians, and orators and of comic and tragic lexica; moved by love of learning to preserve the scholarly heritage of the Hellenistic age. B

IV. S C I E N C E A N D S C H O L A R S H I P : E R A T O S T H E N E S 152 The first union of science and scholarship in Eratosthenes; his friendship with Archimedes. i\o\oyos the new term for his universality. Treatise on Attic comedy; critical chronology; mathematical geography; Homeric geography; catalogue of constellations. Poetry a parergon. V.

colometry and strophic structure. Hypotheses to his text of tragedies and comedies. Great lexicographical studies, based on his own editions, and formal grammatical inquiries, ancillary to his editorial work. Selective list of the foremost authors. VI. ARISTARCHUS: T H E A R T OF I N T E R P R E T A T I O N 210 Callistratus and otherftpioTotfxxvtuH.Aristarchus, the Ptolemies, the great crisis of 145/4 B.C. Running commentaries and monographs on Greek poetry from Homer to Aristophanes, also critical editions of the Homeric and Other poems; critical signs the link between text and commentary. The first commentary on prose writers, Herodotus and possibly Thucydides. No authentic maxim of Aristarchus on the principle of interpretation. General grammatical and metrical observations in the course of the exegetical work. Literary criticism.

Zenodotus the first Homeric scholar and librarian; the poets Lycophron and Alexander Aetolus as revisers of the comic and tragic texts. Zenodotus' text of Homer usually based on documentary evidence; the first critical symbol; no authentic tradition about the reasons for his alterations and omissions. Editions of Hesiod and of lyric poets. Glossary, but no commentary. The tragic Pleiad. Lycophron's Alexandra. Aratus, the poet of the Phaenomena, as Homeric scholar. III. C A L L I M A C H U S AND T H E G E N E R A T I O N O F H I S PUPILS

xv

c

EXCURSUSES

280

ADDENDA

287

171 INDEXES

291

ABBREVIATIONS AG

Anecdota

AGGW

Abhandlungen

(Bachmann, Bekker, Boissonade).

Graeca

der Göttinger

Gesellschaft

American

Journal

of

Archaeology.

AJP

American

Journal

of

Philology.

AUG)

Anthologia

APF

Archiv

Harwick,

Stoische

Sprachlehre

Lyrica

für

der

Wissenschaften.

ed. E . Diehl,

[Graeca),

1 9 2 5 ff.

Papyrusforschung.

K . Barwick, 'Probleme der stoischen Sprachlehre und Rhetorik', Abh. d. Säcks. Akad. d. Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Phil-hist.

Kl.

BCH

Bulletin

Bursian

Bursians

49. 3 (1957).

de Correspondance

Hellénique.

Jahresbericht

über die Fortschritte

der klass.

Altertums-

wissenschaft.

Callimachus I , I I , ed. R, Pfeiffer, 1 9 4 9 - 5 3 (repr. 1 9 6 5 / 6 ) . Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta I , ed. G . Kaibel, 1 8 9 g .

Call. GGF CL

Phil.

Ct.

Qu.

Classical

Philology.

Classical

Quarterly.

CUR.

Classical

CMG

Corpus

Review.

DLZ

Deutsche

DMG

Deutsche

Düring, 'Aristotle'

I. During, 'Aristotle in the ancient biographical tradition',

medicorum

Studio

Graecorum.

Literaturzeitung. Morgenländische Graeca

Gesellschaft.

et Latina

Fragmente

Gothoburgensia

FGrHist.

Die

der griechischen

FHG

Fragmenta

GGA

Göttingische

GGM

Geographi

GGN

Nachrichten

der Gesellschaft

GL

Grammatici

Latini,

GRF

Grammaticae

Historicorum

(1957).

von F . Jacoby, ed. C . Müller, 1841

Graecorum,

Gelehrte Graeci

v

Historiker,

1 9 2 3 ff. ff.

Anzeigen.

minores,

ed. C . Müller,

ed. H . Keil,

Romanae

1 8 5 5 ff.

der Wissenschaften

Fragmenta,

zu

Göttingen.

1 8 5 5 ff.

rec. H . Funaioli, I

(1907,

repr.

and

Rome,

1964). Gr.

Grammatici

Gr.

Journal

JUS

Kenyon,

Books

and

F. G . Kenyon, 2 n d ed.

Readers

Graeci,

1878-1910

of Hellenic

(repr.

1965).

Studies. Books

and Readers

in ancient

H . G . Liddell and R. Scott, Greek-English by H . Stuart Jones, 1 9 2 5 - 4 0 . H . - I . Marrou, A History of Education,

L-S Marrou

Greece

(1951). Lexicon.

New edition

translated by G . R.

Lamb ( 1 9 5 6 ) . Neue

NJb.

Pack

2

Pasquali,

Storia

Jahrbücher

für

das klass.

Altertum.

R. A. Pack, The Greek and Latin literary texts from Egypt, second revised and enlarged edition 1 9 6 5 . G . Pasquali, Storia delta tradizione e critica del testo I952)-

PLG*

Poetae

Lyrici

PMG

Poetae

Melici

P.Oxy.

Oxyrhynchus

Graeci, Graeci, Papyri.

quartum ed. T h . Bergk, ed. D . L . Page, 1 9 6 2 .

1882.

Greco-Roman (1934,

repr.

Abbreviations

XV111 PRIMI

Papiri

delta

R. Universüá

vol. I , ed. A. Vogliano,

di Milano,

1937.

PSI

Papiri

RE

delta

Societá

Italiana.

Real-Enzyklopädie

Paulys

der klassischen

Rh.M.

Rheinisches

Rutherford, 'Annotation Sandys i

Scholia

Schmidt, 'Piti^ » eS

3

Steinthal

111 ( 1 9 0 5 ) .

I . 3 , ed. 1 9 2 1 . etc.). F . Schmidt, 'Die Pinakes des Kallimachos', Klass.-philoL (Berl.

Studien

I (1922).

Sylloge

Inscriptionum

of Classical

Akad.,

H . Steinthal, 1890

Geschichte

der Sprachwissenschaft

mit besonderer

(repr.

Rücksicht

F . Susemihl, Geschickte

der griechischen

Stoicorum

Veterum

TAPA

Transactions

TGF

Tragicorum Die

auf die Logik,

bei den 2

vols.

Griechen 2.

Aufl.

1961).

SVF

Wendel, 'Bu^ beschreib^»

Akad.,

ed. W. Dittenberger, ed. tertia,

Graecarum,

2 vols., 1 8 9 1 / 2 .

Vors.

Scholarship,

Bayer.

1915-24.

drinerzeit,

2

PART ONE

Philologie.

A History

Sitzungsberichte

und Römern

Susemihl

für

Aristophanica,

J . E . Sandys,

SB

SIG

Museum

W. G . Rutherford, 'A Chapter in the History of Annotation',

3

W.St.

Altertumswissenschaft,

hg. v. Wissowa-Kroll-Mittelhaus, 1894 ff.

Fragmenta,

of the American Graecorum

Fragmente

Literatur

in der

Alexan-

ed. I . de Arnim, 1 9 0 5 ff. Philological

Fragmenta,

der Vorsokrattker,

Association.

ed. A . Nauck, 2 . ed., 1 8 8 9 .

von H . Diels.

6.

Aufl. hg. v.

W. Kranz, 1 9 5 1 - 2 .

C . Wendel, 'Die griechisch-römische Buchbeschreibung verglichen mit der des vorderen Orients', Hallische Monographien 3 (1949)Wiener

Studien.

PREHISTORY O F GREEK SCHOLARSHIP

I

POETS,

RHAPSODES, FROM

TO

PHILOSOPHERS

T H E EIGHTH

T H E FIFTH

CENTURIES

S C H O L A R S H I P is t h e a r t o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g , e x p l a i n i n g , a n d r e s t o r i n g t h e l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n . I t o r i g i n a t e d as a separate i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s c i p l i n e i n t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y before C h r i s t t h r o u g h t h e efforts o f poets t o preserve a n d to use t h e i r l i t e r a r y h e r i t a g e , t h e 'classics'. So s c h o l a r s h i p a c t u a l l y arose as 'classical' scholarship. A t least t h r e e centuries h a d p r e p a r e d t h e w a y , a n d t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s h o u l d n o t be m i n i m i z e d . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e r e h a d been v e r y i m p o r t a n t attempts at studying the language, collecting learned m a t e r i a l , a n d a p p l y i n g some f o r m o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . B u t a l l these efforts b e l o n g t o t h e h i s t o r y o f p o e t r y , h i s t o r i o g r a p h y , p h i l o s o p h y , o r p e d a g o g y . I t was o n l y w h e n t h e n e w H e l l e n i s t i c c i v i l i z a t i o n c h a n g e d t h e w h o l e perspect i v e i n t h i s field as i n others t h a t these v a r i o u s a c t i v i t i e s , f o r m e r l y disc o n n e c t e d , w e r e u n i t e d i n t o one selfconscious d i s c i p l i n e . I n t h i s sense t h e h i s t o r y o f classical s c h o l a r s h i p does n o t s t a r t before t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y .

1

T h e p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t I a m a t t e m p t i n g t o m a k e is t h i s : a n o v e l c o n c e p t i o n o f p o e t r y h e l d b y t h e poets themselves l e d t h e w a y t o t h e

scholarly

treatment o f the ancient texts; devotion to pure learning came later. Nevertheless, a s h o r t survey o f t h e p r e l i m i n a r y stages is i n d i s p e n s a b l e ; t h e e a r l y G r e e k f o r e r u n n e r s o f t h e H e l l e n i s t i c scholars m u s t b e c a r e f u l l y considered. T h e epic poets w e r e i n s p i r e d b y t h e Muses, a n d t h e p o e t w h o c r e a t e d the m a i n p a r t o f o u r

Iliad

is t h e greatest p o e t o f a l l t i m e . I t has o f t e n been

said t h a t H o m e r m u s t be his o w n i n t e r p r e t e r ; t h i s is t r u e also i n a q u i t e specific sense. H e n o t o n l y created b u t a g a i n a n d a g a i n ' i n t e r p r e t e d ' his o w n p o w e r f u l l a n g u a g e i n t h e course o f his p o e m . T h u s t h e earliest G r e e k p o e t r y t h a t w e k n o w i n c l u d e d a sort o f ' p h i l o l o g i c a l e l e m e n t ' ;

poetry

i t s e l f p a v e d t h e w a y t o i t s u n d e r s t a n d i n g . T h i s is o f s i g n a l i m p o r t a n c e for t h e o r i g i n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o f scholarship (as w e s h a l l see l a t e r o n ) . 1

See below, pp. 8 8 ff.

* See below, pp. 140 and 149.

2

On

4

Poets, Rhapsodes, Philosophers

Self-interpretation of Epic Poets

'• 4>vmt,6ov yevos roSe aXvjBtos ' t h i s ( E p a p h u s ) is t h e o f f s p r i n g o f t h e l i f e - p r o d u c i n g t r u t h ' (Suppl. 5 8 4 ) , a n t i c i p a t i n g a l e a r n e d ' e t y m o l o g y ' w i d e ­

t h e o t h e r h a n d , one s h o u l d n o t speak o f ' H o m e r as a p h i l o l o g i s t ' . W h e n

d e r i v e d a n o t h e r f o r m o f Z e u s ' n a m e f r o m JfP

epic poets themselves a d d e l u c i d a t i n g w o r d s , h a l f - l i n e s , lines t o a m b i g u o u s

Zrjvos

1

expressions,

o r t o p r o p e r names, t h i s m a y be d u e t o a desire t o m a k e

spread i n t h e f o u r t h a n d t h i r d c e n t u r i e s .

i n s i m i l a r i t y o f s o u n d . I t is c e r t a i n l y a g e n u i n e p a r t o f t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l

Odyssey

Mavaa,

TTOMTOOTTOV

6V j u a A a T r o A A a /

My%H-

T h e attribute to

unique Arai-passage i n

aoı İimm, avBpa is so

o f m a n y m o v e s , 7roAAcW a m b i g u o u s sense o f

rpoiras e x

TTOXVTPOTTOS

iroXiifi-nrtv, -noXva-qx^vov)> ( v e r s a t u m , TroXv-nXayKrov).

D u t

ßmm4s o

The

(cf. K 3 3 0 ) is m u c h discussed i n a n c i e n t

Odyssey is d e p e n d e n t o n t h e u-ijuıv... ovXoii&qv is f o l l o w e d b y f) ııvpC

1502

ff. ; here w e h a v e n o s i m p l e p e r s o n i ­

n

e

T

Airat . . . A10? Kovpai u.eydXoto f ^iuAat re pvaal re irapao6a\u.oj. A n c i e n t a n d m o d e r n i n t e r p r e t e r s h a v e r i g h t l y seen

t h a t these epithets, a c t u a l l y p i c t u r i n g t h e a t t i t u d e o f t h e p e n i t e n t ,

atvos ;

s

this always means a fictitious

opening

i n t h e present circumstances, as i n

Iliad; t h e r e aXye ed-qKe ' t h e accursed

J4xaıotç

about the

lines o f t h e

w r a t h t h a t set countless woes o n t h e A c h a e a n s ' ,

a n d t h e e x a c t p a r a l l e l o f t h e w h o l e s t r u c t u r e shows t h a t t h e r e l a t i v e sentence is m e a n t t o b e a d e f i n i n g o n e i n t h e

Odyssey

as w e l l .

T h e s o u n d o f t h e a n c i e n t n a m e s o f gods a n d heroes n o t o n l y d e l i g h t e d

T h e m o s t f a m o u s e x a m p l e is 'Odysseus' i n w h i c h o n e c o u l d h e a r

(a

5 5 , etc.) as w e l l as

oBvaaofiai (a

6 2 , cf.

r

Airtd.

5

oBvpofiai

4 0 7 - 9 a n d S o p h . f r . 965 P.) ;

story w h i c h has its special significance Odyssey o 5 0 8 . B u t n o s t o r y is t o l d

O n e c a n h a r d l y d e n y t h a t i t is a g e n u i n e

allegory;

s i x t h c e n t u r y s t a r t e d t o detect ' h i d d e n m e a n i n g s ' i n m a n y p a r t s o f t h e 6

t h e y w e r e o n l y d e v e l o p i n g , i n t h i s as i n o t h e r fields,

s o m e t h i n g w h i c h t h e i m a g i n a t i o n o f a g r e a t p o e t h a d once c r e a t e d .

t h e ear o f t h e e p i c p o e t , b u t also r e m i n d e d h i m o f s i m i l a r sounds i n f a m i l i a r w o r d s : m a n y assonances a n d e v e n ' e t y m o l o g i e s ' w e r e t h e r e s u l t .

are

A r c h i l o c h u s a n d A l c a e u s f o l l o w e d i n this l i n e . W h e n rhapsodes o f t h e H o m e r i c poems,

4

4

t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e 'Prayers'. T h e /lirai-passage s h o u l d n o t be t e r m e d a n

a n d m o d e r n times. T h e p r o e m o f the 3

3

f i c a t i o n o f t h e 'Prayers', t h e d a u g h t e r s o f Zeus, as t h e epithets i n I 503

2

o v r a

Iliad

clearly show:

to speak ' e x p l a i n e d ' b y t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l a t i v e sentence : i t does n o t m e a n t h e m a n o f versatile m i n d ( v e r s u t u m ,

2

also a v e r y o l d ' a l l e g o r i c a l ' e l e m e n t i n epic p o e t r y . T h i s occurs i n t h e

asked t h e M u s e : ' O f t h e m a n t e l l m e , M u s e ,

o f t h e m a n m u c h t u r n e d t h a t r o v e d v e r y m a n y w a y s ' avSpa

B y t h e e n d o f t h e e i g h t h c e n t u r y B.C. t h e

Iliad

and

Odyssey

w e r e sub­

stantially complete. T h e y were composed i n a c o m m o n Greek l a n g u a g e; a n d o n t h e basis, so to speak, o f t h i s epic p o e t r y as a priceless p o p u l a r possession t h e w h o l e G r e e k p e o p l e , t h e

IlaviXX-nvts,

b e g a n t o feel its

so t h e v e r y n a m e h i n t e d a t t h e l a m e n t a b l e f a t e o f t h e -noXurXas o r a t t h e

u n i t y i n spite o f a l l t h e differences o f race a n d class a n d i n spite o f t h e

' m a n o f w r a t h ' . L a t e r e p i c poets t o o k t h e same l i n e : H e s i o d i n t h e p r o e m

c h a n g i n g p o l i t i c a l a n d social c o n d i t i o n s . So w e m a y u n d e r s t a n d h o w

o f his

Works and Days p r a i s e d Zeus, Sefire âla ivvi-nere . . . ov r e Sea fipoTol avSpcs {Op. 2 f . ) , w h e r e t h e r e p e a t e d âl A i n t h e same p l a c e o f t h e h e x a ­

t h e rhapsodes w e r e a b l e to c o n t i n u e t h e i r successful a c t i v i t y t h r o u g h o u t

m e t e r s o u n d e d a p p a r e n t l y n o t p l a y f u l , b u t s o l e m n . H e s i o d was f o l l o w e d

d i f f i c u l t y w i t h o l d a n d r a r e single w o r d s o r strange c o m b i n a t i o n s o f t h e m ;

b y A e s c h y l u s i n a h i e r a t i c l y r i c passage, Ag.

1485 ff.:

t h e y , t h e r e f o r e , sometimes

iravanlov -navepyira- rl yap

reXetrai;

6

/SnoTofr

âv€v âıoç

tti foj, 6 W

âıos

A e s c h y l u s also

t h e G r e e k w o r l d also b e y o n d t h e 'epic age'. T h e y h a d , as before, some altered t h e i r o r i g i n a l f o r m a n d even gave

t h e m a new meaning. T h i s reshaping may appear to the m o d e r n m i n d q u i t e a r b i t r a r y o r e v e n m i s t a k e n ; y e t i t c a n be r e g a r d e d as a n e a r l y

! L . Ph. Rank, Etymotogiseerung en verwanU VerschijnseUn bij Homerus (Diss. Utrecht 1951) 'Homerus als philoloog'. (With bibliography; cf. esp. the very useful collection of evidence.) * See also Rank pp. 78 f. 3 From Antisthenes on (Schol. a 1, p. 9- ' 6 Dind.); see below, p. 37. * Similar 'epexegetical' clauses a 2 9 9 i., y 3 8 3 , A 4 9 0 and in the Iliad, passim. On other 'explanatory lines' see J . Forsdyke, Greece before Homer ( 1 9 5 6 ) 2 6 . s About fifty names in Iliad and Odyssey, see Rank 35 ff. A list of etymologies and puns from Homer to Aeschylus in O. Lendle, Die Pandorasage bet Hesiod (Diss. Marburg 1953, publ. 74-100

Wiirzburg 1957) Î İ 7 - 9 1 .

. . . .

E . Risch, 'Namensdeutungen und Worterklarungen beı den altesten grıechıschen Dichtern', Eumusia, Festgabe jîir E. Howald (Zürich 1947) 72 ff.: in Hesiod such 'etymologies' are not later additions, but genuine; p . 8 9 , differences between 'Homer' and Hesiod. 6

/

Besides such epexegetical a n d e t y m o l o g i c a l elements t h e r e seems t o be

poetical technique, not a c o m b i n a t i o n o f learning a n d poetry. T h e poet o f o u r

1

toTiv

Zeus i n

themselves clear, b u t n o less t o pleasure i n p l a y i n g o n w o r d s , t o d e l i g h t

5

Sitz. Ber. Bay. Mad. 1938, H . 2, p. 9. 2 ; cf. E . Fraenkel, Aesch. Ag. ( 1 9 5 0 ) on 1. 1485, and in general on 1. 687. Plat. Crat. 3 9 6 B St* ov t$v . . . xntapxet.—The Platonic Socrates seems to have been the first to get away from the traditional playing with similarities of sound; see C. J . Classen, 'Sprachliche Deutung als Triebkraft platonischen und somatischen Philosophierens', £etemala 22 ( 1 9 5 9 ) esp. 127 ff., cf. below, pp. 61 f. On the structure oi Iliad g and its position in the whole of our Iliad see BLZ 1935, 2129 ff. On its allegorical character see Leaf ad toe. and E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (iSSO« i - Reinhardt, 'Personifikation und Allegorie' in Vermächtnis der Antike ( i 9 6 0 ) 37 f. [Heraclit] Quaest. Homer, c. 37, ed. Bonn., p. 54. 7 = ed. Buffiere ( 1 9 6 2 ) p. 4 4 . Aa Reinhardt is inclined to do, loc. cit. See below, pp. 10 f. 1

a

3

6

4

s

6

K

Poets, Rhapsodes, Philosophers

Peisistratus Legend

a t t e m p t at i n t e r p r e t i n g the t r a d i t i o n a l t e x t . B u t there must have been

a b o u t some lines o f H o m e r w h i c h t h e y r e g a r d e d as i n t e r p o l a t i o n s i n -

a l i m i t b e y o n d w h i c h t h e rhapsodes w e r e n o l o n g e r free t o m a k e t h e i r

serted against M e g a r i a n interests b y A t h e n i a n s , e i t h e r S o l o n o r Peisistra-

6

1

7

tus. T h e r e is n o reference t o Peisistratus as a ' c o l l e c t o r ' i n D i e u c h i d a s

o w n a d d i t i o n s o r t o reshape t h e epic texts.

3

W e m a y assume t h a t Greeks l i v i n g i n t h e first h a l f o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y ,

n o r w o u l d t h e i n s e r t i o n o f a few lines i n t h e c a t a l o g u e p a r t s o f B (546)

i f n o t e a r l i e r , r e g a r d e d t h e c r e a t i v e p e r i o d o f e p i c p o e t r y as c o n c l u d e d .

a n d A (631) b e sufficient t o p r o v e t h e existence o f a n a u t h o r i t a t i v e s i x t h -

B u t t h e r e is n o r e l i a b l e t r a d i t i o n , let alone conclusive e v i d e n c e , o f a c o l -

c e n t u r y A t t i c t e x t o f H o m e r . Nevertheless, R i t s c h l ' s a r b i t r a r y s u p p l e m e n t

2

l e c t i o n o f e p i c poems, o r a b o u t a c o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e t e x t o f t h e

Odyssey

Iliad

and

at t h a t t i m e i n a n y p a r t i c u l a r place. T h e endless discussion o f

o f 1838 a n d its d o u b t f u l consequences w e r e g l a d l y a c c e p t e d b y m a n y scholars,

1

as i f i t w e r e n e w e v i d e n c e from t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , t h e t i m e o f

possibilities a n d p r o b a b i l i t i e s belongs t o t h e h i s t o r y o f scholarship i n

the M e g a r i a n chronicle. Soon afterwards (1846), however, George Grote

post-classical a n t i q u i t y a n d s t i l l m o r e i n o u r m o d e r n age. W e s h a l l h a v e

p u b l i s h e d t h e first v o l u m e s o f h i s

t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f d e a l i n g w i t h these questions, w h e n w e c o m e t o those

w r i t e i n t h e t w e n t i e s ; t h e y c o n t a i n e d t h e first p e n e t r a t i n g c r i t i c i s m o f t h e

periods.

t r a d i t i o n a l b e l i e f i n t h e Peisistratus l e g e n d ( P a r t 1, c h . 2 1 ) . K a r l L e h r s ,

History of Greece w h i c h

he h a d begun to 2

H e r e w e h a v e o n l y t o state t h e w e l l - k n o w n f a c t t h a t t h e s t o r y t h a t

one o f t h e earliest G e r m a n a d m i r e r s o f t h e e m i n e n t h i s t o r i a n , c o n t i n u e d

Peisistratus 'assembled' t h e f o r m e r l y 'scattered' songs o f H o m e r c a n n o t

i n t h i s l i n e , u s i n g n e w a r g u m e n t s , a n d others f o l l o w e d ; b u t t o w a r d s t h e

be t r a c e d b a c k b e y o n d t h e first c e n t u r y B.c.

e n d o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y a r e a c t i o n set i n , a n d t h e c o n t r o v e r s y is

3

N o t o n l y i n the later

e m b r o i d e r i e s , b u t i n t h e w h o l e c o n c e p t i o n o f a p o w e r f u l statesman

as

3

4

5

still going on. I t is h a r d l y s u r p r i s i n g t h a t Peisistratus, t o g e t h e r w i t h Polycrates

a c o l l e c t o r o f l i t e r a r y texts, as t h e earliest f o u n d e r o f a G r e e k ' l i b r a r y ' , as

of

h e a d o f a c o m m i t t e e o f scholars, w e seem t o h a v e a p r o j e c t i o n o f events o f

Samos, h e a d e d t h e l i s t o f G r e e k b o o k collectors w h i c h ends w i t h P t o l e m y

t h e P t o l e m a i c age i n t o t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y . Y e t i n m o d e r n t i m e s , f r o m

I I ; f o r t h e e x c e r p t i n t h e e p i t o m e o f A t h e n a e u s 1 3 a looks t o m e r a t h e r

d'Aubignac

l i k e s u c h lists o f f a m o u s founders a n d i n v e n t o r s as t h e so c a l l e d Laterculi

4

a n d B e n t l e y to L a c h m a n n , t h a t l a t e a n c i e n t t r a d i t i o n w a s

r e g a r d e d as t r u s t w o r t h y . I n 1838 R i t s c h l e v e n w e n t so f a r as t o i n t e r -

Alexandrine o r

polate

goes b a c k t o V a r r o ,

5

into

the obviously

defective

text o f the

Megarian historian

D i e u c h i d a s ( q u o t e d b y D i o g . L . 1 57) a phrase d e s c r i b i n g Peisistratus as ' c o m p i l e r o f t h e H o m e r i c poems'

(ßmrep

B u t the M e g a r i a n historians, Dieuchidas

6

avXXéÇas

rà

'Ofx-jpov

as w e l l as H e r e a s ,

7

«TA.).

spoke o n l y

' M. Leumann, 'Homerische Wörter', Schweizerische Beiträge zur Altertumswissenschaft 3 esp. 157-261 and 3 2 3 ; see below, pp. 12 and 79. * See below, p. 25. * Gic. de or. ni 137 'qui primus Homeri libros confusos antea sic disposuisse dicitur, ut nunc habemus' ; Cicero's source was possibly Asclepiades of Myrlea JlepX ypapua-riKaiv, see G. Kaibel, 'Die Prolegomena Tîtpï KwpyUas, AGGW Phil.-hist. KJ. N.F. I I 4 ( 1 8 9 8 ) 2 6 and on Asclepiades see below, p. 2 7 3 . Adesp. AP xi 4 4 2 IJuaiorparov Ô$ TOV 'Opypov j riôpoiaa otropdS^v TO irplv àcibâpevov. The testimonia again printed by R. Merkelbach, Rh.M. 9 5 (1952) 23 ff-, and J . A. Davison, TAPA 8 6 ( 1 9 5 5 ) I ff. Cf. Dorothea Gray in John L . Myres, Homer and his Critics (1958) 2 9 0 ff. " Dissertation sur l'Riade, ed. V. Magnien (Paris 1925) 4 6 f. 'La composition de Pisistrate : elle est reçue parmi les savants comme certaine, et donne un grand poids à l'opinion que j'ai mise en avant.* W. Schmid, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur 1 1 (1929) 161, gives a wrong reference to d'Aubignac. (1950) passim,

s Die Alexandrinischen Bibliotheken unter den ersten PtoUmaeern und die Sammlung der homerischen Gedichte durch Pisistratus nach Anleitung eines Plautinischen Scholions (reprinted in Opuse. Philol. t (1866) 54) ; on the so-called 'Scholion Plautinum* see below, p. 100. Leaf's supplement is equally misleading (Homer, Iliad i 1 (1900) xviii, taken over with a slight alteration by

Merkelbach p. 29). * FGrHist

4 8 5 p 6 , vol.

* Ibid. 486.

m B p. 4 5 0 , Kommentar

1 3 9 2 , 11 2 3 2 .

P.Oxy. x 1241. I f G e l l i u s , N.A. v n 17, de bibliothecis, a n d I s i d o r . etym. v i 3 , 3 - 5 t o S u e t o n i u s ,

t h e catalogues i n

7

8

respectable g r a m m a r i a n s c r e d i t e d Peisistratus w i t h b e i n g t h e first f o u n d e r

'bibliothecam . . . deinceps ab Atheniensibus auctam Xerxes . . . evexit..., Seleucus jVicanor (sic; v . RE 11 A 1233) rursus in Graeciam rettulit. Ptolemaeus . . . cum studio bibliothecarum Pisistratum aemula retur* etc. ( I s i d o r . l o c . c i t . ) . I t has r e c e n t l y b e e n a r g u e d t h a t t h e d i s c o v e r y of a public library i n Athens:

9

o f o r i e n t a l l i b r a r i e s w h i c h i n c l u d e d extensive l i t e r a r y texts f r o m

the

second m i l l e n n i u m B.C., a n d o u r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e g e n e r a l c u l t u r a l p o l i c y Still by W. Schmid, Ceschichte der griech. Lit. i i (1929) 160. 6 . See L . Friedlander, Die homerische Kritik von Wolf bis Grote (Berlin 1853) 12 if.; the importance of Grate's attack had been rightly stressed by G. Finsler, Homer I i> (1924) 109. 1

1

3

Grate's Geschichte von Griechenland

(1852) — Populare

Aufsdtze

2

(1875) 4 4 7 ff.

* 'Zur homer. Interpolation' Rh.M. 17 (1862) 481 ff. •= De Aristarchi studiis Homericis (2. ed. 1865) 442 ff. (3. ed. 1882, 438 ff.); reference to Grote 440, n. 275. s O. Seeck, Die Quellen der Odyssee, 1887 (see Finsler, I 117 f.). H . Die's, Abh, Bert. Akad., 1904, Abh. 2. * H. Dahlmann, 'Terentius Varro', RE Suppl. vi ( 1 9 3 5 ) 1172 ff., esp. 1291. Sueton. de vir. ill. fr. 102, p. 130 R. Cf. Tertull. apol. 18. 5, and Hieronym. ep. 34. 1. C. Wendel, 'Buchbeschreibung' 19 f.; G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles, Corpus Paulinum (London 1953) 270 and ^«iicAn/i d. DMG 101 (1951) 193 ff. considered the possibility that 'Babylonian methods, required to ensure the preservation of works of literature' had early connexions with archaic Greece as well as later influence on Alexandria; cf. below, pp. 103 and 126. 6

8 9

Poets, Rhapsodes, Philosophers

Attacks on Homer

o f m i g h t y G r e e k r u l e r s s u p p o r t t h i s slender t r a d i t i o n . B u t t h e r e is n o t y e t

s o u t h e r n I t a l y a n d S i c i l y . R e c i t i n g his o w n p o e m s (dAAà KO! aÙTos

8

a n y p r e - A l e x a n d r i a n e v i d e n c e , a n d w e m a y s t i l l suspect t h a t those e a r l y

ippajpi^Beiràêavrov,

b o o k collectors were inventions m o d e l l e d o n the Hellenistic kings.

t h e y ' h a d i m p u t e d t o t h e gods a l l t h a t is s h a m e a n d b l a m e f o r m e n '

1

s i d e r i n g t h e w h o l e a t t i t u d e o f e a r l y Greeks t o t h e b o o k ,

3

1

Con-

(Vors.

t h e existence o f

Vors.

9

21 A i ) , h e a t t a c k e d H o m e r a n d H e s i o d b e c a u s e

21 B 11), '. . . u n l a w f u l t h i n g s : s t e a l i n g , a d u l t e r y , d e c e i v i n g each

o t h e r ' (B 12, c f 1 0 ; 1 3 - 1 6 ) . T h e r e is n o c l e a r evidence t h a t X e n o p h a n e s

p u b l i c l i b r a r i e s i n t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y is u n l i k e l y . H o w e v e r , f r o m a l l these v a r i o u s a n d d o u b t f u l passages one c e r t a i n

r e c i t e d ' H o m e r ' , b u t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y c a n h a r d l y be d e n i e d t h a t h e b e g a n

f a c t seems t o e m e r g e : t h e l i v e l y a c t i v i t y o f so-called pojpuiooi as reciters o f

his l o n g career as a n i t i n e r a n t poet a n d p h i l o s o p h e r b y r e c i t i n g ' H o m e r i c '

e p i c p o e m s i n t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y , o f t e n a t c o m p e t i t i v e performances. S o m e

p o e m s ; i n t h e course o f time he m a y h a v e r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e i r w h o l e

s c a t t e r e d a n d c o n t r a d i c t o r y references agree i n one p o i n t : those contests

conception

4

o f the gods—the pluralism, the anthropomorphism,

the

w e r e i n s t i t u t e d f o r t h e festival o f t h e P a n a t h e n a e a ; a n d there was a r u l e

m o r a l i t y — w a s a dangerous error. E v e r y l i n e o f X e n o p h a n e s ' o w n poems

t h a t a r h a p s o d e s h o u l d b e g i n his r e c i t a t i o n w h e r e t h e p r e c e d i n g r e c i t e r

shows h o w d e e p l y he h a d b e e n i n l o v e w i t h t h e g r e a t p o e t r y o f t h e past

VTroßoXrjs

a n d h o w w e l l h e was a c q u a i n t e d w i t h its style a n d t h o u g h t . A s his o l d e r

D i o g . L . 1 5 7 ) . F o r o u r p u r p o s e , i t does n o t m a t t e r w h o l a i d d o w n s u c h

c o n t e m p o r a r y , t h e l y r i c p o e t Stesichorus o f H i m e r a , h a d ' r e c a n t e d ' his

a r u l e ; w h e r e t h e H o m e r i c p o e m s are c o n c e r n e d , t h e evidence p o i n t s t o

'Homeric' error about H e l e n ,

t h e t i m e o f t h e Peisistratids, w h i l e a P e r i c l e a n

Per.

v i g o r o u s l y a t t a c k e d his f o r m e r i d o l . I t is s o m e w h a t p a r a d o x i c a l t h a t t h e

a contest f o r a l l

p r o t e s t o f a self-conscious, r e l i g i o u s rhapsode s h o u l d b e t h e s t a r t i n g - p o i n t

sorts o f p o e t i c a l a n d m u s i c a l p e r f o r m a n c e s . I n t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y , t h e r e -

o f H o m e r i c criticism i n antiquity ; i t remained the privilege o f philo-

f o r e , a t r a d i t i o n a l t e x t m u s t h a v e b e e n a v a i l a b l e t o w h i c h t h e rhapsodes

sophers t o f o l l o w his l e a d a n d t o c r i t i c i z e t h e w a y i n w h i c h H o m e r p r e -

h a d left o f f ( I f

VTTOX^WS

ed*£i}s [ P l a t . ] Hipparch.

5

13. 4 ) seems t o refer t o a m u c h w i d e r fiovaiKrjs

228 B, e£

decree o f 442 ( P l u t . aywv,

1

2

so X e n o p h a n e s , r e v e r s i n g his a t t i t u d e , 3

4

5

w e r e c o m p e l l e d t o k e e p ; t h e y n o w b e c a m e t h e professional reciters o f

sented t h e gods, u n t i l P l a t o , f o r t h i s a n d o t h e r reasons e x p e l l e d h i m from

established l i t e r a r y w o r k s a s c r i b e d t o ' H o m e r ' . I n t h e n e w , t h e l y r i c , age

his i d e a l c i t y .

these e p i c p o e m s w e r e a c k n o w l e d g e d

as

' c l a s s i c a l ' ; a n d t h e persons

6

O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e v e r y fact t h a t H o m e r , ' f r o m w h o m a l l m e n

apxfis KO.8 'Opvqpov

k n o w n t o h a v e n o t o n l y r e c i t e d b u t also e x p l a i n e d a n d c r i t i c i z e d t h e m

h a v e l e a r n e d since t h e b e g i n n i n g ' ( X e n o p h a n . B 1 0 1 |

f r o m t h e i r o w n p o i n t o f v i e w w e r e a g a i n rhapsodes. T h i s f a c t , t h o u g h

eVei

o f t e n o v e r l o o k e d , is p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t . F o r i t shows t h a t i t was

h a v e i n d u c e d o t h e r rhapsodes t o d e f e n d h i m a n d t o find m e a n s t o m a i n -

fi€fia8i]KaaL irdvres),

1

h a d b e e n rejected i n t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y m u s t

p o e t i c a l l y g i f t e d o r a t least p o e t i c a l l y m i n d e d p e o p l e , w h o m a d e t h e

t a i n his o l d a u t h o r i t y . I t is expressly stated t h a t t h e first o f these defenders

first a t t e m p t a t i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e h e r i t a g e o f t h e e p i c a g e ; o n e m a y e v e n

was T h e a g e n e s o f R h e g i u m , ' d u r i n g t h e l i f e t i m e o f X e n o p h a n e s h i m s e l f .

r e g a r d i t as a c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e e a r l i e r s e l f - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e p o e t s .

6

I t was as a h i g h l y e s t i m a t e d r h a p s o d e t h a t X e n o p h a n e s o f C o l o p h o n ( b o r n i n 5 6 5 ? ) ' w a n d e r e d t h r o u g h t h e G r e e k w o r l d f r o m t h e east t o See below, p. 25. All the evidence is most carefully collected by F. Schmidt, 'Pinakes* 4 ff.: 'Zeugnisse über griechische Bibliotheken', cf. pp. 30 f.—'May be little more than mythical' is the verdict of Kenyon, Books and Readers 2 n d edition (Oxford 1951) 2 4 . — O n Greek and Roman libraries see C. Wendel and W. Gober, 'Das griechisch-römische Altertum' in Handbuch der Bibliothekswissenschaft 2. ed. in 1 ( 1 9 5 5 ) 5 1 - 1 4 5 ; cf. Wendel'« shorter article 'Bibliothek' in RAC11 1

1

(1954) 2 3 1 - 7 4 . «P-

238-46.

J See below, p. 17. • See J . A. Davison, TAP A 8 6 (1955) 7 and JHS 7 8 (1958) 3 8 f. s H . T . Wade-Gery, The Poet of the Iliad (Cambridge 195a) 77, n. 77 to p. 3 0 . See above, pp. 3 f. * Vors. 21 B 8 , 411.; for Xenophanes as a rhapsode see K. Reinhardt, Parmenides (1916) 132 ff. H . Thesleff, On Dating Xenophanes, Helsinki 1957, tried to prove that Xenophanes was born about 540 or still later and left Colophon about 5 1 5 ; if this is correct, it lowers the date of Theagenes and others. But it will not be easy to accept Thesleff's arguments. 6

See Anth. Lyr. Gr. fasc. i i (1949) pp. 6 3 ff. annotation. P M G fr. 192 ff. = Stesich. 15 F. (two palinodes). I Timon fr. 6 0 . 1 D. called Xenophanes ' Opypoirdrns 'trampler on Homer*, cf, Zoilus 'Onypanâong below, p. 7 0 ; this parallel seems to support the variant reading 'Op-vporrarvs in Diog. L . ix 18 (-ajrarijir v.l.), though E . Vogt, Rh.M. N.F. 107 (1964) 2 9 5 ff, strongly pleads for the genitive ' O^pairar^s èniKoirr^v 'censor of the Homeric deceit' (cf. Vors. 21 35)- Timon, in his parodie style, exaggerated and disfigured Xenophanes' attacks on Homer. + 21 B 2. 12 : •ifp.erép-n ao/pin, that is, 'our knowledge and practice of poetry'. • Heraclit. Vors. 22 A 22, B 42, etc. ; on Pythagoras' so-called criticism see H. Schrader's references in Porphyr. Quaest. Horn, ad I I . (1880) 383 and in Od. (1890) 2 . 6 . W. Burkert, 'Weisheit und Wissenschaft, Studien zu Pythagoras, Philolaos und Platon', Erlanger Beitrâge air Sprach- und Kunstwissenschaft 10 ( 1 9 6 2 ) , is perfectly right when he does not refer to any Pythagorean 'interpretation' of Homer, see also p. 258. 13 on the Odyssey. See below, p. 58. * Vors. 8 A I Kara Ka^uVijv 5 2 9 - 5 2 2 B.C. ; 8 A 2 irpâtros. Cf. F. Buffière, Les Mythes d'Homère et la pensée grecque (1956) 103 f., and H . J . Rose, JHS 78 (1958) 1 6 4 ^ P. Lévêque, 'Aurea catena Homeri, Une étude de l'allégorie grecque', Annales littér. de l'Université de Besançon 2 7 (i959)1

1

A

6

Poets, Rhapsodes, Philosophers

Defence of Homer

Porphyry's e x p l a n a t i o n o f the 'Battle o f the Gods' q u o t e d i n the Scholion

t h e l i s t o f t h e i n t e r p r e t e r s ; as i t c o n t i n u e d t o b e t h e d u t y o f t h e rhapsodes

Iliad Y 6 7 ' is o b v i o u s l y d e r i v e d f r o m a Stoic source a n d is t o be used w i t h t h e greatest c a u t i o n ; t e r m s l i k e TO anpe-rrds, m e a n i n g ' m y t h s a b o u t t h e gods w h i c h d o n o t b e f i t t h e i r d i v i n e n a t u r e ' (ov irperrovTas rovs vrrep rwv Oewv fivOovs), o r aAATjyopta, t h e ' h i d d e n m e a n i n g s ' (v-novoiw o f such

i n l a t e r t i m e s also (see P l a t .

I 0

to

II

Ion,passim; X e n o p h . Symp. 111 6) n o t o n l y t o

r e c i t e , b u t also t o e x p l a i n H o m e r , one c a n h a r d l y a v o i d t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t h e was a p r o m i n e n t m e m b e r o f t h a t a n c i e n t g u i l d .

1

Besides h i s

' a l l e g o r i c a l ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e B a t t l e o f t h e G o d s , T h e a g e n e s ' interest i n t h e t e x t i t s e l f is attested b y a v a r i a n t r e a d i n g i n A 381 f o r w h i c h h e is

m y t h s , are p r o b a b l y H e l l e n i s t i c ; b u t even so t h e r e m a y b e some k e r n e l

2

o f t r u t h i n t h e t r a d i t i o n t h a t t h i s k i n d o f ' a p o l o g y ' is v e r y o l d a n d b e g a n

c i t e d ; a n d g r a m m a t i c a l w r i t i n g a b o u t H o m e r ' s c o r r e c t usage o f t h e

w i t h T h e a g e n e s w h o first w r o t e o n H o m e r ' (a-n-d ©cayeVou? TOU 'Pyylvov,

G r e e k l a n g u a g e is s a i d t o h a v e s t a r t e d w i t h h i m (17

c

6?

TrpujTos eypaifse Trepl 'Oprjpov). A t least i n t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , l o n g

TOV

eXXrjvtofxov . . . ap^afiivr] . . . aim ©eayivovs 3

ypafiparucy ...-r) irepl Vors. 8. i a ) . F i n a l l y he is

before a l l e g o r i s m as a m e t h o d was f u l l y d e v e l o p e d b y S t o i c philosophers,

p l a c e d a t t h e h e a d o f t h e w r i t e r s ' w h o first searched o u t H o m e r ' s p o e t r y

interpretations o f the H o m e r i c 'Battle o f the Gods' b y 'hidden meanings'

a n d life a n d d a t e '

(-Kepi rijs 'Opvqpov -rroi-jo-eajs ydvovs T« CHJTOI? KOX xpovov KaB' ov T)Kfiaoev -npoTipevvnoav Trpea^vraroi (lev ©eayevrjs re 6 'Prjyivos,

6eoiia las a l t o g e t h e r either ev i W volats weiroMj/ieW o r avev VTTOVOLOJV {Rep. 11 378 D ) . T h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l source o f t h e l o n g S c h o l i o n t o Iliad Y 67 sees i n t h e p a i r i n g o f t h e gods b y t h e p o e t t h e a n t a g o n i s m o f t h r e e p a i r s o f n a t u r a l elements, TO fypov ray vyptp KOX TO Oepfiov TW foxP ? ^dxeoOai Kai TO Kovov TO> 0 a p e i ; f u r t h e r -

a b o u t his descent, b i r t h p l a c e , f a m i l y , a n d l i f e t i m e . T h i s t e s t i m o n i u m ,

m o r e i t identifies t h e divinities w i t h h u m a n faculties: A t h e n a

u s u a l l y n e g l e c t e d , is i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e r e s u l t o f m o d e r n i n v e s t i g a -

w e r e k n o w n t o P l a t o , w h o rejected

X

1

with

tfrpovnais, A r e s w i t h d^poavvn, A p h r o d i t e w i t h emOvfiia, a n d H e r m e s w i t h Xoyos. S u c h p h y s i c a l allegories w o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n w i t h o u t p a r a l l e l i n

followed by Stesimbrotus a n d A n t i m a c h u s , w h a t is m e a n t b y

Vors. 8. 1). I t is h a r d t o say

ydvos a n d faep4 \ b u t t h i s m a y w e l l h a v e b e e n t h e first

a t t e m p t a t g i v i n g a s h o r t sketch o f H o m e r ' s l i f e , b y c o l l e c t i n g t r a d i t i o n s

plot 'Ofi-qpov a n d t h e Ayotv 'Optfpw teal

tions a b o u t t h e d a t e o f t h e

'HcnoSov. A s preserved t o u s , t h e y are p r o d u c t s o f l a t e a n t i q u i t y ; b u t t h e 4

t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y ; i n t h e few f r a g m e n t s o f Pherecydes o f Syros a n d i n t h e

earliest f o r m s o f those books, n a r r a t i n g t h e fife o f H o m e r a n d his contest

records a b o u t h i m t h e d i v i n i t i e s represent cosmic forces, a n d t h e r e is

w i t h Hesiod, g o back

a t r e n d t o conscious 'allegory*

(Vors. A 8. 9 ; B 4 a s o r t o f b a t t l e o f g o d s ) .

T h e r e is n o a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h e exact d a t e o f Pherecydes e i t h e r a m o n g ancient chronographers

2

o r a m o n g m o d e r n scholars. I f i t is c o r r e c t t h a t

' h e c a n h a r d l y h a v e l i v e d m u c h before t h e end o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y '

3

Theagenes. T h e y

b e e n used

afterwards

c o n t a i n a c o l l e c t i o n o f r a t h e r a m u s i n g stories o f

t h e a d v e n t u r e s o f a n i t i n e r a n t p o e t ; i n this respect t h e y d i f f e r w i d e l y f r o m t h e m e r e l y genealogical

a n d c h r o n o l o g i c a l statements o f a d r y

yevo$.

a l l e g o r y m a y h a v e b e e n i n i t i a t e d b y rhapsodes l i k e Theagenes i n o r d e r t o d e f e n d offensive passages o f H o m e r against m o r a l i s t s , a n d i t m a y h a v e

t o t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y , * t h a t is, t o t h e t i m e o f

Both

yevos a n d

@LOL

are d o c u m e n t s o f t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e a c t i v i t y o f t h e

rhapsodes i n t h e H o m e r i c field. A g r o u p o f t h e m w e r e c a l l e d

' OfiriptSat

b

b y philosophical a n d theological writers like

a n d w e r e believed b y some t o be descendants o f H o m e r h i m s e l f ; f o r o u r

Pherecydes for t h e i r o w n purposes, i r r e s p e c t i v e o f offensive o r inoffensive

p u r p o s e i t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t t h e y w e r e n o t o n l y p e r f o r m e r s , b u t

4

passages. B u t i f he l i v e d a b o u t o r before t h e m i d d l e o f the c e n t u r y i t m a y w e l l h a v e b e e n t h e o t h e r w a y r o u n d ; o n l y n e w evidence c o u l d b r i n g a final d e c i s i o n .

5

7

Wilamowitz, Der Glaube der Hellenen 11 (1932) 215. 2 ; cf. F. Wehrli 91. Vors. 8. 3 Kai ©cayevij? ovrus rrpoavperai; cf. A. Ludwkh, Aristarchs homerische Textkntik 1 113 n. 128, about rrpotptperai. Sec R. Laqueur, Hellenismus (1925) 2 5 ; cf. below, p. 158. Homerus, ed. T . W. Allen, vol. v, and Wilamowitz, Vitae Homeri et Hesiodi, 1916. s Wilamowitz, Bias und Homer (1916) 3 6 7 , 4 3 9 ; cf. E . Vogt, RJi.M. 102 ( 1 9 5 9 ) 220 f. (see below, p. 50, n. 5 on Alcidamas). Blot of early lyric poets, Alcaeus and Sappho, also originated in the course of the sixth century B.C. W. Schadewaldt, Von Homers Welt und Werk* (1959) 55 f.; see also Die Legende von Homer, demfahrenden Sanger {1942) 101. 7 2 ; H. T . Wade-Gery, The Poet of the Iliad (195a) 19 ft, tried to argue that the Homeridai, members of a Chiot family, were the only performers of Homer's works in early times, until in the fifth century 'star' performers arose beside them. * Acusilaus FGrHist 2 F 2, Hellanic. 4 F 20 and Jacoby's Commentary. About families of poets in India see Steinthal, Geschichte der Spraehwissenscfiaft bei den Griechtn und Romem i (1890) 3 0 (but they were priests too). 1

3

1

T h e r e is n o d o u b t t h a t i n t h e H o m e r i c field T h e a g e n e s a l w a y s h e a d e d « Schol. B Y 67, H . Schrader, Porphyr. Quaest. Horn, ad It. 240, 14 = Vors. 8 A 2. * Wilamowitz, 'Pherekydes', Sitz. Bet. d. Preuss. Akad. ( 1 9 2 6 ) 126 f. = Kleine Schnfien V 2 ( 1 9 3 7 ) 128 f.; K. v. Fritz, RE xix ( 1 9 3 8 ) 2 0 2 5 3 " . 1 So emphatically W. Jaeger, The Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers (Oxford 1947) 07. * This seems to be the opinion of F. Wehrli, Z" Geschichte der allegorischen Deutung Homers tm Altertum (Diss. Basel 1928) 89. s Diels-Kranz, Vors. 8 , were probably right in placing Theagenes immediately alter Pherecydes; the case for the priority of Pherecydes is put by J . Tate, Cl.R. 41 (1927) 2 1 4 ; cfCI. Qu. 2 8 ( 1 9 3 4 ) 1 0 5 - 1 4 'On the history of allegorism'. r

4

6

1

Poets, Rhapsodes, Philosophers

1 2

No System of Cases in Lyric Poetry

13

also i n t e r p r e t e r s o f t h e p o e m s . H o w f a r t h e y also p r o d u c e d p o e m s o f then-

H e r e t h e r e is n o t o n l y a n absolute p a r a l l e l i s m o f three sentences, t h e r e

o w n , o r w h e t h e r , f o r instance, t h e o r i g i n a l f o r m o f t h e so-called H o m e r i c

is also a t h r e e f o l d v a r i a t i o n o f t h e same t h e m e , a n d a sequence o f t h e

film w a s p o e t i c a l , r e m a i n o p e n q u e s t i o n s ; i t is b y n o m e a n s u n l i k e l y t h a t

n a m e C l e o b u l u s first i n t h e g e n i t i v e , t h e n i n t h e d a t i v e , a n d finally i n t h e

some o f t h e m w e r e m i n o r poets. I n I n d i a t h e reciters o f o l d p o e t r y

accusative. T h i s has b e e n t a k e n as clear evidence o f a three-case system,

g r a d u a l l y ceased t o w r i t e n e w p o e m s ; t h e y presented a n d e x p l a i n e d t h e

recognized b y I o n i a n g r a m m a r i a n s o f the sixth century a n d applied b y

o l d ones. I t is a t a n y r a t e clear t h a t w h a t Pherecydes a n d T h e a g e n e s

the poet.

w r o t e w a s i n prose.

Flcpl a rnxdrojv starts f r o m a d e f i n i t i o n o f orav -jjTOi ras (ß.vr^ovop.aaias r} TO. ovoptara etff rrdaas ras irrdtaets /j,€TaßdXXovT€s SiariÖio/ieöa rov Xoyov ws irapa KAeo^apet; C l e o -

1

2

3

T h e i n t e r e s t i n g passage i n

W e are n o t t o l d w h e t h e r t h e rhapsodes o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y h a d a n y used w r i t t e n c o l l e c t i o n s o f r a r e a n d obsolete e p i c w o r d s , were

called f r o m the

(14.59

a

fifth

century onwards ;

4

X

TTOXVTTTWTOV:

t e c h n i c a l resources f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e o l d epic p o e m s ; t h e y m a y h a v e

yX&auai as t h e y Poetics

1

1

chares is t h e n q u o t e d as h a v i n g used t h e n a m e o f D e m o s t h e n e s i n t h e u s u a l o r d e r o f t h e five cases o f G r e e k n o u n s , a n d t w o f u r t h e r e x a m p l e s are

A r i s t o t l e i n his

a d d e d , e o r i Se

9 f . ) expressly recognizes glosses as a f e a t u r e p e c u l i a r t o epic

Kai ÄvaKpeovri.

p o e t r y . O n e is t e m p t e d t o assume t h a t t h e e x p l a n a t i o n s o f H o m e r i c

®$jm f a t 7rapa nut, rcvv TToir\ri7>v WS nap* JfyvxApv/o irapa. pev oSv ÄpxiX6 oj . . . (fr. 70 D . ) ; i n t w o t r o c h a i c

TOLOVTOV

8

X

p r o p e r n a m e s a n d obscure w o r d s b y ' e t y m o l o g y ' w e r e f u r t h e r d e v e l o p e d ,

t e t r a m e t e r s o f A r c h i l o c h u s t h e n a m e o f a L e o p h i l u s is f o u r

collected,

the

p e a t e d ; i n spite o f t h e c o r r u p t i o n s a n d v a r i a n t r e a d i n g s i n t h e m a n u -

glosses. I t is therefore n o t s u r p r i s i n g t o find a m o n g t h e few prose

frag-

s c r i p t s t h e m o s t reasonable a s s u m p t i o n is t h a t t h e n a m e a p p e a r e d i n f o u r

Kpovos

o f the

a n d t r a n s m i t t e d b y rhapsodes,

perhaps

together w i t h

m e n t s o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y t h a t Pherecydes e x p l a i n e d t h e o l d theogonies i n e t y m o l o g i c a l t e r m s as

Xpovos {Vors.

d i f f e r e n t cases, possibly i n t h e o r d e r - 0 ? , -ov

t h e fifth c e n t u r y e t y m o l o g y p r o s p e r e d so v i g o r o u s l y : H e c a t a e u s o f M i l e t u s

o f h a v i n g f o u n d these t w o r a r e e x a m p l e s .

t r i e d t o i n f e r h i s t o r i c a l facts from t h e ' t r u e m e a n i n g s ' o f n a m e s o f persons

the

troXvTrTOJTov,

a

= fr. 14 PMG)

In

three

a r e q u o t e d as a n e x a m p l e o f

' t h e e m p l o y m e n t o f t h e same w o r d i n v a r i o u s cases':

KXevfiovXov fiev eywy* ipeat, KXevflovAa) 8' eirtuatvofiai, KXevfiovXov 8e StooKeto. 1

2

6

a b o v c

theoretical

o r d e r o f five cases o f t h e G r e e k n o u n

E . Sittig, 'Das Alter der Anordnung unserer Kasus', Tübinger Beiträge cur Altertumswissenschaft 13 (1931) 26- Against Sittig see K. Barwick, Gnomon 9 ( 1 9 3 3 ) 8 7 f . , 'Stoische Sprachlehre 4 6 ; Schwyzer did not take account of these important objections which were repeated and augmented by M. Pohlenz, NGGW, Phil.-hist. Kl., N.F. HI 6 (1939) = Kleine Schrifien 1 ( 1 9 6 5 ) 87 ff., and by R. Hiersche, 'Entstehung und Entwicklung des Terminus irr&aLs "Fall" *, Sitz. Ber. d. Deutschen Akad. d. Wiss. Bert. 1955, Nr. 3 , 5 ff. and finally by Barwick himself; without taking notice of these articles H . Koller, 'Die Anfänge der griechischen Grammatik', Glotta 37 (1958) 5. 2 and 3 4 ff., against Sittig. Still worse than Sittig G. H . Mahlow, Neue Wege durch die griechische Sprache und Dichtung ( 1 9 2 6 ) 2 1 2 : 'Die Grundlagen der Grammatik waren längst AUgemeinbesitz Anakreon . . . macht sich den Scherz zu deklinieren; der erste Vers mit dem Nominativ ist leider nicht erhalten.' No proof is given for this rather sweeping statement; the assumption that a line is missing before KXevßotäov /*ev eyiu/ *p4vp.tas, referring to Spengel in 34. 2 3 ; he could have referred also to in 139. 1 ; but perhaps dvrovoftaoias should be restored, which means 'pronoun' in Dionys. Hal. de comp. verb. 2 p. 7. 7 Us.-Rad. {Ivraivv^ only in cod. v), in Ap. Dysc. de pron. 4. 18, 5 . 10 Schn., where the grammarian rejects this form used by another grammarian, and in Pap. Yale 4 4 6 , first century A.D. (no. 2 1 3 8 Pack*) ed. Hubbell, CI. Phil. 2 8 (100^) 3

* Evidence for their 'learning in the article 'Homeridai' by Rzach, RE vm 2147 f.—The word fafa&os itself (which does not concern us here), its composition and meaning, is again discussed by H . Patzer, Herm. 8 0 (1952) 3 1 4 - 2 5 (fcMetov oXiya ixpiosvro, x P i ^ iaTioav, atanep KO.1 TO St/catov etf>epe iaayayovrwv &OIVLKOJV is rrjv 'EXXdSa, &otviKt]ia.

M i c h a e l Ventris's ingenious theory o f the decipherment o f this syllabic

aTTiKofievoL . . .

s c r i p t is c o r r e c t ,

K€KXi]o8ai. Greeks, therefore, w e r e ' i l l i t e r a t e ' i n e a r l i e r times, as i t seemed t o H e r o d o t u s . B u t he m u s t h a v e k n o w n a n o t h e r t r a d i t i o n f r o m one o f his

some t r u t h i n t h e s t a t e m e n t o f H e r o d o t u s ' M i l e s i a n predecessors t h a t D a n a u s a n t i c i p a t e d C a d m u s . L o c a l w r i t e r s o f KprjTiKa v o i c e d t h e c l a i m

m a i n sources, H e c a t a e u s

of t h e i s l a n d o f C r e t e (against C a d m u s ) as t h e p l a c e w h e r e letters h a d

€ £ u

writers, A n a x i m a n d e r

2

1

a e v o t

o f Miletus, w i t h w h o m t w o other Milesian

a n d Dionysius,

3

agreed: namely that

'before

irpo KdSp.ov Aavaov fieTcucopiiaat

C a d m u s , D a n a u s b r o u g h t letters over'

1

w e are c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a strange a n d p r i m i t i v e p r e -

H o m e r i c ' G r e e k ' l a n g u a g e i n a s c r i p t t h a t entails countless a m b i g u i t i e s . I t is h a r d l y c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t t h i s c l u m s y s c r i p t c o u l d h a v e been used f o r a l i t e r a r y t e x t . H o w e v e r t h a t m a y t u r n o u t , w e k n o w n o w t h a t t h e r e is 2

3

been m o s t a n c i e n t l y i n v e n t e d , a n d a n t i q u a r i a n a u t h o r s

trepl

evprfpidTOJv*

registered o t h e r c l a i m a n t s ; b u t a l l these v a r i o u s stories p o i n t i n one

D a n a u s h a d sailed f r o m E g y p t { n o t f r o m Phoenicia)

d i r e c t i o n : they dispute the p r i o r i t y o f the 'Phoenician' alphabet a n d h i n t

t o t h e A r g o l i d ; t h e r i v a l r y b e t w e e n E g y p t a n d t h e N e a r East i n t h i s field is

at a n o t h e r e a r l i e r G r e e k s c r i p t ; a n d i n t h i s respect t h e y are o n l y n o w sur-

a p p a r e n t from t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d persistent u p t o t o d a y . Since h u n d r e d s

prisingly confirmed.

aura ( r a

oroixefa).

4

o f c l a y t a b l e t s , c o v e r e d w i t h w r i t i n g i n t h e so-called L i n e a r B S c r i p t

T h e P h o e n i c i a n o r i g i n o f t h e ' a l p h a b e t ' , h o w e v e r , as i t was used i n

( w h i c h h a d been k n o w n before o n l y f r o m Knossos) w e r e f o u n d n e a r

h i s t o r i c a l G r e e k t i m e s , has n e v e r b e e n seriously

Pylos b y C. W . B l e g e n (1939) a n d i n o t h e r places o f t h e G r e e k m a i n l a n d

H e r o d o t u s is b y n o means t h e earliest a u t h o r i t y f o r t h i s ; some o f t h e

called i n question. s

( M y c e n a e , 1950, b y A l a n J . B. W a c e ) , i t has been o b v i o u s t h a t H e r o d o t u s

M i l e s i a n w r i t e r s a l r e a d y q u o t e d are h a l f a c e n t u r y e a r l i e r , t h e oldest

was w r o n g w h e n he expressed h i s o p i n i o n , a l t h o u g h v e r y c a u t i o u s l y (OJS

inscription o f Teos

ifiol

SOK€€IV),

t h a t Greece was i l l i t e r a t e before t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e

( o V av . . . econd, and amongst the rather confused series of titles /Zoij/xeW is fairly certain. Hesych. v. 'os tj>p-qv, Eum. 273-5 pieyas yap ^ i S i j c e o r i v evdvvos ßporwv . . ., SeXroypdoj S e navr e V w n - a

vases, letters o r w o r d s o f e p i c o r l y r i c poems, w r i t t e n across t h e o p e n

pcvL W e find i n A e s c h y l u s n o t o n l y t h i s c o n c e p t i o n o f d i v i n e ' t a b l e t s o f

from

the

m i n d ' , b u t also t h e i d e a o f Z e u s ' t a b l e t s o n w h i c h m e n ' s crimes have

I believe, i n t a k i n g t h e c o i n c i d e n c e o f t h e l i t e r a r y passages a n d t h e vase-

b e e n n o t e d . T h i s i m a g e r e m i n d s o n e o f t h e g r e a t deities o f o r i e n t a l

p a i n t i n g s as evidence o f a c h a n g e i n t h e c o m m o n use o f b o o k s ; n o d o u b t

/XOUCTO/XTJTOO'

p a p y r u s r o l l , c a n s t i l l be d e c i p h e r e d . W e see y o u t h s a n d schoolmasters

SATCH?

2

r e a d i n g t h e t e x t ; i n t h e second h a l f o f t h e fifth c e n t u r y f a m o u s n a m e s l i k e

2

those o f S a p p h o , L i n o s , M u s a i o s are a d d e d t o these figures. O n a C a r n e o l Scarabaeus even a S p h i n x is represented as r e c i t i n g t h e f a m o u s r i d d l e

Alien a

rrdpeopos

[ypd o4Xra> Aio$

(Aesch.

Aitnai

Kairetr* evAios S4Xrov Trrvxals

/

ypd€iv rw

avrd

W e are j u s t i f i e d ,

TrapdSoais,

o f l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n b y books,

W e a r e n o t able t o f o l l o w o u t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t i n this p e r i o d o f t r a n s i -

3

A b o u t h a l f a c e n t u r y l a t e r E u r i p i d e s also r e f e r r e d t o those r e c o r d s : raSi/c^avr' . . .

3

became established.

{Auaj) . . .

[ ? ] a b o u t 470 B.c.) .

o p e n b o o k i n h e r p a w s ( a b o u t 4 6 0 B.C,).

i t w a s a s l o w c h a n g e , l e a d i n g g r a d u a l l y t o t h e f o u r t h a n d final p e r i o d ,

r e l i g i o n s w r i t i n g t h e i r sacred books, b u t A e s c h y l u s f o l l o w e d the H e s i o d i c tradition that made

an

t i o n step b y step. T h e r e seems t o be n o n e w evidence, o n l y a f e w casual

(Melanippe,

allusions i n O l d C o m e d y

p r o b a b l y -r) ootp-q, f r . 506 N . ) . T h e t r a d i t i o n a l expression for w r i t i n g

a n d i n Platonic dialogues, w h i c h are w e l l

k n o w n b u t n e e d t o be c a r e f u l l y r e c o n s i d e r e d . E u p o l i s , A r i s t o p h a n e s ' c o n -

2

m a t e r i a l i n t r a g e d y r e m a i n e d SeAro?, e v e n w h e n o n e m i g h t suppose t h a t

t e m p o r a r y , m e n t i o n e d , p r o b a b l y i n t h e t w e n t i e s o f t h e fifth c e n t u r y , t h e

the

place o£

4

p o e t w a s a c t u a l l y s p e a k i n g a b o u t l i t e r a r y texts w r i t t e n o n p a p y r u s -

rolls.*

rd ftiflXi ojvia,

' w h e r e t h e books are o n sale'. Socrates was able 4

to get h o l d o f t h e books o f A n a x a g o r a s v e r y q u i c k l y , w h e n h e h a d h e a r d someone r e a d i n g a n i n t e r e s t i n g passage from o n e o f h i s w r i t i n g s , t h o u g h

I7g alvth (fivXa^at TCW** , eirij SeA-rowueWs (sc. filias). Pind. 0. x. a (about . ttoQi pei>os eiiä? yeypanrai. Soph. fr. 5 9 7 P. dov 0" ev (Pf.: ot>8' av A, ae 8 ' ev V) tppevos ÖCXTOLOL roOy e/xous Adyovs (60S cf. Call. fr. 75. 6 6 ö>«(JiJf«iTO SeArots); cf. Aesch. Cko. 450, Soph. Phil. 1 3 2 5 ; Eur. Tro. 6 6 3 a\va-nrv^a> tppwa 'unroll my mind' (like a book). s P.Oxy. xx (1952) 2 2 5 6 , fr. 9 a 21 ed. E . Lobel = Aesch. fr. 5 3 0 Mette; recognized by E. Fraenkel, Eranas 52 (1954) 6 4 if., as a fragment of the festival play for Hieron's foundation of the city Aetna; cf. F. Solmsen, The Tablets of Zeus, CI. Qu. 3 8 (1944) 2 7 - 3 0 . The only exception, so far, seems to be Aesch. Sappl. 946 f. raür' ov iriva&v earw eyytypap.p.€va / ovo' iv »JTWYGUS ßißXcup Ka.Ttu6epcu, Sarpaxa, see Babr. 127 and the many proverbs collected b y O . Grusius, De Babrii aetate (1876) 2 1 9 ; cf. F. Marx., Ind. lect. Greifswald (1892/3) vi. No conclusions about the actual use of writing material at certain times can be drawn from such passages. Eur. Erechtk. fr. 3 6 9 . 6 f. N . SCATWV anarrrvaaoi.^i y^pw, av aoot xAtWai; one may compare Socrates unrolling the treasures of the sages of old time in Xenoph. Mem. 16, 14: rovs Srfa-aupois rSiv irdXai aotpüivjivoptäv . . , iveXimov; see below, p. 28, n. 2. 1

474)

Cf. Aesch.

Suppl.

o.väyv

' b u r n , i n f l a m e ' , i t must m e a n ' i n f l a m m a t i o n ' a n d the

rroirjTtjV

. . . vcous" jU.eV, tcryvot)?

3 0 0 B.C., P h i l i t a s , as t y p i c a l

IJpoSiKov TOV ooto-T7)v S e Kal voowBets Kal

1

1

3

6

rj

&iXlrav

TÄ TroAAa

There were also rather wild 'etymological' speculations current in the circle of the socalled Heracliteans, see K. Reinhardt, Parmenides (1916) 241 f. In pre-Hellenistic times 8vup,a}v see Schmid-Stählin, Gr. Lit. Gesch. I I 2 ( 1 9 2 4 ) 1080. Fr. 4 9 0 K. and for his *ilpai as a circulating 'book* Bee above, p. 30. 1

For metrical reasons he said eiriiiv instead of avapAruiv, which would hardlyfitinto the iambic trimeter together with the decisive term 6p86rnr°s and with itpoXoyuw. Modern editors keep the wrong variant reading, evoaiftuiv, in spite of the protest of Nauck, TGF ( 1 8 8 9 ) , Add. p. xxv, and Wilamowitz, Aischylos-Interpretationen ( 1 9 1 4 ) 8 t . r. L . Spengel, Ewwytuyri revvoiv ( 1 8 2 8 ) 4 1 , first compared Ran. 1181 with the references by Plato to Prodicus; but he confused the issue in so far as he identified the opOo-rns ovou.ara)v of Prodicus with Protagoras' opQoi-neia and was followed by others. + Vors. 8 4 A 1 7 - 1 9 ; see also Plat. Prot. 3 5 8 A n)c Si LTpootKov rovSe Staiptaiv TWV avopd-raiv •napa.i-rovu.ai, ibid. 341 c, and Radermacher's notes on Art. script, B VIII to and 11.—A complete list of Prodicus' synonyms is given by Hermann Mayer, Prodikos von Keas unddie Anjange der Synonymik (Diss. Munchen 1913) 2 2 ff. * W. Schmid, Gr. Lit. Gesch. 1 3 ( 1 9 4 0 ) , 4 6 . 8 . Vors. 8 4 B 4 ; Galen himself wrote three books IJepi ovoua.ra>v ipBdrrfros.

6

gibes i t is P r o d i c u s ' n a m e t h a t t u r n s u p as t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t o a b o o k : rj

ßtßXtov ., . rj ripoSiKos. H e

p u r e l y ' f o r m a l ' opBoerreia). 5

5

a

1

4

8

6

6

42

Democritus'' Universality

The Sophists, their Contemporaries and Pupils

43

appajmiav ovras (an seni 15, p . 791 E } . T h e p i c t u r e o f P r o d i c u s as a w e a k l i n g seems t o b e t a k e n o v e r from P l a t o (Prot. 315 D ) ,

explanations.

b u t i t m i g h t have been o r i g i n a l l y derived f r o m a contemporary comic

p o e t r y a n d prose a n d a n o p e n m i n d also f o r g e n e r a l questions o f l a n g u a g e .

p o e t , as i t w a s c e r t a i n l y t h e n e w c o m e d y

T o j u d g e from o u r scanty e v i d e n c e , h e h a r d l y w e n t b e y o n d t h e steps m a d e

KAIVOTT€T€IS

SL

1

that made f u n o f Philitas'

1

Democritus was a n ingenious i n n o v a t o r o f philosophical 2

language himself; he must have h a d a n i n t i m a t e knowledge o f earlier

b y t h e g r e a t Sophists, a n d I a m i n c l i n e d t o suspect t h a t i n t h i s f i e l d t h e

frailty. O n e o f the foremost I o n i c philosophers i n t h e second h a l f o f t h e f i f t h

i m p u l s e c a m e f r o m t h e i r side. B u t w h i l e t h e Sophists used t o c o n c e n t r a t e

c e n t u r y , D e m o c r i t u s , w a s a n a t i v e o f A b d e r a l i k e Protagoras a n d a c o e v a l

on individual problems,

o f P r o d i c u s a n d Socrates ( a b o u t 4 6 5 - a b o u t 3 7 0 B . C . ) ; a g r e a t t r a v e l l e r ,

sidered a l l o f t h e m i n t u r n . H e w a s n o t r e a l l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h e i t h e r t h e

he said o f h i m s e l f : ' I c a m e t o A t h e n s — a n d n o o n e r e c o g n i z e d m e . '

2

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f H o m e r o r r h e t o r i c a l t r a i n i n g i n t h e service o f e d u c a t i o n ,

P l a t o never m e n t i o n s D e m o c r i t u s , t h o u g h h e tells us so m u c h a b o u t his

b u t w i t h his o w n p h i l o s o p h i c a l d o c t r i n e s . So h e w a s pleased t o detect a n

c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . A m o n g s t his w r i t i n g s , w h i c h c o v e r e d n e a r l y e v e r y f i e l d

epic l i n e i n w h i c h his o w n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f vovs a n d

o f k n o w l e d g e , t h e r e w a s a s m a l l section c a l l e d catalogue,

3

after

rjdtKa,

d^at/ca,

MovatKa i n T h r a s y l l u s '

e t c . A r i s t o t l e a g a i n a n d a g a i n refers t o

D e m o c r i t u s ' v i e w s o n physics o r ethics, b u t never t o t h i s l i t e r a r y section. I t s t i t l e a n d those o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l w o r k s ,

ITtpi TtoL-qaios,

KTX,

IJepl pv8p.thv

are d e r i v e d f r o m t h e T J n w e ?

4

KOI

appovi-qs,

o f the A l e x a n d r i a n

Democritus' universal spirit apparently con-

3

4

fax ] 7

was

anticipated,

as A r i s t o t l e r e p o r t e d (68 A 1 0 1 ) ; his g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y (68 B 2 6 , 5

a b a d l y c o r r u p t e d passage o f Proclus) m a y w e l l have b e e n

connected

w i t h his c o n c e p t o f t h e o r i g i n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o f c i v i l i z a t i o n as expressed i n his p r i n c i p a l w o r k o n Physics, t h e

MiKp6$ cUafcocr/xo?. S u r e l y there is n o 6

reason t o say t h a t D e m o c r i t u s f o r e s h a d o w e d A l e x a n d r i a n scholarship o r

l i b r a r y a n d preserved o n l y i n D i o g e n e s L a e r t i u s ; n o n e o f t h e f e w l a t e r

even t o p r o c l a i m h i m as t h e ' A l t m e i s t e r unserer Wissenschaft',

writers w h o quoted a D e m o c r i t e a n saying o n poetry, language, o r c r i t i -

most fervent a d m i r e r d i d .

as his

7

c i s m a t t r i b u t e d i t t o o n e o f these b o o k s ; t h e a t t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e respective

W h e n w e n o w t u r n t o questions o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , w e s h o u l d expect

f r a g m e n t s i n o u r m o d e r n collections are m a d e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e subjects

t o discover i n t h e Sophists a n e w a t t i t u d e t o epic p o e t r y . I n t h e s i x t h

o f t h e sayings a n d a r e therefore q u i t e a r b i t r a r y . W e c a n n o t e v e n be

c e n t u r y t h e a c t i v i t y o f t h e rhapsodes was v e r y l i v e l y , a n d i t c o n t i n u e d i n t o

c e r t a i n t h a t g e n u i n e D e m o c r i t e a n expressions w e r e used f o r t h e h e a d -

t h e fifth c e n t u r y .

ings. D e m o c r i t u s ' k n o w l e d g e o f t h e ' p h i l o s o p h y ' o f his f e l l o w t o w n s m a n

r e g a r d e d as t h e w o r k s o f one poet, c a l l e d H o m e r . T h e earliest w r i t e r o f

Protagoras is attested b y his p o l e m i c s against i t (68 A 114, B 1 5 6 ) ; so w e

elegiacs t h a t w e k n o w , C a l l i n u s o f Ephesus, i n t h e first h a l f o f t h e seventh

should very m u c h like t o k n o w i f Democritus borrowed f r o m h i m the

c e n t u r y ascribed t o h i m e v e n t h e epics o n t h e T h e b a n w a r s ;

i m p o r t a n t t e r m onfWn-eia

:

5

Ilepi 'Opvrjpov rj opBoeireirjs

/eat

yXtooacwv

8

I t looks as i f a l l o r m o s t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e epics were

9

i n the

p o p u l a r story-books o f t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y a b o u t t h e life o f H o m e r a n d

(68 A 3 3 , x i 1 = B 2 0 a ) . T h e w o r d i n g o f this t i t l e suggests a d i s t i n c t i o n

a b o u t his contest w i t h H e s i o d h e is t h e m a k e r o f a r e m a r k a b l e n u m b e r o f

b e t w e e n a ' s t r a i g h t ' epic d i c t i o n a n d t h e obsolete w o r d s n e e d i n g e x p l a n a -

poems, m a i n l y o n t h e T r o j a n w a r , b u t also o n The Afterborn, t h e 'EnLyovoi

t i o n ; this w o u l d b e n o s t a r t l i n g n o v e l t y , as t h e correctness o f H o m e r ' s use

i n t h e T h e b a n wars, a n d o n t h e

o f t h e G r e e k l a n g u a g e a n d t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f his r a r e vocables w e r e discussed a t least f r o m t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y o n . I n his a d m i r a t i o n o f H o m e r ' s 6

d i v i n e genius a n d i n s p i r e d p o e t r y h e is o n t h e side o f Theagenes a n d t h e rhapsodes against X e n o p h a n e s

a n d Heraclitus; but i n conformity with

his Sophistic c o n t e m p o r a r i e s h e seems t o h a v e a b s t a i n e d f r o m a l l e g o r i c a l 1

N o t m e n t i o n e d i n Vors. o r i n Art. script.;

cf. Pkiletae

Coi reliquiae,

ed. G . Kuchenmiiller

( D i s s . B e r l i n 1927) test. 14, cf. test. 15 a-b, t 6 a n d p . 2 2 ; see below, p . 9 1 . 2

Vors. 6 8 B 1 1 6 ; D e m e t r . P h a l . fr. 9 3 , W e h r l i , Die Sckule

des Aristoteles

D e m o c r i t u s and A t h e n s . O . R e g e n b o g e n , v . Hiva$,

RE x x (1950) 1441 f.

i S e e a b o v e , p . 3 7 , a n d Excursus 6

S e e a b o v e , p p . 11 f,

I n this p o i n t I agree w i t h R . P h i l i p p s o n , D e m o c r i t e a I . ' D . als H o m e r a u s l e g e r ' , Herm. 6 4 (1929) 166 ff. 1

2

K . v . F r i t z , Philosophic

on

op6o4w€ia,

und sprachlicher

Ausdruck

bei Demokrit,

Plato

und Aristoteles

(New York

1938) 2 4 ff. 3

O n P r o t a g o r a s see a b o v e , p . 4 2 , o n P r o d i c u s p . 4 1 , n . 5 , o n H i p p i a s p . 5 3 , n . 5 .

4

C f . A r i s t o t . de gen. et corr. 315 a 34

«foi«re . . . ncpl

5

C f . below, p . 5 9 , n . 2 ( P l a t . Crat.)

a n d p. 79, n . 2 (Aristotle).

6

68 B 4 c ff.; D i e l s s h o u l d not h a v e followed K . R e i n h a r d t i n p r i n t i n g the w h o l e o f D i o d .

andvTUiv

tppovriaai

(68

A

35).

1 7 a n d 1 8 as excerpts f r o m D e m o c r i t u s ; b u t w e c a n n o t go i n t o the details o f the endless 4 (1949} 6 4 , o n

dispute. O n t h e objections to R e i n h a r d t , ' H e k a t a i o s v o n A b d e r a u n d D e m o k r i t o s ' , Herm. 47 (1912)

» Vors. 6 8 A 3 3 , x a n d x i ; B 15 c - 2 6 a . ( ' P h i l o l o g i s c h e Schriftcn.*) 4

Taking of Oechalia. A t t h e same t i m e

4 9 2 ff. = Vermdchtnis

Poseidonios', Sits.

Ber. Osterr.

der Antike Akad.,

( 1 9 6 0 ) i i 4 f f . , s e c G . Pfligersdorffer, ' S t u d i e n zu

P h i l . - h i s t . K l . 2 3 2 ( 1 9 5 9 ) 5 . A b h . , 100 ff.

7

H . D i e l s , first i n t h e y e a r 1880, r e p e a t e d i n 1899 a n d 1910, see MJb 2 5 (1910) 9 .

8

S e e a b o v e , p p . n ff. a n d 3 5 .

• C a l l i n . fr. 6 B.« ( = P a u s . rx 9 . 5 ) , see E . B e t h e , Thebanische

Heldenlieder

(1891) 147.

The Sophists, their Contemporaries and Pupils

44

T h e a g e n e s w r o t e a b o u t H o m e r ' s life a n d p o e t r y ,

1

Gorgias: Problems of Style

b u t we do not k n o w

from

t h e rest.

1

45

I n v a i n we look r o u n d for more. W i l a m o w i t z ' s

reference

2

h o w f a r h e c o n n e c t e d a l l these epics w i t h h i m . I n t h e g r e a t c o m p e t i t i o n s

t o S t e s i m b r o t u s a n d H i p p i a s o f Thasos, n o t r e p e a t e d i n this c o n n e x i o n

a t t h e P a n a t h e n a i c f e s t i v a l n o t o n l y o u r t w o preserved e p i c p o e m s w e r e

i n his l a t e r books, does n o t h e l p . W e h a d occasion t o m e n t i o n t h e f r a g -

r e c i t e d , b u t m a n y others i n p r o p e r o r d e r . S i m i l a r l y , i n t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y

m e n t s o f S t e s i m b r o t u s ' b o o k o n H o m e r w h e n w e spoke o f a l l e g o r i s m ;

A e s c h y l u s ' famous s a y i n g t h a t his tragedies are 'slices f r o m t h e

h e d i d n o t d e a l w i t h ' f o r m a l offences' i n d i f f e r e n t epic poems, b u t o n l y

banquets o f H o m e r '

2

great

refers t o t h e mass o f epic n a r r a t i v e p o e m s , a n d t h e

same is m e a n t b y t h e w r i t e r w h o d e s c r i b e d

w i t h t h e contents o f some passages o f t h e

Iliad.

Hippias

3

proposed

two

Sophocles, t h e ^tAop^poy, as

r e a d i n g s i n B 15 a n d i n W 328 as solutions ( A i W ? ) o f r a t h e r o d d t e x t u a l

' d e l i g h t i n g i n t h e epic c y c l e ' , from w h i c h he d e r i v e d m o s t o f his p l o t s , as

p r o b l e m s q u o t e d o n l y b y A r i s t o t l e ; t h e r e is n o reason w h y he s h o u l d be

3

4

E u r i p i d e s d i d after h i m . W h o finally s t a r t e d t o e x a m i n e t h a t e n o r m o u s l y

assigned t o t h e fifth c e n t u r y , a n d he o b v i o u s l y d i d n o t c o n c e r n h i m s e l f

r i c h epic p r o d u c t i o n a n d t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e b e t w e e n t h e single p o e m s a n d

w i t h r e l a t i o n s o f epic p o e m s t o e a c h o t h e r .

t h e i r respective poets ?

A t first i t m a y be u n e x p e c t e d a n d s o m e h o w d i s a p p o i n t i n g t h a t i n t h e

I f w e consult W i l a m o w i t z , w h o m a d e the most p e n e t r a t i n g inquiries i n t o t h i s p r o b l e m as a w h o l e , w e m e e t a n u m b e r o f h i g h f l o w n c o n c e p t s : 4

' D a s fünfte J a h r h u n d e r t b e s c h r ä n k t w e s e n t l i c h

aus künstlerischem

Urteil

age o f t h e Sophists n o d i s t i n c t traces c a n be f o u n d o f t h a t

npiais rrot^d-

T w v , w h i c h was t o be r e g a r d e d as ' t h e finest flower o f s c h o l a r s h i p ' i n t h e 5

best H e l l e n i s t i c t i m e s . O n second t h o u g h t s , h o w e v e r , w e m a y f i n d t h i s

( t h e i t a l i c s are m i n e ) seinen [ H o m e r ' s ] N a c h l a s s a u f I l i a s , Odyssee u n d

result i n h a r m o n y w i t h t h e g e n e r a l l i n e w e t o o k t h a t t h e Sophists s h o u l d

M a r g i t e s . ' B u t , i n f a c t , t h e r e is n o e v i d e n c e t o b e f o u n d o f t h e ' h i g h e r

n o t be r e g a r d e d as 'pioneers o f s c h o l a r s h i p ' . T h e s t u d y o f epic p o e t r y

c r i t i c i s m ' t o w h i c h he refers, o r t h e ' e x a m i n a t i o n o f p o e t i c a l v a l u e ' , o r t h e

o n l y subserved t h e i r r h e t o r i c a l a n d e d u c a t i o n a l a s p i r a t i o n s .

'essentially a r t i s t i c j u d g e m e n t ' .

5

T h e o n l y a u t h o r whose c r i t i c a l observa-

T h e f o r e m o s t stylist was t h e S i c i l i a n G o r g i a s f r o m L e o n t i n i , a n d he

t i o n s w e c a n s t i l l r e a d is H e r o d o t u s , w h o s i m p l y n o t i c e d (11 116) t h e dis-

h a d also a n i n c l i n a t i o n t o t h e o r i z e o n stylistic p r o b l e m s .

crepancy between the account o f Paris' a n d Helen's route f r o m

Sparta

b e g i n n i n g o f t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y a n d t h u s c o e v a l o f P r o t a g o r a s , he is said t o

Iliad Cypria;

was p a i d o n l y i n 427 B.C., after P r o t a g o r a s a n d P r o d i c u s h a d s t a r t e d t h e i r

t o T r o y i n the

(Z

Cypria

( f r . 12 A l l e n — f r . 10 Bethe) a n d t h a t i n t h e

289 f f . ) a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y d e n i e d H o m e r ' s a u t h o r s h i p o f t h e

Epigonoi ( i v p o e m ' (Epig.

6

B o r n at the

h a v e r e a c h e d t h e age o f 105 o r e v e n 109 y e a r s ; b u t his first v i s i t t o A t h e n s

s p e a k i n g o f the H y p e r b o r e a n s i n H o m e r ' s

32) h e c a u t i o u s l y

a c t i v i t y t h e r e . T h e final object o f t h e i r t e a c h i n g was, as w e h a v e p o i n t e d

added ' i f Homer

fr. 3 Allen). T h e

o u t , t o e d u c a t e (•Trai.cWuai') each p u p i l b y m a k i n g h i m

6

r e a l l y m a d e t h i s epic

irepl ETTOJV cWöV whole emphasis o n t o t h e r h e t o r i c a l s t a t e m e n t (Meno 95 c Setvovs Aeyeiv, Gorg.

h i s t o r i a n asks i f t h e t r a d i t i o n o f epic p o e t r y is t r u s t w o r t h y ; a s t r i c t l y

(Prot.

l o g i c a l discussion o f H e l e n ' s s t o r y (11113-20) discovers c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d

t r a i n i n g , a c c o r d i n g t o Plato's

leads t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e I l i a d i c t a l e a b o u t H e l e n i n T r o y

H . Diels, NJb. 25 ( 1 9 1 0 ) 13, considerably over-estimated the merits of Herodotus ('der zuerst . . . mit Glück den echten und den unechten Homer abzugrenzen suchte . . . die höchste Stufe der philologischen Kritik . . . im V. Jahrhundert', etc.). Horn. Untersuch. 3 6 6 ; after mentioning Herodotus' passage on the disagreement of Iliad and Cypria in a point of subject-matter he continues: 'Formelle Anstöße muß selbst die kindliche Philologie der Thasier Stesimbrotus und Hippias genommen haben.* On Stesimbrotus see above, p. 35. F . A. Wolf, Prolegomena ad Homerum (1795) CLXVIII. 'Hippias, acumine artibus Loyolae digno' owes his modern fame to the whole page which F. A. Wolf dedicated to him in his small volume. + Aristot. Poet. 25 p. 1461 a 22 and Soph. El. 4 p. 166 b 1 ff.; on the details of these two passages see the commentaries on the Poetics; on AvWs and XVTIKOL see below, pp. 6 9 ff. Dionys. Thr. I p. 6 . 2 Uhl. tcptots rroir}p.aroiv, o Si) KIIXXIOTOP eon iravrojp -rdv iv rjj Ti*yV1J. Vors. 82 AB; Art. script, B VII. One would not expect to find a book of his entitled 'OvoHaoTiriv, though it is ascribed to ropytq. r$ oo^orfj by Poll, ix praef. and quoted 1 145 (iirtßoXos = ep.ßoXos 'peg', not in L - S under c°-nißoXos); cf. C. Wendel, RE xvm (1939) 507. There is no reference to this 'Ovo/ia

caused a deceit s u c h t h a t h e w h o deceives is j u s t e r t h a n h e w h o does n o t a n d t h e d e c e i v e d is wiser t h a n t h e o n e w h o is n o t d e c e i v e d ' . T h i s m a y b e a serious, n o t a n i r o n i c a l , r e m a r k o n a r t p r o d u c i n g ' i l l u s i o n s ' . W h e n

ws aAal&v KOI a£ OLOIS r e rovs Beards / Ran. 9 0 9 ) , h e s i m p l y means t h a t h i s a d v e r s a r y is a n

E u r i p i d e s charges Aeschylus,

e^ndra

(Aristoph.

i m p o s t o r a n d l i a r w h o cheats h i s a u d i e n c e ; such a r e p r o a c h ( o f ifievSos) is characteristic o f l i t e r a r y polemics a n d parodies f r o m early times, n o t a c o m i c d i s t o r t i o n o f a supposed S o p h i s t i c ' d o c t r i n e ' o f i l l u s i o n i s m . I n t h i s case, t h e r e is n o r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n G o r g i a s a n d A r i s t o p h a n e s . W e h a v e o b s e r v e d t h a t p o e t r y i t s e l f p a v e d t h e w a y t o its u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d poets n a t u r a l l y w e r e t h e c o m p e t e n t c r i t i c s o f p o e t r y ; t h i s p a r t i c u l a r l y applies t o d r a m a t i c c r i t i c i s m .

2

I t is o n e o f t h e i m p o r t a n t t o p i c s o f

O l d C o m e d y f r o m i t s b e g i n n i n g , a n d A r i s t o p h a n e s is t o b e r e g a r d e d as 3

t h e greatest h e i r o f t h i s t r a d i t i o n . W e h a v e b e e n able t o use some single lines o f A r i s t o p h a n e s i n o r d e r t o find o u t w i t h t h e i r h e l p h o w t h e Sophists s t a r t e d t o i n t e r p r e t e a r l y p o e t r y o r t o reflect o n l a n g u a g e ; i t is l i k e l y t h a t M. Pohlenz, 'Die Anfänge der griechischen Poetik', NGG 1920, Phü.-hist, Klasse, ff., tried to prove that Aristophanes used a theoretical book of Gorgias, which contained a syncrisis of Aeschylus and Euripides. Even if this conclusion cannot be accepted, the article offers a valuable collection of relevant passages from the fourth and fifth centuries and started a very lively discussion. Wilamowitz, Radermacher, W. Kranz, M. Untersteiner (The Sophists, Engl, transl. 1954, with a useful bibliography 192 f.), W. Schadewaldt, E . Fraenkel, and others took part in it; Pohlenz, Herrn. 8 4 (1956) 7a f. **= Kl. Sehr. I I 5 8 5 f., quite amiably retracted a good deal of his own overstatements. Regarding the judges who made the decision in dramatic contests, A. Pickard¬ Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (1953) 9 8 , dryly remarks: 'That there was any demand for critical capacity seems unlikely.' So these Kpna.1 do not concern us. A. E . Roggwiller, Dichter und Dichtung in der attischen Komödie (Diss. Zürich 1 9 2 6 ) , collected the material rather inadequately (see E . Wüst, Philol. Wochenschr. 1927, 1137ff.);W. Schmid, Gesch. d. griech. Lit. 1 4 (1946) 11, 13, 2 1 , 209, etc. 1

1 4 2 - 7 8 = Kleine Schriften 11 (1965) 4 3 6

1

3

48

The Sophists, their Contemporaries and Pupils

Gorgias' Pupils, Isocrates and Alcidamas

49

A r i s t o p h a n e s a d o p t e d m o r e t o p i c s f r o m c o n t e m p o r a r y discussions t h a n

d e c l a m a t i o n w i t h t h e s o l e m n p r o p o s i t i o n (Hel.

t h e single phrase o f G o r g i a s o n A e s c h y l u s , b u t w e s h o u l d n o t t a k e t h e r i s k

earlv,

o f t r a n s f e r r i n g his l i t e r a r y j u d g e m e n t s b y m e r e c o n j e c t u r e b a c k t o o n e o r

r e m o v e g r i e f a n d t o effect j o y a n d t o increase l a m e n t i n g ' , SuVarai yap

ov

o t h e r o f t h e Sophists. H e h a d his o w n ideas a n d his o w n c r e a t i v e l a n g u a g e ;

8) Xoyos owaorrjs

1

/icyas

'logos is a m i g h t y r u l e r . . . i t has t h e p o w e r t o stop fear a n d t o Travaai

adWAefi' /cat

/cat XVTFQV

/cat

xapav evepyaaaadai /cat ZXeov €7Tav£rjoat.

a n d i t is j u s t i n t h i s aesthetic field t h a t expressions a p p a r e n t l y c o i n e d b y

T h i s sounds l i k e a h y m n i n p r o s e o n a d i v i n e p o w e r ; i n d e e d t h e logos is

A r i s t o p h a n e s w e r e t a k e n u p b y t h e poets o f t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y .

said t o ' a c c o m p l i s h w o r k s m o s t d i v i n e ' ,

1

Funda-

2

Oeiorara epya

cWoTeAet.

Such

m e n t a l l y , his a t t i t u d e t o p o e t r y w a s o p p o s e d t o t h a t o f t h e S o p h i s t s ; h e

sentences are a t r u e s p e c i m e n o f G o r g i a s ' style, b u t t h e y c a n h a r d l y be

r e g a r d e d t h e e a r l i e r p o e t r y as t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f t h e apycua

r e g a r d e d as traces o f a d o c t r i n e o n poetics. S i n g l e s t r i k i n g f o r m u l a e , l i k e

•naiBeia, G r e e k

that of

p o e t r y was

quite naturally 'ethical'

from

epic

times

o n w a r d s ; i t w a s o n l y i n t h e g r e a t crisis t o w a r d s t h e e n d o f t h e

fifth

dtpUf]

llXeos, w e r e a d a p t e d t o l a t e r theories, as t h e Seven. I t w a s G o r g i a s ' m a i n a m b i t i o n

and

selected t h a t o n

Aristophanes t o t e a c h his

as

p u p i l s t h e t e c h n i c a l devices o f his g r a n d n e w s t y l e ; b u t t h e f o r m a l p e r -

a p r o b l e m . T h e d o c u m e n t a r y evidence f o r t h e n e w r e f l e c t i o n o n i t is

f e c t i o n o u g h t t o h a v e t h e e m o t i o n a l effects o n t h e hearers w h i c h he

c e n t u r y t h a t a consciousness arose o f t h i s i n n a t e e t h i c a l t e n d e n c y 2

Frogs,

g i v e n b y A r i s t o p h a n e s , especially i n t h e

w h e r e t h e g r e a t poets o f

described. Gorgias'

efforts h a v e

o f t e n been subjected

to ridicule i n

t h e past, represented b y Aeschylus, are a p p r o v e d as t h e m o r a l leaders o f

a n c i e n t a n d m o d e r n t i m e s ; t h i s is easier t h a n t o t r y t o r e a c h a b a l a n c e d

t h e i r p e o p l e , w h i l e c o n t e m p o r a r y poets, represented b y E u r i p i d e s , o r

j u d g e m e n t o n t h e m . T h e a r t i f i c i a l i t i e s a n d e m p t y phrases o f t h e v i r t u o s o

' p h i l o s o p h e r s ' , l i k e Socrates a n d t h e Sophists, are c o n d e m n e d as de-

m a y be b o r i n g o r even r e p e l l e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y t o t h e p h i l o s o p h i c m i n d ;

stroyers o f m o r a l s .

b u t w e s t i l l feel a g e n u i n e duAta, a l o v e f o r t h e

I n t h e course o f his d e c l a m a t i o n o n H e l e n G o r g i a s stresses a g a i n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e aVdVr/, t h e ' d e c e p t i o n ' , w h i c h e v e r y w h e t h e r i n verse o r prose, is a b l e t o p r o d u c e (Hel. I i ) . T h e n h e calls p o e t r y i n g e n e r a l a airacrav

/cat

vofxi^oj

teal

ovo/id^a) Xoyov

Xoyos

(speech),

8 . 10 a n d p r o b a b l y

3

fierpov (Hel.

9 ) , w h i c h sounds

Xoyos,

as t h e m o v i n g p o w e r

b e h i n d t h e m . T h i s seems t o h a v e ' e n c h a n t e d ' his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s a n d t o have exerted a lasting influence.

5

S u c h a s t i m u l u s c a n n o t be e n t i r e l y

d i s r e g a r d e d i n a h i s t o r y o f duAoAoyta.

'speech i n verse', TT)V Troir/o-tv

eyovra

4

O f G o r g i a s ' m a n y p u p i l s t h e m o s t d i s t i n g u i s h e d w e r e Isocrates a n d A l c i d a m a s , t w o d i f f e r e n t , even c o n t r a s t i n g

figures.

L i k e his m a s t e r ,

l i k e d e p r e c i a t i n g i t i n t h e interest o f r h e t o r i c ; b u t , o n t h e o d i e r h a n d , he

Isocrates ( 4 3 6 - 3 3 8 B.C.) has n o t been a f a v o u r i t e e i t h e r w i t h p h i l o s o p h e r s

goes o n t o describe t h e e x t r e m e l y p o w e r f u l effect o f t h i s ' m e t r i c a l c o m -

o r s c h o l a r s ; b u t n o b o d y c a n d e n y h i m his t r u e l o v e a n d m a s t e r y o f

aKovovras tlo-rjXOe Kai 2 1 3 4 and my whole review of W. Jaeger,

griechische

Dichtung und die griechische

Kultur

Paideia

1 (1934);

see also

Die

(1932} 18.

See Pohlenz, loc. cit. 167 ff., and especially W. Schadewaldt, 'Furcht und Mitleid?' 8 3 (1955) 129 ff., 144, 158, 165 «= Hellas und Hesperien ( i 9 6 0 ) 346 ff., who provides the most detailed and convincing interpretation of the relevant terms ofios and EACOS- with all the somatic symptoms mentioned by Gorgias have their origin in the literature on medical science. On Aristode see below, p. 75. 3

Herm.

7

1

107, 114.

2

Laiini

3

Auctor

nepl

vipovs 3. 2 TO otSovv,

u-eLpaiciwoes,

ifivxpov,

J . W. H .

Sermonis

with

KOKd^nXov KTX.

* J . D. Denniston, Greek Prose Style (1952) 10 ff., 'the influence was, I believe, wholly bad'. E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa I (1898) 6 3 - 7 9 , 'Gorgias und seine Schule'; pp. 15 ff. 'Die Begründung der attischen Kunstprosa'. Art. script, B XXIV Radermacher ( 1 9 5 1 ) . Marrou 7 9 - 9 1 ; I have always found W.Jaeger's judgement on Isocrates (Paideia in 1 9 9 - 2 2 5 , esp. 222 f.) well balanced, and disagree with Marrou on this point. W. Steidle, Herm. 8 0 ( 1 9 5 2 ) , 257 ff., esp. 274 ff., 296. i Isocr. or. 3 , Nicocl. 5 - 9 = Art. script, B xxrv 4 1 . 3 , repeated almost verbatim in or. 15, Antidos. 2 5 3 - 7 . 814312 £ 3

6

50

The Sophists, their Contemporaries and Pupils

Hippias

d i d n o t a i m a t t h e e m o t i o n a l effects o f pLK-n a n d cAeo?, o f ' s h u d d e r i n g

references t o t h e

a n d w a i l i n g ' , b u t a t r a t i o n a l persuasion b y sober a r g u m e n t s

av8pa>7Tivov

(THAW,

ßiov

Odyssey; KaroTTTpov,

1

Study of Antiquities

he c a l l e d i t a ' f a i r m i r r o r o f h u m a n l i f e '

KOXOV

at t h a t t i m e a startling m e t a p h o r , w h i c h m e t

ireidovs S-qpuovpyov, ' p e r hrt^rrqpvnv Tretöoöff). S o m e Sophists u n f o r t u n a t e l y confused t h i s c r e a t i v e r e a s o n i n g , t h e Xoyos, w i t h sterile l e a r n i n g , ypdp.p,ara, as Isocrates c o m p l a i n e d (or. 13 K . oo. 10 f f . ) ;

w i t h A r i s t o t l e ' s s h a r p d i s a p p r o v a l (Met.

f o r his p a r t n o d o u b t , he h i g h l y v a l u e d t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e k n o w l e d g e o f

agoras) h o n o u r e d b y c e r t a i n G r e e k cities. So i t is clear t h a t his b o o k was

mW«?);

h e is said t o h a v e c a l l e d r h e t o r i c

(Art script.

suadendi opificem'

B x x r v 18, cf. 19

l i t e r a t u r e , p o e t r y as w e l l as a r t i s t i c prose (or. 2

in Nicocl,

13, e t c . ) , b u t

o n l y i n so far as i t l e d t o t h e final i d e a l , t o e5 Aeyew ' g o o d s p e a k i n g ' . is n o t m e a n t i n a p u r e l y f o r m a l sense. ' T o use t h e

KaX&s xPV ^ h Panegyr. 4 9 ) ; a

a

i

s

m

e

D e s t

guarantee o f

rraßevciis,

Xoyos

1

This

Xoyat (or. 4 ,

well',

o f 'culture'

a n d 'those are c a l l e d Greeks r a t h e r w h o share i n o u r [ i . e .

fiaXXov rfjs Kotvrjs

i n 3 p . 1406 b 1 2 ) .

1

O t h e r short

sentences m a y p o i n t t o his d e f i n i t i o n o f t r a g i c p a t h o s , w h i c h p e r h a p s o w e d s o m e t h i n g t o t h a t o f his master G o r g i a s . A l c i d a m a s also m e n t i o n e d 2

l y r i c poets ( A r c h i l o c h u s , S a p p h o ) a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s ( P y t h a g o r a s ,

a c o m p i l a t i o n o f v a r i e d learned m a t e r i a l , a n d this links h i m w i t h the g r o u p o f Sophists t o w h o m w e n o w f i n a l l y c o m e , those w h o m a i n l y o r exclusively

collected

a n d described

'antiquities'.

ApxaioXoyLa

and military 'history';

antiquitates, V a r r o ' s

"EXX-qvas KaXetadai

depreciated o r overestimated w i t h equal injustice at later times.

7ratSeiicrecus' TTJS r)p,€T€pas

T)

TOU?

vaea>$ /leTeyovrac ( i b i d . 5 0 , cf. 15. 2 9 3 ) . F o r t h e first t i m e t h e c u l t u r a l u n i t y o f t h e ' G r e e k s ' is q u i t e consciously p r o c l a i m e d i n t h i s m o s t f a m o u s sentence o f I s o c r a t e s ; i t p o i n t s f a r i n t o t h e f u t u r e .

2

F o r these g e n e r a l

reasons he deserves his p l a c e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f s c h o l a r s h i p . Alcidamas,

I t was H i p p i a s o f E l i s as represented i n Plato's d i a l o g u e 4

285 D =

Vors. 86

A 11) w h o used t h e w o r d

dpxaioXoyla

knowledge,

(Hipp. max.

f o r t h e first a n d

o n l y t i m e i n p r e - H e l l e n i s t i c l i t e r a t u r e ; 'people l i k e t o h e a r a b o u t t h e genealogies o f heroes a n d m e n , a b o u t t h e e a r l y f o u n d a t i o n s o f cities,

p e r h a p s s l i g h t l y o l d e r t h a n Isocrates, w a s i n f a v o u r o f t h e

3

the

L a t i n t r a n s l a t i o n o f dpxaioXoyla,

b e c a m e t h e f a m i l i a r expression for t h i s b r a n c h o f indispensable

rrjs

was

G r e e k t e r m f o r ' a n t i q u a r i a n l o r e ' as d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m t h e g r e a t p o l i t i c a l

A t h e n i a n ] c u l t u r e t h a n those w h o share i n o u r c o m m o n r a c e ' /cat TOVS

Anax-

3

avXX-qßh-qv

rrdo-qs rrjs dpxaioXoylas,

5

Kai

a n d so he h a d ' t o l e a r n a n d t o t e a c h

i m p r o v i s a t i o n o f speeches i n p r a c t i c e a n d t h e o r y . H e r e g a r d e d t h e e p i c

a l l these t h i n g s m o s t c a r e f u l l y ' . P l a t o represents h i m as b o a s t i n g o f his

rhapsodes as i m p r o v i s a t o r s a n d h i m s e l f as c o n t i n u i n g t h e

u n i v e r s a l k n o w l e d g e as w e l l as o f his p r a c t i c a l s k i l l i n e v e r y t h i n g

rhapsodic

(Hipp,

t r a d i t i o n i n o r a t o r y ; i t m a y h a v e b e e n i n t h e same t r a d i t i o n t h a t h e t o o k

min.

u p a n d r e t o l d the o l d p o p u l a r story o f the 'Contest o f H o m e r a n d Hesiod'

H i p p i a s deserves p o s i t i v e c r e d i t f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g some special ' a n t i q u i t i e s ' .

avToax^Bid^eiv,

in

' i m p r o v i s i n g ' , o f w h i c h w e f o u n d t h e first traces i n t h e

s i x t h c e n t u r y . T h i s treatise o f A l c i d a m a s 4

book w i t h the title

Movaetov

5

was p r o b a b l y a p a r t o f a l a r g e r

( w h i c h o r i g i n a l l y means 'shrine o f the

368 B =

Vors.

86 A 12).

M a l i c i o u s t h o u g h this picture m a y

H i s register o f O l y m p i c w i n n e r s , ' OXVP-TTIOVIKUW

dvaypa* ot? s ypudvovs Xeyet, dXXd rovs (fyvXaxas p . 1461 a 10). W e d o n o t k n o w w h e t h e r the much-discussed q u e s t i o n w h y A p o l l o i n t h i s passage o f t h e Iliad strikes first t h e m u l e s a n d d o g s was also i n t h e l i s t o f A r i s t o t l e ' s Homeric

o f H o m e r is m e n t i o n e d b y S t r a b o ( x m 5 9 4 ) , n o t as e d i t e d o r revised b y

Problems, b u t w e d o k n o w b y c h a n c e t h a t t h e m o s t i n f a m o u s a n d m a l i c i o u s

Aristotle, but

d e t r a c t o r o f H o m e r , Z o i l u s o f A m p h i p o l i s , h a d i n c l u d e d i t i n his n i n e

vdpdrjKos

solve

a s s u m p t i o n o f a n obsolete w o r d

s

2

books K a r a

rrjs

'OpL-qpov

a n o t always u n r e l i a b l e h i s t o r i a n , r e p o r t e d : ' A l e x a n d e r always k e p t w i t h his d a g g e r u n d e r his p i l l o w a c o p y o f the

rjv

ifc TOV

an a

vdpdrjKos

e/cSoo-t?,

KaXovo-Lv.'

6

Iliad AptaroreXovs Siopdojoavros Life o f A r i s t o t l e speaks o f

W h i l e the late

a n ' e d i t i o n ' o f t h e Iliad,

P l u t a r c h (Onesicritus?)

calls i t

hiop&toais, a t e x t 'revised' o r ' e m e n d e d ' b y A r i s t o t l e . A l e x a n d e r ' s c o p y 7

8

tfaiperm yovv rts SiopÖiuo-t? rfjs 'Opirjpov Trovr]aeaig, 17 e«r TOV rov AXe^dvBpov p,erd rtov irepl KaXXiadevrj «rat Ävd£apxov erreXÖovTos /cat ur)p,eiojoapi€vov nvd: ' t h e r e is a r u m o u r a b o u t some r e -

iroirjoctas ( f r . 6 F r i e d l a e n d e r ) . So A r i s t o t l e ' s

XeyopLevrj,

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n this case (as also i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r w a r d s , Poet. 1461 a

vised t e x t o f t h e H o m e r i c poems . . . w h e n A l e x a n d e r w i t h

14) m a y h a v e been d i r e c t e d against t h a t s p i t e f u l c o n t e m p o r a r y , t h e ' Opujpo-

a n d A n a x a r c h u s w e n t o v e r i t a n d m a d e some m a r k s o n i t . ' O u r sources

Callisthenes

9

fidori$, 'Scourge o f H o m e r ' . A t t h e same t i m e H e r a c l i d e s P o n t i c u s , o n e o f

agree a b o u t t h e fact t h a t A l e x a n d e r used t o h a v e a t e x t o f H o m e r o r a t

Plato's f a v o u r i t e p u p i l s , w h o l a t e r was closely r e l a t e d w i t h A r i s t o t l e , w r o t e

least o f t h e Iliadwith

3

4

t w o books o n ' H o m e r i c S o l u t i o n s '

(Avoewv 'Op,rjpiKOJv aß'),

5

apparently

w a s a t r u e (f>iXour)pos a n d h o n o u r e d his ancestral h e r o A c h i l l e s as his

w i t h t h e same a p o l o g e t i c c h a r a c t e r . A l t h o u g h c e r t a i n circles o f the A l e x a n d r i n e M u s e u m seem t o h a v e a d o p t e d t h i s ' m e t h o d ' o f

l i f e l o n g m o d e l . I t is also possible t h a t he w a s g i v e n t h a t c o p y b y A r i s t o t l e ,

l^rr\\iara, w h i c h

a m u s e d P t o l e m a i c k i n g s a n d R o m a n e m p e r o r s , as i t h a d a m u s e d A t h e n i a n 6

P e r i p a t e t i c s , Stoics, N e o p l a t o n i s t s , a n d b y a m a t e u r s , u n t i l P o r p h y r y ( w h o

'Opsqptxd t,r)Trjp,ara

7

1

3

p. 4 5 , and

n. 4 . Soph. El. 4 . * F. Wehrli, Die Schule des Aristoteles 7 (1953) 59 f. Kai vorepov yKovaev ÄptaroriXovs * Fr. 1 7 1 - 5 Wehrli; cf. Dicaearch. Wehrli, Schule des Arist. 1 (1944) fr. 9 0 - 9 3 and Phaler. ibid. 4 (1949) fr. 1 9 0 - 3 . 6 Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis (1882) 2 0 6 .

on fr. 3 . Demetr.

3

I have always felt rather uneasy about H . Schrader's bold reconstruction (see above, p. 6 9 , n. 4 and Excursus to p. 7 0 ) ; it is a relief to learn from a thorough re-examination of the attested fragments of Porphyry and of the 'exegetic* Scholia (6) to the Iliad that the bulk of 7

a

2

1

less f r i v o l o u s g a m e . I t was m a i n l y c o n t i n u e d b y t h e p h i l o s o p h i c schools,

4>ovias vcl sim.); detailed references are given in my note on Callimachus fr, 588, who may have used Aristode as a source for his Aetia. See below, p. 78. * Schol. A ad loc. S«i rt. . . AiWres; see Excursus. Suid. s.v. ZatiXos; cf. above, p. 9, n. 3 ; U . Friedlaender, De Zoilo aliisque Homeri obtrectatoribus, Diss. Königsberg 1895. On Hippias of Thasos {Poet. 1461 a 22) see above,

these Scholia with ^r^^ara cannot be regarded as excerpted from Porphyry, see H. Erbse, 'Beiträge zur Überlieferung der Iliasscholien*, Z l 4 ( i 9 6 0 ) 17-77. The assumption that Porphyry had Aristotle's AiropTiu-ara in its original form at hand is confirmed by Erbse, loc. cit. pp. 61 ff. * 'Vita Marciana' in Aristot./ra^m. p. 427. 5 Rose; cf. 'Vita Latina' ibid. p. 443. 6 'Yhadis dictamen quod dedit Alexandra' = Düring, 'Aristotle' 97 (4) and 151 (4). A sceptical 'non liquet' was the result of the acute re-examination of the tradition by O. Gigon in his commentary on the 'Vita Marciana*, Kleine Texteför Vorlesungen und Übungen 181 (1962) 36 f. 3 D. B. Monro, Homer's Odyssey Books xni-xxiv (1901) 4 1 8 ; see also W. Leaf, Strabo on the e t e m a

symposiasts, t h e g r e a t a n d serious g r a m m a r i a n s d i s l i k e d i t as a m o r e o r

d i e d a b o u t A . D . 305) a r r a n g e d his final c o l l e c t i o n o f

h i m i n a precious b o x ; t h i s is q u i t e c r e d i b l e , as h e

Troad

(1923) 150.

W. Schmid, Geschichte der griech. Lit. 1 1 (1929) 163. 4 ; W. D. Ross, Aristotle (5Ü1 ed. 1949) 4 ; W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great I (1948) 2. ' 38 FGrHist 134 in Plut. Alex. 8 ; it is not a verbatim quotation. Plut. Alex. 26 tells of this valuable box (laßdinov) of Darius, in which Alexander put the Iliad, adding that 'not a few of the trustworthy attest it* OVK oXlyot r&v dfio7Tiartuv u.cp.aprvptfKaaiv; cf. Plut. de Alex. fort. 1 4 p. 327 v; Plin. n.h. vir 2 9 ( 3 0 ) . On ÖCSOCTI? and oiopdaiats see H. Erbse, Herrn. 87 (1959) 286 ff. and A. Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik 11 (1885) 431 f. and below, p. 9 4 . At the beginning of this chapter xin 1. 27 Demetrius of Skepsis is quoted, but he cannot be the source o f the later part. Callisthenes, FGrHist 124 T 10. On Anaxarchus see F. Wehrli, Schule des Aristoteles 3 (1948) 67 on Clearchus fr. 6 0 ; cf. W. Leaf, Strabo on the Troad (1923) 150. 4

0

7

8

9

7a

Homer the Poet of Iliad, Odyssey, Margites

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

73

his t u t o r f o r three years, w h o c e r t a i n l y r e a d H o m e r w i t h h i m . B u t o u r

m e m o r y i n t h e u s u a l w a y a n d scattered t h r o u g h his v a r i o u s w r i t i n g s ,

sources b y n o m e a n s agree a b o u t A r i s t o t l e ' s h a v i n g m a d e a recension o f

show t h a t h e was n o t m e t i c u l o u s a b o u t t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e t e x t .

1

'Homer' n o w meant definitively

t h e t e x t for his p u p i l . I n fact, i t is v e r y i m p r o b a b l e t h a t h e d i d . I f s u c h a n A r i s t o t e l i a n eKooor? h a d ever existed, w h y is i t n e v e r m e n t i o n e d b y

the

t h e A l e x a n d r i a n g r a m m a r i a n s i n o u r S c h o l i a , w h i c h o t h e r w i s e refer t o

Iliad

2

apYafa

dvrtypaÁu> viro VMpóevri , . . ( = Y 385), oí Si) OTÍXOV xai o yeatypáipos u-vyoBels finatv (Strab. XIII 6 2 6 ) . See below pp. 9 4 f. Above, p. 6 7 ; Aristot. Fragm. ed. Ross pp. 4 and 67. Aristot. fr. 7 0 - 7 7 Rose; pp. 6 7 - 7 2 Ross. An imaginative reconstruction of the Dialogue is given by A. Rostagni, TI dialogo Aristotélico LJepl trot-qreav', Riv. fil. cl. 4 (1926) 4 3 3 - 7 0 d 5 (1927) 1 4 5 - 7 3 , reprinted in Scritti minori 1 ( 1 9 5 5 ) 2 5 5 - 3 2 6 with bibliographical additions; see especially F. Sbordone, 'II primo libro di Ar. intorno ai poeti', Atti Accad. f¡aoi\etas

or.

II

eíre 'Ofiypov

79 el roiavrá oe

K

a

t

e£r¡yovp.€vos

s

6 7

a n

Pontaniana,

N.S. 4 ( 1 9 5 4 ) 2 1 7 - 2 5 . .

Fr. 76 Rose = LJepl rroi-qr. 8 Ross. Homer mentioned also in fr. 70, 7 5 ; see also Alcidamas, above, p. 50. A. Romer, 'Die Homercitate und die homerischen Fragen des Aristóteles', Sitz. Ber. der 8

B

Sè

(KVKXOS

= ' c i r c l e ' a n d = epic cycle = H o m e r i c

poems) is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e o n l y i f t h e o l d v u l g a t e o p i n i o n was s t i l l a l i v e t h a t H o m e r was t h e m a k e r o f t h e w h o l e o f epic p o e t r y .

1

3

5

rov

I 10 p . 171 a 10), is a n e x a m p l e o f t h e

A f t e r A r i s t o t l e there is n o trace o f t h i s v u l g a t e a n y m o r e ; his d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between H o m e r , the poet o f

Iliad

and

Odyssey,

a n d t h e rest o f t h e

e a r l y epic poets, o f w h o m h e displays i n t i m a t e k n o w l e d g e i n c h a p t e r 23 o f und hist. Classe der Bayer. Akad. (1884) 2 6 4 - 3 1 4 ; G. E . Howes, 'Homeric Quotations in Plato and Aristotle', Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 6 (1895) 2 1 0 - 3 7 . See below, p. 74. * J . Labarbe, 'L'Homère de Platon" Bibliothèque de la Faculté de Philos, et Lettres de l'Université de Liège, Fasc. 117 ( 1 9 4 9 ) , 4 1 0 ; cf. below, p. 74, n. 5 . Poetics 1459 b 16 navra is the reading of the Parisinus A (saec. x fin.) and of most of its apographa, also of the copy (saec. vi) used by the Arabic translator, according to GudemanTkatsch ; -navras Riccardianus 4 6 , called B or R (saec. xin/xrv) and apographa (e.g. the copy used by Aldus). Not only the manuscript-tradition, but the text of the whole passage which deals with the two rroirip.aTa, proves that -navra is the correct reading ; -navras would mean that he, "Ou.r)pos, surpasses all the other poets. This was, at least in later times, often stated, but it does not fit into the context of chapter 2 4 of the Poetics. * Above, pp. 43 ff. Cf. Philopon. ad loc., Commentaria in Aristot. Graeca xni 3 ed. Wallies (1909) 156 f., see E. Kapp in E . Schwartz, Die Odyssée ( 1 9 2 4 ) 154 and Wilamowitz, 'Lesefruchte', Hermes 6 0 (1925) 2 8 0 = Kleine Schriften rv (1962) 3 6 8 (where the text of Soph. El. has to be corrected : T) 'Opripov TToi-qais, not rà '0. ërr-n) ; E . Schwartz, Herm. 75 (1940) 5 f.

philos.-philolog. 1

3

1

74

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

the

Poetics,

Rational Order in Literary Art

seems t o h a v e b e e n final. T h e a r g u m e n t s h e used w e r e i d e n t i -

75

p o e t r y was t o p r o m o t e m o r a l d i s c i p l i n e , n o t t o effect 'pleasure' (T/OOITJ) ;

c a l w i t h those i n t h e analysis o f t r a g e d y w h i c h f o r m s t h e c e n t r e o f t h e

' m o d e r n ' a r t o f t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y w i t h its t e n d e n c y t o d i s r u p t o r t o m i x

w h o l e treatise. T h i s is n o t s u r p r i s i n g , w h e n w e r e m e m b e r t h a t his m e t h o d

u p t h e t r a d i t i o n a l forms, a i m i n g o n l y a t pleasure, e n c o u r a g e d lawlessness

is t o subsume e v e r y single p h e n o m e n o n u n d e r his g e n e r a l d o c t r i n e , i n

a n d b e c a m e therefore a p o l i t i c a l d a n g e r .

p o e t r y as e v e r y w h e r e else. A s i n A t t i c t r a g e d y , t h e r e is u n i t y , c o m p l e t e -

a l t h o u g h s u b o r d i n a t i n g a l l t h e o t h e r arts t o TroAtn/cTj i n his

ness, a n d greatness (ev, oAov,

p,eye6os) i n

H o m e r ' s t w o genuine poems

Ethics,

made a distinction i n the

1

A r i s t o t l e , i n his sober w a y ,

Poetics (1460

Mcomachean opdorrjs:

b 13) as regards

(1450 b 27 f f . - i 4 5 9 a 24 i f . ) . T h i s ' i n n e r ' u n i t y was n o t a t t a i n e d i n a n y

' t h e r e is n o t t h e same k i n d o f correctness i n p o e t r y as i n p o l i t i c s , o r i n d e e d

o f t h e o t h e r epics (1451 a 19 f f . ) ; t r a g e d y , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h a d a s t i l l

a n y o t h e r a r t . ' H e h a d also n o o b j e c t i o n t o its p r o d u c i n g p l e a s u r e ; o n t h e

h i g h e r degree o f u n i t y a n d was t o t h a t e x t e n t even ' b e t t e r ' t h a n epic

c o n t r a r y , pleasure s h o u l d be r e q u i r e d o f p o e t r y , t h a t is o f every species—

( c h . 2 6 ) . T h e e x e m p l a r y t r a g e d y was t h e

Oedipus Tyrannus o f

Sophocles.

epic, c o m e d y , t r a g e d y — i t s p r o p e r pleasure,

17

oUeia r)Sovrj

(1453 b 11).

P l a t o h a d d e n i e d t h e 'seriousness' o f epic p o e t r y , d e n o u n c i n g i t as ' p l a y '

T h e e m o t i o n a l effect o f t r a g e d y h a d b e e n discussed before b y G o r g i a s

(rratSta); b u t A r i s t o t l e n o t o n l y d e f i n e d t r a g e d y

a n d b y P l a t o ; a c c e p t i n g , as i t seems, G o r g i a s ' f o r m u l a o f ' h o r r o r a n d

(p.lpvnais vpdieojs orrovSalas

serious a c t i o n '

as a n ' i m i t a t i o n o f

1449 b 14), b u t also said o f

H o m e r 'as regards serious subjects, i n t h e highest degree a p o e t '

(ra arrov-

3

w a i l i n g ' , A r i s t o t l e c a m e t o a c o n c l u s i o n opposed t o t h a t o f P l a t o . H e c o n c l u d e d t h a t i t d i d n o t h a v e a n e v i l i n f l u e n c e o n t h e soul o f t h e i n -

TTotrjTTys 1448 b 3 4 ) . H o m e r e v e n a n t i c i p a t e d t h e ' d r a m a t i c ' i m i t a t i o n s (puprjaeis Spauart/cas- i b i d , b 3 5 ) , a n d as Iliad a n d Odyssey w e r e r e g a r d e d as a n a l o g o u s t o t r a g e d y , so was his Margites t o A t t i c c o m e d y .

d i v i d u a l , b u t p r o d u c e d pleasure b y t h e catharsis o f those e m o t i o n s j u s t

This poem

t o t h a t e x t e n t also t h e h i g h e r f o r m o f a r t (1462 b 12

Sata juaAio-ra

1

2

r i d i c u l i n g one o f t h e f a m o u s n i n n i e s o f o l d m u s t h a v e b e e n

m e n t i o n e d ( 1 4 5 3 b n o n tragic pleasure); tragedy, superior i n other respects, a t t a i n s t h a t p o e t i c k i n d o f pleasure b e t t e r t h a n t h e epics a n d is

v e r y p o p u l a r i n t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , as o r a t o r s a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s q u i t e s u r p r i s i n g l y r e f e r r e d t o i t o r q u o t e d i t several t i m e s . B u t t h e second b o o k o f the

Poetics,

i n w h i c h c o m e d y w a s discussed, is m i s s i n g , a n d t h e t w e n t y

half-lines o f a r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d p a p y r u s quality o f the

Margites;* w e

d o n o t reveal t h e poetic

3

ff.),

4

A f t e r t h e occasional l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m o f e a r l y poets a n d Sophists, after Plato's p e r t i n e n t questions a n d d e m a n d s , t h e

Poetics

o f A r i s t o t l e was t h e

first a t t e m p t a t d i s c o v e r i n g a r a t i o n a l o r d e r i n t h e p r o v i n c e o f l i t e r a r y a r t , as w a s his o b j e c t i n a l l t h e o t h e r branches o f k n o w l e d g e . W e s t a r t e d f r o m

fitted

t h e g e n e r a l c o n c e p t o f his ' t e l e o l o g y ' ; b u t w e saw t h a t t h i s speculative

i n t o t h e t h e o r y o f t h e p h i l o s o p h e r a n d w h y i t was d e e m e d w o r t h y t o b e

c o n c e p t is r e g u l a r l y c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e analysis o f r e a l i t y a n d ' t h e m a n y

p l a c e d close t o t h e

Iliad

and

are s t i l l a t a loss t o see h o w t h e p o e m

Odyssey

aesthetic s u b t i l i s t l i k e C a l l i m a c h u s . The

t e r m dpÖoVn?,

'correctness',

3

a n d l a t e r o n a d m i r e d even b y a n

6

quite frequently occurred i n t h e 7

a d m i t t e d a t least t h e p r a c t i c e o f c h o r a l l y r i c , w h i c h i n c l u d e d s i n g i n g a n d 8

d a n c i n g , i n t o t h e second best i d e a l c i t y o f t h e

Laws.

The

opdoros

d e m a n d e d f o r this p o e t r y h a d a s t r i c t l y e t h i c a l m e a n i n g . T h e Kal r a rrjs

Ka)(iaihias

ax^fiara

irptöros iweSeifev ov tfioyov,

b 36. Homeri Opera ed. T . W. Allen, vol. v (1912) P.Oxy. xxii ( 1 9 5 4 ) 2 3 0 9 ed. E . Lobel.

oAAa TO

yeXotov

he

'correct' Spap.aroirot'noas

1448 1 3

152

ff. testimonia and fragmenta.

* The bold combinations of H. Langerbeck, 'Margites', Harvard Studies in Classical ( 9 5 ) 33~^3! I

ö

a

r

e

u

6

7

See above, p. 39, and

1

See

Excursus.

passim.

Poetics

is a

rexvrj

i n t h e t r u e sense o f t h a t

m

I f w e l o o k a t his studies o f l a n g u a g e a n d a n t i q u i t i e s , w e find this statem e n t f u l l y c o n f i r m e d . F r o m t h e final lines o f t h e first c h a p t e r o f his l i t t l e book

Plepl ipfirjvelas,

' O n t h e expression o f t h o u g h t s i n speech', w e m i g h t

d i s t i n c t i o n (Siaipeois) prjpia a n d his d e f i n i t i o n o f sentence (Aoyos) m o r e f u l l y i n this l o g i c a l t r e a t i s e : rrpdirov SeT 6eo8ai T I 6vop.a /cat rl prjfio., eVeiTa ri icrrtv arrodtacrt? /cat Kardtpaois /cat aTrotpavois /cat Xoyos (de interpr. I p . 16 e x p e c t t h a t A r i s t o t l e is g o i n g t o t r e a t Plato's between

6vop.a

and

a i ) , 'first w e m u s t define t h e t e r m s " n o u n " a n d " v e r b " , t h e n t h e Philology

hardly helpful. M. Forderer, Z homerischen Margites (Amsterdam i 9 6 0 ) 5 ff. argues against the attribution of the papyrus to the Homeric Margites. * The Ps.-Platonic Ale. 11 147 B quotes the Margites as Homeric (fr. 3 Allen), cf. above, p. 73, n. 2 ; Aristotle might have learnt to appreciate the poem as a member of the Academy. Callim. fr. 397. °3

n o t i o n s o f experience'. So t h e

t e r m w h i c h Aristotle took over f r o m Plato.

Sophistic a n d P l a t o n i c t r e a t m e n t o f l i t e r a r y m a t t e r . P l a t o i n his o l d age

1

2

Plat. Leg. 6 5 5 ff., 6 6 8 B, 700 BD about opBorns and ijSonJ. J . Stroux, 'Die Anschauungen vom Klassischen im Altertum" in: Das Problem des Klassischen und die Antike, ed. by W . Jaeger (1931) 2 ff., derived from these passages the idea of classicism (Klassik), but he apparently misunderstood the Platonic opBorns. On Kplais •notfnp.arutv and ciassicus see below, pp. 2 0 4 ff. Cf. 1453 a 35, 1462 b 13 and above, p. 68. Gorgias, above, p. 48, Plato, p. 58. * Cf. above p. 7 4 ; Bywater's translation freely used. 1

1

3

76

New Fundamental Linguistic Terms

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

terms " d e n i a l " a n d " a f f i r m a t i o n " a n d " p r o p o s i t i o n " a n d "sentence".'

1

B u t he confines his d e t a i l e d i n q u i r i e s t o t h e t e r m s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e subject o f syllogistic, especially t o ' a p o p h a n s i s ' ; i n t h r e e v e r y s h o r t chapters h e says o n l y a f e w w o r d s o n ovofia ( c h . 2 ) , o n pfjp-o. ( c h . 3 ) , a n d o n Xoyos

Sophistes

(ch.

4).

T h e i r r e l a t i o n t o Plato's

( q u o t e d a b o v e , p . 59) is o b v i o u s ,

but

t h e r e is a n e w A r i s t o t e l i a n p s y c h o l o g i c a l e l e m e n t ( c h . 1) i n t h a t h e

Hipp. 199 peXcuiv avv?>€cjp.a, 'sinews'), a n d so does t h e o t h e r t e r m , dpdpov, ' j o i n t ' (cf. S o p h . Tr. 769 airav KOT' dpdpov), w h i c h h e i n t r o d u c e s i n c h a p t e r 2 0 o f t h e Poetics this sounds r a t h e r a n a t o m i c a l

(cf. E u r .

(1457 a 6 ) . T h e y b o t h h a v e a f u n c t i o n o n l y i n c o n n e x i o n w i t h ovouara o r prjp.aTa; as t e r m s t h e y h a v e a w i d e r a n d less d i s t i n c t sense t h a n t h e socalled 'conjunctions' a n d the 'article' i n later strictly g r a m m a t i c a l w r i t -

Xoyos

assumes 'likenesses o f r e a l t h i n g s i n t h e s o u l ; w o r d s a n d sentences a r e

ings. T h e i d e a o f t h e

s y m b o l s o f these likenesses a n d t h r o u g h t h e m s y m b o l s o f t h e t h i n g s ' .

use o f such expressions.

2

T h e r e is n o n e e d f o r us t o go i n t o these p s y c h o l o g i c a l a n d l o g i c a l subtleties,

On

ovop.ara

and

as a n ' o r g a n i s m ' suggested, I s h o u l d t h i n k , t h e

pr/para

A r i s t o t l e n o w h a d m u c h m o r e t o say t h a n i n

as A r i s t o t l e h i m s e l f c o n t i n u e s b y s a y i n g t h a t t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f w o r d s a n d

his l o g i c a l w r i t i n g s . I n t h e same c h a p t e r o f his

sentences 'belongs r a t h e r t o t h e s t u d y o f r h e t o r i c o r o f poetics'

quoted

yap r) TroirjTtKrjs oUeioTepa

(prjTopiKrjs

77

Protagoras'

Rhetoric

(1407 b 7) h e

t h r e e genders w o r d f o r w o r d , b u t i n h i s

Poetics

r) ovc^ts i b i d . 4 p . 17 a 6 ) . So w e realize a g a i n ,

(1458 a 8 ) , w h i l e s t i l l a c c e p t i n g the categories o f males a n d females, h e

as i n o u r o b s e r v a t i o n o n P l a t o , t h a t e v e n i n A r i s t o t l e ' s t i m e , i n t h e l a t e r

d r o p p e d t h e t h i r d t e r m (names o f ' t h i n g s ' ) as i n a d e q u a t e a n d s u b s t i t u t e d

f o u r t h c e n t u r y , n o separate b r a n c h o f ' g r a m m a r ' w a s y e t e s t a b l i s h e d ;

TA

questions o f l a n g u a g e , as f a r as t h e y w e r e n o t o f a m e r e l o g i c a l n a t u r e ,

t h e i r respective ' t e r m i n a t i o n s ' , t h i s t h i r d g r o u p a c t u a l l y occupies a posi-

h a d t o b e r e l e g a t e d t o r h e t o r i c o r poetics. A n d i t w a s i n d e e d i n his b o o k s

t i o n ' b e t w e e n ' t h e t w o others, i n so f a r as i n t h e i r ' t e r m i n a t i o n s ' ( t h a t

on

m e a n s i n t h e i r c o n c l u d i n g l e t t e r ) some o f these w o r d s r e s e m b l e t h e

these t w o subjects t h a t A r i s t o t l e u n d e r t o o k t o i m p r o v e u p o n h i s

predecessors. I n his

Poetics,

'the intermediaries'.

1

c h a p t e r 2 0 , h e first g a v e a c o m p l e t e list o f t h e p a r t s o f 3

. . . r a /idprj 1456 b 20 f f . ) f r o m t h e ' p r i m a r y

(o-Toiyeta) u p t o t h e 'sentence' (\oyos).

F o r t h e single ' i n -

ovopLara

A s he b e g a n t o classify t h e

m a s c u l i n e a n d others t h e f e m i n i n e n o u n s . T h i s r o u g h d i v i s i o n

' d i c t i o n ' (TT}S Ae'^oj? arrdorjs elements'

pLeragv

2

by

according

to g e n d e r a n d t e r m i n a t i o n h a d t o b e r e f i n e d , b u t its p r i n c i p l e was k e p t for a l l t i m e s . A s t h e w i d e sense o f prj^ara, ' t h i n g s said a b o u t oVop.ara', was t a k e n o v e r f r o m P l a t o , A r i s t o t l e t r e a t e d a ' p r e d i c a t i v e a d j e c t i v e ' also as

pjjp,a:

dvdpto-rros

(De interpr.

a

t h e 'vowels* a n d ' c o n s o n a n t s ' h e b r o u g h t i n t h e 'semi-vowels S a n d P '

a b o v e p . 6 0 ) . T h e r e was some d i f f i c u l t y w h e n h e t r i e d t o d e f i n e t h e V e r b * ;

(r)pLLva). P r o b a b l y

prjp,a is interpr.

f o l l o w i n g H i p p i a s t h e Sophist,

he only slightly

t o u c h e d o n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e syllables, t h e i r q u a n t i t y a n d p r o s o d y , a n d left a l l t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d e t a i l s t o t h e m e t r i c i a n s

4

and their metrics;

as a special b r a n c h o f l e a r n i n g , separated f r o m r h y t h m i c s a n d

'music',

i t a p p e a r s f o r t h e first t i m e i n A r i s t o t l e . I n t h e t h i r d b o o k o f t h e

Rhetoric,

eoriv

XevKos

t h a t w h i c h 'also i n d i c a t e s t i m e ' , TO 16 b 6 ff.). I n P r o t a g o r a s

xp° $ vo

20 b 1, cf. P l a t .

Cratyl. 399

d i v i s i b l e sounds' he used P l a t o ' s t e r m a n d his d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , b u t b e t w e e n

irpooornpLatvov xP

ovov

{De

c o u l d n e v e r h a v e m e a n t 'tense'

3

a n d P l a t o d i d n o t m e n t i o n i t ; so i n this case A r i s t o t l e seems t o h a v e b e e n t h e first t o p o i n t o u t t h a t d i f f e r e n t f o r m s o f t h e

pi\ao,

express d i f f e r e n t

t e m p o r a l r e l a t i o n s . A g a i n h e enlarges u p o n this n o t a b l e c o n c e p t i o n i n t h e

also d e a l i n g w i t h d i c t i o n , h e calls a l l o t h e r w o r d s w h i c h a r e n e i t h e r

Poetics,

ovofLara

fect tenses (1457 a 1 8 ) ; i n De interpretation (16 b 16) h e c a l l e d t h e f u t u r e

n o r p-t]p.a.ra

' l i g a m e n t s ' , avvoeop.01

5

(1407 a 20, cf. 1413 b 3 3 ) ;

E . Kapp, 'Greek Foundations of Traditional Logic', Columbia Studies in Philosophy 5 I use his translation. My paraphrase, which gives the essence of the difficult text 16 a 3 - 8 , is based on Kapp's translation (loc. cit. p. 4 9 ) . ' I take this chapter as genuinely Aristotelian in substance; on the heated dispute see the commentaries on the Poetics; see also recently A. Pagliaro, 'II capitolo linguistico della 1

(1942) 4 7 ; a

Poetica' in Nuovi saggi di eritica semantica ( 1 9 5 6 ) 7 7 - 1 5 1 .

b 3 4 I read with Bernhardy and Spengel rots perpiieois (not ev r. ¡1.), cf. Part, a 8 napa ru>v u,erptKtuv; Poet. ibid, b 3 8 rijs p.erptKijs (sc. TC'YMJS)-—On the former unity of word and 'music' see above, p. 53. This may be in the line of an earlier Sophistic tradition, cf. Isocr. (Art. script, B xxrv 2 2 ) rovs avvheap.ovs rois aiirovf ^17 crweyyvs nBevai tcr\. (see also Radermacher's note on fr. 2 4 ) ; as soon as we enter the field of rhetoric, the priority of Sophistic textbooks (above, p. 31, n. 3) completely lost to us, is always possible.

c h . 20, w h e n he recognizes as verbs p r o p e r t h e present a n d p e r -

a n d i m p e r f e c t tenses

majoeis

prjp,aros,

'modifications o f the v e r b ' , using

t h e same t e r m w h i c h covers t h e ' o b l i q u e cases' o f a n o u n a n d a l l sorts o f d e r i v a t i o n s f r o m i t , such as adjectives o r a d v e r b s

(De interpr.

Poetics

cannot go into the very

1457

a

I

9 irrwots

ovopLaros rj pj)pM.Tos). W e

16 b 1 a n d

c o m p l i c a t e d d e t a i l s ; t h e few w o r d s said m a y be sufficient t o s h o w t h a t

« Poet. 1456

an.

660

3

Cf. Soph. El. 14 p. 173 b 28 ff., ibid, b 4 0 rwv Xeyoficvatv . . . OKCVCOV, after referring to Protagoras' criticism of Homer's 'incorrect' use of the gender, Aristotle, of course, proved that Protagoras, not Homer, was wrong; on Protagoras see above, p. 38. * Cf. D. Fehling, 'Varro und die grammatische Lehre von der Analogie und der Flexion', Ghtta 3 5 ( 1 9 5 6 ) 261 f. See above, pp. 38 f. 1

3

B,

78

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

in-aioT? (the L a t i n

casus

A r i s t o t l e , was c o i n e d as

nomen), a p p l i e d a logical t e r m ; i t was t o o f the

Antiquarian

Research

to n o u n a n d verb alike b y

p . 7 0 ) ; t h e s t a t e m e n t was r e p e a t e d i n his

cause m a n y headaches t o

en-oTTowH?, cf. 1404 b 23 w i t h reference t o

79

Rhetoric (1406 b 3 yAwi-rat reust h e Poetics). A s glosses are c o n -

a n c i e n t a n d m o d e r n g r a m m a r i a n s a n d l i n g u i s t s . T h e last i t e m i n t h e list

t r a s t e d w i t h t h e ' c u r r e n t ' w o r d s (/ciipta), t h e r e are d i a l e c t i c a l as w e l l as

is t h e Adyo?, w h i c h c e r t a i n l y m e a n s 'sentence'. T h e d e f i n i t i o n (1457 a

foreign words,

1

23) p a r t l y repeats w h a t was said i n d>oivT7 o-n/iavrtfcr)

Kara, ovvdrjxrjv

De interpretation

c h . 4 (Aoyoc . . .

KTA. 16 b 2 6 ) ; b u t n o w , r e f e r r i n g t o t h e

p a r t s o f t h e sentence d e f i n e d before, i t r u n s l i k e t h i s : Aoyos- Se

avvderr)

OTJfx&vTiKTJ

TJ? evict p.4pi)

tcad* avrd orffxalvei

ri,

(f>a>vr)

'a sentence is a c o m -

T O .

geviKa

1

(Poet.

1457 b 3 ) , i n c l u d e d i n t h i s g r o u p ; i n

prose t h e y s h o u l d be used s p a r i n g l y . A r i s t o t l e ' s r e m a r k s o n glosses c o n tinue a n earlier t r a d i t i o n , certainly o f the

'Op.-qpov yXiuTras LJepi 'Ofirjpov . . . yXcooaecuv.

used t h e expression a book

2

fifth

century:

Aristophanes

a n d possibly D e m o c r i t u s

wrote

B u t l o n g before t h a t e p i c poets a n d

posite i n d i c a t i v e s o u n d , some o f t h e p a r t s o f w h i c h i n d i c a t e s o m e t h i n g

rhapsodes h a d f a v o u r e d such obscure expressions a n d m a y have m a d e

b y themselves.' T h i s , o f course, means t h a t n o t o n l y c o m p o s i t e sentences,

collections for t h e i r o w n professional use. A f t e r A r i s t o t l e , a t a b o u t 300

but

also n o u n s o r verbs i n i s o l a t i o n c a n i n d i c a t e s o m e t h i n g , whereas

' l i g a m e n t s ' a n d ' j o i n t s ' c a n n o t . W e r e m e m b e r Plato's w o r d s i n his

Sophistes

3

B.C.,

a c o m p l e t e l y n e w i m p u l s e was g i v e n t o these studies, w h e n t w o

poets m a d e

t h e first c o m p r e h e n s i v e

learned collections o f epic a n d

262 A-C, t h a t n o u n s a n d verbs c a n n o t m a k e a n y t h i n g k n o w n , unless t h e y

d i a l e c t i c a l glosses, P h i l i t a s o f Cos a n d S i m i a s o f R h o d e s . W e c a n n o t t e l l

are t w i n e d t o g e t h e r a n d p r o d u c e a sentence. A r i s t o t l e ' s c r i t i c i s m is a g a i n

a t w h a t t i m e t h e so-called yXiooaoypd^oi, o f t e n q u o t e d i n o u r S c h o l i a t o

based o n his f o r m a l l o g i c .

Homer,

2

T h e list o f t h e e i g h t c o n s t i t u e n t s o f ' d i c t i o n ' was n e v e r m e a n t t o be

4

5

s t a r t e d t h e i r w o r k , b u t i t was surely n o t before t h e l a t e r t h i r d

century.

a n y t h i n g l i k e a l i n g u i s t i c system, b u t i t s t i l l w a s a f a i r l y c o h e r e n t analysis o f

I n the o l d d i s p u t e o n t h e o r i g i n o f w o r d s A r i s t o t l e w a s q u i t e d e f i n i t e :

tpvoei TOJV ovopdroiv

(De interpr.

some f u n d a m e n t a l t e r m s . T h e r e are some o t h e r r e m a r k s o n l a n g u a g e ,

' n o w o r d is b y n a t u r e ' ,

scattered t h r o u g h v a r i o u s w r i t i n g s , w h e r e A r i s t o t l e c o i n e d t h e t e r m s o r

p . 16 a 2 7 ) ; his answer t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n o f w o r d s t o t i l i n g s

t o o k t h e m f r o m sources u n k n o w n to u s ; w e select o n l y a few as r e l e v a n t t o

( w h i c h w o r r i e d P l a t o so m u c h ) has a l r e a d y b e e n q u o t e d .

our

p u r p o s e . P r o d i c u s h a d t a u g h t his p u p i l s t h e p r o p e r use o f w o r d s

h a v i n g d i f f e r e n t f o r m s b u t m o r e o r less t h e same sense; A r i s t o t l e c a l l e d

ovvojwfia,

such w o r d s ' s y n o n y m s ' (Top.

ouSeV iariv 6

T h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f Platonic a n d earlier I o n i a n - S o p h i s t i c

elements

was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f A r i s t o t l e ' s studies o f l a n g u a g e . T h e r e c o u l d n o t b e

p r o b a b l y first i n his l o g i c a l w r i t i n g s

a n y t h i n g P l a t o n i c i n his a n t i q u a r i a n r e s e a r c h ; i t h a d t o b e i n t h e o t h e r

158 b 3 8 , 163 a 2 4 , c f Cat. 1 a 6 ) , t h e n i n t h e lost p a r t o f his

t r a d i t i o n . T h e r e w e f o u n d H i p p i a s o f E l i s as t h e l e a d i n g ' a r c h a e o l o g i s t ' o r

Poetics (fr.

1 Bywater,

3

cf.

Rhet.

i l l 2 p . 1404 b 39 f f . ) , w h e r e h e r e c o m -

' a n t i q u a r i a n ' , u s i n g his l e a r n e d collections f o r e p i d e i c t i c purposes. A r i s -

m e n d e d t h e use o f s y n o n y m s t o t h e p o e t . H e t r e a t e d also as essentially

totle

p o e t i c a l t h e ' c o m p o u n d s ' , t h e cWAa, w h i c h i n his s u b d i v i s i o n o f ovop.ara

c o n t r a s t t o t h e Sophists he was able t o p u t a vast q u a n t i t y o f m a t e r i a l i n

(De interpr.

o r d e r a c c o r d i n g t o his o w n p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r i n c i p l e s a n d b y o r g a n i z i n g t h e

h e h a d a l r e a d y separated f r o m t h e an-Aa, t h e ' s i m p l e ' w o r d s

16 a 23, 16 b 3 2 ) ; t h e y w e r e considered as t h e h i g h l i g h t s o f t h e d i t h y r a m b i c style

(Poet. 1459

a 9,

Rhet.

1406 b 1, cf. 1405 b 3 5 ) . M u c h m o r e

i m p o r t a n t t h a n compounds a n d synonyms was another g r o u p , the rare and

2

obsolete w o r d s , t h e glosses,

yXwouat.

A r i s t o t l e expressly s t a t e d t h a t

s u c h w o r d s are m o s t i n p l a c e i n h e r o i c p o e t r y 10, w h e r e b y assuming a gloss,

ovpijas is

(Poet.

1459 a 9 f., cf. 1461 a

t a k e n t o m e a n ' g u a r d s ' , see a b o v e ,

' A 'case'-system of Ionian grammarians in the sixth century is a very poor modern invention ; see above, pp. 12 ft with notes and bibliography on m-awts. See above, p. 60, cf. 77. Simplic. in Aristot. Cat. (Comment, in Ar. Gr. vin ed. Kalbfleisch) 36. 13 ev rat /fepi TTOtijTiifiji ovvdivvfia tlrrev etvai TO, ovo/j-ara, Adyoj Se o avros; on Prodicus see above, pp. 3 9 f. Fragments of a treatise, possibly Theophr. Ileal Ae£ea>?, dealing with awiLw/ia, onrXa, etc. in the manner of Aristot. Poet. c. 2 0 - 2 2 , were published by B . Snell in 1

3

Gneckische Papyri der Hamburger Stoats- u. Unioersitatsbibtiotkek ( 1 9 5 4 ) no. 198, pp. 3 6 ff.

7

surpassed a l l h i s predecessors i n u n i v e r s a l i t y o f k n o w l e d g e ; i n

c o - o p e r a t i o n o f his p u p i l s . A s a consequence o f his basic

teleological

p o i n t o f v i e w the d i f f e r e n t stages t h r o u g h w h i c h t h i n g s reached t h e i r ' e n d ' h a d t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d ; so c h r o n o l o g y , as a h e l p t o w a r d s r e c o g n i z i n g t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e past, a c q u i r e d a n e w i m p o r t a n c e . W e c a n u n d e r s t a n d t h e reason w h y h e t o o k so m u c h p a i n s t o establish r e l i a b l e Cf. above, p. 41 and p. 62. On Aristophanes see above, p. 15, on Democritus pp. 42 f. See above, p. 1 2 ; on their occasional mistakes and the consequences of their wrong explanations see above, pp. 5 f. and p. 6 , n. l . See below, pp. 90 f. * K. Lehrs, De Aristarchi studiis Homeruis, 3 r d ed. (1882) 37 f., collected the evidence, but he was wrong in assuming that those yXwoooypitpoi were schoolmasters of the fourth century; see K. Latte, 'Glossographika', Philol. 8 0 (1925) 148. 2 6 . See p. 63 on the origin of words, p. 76 on their relation to things. * W. Jaeger, Aristoteles 346 ff. 'Die Organisation der Forschung* ( = Engl, transl. 324 ff.). 1

1

s

4

6

Records of Performances of Plays in Athens

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

8o

81

lists o f t h e v i c t o r s i n t h e g r e a t n a t i o n a l games. T h e catalogues o f A r i s t o t l e ' s

W h e n A r i s t o t l e r e t u r n e d t o A t h e n s after A l e x a n d e r ' s a n d Callisthenes'

w r i t i n g s m e n t i o n a series o f t i t l e s r e f e r r i n g n o t o n l y t o t h e O l y m p i a n

d e p a r t u r e , he b e g a n t o search t h e o f f i c i a l records k e p t b y t h e a r c h o n s f o r

g a m e s , w h i c h h a d b e e n p r e v i o u s l y t r e a t e d b y H i p p i a s , b u t also i n p a r -

the performances

t i c u l a r t o t h e P y t h i a n g a m e s . T h i s w o r k , u n d e r t a k e n i n t h e archives o f

m e n t i o n e d i n t h e lists o f his w r i t i n g s . N o t h i n g f u r t h e r is k n o w n o f a b o o k

t h e D e l p h i c priests t o g e t h e r w i t h his r e l a t i v e Callisthenes, w h o w r o t e

entitled

a history o f the Sacred W a r ,

ao-TLKtuv Kal Arjvaiojv i n H e s y c h i u s ) w e r e possibly used b y t h e a u t h o r o f

1

2

3

4

m e t w i t h e n o r m o u s success; a c c o r d i n g t o

o f plays a n d d i t h y r a m b s .

1

T h r e e r e l e v a n t titles are

2

IJepl

t h e iVt/cai

TpaywSttov;

AiovvaiaKat

(or

NLKÜJV

AiovvataKiov

a n i n s c r i p t i o n f o u n d i n 1896 t h e a u t h o r s w e r e ' p r a i s e d a n d c r o w n e d ' b y

t h e r e c o r d o f v i c t o r s i n s c r i b e d o n t h e I o n i c epistyles o f a b u i l d i n g e a r l y

t h e D e l p h i a n s ; a n d t h e p a y m e n t o f p u b l i c m o n e y t o a w e l l k n o w n stone-

i n t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y B.C. ( n o w IG.

s

lTv&iaviKüjv

c u t t e r , f o r t h e l a b o r i o u s c a r v i n g o n t o stone o f t h e c o m p l e t e amypadViJ, is registered i n a n i n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e y e a r 331 B.C.

6

Even i f i t

u

2

2325). V e r b a l quotations remain 3

o n l y f r o m t h e t h i r d w o r k , t h e surpassingly i m p o r t a n t

(fr.

A iBaaKaXlai

6 1 8 - 3 0 R o s e ) , a n d t h e r e is some l i k e l i h o o d t h a t t h e i n s c r i p t i o n e n g r a v e d

h a d o n l y t h e f o r m o f a mvag (see 1. 10), l i k e e a r l i e r Sophistic a n t i q u a r i a n

o n t h e w a l l o f t h e b u i l d i n g j u s t m e n t i o n e d was based o n i t (I.G.

w r i t i n g s , w i t h a n i n t r o d u c t i o n o n t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e P y t h i a n games

2 3 ) / T h e poets w e r e t h e ' p r o d u c e r s ' , t h e SiSaovcaAot, o f t h e i r d r a m a s , a n d

a n d a r e f u t a t i o n o f l e g e n d a r y r e p o r t s , a n e n g r a v e d prose w o r k o f s u c h

t h e catalogues o f t h e p r o d u c t i o n s w e r e

called

BioaaKaXtac:

n

2

on

2319stone

a c o n s i d e r a b l e l e n g t h , d e d i c a t e d n o d o u b t t o t h e g o d h i m s e l f , has f e w

t h e r e w e r e e n t e r e d first t h e a r c h o n ' s n a m e , t h e n t h e n a m e s o f t h e c o m -

p a r a l l e l s ; i t m i g h t b e r e g a r d e d as a n o t h e r t e s t i m o n y o f A r i s t o t l e ' s p e r -

p e t i n g poets w i t h t h e t i t l e s o f t h e i r respective p l a y s i n o r d e r o f success a n d

sonal attachment t o A p o l l i n i s m

the names o f the protagonists w i t h the victorious actor at the

7

8

t h a t h e was g r a n t e d t h i s e x c e p t i o n a l

h o n o u r . I t is a f a i r guess t h a t t h e l a t e r registers o f v i c t o r s i n t h e h e l l e n i c contests

9

Pan-

w e r e u l t i m a t e l y based u p o n t h i s w o r k o f A r i s t o t l e .

Aristotle's book

5

end.

was based o n t h e a r c h o n ' s archives a n d m a y h a v e c o n -

t a i n e d m o r e l i t e r a r y m a t e r i a l t h a n t h e i n s c r i p t i o n s , w h i c h w e r e based o n excerpts f r o m t h e b o o k a n d w e r e k e p t u p t o d a t e a f t e r w a r d s i n t h e same

1 3 0 - 4 ; Fragm. ed. Rose p. 8. See Moraux, Les Ustes aneiennes des ouvrages d'Aristote (1951) 1 2 3 - 6 and 1 9 9 ; During, Aristotle 4 9 . 3 3 9 f . ; see also Jacoby in FGrHist in B 4 1 5 , Kommentar (1955) p. 2 1 5 and n. 24. 1

Diog. L. v 21, no.

It is possible that Aristotle mentioned in this list of Olympian victors the victory of Empedocles in 496 B.C. and that Eratosthenes took it over from this book, not from the dialogue IJepl rro^rtuv to which the passage (fr. 71 Rose) is generally attributed; so we would gain at least one short fragment, see A. Rostagni, Scritti minori 1 (1955) 257 f. Fr. 6 1 5 - 1 7 Rose. FGrHist 124 T 23 and F t. Published by T . Homolle, BCH 22 (1898) 260 ff. and 6 3 2 ; reprinted with supplements and notes in Syll. (1915) no. 2 7 5 . The final edition by E . Bourguet in Fouilles de Delphes m 1 (1929) no. 4 0 0 (unfortunately often overlooked) is reprinted with commentary and bibliography by M. N. Tod, A selection of Greek historical inscriptions 11 (1948) no. 187. Published by E . Bourguet, BCH 24 (1900) 4 6 4 ff., and Fouilles de Delphes in 5, no. 58. 4 2 ; cf. Syll. 2 5 2 . 4 2 . It gives the only certain date. In spring 3 3 4 Callisthenes went with Alexander to Asia Minor; this is the terminus ante quern for the composition of the list, We should, of course, very much like to learn the exact length of the lost work of Aristotle; but Bourguet loc. cit. m 1, p. 240 has conclusively demonstrated that this is impossible. The cost of 'two minas' in 331 may be only an instalment for the work done in this year, and the prices paid in the fourth century were quite different from those paid in the third century on which the calculations of Homolle and others were based. The figure of ' 6 0 , 0 0 0 words' given by W. Jaeger, Aristoteles (1923) 348 with particular emphasis and repeated in all the later editions and translations is a slip of the pen; Homolle's estimate to which Jaeger refers was 6 0 , 0 0 0 letters, Pomtow, Syll. 275 and 252 calculated only about 2 0 , 0 0 0 letters. O. Regenbogen, 'nivaf', RE xx (1950) 1414, 20 ff. followed Pomtow (21,000 letters), but we had better not accept any of these figures. 1

3

style. T h e p a r a l l e l t o t h e p r o c e d u r e i n D e l p h i is o b v i o u s . T h e

A l e x a n d r i n e scholars, w h o h a d n o access t o t h e A t h e n i a n archives

3

6

3

7

3

* See 'The Image of the Delian Apollo and Apolline Ethics', Ausgewählte Schriften ( i 9 6 0 ) 7 0 . * The most important is the list of Olympian victors, P.Oxy. 222 (vol. 11, 1899, with the commentary of Grenfell and Hunt); it is reprinted in FGrHist in B (1950) no. 4 1 5 in the chapter xvni 'Elis und Olympia' pp. 3 0 1 - 1 4 , with introduction, commentary and notes in separate volumes to all the historical fragments referring to this part of Greece and to the Olympian games. Chapter xvn deals with Delphi pp. 297 ff. and the Pythian games p. 301.

or

i n s c r i p t i o n s , h a d t o use A r i s t o t l e ' s c o m p i l a t i o n s ; i n t h a t w a y a few relics o f t h e o r i g i n a l w o r k are s t i l l preserved i n t h e B y z a n t i n e S c h o l i a t p t h e Attic

dramatists, b u t

4

s

great

SiSao-zcaAiai

i t is q u e s t i o n a b l e

whether

every reference

to

w i t h o u t his n a m e s h o u l d be c o u n t e d as a g e n u i n e A r i s t o t e l i a n

f r a g m e n t (as b y R o s e ) . I n A r i s t o t l e ' s p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h e o r y t h e highest p l a c e o f p o e t i c a l p e r f e c t i o n was assigned t o A t t i c t r a g e d y ; n o w o n d e r t h e r e f o r e t h a t t o h i m t h e dates a n d details o f e v e r y single p l a y

were

r e l e v a n t f o r his p u r p o s e o f r e c o g n i z i n g t h e a c t u a l h i s t o r i c a l process o f t h e development o f tragic art. A. Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (1953) 68 ff.—A. Wilhelm, 'Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen in Athen', Sonderschriften des österr. Archaeolog. Instituts in Wien vi (Wien 1906, reprinted 1965) remains the classic work on this subject. Ar. fragm. pp. 8 and 15 Rose; cf. Regenbogen, 'J7tVaf RE xx 1415 ff. Reprinted by Pickard-Cambridge, op. cit. 1 1 4 - 1 8 , cf. p. 105. 2 and Moraux, Les listes aneiennes 127.—The inscription of VIKCU IG. 11 2 3 1 8 , which was given the name Fasti by Wilamowitz (GGA 1906 6 1 4 Kleine Schriften vi [1937] 378) seems to have no relation to Aristotle, Pickard-Cambridge 69 f., 105 (106 ff. text), Moraux, loc. cit. 127. 24. Reprinted by Pickard-Cambridge, op. cit. no—13, cf. 71 and Moraux, loc. cit. 127 f. G. Jachmann's reconstruction in his dissertation De Aristotelis didascalUs (Gottingen 1909) is not yet superseded; but see above, n. 3 on the Fasti, which he was inclined to use for his reconstruction. 8143*2 O 1

2

1

2

4

5

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

82

Constitution of Athens, Proverbs

83

A t a b o u t t h e same t i m e (after 334 B.C.) as A r i s t o t l e was c o m p i l i n g t h e

o f his elegiac a n d i a m b i c p o e t r y . H e was, o f course, f a r f r o m i n t e r p r e t i n g

records o f p e r f o r m a n c e s o f p l a y s f r o m t h e A t h e n i a n a r c h i v e s , his f r i e n d

t h e poems, b u t selected those passages w h i c h seemed t o c o n t a i n a c t u a l

a n d fellow student Lycurgus, w h o was i n charge o f the p u b l i c

e v i d e n c e for S o l o n ' s s t r u g g l e a n d f a i l u r e a n d success, a n d c o u l d b e used

finances

1

f r o m 338 t o 326 B.C., h a d a n o f f i c i a l c o p y m a d e o f t h e w o r k s o f t h e t h r e e

as a h i s t o r i c a l source f o r his p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e . T h a n k s t o t h e p a p y r u s

g r e a t t r a g e d i a n s ; t h i s w a s d e p o s i t e d i n t h e p u b l i c a r c h i v e s , a n d t h e actors

w e are a b l e t o see t h e p u r p o s e a n d t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e

w e r e c o m p e l l e d b y l a w t o keep t o t h i s a u t h o r i z e d t e x t . " T h e g r o w i n g

relation to the

Politics m o r e

clearly. I n the

Politeiai a n d t h e i r Constitution of Athens t w o p a r t s

c o r r u p t i o n o f t h e t r a g i c texts b y actors i n t e r p o l a t i o n s since t h e b e g i n n i n g

c a n be d i s t i n g u i s h e d ( a n d i t m a y h a v e b e e n t h e same i n others o f A r i s -

o f t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y was t h u s t o be c h e c k e d ; b u t i t is u n c e r t a i n w h e t h e r

tode's m a n y

t h i s r e g u l a t i o n h a d a n y p r a c t i c a l effect. W e a r e t o l d t h a t P t o l e m y I I I

t i o n as i t existed i n h i s o w n days is d e s c r i b e d ; t h e first, i n t r o d u c t o r y ,

( 2 4 7 - 2 2 1 B.C.) b o r r o w e d t h i s o f f i c i a l c o p y f r o m t h e A t h e n i a n s , b u t n e v e r

p a r t shows h o w t h e A t h e n i a n state a r r i v e d a t t h i s final f o r m d e s c r i b i n g

r e t u r n e d i t ; so i t m a y h a v e b e e n o f some use i n t h e A l e x a n d r i a n l i b r a r y ,

t h e d i f f e r e n t stages, i n this case eleven, t h r o u g h w h i c h i t r e a c h e d i t s

1

2

a l t h o u g h w e s h o u l d n o t o v e r e s t i m a t e its c r i t i c a l v a l u e . h a v e h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l w o r k /loAmfcá, o n t h e o t h e r h i s extensive

c o l l e c t i o n o f JTOAÍTCUU ( f r . 3 8 1 - 6 0 3 R o s e ) ,

I n t h e second p a r t t h e d e m o c r a t i c c o n s t i t u -

' n a t u r e ' . I n this d e v e l o p m e n t t h e S o l o n i a n r e f o r m gave t h e decisive t u r n

A r i s t o t l e ' s w r i t i n g s o n p o l i t i c s offer a close a n a l o g y . O n t h e one h a n d we

Constitutions).

to radical democracy. Aristotle i n w r i t i n g 'history' too remained the p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h e r , t r u e t o his g e n e r a l t e l e o l o g i c a l c o n c e p t .

w h i c h b r o u g h t together t h e

T h e latest d a t e m e n t i o n e d i n t h e p a p y r u s is t h e y e a r 329/8 B.C. ( c h .

histories o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n s o f 158 cities a n d t r i b e s , m o s t o f t h e m G r e e k .

5 4 . 7 ) ; b u t t h e r e r e m a i n several o p e n questions, n a m e l y a t w h a t t i m e

I t w a s one o f t h e g r e a t days i n t h e h i s t o r y o f s c h o l a r s h i p w h e n t h e B r i t i s h

A r i s t o t l e s t a r t e d t o c o l l e c t t h e vast m a t e r i a l f o r t h e

M u s e u m a c q u i r e d i n 1889 f o u r p a p y r u s r o l l s c o n t a i n i n g t h i r t y c o l u m n s

h a v e c o - o p e r a t e d w i t h h i m , a n d w h e t h e r he ever i n t e n d e d t o p u b l i s h i t .

o f a n e a r l y c o m p l e t e t e x t o f A r i s t o t l e ' s A9r¡va¿ojv

T h e same applies t o t h e

3

4

iroXireía

w h i c h was

first

AiKaiwp,ara,

z

Politeiai,

who

may

w h i c h i n c l u d e a passage o n t h e

p u b l i s h e d b y F . G . K e n y o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f 1891. T h e w e a l t h o f n e w

d e a t h o f A l e x a n d e r Molossus i n t h e y e a r 331/30 B.C.; b u t i f t h e y w e r e

information and many

used b y P h i l i p o f M a c e d o n for his p o l i c y o f

n e w p r o b l e m s w e r e i m m e d i a t e l y set f o r t h b y

W i l a t n o w i t z w i t h i n c o m p a r a b l e c o u r a g e a n d quickness o f m i n d i n h i s t w o volumes entitled controversies

Aristóteles

und Athen (1893,

o n questions o f A r i s t o t l e ' s sources, o f his r e l a t i o n s t o t h e

A t t i c h i s t o r i a n s , t h e so-called A t t h i d o g r a p h e r s , the

a b o u t 800 pages). T h e

Constitution are

5

o f the literary type o f

s t i l l i n f u l l s w i n g . T w o p o i n t s m a y be m e n t i o n e d h e r e . 6

KOLVT)

dpr/vr],

a great deal o f

t h e c o l l e c t i o n m u s t h a v e b e e n a v a i l a b l e b e t w e e n 338 a n d 3 3 6 B.C. T O A r i s t o t l e ' s a n t i q u a r i a n studies b e l o n g also t h e

Greek Customs

Nofitfxa

ßapßaptKa,

Non-

(fr. 6 0 4 - 1 0 R o s e ) ; i n c o l l e c t i n g such e t h n o g r a p h i c a l m a t e r i a l

he a g a i n h a d a predecessor i n H i p p i a s , a n d m a n y f o l l o w e r s i n H e l l e n i s t i c t i m e s . T h e r e is n o d o u b t a b o u t h i s l i v e l y i n t e r e s t i n p r o v e r b s , b u t t h e

W e m u s t b e v e r y g r a t e f u l t h a t A r i s t o t l e q u o t e d S o l o n ' s o w n verses for t h e

existence o f a m o n o g r a p h o n

h i s t o r y o f t h e S o l o n i a n r e f o r m , t h u s p r e s e n t i n g us w i t h precious n e w lines

m i s t a k e n l y , I b e l i e v e — s i n c e Uapoip.io.1 a p p e a r i n t h e list o f A r i s t o t l e ' s works,

[Plut.] Decern oratorum vitac vn p. 841 F m Schmidt, Pinakes test. 6 a; cf. Pickard¬ Cambridge, op. cit. toz, 153. > Galen, comment. 11 4 in Hippocr. Epidem. Ill, CMG v 1 0 . 2 . 1 (1936) p. 79. 8 ; see below, P* ' 9 J A new fragment of the AlvUav m>Aw«'a to which we had no reference, will have to be added between fr. 472 (Alyt^rwv) and 4 7 3 (AlrmXüv) from P.Qxy. xxx ed. E. Lobel ( 1 9 6 4 ) 1

2

2527. 5 .

* P. Lit. Lond.

108 (Pack* no. 1 6 3 ) ; H . J . (1927) 84, with bibliography

M. Milne, Catalogue of the Literary Papyri in the British Museum of editions.—Fragments of two small leaves of a papyrus codex (Pack no. 164) acquired in 1880 by the Egyptian Museum of Berlin and identified by the singular acumen of Th. Bergk in the last month of his life 1881, Rh.M. 36 (1881) 87 ff. = Opuscula 11 (1886) 5 0 5 - 3 3 . * F. Jacoby, Atthis (1949) passim; cf. FGrHist ni b 11 (1954) 459ff¬ * See the survey and balanced judgement in the Introduction to Aristotle's Constitution of Athens and Related Texts, translated with an Introduction and Notes by K. v. Fritz and E . Kapp (New York 1950). 1

3

ilapoifilai

has b e e n subject t o d i s c u s s i o n —

a n d h e is expressly b l a m e d b y Isocrates' p u p i l C e p h i s o d o r u s f o r

h a v i n g collected

proverbs

( A t h . 11 6 0 D

rrapotp.ia

S

s o u n d e v i d e n c e . I n his first a n t i - P l a t o n i c d i a l o g u e ,

^tAoo-orfuar, h e

r e g a r d e d p r o v e r b s as 'survivals o f a p r e - l i t e r a r y p h i l o s o p h y ' t h e m i n a survey Delphic maxims 1

4

and treated

o f early wisdom, together w i t h t h e 'Orphics', t h e

(yvädi

aavröv,

etc.) a n d t h e precepts o f t h e Seven W i s e

One should not disregard Wilamowitz's commentary in

band (1902) 20 ff.

w h i c h is

adpotaai),

Tlepl

Griechisches Lesebuch

n i . Halb-

Fr. 6 1 2 - 1 4 Rose. Perhaps 'Pleas of right' or 'Legal decisions between different Greek states', as the (not very reliable) Vita Marciana 4 p. 97 Düring, says: AiKajidip. ara 'EXXrjyiotDii woAewv e£ &» Qihrrnos ras tpiXoveiKtas re5e 'EXX^aiv SUXvoev; cf. Gigon's commentary p. 3 9 . Two new references, see Moraux, Les Ostes anciennes 122 f. and During 140 f. Diog. L. v 22 no. 137, Hesychius no. 127 {npooifiloiv cod.). W. Jaeger, Aristoteles 131 f. = Engl, translat. 1 3 0 ; cf. fr. 13 Rose = fr. 8 Ross (p. 7 5 ) . 1

3

4

84

The Masters of Philosophy in Athens

Men.

H e liked t o embellish his later writings o n rhetoric and polities'

PART

w i t h p r o v e r b i a l q u o t a t i o n s . O n e o f his p u p i l s , C l e a r c h u s o f S o l o i , e n l a r g e d his master's c o l l e c t i o n b y w r i t i n g t w o books o f

TIapoip.taL

z

TWO

which

for t h e a m u s e m e n t o f his readers h e cast i n a l i t e r a r y n a r r a t i v e f o r m ; m a n y o t h e r s f o l l o w e d , w h o w e r e c o n t e n t t o a r r a n g e d r y lists. B u t i t w a s

THE

HELLENISTIC

3

A r i s t o t l e w h o first f r o m his p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o i n t o f v i e w c a l l e d a t t e n t i o n t o those t r a d i t i o n a l sayings a n d t h e i r p e c u l i a r f o r m o f ' b r e v i t y a n d p r e g nancy'

(uvvTouia teal 8e£tQT7)s).

F i n a l l y , there is a n o t h e r t y p e o f c o l l e c t i o n a t least as c o n s e q u e n t i a l as Didaskaliai o r Politeiai, t o w h i c h Aristotle led the way, the collection o f d o c t r i n e s o f p h i l o s o p h e r s a c c o r d i n g t o special topics, c a l l e d Sd^ox. W e h a v e m e n t i o n e d a p r e v i o u s c o l l e c t i o n m a d e b y H i p p i a s o f p a r a l l e l passages, n o t o n l y f r o m t h e oldest poets, b u t also f r o m t h e earliest p h i l o sophers. N o w A r i s t o t l e o p e n e d his great systematic w o r k s , f o r instance t h e Metaphysics, w i t h a r e v i e w o f his predecessors a n d g u i d e d his listeners a n d readers t h r o u g h those e a r l i e r views t o t h e final d o c t r i n e o f his o w n , w h i c h presented i t s e l f as t h e e n d , t h e re'Aoy, o f a n a t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t .

4

B u t i t was o n l y b y t h e c o m b i n e d efforts o f his school t h a t t h e m o n u m e n t a l w o r k c o u l d be continued a n d accomplished. Theophrastus missioned t o m a k e a collection o f the

was com-

Opinions of the Physicists, &vviK Schoî. Flor. 7 to Call. fr. 1. * Fr. 460 with annotations. See also below, p. 125 n. 1 and p. 136. The problem was thoroughly and eloquently treated by K. O. Brink, 'Callimachus and Aristotle: an inquiry into Callimachus LTpos npaÇttpdvrjv, CI. Qu. 4 0 (1946) 11—26; but Rostagni was not to be per­ suaded to change his mind, see his review of Callimachus I , Riv. fil. el. N.S. 28 (1950) 72 f.; cf. also Sentti minori n ( 1 9 5 6 ) 2 7 8 f., 319 and 1 (1955) 321, where, unfortunately, old mistakes are still repeated ('Callimaco fu certamente ad Atene alla scuola di Prassifane'). The correct view is taken by Wehrli, Die Schule des Aristoteles 9 (1957) in his commentary on Praxiphanes fr. 1 5 - 1 7 ; ibid, on fr. 8 - 1 0 about his disputed claim to have been the first ypapparticos see below, p. 158. * As far as I can see, only E. Schwartz, Charakterköpfe aus der antiken Literatür n ( 1 9 1 9 ) 4 8 , has laid the necessary stress on this historical sequence. J

6

Fr. 4 0 3 - 6 6 ; see below, pp. 127 ff.

The Rise of Scholarship in Alexandria

The Members of the Alexandrian Museum

h i s t o r i a n i n t h e l a t e r years o f his r e i g n , h e was t o give t h e m o s t r e l i a b l e

f a c i l i t y b y t h e sovereigns f o r f u l f i l l i n g t h e i r duties t o t h e Muses. O n c e t h e

96 1

97

a c c o u n t o f A l e x a n d e r ' s deeds. H e w e l l k n e w w h a t A r i s t o t l e h a d m e a n t t o

epic poet h a d been i n s p i r e d b y t h e goddess, a n d p o e t r y i t s e l f began t o

A l e x a n d e r a n d was a n x i o u s t o get o n e o f his p u p i l s a n d successors o v e r t o

o p e n t h e w a y t o its o w n u n d e r s t a n d i n g ; i n t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y t h e t w o

E g y p t . B u t T h e o p h r a s t u s refused t o leave A t h e n s ; S t r a t o c a m e , b u t r e -

g r e a t p h i l o s o p h i c a l schools, A c a d e m y

t u r n e d soon t o t h e L y c e u m as i t s h e a d . O n l y D e m e t r i u s o f P h a l e r o n ,

places i n groves sacred t o t h e M u s e s .

2

1

2

a n d Peripatos, h a d t h e i r p r o p e r N o w the rebirth o f poetry a n d the

o n e o f T h e o p h r a s t u s ' p r o m i n e n t p u p i l s , s t a y e d ; h a v i n g fled after 2 9 7

r e c o v e r y o f t h e o l d masterpieces

B.C. t o A l e x a n d r i a , h e h a d t o r e m a i n t h e r e as a p o l i t i c a l refugee, h i g h l y

M e m o r y . T h e n e w M u s e u m was a v e r y p e c u l i a r m e t a m o r p h o s i s o f t h e

esteemed b y his r o y a l h o s t . H e was a p r o l i f i c w r i t e r o n v a r i o u s subjects,

Mono-eta o f t h e m o t h e r c o u n t r y , n o t a b r a n c h o f t h e A t h e n i a n i n s t i t u -

3

4

were protected b y the daughters o f

3

a n d a statesman, u n d e r whose t e n years o f 'strategia* A t h e n s h a d e n j o y e d

tions t r a n s f e r r e d t o E g y p t b y some P e r i p a t e t i c s . T h e c o m m u n i t y d i d n o t

a peaceful

i n c l u d e p h i l o s o p h e r s , b u t m e n o f letters a n d a g r e a t m a n y scientists, a n d

a n d prosperous

breathing-space.

H a v i n g been

an

active

4

p o l i t i c i a n f o r so l o n g , h e c o u l d n o t h e l p m e d d l i n g i n h i g h p o l i t i c s even i n

w e s h a l l h a v e t o consider t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a m u t u a l i n f l u e n c e l a t e r o n .

E g y p t . I n his counsels t o t h e k i n g h e f a v o u r e d t h e son o f A n t i p a t e r ' s

T h e y h a d a carefree l i f e : free meals, h i g h salaries, n o taxes t o p a y , v e r y

d a u g h t e r E u r y d i c e , P t o l e m y ' s t h i r d w i f e , as successor t o t h e t h r o n e ; b u t

pleasant s u r r o u n d i n g s , g o o d l o d g i n g s a n d servants. T h e r e was p l e n t y o f

b y t h e k i n g ' s d e c i s i o n , t h e son o f his f o u r t h w i f e , Berenice, f o l l o w e d h i m

o p p o r t u n i t y f o r q u a r r e l l i n g w i t h each o t h e r . R e c e n t l y a n e w witness has

5

i n 283 B.C. as P t o l e m y I I , w h e r e u p o n D e m e t r i u s fell i n t o d i s f a v o u r a n d

t u r n e d u p , a t r u s t w o r t h y one i n so f a r as h e was a m e m b e r o f t h e M u s e u m

m e t his d o o m . T h i s , a t least, is t h e story t o l d b y t h e m u c h - m a l i g n e d

himself. C a l l i m a c h u s i n his first I a m b u s , p u t t i n g o n t h e guise o f t h e o l d

H e r m i p p u s , w h o is expressly q u o t e d b y t h e source o r sources o f D i o g e n e s

H i p p o n a x c o m i n g f r o m the dead, admonished the

L a e r t i u s f o r his lives o f t h e P e r i p a t e t i c s .

x 'E/Wrjvojv piôvov, àAAà fcat TOJV dXXwv drravTcov iOvtov rjaav Kal 8r) Kal 'Efipatwv avTtàv . . . o r e Si) Kal Ta? TÔJV 'Efipatojv 8id rdiv éfîoopLrjKovra (4f38op.rjKovra

o f t h e f i f t e e n t h c e n t u r y A.D. i n a n a n n o t a t i o n t o P l a u t u s .

T h e r e l e v a n t passages m u s t be q u o t e d v e r b a t i m ; paraphrases are o f n o use. A r i s t e a e ep. 9 - 1 0 ( = E u s e b . ^ . f . v m 2. 1-4) Karao-roBels

em TTJ? TOO

fiaoiXews f$if3\ioBrjK7]S Ar)p,rjTpios o 'PaXypevs expr)p.aTla$rj rroXXd oidopa irpos TO avvayayetv, el ovvarov, drravra TOL KOTO. TT)V oiKoup.ewnv j8t/3Ata, Kal iroiovpievos dyopaopiovs Kal pLeraypafyds e m reXos rjyayev, ooov ifi eavTw, rr)v rod p V c r i A e i o s TTpodeaiv. IJapovrojv ovv r)uu)V ipa)TT)Oels rrocrai rivh piupidSes rvyxdvovai fiif$Xia>v, etrrev vrrep rag sitcom, jUaoiXev- orrovodaai S* ev oXtya) XP® P ^P^ trXi]pa>0'i)vai TrevTi)KOVTa pLvpidSas rd Xoiira. rjpoorjyyeXrai 8e p.01 Kal rd TOJV 'lovoaiatv vop,ip.a p,€Taypa AeXrlov 19 (1964, published 1965) 1 7 - 2 5 (with plates 1 2 - 1 5 ) , who is inclined to assign the handwriting to the middle of the fourth century B . C . (C. H. Roberts thinks of about 300 B.c. and P. M. Fraser of 280 B.c.). Cf. below, p. 139, n. 7 and p. 237. See C. H. Roberts, Greek Literary Hands 350 B . C - A . D . 4 0 0 (Oxford 1956) xv and plates 1—5 with commentary, See above, pp. 19, 2 5 - 2 7 , 29, 6 6 f. Cf. above, p. 18 and especially the references to Wendel and Zuntz, p. 7, n. 9. A. Thibaudet, La Campagne avec Thucydide ( 7 t h ed. 1922) 58 ff., and K. Kerényi, Apollan. Studien über antike Religion und Humanität (Wien 1937) 186, may be quoted as typical examples of exaggerating the influence of the ancient Egyptian tradition on the new course in Alexandria. See above, pp. 24 ff. 1

2

3

4

s

6

104

Th Rise of Scholarship in Alexandria e

Aristeas and Tzetzes, Tzetzes turned out to be partly, although indirectly, dependent o n Aristeas, and chronological confusions i n both of them were obvious. The necessary conclusion is that the vulgate version of Demetrius' key position rests on very poor evidence. Nevertheless, on general grounds we may believe i n the probability that, by his advice to the king, he furthered the new scholarship and brought to i t the influence o f his great master Aristotle. We have argued that this new scholarship originated from the ideas o f Philitas and Zenodotus i n Alexandria; we must now try to get away from those uncertain modern reconstructions and grapple w i t h a serious new historical p r o b l e m : the relation between this new scholarship and the Peripatetic tradition, not only at the beginning of the t h i r d century but throughout the Hellenistic age.

II ZENODOTUS

CONTEMPORARIES

1

2

See above, pp. 95 f. * In my earlier short papers (above, p. 88, n. 1) there was no space for working out this relation; the Aristotelian line, therefore, remained too much in the dark. 1

A N D HIS

I N the previous chapter on the rise of scholarship i n Alexandria one name occurred again and again, that o f Zenodotus o f Ephesus. H e was the first of a series o f great personalities i n an age i n which the supremacy o f the individual was being everywhere asserted. The individual, conscious o f having entered a new sphere of intellectual activity, easily inclined to a slightly exaggerated subjectiveness. There was no tradition o f scholarship yet that Zenodotus could have inherited. H e had to find his own way. We should therefore not be surprised i f sometimes he stumbled. I t is u n just to measure h i m b y the standard o f his followers i n the t h i r d and second centuries, who tried i n the course o f time to build up a regular technique o f editing and expounding texts; compared w i t h them he is bound to appear somewhat unequal or arbitrary i n his textual criticism. Radically opposed theories are held by modern scholars concerning Zenodotus' Homeric criticism, because our so-called evidence, coming from the polemics o f his adversaries, has often been misunderstood. 1

We have mentioned the collecting and storing o f books i n Alexandria; Zenodotus presumably took part i n this formidable enterprise, as the king chose h i m to be his first librarian. Tzetzes' late excerpts from Scholia on Aristophanes and Dionysius T h r a x are our only source for those parts o f the early history of the Museum library on which the Letter of Aristeas is silent. The first sentence o f Tzetzes' Prolegomena contains one o f these unique pieces o f information: 'ICTTCOV on AXe£av8pos o ALTOJXOS KO.1 2

AvKov p,ev rds rijs KOjpupSias, AXelja Se rds Trjs TpayoiSias-, dXXd ST) Kai rds oarvptKas. T h e n comes the passage on Demetrius o f Phaleron and on the translation o f the Hebrew books quoted i n the last chapter, before Tzetzes takes up his first sentence and 3

See especially above, pp. 92, 94, 104. He, if anyone, would deserve a new monograph. Meanwhile see H. Duntzer, De Zenodoti studiis Homericis, Gdttingen 1848, and A. Romer, 'Uber die Homerrecension des Zenodot', Abkandlungen der Bayer. Akad. der Wissenschaftm, I. Classe, 17. Bd., 3. Abh. 1885. See Addenda. Suid. v. Z-nvoooTos. j Cf. pp. 101 ff.; CGF 1 1 (1899) ed. G. Kaibel pp. 19 f, Pb 1 ff. and 2 0 ff. The beginning of version Ma pp. 24 f. is almost identical with Pb; but Mb pp. 31 f. has a slightly different 1

z

106

Alexander Aetolus and Lycophron

£enodotus and his Contemporaries

goes o n : ras Se cncqvueas AXigavSpos re, cos OLOjpdmaavTO, ras Se 7Toinrt«:ac ZT)V68OTO5 TT 6JTOV P

elrrajv, «rat AvKocppojv /cat varepov AplaTapxos

1

OltDpdaHTClVTO. 1

T h e stumbling-block i n this remarkable paragraph is the expression Stopdovv, repeated again and again. As regards Zenodotus, i t is i n conformity w i t h the wording o f a l l the other grammatical sources and the references i n our Scholia on H o m e r ; he was indeed the first StopflorrTjs of the Homeric and other poems, revising and emending the text, and oio 8ovv was the proper technical term. The reference to Aristarchus proves conclusively that this is what the Prolegomena mean; they do not refer to the collecting or arranging of books i n the library. N o distinction is made between Zenodotus' work and that o f Alexander Aetolus and L y c o p h r o n ; they are said to have done the same for the scenic poets as he had done for the epic (and lyric) poets, oiwpBmuav (or BitopOojcravTo), that is, they made critical editions. M o d e r n scholars have been generally startled by this remark, and that is quite understandable; the 'logical' procedure would have been to p u t the mass o f collected books i n order, to sort them out, classify and catalogue them, and then to compare the manuscripts and revise the text, not to start immediately w i t h a treatment of the difficult tragic and comic texts. A stronger objection is the lack o f any reference to Alexander and Lycophron i n our Scholia on the tragedians and on Aristophanes, i n contrast to the many references to Zenodotus i n our Homeric Scholia. For such reasons some have tried to give SiopOovv a non-committal sense ('to make straight', that is, 'to p u t i n the right order') or to charge the not always trustworthy Tzetzes w i t h a mistake. T h e I t a l i a n humanist who translated part of the Prolegomena on the margin o f a Plautine manuscript boldly changed ounpocovav into the 2

P

3

4

5

wording:

AXe^avSpos 6 AinoXos Kp9mcrav, ZyvoSoros be ras 'Op^Tfpflovs KOX TOIV Xantiov TTO^TISV and pp. 32. I ff. rwv 'EXXrjvtoiDV be fiipXuv . . . T O ; Tpayixag piv aiiupBaioe (sc. Ptolemaeus rex) bi AX^avbpov TOV AITOXOQ KTX. on Lycophron, Zenodotus, l

P

Aristarchus, etc. It is reprinted by Schmidt, Pinakes test. 24 a, b, c, and fully discussed pp. 39 f, but 1 cannot accept his conclusions. The text of Tzetzes and the Schol. Plautin. was much better dealt with thirty years earlier by H . Pusch, 'Quaestiones Zenodoteae', Dissertationes 1

Philological

Hatenses xi (1890) 2 0 3 - 7 .

See above, p. 9 4 . 3 On Lycophron see also below, p. 1 1 9 ; it is unlikely that no one attempted an edition of the scenic poets before Aristophanes of Byzantium about 200 B . C . ; but his work, of course, cast every earlier effort into the shade. * Cf. Sandys i 121 'responsible for the classification'; 'preliminary sorting out' E . A. Barber, Oxf. Class. Diet. s.v. Alexander Aetolus and Lycophron, and so many others. s See above, p. 102. 1

3

phrase 'poeticos libros i n u n u m collcgerunt et i n ordinem redegerunt', and he has even been praised for being the only one to find the correct meaning. But this is an arbitrary assumption, based on a modern prejudice. I f we replace our meagre evidence by a fictitious story, the picture of the decisive first decades of the t h i r d century B . C and of their poets and scholars is i n danger o f being falsified. This is the reason w h y we have taken some trouble to re-examine the tradition. I t does not tell us anything about the administrative work i n the royal library and the handling of its books, as we might expect from other passages of the Prolegomena, but about the three earliest Siopdcural, the revisers o f the most important poetical texts i n the possession o f the king. Scholarly co-operation o f this k i n d between two distinguished poets and the p u p i l o f Philitas is quite characteristic o f these years. T h e king i n whose reign this happened, or even to whose 'impulse' i t was due, is said to have been Ptolemy I I ( 2 8 8 - 2 4 7 - - ) ; there is no reason so far to reject this tradition, as i n some other cases, i n which there has been a confusion w i t h Ptolemy I or Ptolemy I I I . W i t h the chronology of Hellenistic poets and scholars we are on particularly treacherous ground, but we must not let overscepticism deprive us of the few more or less reliable dates. Zenodotus may have started to prepare his principal work on the Homeric poems before his royal p u p i l came to the throne; his a.Kp.-t] was put i n the time o f Ptolemy I , that is, before 2 8 8 B . C . , by ancient chronographers. But i t is quite likely that he finished and published his edition and his glossary under the young king i n the first decade of his reign. T h e t w o experts i n scenic poetry seem to have arrived i n Alexandria some time after 285 B . C . ; but how much later we are not able to guess, I t is fairly certain that Lycophron was no longer i n Eretria after 273 B . C , but that does not help very much. Alexander Aetolus belonged to the literary circle o f Antigonus Gonatas at Pella (after 276 B . C . ? ) , so d i d Aratus. Aratus went to Syria for a few years and then returned to Macedonia. I n the same way Alexander may have interrupted B

c

2

3

4

5

See Schmidt, Pinakes 4 0 . On the so-called Scholium Plaulinum see above, pp. 100 ff.; its author hardly knew that 'in ordinem redigere' did not mean 'put into the right order", but that it was the Latin equivalent of the Greek iy plve»>, cf. Quintil. inst. or. 1 4 . 3 'auctores alios in ordinem redegerint, alios omnino exemerint numero', that is 'to put them on the list of the classics'. On otopdow ~ dirigere in the Schol. Arat. see below, p . 121, n. 4 . See above, p. 102. Suid. v. ZTJVOSOTO? 'ErhtaiQs . . . hri nroX(u,alov yeyovws TOV rrptarov; E . Rohde, /Vyoft, Kleine Schriften 1 (1901) 127 f., believed that Philitas as well as his pupils Zenodotus and Theocritus were all dated too early. The real difficulty lies only in the tradition that Aristophanes of Byzantium was his 'pupil'. This is hardly compatible with such an early date for Zenodotus, but see below, p. 172. • See below, pp. 119 ff. i _ 1

K

1

1

s

S e e

b e

o w >

p

1 2 0 t

108

Zjmodolus and his Contemporaries

Zenodotus' Text of Homer

his stay at Pella for several years i n order to w o r k for Ptolemy I I i n Alexandria and then gone back afterwards. I have scanned the chronological combinations o f ancient and modern times anew; b u t I shall not trouble the reader w i t h the separate items. The negative result as a whole is o f some importance to us: there is no reliable tradition or convincing argument to be found against the priority o f Zenodotus. 1

The principal 'Zenodotean question is, of course, another one: what was the character and value o f his critical work? W e shall see that Zenodotus published a new text o f epic and lyric poetry and a glossary, but he d i d not publish any commentary or monograph. So his successors had no opportunity o f learning at first hand the reasons for his decisions. We must assume, though no evidence exists, that they could use an oral tradition o f Zenodotus' viva voce exegesis, noted down by his pupils and handed on to later generations, or, failing this, that they hazarded their o w n opinions about the ground o f his constitution o f the Homeric text. I n our Scholia which are only excerpts from the ancient Hypomnemata some cautious remarks o f Aristarchus or o f the Aristarcheans are occasionally preserved: p ^ o x e . . . vtrelhjtpev 'perhaps . . . he took . . . to mean' ; but we may be sure that they are omitted i n most cases. Later ancient and modern scholars accepted pure guesses and dubious oral tradition as evidence of Zenodotus' scholarship; no wonder a bewildering divergence o f modern opinions on Zenodotus has arisen out o f such mistakes. W e should be conscious o f the fact that we are on treacherous ground whenever Zenodotus' reasons are praised or blamed. I n a case like A 88 he was blamed for having altered the text 'because he believed i t is out o f character for a goddess to endeavour to find the object o f her search'. But this is mere guesswork; an early Ptolemaic papyrus, published i n 1906, agrees w i t h the text Zenodotus had accepted (not invented) for reasons we do not know. There was no authentic written tradition o f Zenodotus' arguments for his alterations or omissions o f Homeric lines; b u t his successors were i n a position to compare Zenodotus' text w i t h that o f other manuscripts, as they had even more copies at their disposal than Zenodotus himself, and so they could see the differences i n the number o f lines and i n the readings. I n this respect their statements deserve credit. There is even 1

2

3

4

109

a chance o f inquiring into the nature o f the earlier and contemporary copies o f the Homeric text that Zenodotus might have been able to use. We have had to touch on the history o f this text several times. I t is very likely that from the sixth century B . C . onwards a traditional text o f the epic poems existed to which the professional reciters, the rhapsodes, had to keep; but that i t was a sixth-century Attic text which became authoritative everywhere cannot be proved. The poet Antimachus of Colophon, who regarded Homer as a Colophonian, produced the earliest edition o f which we know at the end o f the fifth century. The frequent quotations by writers of the fourth century, especially Plato and Aristotle, show considerable variants. I t is difficult to use them for conclusions about a fourth-century text o f Homer, as philosophers, orators, and historians often quote from memory, but i t can happen that their readings agree w i t h early papyri. 1

2

3

4

Actual fragments o f ancient books w i t h Homeric lines are extant from the beginning o f the Ptolemaic era onwards. Since J . P. Mahaffy started to publish the Flinders Petrie Papyri i n 1891,5 fragments o f such early copies have continued to t u r n up from time to time. Compared w i t h the enormous quantity o f Homeric papyri from the third century B . C . to the seventh century A . D . known to us at present, their number (about twenty) is very small, but their importance for our purpose is relatively great. They surprisingly differ not only from our medieval manuscript tradition, but also from the papyri later than 150 B . C . ; quite a number o f new lines ('plus verses') and o f new readings occur besides a few omissions. I t would be too much to say that these early Ptolemaic texts give 6

7

Homer ( 1 9 2 5 ) , The Athelized Lines of the Iliad ( 1 9 4 4 ) , Bias Atheniensium ( 1 9 5 0 ) , did not give any

credit to the various utterances of the later grammarians, and did not admit internal reasons for athetizing, but oversimplified the case, in so far as he assumed that every line suspected or omitted by Zenodotus (and his great successors) was unattested or very badly attested in early copies (cf. below, p. 1 1 4 ) ; nevertheless, his Ilias of 1950 gives a complete and useful survey of Zenodotus' atheteses and omissions. See above, pp. 5 - 7 ; Ritschl's arguments in which he made some good points are spoiled by his general theory of the 'Peisistratus-recension', which is wrong. See above, p. 94. See above, pp. 73 f.; on the so-called Xvmeot see pp. 69 ff. and Excursus. « See Aeschin. 1 149 = Pap. Heidelberg p. 46, 87 Gerhard, 'Ptolemaische Homerfrag¬ mente', below, n. 7. * Royal Irish Academy: Cunningham Memoirs, no. 8 ft (Dublin); this publication provoked A. Ludwich to write his controversial book Die Homervulgata als voralexandrinivh erwiesen 1

1

(1898).

The term in later grammatical literature was awo tbaivijs, Choerob. in Theodos. Gr. Gr. iv 1. 103. 3 and rv 2. 1. 3 Hilg. j cf. Rutherford, 'Annotation' 31 ff. and the references given by Diels-Schubart and Zuntz, p. 212, n. 7, below. * Schol. A A 63, B 553, cf. tarn B 641. A 548. P 134 (see below, p. 118, n. 2 ) . J See below, p. 114. * G. M. Boiling in his careful and valuable studies The External Evidence for Interpolation in 1

Pack* lists 680 Homeric papyri in a total of 3026 literary papyri. See Addenda. Grenfell and Hunt, The Hibek Papyri 1 (1906) 6 7 - 7 5 , opened the discussion of the problem in the introduction to P.Hib. 1 9 - 2 3 (Pap. of Iliad and Odyssey about 2 8 5 - 2 5 0 B . C . ) ; these few outstanding pages are fundamental and not yet superseded. G. A. Gerhard, 'Ptolemaische Homerfragmente', Verogentluhungen aus der Heidetberger Papyrussammlung rv ( 1 9 1 1 ) , with important new texts and useful explanations. Cf. Homeri Bias ed. T . W. Allen 1 (1931) 6

_ 1

the impression o f a 'chaos'; b u t we can appreciate Zenodotus' problem when we realize that he was confronted w i t h such a great number o f more or less differing copies. W e may assume that he ignored carelessly written private copies circulating i n Egypt, of w h i c h a few specimens are extant, and was eager to look for better ones. There is a temptation to think i n this connexion o f the official Athenian copy of the tragic poets which was 'acquired' for the Alexandrian library and helped to constitute the text o f the tragedies. Indeed I should guess that i t is the recollection o f this attested fact that lies behind the modern inventions o f an ' A t t i c ' more or less official copy o f Homer for the Panathenaic festivals. There is no hint o f the existence of such a copy anywhere i n ancient literature; i t has even been argued that the Alexandrian scholars kept silence just because they used i t as the main source o f their editions. But i t must be emphasized that there is not the slightest evidence so far t o show either that there was an authoritative sixth-century Attic text or that a fourth-century one arrived i n Alexandria; i t remains one of several vague possibilities. M a n y copies from cities a l l over the Greek world were assembled i n the royal library, even from the periphery, from Massilia i n the west and Sinope i n the north-east. I t is not i m probable that Zenodotus, examining manuscripts i n the library, selected one text o f Homer, which seemed to h i m to be superior to any other one, as his main guide; its deficiencies he may have corrected from better readings i n other manuscripts as well as b y his own conjectures. Aiópdwois can be the term for either kind o f correction. I t is hard to imagine any other way. T h e I t a l i a n humanists h a d to face a similar situation when numerous manuscripts o f L a t i n classics were recovered and they had to prepare their editions; they used to pick out one 'codex pervetustus' which they followed and occasionally emended by comparison w i t h other codices as well as by their own conjectures. But there was no 'central library like that i n Alexandria i n the Renaissance; and i n any case, o f course, an analogy can do no more than indicate what may or perhaps was likely to have happened. 1

2

1

This is the result, a meagre result, we have to confess, o f our prel i m i n a r y inquiry into the nature o f the texts o f the Homeric poems accessible to Zenodotus for his SiópíWt?. Let us now turn to that 'principal Prolegomena

FT., 194ff.,P. Gollart, 'Les Papyrus de l'lliade' in P. Mazon, Introduction á l'lliade (1942, repr. 1948) 3 7 - 7 4 , chronological table pp. 6 3 ff.—G. Pasquali, Storia della tradizione e critica del testo ( 1 9 3 4 , reprinted 1952) 220ff.,and H. Erbse, 'Uber Aristarchs Iliasausgaben', Herm. 87 (1959) 2 7 5ff.,are most helpful and also give further bibliographical references. On Boiling's book, see p. 108, n. 4. See above, p. 82. See the etcSoWs Kara TTOXCLS above, p. 9 4 . 1

2

The Proem of the Iliad

Zenodotus and his Contemporaries

i io

57

I I I

1

question' w h i c h w e p u t above: what use d i d he make o f those copies ? D i d he carefully consider their lines and variant readings and constitute his text o n this 'documentary' evidence, or d i d he suspect or even delete lines and change the wording according to his o w n arbitrary judgement? The best way w i l l be to select a few typical examples and to examine them as thoroughly as possible. We can start w i t h the text o f two lines (A 4 - 5 ) o f the proem o f the Iliad; the interpretation o f this one short Homeric sentence w i l l reveal nearly a l l the difficulties o f Zenodotus' new enterprise, w h i c h he undertook w i t h the boldness o f a well equipped pioneer. I t is a lucky chance that the fifth-century reading o f A 5 is quite certain from a rare concord o f the three tragedians: Aesch. Suppl. 800 f. KValv 8* en-eifJ' eAojpa /cam^topíoi? / opvioi OÍLTTVOV, Soph. Ant. 29—30 (V4KW , . .) eáV 5* a/cAauTOv, ara^ov, olatvois /3opaV, Eur. Ion 5 0 4 f. TTTOLVOIS . , , $olvav Brjpul T€ (foivíav Safra, Hec. 1078 Kvoiv re oivíav Safra. They all must have had before them a text avrovs Se éXcópia rcú^e Kvveacriv / olojvotol re Safra, not the vulgate text oiwvotul re miox. A n d Safra is exactly what Zenodotus wrote i n his edition, though i t is attested only by Athenaeus (epit. 112 F ) . This line is not preserved i n any extant Ptolemaic papyrus, and there is no trace o f this variant left i n our manuscripts and Scholia, where only the reading olmvoiol re jrao-t is preserved without further comment. W h a t we still read there is the remark o f Aristonicus i n Schol. V e n . A , that Zenodotus athetized the two lines 4 and 5. H e kept them i n his text, as we have seen, but he must have marked them w i t h a marginal 'obelus'. The reason for obelizing A 4 - 5 may have been that they were omitted i n a copy o f his o r that the context o f the poem i n the opinion of the editor runs more smoothly when ¿g oS 8rj immediately follows upon prjviv . . . 7) . . . rrpotaipe, not upon A LOS S' éreXeíero fiovX-q. Thanks to 2

3

4

5

6

Gf. the most valuable discussion by Pasquali, Storia 2 2 4 - 3 0 . For that reason I dare to choose it in spite of its text having been subjected to vehement discussion for ages. I should like to refer to A. Nauck, Melanges Gréco-Romains 111 (1874) 9 - 1 4 and rv {1880) 4 6 3 ; E. Schwartz, Adversaria (Index Gottingae 1908) 7 f., Pasquali, Storia 236 f.; cf. Leaf, Boiling, Von der Mühll ad loe. A. Pagliaro, 'Nuovi saggi di critica semántica', Biblioteca di cultura contemporánea 51 (1956) 8, 21, 35ff.On Apollonius Rhodius' reading of A3 see below, p. 147. Restored by E. Fraenkel, Mus. Helv. 17 ( i 9 6 0 } 2 3 8 ; the interpolation of the Sophoclean Une into [Eur.] Phoe. 1634 was recognized by Valckenaer. Soph. Ai. 8 3 0 , Phil. 957 are not to the point. ciri póvatv TWV av&pdynuiv Batra (Eust, p. 19. 4 5 : Safras Ath.) Xéyei ó noi-or/jS, ¿rrl hi Qnptatv OÓK ért. ayvoátv Sé raines TÍJS hut no longer in 2 7 3 / 2 B . C . , when his adversary Aeschylus took his place, Syll. 4 1 6 . 3. This is the only evidence for the date of Menedemus' banishment from Eretria. If it is reliable (see K. v. Fritz, RE xv [ 1 9 3 1 ] 7go), Lycophron must have met him there before 273 B . C . ; but when this meeting took place and when Lycophron left his native island of Euboea for Alexandria we cannot tell. It ¡3 not known whether Lycophron stayed with Menedemus and Aratus at the court of Antigonus Gonatas in Pella. Wilamowitz, HD 1 166, by mistake refers to Commentariorum in Aratum rel. ed. E. Maass (1898) 1 4 8 ; in Theon's Life of Aratus, which quotes an otherwise unknown writing of Antigonus Gonatas himself to or on Hieronymus of Cardia (6 '4vriyovos ev rots rsepi t 'Itpdivvpav FGrHist 154 T 9 ) , Alexander Aetolus is mentioned together with Aratus, Antagoras, and Persaeus, but neither Lycophron nor Menedemus. 3

4 5

BG

3

6

G. Strecker,

De Lycophrone,

Euphronio,

Eratostkene comkorum interpretibus,

Diss. Greifswald

Zenodotus and his Contemporaries

iao

Aratus as Homeric Scholar

have been based on knowledge of Cratinus, Eupolis, and Aristophanes. I t tried to explain the rare words so frequently used i n comedy, thus continuing the glossographic work o f Philitas i n a new field. Quite naturally Lycophron's bold enterprise was heavily attacked by his better-equipped successors, especially by Eratosthenes; they probably picked up his worst blunders (for instance on Aristoph. Av. 14 or Vesp. 2 3 9 ) , and the whole work may not have been as bad as these examples. Like his contemporary, Zenodotus, who was no doubt a much greater scholar, he had to suffer the fate o f an explorer o f a new literary province. As a connoisseur o f the comic poets, he made a recension o f the text too, i f the w o r d hiopQovv in the Prolegomena has to be accepted. 1

Certainly a text must have been available when Euphronius i n the following generation composed a commentary on individual plays o f Aristophanes. There is a passionate dispute about the genuineness o f an iambic poem unanimously ascribed to Lycophron by the ancient t r a d i t i o n , the Alexandra, i n which Cassandra's prophecies o f the future sufferings of Trojans and Greeks are related i n 1,474 trimeters. T h e language o f this poem is full o f rare and strange vocables, especially epic and tragic glosses; comic ones w o u l d hardly fit the sombre subject. This penchant for glosses is characteristic also o f the treatise IJepl Kwpupolas, and the inclination to enigmatical obscurity would be i n harmony w i t h a tendency we observed i n the Technopaegnia o f the early t h i r d century B . C . I am therefore disposed, after examining Lycophron's scholarly work, to accept the traditional date of Alexandra as correct, a conclusion I reached independently when some time ago I had to consider the relation o f the poem to Callimachus. Another poet o f the same generation, Aratus from the Cilician Soloi, never associated w i t h the scholar poets at Alexandria, but after his formative years i n Ephesus (?) and Athens stayed at the court o f A n t i gonus Gonatas i n Macedonia and for a few years also i n Syria at the court o f Antiochus. His first teacher was Menecrates of Ephesus, a grammarian as well as a poet i n the Hesiodic manner on agriculture and bee2

3

4

5

(1884) 2 - 6

and

23-78;

W. G. Rutherford, 'Annotation*

417;

cf. K. Ziegler,

RE

xni

{1927)

2323 ff.

See above, p. go. * See below, p. 161. 1

' Schol. Lye.

however, made a conjecture about a second Lycophron. XLllt; a full bibliography of the discussion is given by A. contribute alia storia degli studi classici (Roma i 9 6 0 ) 4 3 7 . 2 2 . Cf. Rio. star.

1226,

* Callimachus 11 Momigliano, Secondo itat. 71 (1959) 5 5 i f¬

(1953)

* See above, p. 107 and p. ug, n. 5.

121

1

keeping; in Athens he was imbued w i t h philosophy, particularly Stoic doctrines, and became the friend o f Antigonus. He then celebrated the king's marriage to Antiochus* half-sister Phila (276 B . C . ) i n one or t w o hymns at Pella, where he met Alexander Aetolus and possibly T i m o n . Antigonus is said to have encouraged h i m to put Eudoxus' star catalogue into verse ; the result was the epic Phaenomena, the most successful o f his many poems, highly appreciated even i n the literary circles of Alexandria, not to speak o f its surprising and age-long popularity as a practical schoolbook on astronomy. A scientific subject was here treated w i t h Stoic religious and philosophic feeling i n a style derived from Hesiod. Aratus had learned these things i n Ephesus and Athens, but the polished simple form was his own and could not have earned any better praise than the epithet Xerrrov, 'subtle', bestowed on i t by Callimachus. Intimate knowledge o f the Homeric language is obvious i n every line. W e have referred to the anecdote that he asked T i m o n for the best text of H o m e r he could get and was told to use the ' o l d copies', not the 'corrected* ones. T h e tradition i n the different versions o f the Life o f Aratus that he produced a critical edition o f the Odyssey is fairly reliable ; i n Syria later on he was induced by Antiochus to 'correct the Iliad, as i t was corrupted by many*. W h e n and w h y he went to Syria we do not know. I t is no more than a modern assumption that he fled from Pella to Antioch when Pyrrhus invaded Macedonia i n 2 7 4 - 2 7 2 B . C . , and turned to editing H o m e r ; but he may have gone there later and for a longer time before Antiochus I 2

3

4

Suid. v. Uparos • . . &KOvarr}s Se èyévero ypappariKoS fiev rov 'Eipealov MeveKpdrovç, Sè Tip,s Apâreios dts J^piardpxetos

/cat Apiarotfraveios.

T t v è ç Sè avrov els Evplav èXnXvOévai tf>aoi (cat yeyovivai

nap'

wore rqv '/AiaSa SiopBdiaaoBai, Stà TO VTTO noXXâ>v XeXvp.âv9ai and ibid. p. 78. 32 ëypaipt Sè »cat âAAa rrovquaTa "f irept re 'Ou.-qpov Kai '/AtriSos* ov fiôvov rà 0aivêu.eva. E . Maass, 'Aratea*, Philologische Untersuchungen 12 (1892) 243 ff., and J . Martin, Histoire du texte des Phénomènes d'Aratos', Études et Commentaires 22 (1956) 151 ff., treated these confused and corrupted texts. The sources, on the other hand, Dositheus of Pelusium and Carystius of Pergamum(?), are quite reliable. No one who is at all acquainted with Theon's commentaries on the great Hellenistic poets will believe in the reconstruction of his edition of Aratus attempted by Martin pp. 195 ff. Avri6x

opla>v

.

. . iJASe

rrpos

ftvrloxQv

TOV Meyav

. . . ical Trpoearq vrr' avrov

rijs efcef

Sij/iotri'ar /3i 8Aio(iijK'ijs; cf. below, p. 150. )

* List of Rhianus' readings J . La Roche, Die Homerische Texlkritik im Altertum ( 1 8 6 6 ) 4 5 ff., and W. Aly, RE 1 A ( 1 9 2 0 ) 788 f.; cf. G. Mayhoff, De Rhiani Cretensis studiis Homericis 1870. Callimachus n, p. X L I I I on Rhianus; F. Jacoby, FGrHist m a ( 1 9 4 3 ) 8 9 if. (commentary on no. 265) and in B p. 754 (Addenda), strongly pleads for an earlier date. But even if in a single case, Hy. n 4 7 ff., Callimachus took over an erotic motif from Rhianus, it would not affect the issue, as this poem in my opinion was written at the beginning of the second half of the third century; passages of the Hecale and of the Aitia were certainly imitated by Rhianus, see Hecal. fr. 2 6 6 . If Rhianus is the author of the new epic fragment P.Oxy. xxx ( 1 9 6 4 ) 2522 A , B according to Lobel's 'reasonable hypothesis', it is even possible that a line of Callimachus* second hymn was his model (1. 17—Call. hy. 11 1 5 ? ) . 3

*

FGrHist

8

See below, pp. 148 f.

2 6 5 T 1.

CALLIMACHUS A N D THE

GENERATIONO F HIS

PUPILS

was no distinguished textual critic i n the generation after Zenodotus ; only Aristophanes o f Byzantium at the end o f the t h i r d century was his equal i f not his superior i n this field. The outstanding representatives o f scholarship between Zenodotus and Aristophanes were two men from Cyrene, Callimachus and Eratosthenes. After Alexander's death Ptolemy I ruled over the old D o r i a n colony o f Cyrene as the western part o f his Egyptian kingdom (perhaps 322 B . C ) ; then his stepson Magas was given a kind o f independent regency (about 300 B . C . ? ) , and there was a time o f considerable trouble between Egypt and Cyrene i n the seventies. But at length the only daughter o f Magas and Apame, Berenice, was betrothed to the son o f Ptolemy I I , and o n their marriage and accession i n 247/6 B . C . Cyrene was finally united w i t h Egypt. Although we cannot fix a precise date for the arrival o f the two Cyreneans i n Alexandria, there is no doubt that i t was after the Ionians h a d started the 'new movement'. For literary men were attracted, not a l l at once—but i n the course of several generations—by the splendour of the new capital and the patronage of its kings. Callimachus' Encomion on Sosibius (fr. 384) may have been one o f his earliest elegiac T H E R E

1

2

3

4

5

See above, p. 118, and below, pp. 171 ff. F . Chamoux, 'Le Roi Magas', Revue historique 2 1 6 ( 1 9 5 6 ) 18 ff.; cf. below, p. 124, n. 4 . It worried Niebuhr, Kleine historische una* philologische Schriften 1 ( 1 8 2 8 ) 2 2 9 . 4 0 , and still confused Geyer, RE xiv ( 1 9 3 0 ) 2 9 6 . 6 0 ff. s.v. 'Magas', that Iustin. xxvi 3 . 3 (and Hygin. astr. 11 2 4 ) called Berenice's mother not Apame, but Arsinoe. This mistake can now be traced back to Call. fr. 110. 4 5 , where Berenice is addressed and mount Athos is called fioviropos Apoivo-qs ^ . i j T p o ; aeo; the Scholion to this line correctly explains: KOTO. nu,ty etrrev, errei dvya-r-qp Anap.as KOX Maya. As a matter of fact, Ptolemy I I I and his wife, the foot Evepyerai, were officially honoured as the children of the Beol ASeX^ol (see my note on Call. fr. 110. 4 5 ) . The expression lXn Teicdeooi straightway with 'lieb den Eltern', as we read in the Arttmis-Bibliothek der alien Welt, 'Die Dichtungen des Kallimachos' ( 1 9 5 5 ) 2 9 1 . See above, pp. 9 3 and 95. See Callimachus vol. 11, pp. xxxvui ff. 'Quaestiones chronologicae selectae'; see also H . Herter, RE Suppl. v (1931) 3 8 6 ff. 1

1

3

4

s

124

Callimachus and the Generation of his

Creative Poet and Reflective Scholar

Pupils

poems, written under Ptolemy I i n Alexandria; the only well-attested facts are that he celebrated the marriage o f Ptolemy I I to his sister Arsinoe (between 278 and 273, perhaps 276/5 B . C . ) by an epic, and the apotheosis o f the queen (shortly after J u l y 270 B . C . ) by a lyric poem. This was apparendy i n the prime of his life ; towards its end he composed the Lock of Berenice (246/5 B . c . ) i n honour o f the Cyrenean princess recently married to Ptolemy I I I . I t was this k i n g who sent for the other native o f Cyrene, Eratosthenes, called a ' p u p i l ' o f Callimachus, to be librarian and probably tutor to his son. Both the Cyreneans, very different from each other i n age and spirit, seem to have been peculiar favourites o f the young royal pair. 1

2

There is a complete unity o f the creative poet and the reflective scholar i n Callimachus. W e found this combination first i n Philitas. Between h i m and Callimachus, however, Zenodotus had made a cont r i b u t i o n o f a new kind to scholarship, and institutions for its promotion had been founded by the kings and especially favoured by a king who was the p u p i l o f Philitas and Zenodotus ; so the younger generation started from a better position and was enabled to reach a higher degree of that unity than the older one. There is every reason to believe that Callimachus began to write poetry i n his early years i n Cyrene. W e read on Cyrenean coins of the end o f the fourth and the beginning o f the t h i r d century the same names o f members o f a noble family as i n one o f his epigrams i n which he mourned their misfortunes. H e was apparently still i n his mother country when, as he tells us himself, he first p u t a w r i t i n g tablet on his knees, and the Lycian A p o l l o addressed h i m as 'poet' and 'dear friend' and advised h i m on the art of poetry. A few lines later he implies that he is one o f those 'on w h o m the Muses have not looked askance i n their childhood'. I n the proem to his greatest poetical achievement, the four books o f the Aitia, he pictures himself transferred in dream from ' L i b y a ' to M o u n t Helicon 'when his beard was just sprouting' ; a n d 'Libya'—supposing that the anonymous epigram quotes 3

4

5

6

7

Suid. v. 'EparoaBévns = Call, n test. 15. * WÛaiûowitz, 'Ein Weihgeschenk des Eratosthenes', NGG, Phil.-hist. K l . 1894. 31 = Kleine Schrifien 11 ( 1 9 4 1 ) 65 ; Der Gtaube der Hellenen n ( 1 9 3 2 ) 3 1 8 . I . See also above, p. 9 8 . Strab. X V I I 838 KaXXlp-ax^S . • • WDIIJTIJS âp-a Kaï irepl ypau-piariKriv èairovSaKcûs = Call, test. t 6 ; see also below, p. 136. * Call. Ep. 20 with my notes. F . Chamoux, 'Epigramme de Cyrene en l'honneur du roi Magas*, BCH 82 ( 1 9 5 8 ) 587. 3 , listed the poems which he regards as 'Cyrenean' and promised to deal with them in another article. The new epigram found in Apollonia has no particular Callimachean flavour. * Call. fr. 1. 21 f., see above, p. 9 5 . Call. fr. 1. 3 7 iraî&as. Schol. Flor. 18 to Call. fr. 2 àpnytvetos ; epigr. adesp. AP vit 42 ôvttaa . . . /uw etc Aifivys àvatîpas fis 'EXLKCOVO, (see notes on fr. 2 ) . 1

3

6

1

125

him exactly—can mean Cyrene more easily than Alexandria. W h e n and w h y he left Cyrene for Alexandria we do not k n o w ; we are only told that he started modestly as a schoolmaster i n a suburb o f the Egyptian capital called Eleusis. This may have been under Ptolemy I ; since i n the seventies, d u r i n g the reign o f Ptolemy I I and his sister Arsinoe, Callimachus already moved i n the court circle, celebrating royalty i n the two poems we have mentioned, and he was probably still a 'young man' o f the court when he was given a responsible commission i n the royal l i b r a r y . T h i s swift career seems to have been due entirely to the extraordinary gifts o f a masterful personality. 1

2

3

4

Callimachus* poems, i n spite o f their novelty, were informed by an exact and wide knowledge o f the earlier poetry from which he drew his models. Practising his craft and reflecting on i t went together. This reflection quite naturally extended to the literature o f the past, to a l l the various forms o f metre and language, and to the recondite sources o f its subject-matter. O n l y the most passionate study could result i n exquisite poetical workmanship, and only boundless curiosity could open the untrodden ways (fr. 1. 28) to new fields o f learning. Ironically the poet hints at the danger o f 'much knowledge (^ TroXviSptl-n xaXerrov KO,KOV) i n certain cases; on the other hand, the mere pleasure o f listening and learning is to h i m the least perishable o f pleasures i n human life. 1

5

Two points should be kept i n m i n d . I f his verse very often sounds like charming word-play, the poet is never tired o f reminding us that everything he is going to tell is true because i t is well attested {dfiaprvpov ovBev aet6a>) ; the Muses, who once taught Hesiod and now answer Callimachus' questions, always utter the truth. I n another case he refers to a local writer by name (fr. 75. 54) as his reliable source. I n speaking o f 'recondite sources', 'reliable source', we apply this word, which originally means the fountain of a stream or a river, figuratively to literature. I n the beautiful finale o f Callimachus' h y m n to Apollo {hy. 11 108-12) the god contrasts the filthy water o f a great river w i t h the clear droplets the bees 6

A visit to Athens and an apprenticeship with Praxiphanes must be dismissed as modern inventions, see above, p. 95, n. 4. Suid. v. KaX\tp,ax°s = Call. test. 1. 8 ; his fifth Iambus (fr. 195) deals with a ypapsfiaroSiSoo-KaAos who taught children aXa fSrjTa.. See above, p. 123, on the elegiac poem Sosibius. veavloKos rijs avXrjs Tzetz. Proleg. Mb p. 31. 13 Kaib. = Call. test. 14 c. 17, cf. Ma 1, p. 2 5 , 3 K. = Call. test. 14 b. 14 veavlai fyaav KaX\tu,axos (sscr. y p . auxrrparas cod. A) KOX 'EpaToa&hrns. Whatever these expressions mean, they can hardly refer to a man beyond his twenties. H-OAVESO€(JJ fr. 75- 8 ' Strab. rx 438 iroXvttrratp . . . Kai irdvra TOV fiiov , . . 'ovara u.v8eta8ai 1

2

3 4

S

fsouXopevfas 6

Call. fr.

O W Y W ] ' = fr. 178. 3 0 ; fr. 2 8 2 aieavrj | iiSuAt's. 612;

cf. test. 7 9

voXvlaropos

avSpis

*al afwMrwmw.

ia6

Callimachus and the Generation of his Pupils

The Pinakes of the Entire Body of Greek Literature 1

carry to Demeter from the pure and undefiled fountain-head. I n these metaphorical lines spoken b y Apollo the poet condemns the lengthy traditional poem w i t h its conventional formulae, b u t praises brevity and novelty i n verse. This meaning is quite obvious. But there seems to be implied another piece o f advice, hardly recognized by modern interpreters of the h y m n : poets should draw from the original pure source, not from its polluted derivatives. Callimachus was, as far as I can see, the first to use this image i n a literary sense. This demand o f the scholar poet applies equally to poetry and to scholarship. I t became a favourite image i n the age o f humanism and a fundamental concept of scholarship i n the modern world. 2

3

I f we consider Callimachus' general attitude, occasionally revealed i n some lines o f his poems, the remarkable feat o f scholarship that he achieved i n the l i b r a r y is perhaps not quite incomprehensible. His task was to find a system for arranging the texts o f all the writers collected for the first time i n the royal library (or libraries). W h e n we glanced at the prehistory and early history o f script and book i n Greece, we observed the oriental background and commented cautiously on the relations between the orient and Greece. N o w i n Alexandria a Greek library was founded on a grand scale ; and this reminds us o f the enormous Babylonian and Assyrian libraries o f old. I t is natural to inquire whether there may have been direct influence, since the door o f the east had been opened by Alexander m u c h wider than before, and recent research has at least p u t this question more urgently; but the answer so far is not very definite. T h e layout o f the papyrus-rolls i n the Alexandrian library seems to have resembled that o f the clay tablets i n the oriental libraries i n one or perhaps two significant points. The title o f a w o r k was regularly placed at the end of the r o l l and o f the tablet ( i n contrast for instance to the practice i n the Egyptian papyri ), and i n 'catalogues' not only this title, but also the 'incipit' was cited. O n tablets and rolls the number o f lines was occasionally counted, and these 'stichometrical' figures were p u t at the end and sometimes as running figures i n the margins; they 4

5

6

7

See Excursus. Cf. below, p. 137. rnjyq = ¿pvij in Pind., Plat., etc., is totally different; the Callimachean metaphor has also nothing to do with the so-called 'source-research' that seeks to find out what was not invented by the author but taken over from an earlier 'source', see for instance 'Les sources de Plotin', Entretiens sur l'anüquité classique v (1960) and esp. the discussion by R. Harder, 'Quelle und Tradition', pp. 325 ff. * Above, pp. 17 ff. On the Lyceum see above, pp. 66 f. See Zuntz's and Wendel's publications, p. 7, n. 9, above. Cf. above, p. 1 8 ; Wendel, loc. cit. 2 4 ff, 76, and passim; 'Incipit', 2 9 ff.; stichometry, 34ff.,4 4 ; on titulature see R. P. Oliver, 'The First Medicean MS of Tacitus and the Titulature of Ancient Books', TAPA 82 (1951) 232 ff, with examples from the papyri. 1

1

J

s

6 7

127

appear again i n library-catalogues. T h e earliest example o f title and number o f lines placed at the end of a r o l l turned up i n a recent publication of Menander's Sicyonius; the date o f the papyrus seems to be the last t h i r d o f the t h i r d century B . C . , very near to Callimachus' lifetime. Even a personal remark o f the scribe i n verse is added, and these notes altogether may be properly called a 'colophon'. There is very scanty evidence for libraries i n the Ionic and A t t i c periods; b u t the same technical devices as i n the east, or similar ones, may have been used i n Greek private houses or i n philosophical schools. 1

Whatever may have been achieved before the t h i r d century B.C., Callimachus had no real model for his immense undertaking. T h o u g h his task was probably not so much to create as to develop an appropriate method, he d i d i t so successfully that his 'fists', called IHvaKts, were generally acknowledged as a model for the future. Besides the Pinakes, he assembled a variety o f learned material helpful for the understanding o f the ancient texts and invaluable for the w r i t i n g o f poetry i n the new style; i n these books he resumed the labours o f the younger Sophists and the Peripatos w i t h a new purpose. For the IJlvaKes Tzetzes is again our authority; after giving the number o f books i n the two libraries he goes o n to say: wv TOVS rrlvaKas vorepov KaXXlp,axos d,Treypdqjaro. This sentence is slightly enlarged i n another later version ; v rrjs avXrjs vorepojs pLera i~i)v dvopOwotv TOVS TTLVO.KO.S avriov aTreypdiparo; then a reference to Eratosthenes follows and finally the remark: aAAa rd ifaAAi/xayou 2

3

KOA

TOV 'Eparoadevovs

p.erd

TOJV

fUlfiXoJV, (hs ^fjv,

Kal Siopdojueojs

&i\aoe\ (fr. 4 6 0 ) ; we mentioned i t earlier, when we were pointing out non-Aristotelian features i n the whole new movement i n Alexandria. The only fragment quoted from this book is clear evidence 6

1

2 3 4

s

7

see fr. 4 0 7 , I - X L I V , 4 0 8 - 1 1 .

Call. fr. 4 0 6 ; in the notes I should have referred also to C. Wendel, 'Onomastikon', RE xviii (1939) 5 0 8 . See above, p. 115. On Plato Cratylus see above, pp. 5 9ff.,on Aristotle pp. 76 and 79, Democritus' so-called ' OvofiaortKa or Gorgias' ' OvofiaariKov (p. 4 5 , n. 6) are of dubious authenticity. * Ileal XoyaBcov (fr. 4 1 2 ) , Movaeiov (Call, i p. 339, see above, p. 5 0 , on Alcidamas), ileal wu- ovra cmoeífao-6'at r a ApyovavTiKa «rat Kareyvdfadai); because o f this failure, the story goes on, he left his native Alexandria for Rhodes and lived there as a highly esteemed citizen and as a successful poet and teacher (as ypap.piaTiKos, no doubt). T h e Scholia to Argonautica Book I declare i n six cases that the variant readings which they quote originate from a •npotKooois, 'a previous edition' ; so they presume two 'editions' of the poem by the author himself. Apollonius was a faithful follower o f Callimachus, as many individual passages o f the Argonautica prove; i n principle, however, he was opposed to certain of his master's new doctrines, as we shall see. This master abused h i m , according to a n ancient biographical t r a d i t i o n , i n a poem entitled Ibis, full o f 'dirt and poison'. I t is easy to combine this literary attack w i t h the failure o f his recitation and the emigration. T h e second filos concludes w i t h the statement that some people tell ( r t v h M tpao-iv) of his rehabilitation i n his native city Alexandria and his reconciliation w i t h his hostile teacher, at least i n the grave. But the first filos ends w i t h a l l his honours i n Rhodes. 2

3

4

This is a l a b y r i n t h o f self-contradictory statements, and no thread o f Ariadne leads out o f the darkness. But discussion w i l l t h r o w some light on one or two points i m p o r t a n t for our special purpose. T h e sentence about Apollonius' rehabilitation that is introduced at the end o f the second filos w i t h the cautious words Ttvcs 84 See G. W. Mooney, The Argonautica of Ap. Rh. (1912) Appendix I pp. 4 0 3ff.,and Herter, Bursian 285, 230 ff. ^ •* Suid. v. KaXXl/taxos = Call. I I test. I . 13 VjSts (cari, hi rrolr¡p.a . . . ets nva *Ifiiv, ycvópxvov ¿X&pov TOV KaXÁijíáxov. 4¡v Se ovros ArroXXúivios ó ypátpas T ¿ A p y o v a v r i K a ) ; Epigr. adesp. = test 2 3 . 8 OKÚWTUÍ 5 ' ¿rrapats tfiv AnoXXüjvtov; Schol. Ov. Ib. 4 4 7 (prob. fifteenth century Í » . D . ) De Callimacho . . . qui scripsit in ApoUonium Rhodium. 1

a

14a

Callimachus and the Generation of his Pupils

The Argonautica and Callimachus'' New Principle

considerable trouble, because i t was universally interpreted as meaning that Apollonius was reappointed to his former Hbrarianship, and this can hardly be reconciled w i t h the other tradition about the sequence o f librarians. But this interpretation was wrong, for Eusebius i n his Historia ecclesiastica and his Praeparatio evangelica used exactly the same expression, TOJV Kara, T T J V AXe^dvBpeiavfiifiXioOrjKujvrjgitudrj, not about a librarian, b u t about authors and books 'having been deemed worthy o f the Alexandrian libraries'. Consequently there is no ancient tradition at a l l that Apollonius was twice l i b r a r i a n ; i f he was head o f the Museum library only once, the proper place available for h i m is between Zenodotus and Eratosthenes. Indeed the whole story o f 'the return o f the native' has to be rejected. The other dubious story introduced by Myerat. that the young poet, not yet twenty years o f age, after the i l l success o f his first public recitation withdrew i n shame to Rhodes, is incompatible w i t h his hbrarianship after Zenodotus, which we have accepted; so this story too has to be dismissed. 1

2

T h e second point is the meaning o f 7rpoe'/cSoai?. I t is the usual assumption that the word exSoats involves formal publication; but this is not necessary. W h e n an author has arranged a text o f his own or o f another writer, i t can be called an eVooate, editio, edition, whether i t is subsequently published or not, i n both ancient and modern languages. The serious ypafifiartKot i n their v7ro/j.vrjfxara on the Argonautica, not the rather unreliable biographers, repeatedly quote variant readings o f a text called the TTpotKooots; the obvious conclusion is that the people who issued the Argonautica had two differing texts of which one was believed to be a preliminary and the other consequently the final or vulgate text of the poem. Everything else can only be speculation. Such a definite reference to a preliminary edition is rare; i t confirms the interpretation o f tKOoois i n special cases where i t is often misunderstood, and i t is welcome evidence for a possible process o f book publication, which may encourage us to postulate a similar process i n certain cases, when there is no trace i n our tradition. Discussion o f librarianships and editions belongs only to the external and technical side o f scholarship. But Apollonius' relation to Callimachus 3

4

5

See Excursus. The sequence is correct in P.Oxy. 1241, wrong in Suidas s.v. AiraXXannos, see Call, it test. 12 and 13; see also below, p. 154, n. 2. H. Frankcl in the preface of his edition p. vi and in 'Einleitung zur kritischen Ausgabe der Argonautika des Apollonios', Abh. d. Akad. d. Wiss. Gottingen, Phil.-hist. Klasse 111 Folge, Nr. 55 ( 1 9 6 4 ) 7-11. See above, pp. 71 and 9 4 . E. Eichgrun, Kaliimachos und Apollonios Rhodios, Diss. Berlin 1961 (279 S.), restates the evidence and discusses all the problems in a sensible way. 1

1

3

4

s

143

also involves questions o f principle. The venerable members o f the Museum were, from the beginning, not a very peaceful c o m m u n i t y ; Callimachus alludes to quarrels i n three of his Iambi,' i n the often-quoted reply given to his adversaries i n the introduction to the Aitia, at the end of his Hymn to Apollo, and i n Epigram 2 1 . But there is no ancient reference at all to Apollonius as the principal enemy except i n the case o f the Ibis, where i t is apparently derived from the biographical tradition. I n addition to this we have a late epigram hitting at Callimachus, the writer of which is called ATTOXXWVLOS ypafifiariKos i n the heading o f the Palatine Anthology, but 'PoSios only by the lemmatist o f the other epigrams; i n Planudes and Eustathius i t is anonymous. This is extremely poor evidence. Apollonius' views on poetical aims and criticism can be reconstructed only from the Argonautica; no theoretical or polemical utterances o f his in prose or verse are known to us. The true difference between h i m and Callimachus was that Apollonius adhered more closely to t r a d i t i o n ; the day of the long heroic epic poem was not yet over for h i m . He dared to write a poem which was St^vcfe? and formed a ev; i t had unity and continuity from Jason's and his companions' departure to their return, telling the complete voyage o f the Argo i n four books. Each book, of some 1,400-1,700 lines, was about the length o f a tragedy. I n that respect Apollonius' work conformed to Aristotle's demands, but ran counter to fundamental doctrines o f Callimachus; he d i d not attempt the same scrupulous precision and discipline o f language and metre, and he could never have attained that Callimachean subtlety and graciousness combined w i t h nervous virility. A t that crucial time o f Greek cultural history Apollonius' attitude could not help to rescue poetry from the dangerous situation i n which i t lay, but might aggravate the danger. This at least was the view o f the Callimachean circle. Yet even i f we stress this decisive point, i t is very hard to believe that Apollonius' heretical mode o f 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Call. fr. 191, 194, 203. From the days of Salvagnius (ed. Ov. Ib. 1633) and Isaac Vossius (Catull. 1684 p. 342) people have believed that Callimachus in hy. 11 105 ff. attacked Ap. Rh. I expressed my doubts Herm. 6 3 (1928) 341 = Ausgtw. Schriften ( i 9 6 0 ) 1 3 2 ; see also H. Erbse, Herm. 8 3 1

1

(1955) 4 2 4 ff

See above, p. 141, n. 4. Call. test. 25 = AP xi 2 7 5 ; all the details of the tradition and modern discussion in M. Gabathuler, Hellenistische Epigramrne auf Dichter (Diss. Basel 1937) 64 f. G. W. Mooney, The Argonautica of Ap. Rh. ( i g i 2 ) , quotes with a certain pomposity the saying Avayvwais -rpotpv Ae'fitus as characteristic of our Apollonius; but the rhetor Theo progymn. (Hhet. Gr. 11 61. 28 Spengel) who quoted it with the remark tus rdv Trpeafivrfpaiv TIS e#ij, AiroWdivtoi Sonet u-oi o 'PoSios, did not mean the poet, but the rhetor, who was born in Alabanda and lived as a teacher of rhetoric in Rhodes from the second to thefirstcentury B . C , see W. Schmid, RE u 140. 64 ff. Aristot. Poet. 1459 b 19 ff. See above, pp. 8 7 f. 3 4

s

6

7

i44

Callimachus and the Generation of his Pupils

Apollonius' Monograph on Archilochus

thinking and w r i t i n g could have had such fateful consequences for his life. There seems to be no parallel i n the history o f scholarship. W e may think o f the infuriated Poggio, who almost hired an assassin to murder Lorenzo V a l l a because he had found some very malicious critical notes of a p u p i l o f Valla's i n the margin o f his collected letters ; but o n second thoughts he contented himself w i t h the weapon o f a violent invective, which led to a spirited literary duel without doing any h a r m to the rest o f Valla's life. As to Apollonius, we must honestly confess that we are at a loss to discover what checked his career i n A l e x a n d r i a ; fiction is no substitute for evidence. 1

T h e few fragments o f Apollonius' minor poems on various cities, their local legends and their foundations (fcnWy fr. 4 - 1 2 ) , abound, like the Argonautica, i n antiquarian and geographical rarities; they may have been intended as a revival o f the hexametric Ktisis-poetry o f earlier ages, almost completely lost to us. Apollonius also wrote o n Homer and on several other poets. Hesiodic questions (aTroprJ/xara) had troubled Aristode and his school; i n Alexandria Zenodotus had started to publish a critical text, and nearly all the grammarians followed suit. I n a work of at least three books, o f which the title is not quoted, Apollonius maintained the Hesiodic origin o f the Aoms ; i t was perhaps i n the same work that he athetized the ' Opvtdouavreia and suspected that something was missing i n the speech o f the Muses i n the Theogony (after 1. 2 6 ) . Athenaeus says that ATTOXXOJVIOS O ' P O S I O S èv rip Ilepl ApxiXoxpv by referring to a Laconian custom satisfactorily interpreted the muchdisputed phrase axyvp^evn oKvraAr} as meaning 'grievous message' ; so he apparently published a monograph o n Archilochus. Archilochus, the Ionian poet o f the middle o f the seventh century B . C . , was o f an eruptive m i n d and revolutionized the whole realm o f Greek poetry ; he is properly ranked next to the great epic poets, as is implied even i n Socrates' ironical question to the rhapsode I o n : irôrepov nepl 'Opvqpov piovov Seivoç d rj Kai TTt-pl 'Hoiooov KOX ApxiXâxov; (Plat. Io 531 A ) . A S Archilochus 2

3

4

5

6

Collectanea Alexandrins ed. I. U . Powell (1925) 4 - 8 ; cf. H . Herter, Bursian 2 8 5 (1955) 409 f., with short references to the fragments of the prose-books. From the àpxaioXoyla rùtv 2ap,iu>v of Semonides Arnorg. to the 'Itavucâ of Panyassis ; cf. F. Jacoby, CL Ou. 41 (1947) 4 f. = Abhandlungen zur griechischen Gesckichtschreibung (1956) 1 4 9 ; on lost epic KTiaets as sources of Pindar see P, Von der Mûhll, Mus. Helo. 20 (1963) 201 f. See also above, Callimachus on Kriaeis p. 135. * J . Michaelis, De Apollon. Rhod. fragmentis (Diss. Halle 1875) 1 6 - 5 6 . * See above, p. 117. * Hes. Th. ed. Jacoby p. 46. 3. The reference to Schol. lies. Op. 5 8 has to be deleted ; ol irepi AitoWv 0€of[(rtv ^ i r e - r o ] ; avv^vrero in hostile sense O 34, cf. P 134 and Pind. 0. 11 3 9 ; or avv 8eot[o' €p.iayero\; cf. ovu-u.ioya> in hostile sense Hdt. 1 127, etc. The tmesis is surprisingly frequent in Archilochus, fr. 3. 1 D . ; 7. 3 and 6, 68. 2, 112. 2, etc.; also fr. 9 4 . 2 eV . . . epya . . . ¿p&s has to be understood as ¿ipopffs 'thou watchest over' (not 'thou lookest at the deeds'), the Zeiis 'Eirái/ttos being addressed by the wronged fox. See Heraclid. Pont. fr. 1 5 7 - 8 0 with Wehrli's commentary. Cf. also below, p. 191, on parallel passages from Menander and his models. * The editioprinceps refers to a similar gnomologium used by Clem. Al. Strom, vi 5 . 1 0 - 7 . 4, vol, 11 pp. 425 f. Stahlin; such comparisons of Homer and Archilochus are quoted also in rhetorical school books, see Theo progymn. Rhet. Gr. 11 62. 2 4 ff. 'Op.-npov p.travi$ built a temple to Homer i n Alexandria, and was a patron o f scientists and scholars i n the Alexandrian museum. I n any case, the lines o f the epigram about the young Ptolemy support the assumption that Eratosthenes was his oiodoKaXos. T h a t he passed on to his royal p u p i l a true love of Homer is only natural i n one whose Cyrenean teacher was probably a Homeric scholar and who spent a long life i n the capital o f Homeric studies. B

c

2

3

4

The whole epigram shows a rare combination o f the mathematician and the poet. I t is significant that the greatest mathematical genius o f antiquity, Archimedes, about ten years his senior, d i d Eratosthenes the honour o f dedicating to h i m the one book i n which he explained his Method^ o f which he never spoke elsewhere; the introduction addressed Eutoc. comment, in libr. Archimed. de sphaera et cylindro, Archimedes Opera ed. J . L. Heiberg, vol. in* (1915) 96 = Powell, Collect. Alex. p. 6 6 . The genuineness of Eratosthenes' epigram has been proved by Wilamowitz, 'Ein Weihgeschenk des Eratosthenes', GGN 1894, 23 if. = Kleine Schriften 11 (1941) 56ff.He strongly protested against Powell's note 'dubium', Glaube der Hellenen 11 (1932) 3 1 8 . 1 and maintained his earlier conjecture of the year 1894, loc. cit. p. 31 that Eratosthenes was Philopator's tutor: 'Jetzt wird es kein Kenner der Geschichte mehr bezweifeln.' F. Jacoby, however, doubted it, see FGrHist 11 D (1930) 7 0 5 . 10 ff. H. Volkmann RE xxm (1959) 1678-91 with further references. Schol. Aristoph. Thesm. 1059 = Nauck, TGF p. 8 2 4 ; F. Schramm, Tragicorum Grace. 1

1

3

heUenisticae aetatis fragm.

2

(1929) 8 3 f.

On the mathematical problem of 'The duplication of the cube' see B. L . Van der Waerden, Science Awakening (Groningen 1954) 1 5 9 - 1 6 5 . nepl Ttov p.r)xaviKv 9ea>pnpaTtt>v npos 'Epa.TQo8evnv e^oSos, discovered in 1906 by J . L . Heiberg in a palimpsest of the tenth century andfirstpublished in Herm. 4 2 (1907) 235 ff.; cf. Archim. Opera ed. Heiberg 11 (1913) 4 2 5 ff.; T . L. Heath, The Method of Archimedes, Cambridge 1912. A probable date, ca. 2 3 8 B . C , Eichgrun, Kallimachos und Apollonios ( 1 9 6 1 ) , Exkurs 11, p. 220. 4

s

2

Science and Scholarship

156

to Eratosthenes is full o f admiration and o f a slight humour. There is even a poem i n twenty-two distichs which Archimedes is said to have composed and dedicated to Eratosthenes, his only w r i t i n g i n verse, called the Cattle problem; its formal quality is far below the faultless and gracious lines o f the Eratosthenic epigram. I t is not quite certain that the ingenious Sicilian mathematician, about whose life and sayings countless stories circulated throughout the Mediterranean w o r l d , ever came to Alexandria to use its library, as we m i g h t have expected; but intercourse w i t h his Alexandrian colleague d i d tempt h i m to intrude into the sphere o f the Homeric scholars and to state i n poetical form a preposterous mathematical problem, the number o f the cattle o f Helios i n the Odyssey, divided into four herds o f different colours. I n the first half of the t h i r d century B . C . we hear o f no contact between science, represented above a l l by Euclid's Elernenta, and scholarship. T h a t a lively exchange seems to have started i n the forties, was mainly due to Eratosthenes. I t is also i n this period, after the succession o f Euergetes and Berenice to the throne, that we first learn o f Callimachus' relations w i t h the mathematician and astronomer Conon. Gonon was highly praised by Archimedes i n the preface to his Spirals and by other scientists, but his name survives because he had named a constellation BepevU-qs fTXoKapios i n honour o f the young queen and this astronomical discovery inspired Callimachus to write one o f his most delicate elegiac poems, the Lock of Berenice, which was translated by Catullus into L a t i n . 1

2

I t would be hard to find a comprehensive term for Eratosthenes' manifold spheres of learned activity, i f he had not coined one for himself: tptXoXoyos. Because o f his universality o f knowledge Eratosthenes has been compared w i t h Aristotle; but i n Aristotle every special branch was subordinated to the general principle of his o w n teleological philosophy. Eratosthenes, n o t interested as i t seems i n the philosophical school of his native country, the Cyrenean hedonism of Aristippus, found his teachers 3

4

Archimed. Op. 1 1 (1913) 527 ff.; see R. C. Archibald, Americ. Math. Monthly 25 ( 1 9 1 8 ) 4 1 1 - 1 4 with bibliography and Van der Waerden, Science Awakening (1954) 2 0 8 ; more bibliographical references in A. Lesky, Gesch. d. griech. Lit. ( 1 9 6 3 ) 844. Call. fr. no and Addenda in vol. ir. Herodiani scripta tria ed. K. LehrS (1848) 3 7 9 - 4 0 1 'De vocabulis t\oXoyo$, ypap.p.ari.K6s, KpwiKos'; Sandys i 4 - 1 1 ; cf. also the articles in RE s.w. Grammatik, col. 1808 ff., Kritikos, Philologos, and A. Böckh, Enzyklopädie und Methodologie der philologischen Wissenschaften* (1886) 12 ff. on ^tAoAoyof and ypapuarixos. Gabriel R. F. M. Nuchelmans, Studien über iX6\oyos, ^lAoAoyia, ^lAoAoyefy, Diss. Nymegen 1950. H. Kuch, '&t\6Xoyos. Untersuchung eines Wortes von seinem ersten Auftreten in der Tradition bis zur ersten überlieferten lexikalischen Festlegung', Schriften der Sektion för Alteitumsicissenschaß 48, Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1965) 30ff. on Eratosthenes; but see below, p. 158, n. 9. See above, pp. 79, 8 4 . 1

2

1

2 3

3

4

157

&i\6\oyos, KptTLKos, ypafifiaTiKos

i n philosophy i n Athens w h i c h i n the Hellenistic w o r l d still remained the centre o f philosophical studies. I n Athens i t was not the Aristotelian Peripatos that attracted h i m , but the Academy, revivified by Arcesilaus, and a new branch o f the Stoa, represented by Zeno's unfaithful pupil Ariston of Chios. But the influence of Stoic moralism is confined to a few, probably early, writings. T h a t of Platonic cosmological concepts, especially of the Timaeus, is much more evident not only i n his Platonicus, b u t also i n his mathematical and geographical works and even i n his poems. A l l this, however, d i d not make h i m a iA6oocpos i n principle, like Aristotle or later Posidonius. 1

2

3

Strabo, speaking o f the famous Goans, applied the w o r d KpiriKos to Philitas, the scholar. But Philicus o f Corcyra, who led the Dionysiac T C X V I T C U i n the famous procession o f 275/4 * - ) addressed i n the proem to his Hymn to Demeter not the Kpnixol, but the y p a ^ e m f c o t ; they were the scholars, especially the metrical experts w h o m he proudly presented w i t h his invention o f a whole poem i n stichic choriambic hexameters. This precious testimony of the early t h i r d century B . C confirms that the later biographical tradition i n which Zenodotus and the scholars o f his and the following generations were called ypap,y.evs, KpoTatviarvs fTrowoios, Sv TleLQiorpaTtp ovvttvat rd> -rvpdvvtp AoKX-nmd&rfs ev TW s' /Jt/JAia) ru>v rpap,p.a.Tt,Ku>v; if this is the correct general title of the large work, it was divided into two parts, a systematic 77epi ypap.p.ariK^s (Sext. Emp. Adv. math. 1 2 5 2 , vol. in p. 6 2 . 22 Mau) and a biographical fltpl ypap.p.o.TiKv~>i> {Comment, in Aral, reliqu. ed. E . Maass, p. 76. 5 ) ; on Asclepiades see above, p. 158, and on his Ppap-p-artKa H. Usener, Kleine Schriften ( l 9 ' 3 > 3»9-

B . C ( a c c o r d i n g t o o u r era) a n d this was fixed as t h e first y e a r o f t h e

10

1

"

5

d a t i n g t h e m h e h a d t o use one o f t h e l o c a l systems; i t is n o w g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d t h a t this was n o t Ctesias* A s s y r i a n list, b u t t h e list o f t h e S p a r t a n k i n g s preserved i n Eusebius' Xpovimd. T h e b e g i n n i n g o f this list takes us 6

b a c k t o t h e y e a r 1104/3 - - > w h i c h is t h a t o f t h e B

c

'HpaKXeio&v tcddooos;

t h e I o n i c m i g r a t i o n was p u t s i x t y years l a t e r , a n d t h e t a k i n g o f T r o y ,

Tpolas dXuiais,

e i g h t y years e a r l i e r , 1184/3 - - T h e p e r i o d b e t w e e n this B

c

earliest date a n d t h e latest, t h a t o f A l e x a n d e r ' s d e a t h (324/3 B.C.), w a s d i v i d e d i n t o t e n epochs. A t this p o i n t t h e m o d e r n scientist m a y be i n 7

c l i n e d t o m o d e r a t e his a p p r e c i a t i o n o f Eratosthenes' m e r i t s , n o t i c i n g w i t h 1 2 3

Van der Waerden, Science awakening (1954) 228 ff. See above, pp. 51 and 8 0 f.; on Timaeus see FGrHist FGrHist

241 F 4 - 8 .

566 T 1, 1 0 ; F 1 2 5 - 8 . * FGrHist

2 4 I F 1-3.

On 'Zeittafeln' see Regenbogen, /Jtvaf RE xx 1462. 60 ff. E . Schwartz, 'Die Konigslisten des Eratosthenes und Kastor', AGGW40 (1894/5) 6 0 ff.; the excerpt from Diodorus in Euseb. Chron. 1 2 2 1 . 31 ff. See also W. Kubitschek, 'Kdnigsverzeichnissc', RE xi (1922) 1015 tf. s

6

7

FGrHist

241 F 1.

Science

and

Scholarship

Founder

His knowledge o f the SioacncaXUu as well as o f the copies i n the libraryled h i m to inquire into questions o f the performances o f tragedies and comedies, for instance whether there was a second performance o f Aristophanes' Eirene or even a second play w i t h the same name and whether another version o f Aeschylus' Persai was produced i n Sicily for H i e r o n . Furthermore we owe to Eratosthenes' wide literary horizon a few important critical comments o n lyrics. He assigned to Lamprocles a popular ancient h y m n addressed to Athena, to which Aristophanes and Phrynichus had alluded i n comedies, and he recognized that A r c h i lochus' famous "rrJi-eAAa KaAAtWc ' was not the beginning o f an epinicion but the refrain o f a h y m n to Heracles; Callimachus also had rightly called i t a vucaiov e wvdvai riu rvpavvut AaxXviridovs ev no ?' pVfJAiw TOW rpap.p.a.Ti.Ktau; if this is the correct general title of the large work, it was divided into two parts, a systematic Jlepl ypapip.ariKijs (Sext. Emp. Adv. math. 1 2 5 2 , vol. in p. 6 2 . 22 Mau) and a biographical [Jtpl ypap.p,miKu>v (Comment, in Arai. reliqu. ed. E. Maass, p. 7 6 . 5 ) ; on Asclepiades see above, p. 158, and on his rpa^ariKa H. Usener, Kleine Schri/ten 1

1

6

7 8

* Schol. Dionys. Thr., Gr. Gr. in p. 160. 10. The Scholiast emphasi2.es the same use of ypap.p^ara for ovyypap.p.ara. by Call. Ep. 6 and 2 3 ; cf. the passage of Asclepiades in Sext. Emp., just quoted. See G. Knaack RE vi 384 f. and below, p. i 8 o on accents. 1 0

:

Chronology

163

Eratosthenes was primarily a scientist as we stated at the beginning. I n his writings on O l d Comedy and related subjects there is naturally no evidence o f this. But i n his fundamental books o n chronology and geography we can clearly see the scientist i n h i m , especially the mathematician and astronomer, informing the work of the scholar. I t is this that distinguishes them from the previous attempts o f Sophists, philosophers, and historians. Eratosthenes fully deserves to be honoured as the founder o f critical chronology i n antiquity. ( I t is, o f course, no accident that the revival o f these studies at the end o f the sixteenth and the beginning o f the seventeenth century A . D . by J . J . Scaliger coincided w i t h the founding o f modern science i n the later Renaissance.) The most reliable authentic documents on which Eratosthenes could base the dates of historical events were the lists o f the winners i n the O l y m p i c games; since Hippias had started to reconstruct the ' OXvpmovLKojv dvaypatp-q and Aristotle and others like Timaeus had followed h i m , Eratosthenes was able to build upon these earlier efforts i n his own register of* OXvpnriavtKat, a work o f at least t w o books. I n his greater work, the Xpovoypas ßovXevöuevos (Codd. A V, ßovX6p.cvos cett.) npos Evpevy tpvyeîv, €^t>A 238 aorraaiot 5 ' etreßtw yat-ns.

* This might be a possible solution of the grammatical difficulties discussed by P. Friedlaender, Herrn. 6 4 (1929) 376. See also above, p. 116, on the traditional division into twentyfour books.

Criticism

21 to 23, i n which the contest of the bow, the killing of the suitors, and the reunion o f Odysseus and Penelope are told, suddenly crumbles away. I n a rapid sequence of short scenes, lacking vigour of language, every motif, every action is quickly, even impatiently, brought to a happy end. W e cannot know whether Aristophanes' m i n d was really struck by the i n feriority of the whole complex as unworthy o f the great poet of the R e t u r n and the Vengeance. But we can say that the hint given i n our Scholia under his name had enormous effect; i t has been unanimously welcomed by modern critics o f every denomination, unitarians and analysts alike. As Zenodotus had done i n the proem o f the Iliad, so i n the finale o f the Odyssey Aristophanes posed a crucial problem which has been a subject for continuous dispute up to the present day. 1

2

3

4

The scholar poets of the t h i r d century were remarkably fond of Hesiod, as we have observed, and their interest stimulated the activity o f the grammarians. As Aristophanes is said to have p u t a critical tjijpeim at Hes. Th. 6 8 , he must have followed Zenodotus i n editing Hesiod. W e saw how he raised a special problem o f authenticity i n the Homeric Odyssey; similarly i n Hesiod he continued the discussion o f the PseudoHesiodea, which had apparentiy been started by Apollonius Rhodius. Aristophanes denied the Hesiodic origin o f the Xlpojvos 'YiroOrjicai* and doubted that o f the Shield of Heracles, which Apollonius had maintained. The 'Shield of Achilles' i n the eighteenth book of our Iliad, which Zenodotus had athetized was the model for this later poem; according to the hypothesis o f the Scutum the first fifty-six fines o n Heracles' mother 6

5

7

9

They have used it, of course, in quite different ways. See above, pp. 111 ff. On Aristophanes Byz. and the Odyssey see also below, p. 191. If we carefully consider the style as well as the purpose of the whole finale, we are strongly reminded of the style and aim of the first book. The quality of the poetry is essentially the same: it lacks vigour of language and power of intuition, it displays an anxious accumulation of motifs, carried out more quietly in the first book for the exposition, but more quickly in the concluding book. This is not an addition to an already finished poem, a 'continuation' or 'epilogue', but the work of the poet who finally built up our Odyssey and by his intentional references from Book 24 to Book 1 constructed something like an arch over the whole vast composition for which he had used a number of older powerful epic poems. Even the most scrupulous re-examination by Page 1 0 1 - 3 6 (see above, p. 176, n. 2) has not convinced me that tf/ 297 ff. is 'a later appendix, loosely attached to a poem already substantially complete'; in his notes he refers to earlier literature. Page's view is shared by G. S. Kirk, The Songs of Homer (1962) 248 ff. As regards the relation of at to a I agree in general with P. Von der Muhll, 'Odyssee', /?£ Suppl. vn (1940) 764ff. On Homeric etScoAoTrou'a see Excursus. 1

1 J

4

Schol. Hes. Th. 68 irrea-qp-rivaTo; Schol. Hes. Th. 126 is hopelessly corrupt and we had better wait for a new edition. See above, p. 117. See above, p. 144. Quintil. 1 1 , 15 ( = Hes. test. 57 Jacoby) nam is primus (sc. Aristoph. Byz.) 'YrrodijKas . . . negavit esse huius poetae; cf. Schol. Pind. P. vi 22. » See above, p. 175, n. 6. s

6

7

8

814842

N

1 8

Alexandrian

7

Scholarship

at its

Height

Punctuation

Alcmene were identical w i t h a part o f the fourth book o f the KardXoyos (ywatKcvv) and 'therefore Aristophanes suspected' its non-Hesiodic provenance. This shows that he gave reasons for his suspicion; perhaps he did so i n his supplement to the Pinakes o f Callimachus. Yet, despite his doubts, the Scutum remained w i t h the Theogony and Erga i n every ancient text o f Hesiod, just as the end o f our Odyssey also survived his verdict. 1

2

3

4

We have no information about Aristophanes' views on orthography or methods o f marking variant readings i n the margin, but we have several times referred to the use o f critical signs as an integral part o f Aristophanes' extensive editorial work. Since the presence o f such signs i n a few very early p a p y r i is not proven, we may fairly see i n Zenodotus the originator o f the first critical symbol, the obelus, w h i c h meant more than the introduction o f a mere technical device. Aristophanes then seems to have improved the whole editorial technique by increasing the number o f critical ar}p.eta. By the acrreplo-Kos he marked the lines repeated from another place i n w h i c h they appeared to be more appropriate (Schol. y 71-73 = t 2 5 3 - 5 ) , o-iyfia and fonimyfux (>) two consecutive lines having the same contents and being therefore interchangeable (e 247 ff., w i t h Schol. cf. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1 5 3 ) . The choice and critical decision he left to the reader or future editor, following the example o f Zenodotus. 5

6

7

8

D

V

t

n

e

9

10

Lectional signs, one might say, are not i n the strict sense the business of the scholar, but of the scribe and corrector; punctuation and accentuation therefore are part o f the general history o f the script. But as we paid some attention to the early development o f the script, to books and to libraries, we may now say a few words about the growing importance o f P.Oxy. xxni (1956) 2355 ( = Hes. fr. P Merkelbach), in which Scut. 1-5 are preceded by the ends of six other hexameters, may belong to this part of the fourth book; see Lobel's introduction. Argum. Hes. Scut. 1 (— Hes. test. 52 Jac.) rrjs AorriBos r) apxr) & T VVV CKSOO-IV, that is, according to the edition o f Aristarchus; b u t i t could be divided i n another way, eis re rpidSa Kal irevrdSa. T h . Bergk convincingly argued that the phrase 'present edition' implies the existence of an earlier edition w i t h differing «-aiAa, which could only be that o f Aristophanes; and i n fact i n the chapter on the metrical or}p.eta Hephaestio contrasted 2

t

3

4

5

6

Apiarodv€iov eKSoaiv of Alcaeus w i t h TT)V VVV ri)v Apiordpxeiov. So i t is very likely that there was an Aristophanic edition of Anacreon and certain that there was one of Alcaeus; there is a reference to a reading i n the latter (x&vs instead o f XeTras) i n his treatise on the axyvp>evy] CTKUTOATJ. Aristophanes' lyric texts were distinguished from a l l the previous ones by a prominent new feature; they were not written i n continuous lines like prose, but divided into shorter metrical /c Edw\ which implied his 'foolish' character ; the fragmentary very learned commentary on this poem i n a papyrus o f the second century B . C . contains the name o f Aristophanes besides those o f his older contemporary Hermippus and o f his younger one Polemo. T h o u g h i t is still impossible t o say t o what line o r word that fragment o f the commentary belongs, there can be little doubt the reference is made to Aristophanes the grammarian, not the comic poet. A t the very least the text confirms his view that the word adwas was k n o w n 1

2

3

4

5

to the TraAatot.

I n the same first section o f the Aegeis we find the strange verbal forms €(f}€vyoorav teal iXdyoaav dvrl rov €evyov /cat eXeyov. Eustathius has preserved a longer excerpt w i t h references: 7rapa8l8ojm Se (Aptaro^dv^s) KOI art T O •'eaxdl,oaav" rrapd AvKOpov>. (21) /ecu Trap' aAAotjro 4X4yoaav" /eat T O "ot Se vXr/alov yevop-evatv (l)v tSta etVtv. T h e main point seems to be that there was no literary authority amongst the 7raAatot for the ending i n -oaav, as Aristophanes correctly observed; b u t he found i t i n one o f the new poets and perhaps conjectured that this poet, 6

c provided that the few lines just referred to were athetized, since they were suitable i n Athena's admonition o f Odysseus to go round to the individual Greek heroes, b u t not i n Hera's address to Athena. z

ovTa

T h e use o f the term KVKXIKtorepov or KVKXIKWS* reflects the distinction first drawn by Aristode between the great poet o f the Iliad and Odyssey and the makers o f the other early epics, the KVKXIKOL* Originally this w o r d referred t o the subject o f the poems, especially to the T r o j a n cycle from the causes o f the w a r t o the death o f Odysseus, the latest homecomer; but after Aristotle, compared w i t h the t w o selected poems o f Homer, everything 'cyclic' was regarded as inferior, which meant at least conventional, and often trivial. I n that respect Zenodotus, C a l l i machus, and a l l the Alexandrian poets and scholars—so often i n opposition to the Peripatos—accepted the Aristotelian doctrine. Calhmachus' angry pronunciamento, exBalpia T O Trotrjpa TO KVKXIKOV (Ep. 2 8 ) , was widely acclaimed and frequently repeated; there is also an obvious allusion to it by Horace i n his famous lines A.P. 132 ' n o n circa vilem patulumque moraberis orbem' and 136 ' u t scriptor cyclicus o l i m ' . 5

6

O n the other hand, i f the Iliad and Odyssey were t o be esteemed as creations o f perfect workmanship by one poet, not a few difficulties and discrepancies presented themselves to the scrutinizing scholarly m i n d . I t was relatively easy to recognize and to remove lines missing i n some o f the manuscripts as post-Homeric insertions. But there were many lines or even passages i n a l l the manuscripts w h i c h seemed hardly reconcilable w i t h the idea o f perfection a n d u n i t y , and had therefore t o be carefully 7

231

considered and, i f necessary, marked as un-Homeric or, i n special cases, as 'cyclic'. T h e only solution was not to delete them, b u t t o mark them as spurious, as 'interpolations' (TO aBereiv); athetesis, invented b y his predecessors, was practised b y Aristarchus w i t h the utmost skill and continued to be practised by his followers i n the field of Homeric criticism through two millennia. 1

No change i n method was possible u n t i l a new concept o f history dawned i n the eighteenth century a n d oral, popular poetry was discovered as the product o f an early age, essentially different from the later ones. Aristarchus h a d been able t o distinguish certain traces o f the Homeric language from the Attic and Hellenistic usage and to pick out differences i n civilization; but the new concept demanded an attempt to understand the specific character o f epic poetry as a whole, its origin, development, and final form. M a n y passages that h a d startled the Alexandrian and later scholars were no longer deemed interpolations but were acknowledged as signs o f different strata i n the structure o f the great poems. F . A . Wolf, starting from the newly discovered Venetian Scholia, tried to give proofs for the new historical research step by step, i n contrast to the vague generalities o f the Homeric enthusiasts; he a t least paved the w a y for the analytical efforts o f the following generations o f scholars who were eager t o unveil the mysteries o f epic stratification. 2

I t is quite natural that the negative aspect o f Aristarchus' Homeric criticism prevails i n this chapter; our sources say almost nothing i n praise of the positive values he admired and loved i n the greatest o f all poets. Like Eratosthenes he saw i n Homer an imaginative and creative poet whose a i m was to give pleasure, not to instruct. T h e scattered aesthetic and rhetorical terms that have come down to us do not suggest that Aristarchus followed the principles o f a theory o f poetics. Occasional phrases like Bid. -rravrog (Schol. A & 562, A 217 K T X . ) otKovopiKÖis ( f 6 1 6 , Schol. p 103, v 356), eW/ca TT}S avTLKaraoTdo-ttDs ('balance'? Ö 212) call 3

4

}

Zenodotus had a different text in B 156 followed by B 169, completely omitting Hera's speech. Since that time ancient and modern critics have never stopped discussing the whole passage, see F. Von der Muhll, Arc/. Hypomnema zur Ilias (1952) 4 0 . I read Kvp.iKo>Tep(ov) in the facsimile of cod. Ven. A p. 2 7 last line, which is, I should think, a slightly corrupt KUKXtKajrepov. Villoison's Koivo-repov was accepted by Dindorf; Bekker read (?) Ko>p.tKa>T€pov, Lehrs conjectured avoiKetorcpov (Herodiani scripta tria, Epi¬ metrum, 1848, p. 4 5 9 ) , followed by Friedlaender, Aristonic. p. 62. Aristarchus in Schol. A (Aristonicus) 0 610 said offivelines KVKXIKU>S TtuJi-oAoyetVat and athetized them while Zenodotus had left them out. Cf. Schol. A Z 325 KVKXIK&S KaraK4xPV h I 222 Kv/cXtKaiTtpov; Schol. T Q 628 KVKXIK&S (Wilamowitz: Ihlois cod.); Schol. BEP 1/115 ou KVKXIKUS . . . dAA' . . . TO iSt'wfxa with the annotation of the editors. « Seeabove,pp. 7 3 . Above, p. 117. Above, p. 137. Aristarchus rejected the view of the separators (XCU/M£OIT€S) who assumed two poets for Iliad and Odyssey, as a 'paradox' (see above, p. 2 1 3 ) . He gave references from the Iliad to the Odyssey; cf. Schol. A 354, A 147, etc. 1

2

r

3

Ta

r

7

5

6

Cf. his commentary on to 2 9 6 as the WAoy of the Odyssey, where he agrees with Aristophanes, above, p. 175. Perhaps his most striking athetesis is that of Q 2 5 - 3 0 , the worst patchwork in our Homeric text. See above, pp. 213 f. Didymus had hardly an opportunity of mentioning aesthetic judgements of Aristarchus, but Aristonicus had. The exegetical Scholia in b T contain little Aristarchean material. W. Bachmann, 'Die ästhetischen Anschauungen Aristarchs in der Exegese und Kritik der Homerischen Gedichte', Beilage zum Jahresbericht des Alten Gymnasiums Nürnberg 1 (1901/2) 11 (1903/4) gives a partly useful collection of evidence. Less helpful is Atkins, Literary Criticism 1 ( 1 9 3 4 ) 188 if.; on the art of composition see also R. Griesinger, Die ästhetischen Anschauungen der alten Homererklärer, Diss. Tübingen ( 1 9 0 7 ) 9 ff, See above, pp. 166 f. 1

% 3

4

232

Aristarchus: the Art of Interpretation

Aristarchus' Authority

233

a t t e n t i o n t o t h e a r t o f c o m p o s i t i o n i n t h e epic n a r r a t i v e ; o t h e r phrases

s t u p i d e x c e r p t o r s , first D i d y m u s ,

e m p h a s i z e t h e h a r m o n y b e t w e e n t h e speech a n d t h e c h a r a c t e r o f a n e p i c

h a v i n g m i s u n d e r s t o o d t h e o r i g i n a l . O n t h e o t h e r side t h e r e w e r e

h e r o , eV

rjOa Xeyerat

117

(A

specific f u n c t i o n o f m e t a p h o r s 2

20J

efKfiariKws, I

TO atajTTiofievov

14

els

KTA.). S t y l i s t i c o b s e r v a t i o n s

(npos ipnf>acnv

B

explain

670) o r o f similes

av^Tjatv) o r o f ' n o t m e n t i o n i n g a t h i n g

Z 337, 17 432 KTX.),

sort, censorious epithets arrpe77eV,

the (S

16,

(Kara

1

I n c o n t r a s t t o a p p r e c i a t i o n s o f this

evreXes,

Treptaoov,

crop u p again and

1

then Aristonicus

2

were b l a m e d for the

a n t i - A r i s t a r c h e a n s w h o d i d n o t h i g h l y respect e i t h e r his t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m o r h i s e x e g e t i c a l w o r k . O n e t h i n g is q u i t e c e r t a i n : o n t h e e t e r n a l H o m e r i c 3

battlefield Aristarchus remains an outstanding controversial

figure.

We

h a v e t r i e d here o n l y t o p u t h i m a n d his predecessors i n t o t h e i r p r o p e r h i s t o r i c a l place.

a g a i n ; b u t his deep a f f e c t i o n is a l w a y s present even i f i t r e m a i n s i n t h e

A t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s c h a p t e r w e d e s c r i b e d t h e crisis o f t h e y e a r

b a c k g r o u n d . H e q u i t e h o n e s t l y a c c e p t e d , as m a n y o f his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s

145/4 B . C , w h i c h b r o k e t h e l i v i n g c h a i n o f e m i n e n t p e r s o n a l i t i e s t h a t h a d

c o n f i r m , the Aristotelian a n d Callimachean distinction between H o m e r i c

s t r e t c h e d f r o m P h i l i t a s a n d Z e n o d o t u s t o A r i s t a r c h u s . T h e y w e r e , as w e

s u p e r i o r i t y a n d c y c l i c i n s u f f i c i e n c y a n d he used c r i t i c a l signs a n d w o r d s

h a v e seen, c o n n e c t e d b y p e r s o n a l l i n k s , as t h e y o u n g e r scholars w e r e t h e

t o m a k e i t c l e a r i n t h e interests o f t r u e p o e t r y .

pupils o f the previous generations; b u t there were n o

A r i s t a r c h u s a c h i e v e d s u p r e m e a u t h o r i t y as c r i t i c a n d i n t e r p r e t e r . I n t h e second h a l f o f t h e second c e n t u r y B . C Panaetius, b o r n i n R h o d e s a n d

p h i l o s o p h i c a l schools w i t h t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r

So£ai.

StaSo^at,

as i n t h e

T h e great Alexandrians

w e r e u n i t e d , n o t b y d o c t r i n e , b u t b y t h e c o m m o n l o v e o f letters, a n d e v e r y

t h e n t h e l e a d i n g f i g u r e a m o n g s t t h e Stoics i n A t h e n s a n d R o m e , so a d -

one o f t h e m was a n i n d e p e n d e n t i n d i v i d u a l i t y . W e s h a l l find o n l y

m i r e d t h e ease w i t h w h i c h A r i s t a r c h u s d i v i n e d t h e sense o f t h e d i f f i c u l t

p a r a l l e l i n t h e I t a l i a n Renaissance o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h a n d fifteenth c e n t u r i e s

pAyruv . . . Stavoias.' I n t h e first

paStws

a n c i e n t p o e t r y t h a t h e c a l l e d h i m a 'seer':

Sid.

Karap-avreveadaL

century

TT]S

TUJV

Trot^arcui'

TO

B.C.

C i c e r o a n d H o r a c e attest t h a t his n a m e was a l m o s t p r o v e r b i a l as t h a t o f 2

t h e serious a n d sincere c r i t i c . I n d e e d t h e l e g e n d o f his i n f a l l i b i l i t y h a d its dangers i n t h e u n c r i t i c a l days o f l a t e r a n t i q u i t y , a n d he w o u l d h a r d l y h a v e a p p r o v e d o f those n a i v e a d m i r e r s w h o f o l l o w e d h i m b l i n d l y even against t h e i r b e t t e r k n o w l e d g e .

i n t h e y e a r 1848 N a u c k p r o t e s t e d against w h a t he c a l l e d ' A r i s t a r c h o I f the image o f the g r a m m a r i a n reconstructed

from

the com-

m e n t a r y o f t h e f o u r m e n i n t h e V e n e t i a n c o d e x A a p p e a r e d i n t h e eyes o f t h e m o d e r n A r i s t a r c h e a n s t o be d i s f i g u r e d b y some i m p u r i t i e s , t h e Ath.cn. xrv 6 3 4 c = Panaet. Rhod. Fragrrunta ed. M. Van Straaten ( 1 9 6 2 ) fr. 9 3 . Bentley alluded to this saying in the preface to his Horace ( 1 7 1 1 ) XX 'opus . . . est, ut de Aristarcho olim praedicabant, divinandi quadam peritia et pavriKT).' Cic. ad Ait. 1 14. 3 'quarum (orationum) tu Aristarchus es' (cf. in Pison. 73 more jokingly, Jam. in 11. 5, ix 10. 1). Hor. A.P. 450 'fiet Aristarchus". The remarks on Aristarchus' accentuation at the end of Schol. A E> 316 -mepvyos (against the Kavuiv the Schol. adds Trei$6p f9a avrcp d>$ rravv aplarip ypappaTtK£vo4ooi (paXXov Treiareov ApLarapx

o~ia, but later additions (see Herodian. I p. lxxix n. Lentz, cf. Lehrs 297). One is reminded of an amusingly simple sentence of Boccaccio in his very learned compilation De montium, sytvarum, fontium... nominibus (printed after 'Iltpl yeveaAoyiW deorum' in ed. Basil. 1 5 3 2 ^ . 5 0 3 ) 'ut mallem potius eorum autoritati quam oculis credere meis', when what he read in the beloved books of the ancients did not agree with what he saw with his own eyes. * Aristoph. Byz. Fragm. p. 56, n. 75. He seems to have coined 'Aristarchomania*. 1

1

3

r

J

five

generations

f r o m P e t r a r c h t o P o l i t i a n , whose c o m m o n l o v e

and

l a b o u r restored s c h o l a r s h i p f r o m dangerous d e c l i n e t o life a n d d i g n i t y . A. Roemer relentlessly attacked Didymus in his numerous books and articles, see especially Aristarchs Athetesen in der Homerkritik ( 1 9 1 2 ) ; bibliography in A. Roemer and E . Belzner, 'Die Homerexegese Aristarchs in ihren Grundziigen', Studien zur Geschichte und 1

1

based o n i t A r i s t a r c h u s ' a u t h o r i t y rose a g a i n t o a n o v e r w h e l m i n g h e i g h t ;

4

A . D . : t h e l i v i n g c h a i n o f f r e e l y associated masters a n d disciples t h r o u g h

Kultur des Altertums 13 (1924) 267.

3

A f t e r V i l l o i s o n ' s d i s c o v e r y o f t h e V e n e t i a n codices a n d Lehrs's studies

mania'.

one

M. Van der Valk,

Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad 1 ( 1 9 6 3 ) 5 5 3

ff. tried to

discredit Aristonicus.

Van der Valk in this and in his earlier book on the Odyssey takes a very Alexandrian grammarians, particularly of Aristarchus. See Addenda to p . J

poor

view o f the

105.1.

Invitation

VII

of Stoics

by the

Attalids

235

The Attalids had first invited distinguished members o f the Peripatos, Lacydes, and Lycon, who politely refused to emigrate to the new Hellespontic kingdom. Aristophanes o f Byzantium, although for an u n known reason he had seriously considered fleeing to Eumenes I I , was prevented from leaving Egypt. But this enterprising k i n g ( 1 9 7 - 1 5 8 B.C.) finally succeeded i n attracting a Stoic philosopher from the south o f Asia M i n o r to his capital, Crates from Mallos i n C i l i c i a . I t was not the intention o f the kings to set up a sort of Pergamene school i n opposition to the Alexandrians; it just happened that earlier invitations were declined, and then the Stoics came. T h e 'Stoics' mean Crates and a few personal pupils; one should not speak o f a 'school' o f Pergamum at a l l , as is so often done. There was no sequence o f teachers and disciples like that i n Alexandria, where we saw five generations following one another. Quite independendy, as i t seems, a new k i n d o f antiquarian research was started i n Pergamum towards the end o f the t h i r d century B.C. under the reign o f Eumenes' predecessor, Attalus I (241-197 B.C.) and continued throughout the second century. 1

PERGAMUM:

SCHOLARSHIP A N D

2

PHILOSOPHY A

NEW

ANTIQUAR1ANISM

G R E E K scholarship i n Alexandria suffered heavy losses, as we have seen, in the first great crisis o f its history; nevertheless i t was able to continue its existence' u n t i l Egypt, after a thousand years o f Greek civilization, finally returned to the orient. I n the course o f the second century B.C., when the political and economic power o f the Ptolemies declined, other places i n the Aegean w o r l d grew mightier and rose to importance as seats o f learning also, Pergamum above a l l .

3

2

Even i f we take into account a l l the energy, a m b i t i o n , and skill o f the family o f the Attalids, i t still seems a miraculous feat that Pergamum was brought into such prominence by them for a century and a half. Philetaerus, the son o f Attalus, governor o f the h i l l fortress o f Pergamum, having i n 282 B.C. betrayed and deserted Lysimachus, at that time lord o f Macedonia, Thrace, and Asia M i n o r , left a more or less independent principality to his nephews Eumenes and Attalus and their heirs. They consolidated and enlarged i t i n t o a k i n g d o m , defeating the violent Celtic invaders and w i t h Rome's help i n 190 B.C. even the Seleucids; they made their capital a new centre o f cultural life, and i n its magnificent setting the arts, philosophy, science, and scholarship flourished u n t i l the country was 'legally' inherited by Rome i n 133 B.C. But no Pergamene literary monument could equal the splendour of the colossal marble altar erected to Zeus Soter b y Eumenes I I to commemorate his final victory over the barbarians. There were no poets at any time i n Pergamum comparable to those i n Alexandria, nor can Pergamene scholarship i n its origin and development be compared w i t h t h a t o f Alexandria. 3

4

' Gf. also above, p. 171. See the references to the history of the Hellenistic age above, p. 87, n. 2 . Strab. xttl 623 f. + Altertümer von Pergamon, by A. Conze and others, vol. l-x ( 1 8 8 5 - 1 9 3 7 ) . H . Kahler, Der große Fries von Pergamon ( 1 9 4 8 ) , see esp. Pt. I I I 'Der große Fries und die Geschichte Pergamons', pp. 131 ff., the date of the altar 142 f., the question of allegory 149. 1

3

4

Books are the indispensable tools of scholars; the Ptolemies, stimulated by the scholar poets, had collected and stored hundreds o f thousands o f papyrus rolls i n Alexandria, and appointed the leading scholars i n succession as librarians. I n Pergamum only Eumenes I I is attested as founder of the library (Strabo x m 6 2 4 ) . This seems to be confirmed by the excavations. For according to a dedicatory inscription i t was Eumenes I I who added to the great temple o f Athena on the Acropolis the dignified building that housed his l i b r a r y . Grates may have helped his king i n organizing and administering the l i b r a r y ; this is suggested by the fact that he is said to have played a part i n devising a finer method o f preparing sheepskin for w r i t i n g material and advising its export to Rome. 5

6

7

See above, p. 172. Wendel, Buchbesehreibung 60 ff., tried in vain to prove that Aristophanes' pupil Callistratus moved to Pergamum and there wrote against Aristarchus. Sueton. Degrammaticiset rhetoribus 2 (p. 4. 4 Brugnoli 1963) 'Crates. . . missus ad senatum ab Attalo rege . . . sub ipsam Ennii mortem' (169 B . C . ) ; Attalus (II) became king in 159/8 B . C . , and cannot have sent off Crates to Rome in 168 B.C., it was Eumenes I I . The same confusion of Attalus and Eumenes in Lyd. de mens. 1 28 who depends on Sueton. Varro correctly mentions Eumenes; Sandys i i n (who overlooked Lydus' testimony) by a further confusion understood Eumenes I ( 2 6 3 - 2 4 1 B . C . ) . Sandys 1 163. 'The school of Pergamum' contrasted with 'the school of Alexandria'. See above, pp. 98 ff. Schmidt, Pinakes test. 4 5 - 5 4 , p. 16, on the Pergamene library, p. 28 on the Pergamene IJivajces; cf. pp. 4 3 f. See also Kenyon, Books and Readers 68 ff., and Wendel, Buchbeschreibung 1

1

3

3

3

4 s

go, and Handbuch der Bibliothekswissenschaft 6

in i* (1955) 8 2 ff.

Altertümer van Pergamon 11 and RE xix (1937) 1258 f.

Lydus, De mensibus ed. R. Wuensch (1898) 1 28 = Mette, Sphairopoiia (1936) 105, test. 7 ; the often-quoted sentence in F. Boissonade, Anecd. Graec. 1 (1829) 4 2 0 goes back to Lydus, see Wuensch p. xxxi. 7

236

Pergamum:

Scholarship

and

Philosophy

Allegorism

The use o f this particular material made the name o f Pergamum i m mortal : Lydus 'Pwpatoi ra p-epflpava. L7epyaurjva KOXOVCJIV, Suidas Ilepya.penvai- at pepfipdvat; parchment, parchemin, Pergament. I t became a common legend i n ancient times that parchment was 'invented' i n Pergamum when Ptolemy V , the coeval o f Eumenes I I , stopped the export o f papyrus. But i n fact, w r i t i n g on leather rolls was quite common i n the Near East i n early times and was adopted by the Greeks on the west coast o f Asia M i n o r before the fifth century B.C. Since the excavations o f Dura-Europos on the upper Euphrates brought to l i g h t a document o f the year 195/4B.C. which was written o n perfectly manufactured parchment, we are no longer entitled to say that the Pergamenes were the first to produce i t i n the finest quality. But they do seem to have produced it i n a larger quantity, probably because the import o f papyrus for the scriptoria o f the expanding library became too expensive, and they may have been the first to export i t to the west, as we have just heard. Whether there really was for some time an Egyptian embargo on papyrus remains an open question. Parchment, i n any case, had a glorious future, especially when the form o f the codex came slowly to supplant that o f the r o l l * 1

2

3

T h e literary treasures had to be catalogued; we referred to the IJepyap-nvoi mVaKe? when we dealt w i t h their great Alexandrian model. O n l y one librarian is k n o w n by name, the Stoic Athenodorus o f Tarsus, who went to Rome i n 70 B.C. Figures o f books i n the libraries are to be regarded w i t h due scepticism. Plutarch i n his Life of Mark Antony took from a source hostile to A n t o n y and Cleopatra the story that she was presented by the last o f her lovers w i t h 200,000 volumes from the Pergamene libraries ; modern scholars usually assume that i t was the losses of the Alexandrian Museum library, caused by the fire i n the harbour i n

5

6

7

Varro (de bibliothecis ?, see Dahlmann RE Suppl. vi 1221) in Plin. n.h. x m 70 'mox aemulatione circa bibliothecas regum Ptolemaei et Eumenis, supprimente chartas Ptolemaeo idem Varro membranas Pergami tradit repertas'; cf. also Lydus. Sec above, p. 19. F. Gumont, FouilUs de Doura-Europos 1 9 2 2 - 2 3 , Textes (1926) 2 8 1 - 5 , Parchment Document no. 1. «! C. H. Roberts, 'The Codex', Proc, Brit. Acad. 4 0 (1954) 169 if.; terminology 'membrana', 'membranae', etc. p. 174.—See also F . Wieacker, 'Textstufen klassischer Juristen', Abh. Akad. d. Wiss. Gottingen, Phil.-hist. Kl., 3 . Folge, Nr. 4 5 ( i 9 6 0 ) 93 ff., esp. 9 9 . See above, p. 133. H. v. Arnim, RE it ( i 8 g 6 ) 2 0 4 5 , Athenodorus no. 18. ' Plut. Anton. 5 8 KaXovtoioi . . . KO.1 TOCTO TUJV els KXeanarpav eyKXij/xdrutv AVTWI>1

TiKtôv.

An excerpt in Osann's Anecd. Roman, after the 'Vita Romana* and the section on the

Two Monographs

on

Homer

239

on the meaning of a gloss i n p 8 9 . W e should not be misled by the doubtful remark i n all our manuscripts of Suidas at the end of his article on Crates: avvira^e f S t op8w€Ü)S xa\ 6 AT¡p.T¡rpiós earw, off p,ep,vt)p,€8a iroXXaKis, o rov 4

3

s

TpuiZxov oiá/coau-ov ¿^r¡yr¡aápievos

ypappiartKos,

Kara

rov avrov

xpóvov yeyovútS

Kpárnrt nal

HptorápxypdV KaXovpiva>v rpayiäp-ßaiv, a sentence in which only 'rpay'-iäpßaiv is a mistake. The tap-ßeiov was called by Aristotle Poet. 1449 a 2 4 pdXiara Ae«TtKov rä)v perpwv, etc. Cf. F. Jacoby, 'Apollodors Chronik' 6 0 - 7 4 o n m c 'didactic iambus' of 2

Apollodorus and his imitators; if anyone should inquire again into the metrical technique of those versifications, he will have to consider also the new Menander, see J . W. White, The Verse of Greek Comedy (1912) 58 ff., and E. W. Handley, The Dyscolos of Menander (1965) 56 ffSee above, pp. 163 ff.; cf. Jacoby, 'Apollodors Chronik' 3 9 - 5 9 on Apollodorus' method; see also E . Schwartz and H . Diels, who had initiated the research in this field by his article 'Chronologische Untersuchungen über Apollodors Chronika', Rh.M. 31 (1876) 1 ff. The metrical fragments ( 5 2 - 5 9 ) relating events after 144/3 do not betray any difference in style and technique. There is at least no cogent argument for attributing the fourth book of the XpoviKa to a clever continuator, though it is beyond our means to distinguish a perfect imitation from the original in this sort of literature, F 5 8 . 2 yiyvdjoKeis addresses the general reader as in Hermesianax fr. 7. 49 and 73 Powell, not a special person. 4

3

256

The Epigoni:

from

Aristarchus*

Pupils

to

Chronicle

Didymus

Eratosthenes' earliest date, the fall of T r o y i n 1184/3 * * C 63)» dadng H o m e r 240 years later i n 944/3 B.C. he followed Ephorus, not Eratosthenes, who had assumed an interval o f a hundred years. T h e length o f early epochs i n Greek history was calculated by yeveal, that is, generations of kings or other leading persons; and both Eratosthenes and Apollodorus had to operate w i t h i n this system. T h e trouble was that the duration o f the ysved was not precisely established, but only approximately viewed as a period o f 30 or 33^ years, the t h i r d o f a century, or even longer. A further trouble was that the dates o f b i r t h and death o f individuals were often u n k n o w n ; but the date o f the most important events and deeds i n their lives was known, and Apollodorus assumed that they usually happened at the culminating age of forty, called i n medical language the aKfirj. I t cannot yet be proved whether this term was transferred to chronography by Apollodorus himself or b y later chrono¬ graphers. Using the number 4 o , he was i n an old popular tradition, o f w h i c h the earliest literary witness is Hesiod, Op. 4 4 1 , where a m a n i n full vigour is called T€aaapaKQvraerr)s altflds, w h i c h was expressly understood by the grammarians (and w h y not by Apollodorus?) as aKpa^wv. I do not believe the immediate source o f an omnivorous reader like Apollodorus can be traced; but the lasting effect o f his experiment is still recognizable i n Suidas' biographical articles, where the puzzling w o r d yeyove nearly always refers to the date o f the Apollodorean aKp.fi ('floruit'), not that o f b i r t h . 1

B

G

F

D

u

t

m

4

5

6

Apollodorus' second innovation was that he tried t o render his dates more accurate b y basing them on the lists o f the archons. T h e archon's name, w h i c h could be more easily p u t into verse t h a n figures o f O l y m piads, h a d been used for dating i n the BtSaaKaXlai from Aristotle's time onwards, and Demetrius of Phaleron had published an extensive Apxovrcov dvaypafyi) w h i c h now not only the author of the chronicle, b u t also the reader could consult. Frequent synchronisms were added as a convenient 7

8

9

Sec above, p. 163. Aristarchus dated Homer to the time of Ionian migration, 1044/3, a^ P8. * On this and other figures see the well-documented and graceful paper of F. Boll, 'Die Lebensalter*, JV«w Jahrbikher ftir das kiassische Alterturn 31 (1913) 103. 2 ( = Kleine Schriften 1

1

1950,

s e c

30

2 2

p. 1 7 2 - 5 ) ¬

* Hesych. (Cyrill.) v. ai£i}i'os~ axpatatv, cf. Et. Gud. 42.16 Stef. with many parallels. A possible source for the choice of the number 40 may have been Aristoxenus on Pythagoras {see fr. 16 Wehrli) and Apollod. F 339. See the famous paper of E . Rohde, Ttyovc in den Biographica des Suidas', Rh.M. 3 3 s

6

( 1 8 7 8 ) 161 if. = Kleine Schriften I (1901) 1 1 4 - 8 4 .

Jacoby, 'Apollodors Chronik' 57 ff. See above, p. 8 1 , cf. pp. 132 (CaUimachus), 193 (Aristoph. Byz.). FGrHist 228 F 1-3, 1 0 ; cf. Apollod. 244 F 31 («ri KaXXiov), 3 4 (irri .itye^iWos and KaAAtdSou). 7 8 9

aKp.r]

257

o f Pythagoras w i t h

Ps.-Scymnus i n his summary of the XpoviKa enumerates 7roAeojv dXwo-fus, eKTomopovs

arpaTOtreScov (1. 26) K T A . , and

(ftvyds, arparelas,

KaraXvaei?

TvpawLbujv (1. 31). The fragments themselves are probably unrepresentative i n so far as they deal relatively little w i t h politics and history, but very much w i t h philosophy and poetry. This is, o f course, due to the mainly grammatical character o f the sources from which we derive our quotations of Apollodorus; but i t may still betray a certain predilection o f the disciple o f Diogenes and Aristarchus for literature. I f we consider only one literary example, three lines on Menander, we see that between the biographical dates the total number of his plays is given as 105: K-nfaaievs atv, 4K Aio-neiQovs iraTpos, / rrpds Totatv eKarov

Trevre ypdipas Spdpara

\

e^e'AtTre •nf.vrqKQvra KOX ovtiv eVaiv. 'ex istis tamen centum et quinque omnibus solis eum octo vicisse idem Apollodorus eodem i n libro scribit.' The figure T T O T C (others counted 109 or 108) is guaranteed for the text of the XpoviKa by the metre, while figures i n prose texts are exposed to corruption. The information o n the plays i n which Apollodorus was especially interested was certainly drawn from the oioaaKaXiai i n the revised I7iVa/«s and i n the 'Yrroddacis o f Aristophanes o f Byzantium; Apollodorus had only to cast the figures into his not inelegant trimeters. T h e iambic XpoviKa became a standard authority as continuations, imitations, and even forgeries prove. One obvious forgery was a geographical guide-book, also i n comic trimeters and under Apollodorus' name written i n the first century B.C. A m o n g the continuations one on oriental history, written i n prose at the end o f the first century B.C., was frequently quoted by Christian writers from Clement and Eusebius to Syncellus. But unfortunately for our knowledge o f i t Apollodorus' work was superseded i n Augustan times by a more practical textbook, the XpoviKa o f Castor o f Rhodes. 1

2

3

Apollodorus published two other great works and a few minor ones; there is no evidence for the dates o f their origin or publication. Even the Chronicle was the product o f a ypappariKos, as we have seen; i n these other works we find h i m concentrating entirely on the interpretation o f Greek poetry. T h e monograph Ilepl rov T&V veojv KaraXoyov was a scholarly Gell. N.A. xvn 4. 5 — F 43 with commentary; on the problematical number of the comedies see A. Korte RE xv (1931} 713 f.—As the line before Kr$totevs is unknown, it is difficult to supply the missing short syllable before AiorrelBovs; I should prefer hi to Casaubon's re. 1

2

ivi

Trimeters

help i n many cases, as for instance that o f the the tyranny o f Polycrates.

2

J

in Comic

F 3 1 3 - 3 0 , cf. T 16. FGrHist 2 5 0 ; cf. E.

Schwartz, 'Die Kbnigslisten des Eratosthenes', 93 ff. on Castor's pseudochronology. 1

814342

S

AGGW

4 0 (1894/5)

258

The Epigoni:

from

Aristarchus'

Pupils

to

Didymus

Monograph

treatment of Homeric geography, and that Ileal deaiv dealt w i t h Homeric religion. Aristarchus' intention i n his monograph IJepl rov vavoradpov had been to reconstruct the whole order o f the Greek ships on the roadstead from all the relevant passages i n the Iliadhe had already here and there i n his commentary tried to discover how the poet had located the several heroes and their men on the shore. Demetrius o f Scepsis, the great local specialist, had given a minute account o f the Trojan allies i n Asia M i n o r i n his Tpco'iKos SiaKoapos. These studies may have h a d some influence on Apollodorus; he certainly knew Demetrius w e l l . I n Apollodorus' opinion the poet o f the Catalogue o f Ships i n the second book o f the Iliad had given a description o f heroic Greece, and i t was the d u t y of the interpreter to explain a l l the names o f places and tribes and heroes to the reader. W e can be sure that he would not have spent so much labour o n his twelve books, i f he had not believed i n the Homeric authorship o f the Catalogue. As a matter o f fact, none o f the grammarians suspected i t as a passage o f 'Hesiodic character' or 'cyclic' o r i g i n ; they were content to athetize some individual lines as i n other parts o f the poem. So Apollodorus d i d not have to face the question whether there had been interpolat i o n from a later source, or whether there was a pre-Homeric tradition preserved i n the Greek Catalogue. I t was modern Homeric criticism that suggested those possibilities which are still being explored not w i t h out bitter feuds and personal invectives. T o Apollodorus the Catalogue was a genuine part o f Homer's work, and he used a l l the knowledge o f post-Homeric geography available t o h i m i n order t o identify the names recorded there. 2

3

4

5

H e again followed the lead o f Eratosthenes' genius; the descriptive— but not the scientific—parts o f Eratosthenes' Tetuypadn/ca, which began w i t h Homer, were his model and the m a i n source for his twelve books Ilepl rov r&v veaiv KaraXoyov. The relation is similar t o that which we noted between the chronological works o f the two scholars. T h e most substantial extracts from Apollodorus are preserved by Strabo, especially b

1 2

See above, p. 2 1 3 ; cf. Lehrs 221 ff. See above, pp. 249 ff. T 14 ovx d/ioAoyei rots VTTO rov Eicntilov 3

of

2

p. 168) 'the Catalogue appears . . . the oldest Greek verse we possess', is frankly condemned as 'Unfug'; it becomes, nevertheless, fashionable from time to time. T 13 ra nXeiora fierevdyKas rrapa rov 'Eparoodivovs; cf. above, pp. 165 f.

Ships

259

1

i n Books V I I - X o f his great geographical compilation —just as i n other parts ( I / I I and X I I I ) he is our principal source for Eratosthenes and Demetrius. But Strabo d i d not often attribute his extracts to Apollodorus by name so that a minute analysis o f whole chapters w i l l be necessary before the Apollodorean extracts can be distinguished from those o f other writers like Ephorus, Artemidorus, and Demetrius. W h e n Strabo d i d introduce a verbatim quotation w i t h the title o f the work, he used the 2

formula iv rots (rw) flepl

3

(rov) vecov KaraXoyov ; and we can conclude

from this that Apollodorus d i d not write a running commentary, a viropvnpa, on B 494 ff. line by line, but treated the sections o f the Catalogue more loosely, i n the style o f the iTep l i t e r a t u r e . 4

His immense learning and wide range o f vision over the epic period enabled Apollodorus to form a coherent picture o f Homer's Greece and o f the changes that took place after h i m ; his object was to determine the poet's geographical views, as Aristarchus had tried to discover the Homeric usage o f words and facts. Like Eratosthenes, he was far from i m p u t i n g to the poet any intention o f 'teaching', and w i t h both Eratosthenes and Aristarchus he ignored the Stoic assumption o f 'hidden' meanings which had led Crates astray and not only i n the field o f geography. But, as far as we can judge from our fragments, Apollodorus, as a true Aristarchean i n every respect, d i d not bother to set forth his principles i n a systematic introduction, though he may have given an occasional hint i n an excursus. For instance, i n a digression on the Odyssey, he bitterly criticized Callimachus for having identified the island o f Calypso with Tavhos, an islet near M a l t a , and the Phaeacian Scheria w i t h Corcyra. Callimachus, as a poet pretending (perarroiovpevos) t o be a ypapparucos, could not be forgiven when he sinned against the fundamental distinction between the historical places i n the Catalogue and the imaginary localities o f Odysseus' wanderings (rrapa rov egoitceaviopov rwv TOTTOJV) , a distinction accepted by Apollodorus from Eratosthenes. A n interpreter o f an epic text w i t h hundreds o f proper names was bound to explain the form and meaning o f the names themselves, not 5

6

7

See the table in FGrHist 11 Kommentar pp. 776 f. Is it too much to hope that this analysis, begun by Niese nearly a century ago and meanwhile advanced by others, will be completed one day? See B. Niese, 'Apollodors Commentar zum Schiffskatalog', Rh.M. 32 (1877) 2 6 7 - 3 0 7 ; E. Schwartz RE I 2866 ff., F. Jacoby in his commentary pp. 776 ff. Steph. Byz., less exact than Strabo in several respects, but still very valuable, said only h> r