Verg. Aen. 2.311–12 iam proximus ardet | Vcalegon. This striking phrase is twice echoed, as comme... more Verg. Aen. 2.311–12 iam proximus ardet | Vcalegon. This striking phrase is twice echoed, as commentators observe. The burning neighbour Ucalegon reappears in Juv. 3.198–201 iam poscit aquam, iam friuola transfert | Vcalegon … | ultimus ardebit quem … . And the words proximus ardet reappear in Hor. Epist. 1.18.84 paries cum proximus ardet.
This article discusses the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Lives of Romulus... more This article discusses the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Lives of Romulus, Agis and Cleomenes, Pericles, Brutus, Marcellus, Alexander and Marius.
The plural is inapposite, since ωμος applied to a band of revellers is a collective noun and, how... more The plural is inapposite, since ωμος applied to a band of revellers is a collective noun and, however many times the band accompanied Dionysus, it is still the same ωμος and not a plurality of ωμοι. Dobree's and Bothe's κώμοις must face the same objection, unless it is understood as ‘songs’ (as at 492–3 ), in which case it becomes a feeble anticipation of οιδᾶις in 40. Florens Christianus' κμοί is negligible. Porson suggested κώμωι but left it unclear whether he interpreted Bακχίωι as adjective or noun. Bάκχιος is used adjectivally not more than once or twice in over thirty Euripidean examples (eight in this play), and the satyrs cannot be said to have accompanied a Bacchic ωμος, for the ωμος was constituted of the satyrs themselves. And yet Bακχίωι interpreted as a noun would produce an intolerably unstylish collocation of independent datives. Unimpeachable sense and style, and a strong candidate for corruption, would be furnished by ωμος ( , ‘serving alongside Bacchus ...
C OMMENTATORS and emendators, with few exceptions, find the antecedent of the relative Ot in V€KV... more C OMMENTATORS and emendators, with few exceptions, find the antecedent of the relative Ot in V€KVWV in line 44/45: " ... corpses which leave behind their limbs as a prey to beasts." The gibbering tjJvX~' knocking in vain at the gates of Hell, may have left its limbs behind as carrion. A corpse on the battlefield has abdicated control over its limbs: it does not enjoy the privilege of bequeathing them to anybody. The conjectures of the interpreters in line 44 are not such as to redeem the improbability of their interpretation: alla fLOL T'KVCI. AVCCl.L cfoOLfLEVWV V€KVWIl ed. Brubachiana and the early editors, rendered as "ut redimas mihi filiorum extinctorum cadauera" or "ut eximas me os liberos ex cadaueribus defunctorum," and modified by Brodaeus and Markland to avCI. fLOL KTA., "surge mihi, redime filios meos, etc."; alla A€LtjJCl.vCI. AVCCl.L Kirchhoff, ava fLOL CTtXCI.
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 1974
(i) Heracles64 ὃς l, ὡς L οὓνεκ᾿ ὄλβου Canter, οὐκ ἐν ὄλβω LMegara's father was boasted a... more (i) Heracles64 ὃς l, ὡς L οὓνεκ᾿ ὄλβου Canter, οὐκ ἐν ὄλβω LMegara's father was boasted a great man because of his ὄλβος, possessing as he did a tyranny ‘about which long spears are launched, through desire of it, at the bodies of the fortunate’ (Paley's translation). The sentiment and the language are alike absurd. We can scarcely disagree with the verdict of Wilamowitz: ‘Sinnlose Worte, deren Heilung unmöglich scheint, da sowohl die “Lanzen” wie das “Springen” wie die “Liebe” ungehörig sind, so daß der Sitz der Verderbnis unbestimmt bleibt.’ I shall not transcribe the conjectures: he who is prepared, like Macbeth, to sup full with horrors, may find more than a dozen conjectures in Wecklein's edition.
Verg. Aen. 2.311–12 iam proximus ardet | Vcalegon. This striking phrase is twice echoed, as comme... more Verg. Aen. 2.311–12 iam proximus ardet | Vcalegon. This striking phrase is twice echoed, as commentators observe. The burning neighbour Ucalegon reappears in Juv. 3.198–201 iam poscit aquam, iam friuola transfert | Vcalegon … | ultimus ardebit quem … . And the words proximus ardet reappear in Hor. Epist. 1.18.84 paries cum proximus ardet.
This article discusses the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Lives of Romulus... more This article discusses the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Lives of Romulus, Agis and Cleomenes, Pericles, Brutus, Marcellus, Alexander and Marius.
The plural is inapposite, since ωμος applied to a band of revellers is a collective noun and, how... more The plural is inapposite, since ωμος applied to a band of revellers is a collective noun and, however many times the band accompanied Dionysus, it is still the same ωμος and not a plurality of ωμοι. Dobree's and Bothe's κώμοις must face the same objection, unless it is understood as ‘songs’ (as at 492–3 ), in which case it becomes a feeble anticipation of οιδᾶις in 40. Florens Christianus' κμοί is negligible. Porson suggested κώμωι but left it unclear whether he interpreted Bακχίωι as adjective or noun. Bάκχιος is used adjectivally not more than once or twice in over thirty Euripidean examples (eight in this play), and the satyrs cannot be said to have accompanied a Bacchic ωμος, for the ωμος was constituted of the satyrs themselves. And yet Bακχίωι interpreted as a noun would produce an intolerably unstylish collocation of independent datives. Unimpeachable sense and style, and a strong candidate for corruption, would be furnished by ωμος ( , ‘serving alongside Bacchus ...
C OMMENTATORS and emendators, with few exceptions, find the antecedent of the relative Ot in V€KV... more C OMMENTATORS and emendators, with few exceptions, find the antecedent of the relative Ot in V€KVWV in line 44/45: " ... corpses which leave behind their limbs as a prey to beasts." The gibbering tjJvX~' knocking in vain at the gates of Hell, may have left its limbs behind as carrion. A corpse on the battlefield has abdicated control over its limbs: it does not enjoy the privilege of bequeathing them to anybody. The conjectures of the interpreters in line 44 are not such as to redeem the improbability of their interpretation: alla fLOL T'KVCI. AVCCl.L cfoOLfLEVWV V€KVWIl ed. Brubachiana and the early editors, rendered as "ut redimas mihi filiorum extinctorum cadauera" or "ut eximas me os liberos ex cadaueribus defunctorum," and modified by Brodaeus and Markland to avCI. fLOL KTA., "surge mihi, redime filios meos, etc."; alla A€LtjJCl.vCI. AVCCl.L Kirchhoff, ava fLOL CTtXCI.
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 1974
(i) Heracles64 ὃς l, ὡς L οὓνεκ᾿ ὄλβου Canter, οὐκ ἐν ὄλβω LMegara's father was boasted a... more (i) Heracles64 ὃς l, ὡς L οὓνεκ᾿ ὄλβου Canter, οὐκ ἐν ὄλβω LMegara's father was boasted a great man because of his ὄλβος, possessing as he did a tyranny ‘about which long spears are launched, through desire of it, at the bodies of the fortunate’ (Paley's translation). The sentiment and the language are alike absurd. We can scarcely disagree with the verdict of Wilamowitz: ‘Sinnlose Worte, deren Heilung unmöglich scheint, da sowohl die “Lanzen” wie das “Springen” wie die “Liebe” ungehörig sind, so daß der Sitz der Verderbnis unbestimmt bleibt.’ I shall not transcribe the conjectures: he who is prepared, like Macbeth, to sup full with horrors, may find more than a dozen conjectures in Wecklein's edition.
Uploads
Papers by James Diggle