Pub Date : 1960-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S006867350000287X
E. Dodds
{"title":"Morals and Politics in the ‘Oresteia’","authors":"E. Dodds","doi":"10.1017/S006867350000287X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S006867350000287X","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"6 1","pages":"19-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1960-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S006867350000287X","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57325077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1960-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068673500002923
H. Plommer
On page 318 of F. M. Simpson's History of Architectural Development , vol. 1 (Longmans, 1956) I reprinted as fig. 107 the plan of Trajan's Forum from the earlier edition. I reprint it again here as Fig. 1. The plan is Lanciani's ( Forma Urbis Romae , Milan, 1893, IV, 1). Compare R. Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations (London, 1897), fig. 119. This has drawn on me the strictures of scholars. Thus R. Martin writes ( Revue des Etudes anciennes , p. 404, n. 1) that my book commits an ‘erreur dans le plan du forum de Trajan, qui ne rend pas la forme circulaire du cote meridional de la cour reconnu par G. Lugli’. By which he seems to mean that my plan makes the front wall of the court, to each side of the triumphal arch, straight and not segmental. A. von Gerkan, in Gymnasium , 1958, p. 545, remarks that in my book ‘gar zu oft hoffnungslos veraltetes Material vorgelegt wird. Das Trajansforum Abb. 107 ist ein groteskes Beispiel dafur’. Alas! following his usual custom, he gives no evidence for his statements, gladly though I should learn about these things.
在F. M. Simpson的《建筑发展史》第1卷第318页(Longmans出版社，1956年)，我将图拉真广场的平面图作为图107从早期版本中转载。我把它重新印在图1中。该计划是兰西亚尼的(Forma Urbis Romae，米兰，1893,IV, 1)。比较R.兰西亚尼，遗址和发掘(伦敦，1897)，图119。这使我受到学者们的批评。因此，R. Martin写道(Revue des Etudes anciennes，第404页，第1页)，我的书犯了一个“错误”，即“错误地规划了图拉真论坛，错误地规划了图拉真论坛，错误地规划了图拉真论坛，错误地规划了图拉真论坛。”他的意思似乎是说，我的计划是把庭院的前墙，凯旋门的每一边，都做成笔直的，而不是分段的。A. von Gerkan，在体育馆，1958，第545页，在我的书“gar zu of hoffnungslos veraltetes Material vorgelegt wind”中评论道。《绘画论坛》[b] . 107 . ist in groteskes Beispiel dafur。唉!按照他的习惯，他没有为他的陈述提供证据，尽管我应该了解这些事情。
{"title":"Trajan's Forum: a Plea","authors":"H. Plommer","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500002923","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500002923","url":null,"abstract":"On page 318 of F. M. Simpson's History of Architectural Development , vol. 1 (Longmans, 1956) I reprinted as fig. 107 the plan of Trajan's Forum from the earlier edition. I reprint it again here as Fig. 1. The plan is Lanciani's ( Forma Urbis Romae , Milan, 1893, IV, 1). Compare R. Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations (London, 1897), fig. 119. This has drawn on me the strictures of scholars. Thus R. Martin writes ( Revue des Etudes anciennes , p. 404, n. 1) that my book commits an ‘erreur dans le plan du forum de Trajan, qui ne rend pas la forme circulaire du cote meridional de la cour reconnu par G. Lugli’. By which he seems to mean that my plan makes the front wall of the court, to each side of the triumphal arch, straight and not segmental. A. von Gerkan, in Gymnasium , 1958, p. 545, remarks that in my book ‘gar zu oft hoffnungslos veraltetes Material vorgelegt wird. Das Trajansforum Abb. 107 ist ein groteskes Beispiel dafur’. Alas! following his usual custom, he gives no evidence for his statements, gladly though I should learn about these things.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"6 1","pages":"54-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1960-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500002923","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57325124","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1960-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068673500002911
D. L. Page
{"title":"Conjectures in Sophocles' ‘Philoctetes’","authors":"D. L. Page","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500002911","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500002911","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"6 1","pages":"49-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1960-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500002911","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57325040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1957-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S1750270500012185
J. Crook
In 1900 Mace suggested that Suetonius may very well have been procurator of the Greek and Latin libraries before becoming ab epistulis ; two of his successors in the latter office passed to it from the former. Mace went on: ‘Si on venait a decouvrir une inscription concernant notre secretaire ab epistulis , il ne serait pas surprenant que le texte en fut ici parallele a ceux que nous avons conserves sur ses deux collegues.’ These were prophetic words, for in 1952 there was published an inscription concerning Suetonius, discovered in the Forum of Hippo Regius (Bone in Algeria), which reveals that he was indeed a studiis a bybliothecis ab epistulis imp. Caesaris Traiani Hadriani Aug .
1900年，梅斯提出，在成为书记家之前，苏托尼乌斯很可能是希腊和拉丁图书馆的检察官;他的继任者中有两位是由前总统转任的。梅斯接着说:“我在这里写了一篇关于书信体秘书的碑文，我将在这里写一篇关于书信体秘书的碑文，我将在这里写一篇关于书信体秘书的碑文。”这些都是预言性的话，因为在1952年发表了一篇关于Suetonius的铭文，在阿尔及利亚的Hippo Regius广场(Bone in Algeria)发现，这表明他确实是一个bybliothecis ab epistulis imp. Caesaris Traiani Hadriani Aug .的研究。
{"title":"Suetonius ‘ab epistulis’ 2","authors":"J. Crook","doi":"10.1017/S1750270500012185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1750270500012185","url":null,"abstract":"In 1900 Mace suggested that Suetonius may very well have been procurator of the Greek and Latin libraries before becoming ab epistulis ; two of his successors in the latter office passed to it from the former. Mace went on: ‘Si on venait a decouvrir une inscription concernant notre secretaire ab epistulis , il ne serait pas surprenant que le texte en fut ici parallele a ceux que nous avons conserves sur ses deux collegues.’ These were prophetic words, for in 1952 there was published an inscription concerning Suetonius, discovered in the Forum of Hippo Regius (Bone in Algeria), which reveals that he was indeed a studiis a bybliothecis ab epistulis imp. Caesaris Traiani Hadriani Aug .","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"18-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1957-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1750270500012185","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57010439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1957-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S1750270500012203
G. Kerferd
{"title":"The moral and Political doctrines of Antiphon the Sophist. A reconsideration","authors":"G. Kerferd","doi":"10.1017/S1750270500012203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1750270500012203","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"26-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1957-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1750270500012203","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57010458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1957-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S175027050001215X
G. T. Griffith
It seems uncertain whether the Macedonian infantrymen of Philip II had breast-plates or not. How much it matters, too, is also perhaps uncertain, though obviously it mattered not a little to the men themselves at the time, whether or not they carried on them that combination of strength and of weight, of moral comfort and physical encumbrance, that a breastplate meant to the man inside it. There may perhaps be something in this question, too, for the social historian as well as for the military specialist. That Greek hoplites of the archaic period normally wore breastplates appears from vase-paintings, especially those proto-Corinthian examples which show combats not of individuals but of opposing phalanxes: it appears, too, from Tyrtaeus. Xenophon in the Anabasis , when he makes a passing remark about casualties on one occasion, gives the same impression about the Ten Thousand, who were predominantly a hoplite force. But breastplates were not uniform. Metal ones could vary greatly in weight, and there were variants (πĩλοι, σπολάδeς) that were probably quite light in metal, on linen or leather. It has been suggested with some likelihood that in the fifth century the solid metal type virtually went out of use. If this were so, then the peltasts of the early fourth century would represent a logical development from a hoplite who had already become lighter than of old. It would seem logical for the pekast to have no breastplate at all, an arrangement incidentally that might suit well the mercenaries of the day who often were peltasts, and who were often poor men unlikely to own expensive equipment. But in spite of their occasional spectacular successes even against hoplites, the peltasts did not supersede them, so far as can be seen, in the citizen armies of the Greek cities. Indeed in the Hellenistic period still, in a treaty of about 270 B.C. between the Aetolians and the Acarnanians, the clause providing for reciprocal military aid distinguishes between three classes of infantry: (1) those who wore breastplates (πανοπλίαν), (2) those wore τὸ ἡμιθωράκιον, and (3) those who had no defensive armour (ψιλῲ). The first class is presumably, still, the hoplite.
腓力二世时期的马其顿步兵是否有胸甲似乎并不确定。这到底有多重要，或许也不确定，但显然，这对当时的男人们自己来说很重要，不管他们身上是否带着对里面的人来说意味着力量和重量、精神上的安慰和身体上的负担的结合。这个问题也许对社会历史学家和军事专家都有意义。古代希腊的重装步兵通常都戴着胸甲，这是从花瓶画中可以看到的，特别是那些原始科林斯的例子，它们表现的不是个人的战斗，而是对立的方阵;这也从提尔泰厄斯那里可以看到。色诺芬在《阿纳巴西斯》中，有一次随口提到了伤亡情况，他也给人留下了同样的印象，那一万人主要是重装步兵。但胸甲并不统一。金属表的重量变化很大，有一些变体(πĩλοι， σπολ δeς)可能是很轻的金属，在亚麻或皮革上。有人认为，在五世纪，固体金属活字实际上已经不再使用了。如果是这样的话，那么四世纪早期的骑兵代表了一种合乎逻辑的发展，从一种已经变得比以前更轻的重步兵。骑兵没有胸甲似乎是合乎逻辑的，顺便说一句，这种安排可能很适合当时的雇佣兵，他们通常是骑兵，而且往往是穷人，不太可能拥有昂贵的装备。但是，尽管他们在与重装步兵的战斗中偶尔取得了惊人的胜利，但就目前所见，在希腊城市的公民军队中，他们并没有取代重装步兵。事实上，在希腊化时期，在大约公元前270年埃托利亚人和阿卡南尼亚人之间的一项条约中，提供相互军事援助的条款将步兵区分为三种类型:(1)戴胸甲的(πανοπλ αν)，(2)戴τ ο μιθωρ κιον的，(3)没有防御甲的(ψιλῲ)。第一类大概仍然是重装步兵。
{"title":"ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΑ: Notes on the Macedonians of Philip and Alexander 1","authors":"G. T. Griffith","doi":"10.1017/S175027050001215X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S175027050001215X","url":null,"abstract":"It seems uncertain whether the Macedonian infantrymen of Philip II had breast-plates or not. How much it matters, too, is also perhaps uncertain, though obviously it mattered not a little to the men themselves at the time, whether or not they carried on them that combination of strength and of weight, of moral comfort and physical encumbrance, that a breastplate meant to the man inside it. There may perhaps be something in this question, too, for the social historian as well as for the military specialist. That Greek hoplites of the archaic period normally wore breastplates appears from vase-paintings, especially those proto-Corinthian examples which show combats not of individuals but of opposing phalanxes: it appears, too, from Tyrtaeus. Xenophon in the Anabasis , when he makes a passing remark about casualties on one occasion, gives the same impression about the Ten Thousand, who were predominantly a hoplite force. But breastplates were not uniform. Metal ones could vary greatly in weight, and there were variants (πĩλοι, σπολάδeς) that were probably quite light in metal, on linen or leather. It has been suggested with some likelihood that in the fifth century the solid metal type virtually went out of use. If this were so, then the peltasts of the early fourth century would represent a logical development from a hoplite who had already become lighter than of old. It would seem logical for the pekast to have no breastplate at all, an arrangement incidentally that might suit well the mercenaries of the day who often were peltasts, and who were often poor men unlikely to own expensive equipment. But in spite of their occasional spectacular successes even against hoplites, the peltasts did not supersede them, so far as can be seen, in the citizen armies of the Greek cities. Indeed in the Hellenistic period still, in a treaty of about 270 B.C. between the Aetolians and the Acarnanians, the clause providing for reciprocal military aid distinguishes between three classes of infantry: (1) those who wore breastplates (πανοπλίαν), (2) those wore τὸ ἡμιθωράκιον, and (3) those who had no defensive armour (ψιλῲ). The first class is presumably, still, the hoplite.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"82 1","pages":"3-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1957-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S175027050001215X","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57010409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1957-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S1750270500012161
G. Kirk
Gregory Vlastos, in his interesting review of Cornford's Principium Sapientiae , in Gnomon , XXVII (1955), pp. 65ff., gives a particularly bald statement (p. 74 and n. 2) of a theory advanced in an article by Friedrich Solmsen, ‘Chaos and Apeiron’, Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica , n.s. XXIV (1950), pp. 235ff., and by Hermann Frankel in his Dichtung und Philosophie des fruhen Griechentums (New York, 1951), pp. 148–9. The theory is that Theogony 736–45 has a profound cosmogonical significance, and that it was probably from there that Anaximander derived and developed his idea of an originative ἄπeιρον. Now the Hesiodic passage is one of a group of variant descriptions of Tartaros that extend, as an appendix to the Titanomachy, from 726 to 819. Many of these descriptions are mutually inconsistent, and, although I would not go quite so far as Jacoby ( Hesiodi Carmina: pars I, Theogonia (Berlin, 1930), pp. 22 ff.) in asserting that they are certainly all later additions, most of them by different authors, it seems manifest that they cannot all be by the author of the Theogony as a whole—even accepting that this poem is to some extent a synthesis, not always elegant or consistent, of previous accounts. At all events no other part of the poem, including the cosmogony and theogony of 116 ff., manifests the piecemeal, repetitive and contradictory qualities of this series of descriptions of Tartaros. For example, 726–45 describes the underworld, and it is there that the halls of Night are located; but at 746 ff. there is a sudden transition to the far west, the region where Atlas stands and where Night exchanges with Day. Solmsen ( op. cit. p. 243, n. 2) tries to defend this unaccountable and irrelevant switch by showing that Night, earlier in the poem, is associated with the western parts of the earth, but is also a product of Chaos in the cosmogony of 116 ff. Yet this consideration, although it provides a sufficient motive for an irrelevant rhapsodic elaboration of the kind that Jacoby posited, really does nothing to support unity of authorship for the two adjacent passages. I agree with Jacoby, then, that what we are presented with in this part of the Theogony is a farrago of rhapsodic variants, juxtaposed inconsistently (for the most part) by the most mechanical principles, on the central theme of Tartaros.
格雷戈里·弗拉斯托斯，在他对康福德的《智慧原理》的有趣评论中，《Gnomon》，XXVII(1955)，第65页。对弗里德里希·索姆森(Friedrich Solmsen)在《混沌与Apeiron》(Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica, n.s XXIV (1950)， pp. 235ff)一篇文章中提出的一个理论，给出了一个特别直白的陈述(第74页和第2页)。，赫尔曼·弗兰克尔(Hermann Frankel)的《哲学与哲学》(Dichtung and Philosophie des fruhen griechentum)(纽约，1951)，第148-9页。该理论认为，《神权论》736-45年具有深刻的宇宙演化意义，阿那克西曼德很可能就是从那里推导并发展了他关于原创的ν πeιρον的思想。赫西代的段落是一组对鞑靼人的不同描述之一，作为《泰坦之神》的附录，从726年延伸到819年。许多这些描述是相互矛盾的，虽然我不会像雅各比(Hesiodi Carmina: pars I, Theogonia (Berlin, 1930)， pp. 22 ff.)那样断言它们肯定都是后来添加的，其中大多数是由不同的作者写的，但很明显，它们不可能都是由Theogonia的作者作为一个整体写的——即使接受这首诗在某种程度上是一个综合，并不总是优雅或一致的，以前的叙述。无论如何，这首诗的其他部分，包括第116章的宇宙起源论和神权论。，体现了这一系列Tartaros描述的零碎、重复和矛盾的特质。例如，726-45页描述了地下世界，暗夜大厅就在那里;但是在第746页。有一个突然的过渡到遥远的西部，阿特拉斯所在的地区，黑夜与白昼交替的地方。索姆森(同前第243页，第2页)试图为这种不可解释和无关的转换辩护，他指出，在诗歌的早期，夜与地球的西部有关，但也是116页宇宙演化中混沌的产物。然而，这种考虑，尽管它为雅各比所假设的那种不相关的狂想式阐述提供了充分的动机，但实际上并不能支持相邻两段作者的统一。我同意雅各比的观点，在《神权论》的这一部分，我们看到的是狂想曲变体的大杂烩，在塔塔罗斯的中心主题上，以最机械的原则不一致地(在很大程度上)并在一起。
{"title":"The interpretation of Hesiod, ‘Theogony’ 736ff","authors":"G. Kirk","doi":"10.1017/S1750270500012161","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1750270500012161","url":null,"abstract":"Gregory Vlastos, in his interesting review of Cornford's Principium Sapientiae , in Gnomon , XXVII (1955), pp. 65ff., gives a particularly bald statement (p. 74 and n. 2) of a theory advanced in an article by Friedrich Solmsen, ‘Chaos and Apeiron’, Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica , n.s. XXIV (1950), pp. 235ff., and by Hermann Frankel in his Dichtung und Philosophie des fruhen Griechentums (New York, 1951), pp. 148–9. The theory is that Theogony 736–45 has a profound cosmogonical significance, and that it was probably from there that Anaximander derived and developed his idea of an originative ἄπeιρον. Now the Hesiodic passage is one of a group of variant descriptions of Tartaros that extend, as an appendix to the Titanomachy, from 726 to 819. Many of these descriptions are mutually inconsistent, and, although I would not go quite so far as Jacoby ( Hesiodi Carmina: pars I, Theogonia (Berlin, 1930), pp. 22 ff.) in asserting that they are certainly all later additions, most of them by different authors, it seems manifest that they cannot all be by the author of the Theogony as a whole—even accepting that this poem is to some extent a synthesis, not always elegant or consistent, of previous accounts. At all events no other part of the poem, including the cosmogony and theogony of 116 ff., manifests the piecemeal, repetitive and contradictory qualities of this series of descriptions of Tartaros. For example, 726–45 describes the underworld, and it is there that the halls of Night are located; but at 746 ff. there is a sudden transition to the far west, the region where Atlas stands and where Night exchanges with Day. Solmsen ( op. cit. p. 243, n. 2) tries to defend this unaccountable and irrelevant switch by showing that Night, earlier in the poem, is associated with the western parts of the earth, but is also a product of Chaos in the cosmogony of 116 ff. Yet this consideration, although it provides a sufficient motive for an irrelevant rhapsodic elaboration of the kind that Jacoby posited, really does nothing to support unity of authorship for the two adjacent passages. I agree with Jacoby, then, that what we are presented with in this part of the Theogony is a farrago of rhapsodic variants, juxtaposed inconsistently (for the most part) by the most mechanical principles, on the central theme of Tartaros.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"10-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1957-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1750270500012161","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57010418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1955-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068673500002807
R. P. Winnington-Ingram
The play has given rise to diverse interpretations. The greatest divergence of opinion is about the attitude of Sophocles to the matricidal vengeance. At one extreme we have a robust Homeric Sophocles, untroubled by the squeamishness of Aeschylus; at the other, an Aeschylean sensitiveness to the moral implications of the vengeance and a presumption that the Furies are only waiting for the play to end to begin their pursuit of Orestes. Adherents of the former view can point to certain epic features which Sophocles has introduced, but the constant reminiscences of the Oresteia are far more striking. This paper assumes (what will be in part substantiated) that Sophocles wrote with the Oresteia constantly in mind and expected the better-educated among his audience to be reminded of it. It will be concerned particularly with the Sophoclean treatment of the Furies and will suggest that this is of fundamental importance to the interpretation of the play.
{"title":"The ‘Electra’ of Sophocles: prolegomena to an interpretation 1","authors":"R. P. Winnington-Ingram","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500002807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500002807","url":null,"abstract":"The play has given rise to diverse interpretations. The greatest divergence of opinion is about the attitude of Sophocles to the matricidal vengeance. At one extreme we have a robust Homeric Sophocles, untroubled by the squeamishness of Aeschylus; at the other, an Aeschylean sensitiveness to the moral implications of the vengeance and a presumption that the Furies are only waiting for the play to end to begin their pursuit of Orestes. Adherents of the former view can point to certain epic features which Sophocles has introduced, but the constant reminiscences of the Oresteia are far more striking. This paper assumes (what will be in part substantiated) that Sophocles wrote with the Oresteia constantly in mind and expected the better-educated among his audience to be reminded of it. It will be concerned particularly with the Sophoclean treatment of the Furies and will suggest that this is of fundamental importance to the interpretation of the play.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":"20-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1955-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500002807","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57324378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1955-01-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068673500002819
D. R. S. Bailey
I, 16, 12. sed senatus consulta duo iam facta sunt, odiosa , quod in consulem facta putantur, Catone et Domitio postulante, unum, ut apud magistratus inquiri liceret, alterum, cuius domi diuisores habitarent, aduersus rem publicam. odiosa to whom? To the magistrates and the consul's satellites and Pompey? That is Billerbeck's explanation, more respectable than the silence of modern commentators. But odiosa , without qualification, can only mean generally unpopular, i.e. in the senate, among the boni . But how, asked Malaspina four centuries ago, should those decrees have been unpopular because they were directed against a highly unpopular consul? ‘consul odiosissimus’ to Cicero and his boni M. Pupius Piso, Pompey's legate and tool, assuredly was. Witness among other passages I, 13, 2 (esp. seiunctus ab optimatibus ) and I, 14, 6 (esp. mirum in modum omnis a se bonos alienauit ). And Malaspina might further have enquired why stringent, intrusive measures against bribery should have been welcome per se in an assembly composed largely of persons who had bribed, were bribing, or expected to bribe their way to office. Modern apparatus do not even mention quae for quod , a once popular reading cited from a MS. belonging to Faernus. It seems no more than a palliative. For a cure I suggest ‹ ideo minus › odiosa .
I、 16、12。sed senatus consulta duo iam facta sunt，odiosa，quod in consultem facta putantur，Catone et Domitio postulante，unum，ut apud magistratus inquiri liceret，alterum，cuius domi diuisores habitant，aduersus rem publicam。奥迪奥萨对谁？给地方法官、领事的卫星和庞培？这是比勒贝克的解释，比现代评论家的沉默更令人尊敬。但是，没有资格的奥迪奥萨只能意味着普遍不受欢迎，即在参议院，在博尼人中。但是，马拉斯皮纳在四个世纪前问道，这些法令怎么会因为针对一位极不受欢迎的领事而不受欢迎呢？”奥迪奥西姆斯执政官对西塞罗和庞培的公使兼工具普皮乌斯·皮索无疑是如此。见证其他段落I，13，2（特别是seitucts ab optimatibus）和I，14，6（特别是在modum omnis a se bonos alienauit中的mirum）。马拉斯皮纳可能会进一步询问，在一个主要由行贿、正在行贿或预计行贿的人组成的议会中，为什么严格的、侵入性的反贿赂措施本身应该受到欢迎。现代仪器甚至没有提到quae代替quod，这是Faernus的一位女士引用的一个曾经很流行的读物。这似乎不过是一种缓和。作为治疗方法，我建议使用›ideo-minus›odiosa。
{"title":"Emendations of Cicero, ‘Ad Atticum’","authors":"D. R. S. Bailey","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500002819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500002819","url":null,"abstract":"I, 16, 12. sed senatus consulta duo iam facta sunt, odiosa , quod in consulem facta putantur, Catone et Domitio postulante, unum, ut apud magistratus inquiri liceret, alterum, cuius domi diuisores habitarent, aduersus rem publicam. odiosa to whom? To the magistrates and the consul's satellites and Pompey? That is Billerbeck's explanation, more respectable than the silence of modern commentators. But odiosa , without qualification, can only mean generally unpopular, i.e. in the senate, among the boni . But how, asked Malaspina four centuries ago, should those decrees have been unpopular because they were directed against a highly unpopular consul? ‘consul odiosissimus’ to Cicero and his boni M. Pupius Piso, Pompey's legate and tool, assuredly was. Witness among other passages I, 13, 2 (esp. seiunctus ab optimatibus ) and I, 14, 6 (esp. mirum in modum omnis a se bonos alienauit ). And Malaspina might further have enquired why stringent, intrusive measures against bribery should have been welcome per se in an assembly composed largely of persons who had bribed, were bribing, or expected to bribe their way to office. Modern apparatus do not even mention quae for quod , a once popular reading cited from a MS. belonging to Faernus. It seems no more than a palliative. For a cure I suggest ‹ ideo minus › odiosa .","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":"13-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"1955-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500002819","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57324393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：