Pherekydes in Strabon XIV asserts the Ionian migration to be later than the Aeolian (according to XIII, ibid by 4 generations), its reputed leader being Androclos, son of Codros, a Neleid king of Athens from Pylos He founded Ephesos, while many other sons of Codros and the Pylians became founders of various Ionian cities As to its contingents, the land of Achaia is called by many authors their fatherland, its 12 cities being the pattern of the Ionian 12 , while it is curious that its inhabitants, the former Aigialeis, are propounded there as emigrants from overpopulated Athens, changed their name to the Ionians after Ion, and forced to evacuate the land by the Doric Achaeans, removed to Asia Minor This seems to be mere fiction, but the narrative of Herodotus 400 years earlier makes us think of the strength of such traditions and some truth implied in them On the other hand, the celebration of Pan-ionia at Cape Mycale, with its presiding god Poseidon Heliconios, the strongest bond of religious fraternity for Ionian cities, reminds us again of their connection with Achaia, as the appellation of the god was recognized universally as derived from Helike in Achaia, the episode of Eratosthenes testifying to such belief, though linguistically better to consider it a derivative of Helicon The consitution of the Ionian immigrants, too, calls for our attention, with its many Boiotian elements along with others (the so-called Ionians and Athenians excepted) Poseidon-cult was indeed very powerful in Boiotia, the Neleids of Pylos being a branch of Boiotian-S Thessalian Poseidonic rulers We have to examine the history of P -cult in Athens, how it, once strong as surmised from the remaining legend of his struggle with Athena over the guardianship of Acropolis or the existence of a month called Poseideon, faded to some scanty survivals, in the former case to a more name of P χαμαιξηλοζ or P Erechtheus, in the latter to nothing more than 8 th day offerings The P -cult in Boiotia must also be taken into consideration A difference in kind between the P -worship and that in Attica may then be recognized In short, Ionian P -cult may be due less to its constituent races than to the inclination of its ruling houses, viz religious kings, the decline of which was accompanied by the secularization of the feast The age-worn meaning of P as Earth-king had been disappearing long before The understanding of the close connection of Chios to Boiotia and S Thessaly will help to elucidate the origins of epic poems

View full abstract

The stage-lyrics-what Aristotle called τα απο τηζ σκηνηζ in his Poetics (12, 1452 b 17)-, the solos, duets, and trios sung by the characters on the stage, are particularly Euripidean The present author examines all these lyrics απο τηζ σκηνζ in the tragedies of Euripides*, and his conclusions are as follows In the Alcestis, the Medea and the Hippolytus, the vehement pathos of their heroines is set forth before the spectators in the lyric dialogues at the beginning of the plays The Andromache and the Hecuba have beginning lyrics of a similar sort m their 'pre-parodos' monodies The function of these lyrics is to repeat and emotionalize the dramatic situation already made known to the spectators in the preceding parts of the plays, especially in the so-called Euripidean prologues In other words, to be able to introduce the emotional, which was his main concern in this period, as early as possible in his plays, Euripides had to give the preliminary explanation of the dramatic situation in his peculiar prologues he stage-lyrics in the earlier part of his plays, therefore, have something to do with his dramaturgy derived from his conception of the tragic The beginning lyrics απο τηζ σκηνηζ are formalized, in the Hecuba and the Trojan Women, as the 'pre-parodos' anapaestic monody, and as the background of this we must recognize that the monodies of Hecuba in the two plays have lost the violent passion of Medea or Phaedra, gaining instead in their tone of sorrowful lamentation To this process corresponds the inner world of the poet, who has become more and more concerned with human suffering in its passivity The 'pre-parodos' monody, however, becomes merely accessory and decorative in the Electra, and was entirely given up in the Iphigenia among the Taurians and the Helen And it must be admitted at the same time, that the tragic world of the Trojan Women has given place to another, to which the 'pre-parodos' monody of the Ion makes a strenuous effort to adapt itself But, in spite of this effort, most of the examples of the later stage-lyrics in Euripides, which are characterized, as are the plays themselves in this period, by the various devices in novelty and variety, are 'post-parodos' astrophic arias (whose forerunners were the monodies of Hippolytus in the play bearing his name, and of Polymestor in the Hecuba, both of them sung in physical pain), such as Creusa's in the Ion, Jocasta's in the Phoenician Women, or the Phrygian's in the Orestes The last of these is the boldest possible innovation conceivable on the tragic stage, and marks an extreme in τα απο τηζ σκηνηζ, beyond which the last two plays of Euripides, written in Macedonia, were not able to go These conclusions lead to a supposition that the lyrics απο τηζ σκηνηζ in Euripides are in close connection with the nature and the design of Eunpidean tragedy, and vice versa * A1e 244-279, 393-415, Med 96-130, Hipp 176-266, 669-679, 1347-1388, Andr 103-116, 501-544, 825-865, Hec 59-97, 154-215, 1056-1106, Suppl 990-1030, Here F 1178-1213, Troad 96-152, 235-291, 308-341, 577-607, 782-798, E1 112-166, Iphig T 827-899, He1 625-697, Ion 82-183, 859-922, 1439-1509, Phoen 103-192, 301-354, 1485-1581, Or 960-1012, 1369-1502, Iphig A 1279-1335

View full abstract

Of the manifold meanings of the word φυσιζ, I have selected for my present brief treatment the core of its archaism on the one hand and its meaning 'matter' or 'stuff' on the other hand as an example of those of comparatively later development These two meanings, if contrasted to each other, would give some notion of the general features of the history of the word I 'Φυσιζ' in its archaic sense does but point to that ultimate truth of research which lies too far away from this world and too deep hidden for any words The central idea which Xenophanes' fr 18 expresses (found also in other writers) crystallizes itself precisely in the word φυσιζ of Heraclitus' frr 1, 123 The suggestion that the 'φυσιζ' there might be the same thing as Harmony, Logos, Fire, etc, would be but an obstacle to our penetration into the very life of the word In Philolaus' fr 6 (ad init), the φυσιζ, unlike εστω, eludes at least human knowledge In Plato's Seventh Epistle 341 d, the Heraclitean archaism is obvious And, as in his Phaedrus 270 cd, one cannot define the φυσιζ of a thing except by taking a certain circuitous way Thus, it was only under the all-important condition of an inquiring attitude that 'φυσιζ' could stand for some ultimate truth, hence Heraclitus' adoption of this word in reproaching Hesiod (fr 106), and even Aristotle's in similar passages (e g Metaph, 1000 a 21) Parmenides' disuse of 'φυσιζ' in the extant part concerning the Truth is, I think, due just to the goddess being the revealer of the ultimate reality His way of expression in the places where 'οδοζ διξησιοζ' is spoken of rather betrays his sneering attitude toward any human research In Plato's Theaet 173 e-175 c, on the contrary, 'φυσιζ' is three times found governed (directly or indirectly) by 'ξητειν', 'ερευνασθαι', 'διεριυνασθαι', and 'σκεψιζ', and this inquiry (never to be identified with 'περι φυσεωζ ιστορια' in the Phaedo 96 a) he declares to be the Philosophy Lastly, the difference between 'φυσιζ' in its archaic sense and 'ον', 'ουσια', etc should not be overlooked In the f r 2 of Diogenes of Apolloma, 'φυσιζ' denotes such ultimateness as can no longer be sufficiently expressed by 'εοντα' Aristotle, Metaph 1003 b 22-24, together with Phys A 3, helps us see the difference between φυσιζ and Parmemdes' εον Alexander's Commentary teaches that here ον as well as εν is an επινοια and predicate of φυσιζ, the υποκειμενον We might well say, therefore, Parmenides has only the εον in view, and not the transcendent φυσιζ that makes its multi-lateral appearance to our thinking Again, Plato's Theaet (loc cit) makes a fairly clear distinction between φυσιζ and τι εστιν (an interpretation proposed in opposition to Dr Holwerda) The archaism reaches its culmination in Plato And in order to excavate it, one should not rely too much upon the testimonies of later writers, above all of Aristotle, who once for all transfigured and sometimes made less profound the word, partly by neglecting in his enumeration of its various meanings in. Metaph Δ 4-(and Phys B 1) the above-mentioned archaism, and partly by depriving it of the vivacity and depth in its implication, hence e g his juxtaposition of 'ουσια' to 'φυσιζ' as synonymous II It is probably this same attitude of Aristotle that caused him in the above passages to formulate compactly and conceptualize technically the meaning of 'φυσιζ' as 'matter' or 'stuff' for the first time (his philosophical preference of ειδοζ to υλη) as the more genuine φυσιζ has nothing to do with that wording of his, and is here out of question) Plato's suspected loci, Legg 891c and Phil 29a, betray his hesitation in giving the

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

View full abstract

In Gorgias 481 b sqq Plato distinguishes 'τεχνη' from 'εμπειρια' or 'κολακεια' in two different ways (1)the former can προζ το βελτιοτον θεραπευειν, while the latter can only του ηδεοζ στοχαξειν ανευ του βελτιστου, (2) the former can λογον εχειν whereas the latter cannot This paper is an attempt to clarify one of the essential features of 'τεχνη' in the philosophy of Plato through consideration of its twofold qualification above mentioned To begin with the first of the two qualifications, Plato establishes in the same dialogue as one of its presuppositions a thesis that 'το βελτιστον' should not be identified with 'το ηδυ', thus setting himself against the hedonists of the time (Gorg 495 c-497 d) (Here the writer inserts criticisms directed to some of contemporary interpretations of the passage) Another presupposition is that 'θεραπευειν' should be distinguished from 'στοχαξειν' To sum up in brief Plato's words, the man who can θεραπευειν should necessarily have some rational ideas about the practice and the object of 'θεραπευειν' whereas the man who can but στοχαξειν has none Thus the first of the above two qualifications is found to imply the second as its necessary condition As for the 'βελτιστον', however, Plato goes on to give here some further account thereof with much wider perspective in view The 'βελτιστον', he says, cannot be identified with mere privation of evil, but it has in itself some positive character of its own This positive nature is made clear connected with universal ταξιξ which means the fundamental order of the whole universe The 'βελτιστον' in question thus might be taken in last analysis for the highest good-the thing which cannot be caught by 'στοχαξειν' with whatever sort of good fortune This admitted, and thereto added the other presupposition found implied in the terms 'θεραπευειν' and 'λογον εχειν', that 'τεχνη' comprehends as its necessary condition some rational knowledge about its practice and its object, then it will be natural to expect there some higher sort of 'τεχνη' such as commands a perfect insight of the highest good If such a 'τεχνη' should be admitted, this may be said just the perfect and ideal 'τεχνη', and this above all will be absolutely beyond 'στοχαξειν' and so 'εμπειρια' On the other hand, however, 'τεχνη' in its ordinary sense (i e τεχναι οσαι του σωξειν ενεκα πεποιηνται) is definitely stated by Plato to be one which does not always know the truth about the good This meais that the 'τεχνη' is but imperfect and its 'λογοζ' is but 'hypothetical', so that t here might even arise a doubt whether 'τεχνη' could rightly be distinguished from 'εμπειρια' Such a consideration as above about the twofold qualification of 'τεχνη' will lead to suspect the existence of a higher 'τεχνη' on the one hand which may coincide with 'νουζ', and of a lower one on the other which might coincide with 'εμπειρια' This suspicion may not seem to be justified by the text But here comes to appearance the essential feature of the Platonic 'τεχνη' namely, 'τεχνη' realizes itself only so far as it aims at the fulfillment of its idealized qualifications and thus has in itself an upward intentionality towards the final good The real significance of Plato's criticism rendered against 'ρητορικη will only be clear in this way, i e when it is taken to be intended by him to advance ρητορικη, just in the field of political affairs, towards something which would be worthy of the name 'τεχνη'

View full abstract

In several of his poems, Catullus criticizes the literary works of other poets and approves of two types of poems those of bri liant technical skill, displaying author's knowledge of classical mythology and poetry (docta poemata), and those of graceful plays of wit (lepida poemata) It may be admitted that these criteria are, generally speaking, also applicable to his own poems But quite often, as naturally enough, the two qualities are mixed up in one and the same poem, in such a way, that poemata docta par excellence are also lepida and vice versa Catullus' poetry, seen as a whole, may be therefore better qualified as doctus-lepidus than by one of the two qualities only Catullus, even m his lepida poemata, cannot ultimately be content with mere display of refined wit, because to him, his daily experiences in life, particularly those with Lesbia, which are the chief source of material for this kind of poems, are too serious for that Likewise in his docta poemata, his main concern has shifted from pedantic display of classical knowledge to a more serious pursuit of the problem of love, as a natural consequence of which the poems become more lyrical and subjective than the normal docta poemata Thus Catullus has created a new type of poetry which can hardly be measured properly by the scale of his own make and we may conclude that it is Catullus' bitter-sweet experiences with Lesbia that are mainly responsible for causing this difference in his literary practice and theory

View full abstract

The author believes, with Emm Laroche, that the suffixes -σσ- and -νθ- belong to the stock of formative elements of the Luvian or the Hittite language, -σσ- coming from the suffix -ss- which denotes the relation, -νθ- from the -nt- which gives derivatives of the collective meaning in the widest sense of the word, and, with A Heubeck, that the VI Georgiev's "Pelasgisch" is nothing but a dialect belonging to the Anatolian group of Indo-european languages, or rather one closely related to the Luvian, if not the Luvian itself Besides he thinks that the Arzawan state of the Luvians on the Aegean coast of the West Asia Minor, must have been a powerful nation, at least before suffering the decisive defeat from the Hittite army under Mursilis II, and played a noticeable part as an intermediary of cultural and political influences between the mycenaean Greeks or Achaeans and the inland Hittites From this point of view the author makes an attempt to interpret some place names around the Aegean by means of the Luvian language a One might explain most clearly and neatly the problematical form Ahhiyawa as rendering gr 'Αχαιξοι by putting a hypothetical Luvian from ^*Ahhayawa as a middle term between the Greek and the Hittite form, i e by assuming two steps of phonetic change gr 'Αχαιξο->luv ^*Ahhayawa>hitt Ahhiyawa(cf luv aya- 'facere' against hitt iya-) b Hitt Tabarna, Labarna 'living king ?', tapar- 'to rule, govern', taparnant- 'male', tapariyalli- 'commandant', etc, luv tapar- 'to rule, govern', car, lyd, λαβρυζ 'double-axe (as symbol of authority ?)', Λαβυρινθοζ 'sanctuary to install the double-axe', lye Dapara, Λαπαραζ (TL 62 et 4) personal name, iran tapara- 'axe', russ toporu 'axe', all these might be regarded as constituting a family of words which has its origin in a Hattic verbal root tlabar- 'vigere, augere?', and some members of which have spread far and wide, borrowed from one people to another c Κωζ, the name of an Aegean island, could be interpreted as meaning 'Sheep (Island.)' (cf Capri 'Goats(Island)') For from the correspondence between gr Κυβιστρα, Καβαλιζ, etc and hitt Hupisna, Hapalla, etc as well as from that between gr Τλωζ, lyc Tlawa, hitt Dalawa (pronounced probably Tlawa), we can infer that the original or Luvian name of the island was ^*hawas And we have, in fact, hh hawa- hawi- 'sheep', luv kawi-, although luv ^*hawa- is missing Hom κωαζ 'fleece', car κωζ 'προβατον' (Athen XIII 580 ?)'δερμα'(Hesych), lye kawa (or rather xawa) 'sheep ?' (TL 149 10) must be also of one and the same word-family d We have a group of gr place names containing a suffix -μν-, Λαρυμνα, Αισυνοζ, 'Επιδαμνοζ, Καλυμνα, Κρημνα, Κρωμνα, Κρωμνοζ, Λημνοζ, Λικυμνα, Μηθυμνα Now, from Λαρ-υμνα, Λαρ-ισα and Λαρ-ανδα, we ma}7 abstract a Luvian root λαρ- or lar- On the other hand, we have a seemingly Luvian place name Lar-imma, which must be the passive participle of the root lar- in its origin, and which torms a group with such place names as Attarimma Santimma, Sarlaimmi, Wallarimma Based on these materials, we may safely conclude that the Boeotian Λαρυμνα corresponds to the Pisidian Larimma as toponym-in other words, the name of the Boeotian town must have been larimma in the days of colonization of the Luvian people-, and also that the suffix -μν- in the above-mentioned place names is nothing but the later corruption of the suffix -mm- forming the Luvi- an passive participle

View full abstract

In modern Greece two kinds ot Greek are used that is kathareuousa (puristic language) and demotike (demotic language) They differ some what from one another in vocabulary, grammar and even in pronunciation The one is used in official documents and newspapers, and the other in poems and novels Kathareuousa is a scholarly language, inheriting the tradition of Old Greek, and demotike is a popular language, based on the colloquial language of the common people This difference between the scholarly and popular styles originated far back in the "atticism" of the Hellenistic Age When, in 1821, Greece recovered its independence from the control of Turkey it was necessarily a serious problem to decide which of these two systems should be the official language Many scholars have discussed this problem Among so many trials and practices in the history of the language problem in modern Greece the publication of Psycharis' My Trip" (1888) the translation of the Evangels into demotike by Pallis(1901), and the introduction of demotike into primary school education (1917) may be said to have been the three main and the most important events In this paper therefore three events are briefly traced, attention being focussed on the second event Mention is also made of the fact that, thanks to the efforts of various scholars and literary men, who have contributed to the solution of the language problem with their opinions and their literary works, a new standard style, a kind of mixture of kathareuousa and demotike, is being created in Modern Greek

View full abstract