In his epinician odes Pindar several times addresses the recent dead relatives of the victors' family (Ol. VIII 77-84, Ol. XIV 20-24, Nem. IV 79-90, Nem. V 48-54, Nem. VIII 44-48, Isth. VIII 61-65. I exclude two Theban odes, Isth. IV 16-19 & Isth. VII 23-30, because I think they belong to the different group of the war dead motif, cf. David C. Young: Isthmian VII, Leiden 1970). Furthermore they have some interesting similarities in common like the following: 1) bearing names of the dead relatives and indicating their family relationships 2) communicating with the dead by song 3) always located at the end of the odes 4) only for the victors from Aegina and Boeotia(once) (For the last two points cf. W. Mullen: Choreia, Princeton 1983, 72-75) The first two points (1) & 2)) suggest that while composing these lines Pindar mayhave had to follow some basic requirements from the subject matter, for example there is a distinct difference between half-heroized ancestors (Pyth. V 94-103 or Isth. VI 63-66) and ordinary dead relatives. In other words they form one type of 'topos' beyond each specific condition given to the poet. On the other hand the last two points ( 3) & 4)), together with other facts such as: 1) 3 examples out of 6 are monostrophic and the rest are also considered as marching songs in their homeland. 2) most mentions of the hero-cult in epinician odes except those at Olympia or Pythia are related to Aegina or Boeotia. 3) the popularity of the chamber-tomb in the sixth-fifth century Aegina (some of them are either cenotaphs or heroa) indicate that this 'dead relative' topos may have its origin in a kind of custom or ritual for the dead relatives after the return of the hero-athlete at Aegina and Boeotia. In relation to this kind of topos we may find some traces of more general background in epinician odes. Firstly at several places Pindar shows evidence that he considers a person at the height of his youth and power may be able to communicate with the dead (Pyth. IV 156-159 etc.). This is not only a typical feature of mythical heroes, but also coincides with some legends of famous contemporary athletes who became heroes (e.g. Euthymus or Cleomedes). Secondly sometimes Pindar describes the victors not as an independent self but rather as a kind of materialization of power and constitution of their clan, often using plant metaphors. In these cases repetition or revival itself has its own meaning and although the individual victors are mortal, their inherited power and constitution will survive from generation to generation for ever.

抄録全体を表示

The Bacchae is Euripides' tragic masterpiece based on the long tradition of Dionysiac plays. As is well known, the poet never fails to add his own original elements even when he treats a traditional subject. In the Bacchae such an innovation can be recognized in what is often called the Cadmus-Teiresias-scene in the first episode. It is almost certain that Euripides was the first to add the two old men. He combined the new element to enhance the tragedy; he made it indispensable to the development of the main plot by making effective use of parallel sequences and words. The purpose of this paper is to analyse Euripides' dramatic technique by examining these parallel relationships. First as to the parallel sequences, it is quite usual in drama for some motifs in the first scene to be repeated in later ones, but in the fourth episode of the Bacchae we find a whole concentration of recurrences. This episode shares the same motifs and emotional tone as the first one. Two characters, Cadmus and Teiresias in the first scene, and Pentheus and the Stranger in the fourth one, walk to Mt. Cithaeron in Bacchic dress. Both pairs have the same kind of attitudes and their dialogues have something in common. In addition, the magic of the god has great influence upon both pairs; the old men are filled with a mysterious strength and exaltation. On the other hand Pentheus feels supernatural power in his body. The emotional tone pervading both scenes is the indissoluble blending of the tragic and the comic. In all of these ways, from the viewpoint of motifs and emotional tone the fourth episode is parallel to the first one. But at the same time the relation is completely reversed when we consider who is laughing at whom. In the first scene it is Pentheus who sneers at the god, the old proselytes, and Dionysus' birth myth. He is afraid of becoming the laughingstock of Thebes; nevertheless, in the fourth episode he in turn is mocked by Dionysus. Thus both scenes are placed in symmetrical opposition. Secondly we should discuss the parallel use of words, in particular in the god's birth myth which Teiresias explains. The core of the myth lies in the story that Zeus concealed Dionysus within his thigh. The verb "conceal" appears many times in the Bacchae and constitutes an important motif. Hiding always occurs just before the miracles showing the absolute force of Dionysus. The motif of concealment is closely related with the final epiphany of the god, which brings a miserable destruction to his oponent. Therefore concealment and epiphany compose a paired motif. On the other hand this paired motif is parallel to another, the god's double birth and the antagonist's double death. It is clear from the context that Dionysus was born twice, but it may be necessary to explain in what sense Pentheus experiences double death. When he reappears on stage at v. 918, he is wearing Bacchic dress instead of the armour he called for in the preceding scene. He is suffering from Dionysiac delusions and has lost normal consciousness. In this sense his first death is mental, whereas the second one is physical, executed by his own mother. Seen against the background of these parallel motifs, Teiresias' words describing the birth of the god have a deeper meaning. They express not only Dionysus' birth but also give a hint of the coming destruction of Pentheus and his family in the last scene. V. 290 predicts the king's falling to his death from a high tree and the exile of Cadmus and Agave from their homeland. And v. 292 suggests that Pentheus will be torn to pieces.

抄録全体を表示

The following questions have still been discussed; (1). Was the main source of the Certamen Alcidamas' Museion? (2). In this case, did Alcidamas invent the story of the contest of Homer and Hesiod? This article attempts to reexamine these questions to make the relation between the story of the contest and Alcidamas clearer. I. The main point of discussion about question (1) is whether the following facts coincide one another; 1. The Museion is mentioned in Cert. 240 as the source of a story about the fate of Hesiod's murderers. 2. The couplet which occurs in Cert. 78-9 was attributed by Stob. 4. 52. 22 to the Museion. 3. Michigan papyrus 2754 gave the end of a story closely resembling the end of Certamen, followed by the subscription] δαμαντο&b.sigmav; περι Ομηρου. As the result of examining the above point at issue, by using the structural analysis of the narrative in the Certamen, it is concluded that the series of the stories such as the contest-death of Hesiod-death of Homer were derived from the Museion. II. Next comes question (2). Indeed, we are left with no evidence for a contest between Homer and Hesiod before Alcidamas. But, the writer of the article believes that there are a number of reasons for thinking the contest story older than Alcidamas. One of them is Plutarch's passage of the contest story (Moralia, 153 ff.), where the order of events is different from that of Certamen. Some scholars take the view that Plutarch's version was derived from the Museion. However, from closer examination of that passage, this view does not seem to have any adequate foundation. Then, according to M. L. West, Alcidamas invented the judgement of Panedes who awards the victory to Hesiod. But, this attractive opinion is also not so well-founded. The writer in the second part of the article tries both to clarify the meaning of the construction of the contest story, and to show 1). that the Plutarch's passage reflects the original version, 2). that perhaps Alcidamas reversed the order of this original version, 3). that the origin of the contest was much older than Alcidamas.

抄録全体を表示

類別の境界線ケースとしての泥 システムの一部としての毛髪,知覚からさえも排除されようとする汚物,これらについて見え姿から類似性を媒介にその原範型(イデア)を思考することはできない.イデアと感覚的事物とを,神的な模範を用いて描く画家(Resp. 500 E)のように比較して眺めうる視点は,我々に与えられていない.そして肝腎なことは,そのような視点の不在を,言いかえれば我々の生のパースペクティブの変換がいかにしてなされうるかの問を隠蔽するものとして,範型/似像用語が使われうるということだ.この隠蔽の働きをかりに「絵のメタファー」と呼び,そしてそこからの移動,すなわち像性を類似性から分離することを,ここで「脱喩化」と呼ぶことにする.脱喩化が原範型説のモチーフの展開にほかならぬことを明らかにする,これが本稿の考察課題である.

抄録全体を表示

The concepts of arche and hegemonia in Isocrates have the following features in the light of analysis conducted from a politico-historical perspective. In the first place, Isocrates attributed a highly moral and ethical value to the concept of hegemonia. In his Panegyricus, he claimed that Athens alone deserved the title of supreme leader of the Greeks because the city had been a benefactor of the Greeks and a protector of all those who had suffered. This claim never changed throughout his political discourses. Secondly, Isocrates located the essence of arche in sea-power which he criticized as bringing misfortune to Greece, and stressed the ethical superiority of land hegemony. He came to this conclusion in his On the Peace as a result of the downfall of Sparta after the battle of Leuctra and the defeat of Athens in the Social War. His position is in sharp contrast to that of Thucydides and Old Oligarch, who insisted on the superiority of Athens as a sea-power. In the third place, he considered the problem of constitutional reform in the light of his concept of hegemonia. He sought the model of the ideal constitution in the age of hegemonia of Athens and Sparta, and described it in contrast to the age of arche. The concepts of arche and hegemonia in Isocrates reflect the political situation of Greece in the middle of the fourth century when Sparta, Thebes and Athens fell one after the other, and differ from those of historians such as Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon.

抄録全体を表示

Here we do not pretend to solve all problems of the Stoic doctrine of Zeus the father-god or even to cover the whole ground which they embrace. Our interest is confined to the meaning and reference of προτερη γενεη and its combination with Zeus-θαυμα-ονειαρ. While agriculture and navigation are complements each of the other in Aratus, above all within his general (and traditional) idea of human life, Zeus in the proem turns his eyes away from navigators and exclusively upon ploughmen. This deflection of σημα is suggestive of subsequent development, that is to introduce Nyx and her σημα for navigators. Nyx, both αρχαιη and ουρανιη, is, the double image of Zeus, much more active than Zeus himself and personifies the "night-motif". Night as the stage of the starry sky and its personification alone enable men to distinguish all σηματα. τι&b.sigmav; ανδρων (373), too, does so, and that by originating a new method for men, the constellation, which should correct the method of Zeus (cf. 11 αστρα διακρινα&b.sigmav;→375 παντων οιοθι κεκριμενωνv). Nyx and τι&b.sigmav; αν., whose name and epithet build up a remote antiquity and a mythical fiction around them, can convert θαυμα-Zeus into ονειαρ-Zeus for men, through intervening in their life. But this connection is also fictive and intends to show the origin of the relation between stars and men. Then we can identify πρ. γεν., whose name describes the same mythical situation as that of Nyx and τι&b.sigmav; αν. does, with them. In Phaenomena θαυμα mirrors and means all aspects of the reaction of men against Zeus or the celestial world. Despite the dissolution of θαυμα by πρ. γεν. it remains still in the sky: nameless stars, which do not associate themselves with any constellation, and some constellations of which the shape and name stir up θαυμα again in the mind of men (e.g. Engonasin). Then that paradox rises (cf. 374 f. απαντ'……ηλιθα). But πρ. γεν., who will favour men constantly and devotedly, has nothing to do with it. Aratus shows us the origin of the paradox implicitly and skillfully. The contrast between ειδεα and ειδωλον is in this case more remarkable and intentional, because the former, only one example (381), indicates the shape of the constellation which τι&b.sigmav; αν. first designed, and the latter, nine examples, does for some of the constellations which were transmitted from τι&b.sigmav; αν. to mankind. The ειδλον means therefore constellations like Engonasin and nameless stars which men could not appreciate just as τι&b.sigmav; αν. intended and then which men see with θαυμα. From ειδεα to ειδωλον: in this process that paradox rises and gains ironical significance. It is through the same process as this that Nyx and her σημα finally lead also navigators to the ironical paradox. Men have themselves to blame for the failure. Gods favour men and lead them to ovsiccp. But θαυμα sometimes leads them astray. We may name such a belief "theodicy" as some interpreters do, and it goes without saying that Aratus intends there an ironical effect. In Phaenomena Aratus' purpose, the sole aim, is to describe the celestial sphere, in other words, to explain all σημαγα as intelligibly as possible. He could not, however, suppress his intent to install here one particular point (and the originality of this work), namely, when and how men have a concern with stars. For that purpose the mythical digressions were created by him. In parallel with the association between πρ. γεν. and mankind, then Zeus, the kindly father-god of the Stoics, rises again to the surface now as θαυμα, now as ονειαρ. Zeus is not always ovsiccp for men and that in consequence of mankind being paradoxical. It may safely be said that Aratus' Phaenomena is more ironical than allegorical.

抄録全体を表示

E. T.サノレモンの『共和政期ローマの植民市建設』は,共和政ローマが,いつ,どこに,どんな目的で植民市を建設していったかを詳細に検討し概観した,この分野ではほとんど唯一の貫重な労作である.彼はそこで,ローマ植民市建設の第一義的目的は,イタリア支配とローマ防衛の戦略のため,と主張している.そして,前133年に始まるグラックスの改革になってはしめて性格を変え,経済的社会的意図の下に建設されることになった,と言う.一般に,ローマの植民市建設は軍事的意義とといこ社会経済的側面もあわせもつと理解されるが,軍事面を一貫して強調する彼の説は極端と思われ,その結果,グラックス以前の植民の社会政栄的考察が欠落し,グラックスが突然出現することになろう.しかし,ウェーバーが『ローマ農業史』で行っている問題設定が示すように,またサルモン自身認めるように,ローマの植民政策は植民市建設deductio coloniaeと,都市建設をともなわない個人的土地分配adsignatio viritimからなっていた.伝える史料が少ないこともあり,個人的土地分配は本格的に論じられていない.そこで以下においては,ローマの固有領域の飛躍的拡大をもたらしたウェイイの併合からグラックスの改革前までの植民政策を,主として社会政策的観点から,個人的土地分配政策を含んで再構成し,検討してみることにする.方法としては,我々が今問題としている時期を便宜的に前268年(ラテン植民市アリーミヌムAriminum建設)を境に二つに分け,前期と後期を対比させて述べることにしたい.というのは,後に述べることになるが,筆者は前三世紀前半を境としてローマの植民政策が大きく転換すると考えるからである.

抄録全体を表示

A. K. Michels thinks the Gates of Sleep explain Aeneas' forgetfulness in the sub-sequent books of what he saw and heard in the underworld ("THE INSOMNIUM OF AENEAS", Cl. Qu. 31 (i), 1981, 140-6). Her observation that Aeneas forgets all of his catabatic experience (including the Show of the Roman Heroes) is contrary to the popular view but seems to me to be right. This paper aims at supporting her interpretation of the Gates of Sleep by trying to show that Rome meant next to nothing to Aeneas not only in the last half of but all through the Aeneid and that it was Troy instead that held him to the end. There is in the Aeneid what might be called 'the tale of Aeneas', which begins on the last day of Troy and ends with his killing of Turnus. This tale covers no more than seven or eight years and its setting is still the Homeric world. Rome is in the distant future and, one might say, outside 'the tale of Aeneas'. As the Aeneid shows, Virgil's purpose was not to narrate 'the tale of Aeneas' alone as it was but rather to make use of it for the glorification of Rome. He not only tells 'the tale of Aeneas' as the origin of Roman history but even tries to make us feel as if all the labores of Aeneas in 'the tale' had been done for and successfully resulted in, for example, Rome's birth itself, or Augustus' world dominion itself, although these things were in the far distant future for Aeneas. These and other various devices allowed Virgil to attain his purpose, but at the same time they led to a misunderstanding. Those devices were devised, as it were, outside 'the tale of Aeneas', meant for Roman readers, and had nothing to do with Aeneas himself who was in 'the tale'. But many readers came to think as if Aeneas himself had known something about Rome and even striven for its realization in the distant future. This is a misunderstanding because he did not have any clear knowledge of Rome and because he had his own purpose and 'mission' to perform which bore no direct relation to Rome. His 'mission' was, in brief, the revival of Troy, his own patria. The popular and ruling view holds that Aeneas abandons Troy (the past) and turns his eyes to Rome (the future) with his catabasis, esp. his seeing the Show of the Roman Heroes there as a turning-point. But if my investigation is correct, nowhere in the A eneid does Aeneas abandon his fatherland. The following passages will show what he and the other Trojans had in mind to the end; 1. 5-6, 1. 68, 1. 205-6, 2. 293-5, 2. 703, 3. 86-7, 3. 462, 3. 504-5, 5. 631-8, 6. 66-8, 7. 120-2, 7. 228-30, 8. 9-13, 8. 36-7, 9. 644, 10. 27, 10. 58, 12. 819-28. As these passages indicate, there is no difference between what they aimed at before and after the catabasis. It did not have any effect upon them. And there are some points that strongly suggest Aeneas' forgetfulness of his experience in the underworld. For example, he never mentions any of the experience. And he never makes any use of his father's advice (6. 890-2). And the advice seems inconsistent with Jupiter's speech (9. 96-7). Rome is, as remarked above, in the distant future for Aeneas, outside 'the tale of Aeneas', and so is basically beyond his grasp. But there are two occasions on which future Rome wedges into 'the tale' or 'the world of Aeneas' and makes direct contact with him. (2. 679-704, 3. 97-8, 3. 158-9, 4. 275, etc. are negligible as far as Aeneas is concerned, cf. a lot cf passages collected above, 6. 716-8, 9. 644.) One is that of the Show of the Roman Heroes in question and the other the Shield of Aeneas Vulcan made and Venus brings to him (8. 626-728). And in the latter case Virgil added at the end of the scene an explanatory note to the effect that Aeneas did not know or understand the great events of the Roman

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示

Scholars disagree in opinion about the question whether a colon or a period should be placed after line 36 in Horace's Carmen Saeculare, and many of them choose the latter. This choice, consequently, decides whether vestrum(37)in the next stanza refers to Apollo and Diana or others who are considered chiefly the Capitoline deities, that is to say, luppiter and luno. Some scholars think that the poem can be divided into two halves, 1-36 and 37-72, and that, primarily, Apollo and Diana-the new deities-are sung of in the first and the Capitoline deities-the traditional deities-in the latter. Therefore a full understanding of the C. S. depends on the way in which this point is treated. We find, surveying the whole structure, that both Apollo and Diana are invoked in stanzas 1, 9 and 19, which occupy the opening, central and ending part of the poem respectively. Further, if Sol(9) can be identified with Apollo and Ilithyia(14) with Diana, stanzas 3 and 16-17 are those in which Apollo alone is invoked, while Diana alone is invoked in stanzas 4-6 and 18. These stanzas are linked with each other (3-6〜16-18), thus occupying symmetrical positions in each of the two halves. Accordingly it is evident that Apollo- and Diana-stanzas form the main prop of the whole structure. In stanzas 3-6, Apollo and Diana are called and praised as Sol and Ilithyia, who, advancing time, bring round a new saeculum with fertility, so Fate or, so to say, a fundamental power which moves all things especially toward prosperity is suggested by both deities as such. In the latter half, we can say, the past, present and future of Rome are referred to(stanzas 10-11, 14-15 and 17 respectively), and the gods are begged to confer a benefit upon Rome and the Roman people both now and from now on, as they did upon Aeneas and his party for the foundation of Rome in the past-Roma si vestvum est opus(37). On the other hand, over both halves, the motif of prosperity and fertility is found in stanzas 4-5, 8 and 15, and lustrum(67) showing a cycle of time corresponds to orbis(22). In addition to these, the word 'Rome' appears symmetrically as urbe Roma(11)in the third stanza, Roma(37)in the middle and remque Romanam(66)in the third from the last. Therefore we realize that the prosperity of Rome, which extends from the past to the future, depends on the fundamental power symbolized by Apollo and Diana in the first half. I conclude from the above-stated that a colon should be placed after line 36, and that vestrum(37) refers to Apollo and Diana. It is both deities that are invoked primarily, so the poem must not be divided distinctly into two halves.

抄録全体を表示

周知のように,元首政期のローマ帝国には元老院身分と騎士身分のふたつの官職体系が「併存」していた.このうち,元老院身分のそれは,事実上の「一人支配」という新しい現実の中で著しい変容をとげてはいるものの,その起源を共和政期の政務諸官職にまでたどることができるものであったが,これに対して,本来私人の代理人を意味したローマ私法上の術語を冠して「元首のプロクラートル」と総称されることになる財政業務担当の諸官職を中軸とする騎士身分の官職体系は帝政期に入って生れた全く新しい官職体系であった.固より,帝政の開始とともにこの官職体系が一挙に出現したわけではなく,先年物故したH. G. プーロームの研究に拠れば,騎士身分の官職体系が,諸官職間の俸給額による官職序列も定まり,昇官階梯が整序化されて,元老院身分の官職体系と相並ぶ官職体系として一応の完成をみせるのは2世紀前半期のハドリアーヌス帝代のことであったとされている.ところで,このようにして形成された騎士身分の官職体系のもつ性格に関して,3世紀に入ると,セウェールス朝代に活躍した法学者の間に,元首のプロクラートルもまた公務(res publica)に携わる公職者であると明示的に説く学説があらわれてくる.本稿では,この法学説を,元首政期における帝国国制とその変容という脈絡の中で位置づけ,その意味するところについて考えてみたいと思う.

抄録全体を表示