The present article attempts to clarify the implications of the phrase "ex Sapphus poematis" which recurs several times in the earliest known commentaries on Ovid's Letter of Sappho (Her. 15), with a view to surveying the philological backgrounds which led Angelo Poliziano to pursue two separate lines of research, one on the sources and the other on the rhetorical structure, when he annotated Sapphus Epistula in his personal copy of Ovid (Bodl. Auct. P. II. 2, 238v-241v.; cf. Mediterraneus VIII 1985, 1-51). The argument proceeds the following steps : Francesco Filelfo, if not Bessarion, is the most likely figure who was responsible for a wide-spread 15th century view, that SE was Ovid's translation of Sappho's original poetic epistle ; Giorgio Merula, Filelfo's pupil, revised the master's view, and in the Interpretatio in SE, Venetiis (ante) 1475, stated that SE, though not a translation, contained "multa ex poematis Sapphus" that Ovid had brought into it, without, however, showing concrete evidence to support his contention; Domizio Calderini, reacting sharply to Merula's Interpretatio, presented in his Commentarius in SE fresh evidence from the Scholia in Apollonium Rhodium iv 57-58, demonstrating that Ovid had really made use of Sappho's poem on Luna's love to Endymion when he alluded to it in SE 89-90. Calderini's Greek quotation was a paraphrase derived possibly from the scholia in Cod. Laur. xxxii 9, 242v. In answer to Calderini Merula contended in his Adversus Domitii Commentarius, Venetiis 1478, that his earlier interpretation of SE 39-40 was to be preferred to Calderini's, quoting Demetrius' testimony that the figure of anadiplosis was one ol the characteristics that constituted Sappho's verbal charites. Thus SE, a Latin poem of dubious authenticity though it is, provided the eminent Greek scholars of the mid-1470s with a serious cause for retrieving Sappho-fragments from the most recondite sources available at the time, in order to define Ovid's debt to Sappho's poetry, in materials or in rhetorical devices. Poliziano's annotations clearly betray the close attention he paid to the works of contemporary scholars, and the departures from them toward an intensive rhetorical study of SE with the emphasis on Ovid's skill in the prosopopoiia of Sappho in love.

View full abstract

Readers of Herodotus are inclined to presuppose that they can find the theme of the Histories within the proem. But the entire work elucidates much more than the proem has promised, that is the East-West conflict or theαιτιη of the contention. We should therefore search for the theme by investigating the whole complex of the Histories. Cyrus' statement in the last chapter is meaningfully related to the so-called second proem. Both of them expound the basic idea of Herodotus that the balanced world continues owing to Divine Providence which will cut down all that are exalted above others. This idea is expressed from a synchronic point of view in Cyrus' speech: "no one soil can produce fine fruits and good soldiers too", and from a diachronic point of view in the second proem: "the once great cities have become small; those which are now great, were formerly small." And Herodotus proposes a metaphor of a κυκλο&b.sigmav; (wheel) to explain the second, diachronically viewed aspect of the balanced world. His intent or theme is to give a full account of the universal history under the cyclic view. As to the derivation of the cyclic view of Herodotus, I suggest that it may be compared with the physical theory that the cyclic alternation of birth and death makes existence continue, (cf, Emp. DK 31 B 17. 6-13 ; PI. Phd. 72 B; PS. Arist. Pr. 916a 25ff.). In the beginning of the Histories rotates the κυκλο&b.sigmav; of Croesus, which serves as a paradigm for the rises and falls of Persian emperors, Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius and Xerxes. While the former three have their own κυκλο&b.sigmav;, Xerxes is compelled to ride on a κυκλο&b.sigmav; of the Persian empire moving downward. But the Croesus-logos is not only illustrative of four successive emperors. It provides also a determinative paradigm on which the entire work is constructed. Independent of Macan's theory of perfect triadic structure, the Histories can be divided into three uneven parts. In the first paradigmatic part (I 6-I 94), Herodotus describes from the Lydian point of view how rich Lydia invaded poor Persia and perished, using significant motifs (advisor, oracle, dream, crossing a river etc.) as indicative of up-and-down movements of the κυκλο&b.sigmav;. In the second part (I 95-Battle of Salamis: VIII 42-VIII 96), the rise and fall of Persia is explained from the rich invader's point of view. Although the starting point of the third part is difficult to define, I suggest somewhere in VIII 42-VIII 96, possibly VIII 44.2, where the change of appellation of the Athenians is mentioned. In this final part, the viewpoint is shifting increasingly to the Greeks and especially to the Athenians, and there are suggestive episodes as follows: When the Persians had been driven from Greece, there arose an opinion in Greek army that they should henceforth carry the war into the Persian territory; and Athens, now strong and wealthy, invested a wretchedly poor island Andrus and failed. As compared with the paradigmatic and illustrative character of the first two parts, the third is very implicative. But in it is concealed Herodotus' message that the κυκλο&b.sigmav;, now carrying the Athenians, is going to rotate again.

View full abstract

This paper deals with the "Ten Thousand." in Anabasis as a good example of change in the Greek army when faced with a difficult military situation after the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. For about two years the Ten Thousand marched in a strange country where they met new enemies with new methods of warfare. We can find something in common between the Ten Thousand and other Greek armies after the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. They were destined to advance. A prolonged campaign and a greater variety of tactics made this development necessary. And this development could be made only when a new kind of relation between the general and his soldiers came into existence. Generals wanted to increase their authority over their soldiers. In Anabasis we can see the generals trying to establish their authority. At the same time, we can see soldiers who would not endure being under anyone's authority. In the army of the Ten Thousand, the common soldiers were members of the general assembly. They decided all matters of importance in this assembly. They were "fighting and voting". They were called "a marching democracy". We can see how difficult it was among the Ten Thousand in Anabasis for Greek generals to exercise their authority. Anyway without the exercise of authority by the general, it was hardly possible for the Greek army to meet the needs of the military situation after the Peloponnesian War.

View full abstract

Philebus 55c-59c involves some remarkable ideas or features which may provide a crucial source for evaluating the fundamental standpoint and basic character of the philosophy of Plato. That is, (1) the classification of arts and sciences pursued there is by arranging them in a scale of ascending degrees of exactness, (2) the criterion of which is given in terms of the extent to which they are mathematized. Furthermore (3) it is argued that the concept of exactness of arts and sciences should be clearly distinguished from that of utility or profit according to which Gorgias' art of rhetoric claims the first place among the arts and sciences. And finally (4) even though after all Dialectic, the objects of which are permanent and eternal Forms, is placed at the top of this scale of exact knowledge, the reason or meaning of its excellence over mathematics is not explained at all either with respect to their objects or of their method. In view of these ideas or features of Philebus 55c-59c the following interpretation seems to be natural and tempting: that to Plato mathematics is the ultimate and highest paradigm of all exact knowledge because of the exactness of its unit, of its reductive or deductive method, and of the neutrality of mathematical judgements from evaluation, and that even Dialectic owes its exactness to the mathematical method. Opposing this line of interpretation, I first point out that by the distinction between useful or profitable knowledge and exact or precise knowledge Plato does not intend the Aristotelian absolute division of θωρητικη from ποιητικη and πρακτικη, and therefore that it is impossible in the case of Plato to construe the neutrality from value judgement involved in practical knowledge as a necessary condition of exact knowledge. And then I argue, through a closer examination of the descriptions of Dialectic in Phaedrus and the other parts of Philebus, that in Philebus itself Dialectic is taken by Plato to be ultimate, paradeigmatic knowledge through whose analogical exercise alone the other arts and sciences can be what they should be, but in a way quite different from that in which mathematics is ultimate, paradeigmatic knowledge. And finally I conclude that on the basis of the distinction between two kinds of measurement in Politicus 283b-285c, Plato intends to make clear the difference and the relation between the two ways in which these two highest forms of knowledge are paradeigmatic and therefore exact. What Plato emphasizes and tries to convince us of is that there can exist a philosophical meaning of exactness which is not reducible to mathematical, deductive precision and is more excellent than it.

View full abstract

This paper is approaching Prop. 1.16, a poem of paraclausithyron, from the standpoint of servitium amoris, the main theme of Propertius' first book, observing how it works in the poem, combined with exclusus amator. In the poem this combination is seen to be set up on three paradoxes; first, the excluded lover blames the door for answering him silence, while its monologue, in fact, occupies the whole poem; second, the lover boasts himself a first-class poet having polite manners, while the door regards lovers in general, including him, as drunken rowdies; third, domino, in the lover's song is that of servitium amoris, a hard and cruel lady to her lover, while the door expects her to be a noble and chaste mistress of its house-in the common sense of the word. These paradoxes, in which the poet exploits the conventional, and especially Roman motives and features of pamclausithyron-a door speaking, personified and worshipped, violence to the door and furtive love-, make the complaining concert between the door and the lover effective; the door complains-in monologue, therefore heavy with distress to which no vent is given, unlike Catullus' door telling lightly in dialogue an interlocutor of the scandal (Cat. 67)-that lovers hurt and disgrace it by doing violence, leaving filthy wreaths and torches, and, above all, singing and scribbling shrieking, obscene songs: the lover complains that the door prohibits his song, his best weapon to catch his domina's heart, from reaching her ears, that it answers him dead silence-this complaint comes from an extremely sentimental view, for a silent door itself is not always a bad thing but, far from that, will be very favorable to him when he is accepted furtively, as in Plaut. Cure. 20 ff., 90 f. and Tib. 1. 2. 10-, and that it denies him although he has never uttered any abusive word, unlike Tibullus who repents after cursing (Tib. 1.2.7-12, cf. ibid. 81-88), but paid due honors to it, addressing it in 2nd person, giving offerings and kissing it. Here in this poem Propertius, it seems to me, maintained, against the common view represented by the door's complaint looking down upon love and love poetry as lazy, mean and worthless, his ideal love by combining servitium amor is and exclusus amator, the two most important topoi in Roman love elegy, in which Propertius made the terms servitium and vigilatio synonyms for amor. The lover of Prop. 1. 16 embodies this ideal; he never resorts to violence when excluded by his domina, but tries to bend her mind to him by his poetry, because he, as a slave of love, has sworn absolute loyalty-fides-to her, who has a good understanding of poetry-docta puella, that is one of the most important characteristics of Propertius' domina, Cynthia. Here his faithfulness and love poetry are given the clear images of vigil on the threshold and of a serenade to the shut door. And these images seem to correspond to what Propertius termed blandi carminis obsequium, allegiance of enticing song (1. 8. 40).

View full abstract

In the opening scene of Aeneid book 4 Dido is compared to a deer struck by the hunter's arrow. This is one of the most excellent similes in the Aeneid. But strictly speaking, it is inconsistent with the development of the story. First, although we can recognize behind this simile the intervention of Cupid, who makes mortals (and also immortals) fall in love in the twinkling of an eye with his bow and arrow, the love of Dido in book 1 seems to develop gradually. Second, although just before this simile Anna persuades Dido to abandon her chastity toward her lost husband, this simile depicts Dido trying to flee from the temptation of love. These two inconsistencies come from the following reasons. In book 1 Dido, like Medea, has fallen in love with a guest-hero. But her passion must be restricted by her queenly dignity, like that of queen Arete in the Odyssey. This restriction made a difference in the pattern of Cupid's intervention. In the case of Medea, Cupid used the bow and arrow, but in the case of Dido his weapon is kisses and poison. On the other hand, Dido's agony in book 4 is like that of Phaedra or Helen in the Euripidean tragedy. Dido treads the path to death by abandoning her chastity. If we consider book 4 to be an independent tragedy, the theme of that tragedy is not how Dido falls in love but how she abandons her chastity. In that case the start of her love is no more than the background to the story of abandoned chastity. And it is suitable that her love belongs to the category of love at first sight. So in this simile we can catch a glimpse of some expression of the strength of her passion along with the perplexed state of her mind. In short, Dido's love is described in accordance with the requests of the story in books 1 and 4 respectively. With regard to Anna's persuasion we can explain the inconsistency by an epic technique, the description in two stages*. 1st stage: a. the agony and sleeplessness b. the confession of love c. Anna's persuasion 2nd stage: a. the sacrifice and stopping construction of the city b. the agreement between Juno and Venus c. the wedding in the cave This technique is not used to describe one scene successively, but to describe a crucial moment of the story from two different points of view. In this case the moment of abandoning chastity is described twice in two stages. By this technique Virgil can show that the union of Carthage and Troy is a good choice for both Carthage and Dido from the terrestrial point of view, but at the same time it is nothing but an obstacle to the fate of Aeneas. * One example of this technique is Iliad 4. 446-544. The scene of the encounter between Greeks and Trojans is depicted twice, from general to individual point of view.

View full abstract

In 96 A.D. Roman Emperor Domitian was assassinated and M. Cocceius Nerva, an old Italian noble, was proclaimed emperor. But about one year later, Nerva adopted a Spanish general, M. Ulpius Traianus (Trajan) and nominated him as his coruler. Most scholars consider that this adoption is one of the most significant events in the history of the principate, because it inaugurated a new system of succession (Adoptivkaisertum). One of them regards it as an expression of the Stoic ideal, another one considers that by accepting this system the principate was reconciled with the philosophy which had opposed Nero and the Flavian Emperors. In the Panegyric, however, Pliny the younger insisted that the important point about this adoption was not the method but the person adopted. And he described Nerva as a helpless old man and a tool of the God for Trajan's adoption. How are we to understand his opinion? In this paper we have tried to clarify the political process to this adoption and Pliny's political position under Nerva. Our arguments are as follows. As a candidate for Nerva's successor, Trajan had a rival whose career G. Alfoldy and H. Halfmann reconstruct. His name is M. Cornelius Nigrinus Curiatius Maternus. He was connected with Domitianic senators and perhaps the praetorian prefect, Casperius Aelianus. In the summer of 97, Casperius and his troops rose in revolt to avenge Domitian. Succumbing to their demands, Emperor Nerva had a tendency gradually to agree with Nigrinus and Domitianic group. But this political situation was changed by L. Licinius Sura. He made Nerva's final choice fall upon Trajan. (We must make much of Epitome de Caesaribus XIII, 7; it means not Sura's proposal but his real political maneuvering.) Therefore, in the process to the adoption we can find neither new system nor philosophical principle. We can see only a scramble for political power. Then, by our interpretation on the political process, we can explain the political position and opinions of Pliny. He was one of the anti-Domitianic senators. He accused a Domitianic senator, Publicius Certus who was supported by Nigrinus. So Pliny was helped by the adoption and nomination of Trajan (not Nigrinus). He couldn't praise Nerva except for the final choice, because Nerva had leaned toward Pliny's political opponents for a while. These personal affairs influenced his opinions on the adoption and the picture of Nerva in the Panegyric.

View full abstract

In a previous paper (in Meidai Seiyoshi Ronshu I), I have shown, on the basis of a statistical analysis of its vocabulary and syntax, that De Pallio(P.)is not a work of Tertullian (T.), but rather a work of an anonymous Jew, because he does not use any Christian terminology and he cites only the Old Testament. This paper intends to show who the author of P. is. Notwithstanding my previous conjecture, it is more probable to think that he is a Christian than not, for the passage of The Sibyline Oracles which is cited in ch. 2 is not from Book III, the socalled Jewish part of the Oracles, as usually thought, but from Book VIII, the Christian part. What, then, is his religious background? He uses the words sapientia (4 : 10) and sermo (5 : 7) when referring to a Christian, not Christianity, as is usually thought, for in these places in the text these words are used in the same sense as if someone were putting on a pallium. On the contrary, T. uses these words in reference to the Son of God, not in reference to a Christian. In using these words to personify a Christian, we see the meditative character of the author. For him, to put on a pallium is to retire entirely from public activities (5 : 4) and to live as a philosopher (5 : 1). This attitude is in sharp contrast to that of T., who sees Christians living with Romans as normal citizens of the state (for example, Apologeticum 42) and shows bitter hostility against philosophy and philosophers (for example, De Praescriptionibus Haereticorum 7). The author of P. is on intimate terms with the circle of Clemens of Alexandria because of the philosophical character of his religion. Nevertheless, he belongs to a sect which is unknown to us, because no Christian writer, including Clemens of Alexandria, uses, as far as we know, sapientia and sermo in personifying a Christian. In addition, as those who argue that T. is a Roman knight use P. for their argument, the author of P., not T., is a knight. Now we may conclude that the author of P. is a newly converted Christian, who comes from the equestrian order. His Christianity is, in contrast to that of T., philosophical and meditative. In P. he apologizes for his conversion to Christianity and his retreat from equestrian activities in the form of a defense for putting on pallium, the mantle of a philosopher.

View full abstract