Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T09:28:19.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theophrastus' Characters and the historian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2013

R. J. Lane Fox
R. J. Lane Fox
Affiliation:
New College, Oxford
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a programmatic article, published nearly twenty years ago, Peter Laslett characterized historians who try to write social history from literature as people who look at the world through the wrong end of a telescope. His particular examples of their inverted gaze were not always well chosen: warfare in Homer, the young age at betrothal of Shakespeare's Juliet, the extra-marital affairs in Restoration Comedy. The main point, however, still challenges ancient historians. ‘The great defect of the evidence’, as A. H. M. Jones forewarned readers of his social history, ‘is the total absence of statistics’: at best, we have isolated numbers which do not survive in significant sequences. Yet since 1951, ancient historians have continued to look down their telescopes and find social history in a widening range of texts. In the past decade, Roman historians have re-read prose fictions for this purpose, while on the Greek side, more recent attention has gone to poetry, especially tragedy and Homeric epic.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society (Second Series) , Volume 42 , 1997, pp. 127 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

NOTES

Earlier versions of this paper were read to the Oxford Philological Society in 1992 and the Cambridge Philological Society in 1993. I am grateful to members of both audiences, especially the latter. I also benefited from an Oxford class held by Professor Lloyd-Jones and N. G. Wilson in 1992 and have tried not to duplicate their many detailed contributions or many of those to be found in the important recent commentaries by P. Steinmetz and M. Stein. Dr P. Millett has most kindly shared his own valuable work on this topic and I am also indebted to patient help from Mr N. Worswick and R. C. T. Parker. The new Loeb edition by J. Rusten rightly refers to ‘the apologetic feeling that there was much more to be done’. I dedicate this article to the memory of D. M. Lewis, who always relished the detail of the Characters and would have added so much to what follows.

1. Laslett, P., ‘The Wrong Way Through the Telescope: A Note on Literary Evidence in Sociology and in Historical Sociology’, Brit. Jo. of Sociology 27 (1976) 319–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire I (Oxford, 1964) viiiGoogle Scholar; compare Finley, M. I., Ancient History: Evidence and Models (London, 1985) 44–6Google Scholar.

3. For examples, Millar, F. G. B., ‘The World of the Golden Ass’, JRS 71 (1981) 63–75Google Scholar; the excellent studies by Horsfall, N., ‘The Uses of Literacy and the Cena Trimalchionis, G.&R. 36 (1989) 74–89 and 194–209Google Scholar; in general, Bowersock, G. W., Fiction as History, Nero to Julian (Berkeley, 1994)Google Scholar; Bowie, E. L., ‘The Novels and the Real World’, in Reardon, B. P., ed., Erotica Antiqua (Bangor, 1971) 91–6Google Scholar.

4. Prosper Petronius discovered Vat. Gr. 110 in 1743; Rusten, J., ed., Theophrastus: Characters, Loeb Library (Harvard, 1993) 24–33Google Scholar surveys the main traditions, including P. Oxy. 699, P. Hamb. 143 (Gronewald, M., ZPE 35 (1979) 21–2Google Scholar) and P. Herc. 1457 (Kondo, E., ‘I “Caratteri” di Teofrasto nei Papiri Ercolanesi’, Cronache Ercolanesi 1 (1971) 73–86Google Scholar).

5. Sonntag, C. G., Dissertatio in Proemium Characterum Theophrasti (Leipzig, 1787)Google Scholar first diagnosed the preface; Steinmetz, P., Theophrast.: Charaktere I (Munich, 1960) 55Google Scholar proposes a fifth-century A.D. date. in my view too late.

6. Immisch, O., ed., Theophrastus Characteres (Leipzig, 1856) 2 n. 1Google Scholar.

7. Schmitt, C. B., ‘Theophrastus in the Middle Ages’, Viator 2 (1971) 251–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar, on their oblivion; Wilson, N. G., ‘The Manuscripts of Theophrastus’, Scriptorium 16 (1962) 96–102Google Scholar and Schmitt, C. B., ‘Theophrastus’, in Kristeller, P., ed., Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum II (Washington, 1971)Google Scholar.

8. Smeed, J. W., The Theophrastan ‘Character’: the History of a Literary Genre (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar; Schneider, V., Der moralische Charakter (Stuttgart, 1976)Google Scholar, adds German ‘sketches’ from the press of the 1720s.

9. The editions of O. Immisch (1923), O. Navarre (1952) and P. Steinmetz (1960) are fundamental, with Diels's OCT (19522).

10. Char. 5.6–10 cannot belong with 5.1–5, although P. Herc. 1457 already joined them; I have accepted their placing with Char. 21. In MSS A and B, Char. 30.5–16 goes with Char. 11. I do not share the view that the famous fragment on the inadvisability of marriage for the wise man (Jerome, , Adv. Jovin. 1.49Google Scholar) is part of a lost Character., although it characterizes wives very briskly.

11. Char. 21 and 30.14.

12. Char. 7.8.

13. Char. 3.3; 7.7; 14.13 with Plut. Sulla 14.3; 23.2, surely in Piraeus (Wachsmuth, H., R.E. V. 355Google Scholar); 21.11 and 21.13; 26.5–6. Add 16.2 if we emend to Ἐννεαϰϱούνωι and probably 13.10 (n. 237 below).

14. Char. 7.7 is not yet solved; (i) does ‘rhetor’ have to qualify Aristophon, and if so, which is the battle during the orator Aristophon's long career? (ii) Could it go with μάχην and refer to Demosthenes in 330/29? (iii) Do we emend with Casaubon to ῥητόϱων and cite Dem. 18.226? (iv) Do we delete ‘rhetor’ and opt for the battle of Megalopolis, dated to 330/29 by a minority, including now E. Badian, quite unconvincingly, in Worthington, I., ed., Ventures into Greek History (Oxford, 1994) 258–92?Google Scholar Against (iv) are the preferable date of 331/30 for the battle and its known Spartan protagonists, because Char. 7.6 goes on to specify a battle of Spartans, implying that the previously mentioned battle did not involve them. Despite Wankel, H., Demosthenes: Rede für Ktesiphon über den Kranz I (Heidelberg, 1976) 29–30Google Scholar, esp. 29 n. 68. I prefer solution (ii).

15. Char. 2.9 (women's agora) and 2.11 (theatre); 4.2–5 (Assembly); 6.8 (court, n. 180 below); 9.5 (theatre); 11.3–6 (theatre and courts); 17.8 (courts); 22 (tragedy; trierarchy; epidosis); 27.5 (Heroa, with n. 170); 28.2–3 (n. 16 below); 29.4 (juries; assemblies); 30.6 (theatre).

16. 28.2–3, with Schol. Ven. on Aristoph. Acharn. 243 and Gomme, A. W., Sandbach, F. H., Menander: A Commentary (Oxford, 1973) 465–6Google Scholar for Sosias as a slave-name in Attic comedies, evidently in T.'s mind here: compare Osborne, M. J., Byrne, S. G., edd., A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names II (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar for Attic Sosias (some slaves, but some naturalized as citizens, also some citizens). The new names Sosistratos and Sosidemos (if Meier's supplement is correct) are not known for slaves. For allegations of Attic namechanging, Dem. 39.5ff. is fundamental, with Dem. 18.270 and the passages about known foreigners, ably assembled by Headlam, W., Herodas (Cambridge, 1922) 85Google Scholar. On the open question ofits legality, Fraser, P. M., ‘An Inscription from Cos’, BSA Alex. 40 (1953) 35–62Google Scholar, esp. 56–59; Fraser, P. M., ‘Thracians Abroad: Three Documents’, Ancient Macedonia V.1 (Thessalonica, 1993) 443–54, at 447Google Scholar wrongly maintains that the Kakologos himself is the son of the Thracian woman.

17. Strabo 297C; Plut. Mor. 140B; Plaut., Miles 690ffGoogle Scholar.

18. Char. 5.4.

19. Rostovtzeff, M., The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World III (Oxford, 1941) 1352Google Scholar.

20. Liturgies: Char. 22.5, 23.5, 26.6; hippeus, 21.8; prices in 23.8, cf. 30.13 and 21.5; in general, Giglioni, G. B., ‘Immagini di Una Società: Analisi Storica dei “Caratteri” di Teofrasto’, Athenaeum 58 (1980) 73–102Google Scholar, esp. 79–83.

21. Char. 23.6–9; Osborne, R. G., ‘Leasing of Land and Property in Classical and Hellenistic Greece’, Chiron 18 (1988) 279–323Google Scholar, esp. 311–15.

22. Alexis, ap. Athen. 66.230 B–C.

23. Char. 23.8.

24. Char. 28.4.

25. Finley, M. I., Studies in Land and Credit in Ancient Athens (N. J., 1952) 267Google Scholar n. 29; Webster, T. B. L., An Introduction to Menander (Manchester, 1974) 25–6Google Scholar; Schaps, D. M., ‘Comic Inflation in the Market Place’, SCI 8–9 (1985–1988) 66–73Google Scholar.

26. Schaps, op. cit. (n. 25) 72 n. 22.

27. Char. 6.9, pace Millett, P., Lending and Borrowing in Ancient Athens (Cambridge, 1991) 180–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28. Casson, L., ‘The Athenian Upper Class and New Comedy’, TAPA 106 (1979) 29–60Google Scholar; more generally, T. B. L. Webster, op. cit. (n. 25) 25–42.

29. Webster, op. cit. (n. 25) 29ff.

30. Char. 4.2, 9.3, 10.5. 12.12, 13.4, 17.6, 18.2, 20.7 (probably), 21.4, 22.4, 23.2, 24.9–11, 25.2, 27.12, 30.7–9.

31. Char. 12.12; 25.4; 10.5; 18.8.

32. Char. 17.6.

33. de Sainte Croix, G. E. M., The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (London, 1981) 227, 505–6Google Scholar.

34. Char. 4.12. 4.6 and the σιτοποιός in 4.10.

35. Char. 4.6, with Jameson, M. H., ‘Agriculture and Slavery in Classical Athens’, CJ 73 (1977) 122–41Google Scholar, opposed by Wood, E. M., Peasant-Citizen and Slave (London, 1988) 64–80, 173–80Google ScholarPubMed.

36. D. S. 18.18.4–5, with Jones, A. H. M., Athenian Democracy (Oxford, 1957) 31–2Google Scholar.

37. J. W. Smeed. op. cit. (n. 8) 179–90; Boyce, B., The Theophrastan Character in England to 1642 (Harvard, 1947) 149–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38. Char. 20.1 and 19.5, 19.2.

39. Char. 29.2 and 5; Ps.-Xen. Ath. pol. 1.4ff. Middle Comedy has its Misoponeros (Antiphanes F 157 Kassel–Austin; Men. Dysk. 384–9, with E. W. Handley ad loc.), but he hates bad and corrupting practices, not ‘bad’ people.

40. Char. 29.6, retaining συνεδϱεῦσαι; Calhoun, G. M., Athenian Clubs in Politics and Litigation (Texas, 1913) 64–96Google Scholar is exaggerated.

41. Char. 29.4 with Aristoph., Wasps 894Google Scholar, Knights 1017; Ps.-Dem. 25.40; Plut. Dem. 23.5.

42. Aristot., Rhet. 1408b26Google Scholar.

43. Char. 6.5, with Youtie, H. C., ‘Publicans and Sinners’, in his Scriptiunculae I (Amsterdam, 1973) 554–78Google Scholar; Gosp. Matth. 19.23–6, 21.31 thinks of the whores (not their keepers; contrast Herondas' Mime 2 (surely hostile)).

44. Theophr. F 97 (Wimmer).

45. Purcell, N., ‘Literate Games: Roman Urban Society and the Game of Alea’, Past and Present 147 (1995) 3–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 7–8 on Greek attitudes.

46. Char. 6.6 with Latte, K., Glotta 34 (1955) 200–2Google Scholar.

47. Men., Aspis 216ff.Google Scholar; A. W. Gomme, F. H. Sandbach, op. cit. (n. 16) 81; Dohm, H., Mageiros, Die Rolle des Kochs … (Munich, 1964)Google Scholar; Scodel, R., ‘Tragic Sacrifice and Menandrian Cooking’, in Scodel, R., ed., Theater and Society in the Classical World (Michigan, 1993) 161–76Google Scholar, esp. 171: ‘throughout Menander the cook is a loser’.

48. Char. 28.6.

49. Char. 7.6.

50. Char. 26.5.

51. Plut. Per. 11.2.

52. Aristot. Rhet. 1389a–b.

53. Cic., Brutus 172Google Scholar; Quintil. Inst. or. 8.1.2.

54. D.L. 5.55–56: no wife or child is named. Compare T. on marriage, ap. Jer. Adv. Jov. 1.49 with C. B. Schmitt, op. cit. (n. 7) for its many medieval citations.

55. D.L. 5.37.

56. D.L. 5.39; Lynch, J. P., Aristotle's School (Berkeley, 1972) 98–9Google Scholar.

57. Ferguson, W. S., ‘The Laws of Demetrius of Phaleron and their Guardians’, Klio 11 (1911) 265–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 269.

58. D.L. 5.37 with Them. Or. 23.285C.

59. Dion. Hal., De Deinarch. 2Google Scholar; Plut., Mor. 850DGoogle Scholar.

60. Habicht, C., Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte Athens (Munich, 1979) 27Google Scholar.

61. Plut., Mor. 1097B and esp. 1126FGoogle Scholar; Heisserer, A. J., Alexander the Great and the Greeks (Oklahoma, 1980) 13Google Scholar on Phanias, with Athen. 3 90E, 8 333A, 10 438C.

62. Tod, M. N., GHI 2.191, with pp. 258–9Google Scholar, unconvincingly queried by Bosworth, A. B., Commentary on Arrian (Oxford, 1980) 179Google Scholar. Various ‘liberations’ from tyrants are inferred: one in or before 336, one (perhaps) in 334, one in 332. These liberations are natural candidates for T.'s two interventions. Bosworth argues, most implausibly, that ‘there is in fact no reason to posit a series of expulsions and restorations’. Apart from Tod 191, which sits most easily with such a series, he overlooks Plut., Mor. 1126FGoogle Scholar and its implications. I should add that Ps.-Dem. 17.7 (in my view, composed in spring 335) refers to the ejection of 336, which led to democracy, the altar of Zeus Philippios and the expulsion of Hermon and his brothers. Tod 191.1–7 and 43–55 refers to the backlash by two further tyrants, no doubt backed by Memnon and the Persians. Democracy returned, with Macedonian support, in 332. I date T.'s two liberations to 336 and 332, both abetted by Macedon's power. Heisserer, op. cit. (n. 61) 76–7, is totally unconvincing when dating T.'s second intervention as late as 324.

63. D.L. 5.57.

64. Parentage, perhaps, in Arr. Indic. 18.4: is his father perhaps the great Athenian Kallistratos, in exile c. 360 and active up at Thasos (Ps.-Dem. 50.46–52)? Berve, H., Das Alexanderreich (Munich, 1926)Google Scholar no. 80 for details. Theophr. H.P. 4.9 and C.P. 2.5.5 quote reports from Androsthenes, probably known through his writings (Strabo 16.3.2).

65. Athen. 6253A, 255C; Strabo 13.389; Harpocr. s.v. ὀξυθυμία; Wilhelm, A., ‘Zu Einigen Beschlüssender Eretrien’, Rh. Mus. 89 (1946) 21Google Scholar; Schweigert, E., ‘Greek Inscriptions’, Hesperia 9 (1940) 350CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robert, L., ‘Adeimantos et la Ligue de Corinthe’, Hellenica 2 (1946) 15–32Google Scholar, esp. 31; Badian, E., Martin, T., ‘Athenians, Other Allies and the Hellenes in the Honorary Decree for Adeimantos of Lampsakos’, ZPE 61 (1985) 167–72Google Scholar.

66. D.L. 5.57.

67. Paus. 1.26.1–2; Plut. Dem. 46.1–2; Shear, T. L., Kallias of Sphettos and the Revolt of Athens in 286 BC. (Princeton, 1978) 14–16Google Scholar; C. Habicht, op. cit. (n. 60) 27, 58–9.

68. D.L. 5.41; Numenius F 25 (Des Places); Cic., Tusc. Disp. 3.69Google Scholar; compare Habicht, C., ‘Athens and her Philosophers’, in his Athen in Hellenistischer Zeit (Munich, 1994) 231–47Google Scholar, an excellent survey.

69. D.L. 5.37, where MSS B and V read δειϰτηϱίου; Heisserer, op. cit. (n. 61) is wrong to take συνεδϱίου as a reference to the League of Corinth; Habicht, op. cit. (n. 68) on 2,000 at the lectures: for rhetoric, he suggests, not philosophy?

70. E.g. F. Millar, op. cit. (n. 3) on the (undatable) Golden Ass.

71. Cichorius, C., Theophrasts Charaktere (Leipzig, 1897) lvii–lxiiGoogle Scholar.

72. Survey in Stein, M., Definition und Schilderung in Theophrasts Charakterer (Stuttgart, 1992) 21ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boegehold, A. L., ‘The Date of Theophrastus's Characters’, TAPA 90 (1959) 15Google Scholar.

73. Doubted by Rühl, F., ‘Die Abfassungszeit von Theophrasts Charakteren’, Rh. Mus. N. F. 53 (1898) 324–7Google Scholar.

74. Garnsey, P. D. A., Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman World (Cambridge, 1988) 154–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for Demosthenes' gift in the crisis, Plut. Mor. 851; in general, Tod, GHI 2.196.

75. Char. 23.4.

76. Arr. 3.19.5.

77. Char. 26.5–6.

78. Tritle, L. A., Phocion the Good (London, 1988) 133–40Google Scholar, tries to present the 9,000 as a ‘moderate democracy’.

79. Ps.-Xen. Ath. pol. 1.5, 1.13, 2.19–20; Plut. Per. 11.2; the tone of Men., Sikyon. 150–82, whatever its date and setting, seems quite different.

80. Char. 26.2–3.

81. Ath. pol. 56.4.

82. Boegehold, op. cit. (n. 72) 18.

83. Rhodes, P. J., Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia (Oxford, 1981) 627Google Scholar.

84. Thuc. 4.29, 5.63.4, 7.16; Xen. Hell. 6.2.39; Xen., Oec. 9.14Google Scholar; Xen. Cyrop. 1.5.5–6 and esp. Aristot., Pol. 1298b27Google Scholar (following Susemihl). I am grateful to N. D. Worswick for help here.

85. IG 22 668.13–15 still has 10 (282/1 B.C.).

86. Boegehold, op. cit. (n. 72) 16.

87. Suida, s.v. Demades, with Ferguson, W. S., Hellenistic Athens (London, 1911) 22Google Scholar.

88. Char. 4.2, 6.8, 7.6, 18.8, 21.11, 22.3, 24.5, 29.4–5; perhaps 11.6, 13.2, 14.4.

89. Char. 8.6–8; for earlier logopoia, Plut. Nic. 30.1–2.

90. Cichorius, op. cit. (n. 71) lvii–lxii; D.S. 18.49.4; Plut., Phocion 31.1Google Scholar.

91. D.S. 18.54–57.

92. D.S. 19.23–24, with Bosworth, A. B., Chiron 22 (1992) 63Google Scholar for date.

93. D.S. 18.49, 55 with Williams, J. M., ‘A Note on Athenian Chronology 319/18–318/17’, Hermes 112 (1984) 300–5Google Scholar, correcting Errington, R. M., Hermes 105 (1977) 478–504Google Scholar.

94. Char. 8.9–10, where Diels prefers ἀλλ᾽ οὐν.

95. Char. 8.6.

96. Habicht, C., ‘Literarische und epigraphische Überlieferung zur Geschichte Alexanders und seiner ersten Nachfolger’, VI Kongress für Gr. und Lat. Epigraphik, München 1972 (Munich, 1973) 367–77Google Scholar.

97. Varinlioglu, E., Bresson, A., Brun, P., Debord, P., Descat, R., ‘Une Inscription de Pladasa en Carie’, REA 92 (1990) 59–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 72–3; on the problems of 323/2 and IG 22 401, Bosworth, A. B., ‘Perdiccas and the Kings’, CQ 43 (1993) 420–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar, canvassing various possibilities, consistent with the ‘two king’ rule after 322.

98. Habicht, op. cit. (n. 96) 374–5, esp. n. 36.

99. D.S. 18.55.4–56.2.

100. D.S. 18.56.2 and 56.7 with Habicht, op. cit. (n. 96) 375–6; I reject the attempted compromise of P. Goukowsky, Diodore XVIII, Budé ed. (Paris, 1978) 166, as if, inter alia, ‘le cas du diagramma est limpide’ in Philip III's name only.

101. Habicht, op. cit. (n. 96) 369–72; OGIS 4.13.

102. D.S. 18.53.2, 55.1–2, 57.3–4, 58.1–3, 62.2, 63.3, 65.1, 68.2–3, 74.1–2.

103. D.S. 19.23.3,24.1.

104. Plut. Phocion 33.7–12; Schubert, R., Die Quellen zur Geschichte der Diadochenzeit (Leipzig, 1914) 270Google Scholar distinguishes Plut.'s source from D.S.'s Hieronymus.

105. D.S. 18.57.3–4.

106. D.S. 18.64.3 (retaining the singular of the MSS); contrast 18.68.3.

107. D.S. 18.68.2 (in Phocis); contrast Char. 8.8.

108. Williams, op. cit. (n. 93) 304–5.

109. So too F. Rühl, op. cit. (n. 73) 324–6 and Droysen, J.G., Gesch. des Hellenismus, II.2 (Gotha, 1878) 82Google Scholar n. 1, on different grounds to mine.

110. D.S. 20.20.1–2.

111. D.S. 20.28.1–2.

112. D.S. 20.28.1.

113. D.S. 17.57.2; Lycophr. Alex. 800; Oberhummer, E., R.E. Suppl. VIIA (1939) 1755–6Google Scholar; for the strong feelings of anti-Cassander Athenians, compare the curse-tablet discussed by Habicht, C., Pausanias' Guide to Ancient Greece (Berkeley, 1985) 81–2Google Scholar.

114. D.S. 20.28.1–3.

115. Edmonds, J. M., Theophrastus: Characters, Loeb, ed. (Harvard, 1929) 5Google Scholar, on breaches of the ‘rule of the infinitive’ elsewhere after οἷος.

116. The single narrative focus on one incident in Char. 8 accounts for the ‘rule of the infinitive’ being broken.

117. Char. 2, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 25, 27. Liturgies, however, had altered by 307, perhaps earlier (Habicht, C., ‘Die Beiden Xenokles von Sphettos’, Hesperia 57 (1988) 323 n. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar) and the change is not reflected in any Characters. They assume the old system.

118. Schwenk, C. J., Athens in the Age of Alexander (Chicago, 1985)Google Scholar and Humphreys, S., ‘Lycurgus of Butadae: an Athenian Aristocrat’, in Eadie, J. W., Ober, J., edd., The Craft of the Ancient Historian (London, 1985) 199–252Google Scholar.

119. Char. 18.4.

120. A. W. Gomme, F. H. Sandbach, op. cit. (n. 16) 22–5; his ‘citizens' sit. com.’ contrasts with aspects of Plautus, on which see E. D. Rawson, ‘Freedmen in Roman Comedy’, in R. Scodel, ed., op. cit. (n. 47) 215–34.

121. Ussher, R. G., ed., The Characters of Theophrastus (London, 1960) 5Google Scholar.

122. Furley, D. J., ‘The Purpose of Theophrastus's Characters’, SO 31 (1954) 56Google Scholar.

123. Edmonds, op. cit. (n. 115) 7.

124. Aristot., Rhet. 1278a30–1390b10Google Scholar.

125. Dem. 21.158 is decidedly Theophrastan.

126. Steinmetz, P., ‘Menander und Theophrast’, Rh. Mus. N.F. 103 (1960) 185–99Google Scholar; Walzer, R., ‘Zum Hautontimorumenos des Terenz’, Hermes 70 (1935) 195–202Google Scholar.

127. Men. Dyskol., passim, Epitrep. 126–35, Dysk. 260ff., 407ff.

128. Millbrodt, J., ‘Der Charakter’, in Weiskopf, E. C., ed., Hellenische Poleis III (Berlin, 1974) 1413–49Google Scholar; for the Theophrastan word, Koerte, A., ‘χαϱαϰτήϱ’, Hermes 64 (1929) 69–86Google Scholar.

129. Ussher, R. G., ‘Old Comedy and “Character”; Some Comments’, G.&R. 24 (1977) 71–9Google Scholar.

130. Arnott, W. G., ‘Three Problems in Alexis …’, BICS 6 (1959) 78–9Google Scholar; Athen. 6 236E proves that Eupolis' Kolakes did not use the term parasitoi.

131. Athen. 3 127C, 4 134C.

132. Porphyry, ap. Eus. Praep. ev. 465D.

133. Antiphanes F 296 (Koch–Austin); the Misoponeros of Antiphanes F 157–8 is not the inverse, however, of Theophr. Char. 29; rather, compare Men. Dysk. 388, with Handley, ad loc. (pp. 196–7).

134. Anaxilas F 3; Theophr. Char. 20.9.

135. J. Rusten, op. cit. (n. 4) 12–14, for summary.

136. πϱοσποιήσις in Char. 1.1 (cf. 13.1) with Eth. Nic. 1108a22 (cf. 1169b10); Eth. Nic 1233b39 with 1.1.

137. Char. 30 with Eth. Nic. 1121b18; Char. 26.1 (P. Oxy. 699 is already corrupt) with Pol. 1318b18 (cf. 1302a38; 1308b38). Char. 9 (Ἀναισχυντία) also stresses ϰέϱδος more than the different examples of it in Rhet. 1380a19 and 1383b12ff.

138. Despite Furley op. cit. (n. 122) 59, claiming ‘the excess-mean-defect analysis is dropped’.

139. Eth. Nic. 1094B21.

140. M. Stein, op. cit. (n. 72) esp. 157ff., though I do not share his doubts about the definitions' authenticity or his inferences from the later Ps.-Platonic Definitions.

141. Rhet. 1378b–1392a for instances.

142. Char. 4 and 7, 22 and 30 are almost interchangeable.

143. Sen. Epist. 95.65–6.

144. Sen. Epist. 120.8; 45.7.

145. J. M. Edmonds, op. cit. (n. 115) 6 and 72–3, followed by R. G. Ussher, op. cit. (n. 121) on 13.1; Steinmetz 2.51 claims ἀμέλει refutes a doubt (‘allerdings, sicherlich’) ‘meist in Antworten’. Initial ἀμέλει in Char. 13, 16, 23, 25 (cf. 18); ἀμέλει δὲ in 6.3, 19.3, 26.3; ἀμέλει δὲ ϰαί in 2.9, 5.9, 21.11, 24.12, 27.5, 28.4, 30.18.

146. Blomquist, J., Greek Particles in Hellenistic Prose (Lund, 1969) 100–7Google Scholar is fundamental; Char. 16, 25, 13, 23 begin with verbs in a potential form (Blomquist 107), implying doubt, not answering it; Blomquist concludes ‘we must accept the existence of a progressive ἀμέλει in the Characters’.

147. Aristot., Eth. Nic. 1128a1ff.Google Scholar; in general, Halliwell, S., ‘Laughter in Greek Culture’, CQ 41 (1991) 279–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar, although he misjudges Char. 6.2 on p. 287; λοιδοϱηθῆναι is active in sense (LSJ II; Steinmetz on 6.2; Dem. 54.5) and Ἀπονοία therefore gives out insults, rather than being ‘aberrant’ for ‘tolerating them easily’.

148. Trenkner, S., Le Style ϰαί dans le Récit Attique Oral (Assen, 1960) 16–21Google Scholar; Dover, K. J., Greek and the Greeks (Oxford, 1987) 29Google Scholar, and esp. Tompkins, D. P., ‘Stylistic Characterization in Thucydides’, YCS 22 (1972) 181–214Google Scholar, esp. 204–14 on Alcibiades.

149. Hermipp., Athen. 1 21a–b; compare Fortenbaugh, W. W., ‘Theophrastus on Delivery’, in Fortenbaugh, W. W., Huby, P. M., Long, A. R., edd., Theophrastus of Eresus (New Brunswick, 1985) 269–88, at 274Google Scholar.

150. Plato, , Menexenus; Sympos. 185E–188Google Scholar; perhaps Theopompus' Trikaranos.

151. Plut. Phoc. 27 and Kirchner, J. Y., Prosopographia Attica (1901–1903) 8032Google Scholar.

152. Athen. 12 554e–f.

153. Dyck, A. R., ‘The Function and Persuasive Power of Demosthenes' Portrait of Aeschines in the Speech on the Crown’, G.&R. 32 (1985) 42–8Google Scholar, rightly rejecting Rowe, G. O., TAPA 97 (1966) 402Google Scholar; Trevett, J., Apollodorus the Son of Pasion (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar on Dem. 37.52 and Char. 4; Apollodorus' philotimia is not ‘petty’ in every detail, either.

154. Matron, ap. Athen. 4 134x–137c with C. Habicht, op. cit. (n. 116–7) 325 and Ampolo, C., ‘Un Politico ‘euergete’ del IV Secolo A. C. Xenokles figlio di Xeinis …’, P. del P. 34 (1979) 167–78Google Scholar.

155. Aristot., Eth. Nic. 1127b25Google Scholar; compare 1108a22; Rhet. 1379b31 (). Vlastos, G., ‘Socratic Irony’, CQ 37 (1987) 79–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar is wayward, partly corrected by Gottlieb, P., CQ 42 (1992) 278–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

156. Plut. Phoc. 4.3.

157. Plut. Phoc. 4.4, 5.1.

158. Plut. Phoc. 18.3, 19.3.

159. Plut. Phoc. 9.1.

160. Plut. Phoc. 10.8.

161. Char. 22.10, 24.6–8, 24.11, 22.3, 29.2 despite Giglioni, op. cit. (n. 20).

162. Plut. Phoc. 20; Athen. 4 168E–F.

163. Plut. Phoc. 4.3, 17.10; Fricke, G., De FontibusPlutarchi et Nepotis in Vita Phocionis (diss. Halle, 1883)Google Scholar.

164. Char. 21.8.

165. Char. 23.2.

166. Char. 21.13, under democracy; Palagia, O., Lewis, D. M., ‘The Ephebes of Erechtheis and their Dedication’, ABSA 84 (1989) 334–5Google Scholar, for ephebic gymnasiarchs; Ath. pol. 42.3 does not specify any training in Athens city itself.

167. Char. 6.6, with Σ on Hom. Il. 5.387 and Latte, K., Glotta 34 (1955) 200–2Google Scholar.

168. Char. 5.2, with Fox, R. Lane, Pagans and Christians (London, 1986) 750Google Scholar n. 29.

169. Char. 9.4, with Wilkins, J., ‘Meat in Aristophanes' Knights’, in Jocelyn, H. D., ed., Tria Lustra, Liverpool Classical Papers 3 (Liverpool, 1993) 119–26 at 123Google Scholar.

170. Char. 27.4 (following Schneider), with IG 22 974.11.

171. Rotroff, S. I., ‘An Anonymous Hero in the Athenian Agora’, Hesperia 47 (1978) 196–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

172. Char. 2.9, 22.10; Men. F 456 (Koch); Pollux, Onomast. 10.18 (Dindorf), uncritically followed by Herfst, P., Le Travail de la Femme dans la Grèce Aneienne (Utrecht, 1972) 36–40Google Scholar.

173. Char. 16.4, 27.8; Aristoph. Wasps 9; Lys. 388; Birds 874; F 566; F 878; Dem. 18.260, where Strabo 10.3.18 already assumes the god is the (unnamed) Sabazius.

174. Char. 16.4 with Lane, E. N., Corpus Cultus Iovis Sabazii III (Leiden, 1989) 4 with n. 9Google Scholar; ‘probably the species known to present-day herpetologists as Elaphe Longissima’.

175. Char. 27.8 with IG 22 2932, doubted, however, by Lane op. cit. (n. 174) 8 n. 17: is this text really from an association of Sabaziasts (the main argument is the find-spot, the same as for a much later group of Sabaziasts, of 102/1 B.C. And are the members citizens?).

176. Char. 17.8, misinterpreted by Worthington, I., ‘Once More, the Client/Logographos Relationship’, CQ 43 (1993) 67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar, as if it ‘implies that the logographos had a great deal of control over the oral version of a forensic speech’. Surely it only implies that this type of man is never satisfied, wanting all his pleas to be included in a speech, irrespective of length.

177. Thomas, R., Oral Tradition and Written Record in Classical Athens (Cambridge, 1989) 40–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Humphreys, S. C., ‘Social Relations on Stage: Witnesses in Classical Athens’, in Humphreys, S. C., ed., The Discourse of Law (London, 1985) 313–69, esp. 322Google Scholar.

178. Char. 6.8–9.

179. Dem. 54.37; 56.1.

180. Boegehold, A. L., ‘A Lid with Dipinto’, in Studies in Attic Epigraphy, History and Topography, Presented to E. Vanderpool, Hesperia Suppl. 19 (1982) 1–6Google Scholar; Soritz-Hadler, G., ‘Ein Echinos aus einer Anakrisis’, in Wesener, G., ed., Festschrift für Arnold Kraenzlein (Graz, 1986) 103–8Google Scholar.

181. On ὲξόμνυσθαι, most recently, Todd, S. C., ‘The Purpose of Evidence in Athenian Courts’, in Cartledge, P. A., Millett, P., Todd, S. C., edd., Nomos (Cambridge, 1990) 24–5Google Scholar.

182. Char. 23.3.

183. Theopomp. 115 F 263; Athen. 2 48, 15 689E and esp. 11 782A, Xen. Hell. 4.1.24.

184. Rostovtzeff, M., Iranians and Greeks in Southern Russia (Oxford, 1992) 236Google Scholar n. 8 and op.cit. (n. 19) 1353 n. 48. On the word διαλίθος, Aristoph. F 320; Callix. ap. Athen. 5 197ff. Theophr. De lap. 35 cites inlay-stones, brought from the Bactrian desert: lapis lazuli from the Blue Mountain of Badakshan?

185. Char. 2.12 with Davies, J. K., Democracy and Classical Greece (London, 1993) 165Google Scholar.

186. Pliny, N.H. 34.51 and 35.51 with Robertson, M., History of Greek Art (Cambridge, 1975) 508–11Google Scholar; Cahn, H. A., ‘Les Monnayages des Satrapes: Iconographie et Signification’, REA 91 (1989) 97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

187. Char. 2.6; 11.4; on buying and selling in general in the Characters, P. Millett, ‘Sale, Credit and Exchange in Athenian Law and Society’, in Cartledge, Millett, Todd, edd., op. cit. (n. 181) 184–5, 191.

188. Despite Davidson, J., ‘Fish, Sex and Revolution in Athens’, CQ 43 (1993) 53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

189. Char. 21.12; 26.4 (μεσὴ ϰουϱά).

190. Char. 10.14 (unless a later postscript); Stewart, A., Faces of Power (Berkeley, 1993) 74–5Google Scholar.

191. Geddes, A. G., ‘Rags and Riches’, CQ 37 (1987) 307CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

192. Char. 22.8; 10.14; 18.6; 19.6; 30.10.

193. Athenodorus, ap. D.L. 5.36; Suida, s.v. Theophrastus.

194. Char. 5.3, 12.3, 24.4; on eranoi and epidoseis, 1.5, 15.7, 17.9, 22.9, on epidoseis 23.6 and probably 13.1.

195. Mitchel, F. W., Lykurgan Athens, 338–22 (Cincinnati, 1970) 40Google Scholar, on SEG 16.136 and 145.

196. Finley, M. I., Studies in Land and Credit in Ancient Athens (New Brunswick, N. J., 1952) 100–6Google Scholar. Walbank, M. B., ‘A Lex Sacra of the State and Deme of Kollytos’, Hesperia 63 (1994) 233–9, at 238CrossRefGoogle Scholar; dating by Tracy, S. V., Hesperia 63 (1994) 242Google Scholar.

197. Migeotte, L., Les Souscriptions Publiques dans les Cités Grecques (Geneva, 1992)Google Scholar, omitting, however, Tod 2.198; Faraguna, M., Atene nell' Età di Alessandro (Rome, 1992) 380–7Google Scholar.

198. Plut. Alcib. 10.1; next, Isaeus 5.37–8; for the θόϱυβος, compare Athen. 4 168F.

199. Dem. 21.161–2 (where πϱῶται does not mean ‘first ever’); Ps.-Plut., Vitae X Or. 849FGoogle Scholar; Dem. 18.171, 18.312; Char. 23.3.

200. Theophr. 13.1 with Tod 2.198 line 12 and IG II2 345 line 11 (restored); Veyne, P., Le Pain et le Cirque (Paris, 1976) 358Google Scholar and n. 270.

201. Plut. Aristeid. 4.2; Dem. 21.94 and in general, Gernet, L., ‘L'Institution des Arbitres Publics à Athènes’, REG 52 (1939) 389–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 401–4.

202. Theophr. 5.3, 12.13, 24.4.

203. Millett, P., Lending and Borrowing in Ancient Athens (Cambridge, 1991) 153–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar, perhaps too rigid in classing all eranoi as interest-free loans; Neaira's eranos at Dem. 59.31 reads like a return to her for past favours, not a loan which she would be expected to repay; M. I. Finley, op. cit. (n. 196) 100–6 is still important; Vondeling, J., Eranos (Groningen, 1961)Google Scholar for evidence.

204. Char. 17.9; Dem. 21.101, with D. M. Macdowell's admirable note ad loc.

205. Antiphon, Tetral. 1 B12; Ps.-Aristot., Probl. 950a28Google Scholar.

206. Millett, P., ‘Patronage and its Avoidance in Classical Athens’, in Wallace-Hadrill, A., ed., Patronage in Ancient Society (London, 1989) 15–43Google Scholar, prefers to emphasize Athens' system of public pay and the older Hesiodic patterns of an eranos.

207. P. Millett, op. cit. (n. 203) 6.

208. Char. 23.2; Mossé, C., ‘The World of the Emporium’, in Garnsey, P., Hopkins, K., Whittaker, C. R., edd., Trade in the Ancient Economy (London, 1983) 53–63Google Scholar; P. Millett, ‘Maritime Loans and the Structure of Credit …’, ibid. (London, 1983) 36–52, at 49–50.

209. Dem. 37.52–4.

210. Stroud, R. S., ‘An Athenian Law on Silver Coinage’, Hesperia 43 (1974) 157–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

211. Char. 21.5 and 4.11 with Howgego, C. J., ‘Why Did Ancient States Strike Coins?’, NC 150 (1990) 1–27Google Scholar, esp. 17.

212. Char. 30.9, bronze coins found in the street; cf. 10.2, 10.6, 6.9.

213. Char. 30.15 with SIG 3 252 line 7 (Delphi, 331–29 B.C.).

214. Char. 9.4 and 11.4, 11.7; compare 4.15 and 22.7. At Men. Samia 69–70, a slave-girl shops for her mistress; cf. Lysias 1.8, 1.16. At Men. Samia 190–6, a male slave goes shopping for his master, taking argyrion: cf. Antiphanes F69 (Kassel–Austin).

215. Char. 13.4, 20.10, 27.3; ?klinai in 22.12.

216. Char. 5.5,9.2, 11.8, 17.2; cf. 9.3, 30.18.

217. Char. 2.10, 10.12, 24.9, 30.1–5, 30.16; Men., Sikyon. 184–6 with F. Sandbach, ad loc; Parker, R., ‘Festivals of the Attic Demes’, in Linders, T., Nordquist, G., edd., Gifts to the Gods (Uppsala, 1987) 138Google Scholar; Whitehead, D., The Demes of Attica (Princeton, 1986) 344–5Google Scholar.

218. Andoc. De Myst. 12–13; 17.

219. Char. 11.7; 20.10 with Nicophon 17, on which see Henderson, J., The Maculate Muse (Yale, 1979) 184–5Google Scholar.

220. Char. 17.3–4.

221. Char. 12.3, 27.9.

222. Aristippus, ap. D.L. 5.39.

223. Golden, M., Childhood in Classical Athens (Baltimore, 1990) 90–3Google Scholar; Aristoph., Clouds 1380–90Google Scholar; Aeschin. 1.126; Men., Samia 240–4Google Scholar.

224. Char. 20.5, 5.5.

225. Devereux, G., ‘Greek Pseudo-Homosexuality and the Greek Miracle’, Symb. Oslo. 42 (1968) 69–92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

226. Char. 10.5–6.

227. Char. 12.12–13; compare Plutarch, ap. Aul. Gell. N.A. 1.26, that ‘nasty little story’, remarked by de Sainte Croix, G. E. M., The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (London, 1981) 48–9Google Scholar.

228. Char. 22.2.

229. Mette, H. J., Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen in Griechenland (Berlin, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar II E 1.15, 16, 14, 17; the town/country distribution is notable.

230. Mette, op. cit. (n. 229) 16.

231. Char. 13.10.

232. Hicks, E. L., ‘On the Characters of Theophrastus’, JHS 3 (1882) 128–43, at 142CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

233. Clairmont, C., Gravestone and Epigram (Mainz, 1970)Google Scholar nos. 13, 27, 40.

234. Christophilopoulos, A. P., (Athens, 1946) 130–9Google Scholar; Robert, L., Hellenica 1.71Google Scholar; Daux, G., ‘Notes de Lecture’, BCH 100 (1976) 206–10Google Scholar, wtih bibliography; Braunstein, O., Die politische Wirksamkeit der gr. Frau (diss., Leipzig, 1911) 72–9Google Scholar.

235. Linders, T., Studies in the Treasure Records of Artemis Brauronia (Stockholm, 1972) 7–9Google Scholar; Bradeen, D., The Athenian Agora XVII (Princeton, 1974) 117Google Scholar.

236. Nielsen, T. H. et al. , ‘Athenian Grave Monuments and Social Class’, GRBS 30 (1989) 411–20, at 419Google Scholar; Vestergaard, T. et al. , ‘A Typology of the Women Recorded on Gravestones from Attica’, AJAH 10 (1985) 178–90, esp. 189Google Scholar n. 7.

237. For ποδαπ of a foreign woman, compare Dem. 57.34.

238. Char. 21.9. Fraser, P. M., ‘The Son of Aristonax at Kandahar’, Afghan Studies 2 (1980) 9–21, esp. 14Google Scholar n. 9; Herrliger, G., Totenklage um Tiere in der antiken Dichtung (Stuttgart, 1930)Google Scholar; Purola, T., ‘P. Cair. Zen. 4.59532: Two Epitaphs for a Hunting Dog Called Tauron’, Arctos 28 (1994) 55–62Google Scholar.

239. Plut., Themist. 10Google Scholar; Ridgway, B. S., ‘The Man-and-Dog Stelai’. J.D.I. 86 (1971) 60–79Google Scholar; Day, L. P., ‘Dog Burials in the Greek World’, AJA 88 (1984) 21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 25 no. 26; Thompson, H. A., ‘Excavations in the Athenian Agora: 1950’, Hesperia 20 (1951) 52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

240. Ael. V.H. 3.4; cf. Athen. 12.518e–519 on Melitaean dogs attending gymnasia at Sybaris.

241. Char. 21.11, where I hesitate to accept Wilamowitz's τὰ Гαλάξια for C and D's ἱεϱὰ ἄξια, despite Deubner, L., Attische Feste (Berlin, 1932) 216Google Scholar.

242. Rhodes, P. J., The Athenian Boule (Oxford, 1971) 132–3Google Scholar.

243. E. L. Hicks, op. cit. (n. 232) 134–41, esp. 140; P. J. Rhodes, op. cit. (n. 242) 132 n. 6: ‘honours were not awarded, or at any rate their award not published, on such slight pretexts before the Hellenistic period’; in SEG XXII. 117, a demesman of Icaria is honoured for sacrificing φιλοτιμῶς and declaring the sacrifices ϰαλά, c. 330 B.C., but we do not know how ‘petty’ this sacrificing was.

244. Snowden, F. M., in Vercoutter, J. et al. , edd., The Image of the Black in Western Art, (N.Y., 1976) ch. 3, esp. 184Google Scholar.

245. Dermott, W. Mc., The Ape in Antiquity (Baltimore, 1938) 77–8Google Scholar; Brigden, H. A. G., in Christiansen, J., Melander, T., edd., Ancient Greek and Related Pottery: Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium (Copenhagen, 1988) 62–9Google Scholar; Ashmead, A., ‘Greek Cats’, Expedition 20 (1978) 38–47Google Scholar, for which I thank Dr T. Carpenter.

246. Eubulus F 114; Lilja, S., ‘The Ape in Ancient Comedy’, Arctos 14 (1980) 31–8Google Scholar.

247. Char. 5 (21).9; Alexis F 58; on sticks, Plut. Nic. 19.6, but not Aristoph. Birds 1281–3, according to N. Dunbar, ad loc.

248. I owe the point about metal to Professor Boardman; on precious flasks, Vickers, M. and Gill, D., Artful Crafts (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar; at Acragas, Ael. V.H. 12.29; at Thurii, Athen. 6 228C–E and Metagenes, Thouriopersai, PCG (Kassel–Austin) VII.6–8, both of which I owe to M. J. Vickers.

249. Beazley, J., ‘Theophrastus, Char. 21.6’, CR 63 (1949) 42–3Google Scholar.

250. van Straten, F., ‘Greek Sacrificial Representations: Livestock Prices and Religious Mentality’, in Linders, T., Nordquist, G., Gifts to the Gods (Uppsala, 1987) 159–70, at 167–8Google Scholar; Jameson, M. H., ‘Sacrifice and Animal Husbandry in Classical Greece’, in Whittaker, C. R., Pastoral Economies in Classical Antiquity. PCPS Suppl. Vol. 14 (1988) 87–119, esp. 93–8, 107–112Google Scholar.

251. Theophr. De odor. 15–16; Xen. Anab. 4.4.13.

252. Char. 5 (21). 10; Ps.-Xen. Ath. pol. 2.10.

253. Dover, K. J., Greek and the Greeks (Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar ch. 25, for general discussion.

254. Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte des Griechischen Religion3 (Munich, 1955) 796Google Scholar; Men., Phasma 50–6Google Scholar; Parker, R. C. T., Miasma (Oxford, 1983) 207–9Google Scholar.

255. Char. 21.10 with Aleshire, S. B., The Athenian Asklepeion. The People, their Dedications and the Inventories (Amsterdam, 1989) esp. 46Google Scholar (dedicated objects) and 71 (overwhelmingly Athenian citizen clientele).

256. Char. 15.11; Soph. O.C. 1024 and Aeschyl., Septem 279Google Scholar, for the sense, against Steinmetz 2.172 (‘nicht einmal zu den Göttern zu beten’). The Ἀυθάδης takes all the credit himself.

257. Char. 9.2; 10.11; 17.2; 22.4; 30.1, 4, 16.

258. Bolkestein, H., Theophrastos' Charakter der Deisidaimonia (Giessen, 1929) 39Google Scholar. The sketch is also used, at times questionably, by Mikalson, J. D., Athenian Popular Religion (Chapel Hill, 1983)Google Scholar.

259. Borthwick, E. K., ‘Notes on the “Superstitious” Man of Theophrastus’, Eranos 64 (1966) 106–19, esp. 114Google Scholar with Aristoph., Wasps 878Google Scholar.

260. Char. 16.6; I agree with Oliver, J. H., Athenian Expounders of the Sacred and Ancestral Law (Baltimore, 1950) 135Google Scholar that an official ‘pythochrestos’ is meant; the definite article tells against a private one.

261. Char. 16.9 with R. C. T. Parker, op. cit. (n. 254) 33–66, 59, 307.

262. Philochorus, , FGH 328Google Scholar F 190 and 86, with Parker, op. cit. (n. 254) 30–1; at new moon, Aristoph., Plut. 594–7Google Scholar and scholiast.

263. Parker, op. cit. (n. 254) 348, esp. on the force of ἐπι- compounds; Jameson, M. H., Jordan, D. R., Kotansky, R. D., A Lex Sacra from Selinous, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Monographs 11 (North Carolina, 1993)Google Scholar.

264. Jordan, D. R., ‘A Survey of Greek Defixiones Not Included In The Special Corpora’, GRBS 26 (1985) 151–97, esp. 155–8Google Scholar, and the important study by Habicht, C., ‘Attische Fluchtafeln aus der Zeit Alexanders des Grossen’, ICS 18 (1993) 113–18Google Scholar, with full bibliography; Gager, J. G., Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World (Oxford 1992)Google Scholar nos. 22, 40, 69 for Hecate texts from Attica.

265. Bolkestein, op. cit. (n. 258) 60.

266. Very important is van Straten, F., ‘Votives and Votaries in Greek Sanctuaries’, in Le Sanctuaire Grec, Entretiens Fondation Hardt 37 (1992) 247–90, esp. 274–83Google Scholar: ‘it is clear from the above that the dedicants of the classical votive reliefs preferably viewed and represented themselves as members of a family’.

267. Tsantsanglou, K., Parassoglu, G.M., ‘Two Gold Lamellae from Thessaly’, Hellenica 37 (1987) 3–16Google Scholar; Graf, F., ‘Textes Orphiques et Rituel Bacchique’, in Borgeaud, P., ed., Orphisme et Orphée (Geneva, 1990) 87–102Google Scholar.

268. Burkert, W., Greek Religion (Oxford, 1985) 296–301Google Scholar.

269. E. K. Borthwick, op. cit. (n. 25) 116–18, with the palmary emendation to ἀπεσθίοντα.

270. Σ Aristoph., Plut. 594Google Scholar; Plut. Mor. 708F; Luc. Dial. mort. 1.1; Steinmetz (n. 145), 2.204 (unaware, however, of Borthwick's emendation); Parker, op. cit. (n. 258) 30–1, esp. n. 65; Smith, K. F., ‘Hekate's Suppers’, in Ronan, S., ed., The Goddess Hecate (Hastings, 1992) 57–63Google Scholar.

271. Dem. 54.39.

272. Theophr. H.P. 9.8.6.

273. Theophr. H.P. 7.13.4; Scarborough, J., ‘The Pharmacology of Sacred Plants, Herbs and Roots’, in Faraone, C. A., Obbink, D., edd., Magika Hiera (Oxford, 1991) 138–74, at 146–8Google Scholar; Stannard, J., ‘Squill in Ancient and Medieval Materia Medica’, Bull. of N. Y. Academy of Medicine 50 (1974) 684–713Google ScholarPubMed.

274. Aristoph. F 204; Sophron F 8; Gow, comm. on Theocr. 2.12.

275. Parker, op. cit. (n. 254) 307, with Marinus, V. Procl. 18.

276. Dodds, E. R., ‘The Portrait of a Greek Gentleman’, G.&R. 2 (1933) 97–107Google Scholar.

277. For example, SEG XXXVIII 1237Google Scholar.

278. Lloyd-Jones, H., ‘Ehre und Schande in den griechischen Kultur’, A. und A. 33 (1987) 1–28Google Scholar; Williams, B., Shame and Necessity (Oxford, 1993)Google Scholar; Daube, D., ‘Shame Culture in Luke’, in Hooker, M. D., Wilson, S. G., edd., Paul and Paulinism (London, 1982) 355–72Google Scholar.

279. P. Millett, op. cit. (n. 206) 284; compare 244–5.

280. Whitehead, D., ‘Cardinal Virtues; The Language of Public Approbation in Democratic Athens’, C.&M. 49 (1993) 37–76Google Scholar.

281. Dem. 21.158.

282. Dem. 58.40; Char. 1.2.

283. Dem. 45.77.

284. Dem. 45.63–5.

285. Dem. 45.68; Char. 24.8.

286. Dem. 53.7–13; compare Dem. 47.44, 81–2; especially Dem. 21.101 and 184–5, with D. M. Macdowell's notes ad locc.

287. Anth. Pal. VI.344.

288. Jost, M., Sanctuaires et Cultes d'Arcadie (Paris, 1985)Google Scholar.

289. Char. 12.14; cf. 6.3; on the ‘old saying’ that wine makes old men dance, Athen. 10.428A, with 4.134C.

290. Char. 1.3.

291. Char. 21.6, 24.11; contrast Suet. Tit. 8.2 and S.H.A. Hadr. 17.6.

292. Despite his Orpheotelestai.

293. Wilamowitz, U., Hellenistische Dichtung I (Berlin, 1924) 64Google Scholar; compare B. Boyce, op. cit. (n. 37) 12: ‘pedagogue as he was, he kept a good deal of schoolroom logic, even in his jokes’.