It would seem to be a difficult matter in archaeology to get rid once for all of an erroneous idea which has firmly asserted itself; at any rate it is desirable when an error has been combated without complete success, to adduce any fresh proofs of the truth that may occur. For this reason I venture to reintroduce a question which, as many will doubtless think, has really been finally settled, I mean the distinction which, to the Greek mind at any rate, existed between the Siren and the Harpy. These two mythological creations were to the Greeks as regards outward form as widely distinct as possible; the Siren has in Greek art the form of a bird with human head, or human bust and arms; the Harpy has invariably the winged figure of a woman, with no other distinguishing feature, unless it be that in one instance her hands are drawn in a method suggestive of claws. And yet we hear it constantly asserted that the Harpy has sometimes in Greek art the body of a bird, like a Siren; and when a figure occurs which has a bird's body with the upper part of a woman's body, this is still described, as in the old catalogues, as ‘a Siren or Harpy.’

The error has arisen principally owing to the fact that in the later monuments and literary notices the type of the Harpies became assimilated to that of the Sirens.

Following on Josine Blok’s article (this volume), this note assesses the possible historical contexts for the gift of grain to Athens recorded in Philochoros FGrH 328 F119.

The list of Euripidean plays in P.Oxy. 2456, whose primary principle of arrangement is by alphabetical order of first letter, has a secondary principle of arrangement, namely chronology of first performance date. This discovery provides a relative dating, and/or termini ante vel post quos, for 15 plays. The ordering in the papyrus is compared to orderings of other ancient lists of classical dramas, including a list of Aristophanes’ comedies whose arrangement by the same combination of principles was identified by Wilamowitz. A source for this arrangement is proposed, namely Callimachus’ Pinakes.

This paper addresses the following questions about Plato’s concept of ‘history’: (a) is there a ‘philosophy of history’ in Plato’s thought?; (b) if this concept exists, do the dialogues lay out a single, cohesive understanding of ‘history’ or does it vary from text to text?; (c) how does Plato understand the word ‘history’? This inquiry also addresses the role of ‘progress’ in some of the main Platonic dialogues. An in-depth analysis of these texts can also help us find a solution to the problem of the end of ‘history’, when a civilization either physically collapses (due to a catastrophic event) or morally decays (because of the corruption of its citizens and politicians). I argue that Plato’s ‘philosophy of history’ is not necessarily Sisyphean, but that it attempts to work out how to avoid the entropic decay of civilization and to preserve cultural – almost ‘genetic’ – ‘memory’ in order to counter the danger of cyclical regression.

Pythagoras and Empedocles, the earliest pre-Socratic thinkers associated with the doctrine of metempsychosis, are both said to have accounted for their own previous incarnations. This article focuses on lists of their previous lives, here dubbed curriculum uitarum (CVV), and argues that they are revealing not only of the specifics of how metempsychosis is conceptualized by each thinker but also of the way in which they harness poetic authority. The article surveys all the surviving permutations of Pythagoras’ CVV across the tradition and identifies an interplay of different modes of enumeration within them: lists of named human individuals vs lists of life forms. The latter mode is what also defines Empedocles’ much-cited ‘epigram’ (B117 DK) on his past incarnations. Both CVVs are informed by strategic borrowings from Homer: while Empedocles’ list draws on the characterisation of the Iliad’s Nestor and the Odyssey’s Proteus, Pythagoras’ CVV is defined by the constant presence of the Trojan warrior Euphorbus. As is argued, this originates in the nexus of philosophical speculation and poetical exegesis which accrued around Euphorbus’ short-lived but memorable appearance in the Iliad. In-depth engagement with Homer and Homeric exegesis is thus shown to generate philosophical innovation and to form a strong link between the Pythagorean and Empedoclean teachings on metempsychosis.