This paper examines the distribution of thematic infinitive endings in early Greek epic in the context of the long-standing debate about the transmission and development of Homeric epic diction. There are no aorist infinitives in -έμεν in Homer which would scan as ◡◡ – before a consonant or caesura (for example *βαλέμεν): instead we find unexplained forms in -έειν (for example βαλέειν). It is argued that this artificially ‘distended’ ending -έειν should be viewed as an actual analogical innovation of the poetic language, resulting from a proportional analogy to the ‘liquid’ futures. The total absence of aoristic -έειν in Hesiod is unlikely to be coincidental: the analogical form must have been the product of a specifically East Ionic Kunstsprache, and so could have been simply unknown in some other Ionian school of epic poetry where Hesiod was trained. Finally, the striking avoidance of anapaestic aorist infinitives in -έειν is argued to be explained better under the ‘diffusionist’ approach to the Aeolic elements in Homeric diction than under the ‘Aeolic phase’ theory.

In describing the sacred grove () of Asklepios in the territory of Epidaurus, Pausanias (ii 27.1) mentions two of the rules that were in force there: (he has just mentioned that the ἄλσος is surrounded on all sides by boundary stones), and, secondly,

Those about to give birth or to die were eventually accommodated immediately outside the peribolos in a building constructed for them in Pausanias' own time by ‘Antoninus, a Senator’. The eating accommodation was provided earlier, most obviously in the building generally described as the καταγώγιον. Since this lies between the temple of Asklepios and the theatre, which is itself, according to Pausanias we can assume that sacrificial meat consumed in it had not been taken outside the boundaries.

I do not know of any book or published paper devoted to Cleostratus. In the indexes to most histories of astronomy you will seek his name in vain, and, where you do find it, you are referred to a few jejune paragraphs or more often to a single sentence. Boll in his Sphaera (1903) honours him with three pages (191–194), based on a passage in Pliny and a scholium on Euripides, but he misinterprets both passages and holds one of them to be based on a misunderstanding of some older writer. Nearly all the passages bearing on him are to be found with notes of varying value in Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ii. (1912), pp. 197, 198, where they occupy rather more than a page. Some valuable comments and one reference which is not in Diels will be found in Breithaupt's treatise De Parmenisco Grammatico (1915). And yet, for all this neglect, there are attributed to Cleostratus two capital contributions to Greek astronomy, viz. the introduction of the signs of the zodiac and the authorship of the eight years' cycle of intercalations.

In my publication of the al Mina excavations (JHS LVIII, 7-9) I argued that although al Mina itself, owing to the disappearance of the greater part of the ancient site, produced no remains earlier than the eighth century B.C. yet that it existed in a much earlier period could be deduced from the evidence afforded by the ‘residential’ town at Sabouni where Attic black-figured and Mycenaean pottery were found. Further evidence is now available. In 1947 we found in a pocket in the steep side of the acropolis one of the well-known ’dolly’ Mycenaean figurines; this was important because the few Mycenaean sherds previously discovered might just as well have been of the Xllth century, i.e. posterior to the invasion of the Peoples of the Sea which marked the beginning of a new era in North Syrian history, whereas the figurine is definitely earlier than that catastrophe. This year (1948) two of the peasants who cultivate the hill site brought me three seals found by them when ploughing; all are earlier than 1200 B.C. and one cylinder belongs to the first half of the second millennium. The connection between Sabouni and the port of al Mina is perfectly clear for all the periods represented on the latter site and should hold good for the earlier periods also. If Sabouni, and ex hypothesi al Mina, were flourishing at the time when Alalakh was a royal city we can be sure that al Mina was the port of Alalakh through which the Syrian town had its contacts—amply illustrated by our discoveries—with Cyprus and Crete. I originally chose the two sites for excavation on the theory that such was the case; now for the first time we have direct evidence for their being contemporary.

This article uses evidence drawn from hymenaios and wedding ritual to reach a new interpretation of the third stasimon of the Hippolytos, and its rôle in the play. There is longstanding contention about whether a second (male) chorus participates in the ode, singing in antiphony with the existing tragic chorus. Even scholars who accept that a second chorus is present have tended to regard it as an aberration which needs to be explained away, rather than a deliberate choice with poetic significance. I discuss the cultural implications of such a chorus, examining our evidence for real-life mixed choruses, and then applying this to the ode itself. The evidence for mixed choruses suggests they are strongly associated with marriage. Looking more closely at the language and imagery of the ode, there are allusions to the topoi of wedding songs and ritual running through it. The ode can use these as a device to trigger deep-rooted responses and associations from the audience, as these motifs are drawn from the cultural tradition which the audience shares. The topoi tie in with the theme of marriage and sexuality within the Hippolytos as a whole. But while their usual purpose is to set up conventional models and ways of thinking, the way they are deployed in the ode in fact serves to undermine these models, and to put a darker spin on the norms of sexual behaviour. This strand of imagery therefore also provides a filter for interpreting Hippolytos' own attitude towards sexuality, and a guide to how we are meant to respond to it.

The monumental work of Professor Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain, must always remain the basis of any study among English collections of antiques. But since its publication in 1882 not a few collections have changed hands, others have been dispersed, while others, more fortunate, have been enlarged; in these various processes much that was unknown even to Michaelis has come to light, and he himself soon supplemented his great work by two important papers printed in this Journal in 1884 and 1885. He prefaced the first of these supplementary papers with the following words:

‘I cannot help thinking that there must be in Great Britain a good deal of bidden treasure…which would perhaps easier come to light if there were a place expressly destined to receive such communications…I have therefore ventured to propose to the Editors to open in this Journal a corner for storing up such supplements…As a first instalment, I here offer some notes which may begin the series…May other lovers and students of the Classic art, especially in Great Britain, follow my example.’

Aëtius ii 20.1 (DK 12A21) Aëtius ii 25.1 (DK 12A22), on the moon, is similar, ending

It is generally supposed that is the nozzle of a bellows; but G. E. R. Lloyd, Polarity and analogy 313 ff. is doubtful of this interpretation, pointing out that only one, doubtful, parallel can be cited for this meaning of πρηστήρ, and that the nozzle of a bellows does not emit fire. He concludes, however, that if πρηστήρ has its normal, meteorological, sense, ‘it seems impossible to interpret … αὐλός … for this must surely refer to some sort of pipe or tube and this seems quite inappropriate to such phenomena as lightning or whirlwinds … “Bellows” … appears to give the best sense for this difficult phrase’.

My purpose here is to show that has a good meteorological sense. According to Aristotle Mete. 371a15 ff., the πρηστήρ is a variant of the τυφῶν, which is a whirlwind (370b22) which forms within a cloud (ib. 28), and, being unable to separate itself from the cloud, descends to the earth, bringing the cloud with it (371a9, ff., and especially 11 ff. ). This seems to be the ‘tornado’ or the ‘waterspout’ of modern meteorology. A tornado is ‘a very intense, progressive whirl, of small diameter … From the violently-agitated main cloud-mass above there usually hangs a writhing funnel-shaped cloud …’ The ‘funnel-shaped cloud’ is presumably the cloud which Aristotle's whirlwind ‘draws down with it’.

Asia Minor, interposed like a bridge between Europe and Asia, has been from time immemorial a battlefield between the Eastern and Western races. Across this bridge the arts, civilisation, and religion of the East had passed into Greece; and back over the same bridge they strove to pass beautified and elevated from Greece into Asia. The progress of the world has had its centre and motive power in the never-ceasing collision of Eastern and Western thought, which was thus produced in Asia Minor. One episode in the long conflict has been chosen by Herodotus as the subject of his prose epic: but the struggle did not stop at the point he thought. It has not yet ended, though it has long ceased to be of central importance in the world's history. For centuries after he wrote Greek influence continued to spread, unhindered, further and further into Asia: but as the Roman empire decayed, the East again became the stronger, and Asia Minor has continued under its undisputed influence almost up to the present day. Now the tide has again turned, and one can trace along the western coast the gradual extinction of the Oriental element. It does not retreat, it is not driven back by war: it simply dies out by a slow yet sure decay. It is the aim of this set of papers to throw some light on one stage in this contest, a stage probably the least known of all, the first attempts of the Greek element to establish itself in the country round the Hermus. Tradition has preserved to us little information about the first Greek settlements. The customary division into Aeolic, Ionic, and Doric colonists is not a sufficient one. Strabo clearly implies that there was a double Aeolic immigration when he says (p. 622) that Cyme founded thirty cities, and that it was not the first Aeolic settlement; in another passage (p. 582) he makes the northern colonists proceed by land through Thrace, the southern direct by sea to Cyme. I hope by an examination of the country and the situations, never as yet determined, of the minor towns, to add a little to the history of this Southern Aeolic immigration, in its first burst of prosperity, through the time when it was almost overwhelmed in the Lydian and Persian empires and was barely maintained by the strength of the Athenian confederacy, till it was finally merged in the stronger tide of Greek influence that set in with the victory of Alexander. More is known of Myrina, and still more of Cyme, than of any of the other towns: but both are omitted here, because it may be expected that considerable light will be thrown on the history of both by the excavations conducted on their sites by the French School of Athens. Till their results are published, it would be a waste of time to write of either city.

Questions about authorship have plagued the corpus of Demosthenic orations since antiquity. In particular, scholars often assign certain speeches (usually 46, 49, 50, 52, 53 and 59; sometimes also 47 and 51) to Apollodorus, son of Pasion. We apply an innovative approach to the problem, using morphosyntactic information from dependency treebanks. From the treebank annotation we create input data for various well-established computational approaches to authorship attribution. The usefulness of the input data is first tested with clustering algorithms. We then make finer distinction with a logistic regression classifier. All steps are explained in detail for the benefit of those unfamiliar with computational stylometry. In broadest terms, our results are remarkably consistent with the common opinion about the orations, identifying 49, 50, 52 and 53 as written by a single author, who was not Demosthenes (presumably Apollodorus). We also discuss syntactic traits that are peculiarly ‘Apollodoran’ or ‘Demosthenic’. However, we demonstrate that the data point away from both authors for Dem. 46 and 51, while conclusions about 47 and 59 are ambiguous.

The purpose of this article is somewhat ambitious. It is proposed to adduce evidence in support of the thesis, which the writer has already briefly maintained elsewhere, that the majority of the dates, earlier than the period of the Persian Wars, which pass current in our Greek history text-books, are wrong, and should be ‘scaled down’ by a certain proportion of their distance from 500 B.C. The virtue of 500 B.C. as a base-line lies simply in the fact that it falls in the middle of the generation that saw the beginnings of Greek historical prose writing in the hands of Hekataios of Miletos and others.

The genius of Herodotos, the considerable amount of contemporary information gleaned by later Greek scholars from the early elegiac, lyric and iambic poets, the vivid personalities of these poets themselves, and the systematising labours of generations of logographers and historians, ultimately reduced to order by Eratosthenes and transmitted to us by Eusebios—all these conspire to obscure from us the fact that the whole Archaic period in Greece is not an historic but a proto-historic age; an age known to us, not from contemporary historical writings, but through a synthesis of archaeology, references to historic events in a literature still exclusively poetic, references to our area in historical documents from a more mature adjacent region (such as Assyria), and genealogies and oral traditions that survived long enough to be written down later.

This set of instruments and the large beaker were found about three years ago near the site of Kolophon in Ionia. The objects are thirty-seven in number. With two exceptions all are of bronze. The blades of the knives were originally of steel, but this metal has in each case been almost destroyed by oxidation. The date is uncertain—it may have been before the Christian era but is more probably the first or second century A.D. The glass beaker belongs to a type which is said to occur so late as the fourth century.

At Cyrene, during the summer of 1947, the Antiquities Department of the British Military Administration of Cyrenaica cleared fallen debris from some of the Hellenistic tombs to the northeast of the city, and near the line of the modern road to Apollonia. In the course of these operations some intact burials came to light.

A few years ago R. M. Ogilvie argued against the widely-held view that Theocritus in Idyll i represents the cowherd Daphnis as another Hippolytus, martyred in the cause of Chastity. Nevertheless the view he attacked has been revived in a recent study of Theocritus' pastorals:

‘The chaste Daphnis … died rather than submit to Aphrodite … Both Hippolytus and Daphnis are chaste and wish to preserve their purity at all costs, even that of death … Both heroes are deeply committed to chastity … Daphnis … a true tragic hero, resists all temptation and so pines away to his death.

The second neolithic period in Eastern Thessaly is sharply severed from the first by the intrusion of a new culture which appears as something foreign and alien on the shores of the Pagasean Gulf. The pottery, for example, seems utterly different from that of the first period. The forms belong to a distinct series and are typologically older. The absence of feet and strap handles, so well developed in the A wares, precludes us from deriving Dimini ware from any of the latter. The characteristic designs, too, based on the spiral and the meander, are entirely foreign to the earlier series. Moreover, the use of fortifications beginning with this pottery (the traces of an earlier wall at Sesklo are exceedingly problematical), and restricted to its area, heightens this impression of foreignness. So too do the ‘megaron’ houses of Dimini and Sesklo, which do not seem to find their explanation in the curvilinear or square huts of the first period.

As to the provenance of this culture, the recent declaration of Sir Arthur Evans, that the origin of the spiral motive in Minoan ceramics is not to be sought in Crete itself, should dispose of the only reason for deriving it from the south; for there seems no ground for supposing that the Cycladic spirals antedate those of Dimini. Indeed I have argued in a previous paper, and my conclusion has been supported by more recent investigations, that Thessaly II. must be dated well back in the Early Cycladic Period. On the other hand, the theory of a northern origin has been strengthened by the discovery of Dimini ware in the Strymon valley. Indeed the general analogies between Dimini ware and the widespread group of painted and incised spiral-meander pottery north of the Balkans have been long recognised, and elaborate theories of an invasion, not only of Thessaly, but even of Crete itself, have been built up thereon.

This paper is principally concerned with two fifth century Athenian inscriptions and their interpretation. The first, IG i2 19, was discovered on the Akropolis and first published by Ulrich Köhler in 1867. Some twenty years later it was re-examined by H. G. Lolling, who was the first to see that it concerned relations between Athens and Egesta. It has subsequently been the object of the usual ingenious attempts at restoration. I give below a conservative text.

The route by which the army of Xerxes marched across the plateau of Anatolia has never been determined with certainty. On general considerations it may be stated with perfect confidence that the army crossed the Taurus by the pass of the Cilician Gates. The reasons are conclusive; there was, in fact, no other way, and the matter is so generally admitted as to need no discussion. Thereafter the great army gathered on the north side of Taurus at a place called Kritala in Cappadocia (Herodotus, vii. 26). Whether Kritala was a town or a locality (such as a plain with a river) is not stated; but, taking into consideration all the conditions, one can say with certainty that it was situated either in the fertile plain of Tyana or in the equally fertile and well-watered plain that lies between Kybistra and the lake called in modern times Ak-Gyol. The next point stated exactly by Herodotus in the route of the army is Kelainai at the source of the Maeander. The question is how the journey was performed between those points, the Cilician Pass on the east and Kelainai on the west.

Aristotle and Theophrastus are the two major sources for our knowledge of the atomist theory of weight.

In the De generatione et corruptione Aristotle argues that one atom may be hotter than another and that therefore the atoms cannot be impassible, since an atom which is only slightly hot could not fail to be acted upon by an atom that was very much hotter (i 8 325b36–26a14, esp. 326a6–12 = in part DK 68A60). The premiss to the argument Aristotle derives in part from a comparison with weight. It would be ridiculous, he claims, to suppose that hotness and coldness belong to the atoms, but that heaviness and lightness, hardness and softness do not belong to them (326a6–8). And in fact, he continues, Democritus does claim (καίτοι…γε… φησίν) that each of the ‘indivisibles’ is βαρύτερον…κατὰ τὴν ὑπεροχήν (a9–10). Aristotle has already supposed that one kind of atom, a round atom, may be accounted as hot (a3–5). The use of the comparative for weight (βαρύτερον) Aristotle now takes to justify the use of the comparative for heat (θερμότερον a10–11): from this there follows the argument that the atoms cannot be impassible.

In 1908 there was excavated at Rhitsona a particularly richly furnished single-interment grave that included among the 400 odd items of its furniture two comparatively insignificant black-figure vases, a little spout vase and a lekythos, the interest of which was not immediately recognised. Recent work on the black-figure pottery of Boeotia shows that these two vases belong to the same fabric as the famous lekane in the British Museum, B 80, which has been the subject of much controversy in the matter of its origin and date as well as of the interpretation of the scenes upon it.

As the last of his ‘artis metricae scriptorum testimonia’ for Stesichorus, 275 (b), Page gives the following entry: ‘Suda iv 586 A[dler] s.v. τρία Στησιχόρου … ἐπῳδικὴ γὰρ πᾶσα ἡ Στησιχόρου ποίησις; Diogenian. cent. vii 14 (et alii) οὐδὲ τὰ τρία Στησιχόρου γινώσκεις, sim. al., vid. L–S ad loc. i 288’. There are, in fact, far more testimonia than indicated by the out-dated and rather meagre note of Leutsch-Schneidewin, and it is essential to discover the way in which these various references are phrased. For an attempt to reach the original form of the proverb, and an interpretation based on the exact wording of this original, was the basis of Otto Crusius’ ‘Stesichorus und die epodische Composition in der gr. Lyrik’, the only truly critical examination of the proverb's various forms and sources that has so far been undertaken.