Explication of the meaning of the proverb νυκτιπλοεῖς quoted by Chrysippus of Soli

Scholars traditionally endeavour to interpret Nonnus’ gargantuan, mythologically encyclopedic Dionysiaca – the most important imperial Greek epic – by studying its key themes, including Dionysus’ path towards apotheosis (attained after defeating the Indians). This article contends that the epic regularly hints at a concurrent, greater enterprise on Dionysus’ part, that is, his potential succession to Zeus. It also argues that some of the poem’s chief digressions, Dionysus’ love affairs, are connected to this prospect. This reading of the Dionysiaca sheds new light on Nonnus’ interest in succession – an interest with metapoetic, generic, political and religious roots.

The standard view is that Nola was besieged after the civil war of 83-82, and that its Samnite garrison did not surrender to Sulla until 80. The proof text for this chronology is unreliable, and this article puts forward new arguments for the alternative dating of the fall of Nola to the winter of 82/81. Nola opened its gates at the mere threat of a siege, and I argue that the Samnite garrison mutinied against its commander, the proscribed C. Papius Mutilus, to secure favourable terms of surrender. If Aesernia also capitulated in 82/81, then the settlement of Sulla’s veterans in Campania could have started in 81, not 80. In postwar Italy there was no armed resistance to Sulla except in Etruria, at Populonia and Volaterrae, and further north in Liguria.

After her final exchange with Oedipus, Jocasta withdraws into the palace, followed some time later by Oedipus. When he does not immediately find her, he demands that the attendants bring him a sword. But before they can even react, he discovers Jocasta, who has hung herself in her chamber. What Oedipus had intended to do with the sword is a disputed question of interpretation. That he wanted to kill Jocasta for her role in his abandonment as an infant, as has been suggested, seems improbable. Oedipus’ request must be motivated by a more immediate cause. His intention emerges if one takes into account that Oedipus and Jocasta had already, independently of each other, mentioned the possibility of suicide in the course of the drama. Jocasta had just hinted at this course of action during the final exchange with Oedipus and thereby planted the idea of carrying out a double suicide in his mind.

This study addresses the issues of the reliability of sources on Archaic Greek tyranny and of the synchronising tendency in structuralist analyses of Greek tyrant-myths by focusing on the contemporary discourse on early Greek tyrants. Section 1 re-examines the earliest attestations of the τυρανν- root to determine the associations of the tyrant in contemporary discourse; contrary to consensus, these appear to be overwhelmingly negative in the surviving fragments of early Greek lyric, though positive discourse about specific tyrants is preserved in later narratives. Section 2 studies the contemporary narrative of a specific named person called τύραννοϲ (Alcaeus’ depiction of Pittacus) to investigate how contemporary tyrannic discourse could develop into tyrant-myths.

This paper defends O’s diversae at Propertius 3.3.33 as announcing the diversity of the Muses and their tasks, and explains O’s rura in the same line as a learned Hellenism exploiting the different meanings of χώρα. It argues that lines 33-36 are a Hellenising quatrain closely rendering a Greek original, probably by Philetas, and that the three Muses of lines 35-36 represent comedy, lyric, and elegy respectively, the first being Thalia. The other Muses can also be named, but with less confidence.

Two ancient commentators on Aristotle’s De interpretatione, namely Olympiodorus and the so-called Anonymus Coislinianus, quote the definition of ὄνομα stated at the beginning of the second chapter of this treatise in a version which differs from that testified by our manuscripts in being enriched by two additional characteristics. As Michael Krewet has convincingly argued, the text of this version is very likely to be the authentic one. In the present article his view is, on the one hand, defended against the rival view held by Elio Montanari, which he failed to take into account, and, on the other hand, improved by an hypothesis which better than that advanced by him explains how those parts of the more extensive version of the definition which are missing in our manuscripts could get lost. Finally, the presumably genuine text of the opening section of De int. 2 is reconstructed.

The paper argues on 1) grammatical, 2) stylistical, and 3) literary grounds that Synesius’ Calvitii encomium 3 which he ascribes to his admired Dio of Pruse as ‘Praise of Hair’ is in fact spurious. 1) One strikingly unusual grammatical construction (i. e., ὡς ἄν with participle of perfect middle-passive, and that in causal sense) is found only in the allegedly Dios ‘Praise’ in Calv. enc. 3,1/193,6 and outside of it in the same text in 6,2/200,15. This seems to point to Synesius’ authorship of Calv. enc. 3, even though the construction appears once in Dios Orations, too. 2) The chapter in question also appears to follow Late Antique rules for stress-accents at clause-ends which were not used in Greek literature of Dios time. 3) Synesius was fond of construing literary identities, of imitating other authors or of taking over inspirations, which points to the fact that he is the author of the amiably cunning forgery.

This paper highlights a SERENE acrostic in Lucan’s encomium of Cato (BC 9.600-605) and interprets it against the background of Seneca’s De Constantia Sapientis 6.8-7.1, where the author, addressing Serenus (Serene), presents Cato the Younger as the perfect embodiment of virtus. Lucan’s SERENE and the passage decorated by it might thus be read as alluding to Seneca’s Serene and its entire context. As I argue, this intertextual acrostic makes Lucan able to join Seneca’s argumentation in a metaleptic way.

So far, a passage in Philodemus’ Index Stoicorum (PHerc. 1018) has caused serious problems concerning the meaning of single words and concerning the overall content (Phld. Ind. Stoic. col. 60). The new reading of an adjective now allows for a more meaningful translation and coherent interpretation: Despite his great capacities, Panaetius decided to hold the philosophical preparatory course for the scholarch Antipater. He was irreproachable in his teachings, until he finally took over the headship of the school.