« السابقةمتابعة »
The Society for the Promotion of hellenic Studies.
Entrance Fee - TWO GUINEAS.
PRESIDENT-WALTER LEAF, Esq., LITT.D., D.LITT.
OBJECTS.-The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies was founded in 1879 for the
I. To advance the study of Greek language, literature, and art, and to illustrate the history
To organize means by which members of the Society may have increased facilities for visiting
Application for membership, or for information about the Society, should be addressed to the
The Journal of Hellenic Studies and other publications of the Society are issued by Messrs.
Members also have the use of a well-equipped library at 19 Bloomsbury Square and of a large
THE CLASSICAL ASSOCIATION
THE objects of the Classical Association are to promote the development and
Membership of the Association is open to men and women alike. The annual
Inquiries and applications for membership should be addressed to the Hon.
Vindiciae Platonicae III. JOHN Burnet.
Corrigenda on the Peruigilium Veneris. J. A. FORT
The MSS. of Callimachus' Hymns (continued).
Caesar's Funeral in Lucan VIII. 729-735. B. L. ULLMAN
Isocratea. M. L. W. LAistner
On Eth. Nic. I. c. 5. C. M. MULVANY
Nuances in Plautine Metre. F. W. HALL
Sophocles, Ajax, 601-3. J. E. HARRY
Nos. 3, 4.
The MSS. of Callimachus' Hymns (concluded). M. T. SMILEY
Πέπτες καλής Αλοσύνης. J. U. POWELL
Plato's Simile of Light. Part I. The Similes of the Sun and the Line. A. S.
Greek Colour-Perception. MAUrice Platnauer
Sappho, Book I. The Nereid Ode. E. LOBEL .
Some Emendations in the Fragments of Theophrastus. E. S. FORSTER
The Oldest Extant MS. of the Combined Abstrusa and Abolita Glossaries.
Some Quotations in the Liber Glossarum. J. F. MOUNTFORD
The Earliest Visible Phase of the Moon.
THE CLASSICAL QUARTERLY
VINDICIAE PLATONICAE III.
SCHANZ never edited either the Parmenides or the Philebus.
For the former
we have minute collations of B and T in Waddell's edition, but the readings of W are still unknown. As, however, Wilamowitz has no suggestions to make about the text of the Parmenides, this does not matter for our present purpose. It seems that this dialogue was transcribed with special care just because of its difficulty. At any rate, its text is remarkably good. For the Philebus I published the readings of T for the first time, and I have now procured a photograph of W in this dialogue from Vienna. Mr. R. G. Bury's edition was an anachronism. Though he published it in 1897, he had apparently never heard of the manuscript T.1 In his note entitled The Text of the Philebus (pp. lxxxii sqq.) he attributes to Schanz a view of the relation between the MSS. which that editor had recanted just twenty years earlier. Except for a few corrections regarding the readings of B (which he calls Ci.), Mr. Bury's own apparatus criticus is merely a reprint of Bekker's, which was published in 1823. For the Symposium we have Schoene's collation of W, which I was able to use in my second edition, and I have now a photograph of that MS. in the Phaedrus too.
13b, 3 τί οὖν δὴ ταὐτὸν ἐν ταῖς κακαῖς ὁμοίως καὶ ἐν ἀγαθαῖς ἐνὸν πάσας ἡδονὰς ἀγαθὸν εἶναι προσαγορεύεις ;
Wilamowitz tells us (p. 353, n. 1) that he had anticipated W. H. Thompson's ἐνορῶν for ἐνὸν here. We must, however, save the very Platonic τί ταὐτὸν . . at all costs, and it would be better to sacrifice máσas dovàs than to tamper with it. I think, however, that one of Stallbaum's suggestions, viz. that évòv is a sort of 'accusative absolute,' may be right. Mr. W. L. Lorimer calls my attention to Andoc. 1, § 92, σκέψασθε τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τοὺς κατηγόρους, τί αὐτοῖς ὑπάρχον . . ἑτέρων κατηγορούσι. There is nothing in Wilamowitz's objection to ἐν ταῖς κακαῖς καὶ év dyabaîs. It is only an instance of the way in which Plato tries to avoid formal symmetry in the use of the article, when the scribes and editors will let him. See Riddell, Dig. § 237.
1 This is the more remarkable as the facts about T were adequately summarized in the late Dr. Adam's school editions of the Apology.
NO. I. VOL. XV.
2 It is true that the MS. reading here is τί . . . ὑπαρχόντων.
15b, 2 εἶτα πῶς αὖ ταύτας (sc. τὰς μονάδας), μίαν ἑκάστην οὖσαν ἀεὶ τὴν αὐτὴν καὶ μήτε γένεσιν μήτε ὄλεθρον προσδεχομένην, ὅμως εἶναι βεβαιότατα μίαν ταύτην.
This is one of the most difficult sentences in Plato, and for that very reason it is likely to have been carefully transcribed. Wilamowitz supposes (as others have done) a lacuna before ὅμως, and thinks some such words as ἐν δὲ τοῖς πολλοῖς paivopérny have fallen ont. That can hardly be right; for it is only after this point φαινομένην has been settled (μerà Sè TOûro) that we are to raise the question of the relation between the 'monads' and the things of sense. I have suggested (Greek Philosophy, Part I., p. 326, n. 2) that the difficulty referred to is how we are to affirm that the 'idea' is one, and that it also is one, a point which has been made in the Parmenides, where we are faced by the dropía that, if we speak of the one as being (êv öv), it appears to become two in our hands.
25d, 7 ἀλλ ̓ ἴσως καὶ νῦν ταὐτὸν δράσει, <εἰ> τούτων ἀμφοτέρων συναγομένων καταφανὴς κἀκείνη γενήσεται.
We must certainly keep raròv Spάore, 'it will do as well even so (kaì vôv).' The phrase occurs also, as Stallbaum pointed out, in Ep. V. 322b, 5 ei μǹ párŋv pèv κινδυνεύσειν ᾤετε, πλέον δ' οὐδὲν ποιήσειν, ταὐτὸν δὴ οἶμαι δρᾶσαι ἂν καὶ τὴν ἐμὴν σvμßovλýv,' would be just as ineffective.' I take it that the phrase is originally a medical one (cf. Spaστikós and Phaed. 117b, 1 avrò moýσe, 'it will act of itself '). Wilamowitz's Tavтòv Spáσaσi was anticipated by Badham, though he afterwards gave it up. As to the ei which Vahlen inserted, Wilamowitz asks how the future can be excused. He thinks we require éàv yévηral. Not at all. We may quite well have εἰ γενήσεται in the sense of εἰ μέλλει γίγνεσθαι, ' if there is a chance of its
being made plain,' which is just the meaning required.
47e, 6 Wilamowitz defends the words τοῖς θυμοῖς καὶ ταῖς ὀργαῖς on the ground that they are required to correspond to the Opvoι κaì nółoι below. That is just the sort of formalism Plato tries to avoid, and anger has been mentioned with sufficient emphasis a few lines before. According to Wilamowitz, the sentence should read:
τὸν ὅστε ἐφέηκεν τοῖς θυμοῖς καὶ ὀργαῖς τὸ πολύφρονά περ χαλεπῆναι,
which he renders Wir müssen an den denken, der den Anfällen des Zornes verstattete, dasz selbst ein Verständiger in Groll geriet. I do not make out whether he means ròv åσte KTA. to refer to Achilles (which is just possible) or to xóλos (which is not). I note, however, that he gives an un-Homeric meaning to épéŋkev, which is immittit, not concedit, and it is unlikely that Plato should have made this mistake.
52d, 8 Perhaps I should not have printed irauóv in my text, but I cannot see the force of Wilamowitz's objection to it. He says that 'ávaídea is apt to dwell not far from ἰταμότης. Precisely. The transposition of καὶ ἱκανόν to follow εἰλικρινὲς, which he suggests, is not new, for it occurred to Jackson and Bury (see the latter's note).
610, 7 ὡς οιόμεθα.
Wilamowitz writes os óuela and says: The easy mistake has accidentally not been observed.' On the contrary, Badham said the words ws olópela were 'quite hopeless,' and he would not have hesitated to write os óuela if he had thought that would mend matters.
662, 4 Πάντῃ δὴ φήσεις, ὦ Πρώταρχε, ὑπό τε ἀγγέλων πέμπων καὶ παροῦσι φράζων, ὡς ἡδονὴ κτῆμα οὐκ ἔστι πρῶτον οὐδ ̓ αὖ δεύτερον, ἀλλὰ πρῶτον μέν τῇ περὶ μέτρον καὶ τὸ μέτριον καὶ καίριον καὶ πάντα ὁπόσα χρὴ τοιαῦτα νομίζειν, τὴν †ἀίδιον ᾑρῆσθαι. (So BW : εἰρῆσθαι φάσιν Τ).