Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:42:04.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Παλίοντονον and Eὐθύτονον

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

E. Phillips Barker
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Great advances have been made of late years in the understanding of ancient artillery, but the difference between the παλíντινιν and the εὐθ⋯τινιν seems to remain a riddle still inviting solution. In tentatively accepting the invitation, we are met at the outset by a certain amount of fog due to the fact that ancient guns were classed by two methods which produce a cross division. It will pay us to dispel this fog, or at any rate to find our bearings in it as exactly as may be, before going further.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , April 1920 , pp. 82 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1920

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.)

References

page 85 note 1 It seems unnecessary now to combat the old view (due to Rüstow and Köchly again) that the μινάγκεν was a late invention: it is accepted now as known in all periods of ancient artillery.

page 86 note 1 Whether the passage of Philo (V. p. 91, 35 ed. Th.), cited above, carries the full implication can hardly be decided.