Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:09:02.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Problem in the Tebtunis Inachus-Fragment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Hugh Lloyd-Jones
Hugh Lloyd-Jones
Affiliation:
Christ Church, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , December 1965 , pp. 241 - 243
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1965

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 241 note 1 There is little to add to the bibliography of the piece given by Page in his Greek Literary Papyri (Loeb Classical Library, 1942, no. 6, p. 22); the detailed discussion by Pfeiffer in S.B. der Bay. Akad. (1938), 2 is indispensable. P. Oxy. 2369 is certainly from the Inachus; this too has been discussed in detail by Pfeiffer (S.B. der Bay. Akad. [1958], 6).

page 241 note 2 To the material assembled to illustrate the meaning of πολυιδρίας by Pfeiffer, cit., pp. 30–31, we may now add ποιμανδρίδαι in a fragment of Aeschylus (P. Oxy. 2256, fr. 71 = fr. 284 Ll.-J., 1. 8; see Lobel's note in the ed. pr.).

page 242 note 1 Fraenkel and Denniston-Page prefer Tr's ὠνόμαζεν to F's ὠνόμαξεν, taking it an instance of the special use of ὀνομάζεινin the imperfect (Fraenkel ii. 329). Barrett on Euripides, Hipp. 32–33 (p. 162) warns us that this special use depends on two dubious instances; but if ἐ is right here, the judgement of the recent editors of the Agamemnon acquires fresh support.

page 242 note 2 See J. Lamer, R.-E. xi. 2519 f. and J. Roeger, ᾌϊδος κυνέη, Diss. Graz (1924) (reviewed by Kretschmer in Glotta xv. 175).

page 242 note 3 For the literature of the subject, see Frisk, Griechisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, p. 34; the reference to Nilsson should now read ‘2nd edn., 455, with notes 4 and 5’. Cf. Felix Solmsen, Uniersuchungen zur griechischen Lautlehre, 71 f.

page 242 note 4 See Dodds on Gorgias 493 b 4.

page 242 note 5 At Aeschylus, P.V. 152 the words of the chorus τὰ πρὶν δὲ πελὼρια νῦν ἀϊστοῖ prompt Prometheus to wish that Zeus had hidden him in Tartarus, lower even than Hades, instead of exposing him to derision in the upper air: εἰ γάρ μ᾽ ὑπὸ γῆν νέρθεν τ᾽ Ἀῑδου τοῦ νεκροδέγμονος εἰς ἀπέραντον Τάρταον ἧκεν, κτλ. Did the word ἀϊστοῖ, by reason of this etymology, suggest the idea of Hades? Compare Agam. 462 f.:

κελαιναὶ δ᾽ Ἐρίνυες χρόνῳ

τυχηρὸnu; ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας

τιθεῖσ᾽ ἀμαυρόν, ἐν δ᾽ ἀῑστοις τελέθοντος οὔτις ἀλκά.