75

and

Word-order
and Demetrius,

in Sophron

'ekaoth

On Poems

2, cols.

55-60*

to poetry,1
the On
of Epicurean
mentioned
sometimes
approaches
together as examples
Although
are
both preserved only in papyrus copies from Herculaneum,
and Demetrius,
Poems
by Philodemus
most
The
Demetrius'
treatise.
contain
of
Three
different
works.
fragments
papyri may
really very
<Claudius>
Nero2 and
substantial of these, P. Here.
1014, contains a closing address to an unidentified
as
rest
a subscription
the
The
2
and
author.
of
the
roll
consists
of
it
Book
naming
largely
identifying
and discussion
of rhetorical figures. P. Here.
188 provides more
various material on poetic composition
to
1.
little
It
but references
from
continuous
Book
sense,
material,
supplies
probably
fragmentary
a Peripatetic
to the mid-third
theorist probably
century BC,
dating roughly
poetic
some of
at
and also criticized
in part by Theophrastus,
that
least
suggest
by Philodemus,3
over
more
to
that book may have been given
general accounts of poetic theory. A third papyrus, P.
the most recent editor of On Poems,
be
also
doubts the
Here.
relevant,
Romeo,
1113a, may
though
Andromenides,
influenced

to Demetrius

and suggests
instead that the author may be
(originally made by Cr?nert4),
has recently argued that the hand can hardly be later than the second
the Philodemus
papyri must obviously
belong to the first.

attribution
Philodemus.5

however,

Dorandi,

century BC,6 while

The identity of the author of On Poems
1014 simply gives his name as 'Demetrius'.

is still not firmly established;

to P. Here.
the subscription
earlier
favoured
the
Deme
Although
opinion
Peripatetic
at least four books (cf. Athen.
10. 452 D, 12. 548 D, 14.

trius of Byzantium,
his On Poems comprised
to P. Here.
the closing
1014 looks very much
like the end of the work.7
633 AB), while
passage
now inclines to Demetrius
of Laconia, who probably taught inMiletus
but clearly had Roman
Opinion
are well
at Herculaneum,
attested
His works
there by Philodemus
connections.8
perhaps brought
an
and the address to Nero parallels
that found to
at the end of his
himself,
Quintus
again unidentified
On

the Gods.

and style are also broadly

Language

consistent

with

this Demetrius'

authorship.

Demetrius

Romeo (1988) refers to C. Romeo, Demetrio Lacone: La Poes?a, La Scuola di Epicuro, 9: Naples; Obbink (1995) to
D. Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and Poetry, Oxford; De Falco (1923) toV. De Falco, L'epicureo Demetrio Lacone, Naples.
I examined
supplements;
a new

cols.

publish

new

edition

in Naples
in June, 2002,
to confirm
and was
able
of Romeo's
several
to this discussion,
these are mentioned
in the text or footnotes.
1 plan to
16 in a forthcoming
book on Sophron's
to the staff of the
mimes.
I am grateful

1014

of P. Here.

55-60
I have

where

relevant

readings
as fr.
of all six columns

Officina dei Papiri and the Biblioteca Nazionale for their assistance, and to the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, under
this work
auspices
who made
several

whose
Janko,
here

as Janko

(per

was

about

suggestions

financial
assistance.
provided
generously
at an early stage and then comments
the papyrus

that Varro

also

on

to Richard

indebted

the finished

cited

article,

litt.).

1On
Epicurean poetics in general, see E. Asmis
2 Romeo

I am also

and which

undertaken,

(1988),
wrote

66-7,
an On

the T. Claudius

suggests
Poems

(on which,

inObbink (1995), 15-34.

Nero

to whom

cf. E. Rawson,

Varro's

Intellectual

ad Neronem
Epistulam
Life
in the Late Roman

was

addressed,

Republic,

London

noting
and

Baltimore, 1985, 279f.)

3 For
Andromenides,
Oxford,

2000,

143-54.

and
Janko

his

on euphony
his probable
date

theories

discusses

see
and word-selection,
status as a Peripatetic

and

now

R.

Janko,

Philodemus.

on pp.

151-2;

cf. also Romeo

and C. Mangoni, Philodemo, il quinto libro della Po?tica, La Scuola di Epicuro, 14:Naples,
4W.
Cr?nert, Kolotes undMenedemus, Leipzig, 1906, 106.

On

Poems
(1988),

1,
50,

1993, 277-9.

5Romeo(1988),79f.
6T. Dorandi, ZPE 91, 1992, 33; cf. R. Janko inObbink (1995), 86, and Janko (n. 3), 16 n. 2.1 have had no opportunity
to examine

either

P. Here.

188 or

1113a.

7 Cr?nert

(n. 4), 105-6.

8 Cf. De Falco
(1923), 83-4. For the evidence relating toDemetrius, see E. Puglia, Demetrio Lacone: Aporie testuali ed
esigetiche inEpicuro (P. Here. 1012), La Scuola di Epicuro, 8: Naples, 1988.

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

J. Hordern

76

was

of Laconia

probably a rough, perhaps

school in Athens from about

of Zeno

of Sidon,
the head of
to the early 70s BC. Demetrius
inP. Here.
him with affection
1012 (cols 44, 2 and 50, 6), though his name comes after
at Diogenes
Laertius
10. 25-6.9 Zeno also wrote on poetry;
in the list of prominent Epicureans

the Epicurean
twice mentions
Zeno's

slightly older, contemporary

the end of the second century

a list of his writings, mentions

a keqx 7COir|p(XTC?vxprjcecoc; its
a general
to reconstruct,
but the title, at least, suggests
is difficult
theoretical
treatise
precise content
as
we
one
a
extant
the
find in the
of style such
technical discussion
sections of Demetrius'
rather than

P. Here.

col. x, which

1005,

contains

were dated to the second century BC by Cavallo;

to Demetrius
Janko
papyri belonging
a
to
not
be
the
first
re-ascribed
but
wonders whether
(late) second century dating
they should
century,10
connection with Zeno. It would also suit Dorandi's
could well fit with the dates implied by Demetrius'
2. The

Book

1113a.
dating of P. Here.
In Book 2, Demetrius

himself

devotes

largely

to an account

of technical

of which

discussion

and poetic technique,

Philodemus,
by contrast, broadly
at some length examples
from the mimes of Sophron.12 Sophron wrote
discusses
in prose dealing with comic scenes from everyday
how short) dramatic sketches
into p?poi

men's
and women's
mimes
yuvaiKEioi,
sex
to
the
character
reflect
the
main
of
own,13 appears
appear in either. An interest in character-drawing
evidently

sex could
opposite
in Diogenes
brief reference
coarseness

life. They were divided

(Suda, c 893). This division,
only; minor characters of the

and p?poi

ccv?pe?oi
Sophron's

probably

of composition
In particular, he
short (we do not know

questions
eschews.11

Aristotle

and bawdy humour.

son Xenarchus,
with

the extant

but

Laertius,14

present
fragments
1. 1447a 28) had grouped
the mimes,
and those of
of Teos as prose mimesis,15
and
of Alexamenus
dialogues
statement
and Aristotle's
in his On Poets
73
(fr.
R.3) that

(Poet.

the Socratic

Sophron's
thus a form of

may be indicated by a
more
evidence
for simple

7coir|cic. This classification,

for
Plato's dialogues were half-way between poetry and prose, may have been in part the starting-point
the
like
the
of
and
extreme
that
works
Heracleodorus'
mimes,
Herodotus,
prose
Xenophon,
position
this
well
view
should be considered
Demosthenes,
goes
7to(i)r|paT(x,16
beyond
although
clearly
on
defined
the
basis
and
Heracleodorus
of
word-order
intended.
Aristotle
'poetry' solely
anything
than metrical

rather

euphony,

form. Philodemus,

for the fundamental

importance
in the strict sense.17 Whether
7co(i)r|paxa
of the mime
extensive
discussion
suggests
argued

9 Cf. Romeo

(1988),

26-32.

Libri

scritture

10
G. Cavallo,

scribi

of form

a Ercolano,

in his rebuttal of Heracleodorus'

by contrast,
as well as content,
and so did not regard

Demetrius
not,

CErc

have accepted
this view
is unclear; his
to
his own general theory of poetry is difficult

would

though

Suppl.

views,
as
p?poi

1:Naples,

(n. 3), 5 n. 6.

Janko

1983;

11Cf.
esp. Phld. De poem. 5 col. 26, with D. Blank inObbink (1995), 185f.
12

are cited

of Sophron

Fragments

R. Kassel

after

and C. Austin,

Poetae

Comici

vol.

Graeci,

1, Berlin

and New

York,

2001.
13 It is not an obvious
14D.
cai

Kai

L. 3.

18 (test.

fiGoTcoifjcai

one

for a later editor

6 K.-A.)

rcp?c

?oke?

atrc?v

(cf.

??

to make.

?l^?xcov

J. M.

Kai

S. McDonald,

...
x? Cc?xppovoc
?i??ia
Character-Portraiture

r\?iEXr\^?va
in Epicharmus,

rcpcoxoc

eic

Sophron,

?iockou?
'A0r|vac
and Plato, Diss.

Columbia, 1931); but this statement may just be a development of the common but dubious tradition that Plato was
influenced by Sophron.
15Arist. fr. 72 R.3
(ap. Athen. 11. 505 C) and an Aristotelian papyrus from Oxyrhynchus (P. Oxy. 3219) make the
connection with Alexamenus (test. 2-4 K-A). Cf. M. W. Haslam, B/CS 19 (1972), 17-38.
16Fr. 10 Janko
(ap. Janko (n. 3), 158), quoted at Phld. De poem. 1, col. 199 pp. 428-9 Janko. On Heracleodorus
generally,
for
basis
Sophr.
proper

see

Janko

(n. 3),

the essentially
test.
19 K-A)

cola
17
Cf.

or clausulae
Phld.

De

5, col.

but does

not mention,

(rare in antiquity,
though
a form of 'rhythmical
wrote
find in later prose authors.

view

that Sophron
such as we

poem.

he cites,

155-65;

modern

Aristotle.

apparently
prose',

though

are also
the
probably
to Gregory
Nazianzus:
in the extant
suggests
fragments
statements

Aristotle's
influential

for a scholion

nothing

12, 20-4.

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and exXoyri

Word-order

in Sophron

On Poems

and Demetrius,

77

common
to
1. However,
it was certainly
of Book
practice
fragments
describe mimes as rcovnpccxa and Sophron himself as 7coir|xr|c.18
Reading On Poems can be difficult work. The script is often hard to decipher due to the carbonized
state of the papyrus, and both the tops and bottoms of columns tend to be particularly
poorly preserved;
and the scribe is prone to occasional
sections can normally be read with any confidence,
only the middle
reconstruct

from

the scattered

at least,
but Demetrius
characteristic
of Epicureans,
is, usually
slips. Sloppy writing was allegedly
covers
to
the
The
of
and
discussion
mime
six
concise
so)
(sometimes
surviving
confusingly
point.19
in col. 55, though the extremely
coherent
the end of Book 2. It first becomes
towards
columns
at 55, 6). The extant
the
dealt
with
54
col.
also
subject (cf. 7tpo?KK?ip?[voic
probably
fragmentary
section

of the discussion

three other of Sophron's

7i?p(pepe, Koikocc, xov cku?ov

'bring the full cup, Koikoa'

14

Fr.

15 x?Amvoc Koik?cc,
'wretched Koikoa,
17

to a slave-girl

called Koikoa,

a name we

know

from

fragments:

Fr.

Fr.

a reference

with

begins

pecc?v

Kax? %eip?c ?ouca ?rco?oc 7cox' ?p?v x?v Tparce?av

quick, pour water for our hands and give us our food'

7iip7r?,r| ??, Koikooc

'fill, Koikoa
(se. the cups)'

title of the piece is not recorded, but fragments

14 and 15 are quoted as coming from the women's
mimes
these three quotations
(Athen. 9. 380 E and 408 F respectively).
Clearly
together, and
belong
a
a
scene
one
or
more
to
in
her
which
mistress
and
friends with
Koikoa,
point
serving-girl,
provided
at Demetrius,
col. 55, 7 implies that she at least appeared as a character
food and drink. 8?cayop?v[r|c]
The

(though she was probably not the main one), rather than simply being named by one of other women;
indicate anything about the actual manner of performance.
but it does not necessarily,
of course,
The
no more
mime may have had some influence on Herodas
than the first few lines are
9, of which
but which
clearly depicted women
preserved,
together and included criticism of a maid
breakfasting
abuse of her slave-girl Eunoa at Theocr.
15. 27ff., a poem based on
servant.20 Similar is also Praxinoa's
is not attested elsewhere;
earlier scholars attempted
another of Sophron's mimes.21 The name Koikoa
to
animal sounds such as Ko?^ or koi (koi?eiv).22
representing
like Rhongka
names,
'speaking'
though they are usually more transparent,
or
Trello (fr. 126).23
(fr. 46),
(fr. 22), Cothonias
Demetrius'
discussion
supports an onomatopoetic
explanation:

derive

it from known

fondness

words

Sophron

for

has a

(fr. 2), Physka

Koc[ixtjv] |??T|0r|av x[o]? Xe%Qe[vxoc]|ucp' T]pcovp?c(i)oi?v ?cx[iv] I5cuvi?e?v ?7u[?cxM,ov]|xac xo?c

7ipo?KK?ip?[voic] |vue* xfjc ?icayop?v[r|c] | yuvociK?c KoiK?av p?v J y?p vopaxo7tor|C?v I10[xf)]v
[?]ou?ir|v ^?vi?[ou|cav]

p. 120 R.).

55, 2-11,

t\ [cp]r|av Ka??[v24-(col.

18Cf. Kassel - Austin

(n. 12) on Sophr. test. 19 (p. 190).
19
Cf. Cic.

1. 14; Tuse.

De fin.

20 See Headlam

Knox

2. 7; Dion.

on Herod.

Hal.

Comp.

24.

8. On

Philodemus'

style,

however,

see Janko

(n. 3),

192-3.

9 tit.

21Cf.
Sophron, fr. 171, and Theocritus 15,ZPE 140 (2002) 1-2.
22 E.
Hauler, Verhandlungen der 42. Versammlung deutscher Philologen und Schulm?nner inWien, Leipzig,
257;

Fuhr

ap. A. Olivieri,

Frammenti

della

Commedia

Greca

e del Mimo

nella

Sicilia

e nella Magna

Grecia,

1947,89.
23 The name Cothonias
probably derives from k<50cov,a type of goby, according to Athenaeus
following
Apollodorus;
24 R. Janko
(per

Trello

is cognate

litt.) suggests

with

e.g. Modern

t?, (prjci, koc?,o[v,

Greek

but perhaps

xpeX?c

'insane'.

read KocXe?[v.

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

vol.

1894,

2, Naples,

(7. 309 C), perhaps

78

J. Hordern

of the name recalls the etymological

of Athens,
etymologizing
approach favoured by Apollodorus
on Sophron's mimes
who wrote a commentary
in at least four books,25 but Cr?nert's
that
suggestion
Demetrius
to the commentary
of the mime
is probably
too
may actually have owed his knowledge
at Oxyrhynchus
as late as the second century AD,
extreme;26 papyrus texts of Sophron were available
and there is no reason to doubt that Demetrius
could have been directly
with
them. Of
acquainted
The

with

is certainly
Romeo
translates
lines 8-11 as
possible.27
serva
la
she
Fuhr's
derivation
from
per onomatopea
straniera';
approves
name
a
and
that
the
evokes
to
Greek
suggests
foreigner's
Koi'(?eiv),
inability
speak
correctly, producing
sounds like those of a pig. Imitation or mimesis
is the subject in col. 52, where
nothing but grunting
Demetrius
discusses
the imitative pythikos
nomos, which depicted musically
Apollo's
victory over
course,

familiarity
chiarno
'(Sofrone)

Apollodorus'

work

Koikoa

at Delphi.28

that the name

Certainly Demetrius
implies
of course, should mean
^?Vi?[oucav],

suggests Koikoa's
foreign status: [xr|]v
not simply
'the foreign slave-girl',
but 'the slave girl,
[?]ou?r|v
or perhaps
because
she is foreign',
'because
she speaks a foreign
She
is perhaps
to be
language'.
as
a
an
a
ethnic
which
had
Sicel,
group
imagined
evidently
typically poor reputation among Sicilian
are a frequent
source of Greek
Greeks.29 Non-Greeks
and their attempts
to speak Greek
humour,
a
common
comic
in
A
Old
with
connection
situation, especially
provide
Comedy.30
linguistic barbarism
is also suggested
a Kax? x?v | x?nov
mentions
(xic) | ?r|xou[vxcov]
by col. 60, 4-6, where Demetrius
Pytho

to the Stoic X?%vr| jtepi

7i?pi 7ior||p?xcov xoia?xa.31 The x?rcoc 7i?pi 7ior|p?xcov is probably a reference
the second subdivision
Kai ?ap?apicpou
Kai
(called x?rcoi) was jcepi co^oiKicpou
cpcovfjc, of which
a
and
the
that
from
in
Kai
col.
58
7ioir|p?xcov
possibility
quotation
ap9i?oA,uov,32
Sophron
deliberately
contains erroneous forms (see below) strengthens
the case for this identification.
An

alternative

koi]|ku[M,]?iv
name

is in fact

suggested

by

col.

60,

6-9:

xoiaux[a

[y]?p ?v rcpocpopa?c | xa?c ?k xcovCco[(pp]ovoc |pdpcov xo?c ?\|/i[p]a0?av.

not recur

does

name

of Koikoa's

explanation

in the surviving

sections

of the text until

this point, but, although

that this could refer back

it seems

intervene,
likely, especially
treatment of the Koikoa mime.
Indeed,

Sophron's

four columns
to Demetrius'

given ?\|/i[p]a9?civ,
all the intervening material possibly
refers to the same work, and
at col. 59, 4.33 [koi]|k-?[Mi]?iv
is De Falco's
'mimes' are mentioned
attractive
(I could in
supplement
it refers to Euripides'
fact make out |ku?,[ ]?iv), otherwise
In-Law
852, where
hapax at Ar. Thesm.
as
an
was
he
and
that
searches
for
Demetrius
this
that
the
verb
way
gaping
escape-route.34
implies
see
we
a
and
should
here
direct
with
connection
KoiK?a.35 This sort
probably
actually used by Sophron,
of alliterative
alliteration

play on the name would

may again be intended

25 For
Apollodorus'

26Cr?nert
27 R.
and

interest

in etymology,

a similar
suit Sophron's
style, and at fr. 48 (A,oi;cov x?c ?,oyaSac)
a supposed
or
to suggest
about
Gaping
looking
etymology.36

see R. Pfeiffer,

that as a Laconian
(per litt.) notes
no need for a commentary.

28 See M.

of Classical

Scholarship,

Oxford,

1968,

259-61.

(n. 4), 107.

Demetrius

Janko

so have

A History

L. West,

Ancient

Greek

Music,

Oxford,

would

1992,

have

easily

Cr?nert

212-14;

able

been

(n. 4),

to read Sophron's

107, also

suggests

Doric

that

himself,

this discussion

may depend on Apollodorus, citing Hsch. n 927 (FGrHist 244 F 264).

29

Cf.

esp.Epich.fr.

30 See

e.g. my

The

207 K-A.
of Miletus,

of Timotheus

Fragments

Oxford,

2002,

with

204-6,

the references

collected

there.

31Romeo
(1988) takes Toi uxcxwith the following clause.
32D. L. 7.
44; cf. D. Schenkeveld, Mnem. 43 (1990), 86-108, R. Janko (n. 3), 180.
-

33 Kassel
34 Janko

Austin

(per

litt.)

(n.

12) print

suggests

only

cols.

that koucu??g)

55,

Iff., and 60,4ff.,

may

mean

'babble',

as Sophr.
in which

fr.

16.

case

rcpotpopcx?c

could

have

its usual

sense

pronunciation.

35A connection was first

suggested by De Falco (1923), 92-3.
36 Cf.

esp.

Et. mag.

p. 572,36

...

?xi

X?tpwiax

?v xcoi ?^erceiv

Kax?

x?c

?7ucxpoip?c.

Caxppcov

(Sophr. fr. 48 follows).

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

?v OuvvoGripatc

of

Word-order

and ekXojt]

in Sophron

and Demetrius,

On Poems

79

is a typical characteristic
of dull and lazy servants,37 and rcpo(popa?c (col. 60, 7) may therefore
vacantly
could mean not simply 'expressions'
but 'rebukes' (cf. LSJ, s.v. IV), particularly
apt if we suppose that
the word was used in a speech to Koikoa.
Demetrius'
matter

subject in cols. 55 and 60 is thus the author's choice of words

(eK^oyri), conventional
treatment
in stylistic manuals
and a particularly
for Andromenides,
important concept
1. But Romeo
in Book
that Demetrius
is also interested
in word-order,
opponent
suggests

for

Demetrius'

to that subject in cols. 56, 5ff. and 59. However,

neither case is above suspicion.
seeing references
an
56
with
three
Col.
obscure reference
to 'shameful action'
lines, followed by
begins
illegible

lines 4-5 (cpr|civ [mi] ?i?coci[v ai]|cxpo?

55,

in

[xo?] epyou).38At least fifteen lines intervene between col.

(though Romeo prints fragments of only four lines at the end of col. 55); Demetrius
a
had time to introduce a new subject, but Romeo's
reading of the text presents

11, and 56,4-5

will

certainly have
number of difficulties:

keive? ttc?cv
oio[co]uv (Romeo39)
[xou]|xo [?' ?c]x[u]pck (Gigante) ??i7t[cov], |cuv?rcxei ?' ocKota)u|0c?c,
o n?Xxv

IGaccov

[cuvek]|

?oxikcoc

x] v 7i[poei]7iop?v[cov]

?(p?[cxr|K81

(col. 56, 6-11,

tutto ci? che di nuovo

bene ci?, congiunge

conseguentemente,
sposta r?pidamente
? lontano delle parole precedenti...'
(trans. Romeo).

'Vedendo
mente

opening words are very problematic;

solution. Romeo's
obvious
interpretation

p. 121 R.).
impl?cita

is probably wrong,
but I can see no
keivei
in line 7. The first problem
is
in the Demetrius
papyri (though it is not so

The

[ic]x[u]pcoc
?Xerctcov]
depends on the difficult

asserts as a fact that ei for x is standard

Romeo
orthographic:
in Philodemus),40
but this ignores the evidence of the participle written as kivcov twice in col. 59 (lines
is one of sense: a disjunction
caused by synecdoche
to be
3 and 6).41 The second difficulty
is unlikely
such a difficulty
could well be solved by the creation
removed by altering the order of words. However,
that analogical
between words
connections
of an analogy (aKoAxroGcoc; cf. LSJ s.v.), and it is significant
are also dealt with

in the next column.

(Romeo's

xr|[yavicx?]v

supplement,

|5 [avxojvopac?av42
xo? p |?Ar o rcapf?Kxai

37 At Herod. 4. 4Iff.
At

38 But we

to be

fr. 7.

ad

with

40 Romeo
Philodemus,

should

which

of

further

(n. 3), 77.

[k]ivcov

at col.

(n. 4),

59,

recognises

101,

x?xo

(= xa?x?)

is very

I could
but

no attention

pays

13. 36 says

litt.) suggests

while

his wife

adulteries

freely
plans
kXnxcx X?p7t?u?0a,

Kotxpouc

x?ocovxec

ei for

traces

though

circular
oio[v

of both

than would
o]x>v; Janko

not

it does

be usual
(per

not unusual

the k and
it over

or enclitic

[tivoc]

oci]cxpoi)

i is of course

to recommend

little

fragment,

wrote

Lucignano

out

make

perhaps

and more

rounder

cautious,

this has

this as a new

common

75-6).

is more

Janko (per litt.) suggests reading x?xo ?iyoM?a

crasis

who
fr.

(per

to be

(1988),

3, but

suggests
[ji?xo]vo|iaoiav,
again at col. 59,7-8.
rightly

to me

look

(cf. Romeo

76; Cr?nert

Janko

epyou

omicron

(1988),
see Janko

of a man

and Solon

when

he

hopes.

xo? aicxpo?

the second

is told off by her mistress, Cynno: o? col ?iyco, amr\, xfji coSe KcbSe

is used

references),

of empty

elongated

read

appears
43 Romeo

expect

110 kextjvotoc

and more

41 Romeo
42 Romeo

loc,

enjoyment

traces

thinner

the slave-girl Cydilla

Semon.

(see Lloyd-Jones
means
thoughtless

3^ The

correct):

certainly

121f.R.).

pp.

XacK?iScr|i;.

use of the word

Sophron's

xr\v vco|0p?v [c]uv[?c]iv fxaxo?,e|l5yo.caxcoi:43pr|[S]?v coi a |kxX. (col.

yuvaiK[ ]v | cbc [;c]ap?Mai

57,4-15,

but almost

discusses

apparently

[ c . . . rca|p]eip?vov
[ov]?pa|[xi
xp]fic9oci xr|[yavicx]|?v
Xey?pevov
ano xcov | pcoA,uop?vcov
xa?xa
x?
| S' ?cxiv x? ?paSecoc
?|\|/?p[8]va#

Kai Kax?
?vxi

There Demetrius

the i under

in Kassel

litt.) suggests
in papyri

of

tends

oio[vo]\)v.
this date.

On

the microscope.
a word

[?cvxolvouixo?av,

Lucignano's

appear

[xo\)].

for o, which

recent

Austin's

edition.

xcoi, which I have confirmed as very likely under the microscope. The

in Demetrius.

second

person

dative

coi may

seem

at first

sight

a little unusual

for

Syracusan Doric (we should expect xiv as inAlem?n and Pindar), but uoi is found alongside ?u?v in the first person. The last
word
.]r|?vx.

of

line

15 is perhaps

]oix[ may

suggest

? (= f|), but
an optative.

the following

line provides

no

coherent

sense:

I read, with

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Romeo,

oc[.

. .]oix[.

80

J. Hordern

Demetrius'

that Sophron could use the adjective

as a noun because
it is
point is probably
xriyavicx?v
derivable
from xriyavi?co,
which
stands in the same relationship
to it as the verb pcoA/?(v)co does to
recalls the material
in col. 55, and once again brings
pco?u. This fanciful etymologizing
Apollodorus'
to mind; but at any rate it suggests
commentary
this light, I wonder whether
K?iv?i
in col. 56

that word-choice
is also under consideration
here. In
is not an error, perhaps for (?)K??vr|i
'in that way',
or for (?)Ke?vo, to be taken with rc?v ... ?.
of the discussion,

referring back to an earlier, lost section

Janko (per litt.) suggests an ingenious alternative,
to be a quotation,
taking K?iv?i-7r[po?i]7top'pv[cov]
and noting that the omission
of the article before a quoted statement would not be unusual for an author
like Demetrius:
'Next he adds (the claim): "everything
of whatever
kind moves
(the listener) sooner that
was
is
different from what
mentioned
before (?)'". But who is being quoted? Demetrius
does not
again
seem

to be involved

at this point in direct rebuttal or discussion

that word-order
is meant.

there is no evidence
Romeo

makes

of alternative

poetic

theories.

But again,

the attractive

that the half-cooked

suggestion
garlic may have been part of the meal
an
and
thus
item
which
featured
in
her mistress'
prepared by Koikoa,
(cf. lines 12-15).44
reproaches
The 'garlic' of col. 57 may make another appearance
in the extremely
col. 58, of which
fragmentary
at
the
central
section
is
all
well
only
preserved: cupcpcovcoc xa[?xaic]
?7t?|K?ixai x?* "ev pcota) rc?r|ca ?xi
In line 11 I read
under the
.]" ?p|I0(pa?vovxai
[ (Col. 58, 7-10 p. 122 Romeo).
ItKa^?CKa7ior|[.
Ka^??
an
the
uncontracted
second
middle
person
microscope;
ending suggests
imperfect (< ??co 'boil'?). Janko
thenra'??o
and again Ka'7cor|[ca; Koikoa
is dropping her auments, and
(per litt.) suggests Ka'7cor|[ca],
the forms may be hyperdoricisms;
crasis of Kai ?- should produce
perhaps the iota of Kai. Alternatively,
we
KT)- inWest Greek,45 and
may want to restore that here.
Romeo
also sees discussion
at the start of col. 59; the central section of the column
of word-order
is
once

again fairly legible, though the first three lines comprise

to make more sense from line 3:

just a few

isolated

letters. The

text begins

ap0(p)a

|kivc?v ?? xcovpM?pcov4615d ?tj ano a[?]0?[Kacxco]v | [Jev ap0(p)a kivcov [.. .]tio (col. 59,

3-6,

liif.R.).

pp.

in line 3 as the object of line 4's kivcov,48 but this is unlikely given the position
verb in the extant section, and presumably
the first ap0(p)a
is the end of a first
it. If so, and assuming
clause which will have contained
that ap0(p)a
in line 6 is the object of the
that follows
in line 4 lacks an object. This could be taken over from the
it, then kivcov
participle

Romeo

takes ap0(p)a47
lack a main
of ??. We

clause (in that case, probably ap0(p)a

clause which
preceding
anyway), but the conditional
supposedly
the styles of
begins with ?i ?rj looks out of place; I think that we should read ?i'?r| 'styles'.49 'Changing
. . .' (or
in the mimes')
the mimes
makes
admirable
is
sense,
styles
'changing
though the plural
a
little
difficult.
is
Romeo's
at
and
she
balks
a[?]0?[K?ccxco]v
admittedly
supplement,
although
a translation,
used once
is, however,

lines 4-5

could

seems

no other word

providing

is not a standard stylistic

term; it
severe
22.
to
the
describe
6)
(Comp.
style. Thus,
. .'. This leaves the
the style of the mimes
away from the blunt.
to suit the traces.50 This

of Halicarnassus

by Dionysius
perhaps mean
'altering

44 Romeo
(1988), 284. Col. 58, 12 begins ?paO?[co]c, which Romeo refers back to col. 57.
- E.
45 C. D.
Buck, The Greek Dialects, Chicago and London, 1955, 80; A. Thumb
Kieckers,
griechischen Dialekte 1,Heidelberg, 1932, 212).
^

47
wrote

Romeo

prints

[u?i]ucov,

but

inspection

Lucignano had read ap0[p]a

?vap6(p)a.
48 Romeo
prints
49 For the
sense,

Heracleodorus'
50 a

[k]ivcov,

but

0?[.]v

cf. e.g. Heracleodorus

date, see Janko,
is legible

under

the microscope

reveals

clear

traces

of

the first m

and

the

i.

in line 6, but there is clearly no space for a lacuna between 0 and a; De Falco (1923)

see above,

suggested

under

Handbuch der

n. 41.
fr. 6 Janko,

op.

cit.,

the microscope,

164-5.
and

1, col.
193, 2-3
(cf.
ap. Phld. De poem.
?i ?r|.
The papyrus,
divides
however,
the traces

of

the second

letter

seem

Janko

(n. 3), 419

to be compatible

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

with

n.

1). For

and EKXoyr? in Sophron

Word-order

lacunae on either

and the two difficult

kivcov,

phrase ap0(p)a

and Demetrius,

On Poems

2 81

side of it, in line 6. Changing

the position

of articles is unlikely to have the stylistic effect which my interpretation implies; and it is interesting
that the scribe

the same error, whatever

twice made

in the same order

two words

it was,

ap0a. The presence of the same

has dropped out of the text, but

in writing

in lines 3-4 may

suggest that something

simple, is by no means certain;

I suggest op0a.
term
The word op0oxr|c
to various
forms of
(semi-)technical
applied
at
correctness
the
end
the
fifth
least
of
familiar
to
be
in
used
by
linguistic
century,51
enough
passing by
xcov
when speaking of sophistic Euripidean
(Ra. 1181 xfjc op0?xr|xoc
Aristophanes'
Dionysus
prologues
in Phaedrus
Plato credits Protagoras with teaching
'correctness
of diction'
?7ccov). Thus,
(op0O?7i?ia),
the restoration

while

attractively
a common
had become

ap0(p)a,

in his book

probably

and elsewhere

'A^ri0?ia,

an interest

with

in linguistic
?p0oxr|c;52?p0O?7t?ia
a classification
for different
types of state

own term. He developed

Protagoras'
himself
in questions
of grammatical
gender. His concerns were at least partly
an
a
in
lines of the Iliad, and
literary; he criticized Homer for using
imperative
'prayer' in the opening
...
for the incorrect construction
that
should
nature
be a masculine
pfjviv
o?ta>p?vr|v,
thinking
pfjvic
by
to have been

appears

and

ment,

interested

noun

(DK 80 A 28-9). Democritus

B 20a), perhaps borrowing
68
(DK
see a distinction
between
"straight'

a work

wrote

entitled 7cepi 'Oprjpou ti op0o?7C??r|c Kai ytaocc?cov

the term op0o?7C?ia from Protagoras,
and Pfeiffer
is surely right to
and the obsolete words needing
[i.e. normal words]
epic diction
twice credits Prodicus with teaching 7i?pi ?vopaxcov ?p0oxr|xoc
'on the correct use

Plato
explanation'.53
of words';54 Plato's use of op0oxr|c
in both passages
suggests
derived from the theories of Protagoras.55 The simple
possibly
in Pausimachus'
context, but we find the phrase ?p0? ov?paxa
by Philodemus
reflects
the
accurately

quoted

in On

Poems

l.56 Pausimachus'

that the term was

adjective
discussion

'correct

Prodicus'

is not as well

own,

again
in this

attested

of Homeric

words'

onomatopoeia,
those whose
sound

are

in this context
thus evokes
the onomatopoeic
thing they refer to; op0oc
dicussed
in Plato's Cratylus,
somewhat playfully
and those offered more seriously
in Stoic
etymologies
theories of language.57 Demetrius,
of course, will not have such a precise, philosophical
in
definition
to literature shows little in common with the linguistic
mind. His approach
of a Zeno or
fantasies
his 'correct words' will just be words
in common
use, and his point the simple one, so
Chrysippus;
common as scarcely to require illustration, that 'changing the correct words'
produces a change in style.
If this interpretation
is correct, then the discussion
in col. 59, 3-6 will look back to the treatment of
in the preceding
word-choice
and
fits
columns,
particularly well with the apparently
etymologizing
account

of xriyavicx?v

?cxi[v]

x?h "a[i]|rco?xo

51 See
ven

generally

Grammatik,

unlikely

to be

avxovo|pac?av

x?c fa[.]?r|C?i[.]"58

E. Siebenborn,

Amsterdam,
relevant

in col. 57. Significantly,

andpco^u

?K^oyr|: p?x? xo?xo ?? Val'

Die

1976.

x?

(col. 59, 7-11,

Lehre

von

?p6?

(priuocxa)

the following

lines of col. 59 also deal with

e%exKai p?x?|A,r|\|/iv x? p?v y?p "[?]?|10?ca" xax?v

pp.

122f. R.). Here Demetrius'

der Sprachrichtigkeit
und ihren Kriterien:
are active,
as opposed
to passive

Studien
(x?

vnxi?),

is that

point

zur antiken
verbs,

normati
but

that

is

here.

52 Phaedr. 267 C
(DK 80 A 26); Crat. 391 B (DK 80 A 24); cf. R. Pfeiffer (n. 25), 37-8, 280.
53 Pfeiffer
(n. 25), 42.
54Crat. 384
B; Euthyd. 277 E (DK 84 A 11, 16).
55Cf. Pfeiffer
(n. 25), 39f.
56De
poem. 1, col. 180, 1 (pp. 318f. Janko). For Pausimachus' date (probably late third century BC), see Janko (n. 3),
165. Cr?nert

(n. 4),

106,

supplied

name

Pausimachus'

at Demetrius,

De

poem.

2, col.

7,

11-12

(ria\)ci]||iaxov);

Romeo

(1988) suggests instead 'Avxi]|uo:xov, probably rightly, since Demetrius has just mentioned Sappho and Alcaeus.
57 Cf.

e.g.

SVF

I 146,

148. Janko

(n. 3),

178ff.,

remarks

on connections

between

Pausimachus

and

Stoicism,

but notes

thatwe do not know which way the influence went. ?pO?c is not a usual Stoic word in this context, though the term ?p6?c
t?yoc,

not,

of course,

with

linguistic

connotations,

is common

enough,

and perhaps

had

an origin

language-theories.

58Romeo

(1988) reads tot[.]r|C?ic.

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

in fifth-century

and

later

82

J. Hordern

of

the expected
said ai7toA,co
x?cc59
saying ai7to?,co xo?c ??ecci, with
object,
Sophron
not only does he use a different word (metalepsis),
an adjective
or
but it is, probably,
ta[.]5r|C?i[.];
The
is
and
this
(antonomasia).
feminine,
object, perhaps significantly,
appellative
quotation may also
to the Koikoa mime. Further examples,
have belonged
all regrettably
in what follows.
lost, are adduced
instead

. .]ix?"
is particularly
x? ?? "[. ,]i[.]ko[.
tantalising:
7tap|??Xr|[7c]xai ?[v]xi
which appears in a question,
[^?]i[o]ko[v]ix?,
(lines 12-14). It is tempting to supplement
at Sophr. fr. 74 (kex ?cc?, A,?iOK?viX?;); the third lacuna is almost certainly
woman,60
the first

But

nu can sometimes

discussed

above

too

but we

large for a
(the iota is

be quite broad,
could easily read -ko[v?]ix?
be
her
mistress
said to Koikoa.
easily
something
a provisional
re-translation
based on the revised
of all six columns,

letter, though
obviously wrong). Fr. 74 could
single

I conclude

|"c7i[. . .]"
to a
addressed

xo?

by offering
and in the footnotes.

P. Here.

text

1014, cols. 55-60

(55) ... to test...

about the woman

and it is easy to see the truth of what we have said if we consider what was said before
he brought
in. For he called the slave-girl Koikoa,
because
she was foreign, who
...
...
...
to call (?)
of
('or'?), he says,
(at least 10 lines missing)
(56) action (2 lines missing)
Euripides
... he says and
... of a shameful act.
the common
feature concerning
this
in
detail
provides
Considering

links by way of analogy everything which

is in turn separated from the preceding
(?), he immediately
... (at least 9 lines
words because of synecdoche
and to use the noun
(57) (3 112 lines missing)
missing)
...
a
to antonomasia,
'fried in pan'
instead of 'garlic' (pco?A)); this is derived from
according
saying
means
as for an intellect which
which
the
'cook
women's
is also sluggish
words,
pcoA,?co,
slowly';
(?),
are the same

thing as when
agreeing with these

she says: "Nothing

for you ..." (at least 3 lines missing)
(58) (6 lines
... and I
a
"I
is
the
line:
made
of
because
missing)
you (boiled?)
single piece
garlic
...
...
...
...
are
made
action
the
with
the
[ another?]."
(These words?)
(?)
clear(ly)
slowly
together
...
... (3 lines
covert meaning
correct
lines
the
words,
(59)
(3
missing)
Aeschylus
missing)
altering
in
mimes
the
the
correct
from
blunt
word
the
there
words.
this
After
is
both
(7
missing)
styles
altering
... (sc.
and metalepsis.
Because
antonomasia
"for the sheep" is the same thing as "I tend the [women?]
...
like goats) ", and the phrase: "covered with fine dust" is said instead of "..."; because
instead of"..."
...
...
seems
it
instead of "for people"
(5 lines missing)
(60) (7 7/2 lines missing)
anyone of
making
those who seek61 things of the sort which are in accordance with the topos concerning
poems. For one
are
that 'gape vacantly'
should understand
slow learners in the
(is used) for those who
(koikuM,?Iv)
('reproaches'?)

expressions

taken from Sophron's

mimes

... the
subjects

(?) (at least 9 lines missing).

Berlin

James Hordern

5^We
60

expect

Hesychius,

a dative
A 532,

after aircoAico,
glosses

taioK?vrcoc

and ought
asf]

perhaps
teXeicoc

to read ia(i)c.
eic koviv

8iaAeta)uivr|,

adding

the note

61 I read
]xic |?r|'co'6[vTa)]v;Romeo (1988) has ]axic |Ctito-uIvtcoIv.

This content downloaded from 137.205.50.42 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:21:34 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Aeicoc

y?p

tetaicoc.