VOL. VI PUBLISHED QUARTERLY IN THE MONTHS OF JANUARY, APRIL, JULY, AND OCTOBER APRIL, 1911 No. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS By G. L. Hendrickson 129 Satura the Genesis of a Literary Form Two Linguistic Tests of the Relative Antiquity of the Iliad and the By John A. Scott 156 The De Compositione of Dionysius of Halicarnassus Considered with Reference to the Rhetoric of Aristotle Roman Prayer and Its Relation to Ethics Studies in Greek Noun-Formation-Labial Terminations PAUL SHOREY: Solon's Trochaics to Phokos. E. H. STURTEVANT: Latin ss instead of Intervocalic r. By H. P. Breitenbach 163 MURRAY, The "Iphigenia in Tauris” of Euripides (Putnam).-RODENWALDT, Die Komposition der pompejanischen Wandgemälde (Chase).- DRACHMANN, Scholia Vetera in Pindari Carmina (Clapp).-REES, The So-called Rule of Three Actors in the Classical Greek Drama (Flickinger).-WEICHERT, Demetrii et Libanii qui feruntur TTпоI ЕHIZтоAIKOI et EПIZTOAIMAIOI XAPAKTHPEZ (Wright).-GRAGG, A Study of the Greek Epigram before 300 B.C. (Prescott).- BALLENTINE, P. Terenti Afri Hauton Timorumenos (Knapp).- FOERSTER, Libanii Opera, Vol. V (Wright).-FICK, Die Entstehung der Odyssee und die Versabzählung in den griechischen Epen (Scott).- MURRAY, The Rise of the Greek Epic (Shorey).- CINQUINIGRIMOD, Omero di Engelbert Drerup (Shorey).—PAETOW, The Arts Course at Mediaeval Universities with Special Reference to Grammar and Rhetoric (Shorey).—MooD, Some Figurative Uses of "Venire" and "Ire" (Beeson).-IHм, Palaeographia Latina (Beeson).-PLASBERG, M. Tulli Ciceronis Paradoxa Stoicorum, Academicorum Reliquiae cum Lucullo, Timaeus, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Fasc. I (Gragg).—WACHTLER, Die Blütezeit der griechischen Kunst im Spiegel der Reliefsarkophage (Tarbell).-GASSE, De Lycophrone Mythographo (Bates).-SAUNDERS, Costume in Roman Comedy (Basore).-WILCKEN, Zum Alexandrischen Antisemitismus (Goodspeed).-WELLMANN, Corpus Medicorum Graecorum, X, 1. 1: Philumeni de Venenatis Animalibus eorumque Remediis (Robbins).-SVORONOS, Νέαι Ερμενεῖαι Αναγλύφων (Miller).-GARDIKAS, Κρίσις τῆς Πλατωνικῆς Εκδόσεως τῆς ὑπὸ ΣΠ. Mwpatrov (Miller).-CIACERI, Culti e Miti nella Storia dell' Antica Sicilia (Fiske).- ENDT, Adnotationes super Lucanum primum ad vetustissimorum codicum fidem edidit (Basore).NICOLE, Textes grecs inédits de la collection papyrologique de Genève (Goodspeed).— MEYER, Griechische Papyri im Museum des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen, I. 2 (Goodspeed).- DAHNHARDT, Natursagen (Goodspeed).—EGER, Zum aegyptischen Grundbuchwesen in römischer Zeit (Goodspeed). 216 222 Classical Philology is published quarterly. The subscription price is $2.50 per year; the price of single copies is 75 cents. Postage is prepaid by the publishers on all orders from the United States, Mexico, Cuba, Porto Rico, Panama Canal Zone, Republic of Panama, Hawaiian Islands, Philippine Islands, Guam, Tutuila (Samoa), Shanghai. Postage is charged extra as follows: For Canada, 15 cents on annual subscriptions (total $2.65), on single copies, 4 cents (total 79 cents); for all other countries in the Postal Union, 23 cents on annual subscriptions (total $2.73); on single copies, 6 cents (total 81 cents). Remittances should be made payable to the University of Chicago Press, and should be in Chicago or New York exchange, postal or express money order. If local check is used, 10 cents must be added for collection. The following agents have been appointed and are authorized to quote prices indicated: For Great Britain, LUZAC & Co., 46 Great Russell Street, London, England. Yearly subscriptions, including postage, 11s. 3d. each; single copies, including postage, 3s. 4d. each. For the Continent of Europe, TH. STAUFFER, Universitätsstrasse 26, Leipzig, Germany. Yearly subscriptions, including postage, M. 11.50 each; single copies, including postage, M. 3.40 each. Claims for missing numbers should be made within the month following the regular month of publication. The publishers expect to supply missing numbers free only when they have been lost in transit. Business communications should be addressed to the University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. Editorial communications and manuscripts should be addressed to PAUL SHOREY, Editor, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. Entered June 20, 1906, at the Post-Office at Chicago, Illinois, as second-class matter, under Act of Congress July 16, 1894. It is a familiar observation of the commentators on Horace that the word satura, with which the second book of the Sermones opens"sunt quibus in satura"-is there found for the first time in extant Roman literature as the designation of a literary form. That the non-occurrence of the word before this time is merely a matter of accident, a caprice of fortune in the preservation of literary monuments, has been, I presume, the general opinion of those whose studies have led them to take cognizance of the matter. Apart from the general assumption that Lucilius used the word either as a title or as a generic designation for his caustic poems, it has been the accepted opinion that it was similarly used by Ennius, not to mention the pre-literary dramatic satura of Livy's narrative. Since Kiessling's time we have become familiar with the suggestion that Ennius was the "inventor" of the name as a literary title. But this confidence in the early occurrence of the word rests upon an insecure foundation of assumption and inference, to which Marx has called attention in the Prolegomena to his edition of Lucilius. His brief observations give a most important hint for the history of the beginnings of Roman satire and they contain implications which neither Marx himself nor any who have since discussed the subject have followed out. Throughout the following discussion I would profess the fullest indebtedness to Marx, which will be recognized by those familiar with his learned and brilliant work. [CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY VI, April, 1911] 129 As regards the occurrence of the word, we have then the two well-known passages in Horace (Serm. ii. 1 and 6) and the reference in Livy vii. 2 to the early dramatic performances which he designates as saturae. After this time the word is not found until the latter part of the first century A.D. But with this statement of the facts of occurrence the significant features of the matter are by no means exhausted. Marx himself has called attention to one noteworthy passage in which the word is not used where it might have been expected. It is Varro's allusion (R. R. iii. 2, 17) to "L. Abuccius homo ut scitis adprime doctus, cuius Luciliano charactere sunt libelli," and it may be added that the context of Varro indicates that the writings of Abuccius had to do with a censure of Roman luxury, a Lucilian theme. Similarly in Trebatius' account of a Lucilian invective in verses of his own composition contained in Ad fam. xii. 16. 3 (also cited by Marx), the absence of the word satura may well be significant. But these are no more than hints and indications: to have weight and meaning the number of such observations must be increased, and the character of each passage carefully weighed. First then it is to be noted that Cicero nowhere alludes to Lucilius as a writer of any specific literary form or genus, in spite of a good many references to him. For Cicero apparently his work is as individual as the man himself, and in alluding to it he is content with general descriptive words, as in De or. ii. 25: "C. Lucilius homo doctus et perurbanus dicere solebat ea quae scribebat neque se ab indoctissimis," etc., or again in De fin. i. 7: "et sunt illius scripta leviora, ut urbanitas summa adpareat," etc. As here, so generally elsewhere, the mention of Lucilius is attended by descriptive words or allusions which convey the idea of humorous or satirical writing, and it is at least noteworthy that nowhere the more precise and compact technical term should have been used for this purpose if it was available. It may be questioned whether any other literary name of equal prominence figures in the works of Cicero so vaguely. But whether this vagueness is in defect of a defined category and a name, or is a matter of chance, we may for the moment leave undetermined. Far more significant than the absence of the word satura, or of any other technical designation of Lucilius' work, from the pages of Cicero is its absence from contexts which seem fairly to clamor for it in Horace's first book of Sermones. The fourth satire is a document-but one of many we must believe-of the debate which was going on at Rome in Horace's time concerning the style and spirit of Lucilius' writings and the method of reproducing them for uses of the present. There were typical as well as individual differences in this effort; but probably Horace was at the opposite end of the scale from those who fancied themselves the most legitimate inheritors of the mantle of Lucilius, and who strove most faithfully to reproduce his manner. Horace begins, probably with reference to other contemporary discussions, with a definition of the character Lucilianus by pointing out his dependence upon the old Attic comedy. Both Crispinus1 and Fannius, who follow, must be understood as imitators of the Lucilian style; the former, like Persius and Juvenal at a later time, a declaimer in hexameter verse against vice from the ethical standpoint of Stoicism, the latter, on the evidence at least of the pseudo-Acronian scholia, the author of satires. In contrast with the self-complacent assurance of Fannius, Horace vaunts his own reserve: "cum mea nemo scripta legat. . quod sunt quos genus hoc minime iuvat." Then, after defining the classes against which the satirist directs his attacks, "omnes hi metuunt versus, odere poetas." The vagueness of versus has often been commented upon by editors and critics and variously justified, but a more simple explanation of the colorless general term, namely the lack of a specific word, has not, I think, been entertained. Again in 56 the style and manner which Horace is cultivating are characterized not by reference to a generic name, but by reference to Lucilius: "his ego quae nunc, olim quae scripsit Lucilius," and once more in 64, genus hoc takes the place of a fuller periphrasis. Throughout the whole of the satire it is plain that the poet is dealing with a literary genus which is for him the character Lucilianus, but for which he has at 1 Concerning Crispinus the scholia contain certain items of information which cannot reasonably be looked upon as manufactured to fit the text of Horace: "Hic Crispinus poeta fuit, qui sectam Stoicam versibus scripsit" (ad Serm. i. 120). In the same place they report that the epithet aretalogus was applied to him, a name which implies not so much loquacity as a certain bizarre and fantastic treatment of satirical matter for which we should find better analogues in Lucilius and Juvenal than in Horace (v. Reitzenstein Hell. Wundererzählungen, pp. 8ff.). |