I do not know of any book or published paper devoted to Cleostratus. In the indexes to most histories of astronomy you will seek his name in vain, and, where you do find it, you are referred to a few jejune paragraphs or more often to a single sentence. Boll in his Sphaera (1903) honours him with three pages (191–194), based on a passage in Pliny and a scholium on Euripides, but he misinterprets both passages and holds one of them to be based on a misunderstanding of some older writer. Nearly all the passages bearing on him are to be found with notes of varying value in Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ii. (1912), pp. 197, 198, where they occupy rather more than a page. Some valuable comments and one reference which is not in Diels will be found in Breithaupt's treatise De Parmenisco Grammatico (1915). And yet, for all this neglect, there are attributed to Cleostratus two capital contributions to Greek astronomy, viz. the introduction of the signs of the zodiac and the authorship of the eight years' cycle of intercalations.

The excavations, the results of which are described in the following paper, were conducted in the spring of 1894 by the British School at Athens. The work was under the charge of Mr. A. G. Bather and myself; Mr Ernest Gardner, then director of the School, was also present during a portion of it. I have thought it better to give first a history of the two towns, as known from literature and the evidence of inscriptions, and then to describe the sites, and the discoveries which are the result of our work. The unpublished inscriptions which we dug up or copied on or near the sites are collected in an appendix, and we give (Pl. XIV.) a sketch map of the district. A plan of the gate and a plan of the τέμενος at Abae also accompany the paper. These plans and map are the work of Mr. F. W. Green, who is an expert in such matters, and undertook to do the work for me from general directions which I gave him about the sites.

In describing the sacred grove () of Asklepios in the territory of Epidaurus, Pausanias (ii 27.1) mentions two of the rules that were in force there: (he has just mentioned that the ἄλσος is surrounded on all sides by boundary stones), and, secondly,

Those about to give birth or to die were eventually accommodated immediately outside the peribolos in a building constructed for them in Pausanias' own time by ‘Antoninus, a Senator’. The eating accommodation was provided earlier, most obviously in the building generally described as the καταγώγιον. Since this lies between the temple of Asklepios and the theatre, which is itself, according to Pausanias we can assume that sacrificial meat consumed in it had not been taken outside the boundaries.

• (i) By an oversight which I can neither explain nor excuse, I entirely failed to take account of the relevant Panathenaic amphorae attributed by Sir John Beazley to the Eucharides Painter (ABV 396):

1. 9. Athens, Acropolis 947, fr. … B, man holding auloi (Graef, Heft 2, pl. 61).

2. 10. Leningrad from Kerch. A, Athena; B, aulete on platform between two men on ground level, both leaning on rhabdoi. Arch. Anz. 1912, 339–40, figs. 23(A), 24(B).

3. 12. Athens, Acropolis 1060, fr. … B, two men on platform (= aulode and accompanist?) facing standing man with rhabdos (Graef, Heft 2, pl. 62).

• (ii) Since my article appeared, Dr Dorothy Kent Hill of the Walters Art Gallery (to whom I am indebted for most of the references on which these addenda are based) has published in AJA lxiii (1959), pl. 47 (fig. 3—A, fig. 4—B) a further Panathenaic amphora which she attributes to the Eucharides Painter:

• Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery 48.2107 (acquired 1958). A, Athena; B, man on platform playing kithara between two men leaning on rhabdoi.

In a lecture on the Working of the Athenian Democracy delivered to the Hellenic Society at Burlington House on 3 May, 1949, Professor A. W. Gomme attacked the view ‘ that μοναρχια or principate describes with sufficient accuracy, not only Pericles' actual position, but Herodotus' and Thucydides' conceptions of it ’. To the word μοναρχια Gomme attached the meaning of absolute rule, typified in fifth-century thought, and in Herodotus, by the Persian kingship: by ‘ principate’ he meant the direct, single rule of an Augustus. To both he drew the parallel of modern dictatorship in a totalitarian state. Since he cited me as subscribing to this view in its most extreme form, in so far as I approvedof E. M. Walker's remarks on the strategia in the Cambridge Ancient History and took Darius' arguments in favour of a monarchy for Persia in Herodotus iii 80–2 as ‘ Herodotus’ own justification for Pericles' unique position at Athens ', I feel that I should make some reply; and am grateful to the editor of the Journal for this opportunity of doing so. I am also grateful to Professor Gomme for letting me consult his MS. so that I have been able to take up the point with him on a surer foundation than that of memory, and have had the privilege of a second acquaintance with a brilliant lecture.

Pausanias (viii. 29), on the way between Gortys and Megalopolis, after mentioning the ruins of Brenthe, from which the stream Brentheatis ran into the Alpheius, goes on to say: ‘After crossing the Alpheius the country is that called Trapezuntian and there are ruins of the city of Trapezus. Then, turning down on the left to the Alpheius from Trapezus, close to the river is a place called Bathos, where they perform a rite to the Great Goddesses every third year. And there is a spring there called Olympias, which does not flow every other year, and near the spring fire comes up. Now the Arcadians say that the reputed battle of the Giants and Gods took place here and not in Thracian Pallene. … And from the place called Bathos the city called Basilis is distant about ten stades; its founder was Kypselos, who gave his daughter in marriage to Kresphontes, the son of Aristomachos. But in my time Basilis was in ruins, and among them were remains of a shrine of Eleusinian Demeter. Going on from there you will again cross the Alpheius….' Two other mentions are made of Basilis by ancient authors. Stephanus of Byzantium (s. v.) refers to this account of Pausanias, and Nikander (ap. Athen. xii. 8), without giving any name, tells us that in a town founded by Kypselos on the Alpheius certain Parrhasii set up a shrine and altar to Demeter Eleusinia, and that there was a competition of beauty for women there, first won by Erodice, the wife of Kypselos, in which the competitors were called chrysophoroi.

It was suggested to me by Mr. T. J. Dunbabin that the question of Attic B.F. export might be treated by grouping chronologically—as far as possible, for the sake of convenience, in twenty-year periods—the Attic B.F. ware hitherto found at various sites. This method of grouping differs slightly, of course, from that of Payne, and I have not found it possible to adhere strictly to it throughout (e.g., for the middle of the sixth century), but it perhaps serves as well as any other for the purposes of what aims at being an economic rather than a purely archaeological survey.

Throughout the paper only the earliest finds from any one site are listed. Although this method may well seem to give an undue importance to certain sites which were apparently but scant importers of the ware, it would be impossible—within the scope of such a paper—to give exhaustive lists of the finds of every date.

Professor R. M. Cook has performed a valuable service by raising again the question of the meaning of this word in this context. He finds that the weight of argument goes against the view that it means ‘fashioned with his own hands,’ in favour of its implying ownership of the workshop from which the vessel issued. In the end I disagree with Professor Cook, but the evidence is difficult to evaluate and appears contradictory, and certainly does not justify an unquestioning acceptance of the first interpretation. There are perhaps a few more general observations to be made, and a few points on which his remarks require modification.

1. The position of those who interpret the word as ‘fashioned’ is not always quite so unquestioning as he seems to suggest. Beazley wrote in Potter and Painter in Ancient Athens (1944): ‘Two explanations have been offered for the epoiese-signature. One, that it gives the name of the potter, the man who fashioned the vase; the other, that it gives no more than the owner of the establishment from which the vase came. At one time I held it more prudent to adopt the second explanation: but I now believe that, in general, the first explanation is the right one: Ευφρονιος εποιεσεν means that Euphronios fashioned the vase with his own hands.’

2. Professor Cook writes that he knows only three vases which bear the same name with both egrapsen and epoiesen: two by Exekias and one by Douris.

The difficulty of transcribing words written in the Cypriote syllabary makes our acquaintance with the Cypriote dialect precarious and faulty, and in many cases leaves us uncertain about the exact form of a word, but in spite of this uncertainty it is clear that Cypriote, both in inscriptions and in glosses, shews in its vocabulary a notable similarity to the language of the Homeric poems. Inscriptions discovered since Hoffmann's day have enabled us to increase his already long list of such similarities (Die Griechischen Dialekte, I, pp. 278–283), and it is time to examine the evidence and see what bearing these have on the question of the nature of Homeric vocabulary. The problem presented by Homeric words in Cypriote is similar to that presented by their existence in Arcadian, but, though the meaning of Cypriote words is sometimes uncertain, Cyprus is richer in inscriptions than Arcadia and the ancient lexicographers and scholiasts have preserved a singularly large number of Cypriote glosses. The problem is simply stated: how far are we justified in believing that Homeric words in Cypriote are independent of the Homeric poems ? Are they indigenous words, naturally used, or are they ‘literary’ imitations of a well-known poetical style, used for effect in defiance of local dialect usage?

The alabaster bowl which is our subject is at present in the possession of Dr. J. Hirsch of Geneva and is published with his kind consent. Until recently it was in a private collection in Leipzig; it was presumably acquired in the Mediterranean area several decades ago. Its principal dimensions are:—

Diam. at top, 22 cm.; h. 8 cm.; greatest depth, 5·5 cm.; diam. of the central knob of the base, 4 cm., and of the outer base-ring, 16 cm.; h. of arcade, 4 cm. Measurements seem to be based on an inch of about 2 cm.

The bowl was worked freehand, without the lathe, and is accordingly somewhat uneven and irregular in shape. A deep point in the middle of the bottom indicates that the compass was used to control distances. The carving was done with some form of knife; the cutting is plainly visible round and between the letters of the inscription (fig. 1), at the edges of the hair, and elsewhere.

The monumental work of Professor Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain, must always remain the basis of any study among English collections of antiques. But since its publication in 1882 not a few collections have changed hands, others have been dispersed, while others, more fortunate, have been enlarged; in these various processes much that was unknown even to Michaelis has come to light, and he himself soon supplemented his great work by two important papers printed in this Journal in 1884 and 1885. He prefaced the first of these supplementary papers with the following words:

‘I cannot help thinking that there must be in Great Britain a good deal of bidden treasure…which would perhaps easier come to light if there were a place expressly destined to receive such communications…I have therefore ventured to propose to the Editors to open in this Journal a corner for storing up such supplements…As a first instalment, I here offer some notes which may begin the series…May other lovers and students of the Classic art, especially in Great Britain, follow my example.’

That cremation is unknown in the Mycenaean world, even in its latest phases, and inhumation equally foreign to the Homeric poems is a curious, if familiar, fact, and at once raises the question of the length of the interval which separates the fall of Mycenae from the appearance of cremation in the Aegean area. To fix an absolute date for either event is impossible; but the increasing number of carefully excavated sub-Mycenaean and proto-Geometric tombs makes it possible to note certain features in the rise, spread and, in certain regions, the dominance of the practice, and slightly to narrow the chronological limits.

At Mycenae cremation does not appear at all, not even among those depositions in chamber tombs which were accompanied by pottery of the ‘Granary’ class and therefore belong to the latest period of the city or may even be slightly later than its fall. Similarly, two of its ordinary concomitants are lacking, the arched fibula and iron as a useful metal.

The second neolithic period in Eastern Thessaly is sharply severed from the first by the intrusion of a new culture which appears as something foreign and alien on the shores of the Pagasean Gulf. The pottery, for example, seems utterly different from that of the first period. The forms belong to a distinct series and are typologically older. The absence of feet and strap handles, so well developed in the A wares, precludes us from deriving Dimini ware from any of the latter. The characteristic designs, too, based on the spiral and the meander, are entirely foreign to the earlier series. Moreover, the use of fortifications beginning with this pottery (the traces of an earlier wall at Sesklo are exceedingly problematical), and restricted to its area, heightens this impression of foreignness. So too do the ‘megaron’ houses of Dimini and Sesklo, which do not seem to find their explanation in the curvilinear or square huts of the first period.

As to the provenance of this culture, the recent declaration of Sir Arthur Evans, that the origin of the spiral motive in Minoan ceramics is not to be sought in Crete itself, should dispose of the only reason for deriving it from the south; for there seems no ground for supposing that the Cycladic spirals antedate those of Dimini. Indeed I have argued in a previous paper, and my conclusion has been supported by more recent investigations, that Thessaly II. must be dated well back in the Early Cycladic Period. On the other hand, the theory of a northern origin has been strengthened by the discovery of Dimini ware in the Strymon valley. Indeed the general analogies between Dimini ware and the widespread group of painted and incised spiral-meander pottery north of the Balkans have been long recognised, and elaborate theories of an invasion, not only of Thessaly, but even of Crete itself, have been built up thereon.

The title of Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius of Tyana as it stands in all editions since Kayser’s 1844 edition, Tὰ ὲç τòν Tυανέα Ἀπολλώνιοώ is not correct. The genuine title of the work is Eἰç τòν Tυανέα Ἀπολλώνιον. The suggestion by Ewen Bowie, that the title of the work characterizes it as a novel, must therefore be dismissed. The meaning of the title is ambiguous: it means both ‘About Apollonius of Tyana’ and ‘In honour of Apollonius of Tyana’. This ambiguity may very well have been intended by Philostratus.

This article reviews several books published since the turn of the millennium that explore the role and representation of animals in different areas of ancient Greek and Roman culture. Despite differences in focus and outlook, these books herald the arrival within classical studies of the questions, concepts and methods of human/animal studies as an emerging field of enquiry. This article takes their publication as an opportunity to take stock and to outline the relationship between these disciplines. I explore how current research on ancient animals resonates both in existing debates in classical scholarship and within the context of the larger interdisciplinary debate. I also suggest how this debate can point to productive avenues for further enquiry in classical studies. More specifically, I argue that the interdisciplinary debate sets an important agenda, which should be embraced more fully by classical studies. Classical scholarship on the role, function and perception of animals in different areas of ancient Greek and Roman life can provide important insights into one aspect of the heritage – Western conceptions of humanity and the place of the animal within it – which has not yet received the attention it deserves. I conclude that classical scholarship can make a significant contribution to the interdisciplinary debate, helping it deliver on its stated goal of examining and challenging Western concepts of self, as well as the ideologies of ‘the other’ underpinning them.

The purpose of this article is somewhat ambitious. It is proposed to adduce evidence in support of the thesis, which the writer has already briefly maintained elsewhere, that the majority of the dates, earlier than the period of the Persian Wars, which pass current in our Greek history text-books, are wrong, and should be ‘scaled down’ by a certain proportion of their distance from 500 B.C. The virtue of 500 B.C. as a base-line lies simply in the fact that it falls in the middle of the generation that saw the beginnings of Greek historical prose writing in the hands of Hekataios of Miletos and others.

The genius of Herodotos, the considerable amount of contemporary information gleaned by later Greek scholars from the early elegiac, lyric and iambic poets, the vivid personalities of these poets themselves, and the systematising labours of generations of logographers and historians, ultimately reduced to order by Eratosthenes and transmitted to us by Eusebios—all these conspire to obscure from us the fact that the whole Archaic period in Greece is not an historic but a proto-historic age; an age known to us, not from contemporary historical writings, but through a synthesis of archaeology, references to historic events in a literature still exclusively poetic, references to our area in historical documents from a more mature adjacent region (such as Assyria), and genealogies and oral traditions that survived long enough to be written down later.

This paper is an amplification of that much quoted passage of Thucydides ἐπορεύθησαν δὲ πεƷῇ ἐς Ἀπολλωνίαν. Of this land route, which enabled the Corinthians to get troops up to Epidamnus in despite of Corcyra, we know something andcan guess more, and in view of the undoubted importance of this part of the Greek world to Corinth, it may be worth while to try to fit the isolated facts together and reconstruct a picture of a short phase of Epirote and Acarnanian history in the latter half of the fifth century. It is certain that the north-west ranked as one of Corinth's vital interests. There is no need to quote other evidence when there is the specific statement of the Corinthian ambassador before the Athenian demos that it was a necessity for Corinth to sail to Corcyra. It is beyond the scope of this paper to enquire why this was so; all that is here attempted is a correlation of the facts about the land route, how Corinth and Apollonia contrived to open it, how Corinth and Ambracia tried to keep it open, and how by the end of the Archidamian War Athens had succeeded in closing it. The evidence is not copious, but of good quality; Thucydides is contemporary, Pausanias quotes contemporary sources, and the mountains, rivers, and valleys of the north-west are silent witnesses.

The route falls naturally into three parts, the Acarnanian, the Epirote, and the Illyrian. It will be convenient to consider the Acarnanian section first, and the other two sections in the order mentioned.

This article argues that Pindar refers to cyclic Trojan epics as fixed poems known to his audiences and discusses why this matters for our understanding of his poetry. Section I claims that Isthmian 4 alludes to the Aethiopis as the work of Homer. Section II examines how Nemean 10 closely engages with the Cypria. Section III argues that Nemean 6 and Isthmian 8 signal an intertextual engagement with the Aethiopis and the Cypria. A conclusion assesses how far we can extrapolate from the preceding arguments to generalize about Pindar's relationship to Trojan epic and then suggests one particular way in which recognizing allusions to lost epic can enrich our understanding of his preserved lyric.

Alkaios refers to Pittakos as one who has ‘acquired an Atreid wife’ in fragment 70 Voigt. This paper looks at the connotations of that statement in the text of the Lesbian poet, and its significance for the history of the Greek idea of ancestral fault.