I have deferred the publication of ten new Neo-Phrygian inscriptions discovered in 1912 and 1913, and of my revisions of some of the known texts, in the hope that further revision might be practicable. Careful revision of more of the texts, e.g. Nos. VI, XII, XV, XXV, XLVIII, is essential to a definitive publication of these inscriptions. Such publication should be accompanied by a discussion of the date of the Neo-Phrygian inscriptions, and by a map showing their distribution in relation to the Imperial estates and their bearing on the boundaries of Galatic Phrygia. A provisional discussion of these and other points has appeared in the Journal of the Manchester Egyptian and Oriental Society, No. X. p. 25 ff. The present paper is another provisional instalment, called for by the publication of Professor Sayce's paper on p. 29 of this issue of the Journal. I have continued the numbering adopted in J.H.S. 1911, p. 161 ff. and 1913, p. 97 ff.; it should be observed that the collection includes several Greek inscriptions. Among the inscriptions first published by myself, Nos. LII and LXVI are in Greek; the second contains at most a Phrygian dative form; the former should be transcribed (ll. 4 ff.) π(ρωτ)οκωμήτης Παρεθθ(ω)ν ϒοῃ Όρονδίῳ εὐχήν. The village was probably Παρεθθα, Βαρεττα, or Βαρδαεττα (Dedeler): see Ramsay in Studies in the Eastern Roman Provinces, p. 250 f.

IONE Mylonas Shear claims in her article in JHS 2002 that two Mycenaean animal figurines from Ugarit, only one of which has been previously published, represent Mycenaean centaurs and are thus predecessors of centaurs of the historical period. It is quite clear, however, that both belong to the so-called ‘abbreviated group’ figurines, which consist of driven oxen – ‘plough’ (PLATE 8a) – or single chariots, as identified by E.B. French and further defined by me in my work on the terracottas from the Sanctuary of Aphaia on Aigina. In an abbreviated group there is only one animal instead of two, with one human, sometimes two, standing at the rear of the animal, in or behind a small or almost non-existent box or balustrade. According to what animal head is at the front of the figurine, either horse or bovine, it is an abbreviated chariot or, much more commonly, a driven ox. In the fully preserved pieces the head of the driver always faces towards the animal head.

In this article a new interpretation of the problematic form (Alcman PMGF 28 (85 Calame)) is proposed on the basis of a both a fresh examination of the history and prehistory of the ϕι-case and an overview of the syntax of coordinated pairs in various Indo-European languages.

This article addresses the asymmetry between the two main aspectual paradigms in the Classical Greek verbal system: the imperfective and the aorist (perfective). Whereas the imperfective has separate indicative forms for present and past time reference, i.e. the ‘primary’ and the ‘secondary’ indicative, the aorist only has a secondary (‘past’) indicative. I argue that this asymmetry is not only morphological but also semantic. That is, while the secondary imperfective indicative (the ‘imperfect’) is confined to past time reference, the secondary aorist indicative is used not only to refer to the past but also to the present. It then enters into aspectual competition with the primary imperfective indicative (the ‘present’). Based on R.W. Langacker's (2011) Cognitive Grammar account of aspect, I distinguish five types of context in which a present tense form with perfective aspect is a desideratum, and argue that here the secondary aorist indicative is used to fulfil this function. Moreover, I present a diachronic account of the origin of this remarkable asymmetry, arguing that the aorist indicative was never a past tense to begin with.

Dr. Forrer's discovery of the Achaeans in the Hittite cuneiform tablets of Boghaz Keui is now well known to classical scholars. His identification of them with the Hittite Akhkhiyawas is beyond question, and I am inclined to think that Dr. Cowley has made a happy suggestion in further identifying them with the Hivites (Ha-Khiwwî) of the Old Testament. On the other hand, the identification of the Akhkhiyan chieftain Attarassiyas (also written Attarsiyas) with the Homeric Atreus is phonetically impossible; nor would the date of Attarsiyas agree with that usually assigned by tradition to Atreus.

About 1250 B.C. Attarsiyas the kuirwanas or κοίρανος of the Akhkhiyawa came from the western side of Asia Minor with a fleet of 100 ships to the Pamphylian coast (hardly the Karian, as Forrer proposes). He had previously driven a tributary of the Hittite king, by name Madduwattas, from his dominions in the south-western part of Asia Minor; Dudkhaliyas III, however, the Hittite monarch, had restored the latter, but on the death of Dudkhaliyas, and in the first year of the reign of his successor, Arnuwandas, Attarsiyas made another attack, this time by sea, and again compelled Madduwattas to solicit help from his suzerain.

In the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology I have just published a quantity of new evidence with regard to Keftiu, which should be read as an introduction to the present article. The geographical conclusions in that article were drawn from a variety of sources, and were emphatic that this name was applied by the Egyptians to the country comprised within the boundaries of the later Pisidia, Isauria, Lycaonia and Cilicia. Of this tract Cilicia Tracheia seemed to be the centre. We also found ourselves brought into contact on several occasions with the Philistines. This new evidence, therefore, provides a remarkable confirmation of the results drawn from my original archaeological study of the Keftiuans and their civilisation as exhibited to us on the Egyptian frescoes of the XVIIIth Dynasty.

We offer a reassessment of two letters from the state correspondence of Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (r. 744–727 BC) with the earliest references to a town called Yauna and a people called the Yauneans, as encountered on the eastern Mediterranean coast by the newly established imperial administration. Past scholarship connected these Assyrian terms with the ethnonym ‘Ionians’ and/or the toponym ‘Ionia’. The study narrows down the location of Yauna, drawing also on a review of the coastal sites that have produced Greek ceramic imports: although identification remains elusive, Yauna was certainly situated in the territory of the kingdom of Hamath, and later the Assyrian province of Ṣimirra. Discussion of the historical and cultural background of Yauna’s foundation highlights its significance for the ‘transfer debate’ and the phenomenon of the ‘Greeks overseas’. We argue that the Assyrians first encountered the Yauneans in this locality and that, to them, they were originally simply the inhabitants of Yauna. Due to the similarities perceived between them and (other?) Greeks appearing in the eastern Mediterranean, the Assyrians came to apply the ethnonym universally to all these people, who eventually adopted it for themselves. Thus, we support the argument that the term ‘Ionian’ originated in external nomenclature.

The inscriptions here published are for the most part in the Ghizeh Museum, where I copied them last year when assisting in the preparation of the catalogue of the Graeco-Roman rooms. They do not appear to have been edited previously, and offer some points of interest. The numbers given are those of the new catalogue.

The inscription is on a columnar statue-base of limestone ·88 metres high and ·53 in diameter, one side having been cut flat to receive it; the remainder of the surface is decorated with acanthus leaves. The letters are, in the first seven lines, ·026–·031 high: in the rest, ·015–·02. Date: 181, June 25th.

The stone was seen by Dr. Petrie about 1886 lying at Sakha (Xois), where he copied it, and appears to have been removed to the Museum three or four years ago. It is quoted by S. de Ricci in Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. 1900, vol. xxii. p. 381.

The name of Commodus has been deliberately erased in 1. 5, every vestige of the letters being cut away. A similar erasure has taken place of the name of the prefect in l. 15, but the work has been much less thoroughly done there, by merely digging a line through the letters. The traces which remain are, however, insufficient to make the restoration of the name possible. The nearest in date of the known prefects is Flavius Pris[cus], mentioned in a Berlin papyrus of the year 181/2: but his name will not suit.

This article analyses monodic reperformance of epinicians in the fifth century BC and argues that the musical and ethical dimensions of such performances were mutually reinforcing. Reperformances by solo singers would have strongly foregrounded the agency of the individual performer, while also enacting his understanding of musical conventions. This relationship forms a structural parallel with the function of ethical statements in epinicians, which are usually conventional in terms of their conceptual content and yet also emphasize the agency of individuals in responding to them. I argue that the parallelism between ethics and monodic reperformance is an important thematic strand in Nemean 4 and Isthmian 2, and prefigures the responses that the poems elicit from audiences.

Rather less than a century ago Morelli began a revolution in art-historical method by demonstrating that every painter has his formulae for rendering details—ears, eyes, hands, drapery-folds and so on—amounting to a personal system; and that, for attribution, a study of these minutiae affords a valuable check on, if not a sounder basis than, a general sense of style; or rather that the two together form the only sound basis. There is no rule of thumb. Formulae are the artist's servants, not his masters. They appear and vanish, change and merge, according to the development of his technique and style, the influences he undergoes, the speed at which he is working, all the circumstances of his art; but in much of any painter's work they will be found recurring; rarely, as a system, in another's. Morellian method can only be effectively used by one who, like Morelli himself, is sensitive to works of art not only as aesthetic achievements but as expressions of personality; but without the tools of his forging it is impossible for sensitivity alone to make much headway. The study of Italian painting before Morelli was a chaos of unchecked traditions and conflicting hunches. Despite fine work by Hartwig, Furtwängler and others, the study of red-figure vase-painting remained much the same (without the traditions) until Beazley brought to it a rare combination of sensitivity to personal artistic style with Morellian discipline.

This article offers a new, ironic reading of the false narrative of Orestes’ chariot accident in Sophocles’ Electra (680–763). It argues that the speech exploits an established connection between the ancestral evils of the Atreids and the thematic nexus of horses, chariot racing and disaster to evoke Orestes’ flight from the Erinyes following the matricide. Focusing on the language and structure of the narrative as well as drawing on other versions of the story (notably the surviving plays by Aeschylus and Euripides), the article demonstrates, in contrast to previous readings, that the speech is much more than an over-elaborate means to an end. Instead, in an ominous and profoundly ironic twist, the Paedagogus’ fictional narrative of the chariot race offers a possible vision of the trials awaiting the real Orestes. The matricide and murder, far from ending the ancestral woes of the Atreids, may well bring about Orestes’ pursuit by the Erinyes.

Bei dem seit 25 Jahren wogenden Streit um die Entwicklung der aristotelischen Gotteslehre, in den auch mit wohl abwägendem Urteil Sir David Ross (Aristotle's Physics, 94 ff.) eingegriffen hat, ist eine Stelle aus Sextus Empiricus hyp. 3, 218 nicht verwertet worden. Um aus dem Schwanken der Theologie in die skeptische ἐποχή zu führen, gibt Sextus einen kurzen Katalog der Gottesauffassungen, wobei er wie ‘Aetios’ Doxogr. 297a13 ff. anlässlich eines ausführlichen Kataloges mit den Atheisten beginnt und folgende Lehrmeinungen aufzählt: ᾿Αριστοτέλης μὲν ἀσώματον εἶπενεἶναι τὸν θεὸν καὶ πέρας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ Στωικοὶ δὲ πνεῦμα διῆκον καὶ διὰ τῶν εἰδεχθῶν, ᾿Επίκουρος δὲ ἀνθρωπόμορφον, Ξενοφάνης δὲ σφαῖραν ἀπαθῆ Deutlich ist, wie sich zwei Paare gegenüberstehen. Der aristokratische Gott des Aristoteles, unkörperlich und uns entrückt, und der gemeine, körperliche und auch durch das Hässliche hindurchgehende des Stoikers, weiter der menschenförmige und der in idealer Kugelgestalt gedachte Gott. Die stoische Meinung ist gut wiedergegeben, höchstens dass in διὰ τῶν εἰδεχθῶν ein leiser polemischer Ton mitschwingt; ein frühes Zeugnis bietet Megasthenes, der in seinem Indienbuch für einen Zug der brahmanischen Philosophie die stoische Formulierung übernimmt (bei Strabo 713) ὁ διοικῶν τὸν κόσμον . . . θεὸς δι ᾿ ὅλου διαπεφοίτηκεν αὐτοῦ Der menschengestaltige epikurische Gott ist vielfach bezeugt, z.B. fr. 355 Usener.

Tell me, Muse, of that resourceful Man who travelled far,

After he had sacked the sacred walls of Troy in war,

And looked on many towns of men, and learnt their mind, while he

In his own heart suffered many sorrows on the sea,

To save himself from death and doom and bring his comrades safely home—

Eager though he was, he could not save them; they were fools and ate

The cattle of our Lord the Sun-God; their own folly proved their fate—

Something of that story, goddess, child of Zeus, to us relate.

That, so far as the Muse is concerned, is a complete epic paragraph, the form marked by the chime, ‘Tell, Muse … goddess, child of Zeus, relate!’ The Man, his character and his adventures, his comrades and their folly, are to be the Muse's theme. And yet the pattern still awaits completion, since the Man is not yet named. The second paragraph fulfils an expectation. We are in suspense until we hear ‘godlike Odysseus’ at the end.

There can be little doubt that, as Eduard Schwartz points out, the problem of the political sympathies of Thucydides can only be properly approached if it is remembered that his history in its present form was revised and possibly rewritten after the end of the Peloponnesian War. He was living in an atmosphere of défaitisme. Many of his contemporaries tended to glorify Sparta and her institutions, and to regard Athenian imperialism as a disastrous mistake. As a man of the older generation Thucydides felt it his duty to counteract this tendency by drawing attention to the real idealism which had inspired the Machtpolitik of the Periclean age, and by pointing to the benefits which the rule of Athens had conferred on the Greek world. The Preface to Book I may be regarded as a veiled apologia for the Athenian Empire, which had secured for Greece the freedom of intercourse which the writer holds to be essential alike for economic prosperity and for cultural development. Similarly the contrasts which Thucydides draws between the Athenian and the Spartan character, and the glorification of Athens which is the main subject of the Funeral Oration are inspired by the hope that the disillusioned Greeks of the early fourth century might come to realise that the ideals of Pericles and other Athenian imperialists had been not sordid but noble, and that Greece as a whole had derived benefits from the rule of Athens.

Mr. Mahaffy in his preface to The Empire of the Ptolemies states among other problems raised by Ptolemaic history the following: ‘How far does the observation, that we only know of one crown-prince with a wife (Soter II.) account for the divorce of that wife after his accession, and for the other apparent heartlessnesses in Ptolemaic history? Is the hereditary title recognised in the princesses, which no doubt led to their marriages with their reigning brothers, a relic of Pharaonic ideas, or a mere imitation of the successful experiment of Philadelphus?’ This article is an attempt to show that the former hypothesis is the true one, and that the marriages of the Ptolemies were dictated by their policy of conciliation, and were based on deeply rooted native prejudices.

Of the five Phrygian monuments now published from the drawings of Mr. A. C. Blunt, No. 4 on Pl. XXVIII, may be assigned to an early period of Phrygian history. It has been already published by Steuart, Anc. Monum.; but like all his drawings, this is very incorrect and gives an inaccurate idea of the original. The monument is at Yapuldak (see the map in last number of this Journal). There was at this place a town or fortification of some kind on the top of a hill, which rises about 200 feet above the plain. The western side of the hill is a precipice of rock, and on all other sides it is very steep. On the western side an underground staircase cut in the rock leads down to the plain: a similar one at Pishmish Kalessi has already been mentioned above, p. 6. Near this staircase there is a doorway leading into a small rock-chamber, from which another door in the opposite wall leads into a second chamber, larger than the first. At the back of the second chamber a door admits into a third chamber, and in the back of this third chamber there is a door or window which looks out over the precipice to the west. One can step out through this window and stand on a ledge about eighteen inches wide; and this is the only way to get a near view of the carved front which is now given according to Mr. Blunt's drawing and measurements. The architectural work round the door shows the love of ornament characteristic of both Phrygian and Mycenaean art. It does not consist of curved mouldings: the section shows only straight lines. There is a high pediment over the window, the centre of which is occupied by a peculiarly shaped obelisk. This pediment is very like one over the door of a tomb in the side of Pishmish Kalessi, engraved by Perrot, Voy. Archéol. p. 146; but is much more elaborate. On the two sides of the obelisk, arranged in the usual symmetrical fashion, are two animals, on the right side certainly a bull, on the left side probably a horse. The horse is frequently represented on the outside of Phrygian tombs, but I do not know any other case where the bull appears on them.