R. G. Austin's translation of these famous imprecations of Dido's seems to me perfectly representative, ‘and then do you, my Tyrians, hound with hate and hate again all his stock and all his race to be’. I see no strong arguments against such an interpretation of this sentence, but I think that an alternative—and very different—understanding of these words is likely.

It has long been known that there is a significant connection between Aphrodite and Semitic goddesses. In Walter Burkert's recent words, ‘Behind the figure of Aphrodite there clearly stands the ancient Semitic goddess of love, Ishtar-Astarte.’ This was already recognized by Herodotus and Philo of Byblos. I want here to note a curious and striking item of connection that has not been noticed.

There is nothing that renders this punctuation and the standard understanding of these verses impossible. Parallels can certainly be found . It is however true that this ellipse of seu has no good parallel in the Odes and the two examples in the Satires are much easier to tolerate than the use here. Thus, it may be worth noting that a different view of the verse seems possible. Remove the comma from line 16 and take tollere with maior: ‘than whom (...) there is no master of the Adriatic greater at raising or calming – if he desires – the waters.’ Seu then = vel si, as frequently. Horace has a particular affection for infinitives governed by adjectives ; Wickham provides a lengthy list at vol. 1, pp. 316–17. At Satire 2.3,313 minor is so used. (shrink)

In the discussions and debates about the precise nature of Melanthios’ abuse of Eumaios and Odysseus at Od. 17.215–32 and especially the meaning of μoλoβρóν at 219, an important point appears to have been missed.

‘It is not likely that anything absolutely new can be added to the interpretation of this familiar poem.’ So G. L. Hendrickson forty five years ago. It need scarcely be noted that in spite of these cautionary words much has been written on this ode in the intervening years. With hesitation I add here a few words on what seems to me an overlooked yet central aspect of this poem.

Wordplay involving names is routine in Homer. Less common, but not rare, is wordplay that does not have anything to do with names. Thus, at Iliad 1.290f. there is a play on ; at 24.611 an implicit play on / ; at Odyssey 12.45–46 a possible play on.

In the Res Gestae Alexandri of Julius Valerius, the manuscripts at 1.36 read Tyrum enim proteri mox pedibus haberi principis respondere. The use of habeo with infinitive as a virtual equivalent of the future tense is common in late Latin. Thielmann emended our text to read habere and is followed by the standard critical edition and by TLL. “Can haberi be defended? We ought to remember that auxiliary verbs are often ‘attracted’ into the passive when the dependent infinitive is passive, (...) in the case of some verbs regularly, with others occasionally .b It is not impossible to believe that the text at hand reflects the same phenomenon. (shrink)

Bailey posed the problem succinctly and clearly: ‘Though you can be said to “fashion a dream for yourself”, it is not easy to see how you can do it for someone else.’ He agrees with Giussani: somnia = ineptae fabulae, which is unexceptionable. But in fact Bailey's objection to the ‘literal’ meaning of the text is baseless. Dream control was indeed practised in antiquity.

Ritualistic formulae and acts pervade the political, legal, societal and religious life of the ancient world. In many instances there are striking similarities between the formulae of the Greco-Roman world and those of the Near East. Often illumination exists from one to the other. Here I wish to notice a few passages in Greek drama where I think such illumination is possible.

Ritualistic formulae and acts pervade the political, legal, societal and religious life of the ancient world. In many instances there are striking similarities between the formulae of the Greco-Roman world and those of the Near East. Often illumination exists from one to the other. Here I wish to notice a few passages in Greek drama where I think such illumination is possible.

I offer here two emendations of the text of the Odes, in two passages that make perfectly good sense, offer Latin that is unexceptionable, and have apparently never been questioned.

It appears to have gone unnoticed that the simile used by Vergil at Aeneid 5.458–60 was appropriated by him from Apollonius Rhodius.

Servius was surely not the first to show discomfort with Vergil's choice of the word violaverit. Observing that the simile in lines 67–8 derives from Homer , he seems to be apologizing for Vergil when he explains that the poet's violaverit translates Homer's νινη. And discomfort there should be. The notion of ‘tainting, spoiling, damaging, defiling’ that violare should carry seems out of place both for the ivory-image and for the picture of the beautiful girl. Modern commentators have been no (...) less troubled than Servius. Unwilling, however, to see Vergil as blindly enslaved to Homer, they have offered another explanation: violare here is tied to the violentia of her lover Turnus. ‘Vergil connects the violentia of Turnus with the staining of the ivory in the simile used to describe Lavinia's blush.’ should like to add a third explanation for Vergil's choice of violare. (shrink)