The article treat with the voluntary action (in which we can include the free human action) and non voluntary causality. The author wants give some aclarations over the actual controversy, from Aquinas thought.

The concept of "person" does not determine criteria of identity: the pseudo-concept of "personal identity" is not found in Aquinas. Discussions of immortality and resurrection which use this pseudo-concept have obvious flaws. Neither the affirmation nor the denial of "personal identity through death" have determinate sense.

The view that Pausanias 9. 13. 1–15. 6 is a simple epitome of Plutarch's lost Epaminondas, first advanced by Wilamowitz in 1874 and later elaborated by Wilamowitz himself and by Ludwig Peper, has commonly been accepted, with little or no further discussion, by students of Plutarch, Pausanias and fourth-century history. In a recent general reaffirmation of the thesis John Buckler does note that what Pausanias says about Mantinea is hard to square with Plutarchan evidence and he therefore admits some contamination (...) of the hypothetical source with non-Plutarchan material. But Buckler's discussion of the matter within the framework of a book on the Theban hegemony is necessarily brief and somewhat unsystematic, and may be thought over-ready to assume Plutarchan connections where none can be demonstrated. The purpose of this paper is to show that the Wilamowitz/Peper hypothesis in its pure form cannot reasonably be sustained, that at the very least some degree of contamination must be presumed, and that the existence of a direct connection between Pausanias and Plutarch can hardly be regarded as established beyond reasonable doubt. (shrink)

Lords of Asia Minor: An Introduction to the Lydians. By Annick Payne and Jorit Wintjes. Philippika, vol. 93. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2016. Pp. x + 144, illus. €29.80.

Both patently incorrect readings and long-established emendations have a habit of retaining their places in texts of ancient authors with few or no questions asked. This paper considers two examples of this phenomenon in Book 15 of Diodorus' Bibliotheke.

Why cantoribus? The reference of the phrase cantores Euphorionis has been much discussed, by the author of this note among others. But what is the sense of cantores? The Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Lewis and Short, and the Oxford Latin Dictionary variously classify Tusc. 3.45 as an instance of cantor in the special sense of ‘supporter’, ‘imitator’, or ‘eulogist’. Recently, however, W. Allen suggested that this may be to read too much into the word: ‘… cantor could well have the standard (...) meaning of personal and private recitation of poetry. Since sometime cantare and legere have a semantic identity, however, it may be possible that the word cantores in hi cantores Euphorionis has a meaning no more momentous than that of lector. ’. (shrink)

Catullus 68 has for generations been the site of hard-fought and inconclusive philological battles. This, it may be confidently predicted, will continue to be the case. The present contribution, therefore, can pretend to no more elaborate aim than the opening up of certain new fronts. It falls into two parts of unequal length: first some general observations on the contents of the poem — or poems, for the Einheitsfrage cannot be evaded — and the underlying theme thereof; second a detailed (...) examination of the source and significance of perhaps the most remarkable passage in an altogether remarkable piece of work, to wit the barathrum simile . The argument of I has, the reader will observe, a not inconsiderable bearing on that of IIB, though it is in no way dependent on the latter's acceptability. The argument of IIA, to the contrary, has no necessary link with those of I and IIB and may profitably be judged by itself. (shrink)

There is no hint in either work that any of the information contained in this reconstruction of family relationships might be open to serious question. It is the purpose of this note to suggest that this is none the less the case. The problem concerns the supposed wives and children of Isokratesü adoptive son Aphareus. The information presented on this subject depends on two passages of the pseudo-Plutarchan Vitae Decem Oratorum. The first is a list of members of the family (...) buried in Kynosarges, which mentions Isokratesü. (shrink)

Is there or is there not a reference here to the Megarian Decree? Opinions have differed and no doubt will continue to do so. However, considerable authority has recently been thrown behind the proposition that the matter can be decided on purely linguistic grounds, that merely as a matter of use of Greek the passage cannot contain a reference to the Megarian Decree. This seems, on investigation, to be false, and since confusion appears to persist in the books about the (...) interpretation of Thucydides' text a short discussion may perhaps be of value. (shrink)