A Lost Peisistratid Name

1981 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 134-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. G. Forrest
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Structure ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
The Family ◽  
Positive Argument ◽  
Family Based ◽  
Social Units ◽  
Chronological Group

The family of Peisistratos did not indulge in strikingly uncommon names but it is noteworthy that all but one of them also appear in Chios. Neleus or Neileus (e.g. c. 150a, SEG xvii 381 A 1.2), Hippokrates (c. 420a, RE s.n. 14), Hipparchos {s. Ia, BSA lxi [1966] 199 no. 3.15), Heges[istratos?] (e.g. s. IVa, NC xv [1915] 430), Peisistratos, Hippias and Thessalos (see below): only Iophon is certainly missing. Their occurrences cover many centuries and no long filiations can be established, nor is there any positive argument that they all belonged to the same family, but for the late fourth and third centuries there is a hint. Chian social units had a family-based molecular structure. A catalogue of one of them gives us about 70 names c. 300a with an average of two additions p.a. thereafter (BSA lv [i960] 181–7 = SEG xix 580). On it there is a Hippias of the later fourth (father of the named member) and a Thessalos of the later third century. At least one Hippias appears on coins of the later fourth (NC xv [ 1915] 430) and another (or the same) on a subscription list of the mid third as father of the subscriber (SEG xix 578.12). A Chian Peisistratos dedicated in Rhodes in the second century (IG xii.i 113), a Peisistratos son of Peisistratos made a patriotic subscription in the later third (BCH xxxvii [1913] no. 27. 18—19), a Chian Peisistratos, grandson of Peisistratos, is given proxenia at Delos in the mid third or a little earlier (IG xi.4 598), a Peisistratos put his name on coins belonging to the same chronological group as those of Hippias (NC xv[i9i5]430). That the Hippias-group and the Peisistratos-group were somehow related is put beyond doubt by the name which one fourth-century Hippias and one fourth-century Peisistratos gave to their sons.

The Date of the Muratorian Fragment

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-172
Author(s):  
John F. Lingelbach
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Church History ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Current Work ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Historical Theology ◽  
First Time ◽  
Objective Methodology

Three hundred years after its discovery, scholars find themselves unable to determine the more likely of the two hypotheses regarding the date of the Muratorian Fragment, which consists of a catalog of New Testament texts. Is the Fragment a late second- to early third-century composition or a fourth-century composition? This present work seeks to break the impasse. The study found that, by making an inference to the best explanation, a second-century date for the Fragment is preferred. This methodology consists of weighing the two hypotheses against five criteria: plausibility, explanatory scope, explanatory power, credibility, and simplicity. What makes this current work unique in its contribution to church history and historical theology is that it marks the first time the rigorous application of an objective methodology, known as “inference to the best explanation” (or IBE), has been formally applied to the problem of the Fragment’s date.

scholarly journals From Commentary to paribhāṣās: Kātyāyana and Patañjali vis-à-vis Vyāḍi

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 515-566
Author(s):  
Maria Piera Candotti ◽  
Tiziana Pontillo
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
Fourth Century Bce

Abstract The present paper is targeted on three landmarks in the long story of the paribhāṣās’ development. Two of these landmarks descended from the earliest testimony of Vyākaraṇa meta-rules, i. e. those included in Pāṇini’s grammar (fifth–fourth century BCE), and one which has been handed down as the first independent collection of paribhāṣās and attributed to Vyāḍi. In particular a shift is highlighted between Kātyāyaṇa’s (third century BCE) integrative approach (vacana) and Patañjali’s (second century BCE) recourse to implicit paribhāṣās in the Aṣṭādhyāyī as a powerful hermeneutical tool. A shift that helps in interpreting the need for a validation and collection of implicit pāṇinian paribhāṣās as carried out by authors such as Vyāḍi.

scholarly journals Brooches from the Cemetery of Opushki and Their Role in Costume (According to the 2003–2020 Excavation Materials)

2021 ◽  
pp. 22-39
Author(s):  
Anastasia А. Stoianova
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Cervical Vertebrae ◽  
General Pattern ◽  
Central Area ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Roman Period ◽  
Second Century ◽  
First Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Archaeological Cultures

This paper presents a review of the brooches from the cemetery of Opushki located in the central area of the Crimean foothills. The cemetery was used from the first century BC to the fourth century AD by peoples of various archaeological cultures. 72 of 318 graves excavated there contained brooches. The total number of complete and fragmented brooches discovered there is 190. The largest group comprises one-piece bow-shaped brooches with returned foot and the brooches with flattened catch-plate from the first to the first half of the third century AD. There is a series of brooches made in the Roman Empire, with the most numerous group of plate brooches. There are a few violin-bow-shaped brooches, highly-profiled brooches of the Northern Black Sea type, two-piece violin-bow-shaped brooches with returned foot, and brooches with curved arched bow (P-shaped): great many pieces of these types occurred at other sites from the Roman Period in the Crimean foothill area. In Opushki, brooches appeared in all types of burial constructions, and mostly in the Late Scythian vaults from the first century BC to the second century AD. They accompanied graves of women, men, and children. In the overwhelming majority of cases, one burial was accompanied with one and rarely two brooches; there is only one burial of a child with three clasps. Most often brooches occurred at the chest, in rare cases on the shoulder, near the cervical vertebrae, pelvic bones, or outside the skeleton. It is noteworthy that a great number of brooches was found in the burials of children of different ages, from 1- to 8-12-year-old. Apparently, brooches as a part of the child’s costume were used throughout the child’s life from the very infancy. Generally, the brooch types from the cemetery of Opushki, their distribution in the assemblages and location on the skeletons correspond to the general pattern typical of barbarian cemeteries in the Crimean foothill area dated to the Roman Period.

Monumental Writing and the Expansion of Roman Society in the Early Empire

1996 ◽  
Vol 86 ◽  
pp. 22-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Woolf
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Formative Period ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Late Imperial ◽  
Cultural Phenomenon ◽  
Latin Epigraphy ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Subsequent Rise

The vast majority of surviving Roman inscriptions originated in a cultural phenomenon that is characteristic of, and in some senses defines, the early Roman Empire. At the end of the last century B.C. — roughly co-incident, then, with the transition to autocracy, the Roman cultural revolution, and the formative period of provincial cultures throughout the Empire — an epigraphic boom occurred, in Italy and in every province of the Empire. That explosion of new inscriptions, and the subsequent rise and fall of an epigraphic culture, was experienced by eastern and western provinces alike, in Greek as well as in Latin epigraphy. Many regional epigraphies remain to be characterized in terms of their chronology, but such local studies as have been done strongly suggest that, although there was certainly some inter-regional variation in the scale, rate, and timing of this phenomenon, in its broad outlines this pattern was very widespread. Across the entire Empire, the number of inscriptions set up each year began to rise from the Augustan period and increased more and more steeply through the second century. In every region that has been examined in detail, the majority of extant inscriptions were produced in the late second and early third centuries. The peak or turning-point seems to have been reached at slightly different times in each area. But everywhere the subsequent decline was much faster than the original rise, reaching a new low between the middle and the end of the third century A.D. Epigraphy does survive into the fourth century — in most areas of the Empire, if not in most cities — but late imperial inscriptions are very much rarer and differ markedly from early imperial examples in genre, form, and style.

Corinna

1970 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. L. West
Keyword(s):  
Good Reason ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Made In

In the controversy over the date of Corinna, the following points may be taken as agreed:1. An edition was made in Boeotia about the end of the third or beginning of the second century B.C.2. The texts of Corinna current in the late Hellenistic and Roman periods were all descended from that Boeotian edition.3. Before its dissemination, Corinna was unknown in Greece at large. If she wrote at an earlier period, she must have been remembered only locally.The difference between Boeotian spelling of the fifth century and that of the fourth is very great: but the difference in this respect between the mid-fourth century and the late third or early second is comparatively slight. It is therefore tenable that whereas there would be a good reason for the re-spelling of fifth-century Boeotian into the later convention of any period, there would be no obvious or adequate reason for re-spelling Boeotian of the fourth century into the orthography of the third, or that of the third into that of the second. Even those features of fourth-century spelling which have ceased to preponderate are by no means unknown or even uncommon at the end of the third century.

The Aftermath of Paracomedy

Paracomedy ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 248-264
Author(s):  
Craig Jendza
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Fourth Century Bce

This chapter explores three cases where authors engage with paracomedy after the fifth century BCE. It proposes that the anonymous fourth-century BCE tragedy Rhesus employs paracomedy and that it does so either because the author was indiscriminately copying from fifth-century drama or because he wanted to imitate Euripides’s penchant for paracomedy. It investigates the highly fragmentary evidence for Rhinthon’s third-century BCE hilarotragedies, normally thought to be theatrical farces, and posits that Rhinthon was utilizing a more explicit type of paracomedy than in the fifth century. It also provides an explanation for the surprising assertion from the second-century CE scholar Pollux that Euripides and Sophocles frequently employed a comic parabasis. The chapter argues that these cases of reception highlight paracomedy’s importance in antiquity and indicate that paracomedy was a noted hallmark of Euripidean stagecraft that had an indelible effect on the genre of tragedy.

Mary in Patristics

2019 ◽  
pp. 53-66
Author(s):  
Andrew Louth
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
The Third ◽  
Ephrem The Syrian ◽  
Protevangelium Of James ◽  
The Church ◽  
Apocryphal Texts

Mariological reflection in some second-century Fathers is introduced, especially the parallel with Eve; this explicit reflection on Mary is set beside second-century reflection on the Church as Virgin Mother, a tradition only later explicitly related to Mary as Virgin Mother. Attention is paid to the second-century Protevangelium of James with its remarkably developed Mariology; the nature of its esotericism is discussed, and later apocryphal texts introduced. Other tantalizing hints of devotion to Mary are mentioned, not least the use of the title Theotokos in a prayer belonging, possibly, to the third century. Mary’s virginity as an ascetic model in the fourth-century ascetic movement is briefly discussed. The first elaborate celebration of Mary is found in the liturgical poetry of the fourth-century Ephrem the Syrian. Mariology developed dramatically from the fifth century, witnessed in Proklos’ homilies, Romanos’ Kontakia, and the Akathist Hymn.

Fantasising Phryne: The psychology and ethics of ekphrasis

2011 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 71-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Morales
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Significant Aspect ◽  
The Third ◽  
Fourth Century Bce ◽  
Contemporary Writers

‘It's such a pity that we don't haveAnything like a photographOf her about whom the ancients rave …’…Fragments, copies, our museums still holdOf statues she modelled, or so we're told(from Phryne by Robert Conquest, 2000)Phryne, the celebrity hetaira who is said to have lived and loved some time during the fourth century BCE, was reputed to be ‘by far the most phenomenal of the hetairai’ (ἐπιφανεστάτη πολὺ τῶν ἑταίρων). This article aims to examine the anecdotes told about Phryne and argues that collectively they constitute a discourse on viewing that illuminates a significant aspect of the production and interpretation of art: the ethical and aesthetic problems involved (for the artist, subject, model and other viewers) in making and describing naturalistic art, especially that which represents the gods. A rich repertoire of written material on Phryne, and on the statue of the Aphrodite of Cnidus for which she was said to have been the model, has survived, although mostly by later rather than contemporary writers. Among the descriptions of the statue there is a group of epigrams collected in the Greek Anthology whose authorship and dating are largely uncertain. On Phryne we have accounts and imaginative scenarios in Alciphron, Lucian and Pausanias, all presumed to be writing in the second century CE; Athenaeus, who most probably wrote in the third century CE; and quotations from earlier writers.

Aristoxenus and the Intervals of Greek Music

1932 ◽  
Vol 26 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 195-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. P. Winnington-Ingram
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
First Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Early Date ◽  
Scientific Approach ◽  
Addition And Subtraction ◽  
The One

Ancient Greek music was purely or predominantly melodic; and in such music subtleties of intonation count for much. If our sources of information about the intervals used in Greek music are not always easy to interpret, they are at any rate fairly voluminous. On the one hand we have Aristoxenus, by whom musical intervals were regarded spatially and combined and subdivided by the processes of addition and subtraction; for him the octave consisted of six tones, and the tone was exactly divisible into fractions such as the half and quarter, so that the fourth was equal to two tones and a half, the fifth to three tones and a half, and so on. On the other hand we have preserved for us in Ptolemy's Harmonics the computations of a number of mathematicians, who realized correctly that intervals could only be expressed as ratios (e.g. of string-lengths), that the octave was less than the sum of six whole tones and that this tone could not be divided into equal parts. These authorities are Archytas, the Pythagorean of the early fourth century, Eratosthenes (third century), Didymus (first century) and Ptolemy himself (second century A.D.). To these we must add the scale of Plato's Timaeus (35B) and, closely related to it, the computations of the pseudo-Philolaus (ap. Boethium, Mus. Ill, 8) and of Boethius himself (IV, 6). Aristoxenus is less easy to understand than the mathematicians because of the unscientific nature of his postulates. His importance, however, is very great, not only from his comparatively early date but because he claims to champion the direct musical consciousness against the scientific approach of some of his predecessors and contemporaries.

Developments in Hellenistic-Roman times and the Nonveridicality projection (third century BC to fourth century AD)

2018 ◽  
pp. 99-144
Author(s):  
Katerina Chatzopoulou
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Second Century ◽  
First Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Negative Concord ◽  
Polarity Items ◽  
Sentential Negation ◽  
Syntactic Projection ◽  
Koine Greek

This chapter examines sentential negation during the Hellenistic Koine stage of Greek based on non-atticizing texts mainly from the first century BC to the second century AD. Structural developments of the language are presented that support a treatment for nonveridicality as encoded in a syntactic projection, independent from morphological mood and independent from complementizer position. A treatment of the licensing of polarity items is proposed—among which is the Greek NEG2—in terms of syntactic agreement. Nonveridical operators are taken to introduce the Nonveridicality Phrase (NONVERP) in syntax, encoding the observation that nonveridical environments tend to be morphologically marked in ways that can be distinct from mood marking. Furthermore, in the Koine Greek stage, NEG2 gets more specialized in its lexical negation function at the expense of NEG1, while Negative Concord structures get significantly reduced, a change that was linked to Greek word-order particulars.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document