Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
-
Upload
the-gathering -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
-
8/9/2019 Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
1/5
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Classical Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
Non-Reciprocal Uses of ἁλλήλωνAuthor(s): W. A. HeidelSource: Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Apr., 1928), pp. 176-179Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/263033Accessed: 02-03-2015 22:12 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:12:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/263033http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/263033http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/
-
8/9/2019 Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
2/5
176
NOTES
AND DISCUSSIONS
There
is some evidence in favor
of
frumenTO.
Suetonius
(Aug. 41) in
treating the same subject
which
we have in the eighteenth
chapter
of the
Res gestae
ays:
"Frumentum uoque n annonae
difficultatibus
aepelevis-
simo,interdumnullopretio viritimadmensus st tesserasqueumariasdupli-
cavit."
We should note that the
substantives
which Suetonius used
are
frumentum
nd
tesseras
nummarias.
Likewise,
n
chapterxv of the
Res gestae
here may be some clue to
the
restoration
f
chapter
xviii in the words
(of
xv): "iterumautem
n
consulatu
decimo
ex
patrimonio
meo sestertios
quadringenos
ongiariviritim
pernu-
meravi
et consul undecimum
duodecim
frumentationes
rumento privatim
coempto
mensus
sum." In these lines
Augustus
speaks
of
money (sestertios)
whichhe gavefromhis patrimony ex patrimoniomeo-exactly the phrase
n
chap.
xviii)
and
of
distributions
f
grain(frumentationes)
hich
he made
from
grain
that
he had
privately
purchased
frumento rivatim
oempto-Is
not
the
expression
imilar o such
a
phrase
as ex frumento
. .
. meo?).
The
reading
ex
frumenTO
equires
wo more
spaces
than
the ex
horrEO
of Ramsay
and von Premerstein,
but the
irregularity
of
the
right
margin
and
of the size and
spacing
of the letters
in the Monumentum
ntiochenum
readily
affords
he room
or two extra etters. Instead
of
the
tributus f
Ram-
say
and von Premerstein
we
might
have
tesseraswith
the
change
in
gender
of the adjectivesthat precede he noun,but tributusagreesbetter with the
Greek
translation
and is more suitable
with
the
restoration
EDIDI.
K.
SCOTT
YALE
UNIVERSITY
NON-RECIPROCAL
USES
OF
&AXXowv
Substantially
this
note
was
written
a score
or
more
years
ago,
but
laid
aside for fear of saying the obvious. Experience has shown, however, that
the
point
to be
made
needs
to
be
made,
not
only
for
the
neophyte
but also
for
many
an
accomplished
scholar.
Grammarians
and
lexicographers
call
&XX
Xwv
a reciprocal
pronoun
and translate
it
"one
another,
each
other."
On
consult-
ing any
good
dictionary
one
discovers
that
"reciprocal"
has
many
uses
which
may
well justify
the
accepted
nomenclature;
but
examples
presently
to
be
cited
likewise
excuse
the title
I have
chosen
for
this
note.
Attentive
reading
soon
makes
one
aware
of
marked
differences
in the
use
of
&XX'Xwv.
Pindar (0.42)
uses
aXXaXo4ovta
of
the slaying
of
Eteocles
and
Polynices each by the other's hand. The action is mutual, in the strictest
sense
reciprocal.
Herodotus,
on
the
other hand, speaks
of the
aXXAX0opayt7q
n
the army
of
Cambyses,
meaning
the practice
of
cannibalism
(iii. 25);
and
again,
speaking
of the
final fighting
at
Thermopylae,
says
that many
of
the
Asiatics
KaTeraTE'OVTO
ZWo'?
r'
&XX4Xwvvii.
223).
In
neither case,
as
Merriam
remarks
on the
latter passage,
is
there
any
"proper
reciprocity."
Examples
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:12:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/9/2019 Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
3/5
NOTES
AND DISCUSSIONS
177
of
the latter
sort
are
numerous.
Arist.
(Meteor.
356
a
22) says
KaLot
7TaVTEc
Ot7roTuot
6fatrvovTat
TAEVTVWTEs ls
TV/V
ODTavaTT, TOt
`
dLSdXXovs-' "except
when
one
river
empties
into
another."
Similarly
he
defines
episodic
plots
as
those in which situations follow one another
(urt'
aXXiX)
in accordance with
neither
probability nor
necessity (Poet.
1451 b
34),
in contrast
to
those which
grow one out of
the
other (1452 a
4). Again (ibid. 1448 b
32)
he
explains
the
name of
iambic verse
as arising
from the fact
oTL
ev
VTW
/uCTpPI
TOVrW
LaLjupt3ov
&AXvXovs,
ertainly not
meaning
to
imply that everyone
who was
lampooned
wrote
"iambic" verse.
An
interesting
class
of
examples
uses
&AA
Xwv
n
relation to
a
special
series
or
sequence, which
may
or
may not
be
circular. The circular sort
may
be
illustrated by the Homeric
Hymn to
Apollo 194 ff.:
aiTrap
iv7rX6Kagot
XpLTES
Kat
64)poves
Upat
'ApMovt&
'
dHI7
qe
At6
OvyaT71p
T'
'A4po5L'T
6pXEVVT
ac&XX?Xwv2ri
Kaprqy
Xetpas
IXovwat.
Here each held
"another,"
but
not each "the others,"
by
the
hand.
The recti-
linear
group appears,
e.g.,
in the
phrase
of
Arist.
(Cat.
1
b
16), TrW)v EpoyevW^V
Ka`
,ub vr' &XXvXa
ErTayjuEVa,
sed
of terms which
do not fall one under the
other,
as not
belonging
to the same
order or
category. Likewise
we hear of
various
early philosophers
asserting
that
life, animal and
vegetable,
originated by spon-
taneous generation from the primeval mire, but in process of time organic be-
ings
arose
St'
&XX'Xwvr
$
JAXvAXwv.
hese
phrases may have been
unambigu-
ous,
but one
cannot be quite sure in
view of the
Heraclitean doctrine
of
the
universal flux
and
the common belief in
the
KVKXOV
yeveaews.
Yet
one
is
fairly
startled
by the boldness
of
Lucretius when he
says (ii.75
ff.):
Sic
rerum
summa nouatur
semper,
et inter se
mortales mutua
uiuunt.
Augescunt
aliae gentes,
aliae
minuuntur,
inque
breui spatio
mutantur saecla
animantum
et
quasi
cursores
uitai
lampada tradunt.
Editors
of
the poet
generally pass over
this
passage
without
remark; Giussani
naturally forms an
honorable
exception.
Lucretius
presumably
had in mind
chiefly
Plato's
description
of
the
relay
torch
race
(Rep. 328 a),
XaJU&aM
JXOVTCEs
aU&aSWVTLV
(LX7AXOLS, combining it,
however, with
the same
philosopher's
more
precise
expression in
Legg. 776 b,
Ka&adrEp
dAVra&LoV
3(ov
vrapa&0ov1's XXots
(e
XXwv.
Sometimes,
especially
when a
considerable
group is concerned,
XiWAXwvs
used, even when
there
is no
thought of
involving
all its members,
in order
to
suggest that
the
matter
is of common
occurrence. Thus Plato
says
(Prot.
323 c),
ova
yap
7/yovV7aL
&UqXXovsKaca
eXeLv
acvp'oflO
4v'%EL
v
rv'X7,
od&s
Ov,uOVov
'raL
oSIE
vovcrdZ ("Such
faults as men
think to
see in one
another,
nobody
rebukes"). The
temptation to use
AXvXwv
n
reference to a group
is so
strong
as to
lead at
times to an
expression which
is clearly
illogical. In
Plato's
Apology
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:12:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/9/2019 Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
4/5
178
NOTES
AND
DISCUSSIONS
19
d,
Socrates
denounces
he
misrepresentation
f his
interests
and discourses
n
the
Clouds
f Aristophanes,
nd
after
disclaiming
ll knowledge
f the
things
imputed
to
him, thus
appeals
o
the
court:
uapTvpas
86
atv
vZZv
TOVS
ro"OvXs
rapcxO/JLL
KaL
a4tL
v/,ua'
&XXqov5
&UOYKELV
E
Ka'L
(ApJ
gELY,
L
EOV
7TW7rOTEK27
KocTLE
&LXE`yo,uEvov-0
oXoL
8E
VVLOv
0LO1TOL
tcT
V
4patere
ouv
&XX'XoLots
7T0)-
ITOTE
v
/KpOV
-1
/.Lya
?)KOVOC
TL7S;
VJ/JV C/OV
lrEpL
TOV
TOVO7aTV
&cAXyoLEvOu.
The
colloquial
urn
of
the
sentence
excuses
its faults,
if
such there
be;
but
note
what
is said.
The jurors
are urged
to
tell
one
another,
at
first
quite
generally;
as
an
after-thought
he appeal
is
restricted
o such
as have
heard
Socrates
discourse,
and
this
group
is bidden
4pS4ere
QXX-XoLs.
It is
obvious
that
those who
require
to
be
told
are
not of
the
number
of those
who
have
heard
him,
and
yet
&XAXIAoLS
s
used.
Of course
it may be said,
and
truly
said,
that
Socrates
wished
each
juror
who had
previously
heard
him to confirm
to
his
neighbors
the
truth
of
his present
assertion,
expecting
that
the
testimony
would
reach
the ears
of
such
as
had
no
personal
knowledge
of the facts;
but
the
use
of
WiXXioXs
s
certainly
not
strictly
reciprocal.
In
the orators
also
the
jurors
are
repeatedly
urged
to inform
their
fellows
of what
they know;
but
I
have
noted
only
one
instance-Andoc.
i.37-in
which
a&XX-wv
s used.
Akin to
the passage
from
the
Apology
just
mentioned
is
one
in
the Euthy-
phro,
which long
engaged
my
thought.
It is in fact
the
one
which first
drew
my attention to the uses of dXUXXwv. fter pointing out that men, while
admitting
in
principle
that
the
wrongdoer
should
pay
the
penalty
of
his
injustice,
dispute
about
details
of
particular
acts,
Socrates
asks (8 d),
OVKOVV
aVa
ye
TavTa
KaL
Or
Oo'
7relrOaa-vO
tYVep
a7TaW,o1RL
lrepL
TOV
SLKaCWV
KaL
c8LKWVy,
US
o
ao' Aoyos,
Ka'L
O'
/LV
4avLY
&XVA)XOV;
G&SKELV~
or
& ov
waav.
This
has
been
a crux
to all editors.
Most
have retained
the reading
of the
MSS;
but
that admirable
Platonist,
James Adam, proposed
to emend
by
reading
aAA'
aXXovs.
Those
who observed
the letter
did
all
manner
of violence
to
the
spirit,
as
may
be seen
by
a few examples.
Wohlrab interpreted
the
text
by
paraphrasingt thus:
KiaX
XJXAoV
&&8KOVVTE;
or
.LEv
4aoLv
a'ZKLv, O'
&
OV
XaaYLv.
How
an
editor
of Plato
should
come
to make
such
a
suggestion
is
incomprehensible;
for
his Greek
must mean "Though
they
wrong
one
an-
other,
some
assert that
they (themselves)
are
in the
wrong,
while
others
plead
'not-guilty.'"
Fritzsche
also offers
a
paraphrase
which
has the
double
merit
of being
possible
Greek
and making
sense:
a8LKo'VaV \XkAXovS,
a'L
OLe
V
4XaYLV (a&8LKc1COaL),
oL
8e
ou
4)aow
(&&KCZV).
But this
is
truly,
as he
says,
mira
breuitas.
Professor Burnet,
whom
no one will
accuse
of
not
knowing
Plato,
in
his
annotated
edition
(Plato's
Euthyphro,
Apology
of
Socrates,
and
Crito,
1924), writes as follows: "The meaning of the reciprocal pronoun is a little
hard
to
catch .... e must,
then,
take
&U'XKovg
s
determined
by
the
meaning
of
the whole sentence,
not by that
of the
clause
in
which
it
happens
to
stand,
and we must render,
'Each party
says
of
the
other
that
it
is
in
the
wrong,
and
the other
denies.'
That
means
a good
deal
more
than
the
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:12:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/9/2019 Heidel, W. a._non-Reciprocal Uses of Ἀλλήλων_CPh, 23, 2_1928_176-179
5/5
NOTES
AND
DISCUSSIONS 179
more obvious
ot
,ucv
roi's Trepovs
caxLv
a8&KCLV,
which
would not imply that
the charge was reciprocated."
These editors have this in common that
they regard
WXqAovu
s strictly reciprocaland as
referring o the groups
o v
.... ot
8C.
This
interpretation eads to difficultieswhich all in
their several ways confess-Wohlrab
and Fritzscheby actual transposition,
Burnet by saying that the meaning of
DA&
ovs
is not to be explained
by the clause
in
which
it happens
to
stand. It
will readily be admitted
that the presumption
s
against their
view
of the sentence,
and this
presump-
tion
is
confirmedwhen one
considersthe context.
The
point
is
not that
the gods
fall into two groups
who recriminate
each
other,
but
that
they
must, on Euthyphro'sview, differ,one group
from the
other,
about
what is
right and what is wrong
OTaaatovaL 7rEpL
TWv
LKaLWJV
Ka"L
&8tLKwv);
it is only
the
assumption
hat
dAXiBXovs
ust be
strictly
reciprocal
nd refer to
these
groupswho pass judgmenton the acts that creates
the difficulty. This I saw
long ago
and in
my
edition substituted
&Xovs
or
&XX
ovs,
but
soonrepented
of my sin,
because
I
becameaware that
the
change
was not
necessary.
The
meaning
s
simply
that
the
gods differ,
one
groupasserting
hat
A
wrongsB,
while
anotherholds him
guiltless.
Schanzwas
quite
right
in his laconic note
on
DAXXovs,
hier die einen die
andern."
The
passage
from
the
Apology
shows
that neither
A nor B
need
be
included
n
oL
puEv
...
ot
8
c.
If aXXAXkwverives rom aXXosXXov,his is intelligibleenough; t is just
like "one another"
and einander.Strict reciprocity
would cometo be denoted
by
such an
expression
not
inevitably
but
rather
by
chance. The
development
might
be
compared
o
the
single-pole
witch
being
crowdedbut not
superseded
by
the
three-way
witch,
which works
equally
well from either end. It
seems
that
a
comprehensive
tudy
of
so-called
"reciprocal" xpressions
n
a
large
groupof languages
would
rewardone who
inclines
to
semantics.
W.
A.
HEIDEL
WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
PUBLIUS FLAVONIUS
PAULINUS
A senatorial
career
which
has several
interestingpoints
is
given
in
the
following nscription
rom Pisidian
Antioch,
recently publishedby Professor
D. M. Robinson.'
II.
4Xauwvop
IIavXeT-
Pop
nrv
vXajuLrp6ra-
rop
j-yejuoPa
Xe-yeC7-
vos
ALyulrrKo(D),
-paL-
ropa,
Kovalaro[paj,
raw4ap
E7rapXLas
Kbvrpov, irpeo-
'
Transactions of
the
American
Philological
Association, LVII (1926), 230, n. 62;
cf. Plate XXXV, Fig.
62.
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:12:39 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp