[Milman Parry established first that Homeric poetry was traditional, based on his studies of its formulae and language, and then that it was oral, based on his experience of recording south Slavic epic; he likened the unusually long epics of Avdo Međedović to those of Homer. Albert Lord put the two concepts together, holding that both south Slavic epic and Homeric poetry were oral-traditional and that all oral epic poetry, including that of Međedović, is traditional. However, the author’s investigations into the Milman Parry Collection of Oral Literature and his personal experience of collecting epics in Montenegro in 1989 prove that this is incorrect. The poems of Avdo Međedović do not conform to traditional uses of language, theme and story-patterns, but offer something new, of which other traditional singers disapproved, as their recorded conversations demonstrate. Similarly, by analogy, the epics of Homer differed from the traditional poems of the Epic Cycle, exactly as Aristotle indicates in the Poetics. Hence neither Međedović nor, by analogy, Homer were fully traditional poets, although they were oral poets; instead, they deliberately adapted the tradition so that the old stories were mixed and matched into much lengthier and more complex epics, which should be called post-traditional.]

Scholars have noted that Circe’s instructions to Odysseus illustrate a speech type-scene comprised of directions and then instructions – or ‘map’ and ‘script’: first she tells him (i) how to get to the entrance to Hades and then (ii) what rituals to do and what words to say after he gets there (Od. 10.507–40). This essay argues that the Odyssey poet is, in fact, using the vocabulary and syntax of an important subset of this speech-act: hexametrical oracles, as we see them quoted a few centuries later by Herodotus and parodied by Aristophanes. Her advice, moreover, also echoes closely a specific kind of Archaic oracle that directed Greek colonists to a far-away place and that was typical of the female prophets called ‘Sibyls’, who lived near the Aegean coastline in places where the Homeric poems were originally composed and performed.

This paper re-evaluates the role of the Palici, a pair of indigenous Sicilian deities, in Aeschylus’ fragmentary tragedy Aetnaeans. Past readings of this play focus on ‘linguistic colonialism’, through which Greeks took possession of native gods and thereby demonstrated their cultural superiority. By contrast, this analysis situates the play within more nuanced models that envision cultural contact as a two-way process and highlight the diversity inherent within the categories of ‘Greek’ and ‘Sikel’. By reading the play in its fifth-century Sicilian context, particularly in light of new archaeological discoveries at the sanctuary of the Palici (Rocchicella di Mineo), this study establishes that – although the play does constitute a form of cultural imperialism – nonetheless we can gain more from focusing on the play’s politics of negotiation and accommodation, rather than appropriation and displacement. A reassessment of three aspects of the Aetnaeans – the birth of the Palici, their parentage and the play’s multiple settings – shows that Aeschylus had access to reliable information about the Palici and reworked it in his play in order to develop a new and uniquely Sicilian cultural synthesis in which indigenous deities play an important role.

This article discusses a passage in Athenaeus (14.620d) that refers to the performance of Herodotus’ work in a theatre in Hellenistic Alexandria. In his edition of Athenaeus, highly valued and still influential, August Meineke replaces Herodotus’ name (unanimously transmitted in Athenaeus’ manuscripts) with Hesiod’s. In this article I set out to overturn a widespread tendency to accept Meineke’s emendation of Athenaeus 14.620d, reconsidering the possibility that Athenaeus did in fact name Herodotus in the light of (a) the difficulty of explaining the origin of the alleged mistake in Athenaeus’ manuscript tradition and (b) the ancients’ tendency to draw parallels between Herodotus’ style and language and Homeric poetry. The fact that Athenaeus refers to theatrical performances of both Herodotus’ work and the Homeric poems will be shown to be very much in line with the ancient rhetorical, historiographical and biographical tradition which regarded Herodotus as the most Homeric of all prose writers.

Cicero’s friend and correspondent Titus Pomponius Atticus was a key figure in the Graeco-Roman cultural life of his time, and knowing about the Greek that he used would give us insight not only into this broader culture, but also into the Greek language itself at this crucial point of its history. However, no writings by him survive, and his Greek can only be reconstructed from Cicero’s letters. The only previous attempt to do this was made nearly a century ago and was generously inclusive but lacking in discernment. The current study seeks to distinguish the different types of evidence on this question that Cicero’s letters can offer. It provides a list of those Greek words we can be most confident featured in Atticus’ letters and suggests some criteria for judging the more numerous doubtful instances. Finally, it points to some conclusions about Atticus’ Greek, and how this may have differed from Cicero’s.

A terracotta figurine depicting Athena Parthenos, which is in the collections of the University of Liverpool and previously dated to the Roman period, is argued to have been made in the 19th century. The premise is based on the object’s close stylistic similarities to 19th-century terracotta figurines in collections in Manchester and Geneva, leading to the conclusion that all three were made from the same mould, and accordingly are of the same date. The note also considers possible reasons for the manufacture of this series of terracotta figurines depicting Athena Parthenos.

The Academic scholarch Carneades of Cyrene withdrew from active lecturing several years before his death. He handed the Academy over – either formally or informally – to a successor, who remained in charge for six years (137/6–131/0 BC) and passed away in Carneades’ own lifetime. Philodemus reports this episode three times in the Index Academicorum. Since 1869 scholars have never questioned the notion that Carneades’ lifetime-successor was a namesake: Carneades, son of Polemarchus (also called Carneades the younger). Now, new readings of several lines in all three passages reveal that the name of Carneades’ successor was actually Polemarchus of Nicomedia – a man skilled in dialectical methods. There never was a second Academic named Carneades.

Aristophanes of Byzantium is credited with inventing the signs for Greek accents, breathings and vowel lengths, according to a single source: a short text found in two 16th-century Paris manuscripts. The passage has a doubtful history, but the story it tells is of considerable interest. We first provide a new edition of this text, based on a new examination of both manuscripts, and a complete translation. Secondly we argue that the author consulted a source that was in Latin and that dealt at least in part with the Latin accent. We conclude by considering the implications of our proposal for the text’s date and circumstances of composition.

This paper investigates how Gregory of Nazianzus imitates and responds to the Greek literary tradition in the autobiographical poem ‘On his own affairs’ (2.1.1). Through six case studies, it contributes to the ongoing re-evaluation of Gregory’s literary merit. With learning, wit, subtle humour and faith, Gregory adapts and reinvents earlier poetry to express Christian themes. Imitation is at the heart of his poetic technique, but his imitations are never straight-forward. They include imitating both Homer and other poets’ imitations of Homer, learned word-play and combining references to non-Christian literature and the Septuagint. Gregory’s references add nuance to ‘On his own affairs’ and give pleasure to readers trained to judge poetry by comparing it to earlier poetry, especially the Homeric epics. They also demonstrate the breadth of his scholarship, which extends to Homeric variants, Platonic epigrams and the entirety of the New Testament and Septuagint. Above all, Gregory insists that he is a rightful participant in a living poetic tradition. He writes Greek poetry for the fourth century AD, just as Oppian did in the second century and Apollonius and Callimachus did in the Hellenistic period.

This article examines the surviving Greek declamations of the first to third century AD. They are found to be at odds with Philostratus’ familiar picture of the genre in respect of their brevity and stylistic simplicity. Explanations in terms of forgery/misattribution, textual adulteration of some form or the youth of the declaimers at the time of composition are rejected, and it is concluded rather that Philostratus’ picture of the genre is significantly distorted. Specifically, the Vitae sophistarum (1) omit declamations composed for didactic ends in favour of show declamations and (2) even among show declamations focus almost exclusively on the more florid end of the stylistic spectrum.

This article examines the remarkable inscribed monument IG XII.4.132, a dossier of documents dealing with political strife and reconciliation in the small island polis of Telos, as an important new piece of evidence for democracy in the early Hellenistic period. Placing the monument in its historical, geographical and political context, I argue that the background to the strife was most likely the activity of ‘demagogues’ in the courts of democratic Telos. Furthermore, we should view the terms of the reconciliation against the backdrop of issues of community service, publicity and memorialization, all contested political topics in the late Classical and early Hellenistic periods. The dossier shows that the kinds of ‘high politics’ and stasis that affected major poleis could be found also in the small cities of the Greek world, with important local variations. The document sits at a historical crossroads in terms both of judicial practices (including the use of foreign judges) and of constitutional forms (democracy and oligarchy).

This article examines the alleged author, or first-person narrator, of the tenth pseudonymous letter in the Corpus Aeschineum. It argues that the forger, in a short epistolary novel that describes the seduction of a certain Callirhoe in Troy, uses puns (αἰσχύνειν, ἀναισχυντία, etc.) on the name of the fourth-century BC orator Aeschines. It notes that αἰσχρός-words recur in ancient works and, as a rhetorical device, are attested in Demosthenes. The forger’s aims are, first, to serialize the ‘Aeschinean’ letters as a whole by relating them to the same author and, second, to create an ‘aischrologic’ counterpart of the Callirhoe, which is attributed to Chariton (Χαρίτων/‘The Graceful’). Thus there is less likelihood of suggesting other figures such as the eponymous Aeschines Socraticus.

In this article I review 11 books published since 2010 that bring the ‘material turn’ to classics. Some start from emic ancient perspectives on matter and materiality; others take their cue from current theoretical models such as those of the new materialisms. All offer new insights into our relationship with the material world and consider the material object as active within different paradigms. In reviewing these important volumes together, I question entrenched boundaries: from those between (sub-)disciplines to those between human and non-human agents. I explore the material turn not as an isolated phenomenon, but, first, as a cyclical ‘re’-turn and, second, as an integrated set of ideas incorporating (to name but a few strands) aesthetics, cognitive humanities, embodiment, affect and the senses. The books reviewed range from literary studies to archaeology to art history to material culture to heritage. Taken together, they set new directions for classics, and indeed for our thinking about our place in the world.