Search

In the pamphlet On Salaried Posts in Great Houses Lucian of Samosata analyzes the problem of the impossible relationship between misthos, ‘money’, and paideia, ‘culture’ and ‘teaching’. Money is an indispensable asset for the necessities of life. But starting with Socrates and the Sophists it becomes problematic. In Lucian’s satire the attack is directed at philosophers and the marketing of culture in the Roman Empire at the time of the Second Sophistic.

This paper discusses problems of staging, address and word order in Greek tragedy to shed light on a controversial passage in Sophocles: Aj. 339-343. Ajax’s cry within, ἰὼ παῖ παῖ (339), has been alternatively taken to refer to Eurysaces (as suggested by Tecmessa) or to Teucer (whom Ajax mentions at 342-343). The paper argues for Teucer and responds to three arguments against this view: (1) παῖ is not only acceptable, but also effective to address one’s sibling; (2) the word order of 342, Τεῦκρον καλῶ, strictly implies ‘It’s Teucer I’m calling’ (not just: ‘I call on Teucer’), hence it cannot mark the move to a new addressee; (3) it is hardly possible for Ajax not to hear Tecmessa’s 340-341: short interactions across the skēnē door may occur, and the parallel scene at Euripides, Medea 1270a-1278 suggests that Ajax most likely hears Tecmessa’s words and corrects her wrong guess.

In the following note, the contributor will lead a short discussion on a difficult passage occurring in Germ. fr. 4 Gain: the author revises previous emendations and then uses a palaeographical method in order to propose fresh conjecture, which actually provides a plausible reading of what an ancient scribe miswrote.

Conjecture on [Epicharmus] Fr. 249 K.-A.