The article on crater cratera creterra in T.L.L. iv. 1108–10 is imperfect: several examples are omitted and no clear and coherent account of these forms is given.

crater appears first in Ennius' Annales (511 Vahl.); and very likely it was Ennius who, finding cratera too ordinary for poetry, transliterated . For several centuries crater remained a poets' word. It may have been introduced into prose by the elder Pliny, who affects poetic vocabulary; in later prose it is found more frequently than either cratera or creter

The purpose of this article is to discuss at greater length two problems raised by Mr. D. J. Mosley towards the end of his discussion of the Athenian Embassy to Sparta in 371 published in Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society N.s. viii (1962), 41 ff. The first of these problems concerns the policy pursued by Callistratus at this peace-conference, the second the effect on their audience of the divergent speeches of three of the Athenian ambassadors, Callias, Autocles, and Callistratus, which Xenophon reports.

Cicero's use of the term is hardly a joke, and has to do with medicine, not logic. He says that his predecessor as governor of Cilicia, App. Claudius Pulcher, is like a doctor whose patient has been transferred to another practitioner, and who takes offence when the new man alters the treatment.

1. The Commentariolum Petitionis is not in the Codex Mediceus of Cicero's correspondence with his brother Quintus, but it appears at the end of the letters to Quintus in the other manuscripts. It starts in the normal manner of a letter (QVINTVS MARCO FRATRIS. D.) and is, or purports to be, a collection of tips on canvassing set in the particular context of M. Cicero's consular candidature in 64: a composition of his brother Quintus. It is printed as no. 12 in Tyrrell and Purser's collection of Cicero's Letters.

In 189 B.C. Ennius accompanied Fulvius Nobilior on the Aetolian campaign, which ended in the siege and surrender of Ambracia. He went as a court poet, to the indignation of Cato, and celebrated his patron's achievement in what seems to have been a fabula praetexta, the Ambraci.

The pregnant phrase fatale monstrum comes at a crucial point in the third and longest of the three sentences of the ‘Cleopatra Ode’. Before it Cleopatra is being hissed from the stage of history with cries of disapproval; after it she is recalled to receive plaudit after plaudit for her courage and resolution. The phrase is emphasized by its position at the start of a stanza followed by a marked pause. Prima facie it is the climax of the vituperation, and has often so been taken. T. E. Page, for example, comments: ‘Horace speaks of Cleopatra as not human, but a hideous and portentous creature sent by destiny to cause horror and alarm.’

MR. R. G. M. Nisbet has made the attractive suggestion that the Vinnius to whom Horace addressed his thirteenth epistle was the Vinnius Valens mentioned by the elder Pliny as a centurion of immense strength who had served in the praetorian guard of Augustus (N.H. 7. 82). To the points which he has made in support of this identification may be added the appropriateness, if Horace's Vinnius was a soldier, of the words victor propositi (II) and the fact that Horace's comparison between Vinnius and a pack-animal gains in point if Vinnius was famous for feats of strength involving wagons and beasts of burden.

In 'AΘΠ. 22. I Aristotle made the judgement that Cleisthenes' reform gave a constitution to Athens far more democratic than Solon's, and to prove it he marked as Cleisthenic the law about ostracism. As the ostracism was considered a typically democratic institution, it was both persuasive and credible to connect Cleisthenes with a measure so admirably symptomatic of the adjudged new order.

Valerius Flacgus has few readers and still fewer admirers, even among classical specialists. Most of us, if we want to refresh our memories of Hylas, will turn to Theocritus' thirteenth Idyll or perhaps to Propertius' statuesque version (1. 20). Apollonius Rhodius is read mainly in his third book, so that his Hylas story at the end of the first is ignored, and Valerius Flaccus is hardly read at all. In the year 1894 W. C. Summers in A Study of the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus called for a fair reappraisal of the much-neglected poet. The works of the few scholars who have since attempted a literary assessment lie, for the most part, obscurely stored in the stacks of those Teutonic universities that awarded them a Ph.D.

Glos, who had been in command of the fleet and was married to the daughter of Tiribazus, fearful that it might be thought that he had cooperated with Tiribazus in his plan and that he would be punished by the King, resolved to safeguard his position by a new project of action. Since he was well supplied with money and soldiers and had furthermore won the commanders of the triremes to himself by acts of kindness, he resolved to revolt from the King.

The origins of the unrest among the Pannonian legions in A.D. 14 are easily discerned. The great war in Illyricum of A.D. 6–9 involved the legions in a series of extremely arduous campaigns extending across the western half of the Balkan Peninsula, in particular the impenetrable forests of Bosnia and the rugged karst of Dalmatia. The nearness of this area to Italy made the war a great crisis in the reign of Augustus: conquest of Illyricum was the keystone of Augustus' northern frontier policy and no efforts were spared to achieve this. Advances in Germany could be determined from expediency but the subjugation of the Bosnian tribes was a necessity. During the war the need for men was so great that conscription was introduced in Italy and even freedmen were enlisted when ordinary citizen volunteers were not forthcoming. Cassius Dio speaks of the low morale and outbreaks of mutiny in the army of Tiberius during the last season of the war.

What is the reality behind the famous phrase, in Demosthenes 2. 6? It is commonly spoken of as a secret treaty, pact, agreement, bargain, or understanding, or as a secret clause or article (all these terms have been used in recent times), between Athens and Philip II of Macedon, at some time between 359 and 357, whereby the Athenians promised to hand over their ally, Pydna, to Philip, in return for his promise to hand over Amphipolis to them.

In 346 the Athenians were sadly deceived by Philip. The long war for Amphipolis had taken its toll and the people wanted relief, but the real motive of those who wanted peace in 346, both Philocrates with his principal abettor Demosthenes, and Eubulus and Aeschines, was to try to keep Philip out of Greece itself.2 In Elaphebolion the only debate was about means, whether, as Aeschines wanted, to try to get Phocis included in a Common Peace, or, as Demosthenes with a clearer view of what Philip would accept urged, to make a separate peace and alliance and leave the salvation of Phocis to the future: he probably thought that, if Philip should afterwards attack Phocis, Athens could choose between her allies and, as in 352, rush to the aid of Phocis.

Lily Ross Taylor in an interesting recent article on the proportion of freedmen to freeborn in the sepulchral inscriptions of Imperial Rome discusses the increasing omission of status nomenclature by freedmen in the first and second centuries A.D. and the consequent difficulty of determining the status of persons whose names appear in the epitaphs. One contributory factor to this decline in the traditional nomenclature which she mentions is the growing numbers and importance of the freedmen of the emperor, the Augusti liberti. While non-imperial freedmen were anxious to record their acquisition of citizenship, but not their inferior status in the citizen body, the emperor's freedmen, on the other hand, increasingly formalized their status nomenclature so that the formula ‘Aug. lib.’ proclaimed not only the fact of their manumission within the Familia Caesaris but also the higher social status which they enjoyed. An examination of the nomenclature of the Imperial freedmen might help to throw some light on this process, particularly on the problem of dating.

The aim of the following note is to draw attention to certain links between the marriage of Claudius and Agrippina and that of Nero and Octavia. Previous writers have not, so far as I know, dealt fully with the implications of these marriages, especially when they are seen in the light of the Silanus affair of A.D. 48–49. In each case, it will be argued here, Claudius may have been impressed by Greek precedents.

for the Persian occupation … ([Dem.] II. 5)

read the Macedonian occupation … ([Dem.] II. 4)