This paper points out some of the weaknesses of the traditional account of the Homeric phrase ἀνδροτῆτα καὶ ἥβην and suggests instead that the entire phrase is a relatively recent creation of the tradition on the model of an *ἀμ(β)ροτῆτα καὶ ἥβην. This phrase in turn has a clear Avestan cognate hauruuatātā amərətātā.

This paper examines the evidence for the life and career of the Lesbian tyrant Myrsilos. Following an examination of the ancient testimonia for Myrsilos in the text of Alcaeus and later sources, the name Myrsilos is then considered in relation to the Hittite royal name Muršiliš, Myrsilos as an alternate name for the Lydian king Kandaules and various toponyms in Lydia and Caria that appear to be derived from the same underlying name or title. The consequences of the distribution of these names is then considered in the cultural and historical context of the Aegean-Anatolian interface, with implications for early Lesbian history and cultural continuity from the Late Bronze Age down to the Archaic period.

At the heart of the Thesmophoria festival lies the story of Persephone and the promise of agricultural fertility, but scholars point out that more seems to be at stake, suggesting that the scene of women ‘camping out’ in the sanctuary under the control of the female archons recalls a primitive time when women, perhaps, ruled the city or that the festival creates a place where women are at least beyond the control of men. There are hints, moreover, that during the Thesmophoria women were also actively involved in some kind of juridical activity, especially on the second day of the festival, when they fasted in imitation of Demeter's grief over the abduction of Persephone and the injustice perpetrated against her. Indeed, the epithet Thesmophoros was understood already in ancient times to have some connection with human law. This paper argues that on the second day of the festival women engaged in some kind of impromptu juridical procedure aimed at solving crimes and punishing anonymous wrongdoers and it uses as evidence Aristophanes' Thesmophoriazusae and a series of curse inscriptions deposited in late Hellenistic times at the Sanctuary of Demeter at Cnidus, as well as a few single examples from Locri, Amorgos and elsewhere.

While the simplistic thesis of Greek progress from mythos to logos in the form stated by Wilhelm Nestle is rightly rejected, some aspects of the emerging new consensus are open to challenge. ‘Mythos’ corresponds in important ways to modern ‘myth’ and Greek logos, with which it is contrasted, stands at the beginning of an unbroken tradition of Western rationalism. The semantic history of the terms is freshly analyzed, with particular attention to the contribution of pre-Socratic philosophers, Herodotos and Sophists, but looking forward also to Hellenistic and Imperial writers. The ‘invention of mythology’ is dated to the middle of the fifth century, not the end. Plato's complicated stand on the issue is interpreted as a reaction to Sophistic views.

Democritus' theory of vision combines the notions of images (εἴδωλα) streaming from objects and air imprints, which gives him the resources to account for the perception of the relative size and distance of objects, not just their characteristics. This perspectival explanation of the visual theory accommodates important but overlooked evidence from Vitruvius. By comparing Democritus' theory with ancient developments in visual representation, my analysis provides a new approach to the evidence of atomist vision. I begin with the process of vision before turning to the Peripatetic objections, showing how a unified theory of vision takes into account all of the ancient testimony and provides possible atomist responses to the criticisms raised against it. I also identify the importance of vision via air imprints as an important metaphor for the conventionality of sensible qualities. Understanding these fundamental issues puts us in a better position to assess Democritus' place in the development of ancient optics and of atomist approaches to sense perception.

This article challenges the conclusion of Kovacs (2009) that Oedipus Tyrannus 1468–1523 is an interpolation, arguing that the evidence he brings is insufficient (except possibly in regard to 1500–02), that his proposal regarding Sophocles' original conclusion to the play is unsatisfactory and that in 1468–1523 several significant features of the play's opening scenes are repeated or reversed.

The nature of the census figures produced by Demetrius of Phaleron, crucial evidence for the size of the Athenian population, has been misunderstood. The census categories were not ‘native Athenians, foreign residents and slaves’, but ‘citizens above the property qualification, residents without political rights and members of households’. The property qualification of 1,000 drachmas associated with Demetrius' regime was the requirement for holding the highest offices; the property requirement for citizenship rights was lower, as it was in the spurious constitution of Draco described in Athenaion Politeia 4, which was probably invented and inserted during Demetrius' reign. In the light of this reinterpretation of the evidence for the structure of the Athenian population under Demetrius, a reconsideration of the evidence for the size of the Athenian population in 322 BC suggests that there were ca. 30,000 adult male citizens and far fewer metics than generally assumed, probably ca. 5,000. The distribution of property among the citizen population was very uneven, with the richest 30% of the population owning about 80% of the wealth. According to Demetrius’ census as reinterpreted here, slaves outnumbered free residents by ‘only’ about 3:1, which still seems an implausibly high figure, but needs to be taken seriously as a government estimate rather than a rhetorical exaggeration.

Modern historians of Greek slavery seem to agree, despite other differences, on an understanding of slavery as a relationship of property. This understanding of slavery essentially goes back to Aristotle's theory of natural slavery. An examination of the Greek vocabulary of slavery though shows that the vast majority of Greeks had a very different understanding of slavery as a relationship of domination. This article argues that this alternative Greek understanding of slavery can account for some serious conundrums in Greek attitudes and thought, and explains the reasons behind Aristotle's reformulation of slavery as a relationship of property. Finally, it is argued that seeing slavery as a relationship of domination has enormous potential for the modern study of slavery from a dynamic historical perspective.

In this paper I advance an interpretation of Prodicus' conception of the correctness of names or terms. I advance this interpretation through examining a distinction between pleasures and pleasure terms that several ancient authors, most importantly the fifth-century Neoplatonist Hermias, attribute to Prodicus. Since Hermias lived many centuries after Prodicus, it is questionable whether Hermias' testimony is accurate. Consequently, I first present evidence to support the view that Hermias' testimony is accurate. Subsequently, I examine the grounds and context of Prodicus' distinction. I reject the view that Prodicus was interested in drawing distinctions between near synonyms according to standard usage. Instead, I argue that Prodicus' linguistic distinctions follow substantive distinctions between natural kinds.

The paper focuses on the representation of pedagogical and political communication between (and around) Plato, Dion and Dionysius II in Plutarch's Life of Dion. Plutarch's narrative invokes both the Platonic critique of writing as an inadequate medium for teaching philosophy, and the polarity between free oral speech and writing as a symptom of tyranny. It is argued that the Life espouses but also complicates and implicitly interrogates the opposition between writtenness and orality across the philosophical and the political domain, thus constituting a rich intertextual response, from an Imperial Platonist author, to the Platonic concerns about the written word.