This paper argues for a novel conception of Iliadic Tartarus as a fluid liminal space which includes a superterranean context alongside its (traditionally realised) subterranean localisation. A close reading of Iliad 8.477–81 reveals traces of superterranean imagery which, alongside the traditional subterranean reading of 8.13–6 and 14.198–311, allows for the identification of a fluid, dual-model of Tartarean space within the background of the poem. Further, grounded in recent developments regarding dual localisation within Homeric narrative, this paper explores how localisation can reflect narrative and/or thematic concerns, rather than exclusively denoting spatial-physical realities. Thus, the use of geographical imagery within the three Tartarean passages is examined for its narrative/thematic significance, considering themes such as the hierarchy of the gods and narrative developments such as the relocation of Zeus’ positioning within the larger cosmos. The identification of such nuances, in turn, provides a precedent for retaining ‘conflicting’ or fluid geographical space(s) within the narrative despite the ‘contradictions’ that they embody.

The origins and definition of tyranny in ancient Greece have been debated in scholarship for well over three quarters of a century. Recently, it has been argued that tyranny as a political idea was not anathematised until late and that in the fifth century BCE and before, tyranny comported no negative judgment. While correct to point out that the distinction between ‘king’ and ‘tyrant’ in literature predating Aristotle was not clearly delineated, scholars have often failed to ask the more fundamental question of why that distinction was essential for Aristotle. This essay argues that Aristotle drew upon a much older intellectual tradition which saw tyranny as hateful and contrary to the rule of law. Though tyrants in many cases ruled lawfully, a distinction must be drawn between ‘lawful’ rule, which some but not all tyrants practised, and the rule of law, which anathematised tyranny.

The cavalry of classical Athens remains an enigmatic part of the polis’ military forces. Although often described by historians as an insignificant arm of the classical Athenian army, in the fifth century BCE it was financially supported in two ways: a supposed insurance scheme for each cavalryman's mount, and what is often called an ‘establishment loan’, the κατάστασις (katastasis), to assist with the initial costs of joining the cavalry corps.1 These two unique economic supports are often tied together in modern discussions as parts of the same measure. The present article will instead argue that these two aspects not only could, but should, be separated. Further, it will be suggested that these two forms of support highlight the practical importance of the cavalry, in contrast to the communis opinio. In a military environment where resources were in high demand, the Athenian state made a conscious decision to offer considerable support – around 40 talents a year – to ensure they had a citizen cavalry ready for action.

This paper argues that the slave demonstration in Plato's Meno contains a carefully-wrought analogy of Meno's dialectic which can guide our understanding of the dialogue. This analogy exposes and diagnoses Meno's failings as a student who is unwilling to engage in the learning process but simply wants to be spoon-fed information. This, in turn, reveals the way Plato wants us to interact with his text: insofar as the author makes his point implicitly and allusively, we are aptly required to puzzle our way through the text to unravel the meaning. We must actively engage with the text. The Meno, thus, exemplifies its own didactic message. In this way, I hope to offer a meaningful interpretation of a significant passage in Plato as well as provide a case study of how he can marshal the literary resources at his disposal towards his philosophical ends.

This paper presents a selected aspect of research conducted within the Gaugamela Project, which seeks to finally identify the location of the Battle of Gaugamela. Its particular aim is to analyse the strategic situation of the army of Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in the summer of 331 BCE, with a special focus on the itinerary and chronology of the army's march. The paper critically reviews Classical sources (Arrian, Curtius, Diodorus, and Plutarch), but also employs topographic and archaeological data as well as GIS capabilities (least cost paths). In contrast to most previous scholarship, it is suggested that the Macedonian troops crossed the Euphrates much later than suggested by Arrian (Anab. 3.7.1) – around September 2, 331 BCE. Their march led across the Tur Abdin escarpment (via Nisibis) and left Mesopotamia through a ford in the vicinity of modern Cizre or Basorin. What is more, the Macedonian marching rate was definitely not slow (contra W. E. Marsden), but faster than average due to the activity of the Persian scouting troops and logistic necessity. In total, the Macedonians covered around 370 to 394 km within a maximum of 16 days.

The military punishment of decimatio, the cudgelling by lot of one in ten men in a disgraced unit, often described as a cornerstone of Roman military discipline, was never practised during the third and second centuries BC. The punishment was possibly used as an extraordinary measure a couple of times in the fifth and fourth centuries BC. It soon fell into total desuetude but was cultivated as a rhetorical construct that proclaimed theoretical powers commanders no longer dared effect. It was only revived, or rather reinvented, during the Late Republic, a violent moment that saw the confluence of antiquarian enthusiasm with military dynasts whose unrestrained powers allowed them to manifest what had previously been an aristocratic talking point.

In his letters to Lucius Papirius Paetus from 46 bc Cicero provides striking reports on his thoughts and activities as he seeks to accommodate himself to the new political realities following Caesar's decisive victory over the republican forces in Africa. In these letters Cicero also engages in a kind of performative role-playing: he casts himself variously as a teacher of oratory to two of Caesar's close associates (Hirtius and Dolabella), as a bon vivant immersed in the Caesarian social scene, and as a man of moral principle who measures himself against the model of the wise man. Philosophical jokes, allusions, and arguments all figure prominently: Cicero is evidently drawing on a rich range of philosophical material to frame his actions and how he should be judged. This paper brings out the full significance of these underlying philosophical frameworks and makes clear the ways in which Cicero exploits the resources of the Greek philosophical tradition in his self-fashioning in the letters to Paetus.

The ancestry sections in Suetonius’ Lives of the Caesars demonstrate the inheritance of character traits down the family line. The effectiveness of this as a rhetorical technique rests on an expectation of inheritance and resemblance along the family line. This study investigates the mechanism of that resemblance from the evidence available in Suetonius’ text—nature or nurture?—and then proposes that since the mechanism appears to be not quite the same as that evidenced in earlier writers, the biographer's model of inheritance and degeneration is part of a conversation about succession to the principate. Part one sets out the patterns of resemblance/difference that appear from the lists of ancestors, part two the evidence for nature and nurture of character traits in Suetonius’ Lives, and part three compares the way resemblance works in Suetonius with the way it works in other authors. As modern views on nature and nurture have changed with social and political changes, the final section proposes that the changes over the first century of the principate have to do with the political and social changes in that period. Suetonius’ model of hereditary vice, not hereditary virtue, arises from a disaffection with the system of hereditary succession.

This article discusses nearly 1,200 names of individuals appearing in inscriptions from Roman Carthage. The aim of the study is to answer the question whether there are indications in the anthroponymic tradition that may support the thesis of the multiculturalism of the city. The analyses focus primarily on the cognomen, which constitutes the most individualized element of the Roman naming system. Besides the unquestioned, dominating role of the nomenclature that was typical of the Roman cultural circle, local onomastics also revealed the relationships that existed between local traditions, which were mainly of Punic origins, as well as the influences of eastern migrations. An important point in the analysis of names with Punic and Greek provenance, and the Latin cognomina described as African, was to consider the abundance of their occurrence in each social group. Thus, names could be examined not only as a possible marker of ethnicity, but also as a marker of social affiliation, which is important especially in the context of cognomina graeca. In the last part of the article, the results are presented in a broader regional context, with the aim of presenting the specificity of the anthroponymy of Roman Carthage.

This article examines two attempted senatorial coups against Pertinax during his brief reign in 193 CE. By examining literary and epigraphic evidence related to these coups, I argue that Pertinax's political opponents in 193 should be understood to come from a particular political and dynastic network, and that this network represents the final attempt of the connections of Lucius Verus to compete for the imperial power. Further support for this argument is adduced via an analysis of Pertinax's dismissal from a procuratorial post in 170, where there is circumstantial and prosopographical evidence to suggest opposition deriving from connections of this same network earlier in his career. I conclude by discussing how, through the analysis of these coups and similar incidents, we may gain insights into socio-political conflicts at a crisis point for the imperial aristocracy, and how they illustrate the ongoing importance of Antonine dynastic politics, ever-present but sometimes difficult to see.

The article collects and analyses philosophical terms formed in Latin by fourth-century rhetorician and philosopher Marius Victorinus (c. 285–360s C.E.) as a result of his translation from Greek sources. The study examines primarily his theological treatises: the Ad Candidum Arianum (De Generatione Divini Verbi) and the Adversus Arium. It undertakes a quantitative and qualitative examination of these terms by studying two linguistic mechanisms which constitute ‘term-formation’ in Latin: lexical innovation and lexical augmentation. Both functioned as important linguistic and conceptual devices in Victorinus’ translations. The article also examines the theological contexts of certain metaphysical terms to understand further their similarities and differences, not only in Victorinus’ translations, but also in earlier uses of central Latin philosophical terms, e.g., essentia and substantia. The article concludes that Victorinus was more didactic than his philosophical predecessors such as M. Tullius Cicero, Seneca the Younger or Apuleius of Madaura, preferring literal translation (particularly morphological calquing) rather than semantic extensions or metaphorical usages (lexical augmentation). By using neologisms formed using derivational word-formation processes and, on rare occasions, loan-words from Greek, Victorinus adopted an approach of adapting Greek terminology with a high degree of precision in Latin, from a range of sources including Christian, Neo-Platonist, and Gnostic authors. He thereby introduced a new Christological vocabulary in the Latin tradition, making him a significant intellectual figure of the fourth and fifth centuries. Although by no means as dominant as others, such as Augustine or Boethius, Victorinus would nonetheless come to exert influence over later Christian philosophers in the Latin West, particularly during the Scholastic period of the Middle Ages.

The paper is a contribution to a discussion on the dating of Eunapius’ Vitae Sophistarum. Arguments are put forward that Eunapius’ remark on the necrolatry of the monks of Canopus reflects the establishment of a cult of Saints Cyrus and John. Since this event took place when the Church of Alexandria was headed by Cyril, we may consider the beginning of his archbishopric (October 18, 412 CE) as a reliable terminus post quem for the publication of this text.