Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
The task of making a new Teubner edition of the Anacreontea has led me to realize how much still remains to be done for the text of these once celebrated but no w little-read poems, for which we depend on the same tenth-century manuscript as for the Palatine Anthology. In what follows I attempt to justify the new emendations adopted in the edition, and one or two old ones which have generally been dismissed
1 For two cups from Arezzo with such scenes in relief seeNilsson, M. P., The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenistic and Roman Age (1957), pp. 93–5Google Scholar.
2 τοὺς κτς αὖ T. Stephanus, κα τοὺς πρα T. Bergk. It is a possibility that lines 24–7, which also contain an inelegant crasis of κα with ι-(κἰνδν), are a later addition to the poem. The parallel tradition available for poems 4 and 8 (Gell. 19.9.6; A.P. 11. 47–8, A. Plan. lla. 47. 17–18, etc.) shows that 4 at least, perhaps 8 too, has suffered expansion at the end.
3 38. 9, 47. 9?, 50. 6, 16, 24, 52A. 3, 54. 2, 58. 2, 5, 8, 18.
4 cf. Philodemus, A.P. 5. 13. 5fGoogle Scholar. (Garland of Philip 3170f.) κα ϰρὼς ρρυτδωτος ἔτ' μβροσν, ἔτι πειθὼ πσαν, ἔτι στξει μυριδας Xαρτων.
5 In his revision of Buchholz's, E.Anthologie aus den Lyrikern der Griecheri5 (Leipzig, 1909)Google Scholar.
6 Preisendanz gives the manuscript reading as πλ η. The truth is that the letters λη are rather widely spaced out, as happens here and there in this manuscript. The spacing does not in itself point to the omission of a letter after η.
7 Σθεννώ in Hes. Th. 276 (but σθενώ in nearly all MSS. contra metrum) and Nonnus, Σθενώ in Apollod. 2. 4. 2. 7, Palaeph. 32. 7, 13, ps.-Plut. Fluv. 18. 6, etc.
8 cf. my Greek Metre (1982), p. 169.
9 Quaestionum Anacreonticarum libri duo (Leipzig, 1846), p. 76Google Scholar.
10 PMG 429+SEG 26. 1213 (SLG p. 157 Page) ὑ μν θλων μϰεσθαι, πρεστι γρ, μαϰσθω [μο δ δς] προ [πνειν με] λιϰρ[ν οἶνον] ὦ [παῖ. The same idea, ‘other people can fight if they want to; I'd rather drink’, recurs in 48. 7–10.
11 Because the poem bears the title εἰς κρην.
12 As remoter possibilities for the infinitive I have considered μργειν νερειν.
13 It is uneconomical to introduce it in 17 (τ κν Rose, Preisendanz), which there is no reason to think corrupt.
14 See my Greek Metre, pp. 10, 164.
15 1∼ Pyth. 10. 39; 24–7 ∼ Ol. 2. 89; 32–4 ∼ Ol. 7. 1–8.
16 From πγνυμι, of course (Preisendanz stupidly indexes it under πγω). In 10, where the true text is ἠϰηῖ, P has ϰθη with suprascript ηϰη. This ϰθη is presumably a correction of 18 which got into 10 by mistake and then had to be corrected itself.
17 If the first-person endings are corrupt in both 17 and 18, it is hard to see how they arose. But if the one in 17 is genuine, it is easy to explain the one in 18 from its influence.
18 οὐδν ποττν ἔρωτα πεϕκει ϕρμακον ἄλλο…ἢ τα IIιερδες (Theoc. 11. 1–3). The idea perhaps recurs in 32ff. ϕιλην πρπινε παισν, ϕιλην λγων ραννν π νκταρος ποτοῖο (metaphor for song, cf. , Pind.Ol. 7. 7, from which passage ϕιλην πρπινε also comes) παραμθιον λαβντες ϕλογερν ϕυγντες ἄστρον (οἶστρον Rose, cf. Georg. Gramm. 1. 107 ϕλογερς πϕυκεν οἶστρος, 6. 6 ϕλογερ… οἶστρʿν νγκης)Google Scholar.
19 In Ovid, , Met. 1. 545Google Scholar, it is the river Peneus (there represented as her father) that she prays to, or according to a variant, Tellus; Earth also in Hyg. Fab. 203, Tzetz. in Lye. 6, Eust. Macremb. 8. 18. 2, 11. 22. 1.