¹ J. Phil, xxxiii. 129.Google Scholar

¹ Ligyastades, according to Suid. s.v. Μίμνερμος, is formed διὰ τὸ ἐμμελὲς καὶ λιγύ, in which case it is descriptive and resembles Melikertes, formed διὰ τὸ ἡδύ (Suid. s.v. Σιμωνίδης); the name Ligyrtiades, which Suidas gives as that of Mimnermus's father, is no doubt begotten by it. T.'s father was named not Simichos but Praxagoras. Battiades may be a real patronymic but is not certainly such (see RE. Suppl. 5. 386)Google Scholar; so may Sikelidas, but the name of Asklepiades's father is unknown, for Σ Τ. 7. 40, who assert that it was Sikelos, assert also, among other explanations, that T.'s father was named Simichos, and they cannot be trusted.

² The plainest case is Sikelidas, for in T. the name is on exactly the same footing as Philetas in the same line, and it is used both by Hedylus (Ath. 11. 473A) and by Meleager in his preface (A.P. 4. 1. 46).Google Scholar The poet is elsewhere called, and calls himself, Asklepiades (A.P. 12. 50)Google Scholar, but it is hardly clear which of the two names is genuine and which alias, nor for our purpose is it material. Ligyastades, from its context, must have been recognizable as referring to Mimnermus, and presumably the same was true of Melikertes and Battiades.

³ 26 πâσα λίθος πταίοισα ποτ ἀρβνλίδεσσιν ἀείδει. Eustathius (746. 3, cf. 1236. 4) observes that the singing stones βουκολικὴν ἔχονσιν ἀøέλειαν, and I cannot forbear to quote from Pepys's Diary of 14 July 1667, at Epsom: We took notice of his woolen knit stockings of two colours mixed, and of his shoes shod with iron shoes, both at the toe and heels, and with great nails in the soles of his feet, which was mighty pretty; and, taking notice of them, ‘Why,’ says the poor man, ‘the downes, you see, are full of stones, and we arefaine to shoe ourselves thus; and these’, says he, ‘will make the stones fly till they sing before me.’

⁴ Simichidas leads the trio, for Lykidas addresses him, in the singular, throughout, though his opening questions refer to the whole party, The phrasing (2, 131 f.) may suggest that Simichidas and Eukritos are closer friends to each other than to Amyntas, whose Macedoniansounding name may be significant. A thirdcentury inscription from Cos (B.M. 343, Paton and Hicks, 10 C 91) contains the name EYK ------ OKPITOY: but let no one add ΡΙΤΟΣΘΣ, for the letters will not fill the space, and T.'s name would probably have been spelt Θεύκριτος in Cos. This is sad.

¹ So, more recently, Legrand, , Buc. gr. 1. 2Google Scholar, ‘un quidam que T. s'amuse à dépeindre comme un chevrier’; Bignone, , Teocrito 34Google Scholar, ‘un pastore non è benchè gli rassomigli a puntino’; cf. Edmonds, , Gk Buc. Poets, xiii.Google Scholar

² I do not accept Graefe's λαιοîο and Kaibel's ὤμοιο, for the juxtaposition of practically synonymous adjectives is not rare in Greek poetry (see Lobeck on Soph. Aj. 710)Google Scholar, and the additions of another genitive and another -οιο are no ornaments to the sentence.

³ Τάμισος is not, as L. and S. say, rennet, a substance extracted from the inner lining of the stomach of sucking calves and other animals, but curdled milk from the stomach, in which the coagulant enzyme is still active. It is the Doric for πυετία, which L. and S. define correctly.

⁴ Diokleidas, Philondas, Theumaridas: Lykon, Lykopas, Lykos.

⁵ e.g. Herod. 9. 5, Dem. 20. 131.

⁶ See also Hell. Dicht. ii. 138.Google Scholar

⁷ Cf. C.Q. xxxii. 12.Google Scholar

¹ I agree with those who infer from the characterisation in 15 ff., 128 f. that T. is drawing in part at least from the life, and I will not conjecture that he is confronting himself, à la Pirandello, with a character from his own Idylls.

² Bion is no doubt treated as a rustic in the ‘Ἐπιτάøιος and Virgil introduced his friends into the Eclogues, but the silence of T.'s scholia ought not to be undervalued, for, as the note on 21 shows, some of their information comes from Coan sources (cf. Wendel, , T.-Scholien, 128).Google Scholar

³ 67 Χἀ στιβὰς ἐσσεται πεπνκασμένα ἔστ᾽ ἐπὶπâχυνκνύζᾳ τ᾽ ἀσøοδέλῳ τε πολυγνάμπτῳ τε σελίνῳ I take him to mean not that his στιβάς will be made of these herbs, which would involve an unusual sense for the participle, but that the hay of which it is composed will have a top-dressing cubit-deep of them: cf. Plat. Rep. 372 B κατακλινέντες ἐπὶ στιβάδων ἐστρωμένων μίλακί τε καὶ μνρρίναις εὐωχήσονται. I do not know celery in such a context, but fleabane δύναται … ὑποστρωννύ μενος … θηρία διώκειν καὶ κώνωπας ἀπελαύνειν. κτείνει δὲ καὶ ψύλλονς (Diosc. 3. 121), and it is mentioned together with asphodel for useful properties of this kind at Geop. 18. 2. 4; cf. ibid. 13. 11. 3.

¹ The discrepancy in the duration of the punishment can be evaded by supposing that 85 ἔτος ὥριον means the spring as pomifer annus at Hor. C. 3. 23. 8 means autumn, but I know no Greek example of this idiom.

² Σ 1 praef. offer Menalkas or Komatas as names for the unnamed goatherd. It will not help us to suppose that it was not Daphnis but Menalkas who shared Komatas's fate.

³ See RE. xiii. 2317, 2406.Google Scholar

⁴ C.Q. xxiv. 148Google Scholar; C.R. xli. 166.Google Scholar

¹ Add (from Headlam's note on Herodas 4. 50) Diog. L. praef. 4Google Scholar, Call.fr. 87.Google Scholar

² ἤν ὅτε is used with exactly the same colour, e.g. A.P. 8. 178Google Scholar, 9. 344, 12. 44,14.52; Kaibel, 565.Google Scholar

³ For the position of Haleis and Pyxa see Paton, and Hicks, , Inscr. of Cos, p. 212.Google Scholar

¹ Professor D. S. Robertson has kindly read, and improved the astronomy of, this note.

² Their vespertinal (or heliacal) setting is in the spring, and therefore inappropriate here though said to be stormy at Σ Arat. 679.

³ Se montrent au couchant Legrand. Among the older commentators Wuestemann and Kiessling, though they do not explain the adjective, seem to have understood the reference to be to the rising, and this view was suggested to me also by Professor Housman.

⁴ Colum. 11.2.66, 73, Lydus, de ost.Google ScholarWachsmuth, , pp. 147, 149, 184, 291, 297.Google Scholar

⁵ Cf. Smith, , Dict. Ant. i. 224Google Scholar; Housman, , Manil, . 5, p. xxxix.Google Scholar

¹ P. Ox. 1618Google Scholar, which usually omits iota adscript, has ΕἝβρω παρ ποταμ—no doubt wrongly.

² Cf. A.P. 12. 12, 16, 109, 193.Google Scholar

³ MrDenniston, cites δὴ μάν from Il. 17. 538Google Scholar, and εἰ δὴ μάν, a conjecture at Alc. fr. 89 Diehl. Neither lends any support to an adversative use.