^{page 137 note 1} ‘Théocrite, Simichidas, et les Thalysies’, Antiquité Classique 37 (1968), 491–533; the contrast between the two main characters is admirably summed up on 531 ff.

^{page 137 note 2} Selective bibliographies will be found in Gow's commentary (vol. 2, 565 ff.), and in G. Lawall: Theocritus’ Coan Pastorals (Washington, 1967), 129–30; see also Cataudella, Q., ‘Lycidas’, in Studi Paoli (Florence, 1955),159–69 for a review of the controversy.Google Scholar

^{page 137 note 3} e.g. M. Puelma (Mus. Helv. 17 (1960), 144–64); Archibald Cameron (Miscellanea Rostagni (Turin, 1963), 291–307); G. Luck (Mus. Helv. 23 (1966), 186–9); Giangrande, art. cit., 529–30. Echoes of the Hesiodic investiture were recognized also by van Groningen, B. A. (Mnem., ser. 4, 12 (1959), 24–32), and G. Lohse (Hermes, 94 (1966), 421); cf. M. L. West ad Hesiod Th. 22–34.Google Scholar

^{page 137 note 4} As already seen by Cameron, art. cit.,303, 306. Similarly the traditional equation of Simichidas and Theocritus, which goes back at least as far as the scholia and the Syrinx, is highly suspect: cf. Gow's characteristically canny note on Simichidas (Theocritus, 2. 127–9) and his remarks in CQ 34 (1940), 47.

^{page 137 note 5} Luck, art. cit. 188, would rule such inquiries out of court: ‘Es wäre müissig zu fragen, welcher Gott oder Dämon hier erscheint.’ I do not understand this summary dismissal of such an obvious and important question.

^{page 137 note 6} These particulars—name, provenance, destination or business—were the essential information a stranger was expected to provide in epic, as in Polyphemus’ inquiry:Ω ξνοι, тίνєς έσтέ; πóθєν πλєīθ’ ύγρà κέλєυθα; тι καтà πρξιν μαφιδίως àλáλησθє, οá тє ληïσтρєς ύπєìρ λα, тοí т àλóωνтαι φυχàς παρθέμєνοι, κακòν àλλοδαποσι φέρονтєς;Cf. α 180–4; γ 71 ff.; η 24–5 (a simplified version, because addressed to a child), 237- 9; ι 260–2; ξ 186 ff.; Hom. hymn. 3. 468–70. A similar motif occurs in Attic tragedy (e.g. Aesch. Ch. 674 ff., Soph. Phil. 220–54, Eur. Ion, 258 ff., I.T. 499 ff., Phoen. 278 ff.); cf. also Book of Judith, 10. 12.

^{page 138 note 1} See Gow, Theocritus, i, pp. 15 ff.

^{page 138 note 2} C.Q. 34 (1940), 47–8. Cf. Φήμιος Τєρπιáδης(x 330). Pindar's use of ‘Εννοσίδας for ‘Εννοσίγαιος (Pyth. 4. 33, Pae. 4. 37) is similar; see Jebb ad Soph. Aj. 880.

^{page 138 note 3} Griechische Wortbildungslehre (Heidelberg, 1917), p. 142,§ 283. Cf. Chantraine, P., Formation des noms en grec ancien (Paris, 1933) 38.Google Scholar

^{page 138 note 4} As well as Τєλαμώνιος/ Τєλαμωνιάδης cf. Κρονίδης/Κρονίων / Κρóνιος (Eur. Tr. 1288), Νηληιáδης / Νηλήιος, Гαιήιος(η 324), Пοιáνтιος(Υ 190), Βáκχιος / Βáκχєιος / Βακχίδης / Βακχιáδης, Καλαμώνιος(cited by Et. Magn. s.v. Τєλαμώνιος), etc. Cf. Leaf on A 1, B 566.

^{page 138 note 5} For a further possible significance, see p. 144 below.

^{page 138 note 6} RE 11. 2. 1478.

^{page 138 note 7} On Apollo as adeus pastoralis, see pp. 140–1 below.

^{page 139 note 1} Cf. Kaibel,E.G. 821, 6–8.

^{page 139 note 2} Paus. 2. 9. 7. Cf. Servius ad Verg. Aen. 4. 377: ‘Apollinem Lycaeum appellari dicunt … quod pastoralis deus lupos interemit.’

^{page 139 note 3} Festus p. 119: ‘Lycii Apollinis oraculum in Lycia maximae claritatis fuit, ob luporum interfectionem.’

^{page 139 note 4} Σ, who are well informed on Coan topography, mention only the Cretan town. One must protest against the readiness of commentators to make a μικρóκοσμος of a small island by importing Cydonia, Castalia, and Acharnae. Cf. Kühn, J.H. (Hermes, lxxxvi (1958), 70).Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 5} Steph. Byz. 10. 145 Gow, B. unfortunately omits the words άπò Κύδωνος…θυyαтρóς.Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 6} e.g. Apollo's bow is Κυδώνιονat Gall. h. 3. 81. (See Bornmann, ad loc.) Coins from Cydonia dated to the period 200–67 bear, B.C. a wreathed head of Apollo: Head, Historia Numorum (Oxford, 1911), 464.Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 7} For Apollo's connections with Crete, see Hom. hymn, 3. 388 ff.; Willetts, R. F., Cretan Cults and Festivals (1962), chapter 2; L. R. Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, 4. 147, note (e).Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 8} Guarducci, M., Inscriptiones Creticae, 2. 105, regards Stephanus’ statement on the town's earlier name as erroneous, but admits that the error would have arisen from the closeness of Apollo's links with the town: such an error (if it is) would confirm rather than weaken my argument.Google Scholar

^{page 140 note 1} See Paton, W. R. (CR 2 (1888), 265), and the maps in Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos (1891), and A. N. Modena, L'Isola di Coo nell’ antichità classica (Rhodes, 1933).Google Scholar

^{page 140 note 2} Paton and Hicks (op. cit. 213) condemn the Σ mentioning the temple of Apollo as ‘obviously, quite unreliable’; but their discussion has been superseded by the new evidence published by Herzog, R. in Heilige Gesetze von Kos (Abh. Pr. Ak. Wiss., Phil.-Hist. Kl., 1928) and, in summary form, in Verhandlungen der Versammlung Deutscher Philologen 1929), 46. See further, pp. 142–3 below.Google Scholar

^{page 140 note 3} Art. cit. 305.

^{page 140 note 4} e.g. Horn, hymn, 3. 449–50; Call. h. 2. 32–40; A.R. 2. 674 ff.; Tibullus, 2. 5. 7–10.

^{page 141 note 1} Farnell, 4. 123 ff. Cf. Macrobius, 1. 17. 43.

^{page 141 note 2} Cf. Lycidas’ comments on pretentious poets (55. 45–8) with those of the Callimachean Apollo (A. 2. 106–12); cf. also v. 142 with h. 2. 110. The word έσθλóς might a further link: see p. 143 n. 3.

^{page 141 note 3} Cf. Seneca, Hippolytus, 296–8:

^{page 141 note 4} Id. 24. 1–10. On this tendency, see Huber, G.: Lebensschilderungen u. Kleinmalerei im Hellenistischen Epos ( Diss. Basel, 1926).Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 5} See Arnott, W. G. (Gnomon, 41 (1969), 820).Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 6} See J.H.S. 89 (1969), 122 n. 5 and the article cited there.

^{page 142 note 1} The completeness and precision of the Umkehrung (for this term cf. Giangrande, art. cit. 522 n. 72, 530) of the epic motif can be seen by comparing the serious use of it in A.R. 2. 674 ff. The time is dawn ( àμфιλύκη 671), like noon, a ‘witching hour’; the heroes are exhausted by καμáт πολυπήμονι(673), just as Simichidas and his friends are finding their hot journey hard going (Lycidas’ words in 55. 20 ff. are surely sarcastic). The three essential facts about Apollo are given, name (Ληтος υίóς674), provenance (άνєρχóμєνος Λυκίηθєν 674), and his destination (тλ’ έπ’ àπєίρονα δμον ‘Υπєρβορέων àνθρώπων 675)—both places being centres of Apolline worship. A full description is given of the god's hair (676–7), of what he is carrying (678–9), and of his eyes (682). His epiphany is marked by a celebration which includes a song from Orpheus (705–19).

^{page 142 note 2} 55. 37–8 ~ Pi. 0. 6. 91 ff.

^{page 142 note 3} Art. cit. 508 and n. 39.

^{page 142 note 4} As Gow observed (Theocritus, i, p. 22, and 2. 144), these lines as usually interpreted, are not very relevant. Commentators have perhaps concentrated for too long on extracting from them some suggestion of Theocritus’ opinions on Callimachus’ opinions on Apollonius, or the like, instead of trying to understand them in their context.

^{page 142 note 5} As is shown by the explanation in GPT: οί δέ тòν λιον ώς βασιλєύονтα тν тєσσáρων ώρν тο ένιαυтοwhich implies a rough breathing. Cf. Höfer in Roscher's Lexicon, Oromedon, s.v..Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 6} Wendel 90–1. In view of his own topographical speculations (e.g. ad 55. 12, 71,148) it is a little harsh of Gow to suggest that Σ are guessing here—they are in fact well informed on Coan place-names; but cf. his remarks in CQ 34 (1940), 52.

^{page 142 note 7} See Gow, ad 5. 130.

^{page 142 note 8} Herzog, Gesetze (see p. 140 n. 2), 17.

^{page 142 note 9} I omit the problematic occurrence at P. Schubart, 7. 6 which has yet to be satisfactorily explained: see Carden, R. J. D.,B.I.C.S. 16 (1969), 36.Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 10} Kaibel, 1025, 3; 1036, 2. In the former (a hymn from Tenos)ώρομέδων is, intriguingly, juxtaposed to μουσηγέтης.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 1} Herzog, loc. cit., has the attractive suggestion that Apollo ‘Ωρομέδων and Zeus ‘Οριος were worshipped jointly: ‘Das Bergmassiv hat zwei Gipfel, von denen je einer dem Zeus und dem Apollon heilig sein konnte.’ Cf. his remarks on p. 54. This might add point to 5. 93 (see next note).

^{page 143 note 2} The notion that 5. 93 means that Theocritus had won favour with Ptolemy II (=; Zeus) seems unnecessary and inappropriate; it depends on the last surviving remnant of the masquerade theory, the equation Simichidas = Theocritus, which I feel should be discarded. Herzog's suggestion (see last note) offers a more fitting interpretation. It is of course true that recondite Coan allusions would not be lost on the king, a native of the island and the pupil of Philetas.

^{page 143 note 3} Even the word έσθλóς may have Apolline overtones: it occurs five times in this idyll, but in no other of T.'s Doric poems, and it is used in literary contexts (5. 4 of patrons, 5. 12 of Lycidas, 5. 39 of Sicelidas, 5. 93 of Simichidas’ output, 5. 100 of the poet Aristis; cf. Id. 16. 14, 30; 17. 117, 22. 215). Cf. Call. h. 2. 9: ώπóλλων ού πανтί фαєίνєтαι, àλλ’ ő тις έσθλóς.

^{page 143 note 4} Cf. the scene between Aeneas and his mother, Virg. Aen. 1. 305–409, esp. 327–35. The narrative of the meeting on the road to Emmaus affords a striking parallel, Luke 24: 13–35.

^{page 144 note 1} Puelma, art. cit. 148–50 and n. 17. (Add to his list of examples Sappho fr. 1, 13–15, and Theoc. Id. 1. 96 as explained by Zuntz, G. in CQ 5 (1960), 37–40); Cameron, art. cit. 305 n. 64; Luck, art. cit. 188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 144 note 2} Art. cit. 523 and n. 73.

^{page 144 note 3} 5 287, Ovid, Met. 2. 429, 704 (cited above).

^{page 144 note 4} Giangrande, art. cit. 521 and nn. 71, 72, 73.

^{page 144 note 5} Call. Aetia, I, fr. 1. 21 ff.; cf. Theoc. Id. 7. 45 ff.

^{page 144 note 6} e.g. Aetia, fr. I. 2 ~ Id. 7. 95, Aetia, fr. 29 ~ Id. 7. 139; Asclepiades and Philetas were both mentioned in the Aetia prologue (see Schol. Flor. 11. 5, 14): is the fact that Simichidas approves of both meant as a sign of his gaucheness? More speculatively: Apollo orders Callimachus to take the ‘unworn paths’ (Aetia, fr. I. 27–8): Lycidas encounters Simichidas on the otherwise deserted, stony road out of town (Id. 7. 1–2, 26).

^{page 144 note 7} The argumentum ex silentio is strong here: if had been a cult-title of Apollo qua inspirer of poets, one might reasonably expect some evidence to that effect in poetry; in fact, no use of the epithet in extant Greek poetry suggests this. The use of Lycius at Propertius 3. 1. 38, in a program matic poem full of Callimachean allusions, is rightly taken by Camps, ad loc, as an echo of the Aetia prologue.

^{page 144 note 8} Pfciffer and Trypanis both cite Servius ad Verg. Aen. 4. 177; the correct reference is Aen. 4. 377.

^{page 144 note 9} Servius ad Verg. Aen. 4. 377. Schol. Lond. offer further, inferior, explanations.

^{page 144 note 10} See pp. 138–9 above.

^{page 145 note 1} See Gercke, Rh. Mus. 42 (1887), 595, Schlatter, G., Theokrit u. Kallimachos (Diss. Zürich, 1941), and the important paper by Giangrande, ‘Hellenistic Poetry and Homer’ (Antiquité Classique, 1970, pp. 46 ff.), esp. pp. 65 ff., where the instructive example of Theoc, Id. 26. 30 ~ Call. h. 3. 14 is elucidated.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 2} I am reluctant to make more than this brief sally into the minefield of Alexandrian chronology; but I know of no fact which tells against my placing of the Aetia prologue (in a version not radically different from the one we have) before Idyll 7.

^{page 145 note 3} Cf. Giangrande, Eranos 69 (1969), 41.

^{page 145 note 4} See Wimmel, W., Kallimachos in Rom (Hermes, Einzelschrift 16 (1960)).Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 5} I am grateful to Professor W. G. Arnott and to Dr. R. M. Ogilvie for their valuable comments on earlier drafts of this paper; I must acknowledge a heavy debt to Dr. G. Giangrande, who has most generously placed his precious time and unmatched erudition at my disposal. For the faults which remain, only I am responsible.