This note argues that, at Olympian 13.106, Pindar/the performer references his obligation to fulf... more This note argues that, at Olympian 13.106, Pindar/the performer references his obligation to fulfill expectations of reciprocity. Pindar/the performer says that he will fulfill his obligation to discharge his debt because he is thinking and working within the framework of the χρέος-motif. This note uses comparanda, Pindaric and other, as well as the flow of the narrative in order to support the argument.
Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles' four-root theory at 1.1-5 and... more Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles' four-root theory at 1.1-5 and 1.6-9, and they have suggested that, in doing so, Lucretius shows respect for Empedocles, either as a philosophical predecessor, as a literary predecessor, or as both. I argue, alternatively, that Lucretius deprecates Empedocles' four-root theory. I suggest that, through the use of polemical allusion, Lucretius makes the argument that Epicurean physical theory gets the constituents of nature correct and that four-root theory does not (1-5) and that Epicurean atomic theory worsts four-root theory as a philosophical competitor (6-9). Moreover, cohesive systems of imagery allow the reader to deduce that Venus serves as a metaphor for atoms at the beginning of the proem and as a metaphor for Epicureanism shortly thereafter. Beginning the poem with an attack against four-root theory may be read not only as an attack against Empedocles but also as an attack against several prominent philosophical schools that promoted four-root theory. Thus, Lucretius opens his poem with a fervent endorsement of Epicurean physiologia in relation to competing philosophical schools.
At De rerum natura 2.1-8, Lucretius polemically alludes to Sappho fr. 16 (V.). Lucretius uses the... more At De rerum natura 2.1-8, Lucretius polemically alludes to Sappho fr. 16 (V.). Lucretius uses the polemical allusion against Sappho fr. 16 (V.) in order to develop an impressively artful opening to his second book, while advocating, intertextually, for ataraxia as kalliston.
Practicing at Lucretius' De rerum natura 2.7-8, RhM 163 (2020) 167-173. That essay should serve a... more Practicing at Lucretius' De rerum natura 2.7-8, RhM 163 (2020) 167-173. That essay should serve as prolegomenon to this one. 2) Text is that of M. Deufert, Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura Libri VI (Berlin / Boston 2019). Translations are my own.
I offer a new interpretation of the phrase tenere . . . templa serena at De rerum natura 2.7 -8. ... more I offer a new interpretation of the phrase tenere . . . templa serena at De rerum natura 2.7 -8. I suggest that the phrase refers to the Epicurean practice of keeping the mind peaceful, ataraxia.
I provide a new interpretation of DRN 3.17-30 and 6.68-79, reading 3.17-30 in relation to Epicuru... more I provide a new interpretation of DRN 3.17-30 and 6.68-79, reading 3.17-30 in relation to Epicurus' teachings on the mental construction of gods and 6.68-79 in relation to popular religion. I also review 5.1161-1193, discussing the evidence that the passage provides for the idealist and realist theses.
I was impressed with Briand's perceptiveness in this edition. For example, he observes that odes ... more I was impressed with Briand's perceptiveness in this edition. For example, he observes that odes need not be performed either wholly by a chorus or wholly by a soloist, as discussed below. Similarly, he notes that the crowning of the altar at the end of Olympian 9 need not have anything to do with a literal crown (p.138). And he introduces fundamental concepts well. The translations are generally correct, as are the commentaries. Furthermore, I like that Briand has constructed his commentaries in paragraphs rather than in lemmata. This makes the commentaries more readable, particularly for Briand's intended audience of non-specialists. Overall, the book is a success.
Classics@13: Greek Poetry and Athletics, ed. Thomas Scanlon (Center for Hellenic Studies)
As Ada Cohen remarks, "The selectivity of the Greek imagination-with its emphases as well as its ... more As Ada Cohen remarks, "The selectivity of the Greek imagination-with its emphases as well as its exclusions-is one of its most interesting aspects, and it is relevant to the study of both mythological narrative and landscape description."[1] Following Cohen, I address here Pindar's geographic "selectivity," considering why he includes and excludes certain places, spaces, and landscapes in Olympian 1. By arguing that geography plays a particularly meaningful role in Olympian 1, I refocus a well-worn line of inquiry in epinician criticism, which has considered how myths in individual odes relate to their respective victors but has not considered how mythical geographies relate to real world geographies nor how Pindar develops meaningful spatial connections throughout his odes in the interest of his patrons. I am interested in how Pindar links places in Olympian 1 and I suggest that Pindar articulates several spatial parallelisms between Pelops and Hieron, including in relation to their poleis (and the domestic life that occurs there), in relation to Olympia (and the contests that occur there), in relation to their colonial context (Pelops comes from the east, and Hieron comes from the west), and in relation to the space of the hereafter (both will become immortals).
Edition of P.Mich. inv. 132, a temple declaration (χειρισμός) of unknown provenance from the rst ... more Edition of P.Mich. inv. 132, a temple declaration (χειρισμός) of unknown provenance from the rst century of Roman rule. P.Mich. inv. 132 H x W = 22.5 x 13 cm I AD e lower margin is 3.8 cm. large. A vertical kollesis runs 9 cm from the le . Parts of two columns are preserved. e rst column is incomplete on the le , while the second column is incomplete on the right. e preserved intercolumnar space is 2-3.5 cm wide. e verso is blank. e provenance of the papyrus is unknown. e script is that of a literary hand similar to no. 44 or 47 in G. Cavallo, La scrittura greca e latina dei papiri (Pisa, Roma 2008). e text is a γραφὴ ἱερέων καὶ χειρισμοῦ prepared by the priests of an Egyptian temple and submitted to the Roman authorities. Egyptian temples had to submit such a declaration at the end of each scal year. It included a list of objects in the temple, a list of priests κατ' ἄνδρα, and a statement regarding the temple's scal operations. e papyrus edited here does not preserve the γραφὴ ἱερέων per se, which would have followed the list of objects, nor does it preserve the statement of scal operations (including the temple budget), which would have followed the γραφὴ ἱερέων. What remains provides a rich inventory of objects with references to gods ( ermouthis, Dionysus, possibly Alexander the Great), precious metal (silver), objects of cult (a brazier of a censer, a (peri)rhanterion), and jewelry (a diadem, crowns, pearls, and pendants). Particularly notable are the crowns. Since the provenance is unknown, we do not know to what god the temple was dedicated nor where it was located. e most recent discussions of temple inventories are those of E. Battaglia, "Dichiarazioni templari: a proposito di P. Oxy. XLIX, 3473, " Aegyptus 64 (1984) 79-99 (with list of documents), and F. Burkhalter, "Le mobilier des sanctuaires d' Égypte et les 'listes des prêtres et du cheirismos, '" ZPE 59 (1985) 123-134. ough dated, still of value (on the priests particularly) is O. Montevecchi, "Γραφαὶ ἱερέων, " Aegyptus 12 (1932)
This note argues that, at Olympian 13.106, Pindar/the performer references his obligation to fulf... more This note argues that, at Olympian 13.106, Pindar/the performer references his obligation to fulfill expectations of reciprocity. Pindar/the performer says that he will fulfill his obligation to discharge his debt because he is thinking and working within the framework of the χρέος-motif. This note uses comparanda, Pindaric and other, as well as the flow of the narrative in order to support the argument.
Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles' four-root theory at 1.1-5 and... more Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles' four-root theory at 1.1-5 and 1.6-9, and they have suggested that, in doing so, Lucretius shows respect for Empedocles, either as a philosophical predecessor, as a literary predecessor, or as both. I argue, alternatively, that Lucretius deprecates Empedocles' four-root theory. I suggest that, through the use of polemical allusion, Lucretius makes the argument that Epicurean physical theory gets the constituents of nature correct and that four-root theory does not (1-5) and that Epicurean atomic theory worsts four-root theory as a philosophical competitor (6-9). Moreover, cohesive systems of imagery allow the reader to deduce that Venus serves as a metaphor for atoms at the beginning of the proem and as a metaphor for Epicureanism shortly thereafter. Beginning the poem with an attack against four-root theory may be read not only as an attack against Empedocles but also as an attack against several prominent philosophical schools that promoted four-root theory. Thus, Lucretius opens his poem with a fervent endorsement of Epicurean physiologia in relation to competing philosophical schools.
At De rerum natura 2.1-8, Lucretius polemically alludes to Sappho fr. 16 (V.). Lucretius uses the... more At De rerum natura 2.1-8, Lucretius polemically alludes to Sappho fr. 16 (V.). Lucretius uses the polemical allusion against Sappho fr. 16 (V.) in order to develop an impressively artful opening to his second book, while advocating, intertextually, for ataraxia as kalliston.
Practicing at Lucretius' De rerum natura 2.7-8, RhM 163 (2020) 167-173. That essay should serve a... more Practicing at Lucretius' De rerum natura 2.7-8, RhM 163 (2020) 167-173. That essay should serve as prolegomenon to this one. 2) Text is that of M. Deufert, Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura Libri VI (Berlin / Boston 2019). Translations are my own.
I offer a new interpretation of the phrase tenere . . . templa serena at De rerum natura 2.7 -8. ... more I offer a new interpretation of the phrase tenere . . . templa serena at De rerum natura 2.7 -8. I suggest that the phrase refers to the Epicurean practice of keeping the mind peaceful, ataraxia.
I provide a new interpretation of DRN 3.17-30 and 6.68-79, reading 3.17-30 in relation to Epicuru... more I provide a new interpretation of DRN 3.17-30 and 6.68-79, reading 3.17-30 in relation to Epicurus' teachings on the mental construction of gods and 6.68-79 in relation to popular religion. I also review 5.1161-1193, discussing the evidence that the passage provides for the idealist and realist theses.
I was impressed with Briand's perceptiveness in this edition. For example, he observes that odes ... more I was impressed with Briand's perceptiveness in this edition. For example, he observes that odes need not be performed either wholly by a chorus or wholly by a soloist, as discussed below. Similarly, he notes that the crowning of the altar at the end of Olympian 9 need not have anything to do with a literal crown (p.138). And he introduces fundamental concepts well. The translations are generally correct, as are the commentaries. Furthermore, I like that Briand has constructed his commentaries in paragraphs rather than in lemmata. This makes the commentaries more readable, particularly for Briand's intended audience of non-specialists. Overall, the book is a success.
Classics@13: Greek Poetry and Athletics, ed. Thomas Scanlon (Center for Hellenic Studies)
As Ada Cohen remarks, "The selectivity of the Greek imagination-with its emphases as well as its ... more As Ada Cohen remarks, "The selectivity of the Greek imagination-with its emphases as well as its exclusions-is one of its most interesting aspects, and it is relevant to the study of both mythological narrative and landscape description."[1] Following Cohen, I address here Pindar's geographic "selectivity," considering why he includes and excludes certain places, spaces, and landscapes in Olympian 1. By arguing that geography plays a particularly meaningful role in Olympian 1, I refocus a well-worn line of inquiry in epinician criticism, which has considered how myths in individual odes relate to their respective victors but has not considered how mythical geographies relate to real world geographies nor how Pindar develops meaningful spatial connections throughout his odes in the interest of his patrons. I am interested in how Pindar links places in Olympian 1 and I suggest that Pindar articulates several spatial parallelisms between Pelops and Hieron, including in relation to their poleis (and the domestic life that occurs there), in relation to Olympia (and the contests that occur there), in relation to their colonial context (Pelops comes from the east, and Hieron comes from the west), and in relation to the space of the hereafter (both will become immortals).
Edition of P.Mich. inv. 132, a temple declaration (χειρισμός) of unknown provenance from the rst ... more Edition of P.Mich. inv. 132, a temple declaration (χειρισμός) of unknown provenance from the rst century of Roman rule. P.Mich. inv. 132 H x W = 22.5 x 13 cm I AD e lower margin is 3.8 cm. large. A vertical kollesis runs 9 cm from the le . Parts of two columns are preserved. e rst column is incomplete on the le , while the second column is incomplete on the right. e preserved intercolumnar space is 2-3.5 cm wide. e verso is blank. e provenance of the papyrus is unknown. e script is that of a literary hand similar to no. 44 or 47 in G. Cavallo, La scrittura greca e latina dei papiri (Pisa, Roma 2008). e text is a γραφὴ ἱερέων καὶ χειρισμοῦ prepared by the priests of an Egyptian temple and submitted to the Roman authorities. Egyptian temples had to submit such a declaration at the end of each scal year. It included a list of objects in the temple, a list of priests κατ' ἄνδρα, and a statement regarding the temple's scal operations. e papyrus edited here does not preserve the γραφὴ ἱερέων per se, which would have followed the list of objects, nor does it preserve the statement of scal operations (including the temple budget), which would have followed the γραφὴ ἱερέων. What remains provides a rich inventory of objects with references to gods ( ermouthis, Dionysus, possibly Alexander the Great), precious metal (silver), objects of cult (a brazier of a censer, a (peri)rhanterion), and jewelry (a diadem, crowns, pearls, and pendants). Particularly notable are the crowns. Since the provenance is unknown, we do not know to what god the temple was dedicated nor where it was located. e most recent discussions of temple inventories are those of E. Battaglia, "Dichiarazioni templari: a proposito di P. Oxy. XLIX, 3473, " Aegyptus 64 (1984) 79-99 (with list of documents), and F. Burkhalter, "Le mobilier des sanctuaires d' Égypte et les 'listes des prêtres et du cheirismos, '" ZPE 59 (1985) 123-134. ough dated, still of value (on the priests particularly) is O. Montevecchi, "Γραφαὶ ἱερέων, " Aegyptus 12 (1932)
For my thoughts, see 'The κῶμος of Pindar and Bacchylides and the Semantics of Celebration', The ... more For my thoughts, see 'The κῶμος of Pindar and Bacchylides and the Semantics of Celebration', The Classical Quarterly 60 (2010) 302-312.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, a... more JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, a... more JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Uploads
Papers by Chris Eckerman