¹ Stravaganze quarte e supreme, p. 14.Google Scholar

² Kallimachos und Homer, in Xenia Bonnensia (Bonn, 1929), pp. 5 ff.Google Scholar On the ancient conception of literary imitation and allusion cf. also Reiff, A., Imitatio, aemulatio, interpretatio (Diss. Köln, 1958).Google Scholar

³ Cf. Kuiper, , Studia Callimachea, i (De Hymnorum i–iv dictione epica), Leiden, 1896, p. 114.Google Scholar

⁴ Apollonius' ambiguity as to the subject of (either ) is clearly prompted by the uncertainty of the text at Od. 18. 107, where there existed the variants .

¹ Cf. Od. 18. 107 .

² The scholiast on Apollonius 1. 82. interprets cf. Mooney ad loc.

³ My interpretation of this Apollonian passage is supported by Arg. 3.91, where the superlative is used instead of the comparative on the strength of the Homeric precedent in the genre (cf. in particular Gillies and Ardizzoni ad loc). Apollonius' is a deliberate clue, in that it refers us to Od. 18. 107

⁴ Seelbach, , Die Epigramme des Mnasalkas und Theodoridas (Klass. philol. St., 28 [Wiesbaden, 1964], p. 103)Google Scholar contains useful information on this Alexandrian literary topos. Lattimore (Themes in Gr. Epitaphs [Urbana, 1962], p. 200,Google Scholar = Ill. Stud. in Lang. and Lit. xxviii. 1/2) acutely observes that the topos goes back to the Odyssey: ‘it is the chief thought of Odysseus when he is likely to drown.’Google Scholar

⁵ From the methodological point of view, it is worth remembering that cases in which Alexandrian epic poets used the superlative where the comparative would be expected (A.R. 2. 222, 4. 511, Callim, . Hymn. 3. 109)Google Scholar could easily be emended, but are to be treated with caution: the Alexandrians may have wanted to ‘develop’ the Homeric feature which they saw in Od. 11. 483 or Od. 5. 299. Also the reverse case (‘comparativus pro superlativo’; cf. Keydell, , Prolegomena to his edition of Nonnus, p. 54),Google Scholar when attested in Alexandrian epic (e.g. Callim, . Hymn. 5. 36,Google Scholar cf. Schneider ad loc.) is probably meant to be based on Homeric precedents (cf., e.g., Od. 8. 128 ff., where comparatives are attested as variant readings); the same consideration is valid for the use of ‘comparativus pro positivo’ (cf. Keydell, , op. cit., p. 54):Google Scholar Alexandrian poets were very attentive to such points as the use of the degrees of comparison. Apollonius used at 2. 107 the Homeric formula , but also changed it pointedly to at I. 702 because he knew that in Homer can mean simply ‘near’, (cf. Ebeling, s.v.).

¹ Cf., e.g., Eust. ad loc.

² His implication is that he only accepted, in Homer, the meaning ‘build’, ‘construct’ for , and not the sense ‘execute a work of art’ (like drawing, sculpturing, etc.). Cf. Seiler, Wört, zu Hom., s.v.

³ The Homeric is preceded by : the historical present is ‘oft neben Aoristen und Imperfekten zur Hervorhebung einzelner besonders bemerkenswerter … Momente’, cf. Kühner-Gerth, , i. p. 132.Google Scholar On the question of the historical present cf. Chantraine, , Gramm. Hom, ii, p. 191,Google Scholar and Kühner-Gerth, , i. p. 134.Google Scholar

¹ Moschus 2. 144 is probably a similar reversal of Homer's Il. 17. 645 (‘from under the mist’, cf. Ebeling, s.v. p. 384 = . The bird is imagined as , across and over the , into the air: this hyperbole-motif—which unnecessarily worries Bühler ad loc.—is clearly inspired by Il. 14. 288 (cf. Leaf ad loc).

² A very accurate detail; on the open sea, one tends to underestimate distances, and waves tend to be much longer in reaching one's boat than one expects.

³ What stood after is difficult to establish. Perhaps , cf. Il. 15. 624 f. : the same sedes, and taken from Hymn. Ap. 284; the adjective is not felicitously coupled with and we should expect a notion of movement, as Merkel noted (on the motif wind cf. 1. 1358 ff., 3. 342, and on the hiatus cf. I. 953, 1299, 2. 902,4. 1256, etc.). Another possibility would be (in which case would mean simply ‘huge', with no notion of movement); cf. 2. 592 ff.; Apollonius used at 3. 285. The prosaic , unmasked by Fränkel, was in all probability inspired by at 2. 566; the variant is a Verschlimmbesserung prompted by—and, what is important for us, confirming!—the in line 172.

⁴ For descriptions of waterspouts, in which phenomenon the sea and the clouds appear to be united by a sort of pillar, cf. O.E.D., s.v. Cf. also Encicl. Ital. s.v. Trombe: Apollonius’ refers evidently to the ‘movimento ascensionale’ of the waterspout; waterspouts tend to have ‘la forma del cilindro’ so that Apollonius' ‘steep mountain’ can be imagined as a vertical column joining the horizontal plane of the sea to that of the clouds.

¹ Cf. in particular Lehrs, , Quaest. ep.³, pp. 65–68.Google Scholar Apollonius used the verb also in its non-metaphorical sense, cf. 1. 1269; at 1. 262 is used, Homerically, of a ‘moral wound', as the scholiast correctly understood; cf. Ardizzoni, on Arg. 3. 893.Google Scholar

² Given the formulaic nature of the epic language, it is not totally irrelevant to notice that, at 2. 409 and 3. 432, the metrical unit occupies the same sedes as at 1. 1216.

³ In addition to what Mooney has noted on 1172 ff. and 1176, it must be added that Apollonius' (1174) is inspired by Hom, . Od. xiii. 34,Google Scholar (cf. Arg. I. 1173Google Scholar cf. schol. on Od. 13. 34,

⁴ Cf., e.g., Nic. Ther. 427, 496, 867, Alex. 122; Theocr. 2. 39, 27. 24; Alex. Aet. 1. 5 Pow.; Bion 1. 56, etc. This is the sedes of the word in post-Alexandrian epic writers, such as Manetho or Nonnus.

⁵ On the quantity of the cf. Passow⁵, Wört. s.v.: ‘die Spätern folgen dem Bedürfnis des Verses, doch bleibt die homerische Messung bei den Epikern die gewöhnlichere.'

⁶ Cf. Roscher, s.v. Theiodamas (much useful mythological material) and R.-E., s.v. Theiodamas (clear discussion of the literary problems; cf. also Herter, , B.J. cclv [1937], 121 ff.,Google Scholar and Pfeiffer's commentary on Callim. frr. 22–25). The texts containing the story in question (Conon, Nonnus, etc.) are conveniently quoted in extenso by Pfeiffer, , Kallimachos-Studien, pp. 90 ff.;Google Scholar cf. also Knaaek, , Hermes xxiii (1888), 131 ff.Google Scholar

¹ Cf. Korte, A., Hell. Dicht.², p. 186;Google Scholar cf. also Herter, , B.J., art. cit., p. 122Google Scholar (on Ardizzoni's thesis). In Callim, . Hymn. 3. 159Google Scholar ‘Callimachus attributes the deed to the rapacious greed of Heracles', cf. Mooney on Arg. i. 1218.Google Scholar

² Cf. R.-E., art. cit., 1606, 59 ff.:Google Scholar Heracles is ‘freundlich', whilst Theiodamas is ‘höhnisch’. This corresponds exactly to the version preserved in Conon xi but the refused, and Nonnus, Hist. i. 41Google Scholar = PG 36. 1008 (Heracles but the ploughing Theiodamas refused, ).

³ A formal echo in Theocr. 25. 51: is approached by Heracles (on cf. Gow ad loc.; Theocritus ‘hat sich mit der Behandlung von Herakles-Sagen beschäftigt’, [Fritzsch³, p. 246]). in the Et. Gen., preferred by Fränkel, is lectio facilior, prompted by the in line 1218 (cf. also in Schol, . Arg. i. 1212).Google Scholar would be, at Arg. i. 1213,Google Scholar contrary to the usus auctoris, because the adjective, in the singular, is never used of persons by Apollonius (cf. Arg. 2. 139,Google Scholar 2. 1077, 3. 1304).

⁴ Apollonius insists on this detail 1214, 1217): he was following the version preserved in Lact, . Inst. div. i. 21Google Scholar (Hercules … ab eo petere coepit, ut sibi unum bovem venderet; enimvero ille negavit fieri posse, quia spes sua omnis colendae terrae duobus illis juvencis niteretur).

⁵ Philostr, . Imag. 2. 24Google Scholar calls Theiodamas

⁶ On the difficulty of ploughing the cf. Arg. i. 685 ff.:Google Scholar old men cannot perform such a task: the and a is needed (3. 1331 f.).

⁷ Although the (cf. Arg. 4. 1584)Google ScholarPubMed does not overpower one exclusively at the end of one's toil, from the analogy with the already mentioned topical passages in epic relating to the ploughers (Od. 13. 32 ff.,Google ScholarPubMedA.R., Arg. i. 1172 ff.Google Scholar and 4. 1630) Apollonius' may be taken to infer that Heracles met Theiodamas towards evening (is 1209 allusive?); cf. Philostr. Imag. loc. cit.: Heracles met Theiodamas

¹ Cf. Aratus, 919, 969, 971.

² The bird is using his wings as sails (cf. Mooney on 934): he has spread them , and, in gliding, does not move them .

³ From the semantic point of view, cf. cum accusativo loci, cf. Linsenbarth, O., De Apoll. Rhod. casuum syntaxi comparato usu homerico (Diss. Leipzig, 1887), p. 15.Google Scholar

⁴ Theocr. 22. 44 f. shows an undeniable similarity with Opp. Cyn. 3. 315 f.;Google Scholar the forms are followed by lines beginning respectively with and a dative plural

⁵ Cf. Thes., s.v. , and in particular Boesch, , De Apoll. Rhod. elocutione (Diss. Berlin, 1908), pp. 51 ff.;Google Scholar cf. also Mooney's Introduction to Apollonius, pp. 24 f.Google Scholar

⁶ Both Aratus and Alex. Aet. 5. 5 Pow. evidently read at Od. 5. 337, cf. Powell ad loc.

⁷ The simple was used by Apollonius, in imitation of Aratus, of a sea-animal (as a variation on Aratus' bird), cf. 4. 933 (‘Von Delphinen, die sich auf ruhigem Meere schaukeln’, Passow⁵), and of human beings (1. 424, 2. 903) ‘von Seefahrern, die ruhig dahinsegeln’, Passow⁵): Mooney's interpretation (‘of persons enjoying fair weather’, cf. on Arg. i. 424)Google Scholar is not quite accurate, in that the notion expressed by the verb (cf. Thes., s.v.) is ‘tranquillus sum, tranquillitate fruor’ (i.e. the absence of violent movement is implied, rather than the presence of fair weather).

¹ Cf. Cahen, , Les Hymnes de Callimaque, pp. 491 ff.,Google ScholarMeineke, , Anal. Alex. p. 322,Google Scholar and, for Apollonius in particular, Boesch, G., op. cit., pp. 43 ff.Google Scholar

² Hdt. 7. 16. 1 (with a personal accusa– tive, as in Apollonius) cf. 6. 86. 1. The history of this verb shows the typical features of lexical ‘Ionisms’; , after appearing in Herodotus, was avoided by Attic prose writers, and was revived by that sedulous collector of Ionisms, Xenophon; after him, the Second Sophistic— with its characteristic love for Ionisms (Philostratus, Aristides, etc.)—appropriated it. Cf. Schmid, Atticismus, Wortregister, s.v.

³ The has the regular pluperfect meaning.

⁴ Apollonius is showing, by implication, that he did not accept the ancient etymology cf. Ebeling, s.v.

⁵ The final—consecutive infinitive, extensively used by Homer (cf. Chantraine, , Gramm. Hom. ii. 301 ff.,Google ScholarKühner-Gerth, ii. 3, 16 ff.)Google Scholar remained, of course, in use in Alexandrian epic: cf., e.g., Maass's index to Aratus, s.v. infinitivus finalis; Theocr. 25. 74 (cf. Fritzsche³, Gramm. Index, s.v. Infinitiv). Apollonius' and Theocritus' are final—consecutive infinitives ‘in freier Ergänzung eines ganzen Satzgefüges’, cf. Mayser, , Gramm. Pap. ii. 1. 296 ff.;Google Scholar for final-consecutive infinitives in Apollonius cf. Arg. i. 1011,Google Scholar 3. 1236, 1345 ( = Theocritus' ), 4. 436 (cf. Mooney ad loc.) etc.

⁶ corresponds, as Vian rightly sees, to in line 683.

¹ Apart from the lexical difficulty, there is also a factual one: Aietes was not coming. He had sent two forces of Colchians in pursuit of the Argonauts, cf. 4. 211 ff., but he was himself waiting for the return of Medea at home, whither in fact (cf. 4. 1004, 1015) the Colchians declare that they want to take the girl.

² Cf., e.g., the episode of the huge wave, duplicated at 2. 169–74 and 2. 579 ff.

³ Cf. Pfeiffer on Callim. fr. 9: ‘Colchi ab Aeeta irato missi et apud Callimachum et apud Apollonium in duo agmina dividuntur.’

⁴ Cf. Pape–Benseler, s.v. Nr. 12; Mooney (on Arg. 4. 1175)Google ScholarPubMed understands the scholiast rightly; Delage, , La Géographie dans Us Argonautiques …, p. 251, forces the meaning of the scholiast's words.Google Scholar

⁵ An echo of Callim. fr. 7. 26 (dealing, like Apollonius' line under discussion, with the Argonautarum reditus) is found in Rhianus, Thess. 25. 2 f. Pow. (cf. Pfeiffer ad loc.); ‘wo Rhianos und der Rhodier Apollonios sich beriihren, scheint jener immer der gebende’ (Jacoby, F., F. Gr. Hist., iii a, Komm., p. 90).Google Scholar Apollonius, we may conclude, has borrowed his from Rhianus.

¹ The genitive expresses here ‘die tatsächliche Verfügungsgewalt’ (cf. Schwyzer, , Gr. Gramm. ii. 118);Google Scholar more precisely, the ‘Zugehörigkeitsverhältnis’ between two proper names which genitival type is well analysed in Schwyzer, , op. cit., p. 119,Google Scholar E i and Kühner-Gerth, , i. 333 f.Google Scholar Apollonius evidently sided with those who saw this type of genitive already attested in Homer (on Homer's cf. Schwyzer, loc. cit., note 4, Ameis-Hentze on Il. 2. 527,Google ScholarPubMedDüntzer, , De zenod. stud. hom., p. 51).Google Scholar It is now interesting to note that precisely a ‘genetivus possessoris’ expressing ‘Verfugungsgewalt’ over a person is present in Apollonius, at 4. 376 f.: this attestation, which seems to puzzle Linsenbarth, , op. cit., p. 39Google Scholar (he relates it to Hes, . Theog. 321),Google Scholar in reality confirms our argument: Apollonius evidently saw in the adnominal genitives of the type under discussion the ellipse of the participle of the verbum substantivum (i.e. on this ellipse cf. Kühner-Gerth, , i. 373,Google Scholar e.g. Thuc. 3. 70. 6) and regarded them as identical in nature to the ‘adverbale Pertinentiva’ (Schwyzer, , op. cit., pp. 122 ff.);Google Scholar hence his explicitly adverbal 4. 377. In the case of adnominal genitives ‘beider Verbindung zweier Eigennamen’, the exact ‘Art der Zusammengehörigkeit’ (e.g. ‘Beamte, Agent, Freund, Anhänger’, (Mayser, ii. 2, p. 118 ff.)Google Scholar is to be inferred ‘aus den als bekannt vorausgesetzten tatsächlichen Verhältnissen’ (Kühner-Gerth, loc. cit.); the Colchians, in Apollonius' passage, leave it to the Corcyraeans to infer that the were Aietes' slaves (or allies: on the adverbal type = erant regi Philippo addicti, regi Philippo studebant, cf. Kühner-Gerth, , i. 372 f.).Google Scholar

² Maybe the corruption is very old, if Val. Fl. Arg. 8. 261 f.Google ScholarPubMedAbsyrtus subita praeceps cum classe parentis reflects . If this hypothesis is correct, we must conclude that Valerius Flaccus, in using his Vorlage, had to give the concrete meaning classis (as modern scholars like Shaw have done) to the abstract (which meaning is against the usus auctoris, as already noted) and, in order to avoid the difficulty presented by Aietes' non-existing expedition, used the expression cum classe parentis to denote the fleet commanded by Apsyrtos, but belonging ultimately to the king.

³ Ethnic names of mercenarii had penetrated epic with Rhianus; cf. Meineke, Anal. Alex., p. 189.Google Scholar

¹ In fact, as we see from Schneider's apparatus, the editio Tauchnitziana tacitly emended into . The cases described in Chantraine, Gramm. Hom. ii. § 284,Google Scholar and Kühner-Gerth, , i. 145, 5 f.Google Scholar have of course nothing to do with our passage, in that they pertain to geographical descriptions or an uninterrupted process or condition.

² The contrast with Apollonius is evident: the latter used the lengthened form for the present, unlike Callimachus (cf. Arg. 4. 2Google ScholarPubMed), as well as for the imperfect (cf. Arg. i. 241,Google Scholar 4. 586 ).

³ Cf. Smiley, M. T., ‘Callimachus' Debt to Pindar and others’, Hermath. 1914, 46 ff.;Google ScholarNonnus, , Dion. 8. 247Google Scholar has the second pers. sing. Callimachus'

⁴ Cf. A.R. 4. 1388 , 2. 1059 ; cf. Od. 17. 561.

¹ The minuscule abbreviations for and can look practically the same, cf. Gardthausen, , Gr. Pal. ii ², p. 340, and Allen Motes on Abbreviations, Plates vii and viii.Google Scholar

² Such variations in the tenses are not unusual in Alexandrian epic; cf., e.g., Od. 8. 302Callim, . Hymn. 4. 126Google Scholar

³ Often used by Apollonius, cf. Linsenbarth, , op. cit., p. 41.Google Scholar

⁴ Quintus' is reminiscent of A.P. 6. 219.Google ScholarPubMed 16 (line 15 is probably corrupt).

⁵ In alternation with the epic (used at 3. 962), Apollonius uses the tragic (at 954), which penetrated epic in Alexandrian times (apart from Apollonius, who uses it several times, cf. Callim. fr. 18. 5 Pf.).

¹ Cf. Merkel, , Proleg., pp. xci ff.Google Scholar

² Apollonius evidently read (not at Il. 5. 161.Google ScholarPubMed His was trivialized into by G, cf. Fränkel's apparatus.

³ Apollonius—in common with the ancient critics, cf. Thes., s.v. , 567 A— must have regarded (and its compound ) as a verbum movendi, connected with : cases like Hes. Sc. 279, 348, Lyr. Adesp. 93,Google Scholar wrongly explained in LSJ s.v. , are rather to be referred (cf. Hes, . Sc. 278 f.Google Scholar to Il. 14. 91Google Scholar (cf. LSJ s.v. B 3).

⁴ It is worth noting that Homer's was avoided by the other Alexandrians, who, on the other hand, did not shun (Callim. fr. 688 Pf., Nic, . Alex. 592, fr. 68, Theocr. 21. 43, Mosch. 2. 139).Google Scholar