EVPHROSYNE
REVISTA DE FILOLOGIA CLÁSSICA
CENTRO DE ESTUDOS CLÁSSICOS
FACULDADE DE LETRAS DE LISBOA
M M X V I
NOVA SÉRIE
VOLUME XLIV
h p://www.le as.ulisboa.p
ESTE VOLUME DE EVPHROSYNE TEM O APOIO DE:
NOVA SÉRIE
VOL. XLIV
M M X V I
EVPHROSYNE
ORIENTAÇÕES PARA PREPARAÇÃO DE ORIGINAIS
01. Euph osyne — Re is a de Filologia Clássica, ó gão do Cen o de Es udos Clássicos da Uni e sidade de Lisboa, es á
abe a à colabo ação da comunidade cien í ica na á ea da ilologia clássica, en endendo es a em sen ido la go
da diac onia da adição, das á eas cien í icas especí icas e espec i as disciplinas.
2. Os a igos pode ão se en iados po co eio elec ónico pa a [email p o ec ed] ou pa a a mo ada do
Cen o de Es udos Clássicos.
3. Os o iginais en iados pa a publicação de em se inédi os e não es a subme idos a ou a en idade edi o ial; se ão
eme idos à Di ecção de Euph osyne em o ma de ini i a e ap esen ados segundo as no mas da e is a. Os o iginais
não se ão de ol idos, assumindo-se que os au o es conse am cópia dos mesmos. Os abalhos conside ados a publi-
cação são sujei os a a bi agem cien í ica.
4. Se ão acei es a é 31 de Dezemb o abalhos pa a publicação no olume do ano seguin e; se á dada in o mação sob e
a acei ação da publicação a é 30 de Ab il do ano da publicação do olume.
5. O o iginal se á semp e ap esen ado elec onicamen e e em o ma dupla: em documen o de ex o (Wo d/.doc(x) –
p e .) e em PDF.
6. O a igo se á encabeçado po : a) í ulo (b e e e explíci o); b) nome e apelidos do au o ; c) ins i uição académica
ou cien í ica a que es á ads i o; d) ende eço elec ónico; e) esumo (não supe io a 10 linhas) em língua inglesa;
) indicação de ês pala as-cha e em língua inglesa.
7. A ex ensão ecomendada pa a os a igos é de 10 páginas, não de endo ul apassa 20 páginas de A4, a co po 12
e duplo espaço.
8. Sis ema de no as: im de a igo (endno es); nume ação au omá ica seguida. Na publicação, as no as de a igo sai ão
em undo de página ( oo no es).
9. Sis ema de e e ências:
a) Não é pe mi ida emissão pa a páginas do in e io do a igo.
b) Re e ências (em no a):
Monog a ias: J.
de
R
omilly
, La c ain e e l’angoisse dans le héâ e d’Eschyle, Pa is, 1959, pp. 120-130 (casa edi o a
mencionada apenas pa a edições an igas). Ou em 2.ª e .: J.
de
R
omilly
, op. ci ., p. 78.
Re is as: R. S. C
aldwell
, “The Misogyny o E eocles”, A e husa, 6, 1973, 193-231 ( ol., ano, pp.). Ou em 2.ª e .:
R. S. C
aldwell
, loc. ci .
Ob as colec i as: G. C
a allo
, “La ci colazione dei es i g eci nell’Eu opa dell’Al o Medioe o” in J. Hamesse (ed.),
Rencon es de cul u es dans la Philosophie Médié ale – T aduc ions e aduc eu s de l’An iqui é a di e au XIVe
siècle, Lou ain-la-Neu e, 1990, pp. 47-64.
c) Ab e ia u as: Segui -se-ão as ab e ia u as con encionadas po ThLL, pa a au o es la inos; Liddel-Sco -Jones,
pa a au o es g egos; Année Philologique, pa a í ulos de e is as; pa a as ab e ia u as mais comuns: p. / pp.;
ed. / edd.; c .; s.u.; sup a; op. ci .; loc. ci .; uid.; a.C. / d.C. (em edondo).
d) Ci ações: De em se colocadas en e comas “…” (não as de ex os g egos); os i álicos se ão u ilizados apenas pa a
sublinha pala as ou pequenas ases; as ci ações em la im ou em g ego se ão b e es.
10. E en uais igu as ou imagens se ão de qualidade g á ica (de p e e ência no o ma o TIF, com a esolução mínima de
200 p.p.), o necidas em supo e elec ónico (como os o iginais) e com a indicação p ecisa da e e ência no ex o e na
o dem assim como do í ulo (de em se acau elados os di ei os de ep odução po pa e do au o do a igo).
11. Aos au o es não se á o necido mais do que um jogo de p o as; es as de e ão se de ol idas num p azo máximo de
7 dias. Em p incípio, não se ão pe mi idas al e ações ao o iginal.
12. Aos au o es se á o necido um exempla do olume e a e são elec ónica do espec i o a igo.
EVPHROSYNE
REVISTA DE FILOLOGIA CLÁSSICA
Cen o de Es udos Clássicos - Faculdade de Le as
PT - 1600-214 LISBOA
[email p o ec ed]
EVPHROSYNE
REVISTA DE FILOLOGIA CLÁSSICA
*
CENTRO DE ESTUDOS CLÁSSICOS
FACULDADE DE LETRAS DE LISBOA
PT - 1600-214 LISBOA
PORTUGAL
e-mail: [email p o ec ed]
sí io elec ónico: h p://www. mp.le as.ulisboa.p /cec
diReC oRa
maRia CRiS ina CaS Ro-maia de SouSa Pimen el
ComiSSão de RedaCção
abel do naSCimen o Pena, ana maRia SanChez aRRío, aRnaldo mon eiRo do eSPíRi o San o, JoSé
PedRo Sil a San oS SeRRa, manuel JoSé de SouSa baRboSa, Paulo FaRmhouSe albeR o, anda maRia
Cou inho GaRRido anaS áCio
ConSelho Cien íFiCo
aiReS auGuS o do naSCimen o (U. Lisboa), CaRloS San ini (U. Pe ugia), CaRmen CodoñeR meRino
(U. Salamanca), emilio SuáRez de la oRRe (U. Pompeu Fab a), Joël homaS (U. Pe pignan), JoSé manuel
díaz de buS aman e (U. San iago de Compos ela), manuel alexandRe JúnioR (U. Lisboa), maRC mayeR
y oli é (U. Ba celona), Paolo Fedeli (U. Ba i), homaS eaRle (U. Ox o d)
ConSelho de aRbi RaGem Cien íFiCa
albeR o beRnabé PaJaReS (U. Complu ense de Mad id), ánGel uRbán FeRnández (U. Có doba), auRelio PéRez
Jiménez (U. Málaga), maRía adelaida andReS (U. Salamanca), CaRloS moRaiS (U. A ei o), CaRmen moRenilla
alenS (U. Valencia), CRiS obal maCíaS illaloboS (U. Málaga), maRía eliSa laGe Co oS (U. San iago de
Compos ela), euS aquio SánChez SaloR (U. Ex emadu a), Fabio S ok (U. Roma II – To Ve ga a), FedeRiCo
RuSSo (U. Kons anz), GRan a. nelSeS uen (U. Wiscounsin), GRaziana bReSCia (U. Foggia), GReGoRio
RodRíGuez heRReRa (U. Las Palmas de G an Cana ia), iñiGo Ruiz aRzalluz (U. País Vasco), JoSé maRía
maeS Re maeS Re (U. Cádiz), JeSúS-maRía nie o ibáñez (U. León), Joaquim PinheiRo (U. Madei a), manuel
loPez muñoz (U. Alme ía), nuno SimõeS RodRiGueS (U. Lisboa), RamiRo González delGado (U. Ex emadu a),
RiChaRd maRShall (U. Ox o d), RoSalba dimundo (U. Ba i), RoSSana GuGlielme i (U. Milano), San iaGo
loPez moReda (U. Ex emadu a), SebaS ião a aReS de Pinho (U. Coimb a), Sil ana RoCCa (U. Geno a)
Ti agem 500 exempla es
Depósi o legal 178089/02
ISSN 0870-0133
PubliCação anual SuJei a a aRbi RaGem Cien íFiCa
ReFeRenCiada em
l’année PhiloloGique | aR S and humani ieS Ci a ion index | biblioGRaPhie in eRna ionale
de l’humaniSme e de la RemaniSSanCe | CSa linGuiS iCS and lanGuaGe beha ioR abS RaC S
| dialne | ebSCo | eRih PluS | la index | medioe o la ino | SCoPuS
CENTRO DE ESTUDOS CLÁSSICOS
FACULDADE DE LETRAS DE LISBOA
EVPHROSYNE
REVISTA DE FILOLOGIA CLÁSSICA
MMXVI
NOVA SÉRIE – VOLUME XLIV
346
LIBRI RECENSITI
Exis em á ios ou os ex os cosmogónicos na li e a u a édica pos e io – o A ha a
Veda (XI, 8), o B ihad-a anyaka Upanishad (1, 2, 1-3), o Chandogya Upanisha (III, 19, 1-2;
VI, 2, 1-4; Bha acha ya 3, 5) – que o e ecem ou as in e p e ações da o igem do mundo,
a a és da sepa ação do céu e da e a; do sac i ício e desmemb amen o de um se p imo -
dial ou, ainda, a a és da eclosão de um o o p imigénio; mas o Nasadiya é, sem dú ida, o
mais an igo e al ez o mais belo des es ex os, pelo que se comp eende a opção do au o
em es ingi o egis o édico a es a na a i a.
Já no âmbi o babilónico e a endendo à pa icula idade da designada Teogonia de
Dunnu, comp eende-se que o au o lhe dê ambém especial des aque, consag ando-lhe
um capí ulo sepa ado, embo a incluído no capí ulo gené ico dedicado ao An igo P óximo
O ien e. Não obs an e, ao a a -se de um ex o babilónico, a ob a ganha ia, al ez, em
maio ha monia se es e osse incluído no co pus babilónico.
De igual modo, a o gânica da ob a fica ia mais cla a ao lei o se o Capí ulo 7, dedi-
cado ao mundo g ego en e o O ien e e o Ociden e, apa ecesse imedia amen e an es do
Capí ulo 9, que jus amen e diz espei o às cosmogonias g egas, em ez de an ecede o
Capí ulo 8, consag ado ao mundo hi i a; e ainda se, no Capí ulo 9, depois da in odução
que se az ao âmbi o g ego, ossem incluídos os ex os que o au o op a po conside a em
capí ulos sepa ados (designadamen e do Capí ulo 10 ao Capí ulo 14).
O mundo g ego é sem dú ida o âmbi o de in es igação em que o au o se sen e mais
à on ade, como deno a a con ex ualização que az dos ex os incluídos, em con as e com
o egis o mais sucin o dos capí ulos an e io es dedicados ao An igo P óximo O ien e.
Em suma, po ém, o au o le a-nos numa iagem mágica, a a és de ex os a caicos
de g ande beleza e li ismo: uma ob a de mé i o que defini i amen e me ece a pena
conhece .
MARIA JOÃO CORREIA SANTOS
Cen o de Es udos Clássicos da
Faculdade de Le as da Uni e sidade de Lisboa
[email p o ec ed]
FRANCO MONTANARI, STEPHANOS MATTHAIOS, ANTONIOS RENGAKOS, B ill’s Com-
panion o Ancien G eek Schola ship, ol. 1: His o y. Disciplina y p ofiles;
ol. 2: Be ween heo y and p ac ice, Leiden – Bos on, B ill, 2015. 2 ol.
1504 pp. ISBN 978-90-04-24594-5
Gi en he inc easing in e es ha his a ea o s udy has ecei ed in he las ew
decades, an up- o-da e and comp ehensi e s udy o Ancien G eek Schola ship was e y
necessa y and expec ed. The cu en companion is a collec i e con ibu ion in wo olumes,
which will undoub edly become a e e ence wo k o anyone who s udies no only ancien
G eek schola ship, bu also o he disciplines which a e in ima ely ela ed in hei de elop-
men and way o ansmission, such as he o ics, my hog aphy o Hellenis ic as onomy.
In he p e ace, he edi o s decla e ha he app oach ollowed is a “posi i e eassess-
men ” o he ancien G eek schola ship as a field o s udy in i sel , and no an as “ancilla y
science” o as a sou ce o agmen s o los wo ks (p. IX). Indeed, R. P ei e in his His o y
o Classical Schola ship (1968) eclaimed he ole o ancien schola ship as an impo an
pa o ancien cul u e in i s own igh , an app oach indica ed by se e al schola s since
(L. D. Reynolds, N. G. Wilson published also in 1968 hei Sc ibes and Schola s. A Guide
o he T ansmission o G eek and La in Li e a u e, Ox o d. O he p e ious s udies on
schola ship a e F. Pon ani, “La Filologia”, in SleGA II, Roma, 1995, pp. 307-351; E. Dickey,
Ancien G eek Schola ship, Ox o d, 2007; S ephanos Ma haios, F anco Mon ana i,
An onios Rengakos (eds.), Ancien Schola ship and G amma : A che ypes, Concep s and

LIBRI RECENSITI
347
Con ex s. T ends in classics – supplemen a y olumes, 8. Be lin – New Yo k: De G uy e ,
2011; F. Mon ana i, L. Pagani (eds.), F om Schola s o Scholia. Chap e s in he His o y
o Ancien G eek Schola ship, T ends in Classics Supplemen 9, Be lin – New Yo k, 2011).
A he same ime, he in insic in e disciplina y na u e o schola ship has no been a oided
in he companion and – besides he his o ical and opic-based desc ip ion – i includes a
sec ion on ela ed disciplines o gen es.
Ancien schola ship is defined by he edi o s as he “nume ous phenomena ha
belong o li e a y ci iliza ion. The e m ‘schola ship’ e e s (...) o all w i en wo ks ha
aim specifically and di ec ly o p o ide an in e p e a ion o he li e a y wo ks on a ious
le els. (…) I e e s o di e en o ms o commen a y on he ex and o exege ic ea men s
o monog aphic na u e. (…) [I ] also co e s many o he gen es, (…) lexicog aphy and
linguis ic-g amma ical s udies, which can and mus be expanded o include (...) biog aphy,
pa emiog aphy, my hog aphy, s udies on me ics, no o men ion s udies in o he o m o
he ancien book (…)” (p. X). The common elemen o all hese ypes o wo ks is ha hey
can be gene ally defined as “ ex on a ex o ex abou a ex ” (p. XI).
The wo k is o ganised in o h ee pa s: His o y, Disciplina y P ofiles and Be ween
Theo y and P ac ice. The fi s olume co e s he fi s wo pa s, and he second olume is
exclusi ely dedica ed o he hi d pa o i is a b oade field.
The his o ical desc ip ion is comp ised o ou chap e s co e ing he di e en pe iods
– om i s o igins o Alexand ia, he Hellenis ic pe iod, he Impe ial e a and La e An iqui y
and he Byzan ine Empi e. I is, as he edi o s decla e, “ he only up- o-da e sys ema ic
compendium o his o y o ancien schola ship om he o igins up o he Byzan ine age”
(p. XIV). In u n, each chap e is di ided in o sec ions by opics and p eceded by an index
– as a e all o he chap e s in he companion – which acili a es looking up o specific
issues. One can imagine ha he edi o s ga e p io i y o he pu pose o o e ing a p ac ical
ool o consul a ion. In e u n, in he his o ical pa , he a omiza ion o opics some imes
dis up s he fluidi y o lec u e due o he cons an shi ing. As an example, he fi s chap-
e , which co e s he A chaic and Classical pe iods, is di ided in o h ee main sec ions.
The fi s sec ion has 7 subsec ions, he second wo subsec ions, he fi s o which has six
sub-sub-sec ions, and he hi d has 10 subsec ions, some o which in u n ha e mo e di i-
sions. Ne e heless, i is a good and clea exposi ion o a g ea amoun o ma e ial, based
in he p esen a ion o he p ima y sou ces and p o iding he ele an bibliog aphy o he
many discussed opics.
The second pa , Disciplina y p ofiles, is dedica ed o he sou ces o schola ship, he
defini ion o g amma and he ypology o wo ks which all unde he label o philology
and g amma . E. Dickey gi es a clea and condensed desc ip ion o he di e en sou ces
o ganised acco ding o hei ex ual o m: papy i, ex an wo ks – lexica, g amma ical
wo ks, commen a ies and o he s such as Pho ius –, agmen a y wo ks and scholia. I find
he chap e ex emely use ul o i goes s aigh o he poin and elucida es he na u e
o sou ces wi h a complica ed his o ical ansmission. The My hog aphus Home icus is
men ioned in he sec ion on papy i. I would ha e been desi able o also find i in he
sec ion on he Home ic scholia, since he majo numbe o agmen s conside ed o be
My hog aphus Home icus a e p ese ed in he D scholia. In he bibliog aphical no es,
E. Dickey o go o men ion a disse a ion o 2007 which consis s in an edi ion o he
My hog aphus Home icus o he Iliad (J. Pagès, My hog aphus Home icus. Es udi i edició
comen ada (diss.), Uni e si a Au ònoma de Ba celona, 2007).
The chap e on g amma is a his o ical and c i ical analysis o he o ma ion o
g amma as a discipline and he defini ions o ancien schola s such as E a os henes
o Cy ene, Sex us Empi icus o Asclepiades o My lea p o ide.
The hi d chap e p o ides a heo e ical desc ip ion o he di e en ypes o philo-
logical w i ings and gi es a defini ion and a delimi a ion o philology. The absence o a
delimi a ion o ancien philology inside he b oade ca ego y o ancien schola ship, o
o a discussion on how hese wo ca ego ies ela e o each o he is a bi puzzling. Since
ancien schola ship is defined in he p e ace as “ ex s on ex s”, I wonde how his is di e -
en om he defini ion ha M. Dubischa claims o be adop ing in he chap e : “philology
348
LIBRI RECENSITI
has wo main pu poses: fi s , o es o e, p ese e, and ansmi impo an ex s om he
pas ; and, second, o unde s and and in e p e hese ex s adequa ely” (p. 564). The use
o he exp ession “philological schola ship” in many places (pp. 549, 561, 562, 564, 569,
588, 589, 590 and mo e) implies ha philology is seen as a ype o schola ship. Which
pa o ancien schola ship, hen, should we no conside philological? No is clea o me
he di e en ia ion inside schola ship in sec ion 4.1 “Ex e nal and In e nal Di e en ia ion
o Philological w i ing”. Rega ding scholia, he au ho exp esses ha “scholia and scholi-
og aphy will be conside ed as phenomena o ecep ion and ansmission, no as o iginal
philological p oduc ion (p. 548)”. This is unde s andable om a p ac ical poin o iew.
Howe e , e y o en scholia a e he only sou ce o Alexand ian philology, whose wo ks
a e p ese ed only agmen a ily. In agmen a y wo ks one should no o ge , as Dickey
poin ed ou in he p e ious chap e , ha hese wo ks a e cons uc ions o edi o s, and is
no possible o assess hem wi hou aking in o accoun he way o ansmission. Besides
ha , he con ibu o poses h ee ques ions abou philology ha seem e y pe inen o me:
“which ypes o philological w i ings did exis ? Why hese ypes? How a e hey ela ed o
one ano he ?”. Also, he desc ip ion o each ype o philological ac ion o p oduc and he
analysis using he sys em heo y as a amewo k a e inno a i e and hough -p o oking.
The las chap e unde akes a classifica ion o he ype o g amma s, se ing wo
big g oups: he IJȤȞȘ- ype and ela ed monog aphs – “a comp ehensi e and sys ema ic
accoun o g amma and i s asks, along wi h he defini ion and desc ip ion o he pa s
o he speech” (p. 601) – and he monog aphs on Hellenismos – “dealing wi h doub ul
cases and i egula i ies” – none o which has su i ed bu can be econs uc ed om he
desc ip ion o Sex us Empi icus and om he compa ison wi h wo ks on La in.
The second olume con ains he hi d pa , Be ween Theo y and P axis, and has he
pu pose o assessing he “conc e e applica ion o heo ies o li e a y ex s and language”
(p. x ). This pa is di ided in o h ee main sec ions: Schola ship, G amma and Philo-
logical and Linguis ic Obse a ions and Theo ies in In e disciplina y Con ex .
The fi s sec ion (Schola ship) includes h ee con ibu ions: one on Ekdosis, ano he
on Home ic c i icism and a hi d one on poe ics and li e a y c i icism.
The fi s chap e desc ibes he his o ical de elopmen o Ekdosis ocusing on i s p o-
cedu es, “ he way in which i was ma e ially cons uc ed” (p. 644). Se e al papy ological
es imonies (P. Ilias 12, P. Odyssey 31, P. Uni . Milan. 309, P. Oxy 2161, P. Be ol in . 9872,
P. Oxy. 2256, Pbodme 2, Poxy. 2404 + Plau . 111/278) a e p esen ed o suppo he iew
ha new examples o li e a y books we e e- ead and compa ed o he an ig aph and o
o he edi ions and ha hey we e co ec ed. In he second sec ion o he chap e , Mon a-
na i s udies he p ocesses in ol ed in he choice be ween he a iae lec iones and in he
conjec u es o ancien edi o s, analysing bo h he indi ec e idence and he di ec es i-
mony p o ided by he case o he ecen ly disco e ed manusc ip o Galen’s De indolen ia.
Mon ana i also p esen s a s a e-o - he-a deba e on whe he he Alexand ian edi o s om
Zenodo us o A is a chos ca ied ou a colla ion o manusc ip s, abou which he has a
posi i e posi ion. He concludes ha “in a his o ical pe spec i e, all ha is needed in o de
o he e o be a decisi e s ep o wa d in in ellec ual achie emen was he e y ac o
unde s anding and add essing he p oblem, e en i only pa ially, e a ically and incohe -
en ly” (p. 671).
As R. Hun e unde lines, he dominan ole o Home in educa ion and schola ship
is clea ly eflec ed in he “cen ali y o Home ic ex s o he g ow h o c i ical p ac ice
and e minology” (p. 673). The e o e, he Home ic c i icism dese ed his second chap e
on i s own. R. Hun e g oups he opics on which Home was commen ed in An iqui y
in o ou ca ego ies: s ylis ic, didac ic, he o ical and e hical, “ hough li le weigh is o
be gi en o he bounda ies o hese ou ca ego ies” (p. 674). Using di e en examples, he
o e s fi s a su ey o he ea lies c i ical discussions, which “may be classed b oadly alle-
go ical in he sense ha i seeks o unco e meanings in he ex which a e no pa en om
wha he ex appea s o say ‘on he su ace’” (p. 675). In a second sec ion, he ea s he
he o ical c i icism o Home , defining i as “ he s udy o s a egies o bo h language and
subs ance which lead o he e ec i e p esen a ion o a gumen s and cha ac e s” (p. 686).
LIBRI RECENSITI
349
The hi d chap e consis s on he analysis o 90 specific e ms and concep s ha
belong o li e a y c i icism, a anged in alphabe ic o de . R. Nünlis ocuses on he
Hellenis ic pe iod bu does no exclude es imonies om Roman imes. The lis comp ises
o a g ea a ie y o concep s, amongs which one can find, o example, “Aes he ics”,
“Anach onism”, “Book”, “Fo mulaic language”, “My hology”, “P ose” o “Synaes hesia”.
E en hough he alphabe ic o de helps o find he concep s, gi en he wide a ie y, i
would ha e been help ul o include an index – maybe in wo o h ee columns – on he
on page o he chap e .
The second sec ion o he hi d pa , on G amma , is composed o six chap e s dedi-
ca ed o he ollowing issues: “1. Desc ip ion o he cons i uen elemen s o he G eek Lan-
guage”, “2. Language co ec ness (Hellenismos) and i s c i e ia”, “3. Syn ax”, “4. Ancien
e ymology”, “5. P osody” and “6. O hog aphy”.
The fi s chap e analyses ideas ela ed o he pa s o g amma and language in
Pla o, A is o le, he S oics, he Alexand ian philologis s. The chap e ends wi h a eflec ion
on he cons i u ion and e olu ion o G eek g amma , which “consis ed in he sepa a ion o
g amma om philosophy and Rhe o ics” (p. 792).
The second chap e o e s a his o ical desc ip ion and analysis o he concep o
language co ec ness in philosophy and he o ic, in Hellenis ic schola ship, in heo e ical
w i ings on Hellenismos and in specific au ho s om he 2nd cen u y AD and la e pe iods.
We also find an analysis o he c i e ia o e alua e co ec ness and how hey a ied depend-
ing on he sou ces.
In chap e 3, on Syn ax, J. Lallo s a s ques ioning i his discipline is a pa o
g amma and desc ibes how his a ies ac oss ime. The chap e is dedica ed o desc ibe
ancien ideas on syn ax, he no ion o cong uence, “ he p inciple which go e ns syn ax”
(p. 855), he scheme o unc ions, he syn ac ic domains and he ela ions o syn ax wi h
logic and philology.
E ymology is he opic o he ou h chap e which bea s he sugges i e i le “Ancien
E ymology: A Tool o Thinking”. I. Slui e decla es in he in oduc ion ha he chap e ’s
“main ocus will be on he cul u al and his o ical embedding o hese p ac ices, analysis o
he ype o discou se hey ep esen , and hei cogni i e and he o ical unc ions” (p. 896).
Ancien e ymology is di e en om he mode n e ymology in wo aspec s: i is synch onic,
e en hough i eso s o he pas o explain he wo ds; and i seeks o explain he seman-
ics o wo ds. The p inciples o e ymological discou se a e exemplified in a case s udy on
a passage o Pla o’s C a ylus e e ing he e ymology o he name o Apollo (405a-406a). I s
echnique is desc ibed using ano he example om he C a ylus (349b). E ymology gi es
suppo o cul u al memo y, is a heu is ic ool, a ool o in e p e a ion and o pe suasi e
a gumen a ion and a mnemo ecnic aid.
The fi h chap e is abou ancien heo y o p osody. I s a s wi h a his o ical
desc ip ion o he b anches o p osody – owels, quan i ies and b ea hings. The ollowing
sec ions deal wi h he ancien heo ies on b ea hings and owel quan i ies. Sec ions 5 o
10 a e dedica ed o he accen .
The six h and las chap e o his sec ion desc ibes he his o y o o hog aphy om
i s beginnings o He odian’s sys ema iza ion.
The las sec ion is, as we said, dedica ed o wo ks om o he gen es which p esen
philological cha ac e is ics and p ocedu es. I s pu pose, as s a ed in he p e ace, is o
“b ing o ligh he p esence o elemen s and a i udes o a philological-exege ic cha ac e ,
and in ol ing language p oblems, in wo ks and ea men s belonging o li e a y gen es
ha a e dis inc om schola ship i sel , e en i schola ship is unde s ood in he b oad
sense” (p. x ). Se en chap e s co e he ollowing gen es: he o ics, philosophy, my hog-
aphy, he iad o his o iog aphy, e hnog aphy and geog aphy, medicine, as onomy and
zoology.
The i le o he fi s chap e is “G amma ical Theo y and Rhe o ical Teaching”.
C. C. de Jonge unde lines ha he o ic and g amma we e he “ wo pilla s o Hellenis ic and
Roman educa ion” (p. 982) and i is he e o e no possible o d aw a clea line sepa a ing
350
LIBRI RECENSITI
he wo fields. The chap e is dedica ed o desc ibing how g amma ical heo y is used
in he o ical ea ises, ocusing on le e s, pa s o speech, wo d o de and g amma ical
figu es o speech, o hey a e he “ca ego ies mos ob iously influenced by g amma ical
heo y” (p. 983). In he s udy, he ollowing specific wo ks a e ocussed on, o hey a e
ep esen a i es o G eek he o ic and in eg a e g amma ical heo y and he o ical eaching:
On S yle o Deme ius (second o fi s cen . BC), se e al ea ises and li e a y le e s o
Dionysius o Halica nassus (end o fi s cen . BC), and he anonymous On he Sublime
(da a unknown).
W. Lapini ea s he app oaches o language and he philological obse a ions in
philosophy. The chap e is di ided in o wo sec ions: he fi s is on language, whe e he
discusses he sophis ic me hods p io o he sophis ic mo emen , in he sophis ic mo e-
men , in Pla o, in A is o le and in Hellenis ic philosophies; he second sec ion is on
philology, whe e he discusses he Alexand ian schola ship as cul u al pa adigm, he ela-
ionship be ween philology and di e en philosophical schools, Panae ius and Galen and
he A is o elian commen a ies.
My hog aphy is he opic o he hi d chap e . C. Meliado p esen s a desc ip ion o
he p incipal my hog aphe s, which, as he decla es a he end o he chap e , “does no
claim o be comple e bu may ha e helped o define he undamen al ole co e ed by he
s udy o my h in ancien imes”. He quo es significan passages o some o he my ho-
g aphical wo ks he deals wi h and commen s on he key issues. The au ho s included in
he sec ion “The o igins o my hog aphy” a e Heca eus o Mile os, Acusilaos o A gos,
Phe ecydes, Simonides o Ceos, Hellanicus and He odo us. The second sec ion is i led
“The bi h o scien ific my hog aphy” and s a s by e e ing o Asclepiades o T agilos,
Glaucus o Rhegium, He aclides Pon icus and Philocho us o A hens, all ela ed o agic
my hs and agmen a ily p ese ed. He con inues wi h Dionysus Schy ob achion, Apollo-
do us o A hens, he Lib a y, Pisande , Pa henius o Nicaea, An oninus Libe alis, Conon,
he My hog aphus Home icus and P olemaeus Chennos. I is a clea and fluid exposi-
ion. Howe e , some impo an wo ks a e missing, as is he case o he Ȇİȡ ʌ઀ıIJȦȞ o
Palaepha us and he mo e se ious case o he Ca as e isms o E a os henes, a schola and
membe o he lib a y o Alexand ia who composed, amongs o he schola p oduc ion, a
wo k on my hs o ans o ma ions in cons ella ions ( he Ca as e isms has been included
in e e y mode n compila ion o my hog aphe s, o ins ance he My hog aphi G aeci o
Wes e mann, 1843 o Wagne , 1897 [ ol. 3.1], and since del Can o’s ansla ion in 1992,
he in e es o i has mani es ly inc eased – nowadays, we ha e 12 edi ions and ansla-
ions and a monog aphic olume e y ecen ly appea ed: Jo di Pàmias (ed.), E a os henes’
Ca as e isms: Recep ions and T ansla ions, Me ing, 2016). C. Meliado seems o conside
my hog aphy as a phenomenon independen om o he phenomena o my h ecep ion.
In his sense, i would ha e been use ul i he had p o ided a defini ion o he gen e o a
e e ence o he discussion on i s defini ion, which i sel is ela ed o an olde and p o-
ound deba e on he defini ion o my h ( d. M. Alganza Roldán, “La mi og a ía como
géne o de la p osa helenís ica”, Flo Ilib., 17, 2006, 9-37; R. Fowle , “My hos and Logos”,
JHS, 131, 2011, 45-66). A discussion on how – o i – my hog aphy should be conside ed
a pa o ancien schola ship, oge he wi h an analysis on how he ansmi ed ex s o
“my hog aphe s” show p ocedu es which come om o a e cha ac e is ic o schola ship,
is especially missed. An example he au ho could ha e used o elabo a e on ha is he
use o e ymology by Apollodo us o A hens o explain he names o he Gods, o which
he e e s in p. 1075, o he in e es ing in oduc ion o Pa henius o Nicaea, quo ed in
p. 1082, whe e Pa henius decla es he pu pose o he wo k and his me hod o composi-
ion. E a os henes, a schola himsel , would ha e been he pe ec case s udy o discuss
abou he ela ion be ween my hog aphy and schola ship. Rega ding he bibliog aphical
e e ences, he edi ion wi h commen a y o he Lib a y’s fi s wo books by F. Cua e o is
missing (Cua e o, F ancesc J., Pseudo-Apol·lodo . Biblio eca. Vol. 1 [Llib e I], Fundació
Be na Me ge, Ba celona, 2010; Pseudo-Apol·lodo . Biblio eca. Vol. 2 [Llib e II], Fundació
Be na Me ge, Ba celona, 2012), as well as o he impo an non Anglo-Saxonic bibliog aphy.

Es e XLIV olume da No a Sé ie de
Euph osyne oi compos o, imp essso
e encade nado em B aga, nas Oficinas
da
PUBLITO
–
Es údio de A es G áficas, Lda.
Dezemb o de 2016
ARTICLE SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
1. Euph osyne — Re is a de Filologia Clássica, he pee jou nal o he Cen e o Classical S udies, publishes pape s
on classical philology and i s disciplines (including classical ecep ion and adi ion).
2. Pape s can be sen o
[email p o ec ed]
o o he Cen e o Classical S udies’ pos mail.
3. Pape s submi ed: mus be o iginal; canno be yield o o he en i y; mus be sen in hei defini e e sion; ha e o be
p esen ed acco ding o hese guidelines; will no be e u ned o he au ho . Pape s will be submi ed o pee e iews.
4. Pape s will be accep ed un il 31s o Decembe in he yea p e ious o publica ion; an accep ance no ifica ion will
be sen o he au ho un il 30 h o Ap il in he yea o publica ion.
5. O iginals mus always be submi ed in double elec onic o ma (Wo d/.doc(x) and PDF).
6. Pape s mus ha e: a) i le (sho and clea ); b) au ho ’s name and su name; c) au ho ’s academic o scien ific ins i-
u ion; d) au ho ’s email; e) abs ac (10 lines) in English; ) h ee key-wo ds in English.
7. Recommended size is 10 pages and ne e mo e han 20 A4 pages ( on size 12, double spaced).
8. No es: endno es, wi h sequen ial nume a ion. When published, hese will be con e ed o oo no es.
9. Re e ences:
a) Remissions o pages wi hin he pape a e no allowed.
b) No e e e ences:
Books: J.
DE
R
OMILLY
, La c ain e e l’angoisse dans le héâ e d’Eschyle, Pa is, Les Belles Le es, 1959, pp. 120-130;
2nd e e ence: J.
DE
R
OMILLY
, op. ci ., p. 78.
Jou nals: R. S. C
ALDWELL
, “The Misogyny o E eocles”, A e husa, 6, 1973, 193-231 ( ol., yea , pp.). 2nd e e ence:
R. S. C
ALDWELL
, loc. ci .
Mul i-au ho olumes: G. C
AVALLO
, “La ci colazione dei es i g eci nell’Eu opa dell’Al o Medioe o” in J. Hamesse
(ed.), Rencon es de cul u es dans la Philosophie Médié ale — T aduc ions e aduc eu s de l’An iqui é a di e
au XIVe siècle, Pa is, Les Belles Le es, 1971, pp. 47-64.
c) Abb e ia ions: o La in au ho s will be ollowed ThLL con en ions; Liddel-Sco -Jones will be used o G eek
au ho s; Année Philologique o abb e ia e jou nal i les; common abb e ia ions: p. / pp.; ed. / edd.; c .; s.u.; sup a;
op. ci .; loc. ci .; uid.; a.C. / d.C. ( oman).
d) Quo a ions: Mus be ma ked by quo es “…” (bu no in G eek); i alic is used o highligh wo ds o sho sen ences;
quo a ions in La in o G eek mus be b ie .
10. Images mus ha e quali y (p e e ably in TIF o ma , minimum esolu ion 200 p.p.), p o ided in elec onic o ma ,
wi h he p ecise indica ion o whe e hey mus be placed in he ex , and who is hei au ho . The au ho is
esponsible o ob aining any copy igh s needed.
11. The au ho will no be p o ided wi h mo e han one se o e iew, which has o be e u ned wi hin a week pe iod.
O iginals canno be modified.
12. Au ho s will ecei e a physical copy o he olume and he elec onic e sion o hei pape .
EVPHROSYNE
REVISTA DE FILOLOGIA CLÁSSICA
Cen o de Es udos Clássicos - Faculdade de Le as
PT - 1600-214 LISBOA
[email p o ec ed]