THE book which Eudoxus of Cnidos was stated by some to have translated from the Egyptian is entitled in the manuscripts of Diog. Laert. 8. 89, a reading which R. D. Hicks retains in his Loeb edition (vol. ii, 1925, revised ed. 1931, repr. 1950, p. 402). It was retained also in the edition of C. Gabr. Cobet (Paris, 1878) and in the Tauchnitz edition (Leipzig, 1895); so also H. S. Long in O.C.T. (1964). Egyptian religion was richly theriolatrous. But does it proffer a suggestion of ‘Dialogues of Dogs’ ?

The contrary belief is suggested by the proposal of various emendations.

According to the Ars Amatoria the notorious rape took place on the occasion of a primitive dramatic entertainment staged in a theatre, in which the seats and furnishings were also primitive. There is no time for a description of the arts of the performers—a tibicen and a ludius—before the Romans, impatient for action, receive their signal from Romulus. Nor is there any mention of a god in whose honour the entertainment had been provided.

We now know that the epitomes prefixed to the plays of Euripides in the medieval manuscripts were written not for this purpose but as part of a complete collection of Euripidean epitomes, arranged alphabetically by initial,and intended presumably to make the subject-matter of the plays available to persons unable or unwilling to read the plays themselves. The first direct proof of the existence of this collection came with the publication in 1933 of a fragment containing Rhesos, Rhadamanthys, Skyrioi (Gallavotti, Riv. Fil. lxi [1933], 177 fif.; now P.S.I. 1286); we now have parts of it in three other papyri as well (P. Mil. Vogl. 44, with Hippolytos; P. Oxy. 2455, with over twenty plays, including Medea, Orestes, Troades, Phoinissai; P. Oxy. 2457, with Alkestis and Aiolos), and may reasonably suppose that P. Oxy. 420 (Elektra; published in 1903) is also from the same work.

The reader of Juvenal's fifth satire, making his way through the new Oxford text edited by W. V. Clausen, finds the sweep of the poet's indignant rhetoric interrupted by the obeli of 104. Reference to Clausen's paper which he quotes in support of his proposed reading glaucis sparsus (A.J.P. lxxvi [1955], 58–60) reveals that he proceeds from the assumption that the line is corrupt, and evidence that this is the case must be sought elsewhere.

IN C.Q. N.S. xiii (1963), 1578ff., M. L. West discusses various non-Greek traditions which throw light on the interpretation of Pherecydes. Of course problems remain, but one of these the comparative material may yet solve. Is West correct in suggesting (p. 157) that we emend the Suda entry on Pherecydesand so reduce the seven recesses to five ? A convincing analogy can help us here. G. S. Kirk has already compared the seven gates which Ishtar has to penetrate when she descends into the underworld. Despite all his reluctance to admit oriental influence on Pherecydes, he sees this as a possible source.

Nikostratos son of Dieitrephes is stated by Thucydides to have been a general in a number of years during the first half of the Peloponnesian War, ranging from 427 (Th. 3. 75) to his death in 418 (Th. 5. 74. 3). Nikostratos, a Skambonides by deme, is mentioned in Aristophanes as a member of the audience at the performance of the Wasps in 422 (Ar. Wasps 81).

Suetonius records that as Vespasian lay on his death-bed his dying words were Vae puto deus fio (Vespas. 23. 4). If we assume that Vespasian could hardly have believed that he was literally destined for divinity, it is an open question what exactly he intended by this remark. As a general rule scholars seem to have interpreted it as a sarcastic sneer at deification: one reads for example such statements as ‘Historically we do not associate the reign of Vespasian with the Emperor Cult.

There are signs that a list of parallelisms containing quite lengthy citations of republican works in prose and all kinds of verse, as well as remarks highly critical of Virgil, provided the material of Saturnalia 6. 2, Saturnalia 6. 3, and Saturnalia 6. 1. 55–65.1

Whereas Macrobius transmits the uersus parallelisms practically without comment, the locus parallelisms have a certain amount of discussion clustered at the beginning and at the end. This is for the most part neutral and matter of fact but in 6. 2. 33 the harsh tone of an obtrectator makes itself heard: nee Tullio conpilando, dummodo undique ornamenta sibi conferret, abstinuit. The original list was excerpted very carelessly: in 6. 2. 29 the Virgil citation ought to continue for two more verses; in 6. 2. 7, 9, and 24 the Lucretius citations are likewise defective.

The critics have not been generous towards Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica as a whole, but their praise of his Medea episode, whether moderate or immoderate, has been fairly unanimous. W. C. Summers writes: ‘Valerius manages to treat the same theme with originality and power; in psychological probability his version seems to me superior to anything that has reached us from antiquity’. And J. M. K. Martin: ‘Where he displayed the most distinct originality, where he parted company with the Alexandrian poet with greatest advantage to himself and his readers, is in the treatment of the episode of Medea and Jason’. Earlier articles of mine have endeavoured to illustrate Valerius' basic originality, i.e. that, however much he takes over from others, the final product is something new and distinctive.

These two texts come from a store of papyrus fragments which are at present being examined and worked over at Oxford. They are the property of the Egypt Exploration Society and will be republished in vol. xxxi of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri as Nos. 2544 and 2534; permission for their separate publication here has been granted by the Society in view of the relevance of the former of them to the article by Mr. W. S. Barrett which appears on pp. 58–71 below. We are much indebted to Mr. Barrett and Professor Hugh Lloyd-Jones for many valuable suggestions and criticisms. The nature of both texts was recognized by R. A. Coles, of Magdalen College, Oxford, one of the collaborators in this article.

The Curculio, with its 729 lines, is the shortest play of Plautus which has survived, about half the length of the Miles Gloriosus (1,437 lines) or Rudens (1,423 lines). The Epidicus, with 733 lines, and the Stichus, with 775, are almost as brief. It is most unlikely that any of these shorter plays took even a full hour to perform. Although it is possible that their Greek originals were also of less than normal length, the many signs of compression and disproportion in their development seem to guarantee that their brevity is imposed by Plautus.

Galen in a celebrated passage remarks that there were three ‘choirs’, in early Greek medicine: the choirs of Cos, of Cnidus, and of Sicily. The word is vague and suggestive, and we do well to keep it so. If we look in the Hippocratic Corpus for schools of medical theory, with distinct sets of doctrine marked off clearly from the doctrines of rival schools, we shall be lucky indeed if we can find them, and, having found them, succeed in convincing others of their existence. But we shall find, now and again, an individual voice proclaiming itself from among its impersonal surroundings with clarity and vigour: some treatises in the collection have their author's personality stamped on them as distinctly as on a work of art.

I Should like to draw attention to two little-known inscriptions of republican senators; both men deserve notice in that each of them may illustrate the early stages of the recruitment of provincial senators, from Transpadane and Narbonese Gaul respectively.

The career of the father of Claudius Etruscus is of special importance in the history of the Imperial administration in the first century A.D. In the course of a long life he rose from slave status under Tiberius to be head of the Imperial financial administration and to equestrian status under Vespasian. He was one of the most important, wealthy, and influential of the Imperial freedmen in the first century when their influence was at its peak; he is one of the best documented of their number outside the pages of Tacitus; yet we do not know his personal name—he has to remain simply ‘the father of Claudius Etruscus’ —and even his nomen gentilicium and the date of his appointment to be the secretary a rationibus are subject to disput.

IN the fourth book of Stobaeus’ Anthologium, in a section entitled, ‘The Virtue of Having Children’, there is preserved a passage from the writings of the first-century Roman knight and Stoic, Musonius Rufus. This passage is headed: ‘Whether all children born should be raised’,