The TLL and the Sustaining of Scholarship

This is the published version, also available here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/apa.2008.0011

Genus quid est? Roman Scholars on Grammatical Gender and Biological Sex*

This is the published version, also available here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/apa.0.0007.From at least as early as Varro, Roman scholars and grammarians occupy themselves with cataloguing peculiar instances of grammatical gender. The practice, with little extant precedent in Greek tradition, finds the grammarians consistently placing great importance upon the identification of grammatical gender with biological sex. I attempt to explain this fascination with "sex and gender" by assessing ancient explanations for the fluid gender of nouns, and by considering the commonest practitioners of grammatical gender-bending (in particular Vergil). By dividing the world into discrete sexual categories, Latin vocabulary works to encourage the pervasive heterosexualization of Roman culture

Cyclical Metaphors and the Politics of Horace, Odes 1.4

This is the published version

“GOING FORWARD”: A DIACHRONIC ANALYSIS OF THE THESAURUS LINGUAE LATINAE

This is the published version, also available here: https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/american_journal_of_philology/v128/128.4corbeill.htmlThe article anteeo, written by Wilhelm Bannier, was published in the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (TLL) in 1901. This entry has been rewritten according to contemporary standards at the institute and edited at each step in the process by editors currently at TLL. In comparing the two versions, I discuss differences between anteeo 1901 and 2007 in matters such as methods of data retrieval, rates of composition, levels of accuracy, and editorial policies. The article evaluates both the pros and cons of developments at Munich, while also serving as a primer on how to "read" a TLL article

A New Painting of Calypso in Pliny the Elder

At Naturalis Historia 35.147, Pliny offers precious information on female artists of Greece and Rome. This article emends Pliny’s text, thereby attributing a more precise subject to a painting by a Greek woman. Linderski has discussed the difficulties associated with text and interpretation of the first sentence of 35.147 (ZPE 2003.83-87). Pliny lists female painters from antiquity, including Irene, daughter of Cratinus (text of Mayhoff 1897): Irene, Cratini pictoris filia et discipula, puellam, quae est Eleusine, Calypso, senem et praestigiatorem Theodorum, Alcisthenen saltatorem (sc. pinxit). Since the nineteenth century, scholars have debated whether Calypso is here in the accusative or nominative case; in other words, was she one of the known works of Irene or does Pliny include an unattested painter named Calypso? Linderski ingeniously reconstructed how ancient uncertainty over the form Calypso had corrupted the text. An overly meticulous scribe glossed Calypso with the more common accusative in late antiquity, Calypsonem. This form was subsequently incorporated into the text and miscorrected to Calypso senem. Linderski therefore proposed deleting senem and reading Calypso as accusative, the accusative form that we know Pliny preferred (Char. gramm. p. 162.6-11). While agreeing that Calypso is a painting, I propose here an emendation that is more plausible paleographically and accords well with known representations of the nymph. These fall into two main types: standing beside Odysseus at his raft (three examples) or seated alone (two examples, one of which is attested at Plin. nat. 35.132). I read Calypso sedentem for the transmitted text (Calypso senem et) and then discuss five points that favor this emendation. I close by conjecturing how Irene’s “new” subject – a Calypso seated, presumably after the departure of Odysseus – can supplement our appreciation of women artists of Greece and Rome

How not to Write like Cicero: Pridie quam in exilium iret oratio

This article examines the pseudo-Ciceronian Pridie quam in exilium iret oratio, a short work that appears at the head of our best witnesses for Cicero’s genuine post reditum speeches. Supplementing the work of previous scholars, I catalogue Ciceronian and non-Ciceronian works to which the author seems to refer and compare that list to those texts that were thought to be taught in the schools. The mismatch between the two lists leads to a discussion of other non-Ciceronian idiosyncrasies: prose rhythm; multiple addressees; the anonymity of Clodius; the references to Cicero in the third person; the use of hyperbaton. I close by suggesting that this exercise shows a student willfully, even perversely, creating an independent oration in reaction to the restrictions of declamatory practice in the school.Il contributo offre una rilettura della breve orazione pseudo-ciceroniana Pridie quam in exilium iret, che appare spesso in prima posizione nei codici che tramandano le orazioni post reditum. Sviluppando temi e metodi che sono già parte della storia interpretativa del testo, il saggio cataloga passaggi di opere ciceroniane e non-ciceroniane ai quali l’autore fa riferimento, confrontandone l’elenco con i testi scolastici dell’epoca. Le differenze tra queste due liste portano ad una riflessione su altre idiosincrasie non-ciceroniane presenti nell’orazione, tra le quali le clausole metriche, la presenza di molteplici destinatari, l’anonimità di Clodio, i riferimenti a Cicerone in terza persona, l’uso dell’iperbato. Questo esame del contesto scolastico e dello stile del testo permette al lettore di intravedere nell’autore uno studente che volutamente, se non perversamente, compone un discorso contraddistinguendolo in reazione alle limitazioni imposte dalle pratiche declamatorie vigenti nelle scuole dell’epoca