Ovid, Heroides 6. 54Author(s): St. John HickeySource: The Classical Review, New Series, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Jun., 1966), pp. 144-145Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/708207 .

Accessed: 21/12/2014 05:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to The Classical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 05:25:37 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

144 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW

When she dies she must come by the same route (hoc iter) to join him in the

grave. The rest of the poem is an appeal to her to mourn and love him mean- while, even though he cannot respond. Ll. 43-50 are a parenthetical wish that death had come to him in the cradle-meaning presumably that he had not lived to quarrel with his beloved. The passage is integral as a self-pitying appeal for her love, but the only preparation we have for it is line 15-

The train of thought throughout the poem is thus quite well marked. Butler and Barber say that the change from the third person of 1-16 to the second at 18 is impossibly abrupt; but it is no more abrupt than at i. 8. 13, 17 and 25, in a poem which Barber prints as a unity in his Oxford text (cf. ii. I. I7). And the sudden introduction of thoughts of his own death is exactly paralleled in ii. I, which we have seen to be in other respects also a counter-

part, let alone i. 6. 27, ii. 8. 17, iii. 5. 13, and Tibullus i. I. 59.

King's College, Cambridge L. P. WILKINSON

OVID, HEROIDES 6. 54

51 Certa fui primo, sed me mala fata trahebant, hospita feminea pellere castra manu,

Lemniadesque viros, nimium quoque, vincere norunt:

54 milite tam fortuna tuenda fuit.

THUS the first hand in P, giving at 54 a line of nonsense, metrically defective. The second hand has written

milite tam forti vita tuenda fuit,

which is what we find in E, G, and several late manuscripts. A few late manu-

scripts give ripa for vita. Vita gives a pentameter, but is less satisfactory than some editors have found

it. Even if we judged 53-54 as an isolated couplet, vita would not satisfy, since there was no question of the Argonauts' making an assault on Hypsipyle's life. In the context of 51-56 vita jars for a further reason. The thought sequence is:

my first plan was to repel the invaders (51-52); I could have succeeded in

doing so with the forces at my disposal (53-54); but I decided not to (55-56). The context requires that the subject of tuendafuit be something which in the event was not defended but was yielded up to the enemy. To claim that this is true of vita involves more mental acrobatics than Ovid's smooth thought sequence usually requires of us.

The case for ripa hangs on the tenuous thread of a very few parallel usages in Horace and Virgil. Never in Ovid does the word mean anything other than the bank of a river or stream. The examples in Horace and Virgil save it from irrefutable condemnation, but it must remain suspect.

In the Carolingian minuscule in which P's exemplar was written, forti terra would look very like fortuna. Very slight damage in the exemplar-only one or two faded strokes-could easily cause the error. Terra gives perfect sense. It is more apt than Sedlmayer's vitta or Merkel's causa (approved by Palmer) or Palmer's tentative porta, and the ratio corruptelae seems more probable than

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 05:25:37 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE CLASSICAL REVIEW '45 those entailed by any of these emendations. And, lest terra seem too pretentious a word for Lemnos, cf. 1. I117, where Hypsipyle says:

dos tibi Lemnos erit, terra ingeniosa colenti.'

New Hall, Cambridge SISTER ST. JOHN HICKEY

CICERO, AD A TTICUM i. 14. 4

Si umquam mihi •rEplooSL, si KaIraL, si E'VOvULra7raa, si KaTraKEval suppeditaverunt,

illo tempore. (a) Kaptrral, the reading of Bosius, is the only feasible emendation which has been suggested for KAPHOI, the reading of the extant manuscripts and the lost codex Tornesianus. Bosius explained as 'flexus ille orationis quo verborum complexio in orbem quendam circumacta ad clausulam perducitur'; and so still D. R. Shackleton Bailey, Cicero's Letters to Atticus, vol. i (Cambridge 1965), p. 309, 'rounding off of a period'. This meaning, though rare, is possible (cf. Demetrius, De Eloc. Io and 17) but is suspiciously tautological after

rrEplooo8. I suggest that Kavrral means here 'vocis variationes': this is a well-established meaning of the word (e.g. Ar. Nub. 969, Philostr. V.S. ii. 28), and the same metaphor of 'bending' appears in the Latin expressions for vocal modulations :2

flexiones vocis (Cic. De Or. iii. 98, Orat. 57, Pliny, N.H. xi. 271),flexus vocis (Quint. i. 8. I etc.), inclinatio vocis (Cic. Brut. 158; cf. Orat. 27, Quint. xi. 3. 168). The importance of vocal power is regularly mentioned in rhetorical works (e.g. Arist. Rhet. I403b2I ff.), and Cicero himself approves Demosthenes' remark that good delivery is the most effective weapon of the orator (Cic. Brut. 142, Orat. 56, De Or. iii. 2I3). Here reference to the voice is especially appropriate, since Cicero continues: nosti iam in hac materia sonitus nostros. tantifuerunt ut ego eo brevior sim quod eos usque istinc exauditos putem.

(b) I suggest that Ka-ragaKval here means not confirmatory arguments, as has been almost universally assumed, but ornaments of style or diction. This interpretation was tentatively proposed by C. Brandstaetter, Studien f. H. Lipsius z. 60 Geburtstag, pp. 153-6: 'certum iudicium facere non audeo: possunt enim, quae vocantur KaraaKEval, non minus esse exornationes artifi- ciosae, quam confirmationes'. In Dionysius of Halicarnassus KaraaKEval, in the plural as well as the more common singular, is frequent in this meaning: e.g. Dem. 138. 16, 157. 3, Din. 304. 12-13 U-R. Brandstaetter points out that

KaraUKEV•4 in the sense of confirmatio does not, if we ignore our present passage,

occur in extant literature until after Dionysius, but this is probably an accident, since the corresponding verb KaaaUKEVaiELV is found already in Aristotle, e.g. Rhet. 1397a9. I do not deny that confirmatio is a possible meaning in Cicero, but the specialist meaning of confirmatory arguments seems less appropriate

I When this note was at proof stage, I discovered that Riese, in a review in Burs. Jahr. for 1881, suggested reading here terra tenenda, and that this was printed in the apparatus of Sedlmayer's edition in I886; but no subsequent editor appears to have known of this conjecture of Riese's.

2 Modulations were especially associated with miseratio but were appropriate to any emotional speech: v. Cic. Orat. 56 et in- clinata videri gravis et inflexa miserabilis; the apparent distinction here between inclinata and inflexa is not important: cf. Orat. 27.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 05:25:37 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions