LIBRARY
OF THE
University of California.
RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE
Class lb /W
The Article in Theocritus
BY
WINFRED GEORGE LEUTNER
3 2E>ts#matioit
SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OP UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS POR THE DEOREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
!7Y
BALTIMORE
H. FURST COMPANY
1907
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/articleintheocriOOIeutrich
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page.
Bibliography 5
Preface 9
Introduction 11
A. Substantive Article 24
i. Demonstrative 24
ir. Relative 30
B. Adjective Article 31
1. With objects present to the senses 31
2. " " previously mentioned 32
3. " " present to the mind 34
4. " " marked as customary, proper, etc 35
5. With possessive value 35
0. With proper names 38
a. Names of persons 38
b. " " divinities 45
Oaths 47
c. Names of peoples in the plural 47
d. " "cities 47
e. " "rivers.. 48
f. " " mountains and promontories 48
g. M "islands 48
h. " " countries 48
i. " "seas 48
k. " " vessels and statues 48
1. " "festivals 49
m. " "constellations 49
n. " " winds 49
o. Natural divisions of time 49
p. Xp6vos, GtiXacrcra, yrj 50
r. BeuriXetfs, fiao-lXeia 50
7. The generic article 50
8. With substantivized words and phrases 53
a. Adjectives 53
b. Participles 54
3
Table of Contents.
c. Adverbs 56
d. Prepositional phrases 57
e. Infinitives 57
9. With appositive nouns 58
10. With the predicate 60
11. With nouns accompanied by attributive adjectives 61
12. Predicative position 65
13. In genitive combinations 67
14. With possessives and genitives of personal and reflexive pronouns. 70
15. With interrogatives 73
16. With <S\Xos and trepos 73
17. With ^Karros 74
18. With e/carepos, #/a0w, and ap-cpbrepos 74
19. With ovtos, 85e, ttjpos, and ixeivos 74
20. With demonstrative adjectives ... 77
21. With atrds 77
22. With iras, d-rras, a-tip-iras, and 6\os 78
23. With numerals 79
24. With superlatives 79
25. With comparatives 80
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
General Grammatical Works.
Bernhardy, G., Wissenschaftliclie Syntax der griechischen Sprache.
Berlin, 1829.
Brugmann, K., Griechische Gram m at ik-M tillers Handbuch, n 1 ,
3. Ed. 1900.
Buttmann, A., Des Apollonios Dyskolos vier Buecher ueber die
Syntax. Berlin, 1877.
Krueger, K. W., Historisch-philologische Studieri, Vol. n.
Berlin, 1851.
Krueger-Poekel, Griechische Sprachlehre. Leipzig, 1875-1894.
(Referred to simply as Krueger.)
Kuehner-Gerth, Ausfiihrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache.
Leipzig, 1898. (Referred to simply as Kuehner.)
Madvig, J. N., Syntax of the Greek Language. London, 1873.
Monro, D. B., Homeric Grammar. Oxford, 1891.
Schoemann, G. F., Die Lehre von den Redetheilen. Berlin, 1862.
Vogrinz, G., Grammatik des Homerischen Dialektes. Pader-
born, 1889.
Special Works Dealing with the Article.
Ameis, C., Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels in den griechischen
Bukolikern. Muehlhausen, 1846.
Blass, Fr., Rheinisches Museum xliv (1889), 101 ff. (Reviewed
Amer. Jour. Pkil., xi, 107.)
Brugmann, K., Die Demonstrativpronomina in den Indogermani-
schen Sprachen, Abhandl. der Koenigl. Saechsischen Gesettsch.
d. Wiss. xxii, No. vi. Leipzig, 1904.
Dornseiffen, I., De articulo apud Graecos eiusque usu in praedi-
cato. Amsterdam, 1856.
5
6 Bibliography.
Eichhorst, O., Die Lehre des Apollonius Dyscolus vom Artikel.
Philologus, xxxvm, 399 ff.
Die Lehre des Apollonius Dyscolus vom articulus postposi-
tive. Wehlau, 1882.
Foerstemann, H., Bemerkuugen ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels
bei Homer. Magdeburg, 1861.
Fuller, A. L., De articuli in antiquis Graecis comoediis usu.
Leipzig, 1888.
Gildersleeve, B. L., Amer. Jour, of Phil., in various places as
cited below.
Herbst, L., Philologus, xxxviii, 502 ff. ; xl, 374 ff.
Kallenberg, H., Studien ueber den griechischen Artikel. I — bei
Namen von Laendern, Staedten und Meeren in der griechi-
schen Prosa. Philol. xlix, 515 ff. n. — bei Flussnamen,
bei Gebirgsnamen. Berlin Pr., 1891. Der Artikel bei 7ra?,
ovtos, iKeivos und oBe in Herodot. Jahresh. des Philol.
Vereins zu Berlin, 1897, xxin, 204 ft'.
Middleton, T. F., The Doctrine of the Greek Article, etc. 4th ed.
by Rose. London, 1841.
Mildeu, A. W., Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
J. H. U. dissertation, 1900.
Proksch, A., Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels insbesondere beim
Praedikat. Philol. XL, Iff.
Schildener, H., Der griechische Artikel. Jahns Jahrb., 1851.
Suppl., xvn, 101 ff.
Schmidt, C, De articulo in nominibus propriis apud Atticos
scriptores pedestres. Kiel, 1890.
Stein, R., De articuli apud Pindarum usu. Breslau, 1868.
Uckermann, "W., Ueber den Artikel bei Eigennamen in den
Komoedien des Aristophanes. Berlin, 1892.
Volker, F., Syntax der griechischen Papyri, I. Der Artikel.
Munster (Program) 1903.
Zucker, A., Beobachtuugen ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels
bei Personen namen in Xen options Anabasis. Nuernberg,
1899.
Bibliography. 7
Editions of Theocritus.
Ahrens, H. L., Theocritus, Bion, Moschus. I. Text, n. Scholia.
Leipzig, 1855.
Theocritus, Bion, Moschus ; Ed. minor, Teubner. Leipzig,
1902.
Cholmeley, R. J., The Idylls of Theocritus, with English notes,
etc. London, 1901.
Fritzsche, Ad. Th. Arm., Theocriti Idyllia. Editio altera
parabilior. Leipzig, 1870.
Theokrits Gedichte, 2. ed., 1869; 3. ed., by Ed. Hiller.
Leipzig, 1881.
Hartung, J. A., Theokrit, Bion und Moschus, griechisch mit
metrischer Uebersetzung. Leipzig, 1858.
Kiessling, Th., Theocritus, Bion et Moschus, Graece et Latine.
London, 1829.
Lang, A., Theocritus, Bion and Moschus. Rendered into English
prose. London, 1901.
Meineke, Aug., Theocritus, Bion et Moschus. 3. ed., Berlin,
1856.
Snow, H., The Idylls and Epigrams of Theocritus. Oxford, 1873.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Bucolici Graeci. Oxford.
Wuestemann, E. F., Theocriti Reliquiae. Gotha, 1830.
Ziegler, Chr., Theocriti Carmina. 3. ed., Tuebingen, 1879.
Miscellanies.
Hiller, Ed., Beitraege zur Textgeschichte der griechischen
Bukoliker. Leipzig, 1888.
Legrand, Ph. E., Etude sur Theocrite. Paris, 1898.
Rumpel, J., Lexicon Theocriteum. Leipzig, 1877.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. v., Die Textgeschichte der griechi-
schen Bukoliker. Berlin, 1906.
Ziegler, Chr., Codicis Ambrosiani 222. Scholia in Theocritum.
Tuebingen, 1867.
PREFACE.
The following study embraces the thirty idylls of Theocritus
found in the edition of Fritzsche, and the nine epigrams accepted
as genuine by both Ahrens and Fritzsche. In referring to the
idylls, the numbering employed by most editors, as found in
Fritzsche, is used, while in reference to epigrams the order (i-ix),
found in Ahrens, is kept, but the numbering of Fritzsche, and
most editors, is given in brackets.
The monograph of Ameis mentioned above in the bibliography,
and frequently referred to below (always as " Ameis "), was
published as a specimen chapter of a proposed lexicon of the
bucolic poets. The treatment of the article in Theocritus there
given does not aim at completeness, and only the more important
features are pointed out.
V OF THE
UNIVERSITY
OF
THE ARTICLE IN THEOCRITUS.
Introduction.
Before proceeding to the examination of the article as it is used
by Theocritus, it will be well to consider briefly the leading facts
of its origin, and the development of its various functions.
The demonstrative origin of the Greek article is a well recog-
nized fact, attested as well by comparison with other languages of
the Indo-European family, as by the literary monuments of the
early language, and the persistency with which the demonstrative
force attaches to the article through all periods of its history.
This demonstrative origin was recognized by the Stoics, who
rightly classed the article among the pronouns. It appears,
however, that grammarians probably as early as Aristarchus
considered the article (to apdpov) a separate part of speech entirely
distinct from pronouns (avrcovvfiiat). (See Schoemann, " Lehre
von den Redetheilen," p. 1 1 7 f.)
The first use of a demonstrative seems to be to point to some-
thing that is actually present to the senses, a function called by
Apollonius Dyscolus ' a Setf t? ttj? cn/reo>?. 2 That is, the demon-
strative is local, and has relatively strong emphasis, which is
augmented by actual gesture. Out of this function develops
naturally the one whereby appeal is made, not directly to the
senses, but to the intellect and mental experience, called by
Apollonius (1. c.) a SeZft? rod vov. The reference is then to
something that is known, or assumed to be known, either from
previous experience or, more immediately, as the result of previous
mention. It is the recall of a previously recognized object —
1 irepl (rvpT&Zews n. 3., page 99. 9, Bekker.
2 Brugmann, "Die Deraonstrativpronomina," p. 15.
11
12 The Article in Theocritus.
— ava<f>opd, avaTroXrjcns. 1 The element of actual gesture is lost,
and the pronoun depends for its emphasis on the position it
occupies, and the tone in which it is uttered. It was in this
avatpopd, its most common function, that the grammarians saw the
real nature of the article. Apollonius emphasizes this in various
places, especially Synt. I. 6. p. 26 (Bekker), where he says,
"Eo'Tiv ovv . . . lSlov dpOpov r) ava$opd y rj icrrc irpOKareiXe^/ /jlcvov
7rpoao)7rov irapaaTaTLKT}.
The demonstrative nature of the article is clearly seen in another
use to which it is put. When two sentences are coordinated, a
demonstrative, by virtue of its power of avacfropd, may be used at
the head of the second to connect the two sentences by referring to
an antecedent contained in the first. Originally a paratactic
relation, this connection of two sentences develops into a hypotactic
relation, in which the second sentence is made dependent upon the
first, and the connecting demonstrative becomes a relative. 2 In
Attic Greek the form of demonstrative which is used in this way
is the relative pronoun properly so called, o?, etc., but the article,
as a demonstrative, can also appear in this role. Where there is
still a shifting between parataxis and hypotaxis, it is sometimes
doubtful, whether the postpositive sentence, with the article at its
head, is dependent or not, whether the article is demonstrative or
relative. 3 Since the use of the article as relative depends upon its
power of avacj)opd, it is natural, that the clause in which it stands
regularly follows the clause containing the antecedent, and that
the antecedent is definite. 4
Apollonius Synt. i. 6. p. 26 (Bekker), cf. i. p. 48, 11. 26-28, ir. 3. p. 98, 11.
25. 26, etc.
2 See Professor Gildersleeve, "Problems in Greek Syntax," A. J. P. xxin,
pp. 255 f.
3 Cf. Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik §642. Apollonius distinguished two
kinds of article, the "prepositive," Apdpov ttpotciktiicSv, and the " postpositive, "
&p6pov bTOTaKTiicbv (Synt, i, 43, p. 85, 1. 12 ff. (Bekker)). All the later Greek
grammarians followed him in this (Eichhorst, "Die Lehre des Apollonius D. vom
articulus postpositive," p. 1), while modern grammar no longer considers the
postpositive form an article, but a pronoun, viz., the relative pronoun.
4 Apollonius saw difficulty in cases where the relative precedes, with an indefinite
antecedent, and consequently, when 5s is so used he no longer called it an article
but an &6pi<TT0P p.bpiov. (See Eichhorst, o. c, page 5.)
The Article in Theocritus. 13
It is but logical to suppose that in its earliest conception the
demonstrative was adapted to use as an adjective as well as a
substantive demonstrative. Mere juxtaposition of the substantive
with a noun would be sufficient to bring about a reduction of the
substantive demonstrative to an adjective. Clear indications of
this process of reduction are seen in Homer. It is attended
by a decrease also of its pure demonstrative value, tho in
Homer this is still well preserved. 1 Just as the pronominal
demonstratives, so the adjective demonstratives, including the
article, serve for sensual demonstration, Setft? tt)? 6S|rea>?, and
mental demonstration, Setfi? rod vov, dva(j>opd. Between these
two kinds of demonstration there is often but a very slight differ-
ence, and by a simple gesture a Setft? rod vov may be made an
actual Setfc -n}? ctyeo>?. (Cf. Theocr. Id. xv. 63).
We have said that Apollonius and others saw in dvacpopd the
real nature of the Greek article. What Apollonius included under
ava(j)opd can best be seen from his own words, Synt. I, 6, p. 2G,
1. 14 ff (Bekker). There after saying that IlSlov dpOpov rj dva<f>opd,
he continues : ' Avafa'perat, 8e rd 6vop,ara (1) rjroi fear i^o^rjv, [our
' par excellence/ l the famous/ etc.] . . . (2) t) koX Kara piovaSLtcrjv
k.tt\o~iv. 6 yap outgo? cnrocfMiLvopLevos, 8ov\6<; o-ov ravra eVcu^cre,
7r\rj6os V7rayopeveL SovXcov. 6 8e p,erd rod dpdpov, 6 SovXds o~ov
ravra e7roLr]ae, pLovabi/crjv Kriqcnv urrayopevei. { } H icai icar avro
povov drrXrjv dva<j>opdv [simple anaphora, of a thing previously
mentioned, or known] . This passage has been quoted at length
because of a misapplication of part of it by Krueger in his gram-
mar, 1, 50. 2. 3. There, after stating : " Gleichfalls deiktisch
steht der Artikel, insofern der Begriff als einem bevorschwebenden
Gegenstande naturlich, notorisch oder iiblicher Weise zukommend
gedacht wird, wo er dann oft als schw'dcheres Possessiv erscheint"
he cites in support of the last part of his statement Apollonius
1 The essential difference between the early adjective article and the real Attic
article lies in the fact that the latter had become customary or obligatory in certain
cases to mark an object as definite and known. In this sense the use of the adjec-
tive article is denied to Homer.
2 Cf. Apollonius, page 71, 1. 28 f.
14 The Article in Theocritus,
Synt. i, 36, p. 72, Cf. 39, p. 79 : 'MovaSi/cal ovcrau at KTrjcrei*; to
dpdpov <nraiTov<Tiv? Compare Milden, u Limitations of the
Predicative position in Greek," page 9, to a similar intent. But
it is clear, from the passage cited from Apollonius, and from
a comparison with the places cited by Krueger, that Apol-
lonius is referring to the use of the article with nouns accom-
panied by possessives or genitives of personal pronouns (or
nouns), and means to show that the articular noun in such
cases designates an object as the sole possession of its kind : 8ov\6<?
crov, a slave of yours (you may have many), 6 8ov\6<; a-ov, your
only slave. More exactly stated this means, if sole possession is to
be indicated the article must be used, if not, the article may be
omitted. 1 As a matter of fact, what we call a " possessive " use
of the article is not recognized by Apollonius as far as can be
discovered, is in fact merely a modern category adopted for
convenience to characterize a certain phase at dvafopd.
Logically then, the Attic article marks an object as definite and
known. The generic article is no exception, for it picks out an
individual and lets it stand as typical of its class. 2 The ancient
grammarians recognized a generic article, and Apollonius 3 says,
tr aopio-T(i>8r)s 7] cnWafi? yiverai rod dpdpov \ in cases, namely, like
H 6 heLTrvr}<ras irah /coifidcrda) ", and adds that the Stoics also
recognized this use of the article. What marks the difference
between the generic article and the specific article is that, while
the latter became obligatory in certain cases, the generic article
never became a necessity. 4
The use of the adjective article with substantivized participles
was not recognized by Apollonius, 5 except in a few isolated cases,
tho he did admit its use in the case of other parts of speech used
substantively. 6 As substantivized participles Apollonius accepted
1 Eichhorst, Philol. 38. 413, correctly interprets the passage thus.
2 Cf. Professor Gildersleeve, "Problems, etc.", p. 122.
3 Synt. i, 34, p. 68 (Bekker). *See Professor Gildersleeve, I. c.
5 See Buttmann, Apol. Dysc. Synt., p. 83, note 3 to 108. 20.
6 Synt, p. 22, 1. 15 ff (Bekker).
UNIV
The Article in Theocritus. 15
only such few as had become genuine substantives by common
usage, and with these only he admitted the use of the adjective
article. In other cases he viewed the article as a pronoun to
which the participle was added as an attributive.
Because of its defining power the article is used to distinguish
subject from predicate, the definite subject being articular, and
thus it becomes a rhetorical means to avoid ambiguity. 1 But the
predicate also admits the article, in its deictic as well as generic
uses, and then subject and predicate are logically equivalent.
It is beyond the scope of this study to trace the history of the
Greek article in all its functions. We need only consider briefly
a few important facts of usage which will help us to fix the
position of Theocritus.
The substautive article has the widest range and the freest use
in the epic of Homer. In the Iliad, we are told, 2 o, rj, to is used
as a demonstrative pronoun 3000 times, as adjective article 218
times, or in the ratio of 14 to 1 ; and in the Odyssey the pro-
nominal use occurs 2178, the adjectival 171 times, in the ratio of
13 to 1. In common with Homer, the lyric poets, as well as the
tragic poets often use the article as pronoun, rarely with preposi-
tions, 3 the latter oftenest in Euripides. Figures need scarcely be
adduced, if they were available, to show the vast difference in the
relative frequency of the pronominal and adjective article between
Homer and Attic prose. Under the constantly degrading
influence of the adjective article and the simultaneous growth of
other demonstrative pronouns, the pronominal article became more
and more closely confined until it was reduced in Attic to the
sphere of a few fixed expressions. On the other side, the adjective
article, tho rare in Homer and Hesiod, had won a secure foothold
and contained at least potentially all the functions that the later
article actively displayed. In Hesiod 4 the demonstrative use of
1 Cf. Theon Progymnasmata-Spengel Khetores Graeci, n, 83.
2 Stummer, "Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels bei Homer," Miinnerstadt, 1886,
p. 56— quoted by Vogrinz, p. 198.
3 Bernhardy, p. 312. 4 Kuehner, § 458. 1.
1G The Article in Theocritus.
the Article corresponds to the Homeric use, but the real article as
we find it in Attic is said to be excluded altogether. Late epic
writers, especially Apollonius, seem to have reverted consciously
to the Homeric use of the article. 1 We shall see presently to
what extent Theocritus follows the same line. When we come to
lyric poetry we find that the article proper is again very rare.
The farther the poetry is removed from the language of everyday
life, the less scope it affords for the article. So, in Pindar the
article is a rare phenomenon, and the old demonstrative meaning
usually lies close at hand. 2 In the lyrical portions of tragedy
likewise, the real article is little used, and even in dialogue it
is far less frequent than in Attic prose. Late dithyrambic
writers carried the avoidance of the article to excess, and in
Telestes it does not occur. 3 Comic poetry, on the other hand,
approximates the popular language, and consequently we find an
increased use of the article. Not only is this true of Aristophanes^
but the fragments of Epicharmus indicate the same for the old
Dorian comedy. But even in comedy the differences between
lyric and dialogue must be taken into account, besides the elements
of parody, paratragedy and mock heroic. In prose, it need
scarcely be said, the article as such reached its highest develop-
ment and freest use, especially in Plato. Coming now to a later
period, a little later than Theocritus, if we examine the mimes of
the Dorian Herondas, who wrote in Ionic, and in a sphere closely
related to that of the Doric-bucolic idylls of Theocritus, we find
that the article is used with a frequency that equals if it does not
actually exceed that found in Aristophanes. 4
When we take up Theocritus, a few general considerations must
be kept in mind in order to obtain a clear picture of his usage.
Alexandrian literature is characterized by a studied imitation of
earlier models, especially the epic of Homer. This imitation was
extended to departments not strictly epic, and is shown by the
revival of archaisms in form, vocabulary and syntax. That
1 Kuehner, I. c.
2 See Professor Gildersleeve, Introductory Essay to his Pindar, p. ci, and
Stein's dissertation.
3 Smyth, " Greek Melic Poets," p. 465. 4 See table, p. 19.
The Article in Theocritus. 17
Theocritus is never entirely free from this Alexandrian influence
is to be expected. Judged, however, by the Doric idylls, it must
be admitted that he was poet enough not to allow his own fresh
and natural impressions to suffer under the influences active in his
time at the expense of realism and truth. The language of these
rural idylls, it is true, is far from being a pure Doric — a fact for
which allowance is to be made in any application to Theocritus of
K. O. Muller's statement 1 that a free and familiar use of the
article is characteristic of the Dorian dialect — yet the essential
tone of the Sicilian shepherd speech remains. In the epic idylls,
on the other hand, we expect to find an actual return to early
models, and imitation of the Homeric epic. This imitation
Theocritus carries out with a great degree of consistency. Any
study, therefore, of the forms, syntax and style of our author must
distinguish between these two principal types represented in the
idylls : the Doric (bucolic, and urban mimi) and the epic (includ-
ing one Ionic lyrical piece, Id. xn). 2 The differences between
these two types are basic and penetrate the metrical form as well
as the vocabulary and syntax. Karl Kunst 3 showed the differ-
ences obtaining between the Doric and the epic idylls in the
treatment of the hexameter. It needs only a glance at the tables
given below to see how far apart are these two groups of idylls so
far as the article is concerned. 4 It is true that statistics based
simply on the number of articles found in an author cannot
present the facts in anything like their full light. There may
be stretches of poetry or prose where the article would not
Gorier, in, p. 504.
2 The small group of Aeolic poems stands closer to the epic than to the Doric
idylls in the treatment of the article.
3 Diss. Philol. Vindob. i, p. 1 ff.— cf. A. J. P. xxi, 352, vm, 116.
4 In the tables no attempt is made to separate the bucolic idylls in the narrower
sense from the mimetic pieces, as Kunst did for metrical study, since no sharp lines
can be drawn between the two classes of poems in the treatment of the article. It
may be noted, however, that the mimetic pieces, n, xiv, XV, xx, xxi, xxvn,
(xviii), do not reach the highest average. Idyl xviii, which Kunst puts for con-
venience with the ' Edyllia mimica,' stands because of its dialect at the end of the
Doric group in the table, but represents a different type of poetry from the other
Doric pieces, while Id. xn, Ionic lyric, belongs dialectically to the epic group,
where Kunst also puts it.
IS The Article in Theocritus.
be required, because of the form of the thought and the
character of the nouns; and again there may be passages in
which the form of the thought and the character of the nouns
ordinarily require the article. That is to say, the frequency or
infrequency of the article may be due to accident, or the nature of
the thought expressed. Nevertheless, masses of figures from
various authors would at least show the relative tendency in these
authors. Unfortunately there are few statistics on the Greek
article. All the available figures that have been found are incor-
porated in the tables given below. For the dramatic poets and
Plato we are confined to the figures given by Fuller, 1 which have
been augmented slightly by a personal count. For Homer the
figures given by Stummer as cited by Vogrinz (p. 197) will have
to serve. Personal count of the article in Herondas furnishes the
basis for the figures quoted for that author. From the meagre
statistics given for the dramatists no farreaching inferences can be
drawn in a comparison with the figures for Theocritus. The
tables show a far greater frequency of the article in the Doric
idylls than in the tragedians, bringing them closer to Aristophanes.
It is to be remembered, however, that in the case of the
dramatists no distinction has been made between lyric on the one
hand and dialogue on the other, tho quite the same differences
may be expected to obtain between these elements in the drama, as
between the different types represented in the idylls. Comparison
with Herondas shows that in his mimes as a whole the average
occurrence of the article is greater than in the Doric idylls of
Theocritus taken as a whole. But the extremes in Herondas
present uo such differences as in Theocritus, as indeed the
elements that go to make up the mimes of Herondas are not as
varied as the elements in the Doric idylls of Theocritus. It may be
assumed then, that these two writers (Theocritus in the Doric idylls)
cannot be far apart in the use of the article. For the epic group
of Theocritean idylls we may say, that here the poet in general
follows the lines of Homer, tho with a degree of greater freedom in
the addition of the adjective article.
J Diss. ? p. 117.
The Article in Tlieocritus.
19
Table Showing the Frequency of the Article and the Comparative
Frequency of Articular and Anarthrous Nouns. 1
Doric
Idylls
's
11
go
tJOC
73 *.
3*
be »
> *<
S
<
u
■11
13
1
c"J5
u *.G
a) C
i
152
14
.092
2
80
.526
142
52
194
26.8
ii
166
6
.036
2
84
.506
139
63
202
31.1
in
54
1
.018
2
42
.777
29
25
54
46.2
IV
63
—
1
57
.904
24
37
61
60.6
V
150
3
.02
3
124
.826
93
83
176
47.1
VI
46
10
.217
—
29
.630
36
19
55
34.5
VII
157
8
.05
2
52
.331
190
34
224
15.1
VIII
93
3
.032
—
64
.688
91
54
145
37.2
IX
36
5
.138
4
6
.166
59
6
65
9.2
X
58
—
1
52
.896
37
37
74
50.
XI
81
3
.037
3
38
.469
70
27
97
27.8
XIV
70
1
.014
1
24
.342
54
12
66
18.1
XV
149
4
.026
2
76
.510
119
48
167
28.7
XIX
8
1
.125
—
6
.75
9
5
14
35.7
XX
45
1
.022
—
19
.422
49
10
59
16.9
XXI
67
2
.029
2
54
.805
69
52
121
42.9
XXIII
63
2
.031
4
43
.682
66
33
99
33.3
XXVII
70
2
.028
1
24
.342
77
16
93
17.2
XVIII
58
—
2
10
.172
79
4
83
4.8
Total-
1586
66
.041
32
884
.557
1432
617
2049
30.1
Epic
XII
75
3
.04
1
20
.26
100
8
108
7.4
XVI
109
5
.045
1
6
.055
150
4
154
2.5
XVII
138
12
.086
2
6
.043
181
1
182
.5
XXII
223
25
.112
2
12
.053
331
3
334
.8
xx rv
138
9
.065
3
8
.057
210
5
215
2.3
XXV
281
37
.131
3
14
.049
388
8
396
2.
XXVI
38
3
.078
—
11
.289
41
2
43
4.6
Total..
1002
94
.093
12
77
.076
1401
31
1432
2.1
Ion.Lyr.
XII
37
2
.054
—
11
.29
42
3
45
6.6
Aeolic
XXVIII
25
—
1
5
.20
37
2
39
5.1
XXIX
40
2
.05
1
14
.35
25
6
31
19.3
XXX
32
5
.156
—
17
.531
24
13
37
35.1
Total..
97
7
.072
2
36
.369
86
21
107
19.6
Bere-
NIKE
5
1
.20
—
1
.20
9
1
10
10.
Epigr.
54
1
.018
1
38
.703
40
22
62
35.4
^n the statistics for articular and anarthrous nouns (columns 8-11), proper
names, vocatives and predicates are excluded.
20
The Article in Theocritus.
43 <1>
> CO
•jg CD
<D CD
fcJDc
Homer.
«3
ID
03 -3
«*J CD
S3
CD 1- <
Iliad.
15693
3000
.191
218
.013
Odyssey.
12110
2178
.171
171
.014
*2~
a>
ve A
irstl
uller
J J
CD h-1
■=»&-
K ►»
T3 *-<
► ^
te
* F*
?5
<»j 3!=a
Aeschylus. Prom. Vine.
210
1114
230
.206
Sophocles. Oed. Tyr.
303
1530
484
.316
Euripides. Medea.
159
1419
230
.162
" * Iphig. Taur.
257
1499
375
.250
Aristophanes. Vespae.
562
1537
810
.527
Plato Phaedo.
768
Theocritus* {l^]°ll n '
606
Herondas.*
Mime.
Number
Lines.
Adj.
Articles.
Average
per
Line.
i
90
48
.533
ii
102 J
70
.686
in
97
73
.752
IV
95
64
.673
V
85
47
.552
VI
102
57
.558
VII
129
70
.542
Total.
700
429
.612
* Statistics marked (*) are based on a personal count.
The Article in Theocritus. 21
Within each of the two principal groups of idylls the table
shows wide divergences. This is especially noticeable in the
pieces of the Doric group, and even within individual poems there
are important variations as will be seen presently. At one pole
stands Id. iv, i la plus rustique de toutes ' (Legrand, p. 242), with
an average of .904 per line; at the other stands the troublesome
and corrupt ix, with an average of only .166. Or, to take a
more legitimate example than ix, Id. vn, the ' regina eclogarum '
as Heiusius called it, of which large portions are lyric and
descriptive, shows an average of .361 per line. Id. xviii
(EXe'vTjs i7ri0a\dfjLLO<;), tho of the same dialect, is so essentially
different from the other Doric idylls as to require a place by itself.
In it the average occurrence of the article per line sinks to .172.
Between these extremes of the Doric group the tables show variety
and gradation. We will return below to a consideration of some
of the phenomena presented by individual idylls.
To turn briefly to the epic group, it will be seen that Idd. xin
and xxvi stand out above the rest with a freer use of the adjective
article. In the case of xin ( r/ T\a?), however, it is to be noted
that twelve of the twenty adjective articles in the idyl are found
in the introductory verses (1-15), addressed to the poet's friend
Nikias (at an average of .8 per line), while the remaining 8
articles are distributed over the sixty lines of the epyllion proper
(at an average of .13 per line 1 ). In Id. xxvi (Afjvai rj Ba/c^at),
the opening verses (1—6), which give the setting as it were, contain
five of the eleven articles. In the rapid account of the mystic
rites, of the confusion at the discovery of Pentheus, and of the
terrible punishment for his curiosity, the article disappears.
In order to complete the account of Theocritean usage it will
be necessary to consider, in addition to the frequency with which
the article appears, also the freedom with which it is omitted.
In the last four columns of the table (p. 19) are given
statistics comparing the number of articular nouns (exclusive
of substantivized words), and anarthrous nouns (excluding from
1 The difference between the introduction and epyllion was noted by Professor
Gildersleeve in his review of Legrand, A. J. P., xxi, 352.
22 The Article in Theocritus.
both counts proper nouns, and from the latter predicates and
vocatives). The same objections must be admitted in the case of
these figures as those mentioned above in connection with the
preceding statistics. We can, however, learn from them approxi-
mately what the state of affairs is. In this discussion we may
lay aside the epic idylls with the remark that, since they are
Homeric imitations, a general omission of the article is normal.
A few instances where the article is used with an extension that
is not Homeric (Cf., xxv, 180 and 84) do not affect the general
result. Among the Aeolic, lyric, pieces, only Id. xxx shows any
degree of freedom in the use of the article. The others stand
close to the epic group.
In the Doric poems, on the other hand, in accordance with
what has already been said, the omissions of the article are far
less numerous and varied. They are not confined to the cases
where Attic prose may omit the article, nor, on the other hand,
do they seem to be as extensive as in the tragic poets and perhaps
even in Aristophanes, certainly far less extensive than in Homer,
Hesiod and Pindar. Comparison with Herondas seems to indicate
that there is no great difference between Theocritus and the author
of the mimes.
Ameis (p. 23 f.) says simply that the article is omitted with
great freedom by the bucolic poets in the case of common nouns
unattended by attributives. He gives a list containing nearly
seven hundred examples of such omissions from the idylls and
epigrams of Theocritus — and the list is evidently not intended to
be complete. He makes no attempt to distinguish between epic
and Doric idylls, and an examination of the citations in the list
shows that more than half the cases cited for Theocritus are taken
from epic idylls. In a second list of examples (also incomplete
and apparently chosen at random) of cases where the article is
omitted with nouns accompanied by attributives, Ameis includes
seventy-six examples from Theocritus. But here again no less
than fifty-one are citations from epic idylls. While it is true, of
course, that Theocritus makes use of his privilege as a poet, and
omits the article freely even in the Doric idylls, yet simple lists
and figures that do not discriminate between epic and Doric
The Article in Theocritus. 23
idylls are apt to create false impressions. Many of the omissions
of the article in Theocritus will be discussed below under the
various categories. What is to be noted here is, that in nearly all
of these categories a large proportion of the omissions are found in
epic idylls. Furthermore, prepositional phrases and formulae
figure to a considerable extent. By taking these things into
account, as well as the fact that many of the omissions of the
article are such as are permissible also in Attic prose, the margin
of actually poetic omissions in the Doric idylls is greatly reduced.
That metrical exigences may have determined the poet's choice in
certain cases seems inevitable, but we cannot admit that the
influence of metre was great enough or frequent enough to have
interfered materially with the natural taste of the poet and so have
affected his style.
Within individual idylls of the Doric group closer analysis
shows considerable variation in the use and omission of the article.
Idyl i may serve as an example. In the dialogue portions of this
poem (11. 1-28, 57-63, 143-152 = 45 lines) the article is used
most freely (1 .0(3 per line) and omissions with nouns of definite
reference are correspondingly rare (of ten omissions, four are in
prepositional phrases). Contrasted with this, stands the passage
containing the description of the prize cup (11. 29-56), where the
article sinks to an average of .214 per line, with a corresponding
increase in omissions (fifteen with nouns of definite reference).
Commentators have long noticed the epic coloring in this passage,
shown in epic forms, words and expressions, and in the free use
of the substantive article. — The gS&j (11. 64-142) occupies middle
ground between the other two parts, with an average of .455
articles per line. Its tone is noticeably higher than that of the
dialogue, and epic forms occur with considerable frequency. The
tendency to greater freedom in the omission of the article in this
(pSrj than in the dialogue, might suggest similar conditions in other
idylls where we have songs incorporated in the poems. An
examination, however, of such idylls (viz. xi, xv, xvm, — V, VI,
vn, viii, x) proves, that the song portions of the Doric idylls
show no characteristic treatment of the article, different from other
parts of the poems. Just so Legrand (p. 426) has shown, that
24 The Article in Theocritus.
Theocritus does not aim to distinguish his pastoral songs from
other parts of the idylls metrically or musically, and that the
bucolic caesura is treated in the same way in the songs as in other
portions (ib. p. 425).
For Id. ii it may be noted that in the monologue of Simaetha
(63-165), her address to the moon — a passage cited by Legrand
(p. 262) as showing a greater proportion of epic forms — there is a
falling off of the article (from an average of .451 in other parts
to .216, the refrain counted once). So in Id. xiv the introductory
dialogue shows few actual omissions of the article. But in the
prj(iL<i of Aeschines they become more numerous, and in the rapid
and excited account of the lover's quarrel with his mistress, the
article disappears. This passage again is cited by Legrand (/. c.)
as showing traces of epic diction. — In the rapid exchange of speech
between the impassioned lover and the reluctant girl in Id. xxvn,
there is a marked freedom in the omission of the article — especially
with names of parts of the body, nouns of relationship, and nouns
accompanied by possessives or genitives of personal pronouns.
For Id. ix we may note great unevenness in the use of the article.
Introduction (1-6), Menalkas' song (15-21), and narrative (14,
22-27) lack the article ; the concluding address to the Muses (28-
38) has but one article (32) ; while the remaining five articles of
the piece, all generic, are found in the seven lines of Daphnis'
song (7-13).
This analysis might be carried further and applied to each of
the idylls. It has been carried far enough, however, for our
purpose. We will proceed in the following to a detailed account
of the use of the article by Theocritus.
A. Substantive Use of the Article.
i. The article as a demonstrative pronoun. The use of the
article as a demonstrative pronoun is not restricted in Theocritus
to the cases that are common in Attic prose, but includes also
cases that are peculiar to the language of epic and appear
occasionally in Attic poetry. The epic idylls naturally show a
much freer use of the substantive (demonstrative) article than the
The Article in Theocritus. 25
Doric idylls, because of conscious imitation of Homer. 1 It is
seen, however, that even here the proportion of substantive to
adjective articles is not nearly so great as in Homer. 2
1. The substantive (demonstrative) article, unaccompanied by a
particle. This is the least common use of the substantive article
in Theocritus, as it is in Homer and the Attic poets. Fifteen
cases occur, seven of them in epic idylls. It is found only in the
oblique cases, and resumes an object previously mentioned either
as subject or in an oblique case. In only three cases (i, 37, 91 ;
xxv, 129) it is used with a preposition. In all cases save xvi,
40 the article stands in the thesis of the foot, and in eight at the
head of the line. The occurrences are the following : I, 29, 37,
60, 91; vi, 43 (twice); vn, 103; ix, 33; xvi, 40; xvn, 85;
xxn, 53, 161, 195; xxv, 129, 278.
The dative of the substantive article, unsupported by a particle
is occasionally used as an adverb. 3 So, tw, "therefore,'' xvn,
28, 38 ; xxv, 186 ; ra = " turn," xxix, 11 ; tt}, "there," xxv,
159. One of these stands outside the epic group, in the Aeolic
xxix, and all stand in the thesis of the first foot.
2. The substantive article accompanied by a particle. This is
far the commoner use of the substantive article. Most frequently
the article so used stands at the head of a clause, followed by fiev,
Se, yap, Srj, ye } or preceded by avrdp. This use, of which certain
phases survive in Attic prose, is not so closely confined as the
preceding, but occurs with considerable freedom also outside the
epic idylls.
a. A use, characteristic as it is common, is the use in balanced
clause of o fiev and o Be: I, 48 Sv a\a>7re/ce?, a fiev . . ., a B\ Here
a uev . . . a 8e, designating parts are put in apposition with the
word signifying the whole (cf. Ameis, p. 9), as in Homer, Od. 12,
73, cf. Od. 18.95. A similar construction, with a noun in the
singular designating the whole is found in a Skolion : 4
a u? rav fiakavov rav /xev e^et rav fteparai Xafielv
/cayo) TralSa /caXrjv rrjv fjuev e%0) tyjv h'epa^at Xafieiv. —
1 See table, introd. , p. 20. 2 See figures cited above from Stummer.
3 Ameis, p. 9. 4 Smyth, « Greek Melic Poets,' p. 152, 18.
26 The Article in Theocritus.
where the lirst line is spoken by a Dorian, while in the second an
Athenian parodies the rustic taste of the Dorian (Smyth). An
unusual application of this construction is that in Id xxu, 112 :
ardpKes 8* ai fiev IBpwn avvL^avov, i/c fieydXov Be I aTyjr 0X4709
j ever avBpos • S' alel irdcraova yvla I airrofievos fyopeeaice ttovov
Xpoty Be t' afielvco. — Instead of the expected al Be there is a shift
here to the person, making the construction a mixed one : u but
their bodies — that of the one kept shrinking . . . while the other
(man) grew ever stronger."
Other instances of the use of o fiev . . . 6 Be in balanced clauses
are : v, 94 ; VI, 2, 43 ; xi, 58 ; xv, 128 ; xvn, 30 ; xxx, 18-21.
In the sense "some . . . some," "part . . . part," "some . . .
others," we find fiev . . . o Be: vm, 70; xvi, 24; xxv, 9 if.,
49 ; xxx, 4.
In place of either fiev or Be another pronominal form, or
a noun may be used : rj fiev . . . o? Be xxvn, 68. to> fiev . . . 3
Be XXII, 182. fiev . . . iya> Be II, 138. 0$ fiev . . . epXv Be
IX, 4. 6 /juev . . . avrap eya) VII, 130. 6 fxev . . . rbv B* erepov
XII, 13. fiev . . . aWbs Be XXV, 102 ff. apes fiev . . . a Be
XIV, 20. nev0ev? fiev . . . at Be xxvi, 16.
In two cases the first member of the pair is omitted, but is
implied in the preceding words : xvn, 105 ; xxv, 187.
b. 6 Be, o2 6Y, etc., without a preceding o fiev, ol fiev, etc. This
use of the substantive article in the nominative case, at the head of
a sentence, is one of the uses that survived even in Attic prose.
It is frequent in Theocritus and is by no means limited to the
epic idylls. As in Attic, the article here regularly marks a
change of subject. Cases where there is no such change are rare
in Attic, and no certain examples occur in Theocritus. The
following cases, marking a change of subject, are found in Theo-
critus : I, 35, tcl B' ov cf>pevb<; airTerai aura? — ra Be refers to the
rivalries of the two lovers, as just described. The neuter plural
referring to the general context of an immediately preceding
sentence or clause is found again in the epic idyl xxu, 167 and
181. — 1, 37. ot 8' . . . . I . . . eTGHTLa fiox@%ovTi, referring to the
two objects of the foregoing sentence. — 11. 102. a 8' rjvOe, i. e. the
maid addressed in the preceding line. In all other instances the
The Article in Theocritus. 27
reference is, as in the examples quoted, to a person or thing either
directly mentioned in the preceding sentence, in an oblique case,
or clearly implied: VI, 10, 15, 26; VII, 128, 156; IX, 27;
XI, 13 ; xnr, 47, 70 ; xv, 57 ; xvi, 8 ; xvn, 32, 62, 63 ; xix,
3 ; xxn, 10, 80, 191, 198 ; xxm, 53 ; xxiv, 12, 17, 30, 41, 55,
71 ; xxv, 94 ; xxx, 25.
It has been said that there is no certain example in Theocritus
of b Be used at the head of a sentence in the nominative without
a change of subject. A possible case is II, 61 : e/c Ovecov BeBerai •
o Be /Jbev Xoyov ovBeva iroiel. But BeBeficu is given by the mss.,
and if this reading is retained, o Be marks a new subject. The
reading of the whole line is, however, open to question.
In two instances, in dialogue, an individual, addressed in a
command — and so subject of an imperative — or in the nominative
for the vocative, is referred to in a following clause by o Be : v.
149, and xv. 30.
The oblique cases of 6 Be, oc Be, etc. are likewise used without
a corresponding 6 fiev, to refer to persons or things previously
mentioned or easily recognized from the context. The antecedent
referred to is regularly subject of the preceding sentence or clause :
i, 39, 100, 138 ; n, 48 ; vi, 20 ; vn, 27, 90 ; vm, 8 ; xxn, 88 ;
xxm, 59 ; xxv, 1, 42, 51, 68, 126, 235.
In three instances an oblique case of 8 Be refers to an antecedent
other than a subject of a preceding sentence : n, 78. (77) elBov
AeX(f>Lv ofiov T€ Kal RvBd/U7T7rov lovras . tois B'tjv %av6oTepa
fiev eki'xpvcroLO yeveids. — XXIV, 10. B(vao~e (sc. 'A\/c/JLr)va) tra/co?
fjLe'ya • (in which lay the two infant brothers Herakles and
Iphikles) tow B y e\a/3' vttvos. — xxvi, 14. (13) vvv B* irdpage
(sc. Avtovoo) . . . opyia Bd/c%(o, | . . . . ra 8' ov% opeovri
/3e/3rj\oc. 1
In apodoses of conditional and relative sentences Homer and
Herodotus sometimes use o Be (also in oblique cases) to refer to an
antecedent in the subordinate clause (also in oblique cases 2 ).
1 mss. t& 5'. Meineke and Hiller r&re ; but Fritzsche — to vn. 59 — correctly
notes "nunquam videlicet Theocritus dixit toLtc, ralre, r&re cet. pro olVe, atre
cet."
2 See Kriiger, n, 50, 1, 11, and compare Homer II. xi, 409.
28 The Article in Theocritus.
Such a use can also be cited for Theocritus in the following
instances : ix, 36, ou? yap opevvn | yadevaau (sc. Molaai), row £'
OVTL 7TOTft> 8a\r)<TClTO J^ipKT). XXIX, 17, KOI fJL6V (T€V TO KClXoV Tt?
cSoov pedos alveaaij | tw 8' evdv<; rnrXeov rj rpieTr}? eyevev <f>i\o<;.
The Be is in these cases the so-called apodotic 8e. In n, 1 24 :
kcli fju el fiev h? eSe'xeo-Oe, tcl S' rjs (f>i\a (where tcLS' is preferred by
some editors), ra 8e may be explained in the same way, as
referring to the preceding context (as in I, 35, discussed above
under 2 b.) : " if you had received me, that had been dear to me."
Compare the scholiast ad loc. : /cal ravra civ /caXw? el^ev (vf JL ^ ,v ) >
and : rjv av tovto irpocrfyikh}
When the relative conditional clause follows the main clause,
the case is slightly different, as in xvn, 74 : 6 8' eifoxos, ov ice
fyCkriar) (sc. Zeu?) yetvofxevov tcl irp&ra.
c. 6 fievj oi pep, etc., without a corresponding o 8e, o'i 8e 9 etc.,
in the nominative case resumes a person or thing previously
mentioned and is always followed by a contrasted action of the
same or of another subject. The nominative case never stands at
the head of the sentence or clause, but is preceded by one or two
particles — namely /cat, ei he, rjrot, &?. Following instances occur
in Theocritus: I, 138; vn, 90; xx, 17; xxi, 46; xxv, 45,
223 ; xxvi, 3 ; xxvn, 66.
The oblique cases of o fiev so used, with one exception (xxi, 58),
stand at the head of the seutence. Of the fifteen occurrences,
eleven are in epic idylls and a twelfth in the Ionic xn. In most
cases the demonstrative refers to the subject of the preceding
sentence. The occurrences may simply be noted. They are,
1,57; ix, 22; xn, 25; xvn, 36 ; xxi, 58; xxn, 102,131,
196; xxv, 73, 92, 138, 145, 204, 250, 262.
d. The substantive article with other particles. Tap : The
substantive article with yap, frequent in Homer, found occasion-
ally in tragedy, in Pindar, and in Herodotus, 2 and cited even for
Thucydides, 3 occurs in Theocritus only in two epic idylls : xvn, 4 ;
1 This is a more natural interpretation than that of Fritzsche who refers tA 5^
to " Amici . . . . quasi dicas vernacule 'das Volkchen' (those good fellows)
V. 119."
2 Krueger, n, 50, 1, 2, 3 See commentators to Thuc., i, 69, 2 ; vi, 36, 2.
The Article in Theocritus. 29
xxv, 5, 44, 197, and in the Berenice frg., line 4. — At; : to 877,
VII, 29. — Avrdp : avrap o, xxii, 105 ; XXV, 232.
e. The article as a substantive antecedent to a relative clause is
found in Homer, Pindar and Herodotus. In Attic prose it occurs
with some degree of frequency only in Plato. 1 Even in epic
diction this use is rare. Three examples may be cited for Theo-
critus from epic idylls: xvi, 5, rcov ottogoi . . . valovaiv. XXII,
182, tq) /lev ... &) yeverj irpofyepeaicov. XXV, 193, to fxev ottc fie
irpoiTOv avrjpev. In VII, 94, aXka to y i/c Travrcov fxey xnreipo'xpv
<sc. Si8ai;av^>, o5 tv yepaipeiv apgevp, <at>, most editors write
Toy or t68\ This use of the article is simply a type of anaphora
whereby the speaker or writer anticipates his own words and
points forward to the following. The relative clause takes the
place of a noun with the article. Compare Plato, Euthyd. 291 a.
f. The noun to which fiev or o 8e refers may be added in
apposition. It is often separated from the article by a considerable
interval. This form of expression begins in Homer and remains
the property of epic also in Alexandrian times, especially in
Callimachus. It is a form of deixis suited to the language of
everyday life and, hence, is more frequent in Aristophanes and
Plato than in the tragedians and historians. 2 In Homer it is most
frequent in the nominative case, and with # 6V, but is found also
in the oblique cases. 3 The occurrences in Theocritus, mostly in
epic idylls, are confined to the nominative case, and in all save
three instances to he : 111, 44 ; xin, 17 ; xvn, 71 ; xxn, 27, 76,
91, 99, 109, 110, 137, 183, 203; xxiv, 26, 51 ; xxv, 86, 148,
153. In most cases the noun referred to by the article is clear
from the context even before the addition of the apposition. An
exception is XXI, 17, oifBeh B y iv /jl€o-o-g) yefrcov ireXev a 8e
irap avTav | 6\if$op,4vav icakvftav Tpvfyephv irpoo-eva^e OaXaaaa. 4
The indefiniteness of a oY, and its distance from Oakaoraa cause
x Krueger, ir, 50, 2, 5, and 1, 50, 1, 20. Cf. Gildersleeve to Justin Martyr
A, I, 5, 8.
2 Bernhardy, Wissenschaf tliche Syntax, page 308. 3 Foerstemann, page 6.
4 Reiske's conjecture ir£\ev • 6. is now generally adopted for vevia of mss. 11, 18.
M. and Edd. Junt. and Call. (Cholraeley trevlq), and tt&vtt] of the Aldine ed.
30 The Article in Theocritus.
no difficulty. Such separatiou would uot seem abnormal to a
Greek. 1
ii. The article as a illative pronoun. The use of forms of the
article as relative pronouus is not found in Attic prose. That its
use in this manner was not altogether foreign to Attic is evidenced
by its appearance in private inscriptions. 2 The usage was continued
in the /coivrj and survives in modern Greek. 3 In old Ionic it was
frequent, but o? and 01 are more common than 6 and to/. 4 It was
common also in Aeolic, Doric, and Neoionic. Herodotus so uses
the forms with initial t, but with prepositions also the ordinary
relative, and with tj? only the latter — tho Homer shows 6Vt?,
oirep. 5 The fragments of Epicharmus and the poems of Pindar
offer examples for Doric. In Alexandrian poetry the Homeric
use is freely imitated, and in Theocritus the article as relative
occurs in most of the poems. The ordinary forms of the relative
are of course far more common.
This relative use of the article is in general restricted in Theo-
critus as in Homer, 6 to clauses that refer to a definite antecedent,
and, therefore, regularly follow the antecedent clause. Two cases
are cited from Homer where this rule is not observed, II. I, 125,
Od. iv, 349 (= xvn, 140). 7 In correlation with a demonstrative,
forms of the article are not used as relatives. With one possible
exception (xv, 86), only forms with initial t are used as relatives
by Theocritus. The antecedent is indefinite in but one instance :
XXIX, 3, KTJyco fih ra cfrpe'vcov ipe'co /cear iv pvyuf. The article
as relative, with a definite, preceding antecedent is found as
follows: i, 47, 118; n, 12, 67; in, 22, 35; iv, 59; v, 8, 11,
93; VII, 59, 93; IX, 10, 23, 24, 29; x, 4, (v. 1. a?); xi, 16,
47, 53; xin, 57; xiv, 34; xv, 86, o Tpt^iXrjro^ "A6Wj? o tcqv
'Kxepovn faXeirai, 8 117; xvi, 102; XVII, 5, 128; xvin, 25,
1 Cf. Pindar, O, xi (x), 19, and Gildersleeve, ad loc.
2 Meisterhans 2 , 123, cf. Volker ; " Syntax d. gr. Papyri," i, p. 6.
3 Brugmann, §642. 4 Monro, 262.
5 Krueger, n, 25, 5.4. 6 Monro, §262. 7 Brugmann, §642, p. 550.
8 The only example of a form without initial t used as relative. (For this use
in Homer, cf. Krueger, n, 15, 1, 2). For the vulg. 8 . . . 0i\etrai, Ahrens wrote
6s after MS. p. — contrary to the metre, while Fritzsche followed Beiske in reading
6 . . . <Pi\t)t6s, from the variant (pikrJTai in some minor mss., and early edd.
Theocritus may have used # simply for metrical reasons.
The Article in Theocritus. 31
37; xxi, 38, 62 ; xxn, 55, 183 (?) ; xxm, 9, 43, 46, 58 ; XXIV,
4, 29 (?), 114; xxv, 2, 34, 209; XXVII, 19; xxvm, 10 ;
Epigram viii (xvn), 5.
B. Adjective Use of the Article.
1. With objects present to the senses, Setfi? t?}? cn/re&)?. From
what has already been said of the origin of the article, it is clear
that in its earliest stage the adjective article was used with the
names of objects actually present to the senses. When the article
was still largely implicit in the noun, its addition was necessarily
attended by a certain degree of emphasis or direction. With the
growth of other demonstratives, however, and the rapid extension
of the article itself to wider uses, this emphasis decreased until by
the time of the Attic period the adjective article in all its uses was
relatively unemphatic. The Alexandrian poets, we are told, 1 often
used the article with demonstrative force. If this is true, it can
be due only to a conscious return to earlier models. In Attic and
later Greek, when the article had long been fully developed, its use
to point to things actually present was probably no more emphatic
than any of its other uses, unless supported by actual gesture.
This is true of our own definite article and that of modern German
as well, tho both English and German use the article in this way
with far less freedom than Greek, and more readily resort to
stronger demonstratives. It is to be remembered that analysis
into " objects present to the senses," "previously mentioned,"
" present to the mind," etc., is merely convenient categorization,
and does not imply that there was to a Greek any difference in
meaning between the article in one case and in another. Among
the examples to be cited under the present category there are
comparatively few where the simple article in English will not
approximately give the value of the Greek article. For instance,
when Battos (Id. IV, 1) asks Corydon, " tivos al ^5oe?"; the
article evidently points to the cattle before him, and yet al is by
no means equivalent to aihe or avrat. " Whose are the cows,"
or even " whose cows " practically puts as much emphasis upon
1 Ostermann, Jahnii Ann. 1858, vol. 78, p. 361.
32 The Article in Theocritus.
at as was intended. Similarly, Id. I, 2, ttotI rais ira^alcri is not
" by yonder spring," or " by this spring/' but simply " by the
spring," the one, namely, in the landscape before us and the only
one at this moment of special interest. Where emphasis is actually
laid upon the location of a person or thing, the demonstratives are
freely used, or, where the demonstrative pronoun is not added, the
presence of some demonstrative form often supports the article,
much like a gesture in actual conversation. So, for instance, wSe
(in, 38; IV, 51), relSe (i, 12; v, 32), Bevpo (i, 21 ; XXVII, 10,
12), rjvChe (v, 23), or a demonstrative standing with another noun
in the immediate vicinity (i, 1, 8, 13, 23 ; v. 63, 101). In some
other cases actual gesture must be imagined, as in xxn, 69, where
Amycus refers to himself as 6 ttvktt]^. The following cases of
this use of the article, with objects present to the senses, have been
noted, none, save xxn, 69, from epic idylls: i, 1, 2, 8, 13, 21,
23;— in, 38;— IV, 1, 44 (two), 45 (tov OaWov), 46, 50, 52
(two), 55; — v, 3, 24 (two, a>/9t<£o?, — with anaphora also to 1. 21 ;
—tov €v/3otov &fiv6v), 32, 47, 48, 49, 1 63, 75, 78, 99, 100 (ra?
kotivov), 101, 102 (ras Spvos), 110 (tov aliroXov), 138 ;— VI, 11,
13 ; — vil, 43 ; — vin, 27 (two), 44 (%<w wotynqv = iyco • cf. viii,
48, xxn, 69);— xv, 14, 27 (to vdfia), 2 65, 81, 89, 145 (to
Xpnpa o-ocj)Q)T€pov ! a drjXeia); 3 — XXII, 69; — xxvn, 10, 12, 57;
— Epigram, I, (i), 1, 3 ; — IV, (xn), I, (top TpiiroSa) ; — IX (xxi), 2.
2. With objects previously mentioned. From a Setft? -n)? cn/reo)?
to a Setft? tov vov is but a short step, as we have seen, and the
line between the two cannot in some cases be sharply drawn. The
categories frequently overlap. By a SeZfi? tov vov is meant
reference to a definite object that is present to the mind. This
mental presence is either due to the fact that the given object has
1 In connection with the lines last quoted, 47-49, note rovrei, <55e, %vda, 11. 45-47.
2 Na/ta seems to be a rare hyperdoric form for vijfia, "sewing." Na/m from vdw,
11 liquid matter," belongs to a higher sphere, being especially common in the
tragic poets, particularly Euripides, and nowhere occurs in the sense "basin of
water," as would be required here, tho in idyl xxm, 61 it is used of the water
in a natatorium.
8 T6 XPVP- ; in the speech of the Syracusan woman refers to the singer of the
Adonis song. The line is doubtful, but this reading and the interpretation of
Fritzsche seems most reasonable. See for a discussion of the line, Legrand, p. 308.
The Article in Theocritus. 33
previously come within the range of the hearer's mental experience
and is suggested again by a present circumstance, or it is due more
immediately to a direct mention or implication of the object in the
preceding words. That Apollonius uses the term avafyopd in its
widest sense to cover both these cases is clear not only from his
triple division of this function, but also, because he speaks of
ava<f>opd as presupposing in general a Trpov^earcoo-a yvcoai,?, 1 or,
in a narrower sense, as a recall of a irpoKareuXe^ fievov irpoa-oyrrovr
We will take up first the cases of simple anaphora of things
that have been mentioned or implied. The article was used for
this purpose as early as Homer's day, but while the emphasis upon
this article was comparatively strong in the early period, in Attic
and later Greek it was no longer so.
In contrast with the preceding category, it is to be noted that
no small number of the examples to be cited here are found in
epic idylls, and a large proportion of the others occur in narrative
passages. I, 41, 6 Trpecrfivs, i. e. the jptTreis ye'pcov of 1. 39, 3 50,
61, 92, 143 (two), 149 ;— n, 36, 72, 159;— iv, 22 (6 Safios, the
dcme of rol SafMorat of line 21), 37, 52 a w6pTi^\ — v, 24, 30,
61, 139, 144, 149;— vir, 34, 42, 128 ;— vm, 28 (two), 29 (two),
61, 81 (two), 84, 88;— xi, 17;— xm, 14, 46, 59;— xv, 129 (o
yafiftpos, i. e. "AScovk, 1. 128), 4 148; — xix, 5 (rav oSvvav, implied
in /cevTa<T<re, 1. 1.); — XXI, 4 (top vttvqv, after kclv oXfyov vvktos
Ti? iwifjiiKTorycn : " the little sleep he does snatch."), 14 (rots
aXievo-cv), 20, 26 (o Katpos, i. e. to /caXov de'pos) 46, 47 (two), 50,
52, 53 (to> xpvaq>, with anaphora to : aveiXfcvaa y^pvaeov IxOvv.
Cf. %/juo-oV, 1. 57, "some gold," and tq> XP V<T <? again, 1. 60, with
a Synt., p. 29, 5. 2 Synt, p. 26, 12.
3 To this Ostermann [Jahnii Ann. 1. c] notes, "jener Greis, wie der Artikel
oft bei den Alexandrinern demonstrative Bedeutung hat." This note is quoted
(ad loc.) by Fritzsche, and Hiller refers to Krueger, n, 50, 3, 4, where the
Homeric use of the article in such cases is referred to. As a matter of fact Attic
Greek would have nothing else here but 6 irptafivs, and it is scarcely conceivable
that an Alexandrian should interpret the article here differently from an Attic
writer. The mere fact that epic influence can be seen in the present passage is
not sufficient to force an Homeric emphasis upon the article.
4 Cholmeley's comparison with 6 (rrpaTubras of xiv, 56 is pointless, unless he
intends 6 yauPpds to be taken in apposition with'ASoms.
34 The Article in Theocritus.
anaphora.), 56, 57 (raynio-Tpia), 60, 66 (row vttvcov, the dream
just related. — xxin, 7 (rcov wvpacov, implied in TroXvfaXrpos,
rjparo, 1. 1, cfriXeovTa, 1. 3, tov "E/og)t<z, 1. 4), 11, 39, 51, 52, 53,
60 (TwyaXfia, of Eros, tov 6eov, 1, 58), 63. — The next seven
examples are from epic idylls: xxiv, 103, 133; — xxv, 1, 51,
64, 71, 84; — xxvn, 2, 5 (to fylXaiia). — Epigram v (xiii), 1.
(ttjv 6eov).
3. With objects present to the mind, that is, objects that are
referred to simply as known, either from previous experience or
general report. Here the anaphoric power of the article has its
widest scope. Minute analysis of this type of anaphora into
subsidiary categories would be unprofitable. It is sufficient and
convenient to group under a few principal heads cases that are
approximately alike. 1 So we may consider together (1) things that
are set doion as known or notorious, including the avafyopa /car''
i^o^rjv of Apollonius, (2) things that are customary, proper, requisite,
desirable, (3) things that are known and referred to in their relation
to a person or thing previously mentioned or implied — the so-called
possessive use of the article. Under the present category, then,
are included those cases that come under the first of these three
divisions. They are the following : I, 6, 9 (rav oliSa), 11, 82 (a
Kcopa — Priapus pretends to know her), 105 (o ftov/coXos), 152; —
ii, 74;— in, 4 (two), 29 (two), 40, 43 (two) ;— iv, 4 (two), ,35,
36 (ral Se yvval^), 37, 58, 61 ;— V, 12 (rav alya), 42, 97, 123
(rav KV/cXdfiivov), 133 (rav <j)daaav), 135; — VI, 45; — VII, 67,
78, 136 ff. (to . . . vScop, rol . . . TeTTiyes, a 8' oXoXvycov), 145
(rol op-raices) 2 — VIII, 87; — x, 15, 21, 44, 54, 55; — XI, 12; —
XIII, 6, 7 (rav irXo/cafjiiSa, with which Hylas is usually pictured), 3
16;— xv, 7, 24, 37 (rofr 8> epyoi^), 43 (two), 52, 63, 77 (rav
vvov, quoting a proverb or custom), 98 ; — xix, 8 ; — xxi, 31 (rav
aypav, the daily catch), 36 ; — xxix, 37 ; — xxx, 29 ; — Epigram,
1 See Krueger, i, 50, 2, 4.
2 In this description of a scene witnessed in the past, and now recalled, the arti-
cle is virtually a deixis transferred to the past. In the same lines the article is
also freely omitted with other objects.
3 Theocritus may have had a picture of the boy in mind. Cf. Wilamowitz,
Textg., p. 175, n., and Naber, Mnem. xxxiv, (1906), p. 169.
The Article in Theocritus.
VI (xx), 6. Cases occur where the article is used with a. noun
whose identity is first explained in the following words. The
mind of the speaker anticipates his speech and lets the article point
forward to the definition that is to follow. This definition usually
takes the form of a relative clause. 1 In Theocritus we note the
following: in, 21, tov arec^avov . . . tov . . . (pvXdcraa) ; — IV, 28,
40; — xxn, 64; — xxni, 58; — xxv, 211. Once we find the
article pointing forward to infinitives : xvi, 60, 6 po^Oo? . . .
/nerpelv . . . vl^eiv . . . irapeXOelv. The article is used with similar
prolepsis, but without a following relative clause or equivalent, in
Epigram, vin (xvn), 1. "A re <fxovd Awpios %(ovr]p 6 tclv
KcofjLG)8Lav I evpcbv 'E7rt%a/0fio?. ; A (fycovd is defined only when we
reach rav tcwpLwhiav.
4. With things thai are marked as customary, proper, etc. Tho
this use of the article is merely a subdivision of the previous
category, as was said above, it is given a separate paragraph for
convenience. The same is true of the following division.
II, 1 , ral Sdcfrvai, ra (f>i\rpa, 2, rav /ceXefiav, the ingredients and
implement for preparing the love charm in the mystic rite about to
begin ; 33, ra iriTvpa, the husks essential to such rites. — vin, 86,
ra SiSa/crpa, the requisite pay for instruction (1. 85). — XI, 17 to
<f>dp/jLafcov, the proper remedy, with anaphora also to line 1 fF. —
xiv, 52, to (f)dpfia/cov. — xxn, 64, 6 (jllo-Oos, the required pay ;
anticipating the relative clause oo /cev ere TrWoi/xev. — xxni, 24, to
<t>dpfjLa/cov . . to \a6os, in both cases "the longed for," and to
Xa^o? may be looked upon as an appositive to to c^dp/xaKov; 38,
ftpaxy fcXavaov, e7rto-7retcra? 8e to Bd/cpv. Fritzsche aptly compares
Horace, Od. n, 6, 23 : " debita sparges lacrima favillam " ; but
the article also refers to the Sd/cpv implied in Kkavaov, and so Lang
renders, "weep a little; and when thou hast made this libation of
thy tears."
5. The article with possessive value. This use of the article
seems to have belonged to the early language, and if some of the
examples formerly cited for Homer have been replaced by conjecture
with forms of the personal and possessive pronouns, 2 it seems
1 Krueger, i, 50, 2, 7. 2 See Vogrinz, p. 194.
36 The Article in Theocritus.
impossible to deny it to Homer altogether. 1 Here, as in other
uses of the Greek article, the failure of our own definite article
may cause over translation, whereby the Greek article is unduly
emphasized. The Greek grammarians themselves, as we have seen,
made no special provisions for this use of the article apart from
the general head under which it really belongs, namely avacfropd. 2
The definite article in modern English may also be used in this
way, but we are restricted to a few old combinations. We may
render < fie >> twv a>rcov KaOekolcra [Id. v, 133), "taking me by
the ears," and, " I have a pain in the head " is perfectly intelligible
for aXye'co rav KefyaXdv (Id. Ill, 52); but our article fails us when
we try to translate So? rav x e P a f* 01 (^- xv > 66), and we resort
to the possessive. Even the Greek article at a later period no
longer sufficed to indicate possessive relations. 3 When the article
is used in this sense, it is of course necessary in order to avoid
ambiguity, that the possessor be known, and consequently, in most
cases, the person of the possessor is directly indicated in the
preceding context, most frequently as subject or object of the verb,
or as a dative of interest. 4 No cases are cited below from epic
idylls. In the other idylls, particularly the Doric, the article
appears freely in this function, especially with names of parts
of the body, articles of dress, and nouns of relationship.
With parts of the body the possessive article has been noted
in thirty-nine (39) cases, its omission in forty-six (46), of which
twenty-one (21) are prepositional phrases, and a number of others
formulae like irocral %opevo-ai, TroBas eX/cet?, %etpo? e^ayjrafie'va.
It may be of interest also to note that the possessive article is rare
in narrative portions. Dialogue furnishes most of the examples,
for here there is least danger of ambiguity.
a. With parts of the body : afi<\>r}v (Aeol. = civxv v ) xxx, 28
yao-Trjp xxi, 41 ; — yeveiov VI, 36, XX, 8 ; — yews XXIX, 33
Sd/crvXos viii, 23; — /ce(j>d\Ti in, 52, xi, 70, xx, 12, xxi, 13
fcpaBta XXIII, 34 ; — /cporacjios XI, 9 ; — fierooirov XX, 24 ; 5 — fiveXos
1 See Foerstemann, p. 28. 2 Compare above, Introd.
3 See Volker, o. c., p. 7, and footnote 5. 4 Cf. Foerstemann, 1. c.
5 (ifiol) Xevicbv rb fitrcoTrov <?7r' bfypticn Xdfitre fieXaipais. In the same self-descrip-
tion we find without the article vrr/pav, xcurcu, -rrepi KpoTCMpoiai, in' ocppvai, 6fi/xara,
but t6 (rrdfia, and again £k ctoh&twp, (pupa.
The Article in Theocritus. 37
xxx, 21 ; — bhovs vi, 37 ; — ofi/xa v, 36 ; — 6w% IV, 54; — crrrXd iv,
36;— oS<%> viii, 69;— ofc (<B?) v, 133 ;— wj>0a\/juk xi, 53;—
TrapavaXXX, 5 (?); — 7rou? XX, 12; XXX, 3 (?) ; — Trpoacoirov II, 140
xxiii, 13 ; — TTcoyoyv x, 40 ; — o-To/ia I, 146 ; viii, 82; xi, 9, 56
XX, 26 (v. 1. teal o-TOfia); XXI, 57 ; — o-cfrvpov iv, 51 ; — %€t/> x, 55
xv, 66 ; xxi, 9, 48 ; xxvn, 18.
The following group of words, used with the possessive article,
tho not to be classed as parts of the body, may best be treated
here: yvayfjiv, in the sense of "mind" or " judgment " xxi, 62,
tv 8 y & %eve . . . epeiSe rav yv(bfjiav ; l I8ea XXX, 14; — fcdWos
II, 83 ; — poppet xx, 14 ; xxiii, 2 ; — voos, xxi, 32. 2 — irvev^a
"breath " viii, 76 ; 3 — o-Qivos I, 44 ; — 779071-09, " character, disposi-
tion ; " x, 37 ; xxiii, 2 ; — cfrprjv n, 19 ; XI, 72; — <f>covd x, 37 ; —
i/rin^a xi, 52 ; xv, 4, 4 37 ; xxiii, 55 ; xxvn, 61.
b. As with parts of the body, so with articles of dress : II, 53,
156 ; in, 25 ; v, 15 ; xv, 21 (two), 39 (two) ; xxvn, 54.
c. With nouns of relationship. Where the reference is clear
the article may be omitted. The nouns then approach the value
of proper names and are similarly treated. 5 In Theocritus Attic
usage is generally followed. The proportion of omissions of the
possessive article with this class of nouns is not large in Doric
idylls. Following are the cases where the article in the possessive
1 Hiller explains: "firma mentem meara," and similarly "Wuestemann and
Hartung. Kiessling however (cf. Cholmeley, and Lang's translation ) renders :
"iam animum intende, scil. ut somnum recte interpreteris." Aside from other
considerations, since rdp follows the imperative ri> . . . epei.de, it is natural to under-
stand it as referring to the subject, that is "your." For the possessive article
similarly used after an imperative, with reference to the subject compare x, 55 ;
xv, 21, 66 ; xxvn, 18. In two cases, in, 3, and viii, 63, where the reference is
not to the subject of the imperative but to the speaker, there is no ambiguity,
because the context in each case decides.
2 ed yap av eiK<i£ais Kara rbv vbov. Whatever the true reading of this troublesome
line, rbv vbov is ' ' the mind " of the subject of the verb. The same phrase is else-
where anarthrous with or without a possessive pronoun.
3 ' KbeV a <po}va ras irbprtos, a80 rb 7rvevp.a. The presence of ras wbprios and its
own position indicate that rb irvevfia is "her breath." Fritzsche's objection to
this interpretation, 'obstat connexus versus sequentis,' would have to be applied
as well to the preceding words. He interprets rb irvev/xa, l aer spiritu motus,'
4 c5 ras dXefidro} \pvxa.s. See Wilamowitz, Textgeschichte, p. 48, note 1,
5 See Krueger, 50, m, 3, A. 8. Kuehner, § 462, d.
38 The Article in Theocritus.
sense is prefixed: fidrn p iy, 9; vm, 16; x, 58; XI, 54, 67;
xix, 7 ; — Trarrjp vui, 20 ; — re/cwv (which had become thoroughly
substantivized and was treated as a real noun) xv, 47. Here
we may put also heairoTn^ v, 10 and SovXa II, 94. In xv, 148
X<tsvr)p is not " my husband " but, with anaphora to Ato/cXet'Sa?,
"that man."
Outside the sphere of words above enumerated, Theocritus is
free in the use of the article with possessive value. The identity
of the possessor is usually clear from the context. Cases occur,
however, especially in dialogue, where the possessor is not directly
indicated to the reader. This is the more common in dialogue,
because the reference was at once clear to the listener, and the
possessor need not be indicated to him with such exactness. The
examples need simply be listed. They are the following : i, 14,
62, 87, 120, 121 ; n, 64, 127; in, 3, 7; iv, 13, 26, 28 ; v, 28,
85, 87, 88, 89, 96, 105, 107, 127 ; x vi, 2, 6, 9, 10, 21, 29 ; vn,
65, 87 ; 2 vm, 35, 63, 70, 72, 73 ; x, 2 (?), 3, 6, 34 ; xi, 12, 39,
44, 74, 80; xn, 20, 23; xv, 55, 130; xx, 28, 40, 42, 44;
xxi, 14 (twice), 27, 33, 67 ; 3 xxni, 13, 18 {rav ^Xidv,
"its doorpost" with reference to fieXdOpoLs) ; xxvn, 33, 37 4 ;
xxviii, 23.
6. The article with proper names, a. With names of persons.
Few chapters in the study of the Greek article have caused more
difficulty than that of articular proper names, and especially names
of persons. Recent years have seen the publication of a number
of important contributions in this special field, which are devoted
to the examination of individual authors and departments. Impor-
tant data have been brought to light which contribute to an
1 d 7rcus . . . rq. K&\iri5i. i ' my girl. ' ' So Fritzsche, noting : ' ' alii minus apte
puellas in universum articulo signincari existimant." — t£ icdXindi is " her pitcher. "
2 rds KaXds alyas. Cf. schol. : ras tcaXas <rov a?7as.
3 Kal tois x/>u<ro?0-ti> ovetpoLs. Kal tois is Scaliger's correction (ap. Ameis, p. 16)
for the vulg. kclLtoi. Hermann (ap. Fritzsche) wrote Kal cots, and so Fritzsche
and Hiller. The article is desirable not only with possessive meaning, but also
with anaphora, \ ' those golden dreams of yours. ' '
4 rd 5£ ircfoa /caXd vofxeOoj. The reference of t& is ambiguous. With vopevta in
the present it is best taken "iny flocks," with *a\d adverbial as in 1. 47.
The Article in Theocritus. 39
understanding of the sphere of the articular proper name, and
consequently, of the stylistic effect of its free employment. 1
The sphere and effect of the articular proper noun have been
stated in their general aspect by Professor Gildersleeve in the
American Journal of Philology, xi, 483 ff. The facts to be noted
, are the following. We know that classical Greek poetry outside
of comedy had little use for the articular proper name. It is
excluded from Homer and rare in lyric poetry — the sole instance
in Pindar (Pythia, x, 57) being accounted an excusable Dorism. 2
In tragedy it is so rare that Valckenaer 3 was led to deny its use
in that department. In Aristophanes there is a freer use, so that,
tho the lyric choruses admit articular proper names of persons in
only two places (Lys. 1213, Ran. 422), according to Fuller, 4 in
dialogue they are by no means rare. In prose, Plato leads with
the freest use of articular proper names. He is followed by the
historians, while the orators, restricted by official speech, stand
last. The meaning of all this can be nothing else, than that the
sphere of the articular proper name is to be sought in those depart-
ments and authors that approach the speech of everyday life.
The home of the articular proper name is familiar language, and
its tone, therefore, where it is freely used, is familiar. The mere
fact that the article regularly accompanies proper names in modern
Greek is itself an indication of this, for it is in the popular usage
of the earlier language that the origin of modern uses is to be
sought.
In Theocritus it is necessary to distinguish again between the
epic (Ionic), and Doric (bucolic) idylls. In the former Theocritus
! In the domain of prose, L. Herbst, Philologus xl, 374 ff., for Thucydides
(see A. J. P. ii. 541) ; Fr. Blass, Eh. M. xliv, Iff. (see A. J. P. xi, 107),
for Demosthenes ; C. Schmidt, " De articnlo in nominibus propriis apud Atticos
scriptores pedestres," Kiel, 1890 (see A. J. P. xi, 484, note) ; H. Kallenberg, in
two studies, Part i, Philol. xlix (N. F. hi) 1890, 515 ff., " Der Artikel bei
Namen von Landern, Stadten und Meeren in der griechischen Prosa," n, Berlin
Program 1891, "Der Artikel bei i, Flussnamen und n, Gebirgsnamen ;" and Ad.
Zucker, Niirnberg Pr. 1899, for Xenophon's Anabasis. In poetry there is the
study of Uckerraann, "Der Artikel bei Eigennamen in den Komodien des Aristo-
phanes," Berlin Pr. 1892, which has remained uncompleted.
2 Cf. Prof. Gildersleeve, ad loc. 3 In a note to Euripides, Phoen. 147.
4 Diss., p. 35.
40 The Article in Theocritus.
in general closely follows his model, and admits the article with
names of persons only in the following instances : 1) with an
attribute, xm, 7 (not in the epyllion proper) ; xvn, 26 ; xxn,
34, 140; xxvi, 1 j 1 xn, 35 (Ionic "lyric) ; and 2) with national
appellatives, XXIV, 1, a MiSeans, 'AXtc/Jirjva; xil, 14, 6®eo-aa\6<;,
generic; xxv, 180, ov% 'EXi/cnOev 'A%ato?, with anaphora. This
is a total of nine cases against one hundred and fifty-one, where
the article is omitted (vocatives and predicates not being counted).
The Aeolic (lyric) group shows but one articular name of a person,
with an attributive (xxviii, 17), against five without the article. 2
In the Doric idylls the situation is different. There Theocritus
approximates the familiar language of the naive shepherd, and
we find articular proper names of persons used with considerable
freedom. Taking the Doric group as a whole, we find sixty-eight
proper names of persons with the article, one hundred and eighty
without the article, or 27.41 f articular. With the Doric idylls
it is interesting to compare the mimes of TIerondas. A single
careful count covering the first seven mimes showed eighty-five
anarthrous names of persons, and twenty-two in articular combina-
tions, or 20.5 % articular. Of these twenty-two, nine are of the
type o Mara/civr)? tt}? Marauciov ^vWos, where the proper name
stands rather in appositional relation to the elliptical phrase o (17)
+ genitive ; and four others are national appellatives. It is
evident then, that in Herondas the articular proper name is less
frequent than in the Doric idylls of Theocritus. In the epigrams
included in this study no articular names of persons occur.
Ameis (p. 14 f.) in discussing the articular proper name in
Theocritus simply accepts for our author the rule posited by
Hermann : 3 " Nimirum ut articulus apponatur ad illud nomen,
quod aut loquenti vel ei quicum is loquitur in animo versatur, aut
fama et sermonibus hominum celebratum est" — the familiar
anaphora, — and remarks, p. 23, "Nominibus propriis saepe vix
1 In each of these cases strict epic interpretation makes the article demonstra-
tive.
2 For names of divinities see below.
3 Euripides, Iphig. AuL, praef,, p. xvii.
The Article in Theocritus. 41
ullo discrimine additur et adimitur." That anaphora does play a
part is true, and the categories "the famous," "the aforesaid," etc.,
may in some cases be applied, but no law can be laid down which
will categorically explain Theocritean usage. It lies wholly within
the poet's choice, whether or not he shall use the article, and the
metre may in some cases be the deciding element. The best that
can be said is that where the article is used, the tone is generally
that of familiar reference to persons either belonging to the small
circle, rural or urban, in which the speaker moves, or familiarly
known to the speaking characters by current report, or homely
legend and superstition.
The occurrences will be taken up by idylls, and the first to be
considered are those unaccompanied by attributives.
Id. I, 100, %<w Adcfrvis 7roTa/jLei/3eTo. Aa</>w?, the subject of
this shepherd song, " ra AdfotBos akyea" occurs but once more in
this idyl with the article, line 140. The name occurs eight times
(exclusive of vocatives) without the article : 1. 19 in the title "to,
AdcfrvLSos a\<yea ; at the beginning of the song, 1. 66 ; as predicate,
120, 121 ; in apposition, 113, 116 ; and where Daphnis speaks of
himself in the third person, 103, 135. — I, 109, wpaios x&8covi<>.
This is the only mention of Adonis in the idyl, and the line is open
to question. Anchises, another favorite of Aphrodite is mentioned
in line 106 without the article. Both were familiar figures in
shepherd lore and might with equal propriety have the article.
The article with "ASavis may be contemptuous. Besides the nine
anarthrous forms already quoted for this idyl we find (dvpaios (65)
and Aio/z^Seo? (112).
Id. in, 1. tclv ' AfiapvWcSa, the Amaryllis of the speaker's
dreams and hopes, almost " my Amaryllis." — 2. o TiTvpos. — 41,
a 8' ' AraXdvra, 47, coSoovls. In these lines (40 to 51) five
mythological parallels are related. In the first we find 'liriropbevr)^
(40) without the article, y Arakavra with the article in a contrast ;
in the second Me\a^7rou? (43), itself anarthrous, is preceded by
the apposition 6 /jbavris, while Pero is described as a 8e . . . /jLarrjp
a yapieaaa Treplfypovos 'AXc^eo-fcySot?;? (44/45) ; in the third parallel
we find "ASft)w? with the article (47). The formula a the famous,"
" storied," etc., might do for a S' ^AraXdvra and o "ASawt?, but
42 The Article in Theocritus.
we have the equally well known 'liriro^evrj^, MeXd/Jurov^ and
'A\(£ea-£/3(H?7? ? as we ll as Biaz/ros (44) and 'IacrtWa (50) without
the article.
Id. IV, 21, t<m AafjL7rpid8a. — Id. v, 88. a KXeap terra, the only
mention of her name in the idyl. — 90 o Kpa-rtSa?. In both
cases a possessive translation will approximate the tone of the
article. — Id. VI, 6. fldXXei tol I ioXixfyafie to ttoi/jlvlov a TaXdreua
| fiaXoco-iv. In this as in the other Polyphemus idyl, TaXdreia
always has the article except xi, 76, TaXdretav . . . aXXav,
" another Galatea.'' — 42. rbv Adcfrviv 6 Aa/Wra? i(f>C\rjae. Else-
where in the idyl these names are anarthrous (11. 1, 5, 20, 44) save
Aa^yt? once, 1. 1, where it has the appositive 6 fiovicoXos added.
— Id. vn, 55. tov AvklSclv, " hunc hominem, me, Lycidan,"
(Fritzsche) — but this is the only passage in which the name of the
person thus used for the speaker himself has the article. 1 — 72. 6
Be Tn-f/309. 2 73. t&s Be^ea?, her namely of the familiar Daphuis
legend, (v. 1. %evLa<$ p. s., %avQas v. 1. in schol.). — Id. VIII, 8. %a>
Adifivis. Except here and verse 1, where we have Ad<f)vi8i ra
%apievTi, this name is anarthrous throughout the idyl (5, 31, 36,
38 = 670), 71, 92) and the name of the other shepherd, MevdX/cas
never has the article (2, 5, 30, 32, 33 --= iyeb, 39, 62). In line 8 we
have a contrast, but we have contrast as well in other cases where
the article does not appear, so, 5, 31, 71. Daphnis is referred to
familiarly with the article, and of the two singers he was the
more widely known and more famous (v. 92). 3 Id. xi. 8. rds
TaXareias. 13. rav TaXdretav — "that Galatea of his/' cf. to VI,
6, above. — Id. XIV, 31. a Be Kwio-tca | e/cXaev. It is her lover
who is speaking. He has previously referred to her as a xapieaaa
KvvLcr/ca (8) and a Be (21). Here the noun stands in a strong
contrast and a Be is almost demonstrative. — Other articular names
in this idyl are proper adjectives, and names accompanied by
attributives. It may be noted that of the twelve anarthrous names
nine occur in the long speech of Aeschines. — Id. xv, 23. tov
Compare for anarthrous forms, 1, 103; v, 9, 14, 86, (Ad/cwi>), 19, 70, 150,
(Kofidras) ; vii, 96 ; VI 11, 33, 38.
2 See Wilamowitz, Textg., p. 165.
3 Cf. Leutsch, Philol. Anz. 11, 515. Wilamowitz, Textg., p. 234.
The Article in Theocritus. 43
"AScoviv, here "the Adonis," i. e. the spectacle, celebration. Of
the ten occurrences of this name in Theocritus (exclusive of four
vocatives), seven in this idyl, and I, 109 ; in, 47 ; xx, 35, there
is but one lackiug the article, namely line 111 of this idyl. The
other occurrences of the name in Id. XV follow : 96, tov "ASeoviv
aeiSew, "the Adonis song" ; 102. olov tol tov" AScovlv . . . ayajov
T £lpai — "thy (Aphrodite's 1. 101) Adonis here." A statue of
Adonis was set up at this festival (11. 127-128, Bekker, Charikles,
i, p. 101). But this fact will not account for the article, tho
names of statues regularly take the article in Attic prose (Schmidt,
p. 16), for Kinrp^j also represented by a statue (1. 128), is without
the article in both places where it occurs (128, 131). — Elsewhere
in the idyl "AScovis, with the article, is accompanied by attributives.
— 92. KopivOiai, elfies avcodev, | ek koX 6 BeXXe/oo^wy, Bellerophon
whom the Corinthians chose as their special hero. — Id. xx, 35.
/cal tov "AScovlv . . . <f)C\.7)o~ev (s. c. Ku7T/9t9), (vv. 11. avTov vulg.,
Fritzsche, cett. ; kclv tov Ahrens, Hiller, Cholmeley ; ov tov,
Wilamowitz). Compare Id. xv, above. Anarthrous are JLvvei/ca,
1, 42, and 'Ev8v/jl(cov, 37.
A few cases follow where the article is used with proper
adjectives to refer to persons : II, 96, o MvvSlos ; xn, 14, 6
©ecro-aXo?, generic, as o'AfivfcXaid^cov, 1. 13; XIV, 12, 30; XV,
97. In vn, 71 where the article is omitted with a national
appellative in the singular, 'A^a/weu? was probably the man's
name. In other cases the proper adjective with the article stands
in apposition with the name of the person : n, 29 ; v, 2, 72, 73 ;
xxiv, 1 ; or with an attributive added, xxv, 180, ovg 'EXi/crjOev
'A%ato? (with anaphora, referring to 1. 165).
Cases where the proper name with the article is attended by an
appositional noun are comparatively rare. When the proper name
precedes, it is set down as well-known and the apposition is added
with little emphasis : l in, 31, a Tpacco . . . /coo-/civ6fjLavTi<;. 2 — v,
1 See Kuehner, § 462, A. Anm. 1.
2 For this troublesome line see Wilamowitz, Textg. p. 135, where the ' Ay poid>
reading of the mss. is plausibly defended. In the reading given above, the addi-
tion of the anarthrous Ko<xKiv6fiavTis after the intervening raXadea finds no parallel
in Theocritus, tho Hiller cites Iliad, I, 11, rbv Xptio-rjp TfTl/xrja- 1 apTjTfjpa.
44 The Article in Theocritus.
2, ttjvov tov iroLjieva tov Hvftapvrav | tov Ad/cayva, 62, 6 /3ovko\os
tt>8' 6 Av/ca)7ra$ (v. 1. o>Se), 143, tw Ad/cwvos tw Troifievos. — VI, 1,
Aa/xotVa? ^a> Aa(/)w? o ftov/coXos, 1 23, o fxavTis 6 TiJXeyLto?, con-
temptuous, "that fakir prophet 7 ' — cf. Odyssey ix, 509. In the
following cases attributives also occur : vn, 152, rrjvov tov iroijueva
tov itot ' " Avdirw | toi> icpaTepov TloXvcfra/jLov ; compare XI, 7, 6
Ku/cXft)-^ 6 Trap' a/xw | cop^alos IIoA,v(£a//,o?, both passages notable
for the heaping of articles. — xiii, 7, ttcuBos | tov ^apievTo^ "TXa.
— For articular proper names in the nominative in apposition with
an expressed or implied vocative see below under " article with
nouns in apposition with pronouns. 7 ' The proper names so used
are names of animals.
With proper names of persons, accompanied by an attributive the
article is used with considerable regularity in the Doric idylls.
Of thirty-two cases where the article is omitted, twenty-seven
occur in epic idylls. The first attributive position is the most
common (26 cases), far behind follows the third (6 cases), and last
stands the second (4 cases). Four instances of the first position
are found in epic idylls, and one of the third position.
First attributive position: II, 102-103, ay aye tov XiTrapo^pcov
| ek efia ScofjLaTa AeXfytv, 2 115; in, 32; V, 4; VI, 40; VII,
39, 118, 152; vm, 47; x, 41; xi, 8; XII, 35; xiii, 7 (in the
introduction, not the epyllion proper where, excepting "TXa? 6
%av06<;, 1. 36, proper names of persons are anarthrous); xiv, 8,
30; xv, 86, 128; xvn, 26, (epic); xvm, 5, 28, 31 ; 3 xxn,
34, 140, (epic); XXVI, 1, (epic); XXVII, 1, tclv ttlvvtclv 'Eke'vav,
the only articular name of a person in the idyl ; xxviii, 17.
1 Here as in v, 62 ; xiii, 5, (' ApQirpfavos) and xv, 83, {Sivdpwiros), "Wilamowitz,
in his edition, prefers the readings without the article. Pairs in which the first
name is anarthrous, while the second, always with an attributive or apposition,
has the article, are found elsewhere in Theocritus : vu, 132 ; xxn, 34, 140 ; xxvi,
1, and similarly in the (spurious) epigram xi (in), 3.
2 This is the only place in the idyl where AA.0is is articular, tho 1. 29 we do find
the name in apposition with 6 Mtvdios. Most of the occurrences of the name are
in the ritualistic chant of the girl (21, 23 (twice), 26, 29, 50, 53, 62) and the rest
in the address to Selene (narrative) (77, 149).
3 Elsewhere in the idyl 'EX^a, without an attributive, is anarthrous ( 25, 37, 48)
as MeveXdy, also (1. 1),
The Article in Theocritus. 45
Second attributive position : in, 35 ; v, 147; vn, 98; xv, 127.
Third attributive position. An attributive added to a proper
name in this position has more often the value of an apposition,
added loosely as an afterthought. The occurrences follow : vn,
105; vin, 1; xn, 29; xiii, 36; xx, 43. So also once the
name of a divinity, n, 148.
In only five cases the article is used with the genitive of a
proper name depending upon a noun of relationship, expressed or
understood : II, G6, a rcovfiovXoio . . . y Ava^co. iv, 21, rol t<m
AafMrrpidSa, rol Ba/JLorac. XV, 97, a t<z? 'A/>7eta<? Ovydrnp ; with
names of divinities : Epigram, n (vn), 1 ; VI (xx), 1.
b. With names of divinities. In the case of names of divinities
Theocritus shows much the same latitude in the use of the article
as in the case of personal names. In fact, even excluding oaths,
the proportion of articular names of divinities is greater than that
of articular names of persons. In the epic idylls the article is
generally excluded, as we expect. Four cases occur in epic idylls,
where the article is used, but of these, two in xiii are not in the
epyllion proper (11. 1 and 11), while the other two stand together
(xxvi, 6), in a contrast. The Aeolic group furnishes two
examples, both forms of "E/ocw? (xxix, 22 ; xxx, 25), and in the
epigrams considered, four such articular names are found. In the
Doric group of idylls the article is prefixed to names of divinities
with great frequency. Of the hundred and fourteen names
(excluding oaths which will be treated below) forty-two, or 36.8
per cent, have the article. The Nymphs of wood and water, the
Muses, patrons of shepherd minstrelsy, Eros and Aphrodite,
themes of many a shepherd song, are the divinities that figure
most prominently in the list. We may believe that statues of
Nymphs, of Priapus, Pan and Dionysus were a common sight in
the groves where many of the pastoral scenes are laid. And so
these rural divinities were felt as ever present, even as their
statues — and statues, when named, regularly have the article. One
of the common cases in which the article is used is after verbs of
sacrifice and analogous expressions. (The alphabetical arrange-
ment is for convenience.)
46 The Artiole in Theocritus.
' AfufyLTphr] : xxi, 55 — 'AttoXXcqv : v, 82 ; anarthrous in epics.
<S>ot/3o? and <1>. 'AiroXXcov anarthrous, VII, 101 ; XVII, 67 ; Ilataz/,
articular, epigram n (vn), 1. — 'AfypohiTa : n, 7; x, 33; xix,
4 ; anarthrous four times in Doric idylls. Kv7r/)t9, articular five
out of thirteen times: I, 95, 105; n, 130, 131. Epigram v,
(xin), 1, on a statue of the goddess. Kvirpoyeveta anarthrous,
xxx, 31. Uacfria articular : xxvn, 14,15, 55. Kvde'peia artic-
ular: in, 46; xxiii, 16.— 'Ao>? : n, 148; xiii, 11 ; anarthrous
xviii, 26 (?). — A^eo: vii, 3. AafjLarrjp anarthrous, vn, 32, 155.
— Atowcro? : XX, 33 (?) ; XXVI, 6 ; tg>? rpels (sc. ftwixovb) to,
'ZepeXa, to>? evvea tw Aiovvaa> ; anarthrous, xxvi, 9, 27, 33, 37
(epic). — 'E/cara: n, 12. — "Ejo&>? : i, 97; tov "Epcora, spoken by
his mother (but 1. 98 : v E/9<wto? . . . apyaXeco). n, 7, 6 t' "Epw?,
with a touch of bitterness, in, 15, rov^'Epcora; the disappointed
lover speaks, x, 20, axftpovTiaTos "E/jo)?, again a lover speaking.
— xiii, 1; xxiii, 4; xxvn, 19; xxix, 22; xxx, 25. Anar-
throus as proper noun "E/>a)? occurs eight times. — Zev? : IV, 43,
the sky-god ; epigram, VI (xx), 1 ; anarthrous thirty-seven times,
twenty-five of these in epic idylls. — "Hpa : IV, 22 ; anarthrous
three times, once in Doric. — Moio-ai : I, 9, 20, ra? ftovicoXiKas
MotVa?, 144; v, 80 ; ix, 32, a Molaa icai <b§a y " my muse;" xi,
6 ; anarthrous sixteen times, seven of these in epic, one in epigram,
and six in Id. vn. UiepiSes, with the article XI, 3. In epigram
I, 2, we find rah 'TLXt/ccovido-i. — NvfjLcjzai: v, 12, 54, 140, 149.
In this idyl statues of nymphs may have been part of the
setting. 1 Nvficjxu, (Nu/nfa, viii, 93), is anarthrous four times in
Doric idylls (excluding vocatives and oaths). In I, 22, we find
rav Kpavaiav, with reference to a statue. — naz/: I, 16; V, 58.
Besides these two occurrences Yidv is articular seven times in oaths,
for which see below. It is anarthrous but twice : I, 3, /xera llara,
and iv, 63, in the plural. — IlXoOro? : x, 19, avrd? 6 II. (clvtos =
"alone"). — IIpir}7ro$: I, 21, (a statue), 81, fy& 6 U ; the speaker
sits before a statue of the god. — Upoarev^ : viii, 52 (?). — ^lefieXa :
xxvi, 6, (see above under AtoVuo-o?) ; anarthrous xxvi, 35. 2
1 See Wuestemann, to 1. 17, and cf. Fritzscke.
3 Of the names of divinities used with the article, nine are accompanied by an
The Article in Theocritus, 47
Names of divinities in oaths. 1 1. TiorC with the genitive. In
Theocritus (and the other bucolic poets, see Ameis, p. 37) the
noun in this form of oath always has the article, tho in comedy
it is sometimes, in tragedy always, anarthrous (Krueger, I, 68,
37, 2): I, 12; iv, 50; V, 74; XV, 70. So once with val ttoti,
in v, 70.
2. Nat' with the accusative. In this common form the name is
anarthrous twice, once with a common noun in an epic idyl,
XXIV, 73, >val yap ifiov yXv/cv (jzeyyos, and val Mot/oa?, II, 160.
In the following cases the article is used: n, 118; iv, 47;
V, 141 ; vi, 21 ; xv, 14; xxvn, 20, 50.
3. Ov and ov fid with the accusative. In four cases the noun
is anarthrous : iv, 17, 29 ; vn, 39 ; xi, 29. It is articular in
y, 14, 17 ; xxvn, 35. Once a common noun is used : vi, 22,
kov fi e\a6\ ov top ifiov rov eva yXv/cvv, wwep oprj/u. 2
c. Names of peoples in the plural. Theocritus in general ob-
serves the rule, according to which they are anarthrous. Of the
forty-seven occurrences of names of this class (only nine in Doric
idylls) only two have the article : XV, 93. Iie\oirovva<ncrTl
XaXeO/xe? ■ | hcopiahev 8' ef eari, So/cw, rot? AcopLeeao-i, i we are
Corinthians (Dorians, 1. 91), and who may speak Dorian if not
(we) the Dorians?' — The other case is a patronimic in the plural :
XV, 141, ol en, wporepov KairCQai /cat Aev/caXccoves.
d. Names of cities in general do not require the article. 3 In
Theocritus the article is used only in two passages in Doric idylls :
IV, 32, alveco rdv re "Kporcova ■ Ka\a ttoXl? • d re Zd/cvvOos. —
XV, 126, a MtXaro? ipei. Without the article such names occur
adjective in the first attributive position (i, 20 ; n, 12 ; m, 46 ; x, 20 ; xi, 6 ;
xni, 11 ; xx, 33 (?) ; xxi, 55 ; xxx, 25) , one with an adjective in the third
position (n, 148).
1 Fuller, p. 74 ; Ameis, p. 37 ; Krueger, 50, 5, 9 ).
2 Fritzsche interprets : " nee me latuit, non (latuit) hunc meum unicum dulcem
(oculum)," and so most editors. Two passages in Herondas, cited ad loc. by
Cholmeley for a different purpose, support the interpretation which makes oi rbv
iixbv k. t. i. an oath, viz., V, 59, /id toijtovs tovs 860 ; vi, 23, fia rotirovs roils
yXvKias, sc. 6<pda\ixofc. Compare also the oath cited above from the epic xxiv, 73.
3 Kallenberg, Philol., xlix, 536; Blass, Eh. M., xuv, 13.
48 The Article in Theocritus.
eighteen times in epic, eleven in Doric, and twice in Aeolic
idylls.
e. Names of rivers. With such names Theocritus uses the
article three times, in Doric idylls, in referring to neighboring
streams: IV, 24; V, 123 (cf. 124, ' 1 fie pa anarthrous); VII, 1.
Names of rivers are anarthrous eighteen times in Doric, nine times
in epic, even when iroTafios is added, as in vn, 75, 112.
f. Names of mountains and promontories. With names of this
class the article is found three times, twice with an attributive :
IV, 19; XI, 47; once where the name stands in apposition: IV,
33, to 7roTaq>ov to Aaiciviov} Names of this class are found
without the article seventeen times in Doric, five in epic idylls.
g. Names of islands have the article in two instances: I, 125,
e7rl vao-ov tclv ^iKeXdv ; XV, 126, tclv *2afiiav < sc. vaaov or
yav >. Such names are anarthrous twice in Doric idylls, once in
Aeolic with raero?, five times in epic.
h. Names of countries are rare in Theocritus and never have
the article. Three cases were found in Doric idylls — xiv, 68 ;
XVIII, 20, 'AxauSa yalav, 31.
i. Names of seas are also rare. Only one example was found
in Doric and that in adjective form, with the article : viii, 56,
tclv l£itee\dv t e? aka. The five instances in epic all stand
without the article. Of other bodies of water, a lake is men-
tioned, xvi, 84, without the article. A spring is mentioned with
the article, its name in adjective form : v, 126, a Su/Sapm?
<sc. Trnyq or icpdva^>, but elsewhere such names are anarthrous,
so : vii, 6, 115 ; xvi, 102.
k. Names of vessels and statues, Attic Greek regularly used
with the article. 2 In Theocritus the 'Apyco, ship of the Argo-
nauts, is mentioned in the epyllion of Id. xiii, without the
article, lines 21, 28, 74. In Id, xxn, 27, *H fiev . . . 'Apyv,
the article is substantival. Names of statues with the article have
1 But here a temple of Hera on the promontory may be meant. Cf. Schol. in
cd. Med. 37, Ziegler, " Scholia," p. 100, and for iroraQov (-rrpoarjcpov) of a temple
cf. Plut. Themistocles, viii, 2, 10.
2 Schmidt, pp. 16 and 13.
The Article in Theocritus. 49
already been spoken of (see above under Nv/4$at and Hpiniros).
In Id. XXIII, 58, we find teal ttotI top Seov rj\0e, top vfipio-e,
where a statue of Eros is meant, and in the epigrams, v, (xiii),
1, 7) Kvirpts; VI, (XX), 88' . . atvrjp | . . . IleLcravSpos; VIII, (xvil),
1, xwvrjp 6 tclv KcdfiwhCav evpeov 'E7r^a/3/ao?, all of which are
inscribed on statues of the persons named.
1. Names of festivals of the gods are anarthrous in inscriptions
of the best period. 1 In Theocritus two such names occur, one
with the article: V, 83, (e/x* oyiroWcov faXeei fieya) . . . t« Be
Kdpvea (Apollo's festival) tcai 8rj tyepirei. The SaXvaia are
mentioned, vn, 3, without the article.
m. Names of constellations are anarthrous save in vii, 54 :
XcopCav, and here corruption is easy for /ea>ptW <Morelius ed.,
ap. Ahrens>. In the same idyl "A/3/cto? is anarthrous (112).
Other names of constellations occur only in epic idylls.
n. Names of winds are anarthrous (vn, 53; ix, 11 ; x, 46),
except in one passage : vii, 58, %a\/«/oVe? GTopeaevvri . . . | top re
NoVoz/ top t' JLvpov.
o. Tho not strictly to be classed as proper names, the nouns
denoting natural divisions of time are by their definite nature akin
to proper names and may be treated here conveniently. Here
belong primarily the names of the seasons of the year. In Attic 2
they appear with or without the article, the latter principally in
prepositional phrases. In Theocritus de'pos alone appears with the
article, in Doric idylls : vi, 16 ; vin, 78 ; ix, 12 ; xxi, 23, 26.
These nouns are used freely without the article, ten times in Doric
idylls, and six times in idylls of the epic group.
Like the seasons may be viewed also the lesser divisions of time,
wf and a/jLap. s r Afiap is used but once with the article, in the
plural : XXI, 23, octoi ras vvktcls 'ifyaaicov | tw Oepeos /juvvdetv,
ore Ta/jLara /xarcpa <f>epei, Zevs, where the article is generic. Of
the twenty anarthrous forms of this word, eight stand in epic
idylls, and of the others, five are used in prepositional phrases.
J See Meisterhans, Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften,* p. 228.
2 Krueger, i, 50, 2, 12.
3 Krueger, I, 50. 2, 12 and 47, 2, A. 1 and 2.
50 The Article in Theocritus.
Nvf occurs more frequently with the article, twice in the accusative
denoting extent (anarthrous once in the plural, II, 86, with he/ca) :
x, 18 ; XI, 77. So in comedy the article always accompanies vvktcl
in this construction. 1 Other cases of vv% with the article are : xi,
44 (generic) ; xxi, 28 (" the present night ") ; and in the plural,
generic, xxi, 22, 25. Nuf is anarthrous nine times in Doric
idylls in expressions of time.
p. Here may be considered also xpovos, OaXaaaa and 777,
which, like proper names, are definite, and do not require the
article, unless a particular time, sea, or land is indicated. 2
X/00V0? is articular three times : 11, 92, 6 he ^popo? avvro (f>ev<ycov,
possibly with anaphora, "that time," "those days of longing."
— xiv, 70 ; xxiii, 28, both times generic, with semipersonifica-
tion. — SdXaaaa is found with the article : VII, 57 (generic, of
the whole sea, cf. Vergil, Eel., IX, 57) — XI, 43, rav ry\av/cav he
OaXaacrav, cf. 1. 62, top fivdov, " that deep of yours." In xxi,
17, a he . . . OaXaao-a, the article is substantival. In Doric
idylls OaXaaaa is twice anarthrous (vi, 27 ; XI, 49). — r^ (7a) :
XI, 79, ev tcl 7a fcrj<yd)v rt? (j>aivofjLaL elfMev. Here Ameis (p. 15),
and Fritzsche : "in hac terra;" cf. Hiller. But Kiessling better:
" Non ( in patria/ sed in terra continent!, quam opponit mari, in
quo Galatea, aqua repudiatur, degit." But ev 7a, "on land," is
phraseological, and the article would ordinarily be omitted. —
XIX, 4, tclv yav eirdra^e, " the ground." — xxx, 3, ra9 7a?, " the
earth." With definite reference the word is twice anarthrous in
Doric idylls (viii, 53 ; xvm, 20).
r. BacriXev?, in the singular, referring to a definite individual,
occurs twice in Doric idylls, with the article: xv, 22, 51.
^aaiXeia (BaaiXiao-a) is used once with the article, XV, 24, with
reference to Ptolemy's queen, while in xxvn, 29, rerj BaaiXeia
is anarthrous in the predicate.
7. The generic article* With a noun in the singular, the
1 Fuller, p. 46. Compare also the neuter adverbial expressions rb fieaauPpivdv,
etc., 1, 15 ; iv, 3 ; v, 113, 126 ; x, 48, and rb Kav/ia, "aestus per medios," x, 51.
2 Kuelmer, § 462, /. ; Krueger, 1, 50, 2, 15.
3 Compare above, introd.
The Article in Theocritus. 51
generic article points out an individual as the representative of its
class. If the noun used with the generic article is of a nature that
it can be used only in the singular, because the only one of its class,
the article shows that it is conceived as a whole, complete in all
its parts. When the generic article is» used with a noun in the
plural, all the individuals of the class are taken together and
conceived in their relation to one another, as members of the same
genus. In all cases there is anaphora in the widest sense of the
term, since individuals or classes cannot be designated with the
article unless they have previously to some extent come within the
experience of the hearer. Hence, in the definition of objects
entirely unknown, the article is unnecessary, except in cases where
the nature of the substantive, or the need of distinguishing subject
and predicate, demands the presence of the article. The exact
limitations of the use of the generic article cannot be defined.
Theocritus uses the article with nouns in this sense freely and
at times abundantly.— (Cf. Id. I, 133 ff. ; vm, 76 IF. ; ix, 7-8 ;
x, 30-31). The fact that it is never obligatory (cf. Gildersleeve,
" Problems," p. 122), makes its free employment in the Doric idylls
a characteristic of the naive speech of the characters in these idylls.
In Homer the generic article is rare l and so we are not surprised
to find that it does not occur with nouns in the epic idylls of
Theocritus.
a. With singular nouns. This is the more common use in
Theocritus and occurs as follows: I, 72, 87; 132 fif., a he KaXa
vdp/acraos , a ttitvs, G>\a<£o? (ra? tcvvas, rol oveft>7r€?) ; III, 13 ; IV,
16 ; v, 130 ; VI, 7 ; VIII, 76 (2), 79-80, ra Spvl (ral fiakavoi),
ra fiaXiSi (/-taXa), ra ftol, a ixoa^os, ra> ftov/coXcp (at fides) ;
IX, 7 (2), 8 (2) ; x, 28 (2), 30—31, a atf, tclv /cvtmtov, 6 Xu/co?,
rav alya, a yepavos, rwporpov, 47, 52 ; XII, 14 ; XV, 58, rov
tyvxpov 6<f>Lv (preceded by lttttov without article ; the article
visualizes, hence emphasizes the unpleasant), 83 ; xxi, 33, 6Q ;
xxiii, 28, 29, 30, 31 j xxvn, 3, 9.
b. With plural nouns : I, 80, rol (Sovtcii, rol 7rot/ieVe?, wttoXol
(v. 1. aliroXoi), 90, 135, 136; n, 35; m, 26, 53; IV, 11,
^rueger, n, 50, 4.
52 The Article in Theocritus.
to)? Xv/eo? ; V, 111, 112, ras Saavfcep/cos aXtoireicas , 114, tq>?
Kavddpo?, 1 125 ; VI, 16; vn, 57, 120; vm, 38, 44, 48 (2), 49,
79; X, 29, a\X efJLiras ev rot? arefydvoL? ra irpara Xeyovrai, 2
44 ; XV, 28, ai ya\eai (perhaps, however, a term of reproach
applied to the awkward* Eunoe) ; xxi, 22, 23 ; xxx, 15 ;
Berenike fr., 2, ra SUrua.
c. With abstract nouns. As with concrete nouns, so with
abstracts the generic article is not obligatory, and it is impossible
to establish sharp differences everywhere between articular and
anarthrous abstracts as Kuehner for example does. 3 The article
with an abstract noun may be intended to designate not only an
individual phase of the abstract in a particular relation, with
anaphora, but also all phases and relations gathered into a single
concept — a strictly generic sense. The sphere of Theocritean poetry
precludes the free use of abstract nouns as such, and simple
abstracts are consequently not numerous. A tendency to personi-
fication is noted in a number of instances and in other cases there is
distinct anaphora. For convenience the arrangement of examples is
alphabetical, akyos xx, 16 (anaphora) — e/)a>? n, 63; XI, 1, 80;
xxiii, 9 ; xxx, 9 ; with anaphora in n, 63 and xi, 80. Otherwise
articular only with attributives : I, 93 ; n, 69, etc. (refrain) ; x, 57 ;
XIV, 26 ; xxiii, 43. As a common noun e/>a>? is anarthrous twelve
times in Doric idylls, five of these with prepositions. fcdWos
xxiii, 32 (with attrib.). In n, 83, /cdWos is concrete. — XaOos
xxiii, 24 (anaphora) — neXwfia xiv, 2 (anaphora) — poxOos xxi,
2 (concrete in xvi, 60) — irevia xxi, 1, 16 (personification in both)
1 The relative clauses which follow the last two nouns are causal, and in 112
5a<rvK4picos is an epithet.
2 Fritzsche notes correctly : " in coronis vel nectendis vel a nobis conspectis (si
quis nectit coronas vel si nexas cum gaudio contemplamur). ,, Objection to rots,
-and its position in the verse, at the penthemimeral caesura, where it receives
undue emphasis according to Hermann (Opusc, v, 89), led the latter to emend
to iv to?s <rre(f)dvio (cdd. p. D., tu a-T€<pdpo}) and so Ameis (p. 9). But Fritzsche
shows (ad loc. and to viii, 5) that the verse is to be read with a caesura after
€/j.Tras and after arecp&vois. On the other hand iv rots with superlatives seems
to be decidedly a prose use. See Krueger, i, 49, 10, 6.
3 § 461, 1, 2. Cf. Krueger, I, 50, 3, 3 and 4 and Hist. Philol. Studien, n, p.
60, and see Gildersleeve, 1. c.
The Article in Theocritus. 53
— ttoOos xxx, 21 (semipersonification) — <£tXoT??<? xn, 20 (with
possessive). It is anarthrous as abstract xvi, 66 ( e pi°) j xviii,
54. — (frpovrfc xxi, 28 (personification and anaphora) — %a/w? V, 37
(generic-semipersonification) — XP^t xa XXI > ^*>. ^ n xv ? 1^5 (cf.
xviii, 4) the word is concrete. Here nfay be put also /ea>/xa>oYa,
epigram vm (xvn), 1.
8. The article with words and phrases used as substantives. The
use of the article with substantivized words and phrases was
recognized by Apollonius in all cases save apparently with
participles. 1 The use is so familiar that it requires no detailed
discussion here. With substantivized words and phrases the article
appears in all its functions, particular and generic. In the idylls
of Theocritus the particular use is far the more common one. In
the epic idylls cases of this use of the article are infrequent,
especially in the two idylls where Homeric lines are most closely
followed, xxn and xxv.
a. With adjectives. Most frequent are the cases where the
article stands with substantivized adjectives. 2
a. Particular: Masculine. II, 112, waTopyos. in, 4, rbv
ivop^av ; 24, 6 Svo-aoos. VII, 5, ^aSiv ra>v iirdvcoOev ; 96, o SetXo?;
119, o Svo-nopos. 3 xn, 23; xiv, 29; xv, 8, 12, 42, 53; xx,
18, 44; xxin, 37; xxix, 20. Epigram, vi (xx). 2, rbv
Xeovrofjudxav, rbv o^v^eipa.
Feminine. I, 49, rav rpco^Lfiov (sc. crra^vXrjv). 4, II, 72, 138 ;
V, 51, 100 ; xv, 43, 145, a OrjXeia, the singer present, xviii, 4.
Neuter. (Neuters used adverbially with the article are not
included here). I, 20, /cal t&$ ftovtcoXacas eirl to irXeov i/ceo
Moio-as. Here as in vm, 17, rb rrXeov seems to be " the prize." 5
1 Cf. introduction and below under " participles " .
2 Cf . Gildersleeve, Syntax, § 28 ff.
3 Ameis cites rbv &lvov from this passage and elsewhere as a substantivized
adjective. Its use as a noun had become so fixed that it was no longer felt as
a substantivized adjective in the sense in which it is here used.
4 It is unnecessary to take the article here as Fritzsche (ed. 1869) took it,
"seine Appetitstraube, . . . die zum Essen bestimmte Traube," comparing t&
didaKTpa, vm, 86. Tb.v Tpd)£ifwi> is the edible fruit on the vine (1. 46).
5 So Fritzsche, but Cholmeley insists that rb ir\4ov does not equal d/cpo^ (Haupt,
Opusc, ii, 312), but expresses simply a degree definitely higher than that reached
54 The Article in Theocritus.
II, 36, 143. — in, 27, to 76 fxav reov ahv rervKraL. 1 IV, 45 ; V,
71 ; vin, 17 ; xiv, 11 ; xv, 78 ; xvi, 42 ; xvn, 118 ; xx, 31,
ra S' aarifcd fi ov/c ifylXwo-ev — " that baggage (Euneike) with
her city airs/ 7 with contemptuous reference to her own words
(1. 4) ; not " those town girls," as Cholmeley translates. — xxiv,
72; xxvi, 24; xxix, 5; xxx, 4.
/3. Generic : Singular. The generic singular is rare and outside
of neuter forms occurs but once : x, 17, rov akiTpov. The neuter
is found in three places : xx, 19, to /cpijyvov, equivalent to an
abstract noun ; xxix, 6, to 8e Xonrov, " all the rest." Epigram,
IV (xn), 4, to tcaXov. Plural. In the plural again most of the
cases are neuter, but a few masculines and feminines do occur :
XXI, 44. Epigram, VII (xvi), 5. — I, 87, t<z? /za/eaSa?. 2 The
remaining cases are all neuters : in, 31, TaXaOea " the truth."
vi, 19 ; vn, 127 ; vin, 42 ; xiii, 3 ; xiv, 50 ; xxvi, 32.
b. With Participles. It has been said (see introduction) that
Apollonius did not recognize the use of the article with substan-
tivized participles except in the case of a few stereotyped forms.
As a matter of fact, because of their adjectival character, partici-
ples are treated in this respect exactly as adjectives are treated.
Apollonius himself takes up cases where the participle is used as an
by others, just as vin, 17 is according to him "the advantage," as v, 71. That
there are, however, cases in Theocritus where there is a confusion of superlative
and comparative is shown by Legrand (p. 311), who cites our passage. See, how-
ever, also Wilamowitz, Textgeschichte, p. 50, note. Taken in connection with the
preceding, the meaning is clear: "you sang rb. Ad<pvi5os <£\7ea and won the
prize (t'fcco aorist) for pastoral minstrelsy" — with a possible reference to the
very contest mentioned, line 24.
1 Fritzsche : "ad te quod attinet, tu quod sentis <t6 re6p^> suave, hilare,
laetum erit <d5i> t£tvktoll>." Compare schol. cd. /c, "rb <rbv fiipos." This con-
struction is common enough (see Fritzsche, ad loc. ) and is found in Pindar,
Pyth., xi, 41 (cf. Pyth., v, 72). Meineke, however, followed by Hiller, renders:
"tua tibi voluptaseffectaest," connecting rb rebv ctStf, and similarly Ameis (p. 11)
and Snow. Cholmeley objects to this version on the ground that rb rebv AM
" could only mean 'your sweetness.' " But Aristotle, (BheL, i, 1354, b. 11) fur-
nishes an exact parallel in iirnxKoireip rrj Kpicrei rb Ulov r}bi> 1) \vir-qpbv.
2 Like £etvos, /x-qKds, "the bleating one," had practically become a noun. In
the Thesauros of Stephanos but one instance is cited where /^/cds is used as an
adjective of something besides a goat, Soph., Frg. Amphiar. Nauck Fr. 466,
nr)K&8os /3o6s.
The Article in Theocritus. 55
adjective in the first attributive position, 1 and with ' 6 Tvpavvo/cTovrjaas
TifjLcLo-Oco ' he illustrates a generic use of the article which he
characterizes as TrpoXwTrTiK&Tepov. 2,
In Theocritus substantivized participles with the article do not
occur in the strictly epic idylls and they were probably not used
by Homer. As in the case of adjectives the generic use is to be
distinguished from the particular.
a. Particular. Here the anaphoric value of the article appears
in all its phases, with reference to definite persons or things :
XI, 19, tov fyiXeovra. XIII, 68, tcov irapeovTwv. This is the
only idyl of the epic group that shows examples of this type.
Two other cases, both generic, occur in the same poem. (See be-
low.) xv, 47, 6 t€kq)v, 3 54, 77. xxin, 3, 62-63, toI tyXeovTes,
6 fucrwv, ol /Mo-evvres. xxix, 9, 18. — Here belong also those cases
where the participle with the article is used in apposition with a
noun or pronoun. So with nouns : I, 63, 'AtSav tov eicXdOovTa,
120, 121. xni, 7 ; xiv, 53. Epigram, iv (xn), 1 ; viii (xvn), 1.
— With pronouns : xxviii, 8 \ xxix, 32. Three cases may also
be mentioned, where the participle with the article precedes a
proper name : ill, 32, %a irpav iroioXoyevcra TXapaifiark ; 49, 6
rbv arpoTTOv vttvov lavcov | 'Ev£i//lmW ; V, 4, tov fiev tclv avpcyya
irpoav K\e-\jravTa KofjLaTav. Of these the first and the last have
been enumerated above among proper names with the article, but
in the remaining case, the position of 'Ez^u/uW at the head of
the following verse indicates that the participle was felt as an
appositive.
13. Generic: Singular, viii, 17, 6 vi/cwv, "the winner," 48.
X, 53; XI, 75, tclv irapeolaav afxeXye. tl tov <f>evyovTa Sta/ceLS
(proverbial). XII, 13, 16 ; XIV, 62, tov <f>tXeovTa, tov ov fyikeovTa
(= tov fJuaevvTa, hence ov. Cf. VI, 17). xv, 25, 48, 126. The
only generic neuter singulars are: xxin, 27, to fieWov, and
epigram iv (xn), 4, to Trpocrfj/cov.
1 Syntax I, 34, p. 68, Bekker.
2 Synt, p. 27.
A T€K&v had become so thoroughly substantivized as to be construed with a
dependent genitive ; f. L, Eur. Elec, 335; Ion., 308 ; Ale, 167.
56 The Article in Theoci'itus.
Plural, x, 8, tcov aireovrayv ; XII, 2, oi 8e 7ro0evvT€<; ; XIII, 66
(epic); xxiii, 24; xxix, 30; xxx, 15. — Actual omissions of
this article with substantivized adjectives and participles are rare
outside of the epic idylls. In the Doric idylls we may note : in,
47, iirl irXeov . . . XiWa? ; XV, 27, e? fjueaov, both phraseological ;
xv, 142; vi, 17; vm, QQ.
c. With adverbs. Three cases are to be distinguished here;
first, when the adverb is used as a noun, second, when it is used as
an adjective, third, when it preserves its adverbial character.
a. Used as nouns. This use of the article is denied to Homer.
Where forms of the article stand with adverbs they are explained
as demonstratives. 1 Occurrences of this use in Theocritus are
infrequent, two in epic. — V, 28, rbv irXarlov ; x, 3, tw Tfkarlov, 9,
twv eKToOev ; xiii, 4, to S' avptov; XVI, 13, rcov vvv (taken by Ameis,
p. 6, as demonstrative, in the Homeric manner) ; xxv, 216, to
fieo-nyv. Epigr. VII (xvi), 4, toiv TrpoaOe.
/3. Used as attributive adjectives, with nouns expressed or under-
stood, generally in the first attributive position. One instance of
this use and the first position is cited from Homer, II. xiv, 274.
Two cases appear in epic idylls : xxn, 38, at 8 virevepOev
| XaXkai — where the article may be considered demonstrative, and
xxv, 236, o irplv (sc. oto-To?). The remaining cases are I, 24 ;
vn, 136 ; xv, 141 ; xxx, 21. Epigram, vi (xx), 3. Once we
find the adverb with the article following the noun, like the
appositive use in Homer, 1 f. i. II. ix, 559, and Od. xxn, 220.
The case in Theocritus is vn, 5, x a ^ v ™ v eTrdvcodev.
7. Preserving their adverbial character. 2 This use is frequent
enough in Homer, and with adverbial accusatives of adjectives is
found in Pindar. 3 The article is not restricted to local and
temporal adverbs, but these categories cover most cases. In
Theocritus the construction is frequent in Doric idylls, and three
cases occur in epic. Temporal adverbs or neuter adjectives are
1 Foersteinann, p. 19.
2 Krueger, 1, 50, 5, 10 and 13. 11, 50, 5, 10 and 11. Kuehner, § 461, 6.
3 Stein, p. 40.
The Article in Theocritus. 57
the most common. I, 41, kclijlvovtl to tcaprepov. Ill, 3, TiTvp 1
i/julv to kclXov 7re(f)i\r)fjL€ve. 1 ill, 18, to kclXov 7ro0op(baa. Other
cases are the following : Temporal: I, 15 ; II, 144 ; IV, 3 ; V, 13,
113, 126; x, 2, 29, 48; xv, 15; xvn, 75; xx, 21; xxn, 4;
xxv, 240; xxiii, 40. — Adverbs of manner : in, 18; vii, 59,
98 ; xv, 58. — Omission of the article may be noted in I, 34,
kclXov, VII, 21, fieo-afjLeptov ; 2 VIII, 16, iroOeairepa.
d. With prepositional jihrases. Masculine and feminine forms
to designate persons do not occur in Theocritus, a. The purely
substantive use of prepositional phrases occurs only in the neuter
in four instances : x, 14, to, irpo Ovpav. xxvin, 25, to, Trap <f>CX(p.
XXII, (epic) 22, tcl 777909 ttXoov, 61, to, t ef ifiev (sc. gevca). — /3.
The appositive use of articular prepositional phrases, found also in
Homer, occurs in Theocritus as follows : I, 1, a 7rn-t>? . . . ttjvcl a
ttotI tclIs irayaicri, 65, ®vpcri<? 08' a>f Atri>a? ; V, 52, 65 ; VII, 40,
151 ; xi, 7 ; xxvi, 4 (epic). Epigram, vi (xx), 4. — y. Most
common are the cases where a prepositional phrase stands in the
first attributive position : I, 30, a 8e /car' clvtov . . . e\tf, 72 ; II,
33 ; v, 47, 49', 57 ; vi, 18 ; vn, 7, 130, 138 ; xxv, 180 (epic) ;
xxvin, 17 ; xxx, 27.
e. With the infinitive. We would naturally expect but little
use of the articular infinitive in Theocritus. Doubt has been cast
on each of the three cases that are cited (from Doric idylls). In
IX, 13, tw Se Oepeos <j>pvyovTO<; i<yay too-gov fxeXehalvct) | oaaov ipebv
to TrcLTpos fivdcov Kol /jLdTpo? ciKovav, various changes are made. 3 —
No certain parallel has yet been cited for such a use of the infinitive
for a concrete noun as is found in x, 53, ov /xeXeSaivei tov to
irielv iyxevvTa. Here, as in the passage cited as parallel from
. l T6 ko\6v troubled the scholiast who explains : tfyovv 81a to kcLWos 4/xol ire<f>i\.
• 7} olptI tov xaXws . fj 5ia t6 koXov . . . J) to KaXbv olvtI tov \tav. Editors ( Cholme-
ley ad loc., Fritzsche to 1, 41) cite as parallels to this use of the article with neuter
adjectives for adverbs of quality, Lucian, Amor. 26, voucivdois t6 ko\ov avdovaiv
(cf. ib. 3), Herondas, 1, 54, Anthol. Pal., vn, 219, Callim., Ep. 52, and others
(see Legrand, p. 308), which show that the construction is late. As in the case
of other adverbs, the article lends definiteness. Cf. 1, 34, where the article is
omitted.
2 Now probably correctly read r6 fxea. by Wilamowitz for tv /j.e<r.
3 See Fritzsche' s critical note.
58 The Article in Theocritus.
Anthol. Pal. xii, 34, 4 : el? efyepev to <j>ayelv, eh Se irielv eSiBov,
changes have also been made to avoid the article, tho most editors
keep the reading given. The verbs used here, belonging as they
do to ;the sphere of vulgar language would be especially prone to
such an extension of the articular infinitive. 1 In xi, 60, vvv av to
ya velv /jbepLadev/jLcu, editors generally write avTo ya, clvtoOl or
similar forms.
9. The article with appositive nouns, a. When a noun is used
in apposition with another noun, it takes the article if it does not
simply express an attribute or predicate, but adds a definite and
distinguishing characteristic. The article then has anaphoric
value. Apollonius 2 lays it down as a law, that an appositive
added to a proper noun always takes the article : tol Be eirideTiKa
eirdv o-vvTaacrnTat KVpiois ovofiaai, ttclvtws o~vv apOpois \eyeTai,
el fjLrj tcl inrap/CTLfcd t&v pn/JLctTcov eirKpepotTo. This is too general
a statement, since numerous cases arise where the appositive stands
without the article. 3 As a matter of fact, the rule stated at the
beginning of this paragraph applies also in the case of proper
names followed by an appositive, for if the appositive simply adds
an attribute which does not distinguish the individual the article
is unnecessary. 4 For Theocritus we may cite in, 31, a Tpaioo . . .
fcocr/av6/JLavTL<; (?). VII, 3 f. teal <£>pao-i8afJL0$ | /c' 'AvTiyevvs Svo
TeKva Avfcvpeos. vili, 93 ; XIV, 24 ; XXVIII, 6 ; XXIX, 38.
Epigr., vn, 2, and others, besides many in epic idylls. Only
two cases are cited below from an epic idyl where the appositive
has the article, xiii, 5, and 19, of which the former is not in the
epyllion proper. For cases where the proper name also has the
article, see above under proper names.
a. The appositive may precede, and then it has the greater
emphasis : I, 113, tov /3ovto,v vi/cco Ad<f>viv. ill, 43 ; IV, 33 ; V,
80; xiii, 19; xiv, 1, 12; xv, 11, 18, 22, 110, 120; xix, 1.
Epigram, vm (xvn), 1 ; ix (xxi), 1.
*&. A. J. P., in, 195.
2 Syntax, 32, p. 65. 11, Bekker.
3 See Kuehner, § 462 A. Amn. 1.
4 Cf. Fuller, p. 66 f. for examples from Aristophanes.
The Article in Theocritus. 59
p. The appositive may follow, and then the greater emphasis is
upon the noun which it modifies: n, 146, tfrtXto-ras . . . Ta? afias
avXwrptSos. ill, 4, 26 ; IV, 21, rol tw Aa/JtTrptdSa rot BafioTcu ; "the
people (descendants) of Lampriades, the demesmen" (cf. iv, 33;
xm,5). v,10,15, 64 ; vi,44 ; vn,73 j viii,34 ; xiii,5 J xiv,13,24 ;
XV, 138, 139 ; XXI, 9 ff. rd ratv yetpotv aOXruxaTa, rol KaXa6t(Ticot,
| toI tcaXa/jtot, rdyKtcrrpa, rd (frvfctdevra SeXwra | (op fiat KvpToC re
/cat i/c o-'Xpivwv XaBvptvOot | fxrjptvOot /coma re yepcov t eir
ipeia/jLCMrt \e/x/3o?). Here rol icakaOCa-Koi, etc., are in epexegetic
apposition with rd d6\rj/jLara. The omission of the article with
the other nouns in the series is noteworthy. At first the article
retards the description. Each group of implements is a picture
by itself: " the baskets, the rods, etc.," of their trade, and then in
a rapid sweep are added, in a confused heap, " lines, wells, traps,
cords, an oar and an old boat on stays." — xxiii, 21. Epigram,
IV (xn), 1 ; vi (xx), 2. Omissions of the article with nouns
in apposition with common nouns also occur. So n, 121; VII,
11 ; xv, 97, etc., but mostly in epic idylls.
b. A common type of apposition is that where a noun
stands in apposition with a personal pronoun expressed or
understood. A noun or substantivized word standing in this
relation generally takes the article, because the reference is
necessarily definite in most cases. The appositive may precede
or follow the pronoun to which it belongs : I, 116, 6 fiov/c6\o$
. . . iycD Adfois. II, 72, iya) ... a peyaXoiTOSj 138 ; III, 19,
irpoGTTTV^ai fxe top aliroXov ) x v, 90 ; XI, 39 ; XII, 23 ; XIV,
56. XVIII, 22, a/i/xe? 8' at irdaai o-vvofAdXuces. Here at irdaai
is generally taken with avvo/jidXiKes as predicate to d/jL/ues.
It seems better, however, to take at irdarat alone, in apposi-
1 Fritzsche expands on the article here saying : ' ' hunc qualem coram vides
caprarium, h. e., qualis esse caprarius verus debet, hominem haud contemnen-
dum. Aliquoties Theocritus quum quis de se ipso atque officio suo et vitae
genere praedicat, ita ponit articulum, ut aut cum conscientia quadam dignitatis
suae ea persona, quae verba facit, loqui videatur, aut, id quod redit eodem,
officium eius notum significetur. " He compares v, 88, 90; xiv, 56. It cannot
however be maintained that in all these cases there is dvacpopa /far' k^oxhv — for
that is what Fritzsche' s note seems to say for this instance.
60 The Article in Theocritus.
tion with amies. — xx, 18; xxm, 37; xxvm, 8; xxix, 32.
Epigram, iv (xn), 2. With pronouns implied or understood we
find an articular appositive in in, 24, and xiv, 29. Here belong
those cases where the noun with the article, in the nominative
case, stands in apposition with an expressed or unexpressed voca-
tive. 1 This use, found also in Homer, is more common in the
plural, where distinct forms for the vocative are wanting, but the
singular of common as well as proper nouns is similarly found ;
so, Arist. Birds, 665, rj Upo/cvrj \ eicfiaive ; cf. ib., 1628; Plut.,
1100 ; Lucian Deor. Dial., 20, crv Be irpocnQi ty KOnva. Following
examples of plurals are found in Theocritus: 2 I, 151, at Be
Xfaaipat, | ov fir} o-KipTvarelre ; V, 100, 108 (?), 110; Vili, 67 ;
xxin, 62, 63. — In the singular are found the folloAving, all
names of animals : IV, 45, gitO' 6 Keirapyos (or Xeirap^os), 46,
a Kvfiaida (v. 1. v K.) ; with obros, v, 102, 147. In I, 151, the
name of an animal is thus used without the article.
10. The article with the predicate. The fact that the predicate
usually adds something previously not known of the subject,
and is indefinite in the sense that it designates the class to which
the subject belongs, causes the predicate in most cases to stand
without the article. But when the predicate is to be regarded as
known and definite, it takes the article in the same way as other
nouns, and subject and predicate are equivalent. If the subject
itself is anarthrous the predicate cannot take the article, unless the
nature of the subject is such as to make it definite without the
article, or the predicate is a word which requires the article to
complete its meaning. 3 Cases are rare in Theocritus where an
actual predicate has the article. Id. in, 13, aide yevoifiav | a
fio/jL/Sevcra, fieXto-cra. Editors usually call the article deictic,
explaining that the speaker points to a bee that happens to be
flying about. Theocritus shows a fondness for the generic article,
and since there is nothing in the passage to indicate emphatic
1 See Gildersleeve, Syntax, § 13 ; Krueger, i, 45, 2, 6 ; n, 50, 7, 4.
2 Cf. Ameis, p. 17.
8 See especially J. Dornseiffen. o. c, and A. Proksch, o. c, who eliminated
many cases of articular nouns falsely understood as predicates. This special work
has however yielded little that is not in the grammars.
The Article in Theocritus. 61
deixis, it seems better to call the article here generic. — xxi, 14,
outo? toIs aXievaiv 6 7r<z? Tropos, ovtos 6 ttXovtos. The article has
possessive value. (Outo? by attraction for Tavra, referring to the
list of implements described in the preceding lines). — xxi, 36,
aW* ovos ev pd/j,va> to re \vyyiov ev irpvTaveiw : u he is (like) an
ass in the bramble, and the (proverbial) light in the Prytaneum."
Ameis, (p. 4), reading to Be (mss. ; to re is Kaupt's correction),
takes the article as substantive subject with \vyyiov predicate.
(Cf. Hermann, Opusc. v, 112).
In other cases that have been cited as instances of articular
predicates, the articular noun is to be taken as subject (so where
one member of a sentence is an interrogative pronoun, f. i. xiv,
2, tl Be tol to fjbeXrjfia). This is true of XXI, 33, otrro? apLCTTOS
oveipo/cpLTas, 6 SiSda/caXos io-Tt 7ra/o' a> vovs, which Ameis, (p. 19),
renders : " cui mens est pro suo magistro." 'O faMcr/cako? etc.,
logically answers the question ti? 6 StSda/caXos with the predicate
i/oO?. — In x, 29, t& irpaTa has been taken adverbially (see above)
while at iracraL in xvin, 22, has been construed as in apposition
with the subject a/x^e? (see above under 9 b).
Somewhat different are the cases where an articular noun stands
as indirect predicate after verbs of making, calling, and similar
verbs. So, f. i., viii, 17, tl Be to irXeov e^el 6 vlk<ov. Here ti
ifkeov would simply mean "what more" while rC to irXeov is
" what is the prize the victor will get." Compare viii, 86 and
in, 7.
11. The article with nouns accompanied by attributive adjectives.
When the article is used with a noun accompanied by an attribu-
tive adjective, the adjective may occupy one of three positions.
These positions are regularly designated as the first, second and
third attributive position respectively, as the adjective stands
between the article and the noun, or follows the articular noun
with an article of its own, or with its own article follows the
anarthrous noun. 1 Of these positions the first is logically the
simplest, and is therefore designated by Aristotle (Rhet. 1407,
b. 37) as the position which contributes to o-vvTOfjuia in composi-
1 See Milden, " Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek," introd.
62 The Article in Theocritus.
tion. In the second position each article has its own value. 1
Aristotle mentions this position (1. c. line 36) as one of the
elements that contribute to oy/cos in composition, and it has been
called the "oratorical" position. In the third position the noun
is stated simply, without being indicated as definite or known,
and the adjective with its article is added much like an after-
thought to explain the noun. Aristotle does not directly mention
this position. Professor Gildersleeve has called it the position
that " is, or affects to be, easy " and " familiar/' 2 and has pointed
out that its interpretation depends upon the grammatical stage of
the language. " When the article is still largely implicit, when
vuh is 6 vlos then uto? 6 e/^o? = 6 wo? o eyuo?. When it is explicit,
then vlos 6 e/io? has a decidedly naive effect, the afterthought
o ifjuk is a grata neglegentia, a slipshoddiness of the Greeks."
Since poetry can omit the article, can resort to the implicit arti-
cle, the third position may be used as a poetical equivalent for the
second position. This is especially the case where the noun has
more than one attributive, as, f. i., it/, xvi, 44, I, 126.
Of the three positions, the first is far the most common in
Theocritus, while the second is the least common, and the third is
only about one fourth as common as the first position. Where
the adjective is a possessive, the first position is regular in
Theocritus, only one instance of each of the other positions being
found.
a. First attributive position : I, 3, 7, 13, 20, 61, 133, 146 ;
ii, 12, 94, 102, 115, 118, 126, 156; m, 5, 46, 49, 13 (parti-
ciple); iv, 19, 40, 59; v, 17, 24, 87, 101, 112; VI, 11, 16
(twice), 36 ; vn, 10, 39, 65, 87, 118, 121, 123, 132, 152 ; vm,
47, 49, 56, 62, 86 ; x, 20, 24, 28, 41 ; XI, 6, 8, 35, 39, 43, 47,
53; xn, 20, 28, 35; xm, 5, 7, 11, 16, 19 ; xiv, 8, 12, 26 ;
xv, 4, 33, 34, 51, 58, 81, 86, 110, 128; xvi (epic), 22; xvn
(epic), 26; xvm, 5, 19, 28, 31; xx, 5, 33; xxi, 10, 14, 19,
26, 55, QQ, 67; xxn (epic), 34, 140, 189; xxm, 51; xxiv
1 Apollonius Synt., I, 40, p. 80, 12, Bekker, twp 56o dpdpuv 56o ava<popas
8ia<popovs SrfkotivTuv.
2 See his Justin Martyr A. ; 6, 7 ; A. J. P., vi, 262, xvn, 518.
The Article in Theocritus. 63
(epic), 61 (aWos), 63 ; XXVI (epic), 1, 24 (aWo?) ; xxvii, 1 ;
xxvm, 23 j xxix, 16, 37 ; xxx, 25. Epigram, I, 1, 3. For
adverbs and prepositional phrases used attributively in this position
see above under 8 c and d.
b. Second attributive position. No examples of this position are
found in epic idylls save xiii, 6, and this does not stand in the
epyllion proper. Following examples occur: iv, 20; v, 99, 108 ;
vn, 98 ; viii, 27 ; xiii, 6 ; xv, 127. Epigram, I, 1. Here may
be mentioned also v, 11, to Kpo/cv\o<; /jlol eBw/ce, to ttouciXov,
answering the question to irolov . . . voucos. The adjective takes
this position in three cases where the noun is accompanied by a
demonstrative: I, 23; v, 147. Epigram, in (x), 2. Similarly
once with <zuto'?, v, 14. Four instances where a prepositional
phrase stands in this position have been cited above, under 8 d yS. 1
c. Third attributive position. The addition to proper names of
an adjective in this position has already been discussed (see 6 a
end). Outside the sphere of proper names the following cases
have been noted : I, 124 ; in, 37 ; v, 36 ; viii, 74, \6yov . . .
top irucpop (vv. 11.); X, 18 ; XI, 46, afiireXo^ a yXv/cv/capiros ; 2
xxi, 8 ; xxni, 32; xxv (epic) 27 ; xxix, 19 ; and with a pre-
ceding demonstrative, II, 30. 3
d. When the articular noun is accompanied by two or more
attributive modifiers, Attic prose usage permits a choice of positions
within certain limitations. 4 Stated generally, the rule is, that,
when two attributives without a conjunction are joined to a noun
by means of the article, usually either both stand between the
article and noun, or one (or even both) follows the noun with the
article repeated. According to Krueger, when both attributives
are adjectives, they are usually both inserted in the first position
1 For cases where one of two adjective attributives takes this position see below
under d.
2 In this description put into the mouth of the Cyclops, the omission of the
article with the other nouns is noteworthy. The Cyclops emphasizes what is good
to eat and drink, the product of the vine (cf. Legrand, 307, 364). Note that in
English also the vine par excellence is the grape).
3 For participles, adverbs and prepositional phrases in this position see above
under 8, and for cases where the noun has more than one attributive see below.
4 Krueger, i, 50, 9 ff . Kuehner, § 464, 7.
64 The Article in Theocritus.
only when one adjective forms a single concept with the noun, and
the other adjective modifies the complex. In Homer ! the com-
bination of two attributives with an articular noun is rare, and in
most cases both attributives stand between the article and the noun.
This is also the most common position in Theocritus. With two
adjectives we find the following cases : n, 3, tov ipov < fiapvv
evvray* <f>i\ov . . . avSpa ; x, 57 ; XV, 138. Where one modifier
is an adjective, the other a genitive or some other modifier, the
inside position for both attributives is found : I, 92, tov clvtco . . .
TTiKpov epcora; vii, 80, 136, 138; xvi, 90 (epic); xviii, 6. In
one case two adjectives joined by ical take this position : xxx, 1 ,
teal tco ^aXeiro) /calvo/jiopco rtwSe vo<rr)\xaTOS. In V, 84, a predicate
adjective is inserted by hyperbaton : irXav hvo ra<z Xoittcls BiSvfJia-
to'/co? al<ya<; afxeXyco (cf. Ameis, p. 15).
In one instance two attributive adjectives, each with an article,
precede the noun : VI, 22, tov ifibv tov eva yXv/cvv. Compare
Thuc, 8, 23, 4, raZ? yu,e#' eavTod vavcrl teal Tah Tpurl tclIs Xtat?
iraperrXei, and other examples cited by Kuehner, § 464, 7, c. (cf.
Ameis, p. 21). — In xin, 5, oo/JLcjiLTpvcDvos 6 %a\«;eo*;a/?Sio? wd?, o?
tov Xlv vTrefjLeive, — o %a\/e. vl<h is in apposition with the elliptical
(dflfaTpVCDVOS.
In a few cases one attributive precedes with the article, while
the other follows with the article repeated: I, 141, tov MotVat?
(f)iXov avBpa, tov ov Nv/jlcJxilo-iv a7re^^. II, 70, a ©et^a/Jt'Sa
Opaaaa Tpo(j>6<; a iLoucaplTis | ayxfflvpos vaiovcra; 2 VII, 39; XIII,
7. In in, 45, an adjective and a genitive follow in the third
attributive position. Twice we find positions not sanctioned by
prose usage: I, 126, alirv re aa/xa \ ttjvo Avicaovihao, to koX
1 Krueger, n, 50, 9 and Anm.
2 Qpq.<rcra because of its position can hardly be a proper name as some editors take
it. Fritzsche's argument for /xcucapTris as a proper name, on the ground that the
girl here speaking would scarcely call " na/capiTis" an old woman who had
brought all her woe upon her, cannot be taken seriously. MaKaplrrjs, fern.
naicapiTis seems to have been commonly used of the dead with about as much
sincerity as "derseelige" in modern German. lias yhp X^yei tis l 6 paKaplrifjs
orx«"cu' (Stobaeus Flor. 121, 18, cf. Hiller ad loc). Compare Herondas, vi, 55,
Ku\cu0ts i} p,aKap?Tis.
The Article in Theocritus. 65
ticucdpeao-Lv ayrjTov, and xvi, (epic) 44, Seivos aot8o\ 6 K^to?, where
the omission of the article before the nouns is poetical. The
article is unrepeated with a genitive, following an articular noun
with an adjective in the first attributive position, in XV, 51, and so
frequently where the genitive is a personal pronoun.
12. Predicative position. 1 An adjective modifier either preced-
ing or following a noun and its article is said to stand in the
predicative position. The relation of the adjective to the nouu is
then that of predicate to subject, with a form of the participle
understood. A noun thus attended by a predicative adjective is
not distinguished from other individuals of its class, but its
present attribute is contrasted with other attributes of itself. In
translation the article is often omitted. 2
Simple cases of this construction with nouns in the nominative
case are the following : IV, 5, Avto? . . . a<t>avTO<; 6 /3ov/c6\os
a)%ero. xi, 67, a fjudrvp a&i/cel /ne fiova, cf. xxi, 1. — XV, 53 ; XX,
24 ; xxiii, 24 ; xxv, 236 (epic). Cases where there is an ellipsis
of the verb eVrt need not be cited. Such ellipses are very common
in Theocritus, especially in idylls vni and xv.
The most common type of the predicative modifier in Theocritus
is that of oblique predication in the accusative case, with verbs of
calling, making, and a few others. Of the adverbial dative and
prepositional types discussed by Milden (o. c.) no examples occur
in Theocritus. Of the accusative type following instances have
been noted : iv, 13, top BovkoXov &>? koucov eitpov ; VI, 7 ; x, 2 ;
xix, 8 ; xxi, 23, 47 ; xxix, 18. (In xxvn, 37, ra 8e irwea
KaXa vo/jLevco, kclKcl is used adverbially with the verb). Add to
these three instances of oblique predication in the accusative with
parts of the body : XX, 8, fxaXafcov to yevecov e%ei? ; XXIX, 33 ;
xxx, 28. All of the cases so far cited are easily explained in
conformity with Attic usage. The four cases remaining have
caused commentators no little trouble. — I, 95, rjvOe ye fiav dSela
koX a Ku7rpi? yeXdoco-a. Here as in the other three cases presently
to be cited, Legrand, (p. 309), believes that we must admit faulty
a See Milden, " Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
2 See Gildersleeve to Justin Martyr A., 17, 11.
66 The Article in Theocritus.
construction, that in every case the adjective ought to stand between
the article and noun. None of the passages, however, save iv, 49,
need cause any real difficulty. In the passage just cited, dSela
belongs to the predicate, with the participle yeXdoiaa. Cholmeley
correctly compares Pind. Pyth. viu, 12 (10), Tpa^ela Svcrfxevecov
. . . viravTid^aLG-a /cpdrei. In Theocritus we find the same
construction in V, 90, 6 YLparihas tov iroL/xeva Xeto? vjravrcov |
eK^iaCveL, for which Ameis, (p. 41), also believed that a transposi-
tion of the article must be assumed. The construction does not
differ from XX, 24, ical Xevicdv to fxercoTrov en oc^pvai Xd/jare
fjueXatvat^. 1 — In I, 109, a>/?ato? x&Scovls iirel /cal paXa vofievei, we
have to do simply with an ellipsis of eari and aypalos is predicate
to o"A&wm. — In XXIX, 33, aviKa tclv yevvv avhpe'i'av 6^779, we
have a construction familiar enough with parts of the body, and
this, together with two other examples of the same kind, has
already been cited under " oblique predication." — There remains
only IV, 49, eX6 > r)v fioi poi/cov to Xay(o/36Xov • (tl for to Hermann,
Wilamowitz, to codd., tv P.). The scholiast vet., noting the
position of poL/cov, explains fancifully : pd/38ov ovaav opOrjv
€7r€v%6Tai yeveadai tcajXTrvX^v, cva fir) ey/cvov ovorav /3Xdyjrrj tt)v
ftovv. The parallels cited by Fritzsche and others for this position
of poiKov are accusatives and datives of the type discussed by
Milden, and do not explain this passage. The same is true of the
prepositional type cited from Lucian by Cholmeley, while the
latter's suggestion f Pot/eoV, "my staff Crookie," is unsupported.
To take poiKov as the direct predicate of to XaycofioXov does not
suit, since a XaywftoXov is naturally poacov (cf. vn, 18, where a
XaycoftoXov is called a poiica Kopvva). Unless we admit hyperba-
ton of the adjective attribute, tl for to seems the only present
solution of the passage.
Of other cases of the predicative position where Ameis, (p. 41),
sees difficulty, xx, 24 and xxi, 23, have been disposed of above.
Two others remain to be mentioned : xv, 145, to XP^H 10,
aocj)(OT€pov, where evTi is to be supplied, and xxvn, 58,
^n the whole passage see Seymour, Proc. Am. Phil. Ass'n, July, 1882, p. xli,
' ' On the Smile of Aphrodite."
The Article in Theocritus. 67
Ta/jLTre^ovov iroincras i/juov pd/cos, for which see below under
" article with possessives."
Among participial modifiers no examples of the type discussed
by Milden occur in our poet.
13. The use of the article in genitive combinations. In the case
of nouns accompanied by dependent genitives, two kinds of rela-
tions are distinguishable, an attributive relation and a partitive
relation. 1
a. Attributive position. A simple attributive genitive depend-
ing upon an articular governing noun is generally treated as an
attributive adjective and stands in an attributive position. The
genitive usually has, an article of its own, except when it is a
proper noun. 2 In Theocritus there are few instances of such posi-
tions outside of proper nouns.
In three cases an anarthrous genitive of a common noun stands
in the first attributive position : xv, 107, wvOpdyrrwv &)? fivdos
(most edd. now dvdpdiirwv). — xvi, 90, at 8' avdpiOfioi | /jlt/Xcov
XiXid8e$, apparent hyperbaton of a partitive genitive. But the
idyl is epic and at 8' may be the true reading (v. 1. ai re). —
xxvn, 46, ra /SoukoXco epya, where fiovfcoXco is generic. — Geni-
tives of proper nouns are more numerous: I, 19; II, 8, 21, 62
(ra AeXfaSos Sana, tho parts of the body usually stand in the
partitive position), 70, 146, a re $>iXl<7Ta<s | fidrvp tcls afxas
avXnrplhos a re MeXtfoO?, 3 160. V, 20, 114; XVIII, 6. — In two
cases anarthrous genitives of proper nouns follow articular gov-
erning nouns with the article repeated, i. e., in the second attribu-
tive position: II, 74, rav ^variSa tclv KXea/oto-ra?. 4 vii, 10. —
1 Krueger, i, 47, 9, 9 ; Studien, it, p. 78. Kuehner, § 464, 3.
2 Apollonius Syntax, i, 42, p. 84, Bekker.
3 The context, esp. 1. 154, shows that, in spite of the re .... re, one woman,
mother of both girls, is meant. Changes in the text and assumption of a lacuna
(Fritzsche) are unnecessary. Parallels with similar repetition of the article
with connectives can be cited. So Cholmeley cites Xen. Anab., m, 117 ; Plato
Rep., 334 E ; Ant,, i, 21 ; Dem. De Cor., 205 ; Add Ant., v, 63, and Dem. In
Meid., 124, and see Maetzner to Ant., I, 21.
4 Fritzsche (et al. ) writes rds KX. after certain cdd., and notes: u congruit
consuetudini Theocr. artic. personae designandae appositus." But a parallel for
an articular genitive of a proper noun in such a position cannot be cited from
68 The Article in Theocritus.
Once the anarthrous genitive of a proper noun occupies the third
attributive position in conjunction with an adjective : HI, 45.
Articular attributive genitives in a few instances stand in the
first attributive position. Two of the genitives are common
nouns : x, 52 ; xxi, 9 ; three are proper nouns : xv, 97.
Epigram, n (vn), 1 ; VI (xx), 1.
b. Partitive position. A dependent genitive, articular ! or
anarthrous, preceding or following an articular governing noun, is
said to stand in the partitive position. In the case of actual
partitive genitives this is the regular position, tho by hyperbaton
such genitives sometimes stand between the article and the
governing noun. 2 Except in the case already cited (see under a),
xvi, 90, Theocritus observes this rule for partitives. 3
a. With substantivized adjectives denoting a part, the partitive
genitive is anarthrous in xv, 139 ; xvn, 2, 12 ; xvin, 4 ; xxiv,
37, 72 ; xxv, 216. Epigram, iv (xn,) 2. Five of these stand in
epic idylls. It is articular twice : I, 20 ; xxix, 5.
/3. With parts of the body and analogous nouns the genitive,
in partitive position, is articular, save in xxvi, 20 (epic). The
articular genitive precedes : IV, 15, 44-45 ; x, 46. The genitive
follows : VIII, 76 ; X, 39, tclv Iheav ras ap\xovias (cf. Kock to
Arist. Birds 993) ; xv, 33 ; xxvi, 20 (epic), %a \xkv tclv rcecfraXdv
/jLVfcrjo-aro 7ratSo? ekolaa (where fidrvp fiev stands for ^a fiiv tclv
in some cdd.).
<y. Examples are also found in Theocritus, as occasionally in
Attic prose (esp. Thucydides, — Kuehner, § 464, 3 A 1), where
purely attributive genitives stand in partitive positions. In one
case the genitive is articular: XV, 52; otherwise anarthrous:
V, 1 (?), 73 ; xiv, 52 ; xxm, 23-24.
c. Omission of the article with the governing noun, while the
Theocritus, who uses few articular adnominal genitives of proper nouns, save with
nouns of relationship. In xxvn, 14, we have a proper adjective ; in xxi, 55, and
i, 20, added attributives.
1 Apoll. Synt. i, 10, p. 35, Bekker.
2 Krueger, I, 47, 9, 11.
3 See Kallenberg, Jahresb. d. Phil. Ver. zu Berlin 23, 199 and 200 ; cf. J. B.
1892, 312.
The Article in Theocritus. 69
genitive is articular. Most cases of this kind in Theocritus can
be explained from the character of the governing noun, which
may be indefinite, accompanied by an interrogative or indefinite
pronoun, a vocative, or a predicate, while the genitive is a noun
with definite reference and hence is naturally articular. In a few
cases the omission of the article is poetical.
a. The governing noun precedes : x, 9, Tt? ttoOos rcav e/eroOev.
XXI, 66; XXIII, 14, vj3piv ras opyas ; XXVIII, 23.
/3. The governing noun follows : VI, 10, a rot royv otcov hrerat
<r/co7ro<? (a-KOTTos is subsidiary predicate), 13, 37; vin, 49; xxi,
2, 55 ; xxin, 7 ; xxvn, 14.
d. The partitive genitive with interrogative and indefinite pro-
nouns. Here the article is more often omitted in Theocritus with
the genitive than it is used. But most of the omissions are found
in epic idylls, while only one case occurs in this group where the
article is used (xvi, 13). Apollonius l states it as a rule that the
partitive genitive after ti'<? and 7T(uo?, unless it is a pronoun,
always has the article. The following cases occur in Theocritus
where the genitive is articular : v, 148 ; vn, 5 ; (cf. Epigram vn
(xvi), 4.) — x, 8, 15; xvi, 13 (epic); xxi, 44. Most of the geni-
tives are substantivized words. Anarthrous genitives with ti? in
Doric idylls are only n, 83, and VII, 24.
e. Forms of the article, with the noun unexpressed, followed by
dependent genitives. Here there is always a familiar ellipsis which
need not, if indeed it can, be supplied in all cases. The most
common type in Theocritus is that with neuter plural forms of
the article, designating property, actions, affairs, etc. : II, 76,
rd Av/ccovos, Lykon's (house, shop, garden or what not). 2 IV, 23,
rd 4>u07ea>, 31, rd TXavfcas, rd Uvppo) (sc. /JLeXrj. — Cf. Arist.
Birds 919, Clouds 1365). v, 112; vm, 20; x, 41; xin, 67
(epyllion) ; xxvi, 38 (epic).
Masculine and feminine forms of the article, with nouns of
1 Syntax, I, 37, p. 76, 1. 12 ff. Bekker.
2 Cf. Herondas, v, 52, and for parallels in Attic, where this form of expression
is rare, Dem., 54, 7, tQv HvdoSdpov ; 43, 62 (p6fios), ra rod &irodav6vros. Arist.
Wasps, 1432, tA UittAXov. Lysias, 12, 12, «Jf t' d5e\<f>o0 rod i/xov.
70 The Article in Theocritus.
relation understood, are found as follows : H, 66, 146 ; HI, 35 (?) ;
IV, 21; V, 15; x, 15; xiv, 53 (?). x
14. The article with possessives and genitives of personal and
reflexive pronouns. — a. With possessives. The article with nouns
accompanied by possessives, or genitives of pronouns, personal,
reflexive, or demonstrative, may (1) distinguish the given object
from similar objects in the possession of others (xv, 18), or (2)
with deixis or anaphora designate a particular object, in the posses-
sion of the person indicated by the pronoun, as distinct from other
objects of the same kind in his possession (xxi, 30), or (3)
designate the given object as the only possession of its kind (xxi,
27). This last is the (avafyopa) Kara fJiovaSiicrjv kti)(tlv according
to which Apollonius and other Greek grammarians account for the
article in this construction. 2 If there is no such avafyopd the
article may, according to Apollonius, be omitted. But, as we
have seen, this is but one phase of the article in this form of
expression. Only one case occurs in epic where the article is used
(XXII, 59), in an elliptical expression : rr)? <rri<; (%a)/?r;?).
Position. With the exception of two cases, the possessive
occupies the normal position between the article and noun, 3 the
first attributive position. The two exceptions are : v, 108, rdv
<f>pay/iov . . . tov cl/jlov, and xxiii, 36-37, iv irpoQvpoHJi | rolai
Teolaiv. The first attributive position is found : I, 7 ; n, 3, 39,
116, 146, 164; v, 128, 130; vi, 22; vm, 75; x, 57; xn, 20 ;
xiv, 30, 38 ; xv, 11 ; xxi, 27, 30 ; xxiii, 21, 26, 27, 41 ; xxix,
6. The noun is to be supplied from the context in xv, 18 ;
xxvii, 59 ; xxn, 59.
In one passage the manuscripts show the possessive in the
predicative position, after the noun : xxvii, 58, rwpurexovov
7roL7)(Ta<f i/jibv pdfcos. This, and two examples, cited for this
position in classical Greek, Soph. Ai., 573, 4 Eur. Hippol., 683,
l See Wendel, Jahrb., Suppl. 26, 1901, p. 33. Kaibel, Comic. Graec. Frg., I 1 ,
p. 177, to Sophron frg. 145.
2 See introduction.
8 See Milden, o. c.
4 See Jebb's note.
The Article in Theocritus. 71
have been emended in various ways. The same position is found
in the next to the last line of Id. xxvn, contained in MS. c. : 1 rdv
(rvpvyya redv (MS. re(ov).
In the omission of the article with possessives Theocritus shows
considerable freedom. Of the one hundred occurrences of posses-
sives (excluding vocatives and predicates, and counting the refrain
of Id. ii, but once) seventy-two are anarthrous. Of these, thirty-
four are found in epic idylls, and of the remaining thirty-eight in
Doric and Aeolic idylls, seventeen stand in prepositional phrases.
b. With genitives of pronouns. 2 This use of the article is
post-Homeric. 3 When the article is used, the genitives of per-
sonal pronouns and avrov, eius, regularly take the partitive
position, while genitives of reflexive pronouns, avrov, ipsius, and
aXkrjktov stand in attributive positions. When an attributive is
added, the genitives of personal pronouns and avrov, eius, may
stand in the attributive position before the substantive. There are
few exceptions to these rules in Attic, and some of these have
been removed by easy conjectures. 4 Theocritus follows the same
rules, offering but one possible exception to the partitive position
of fiev in v, 2 (see below). No examples with the article are
found in epic.
a. With genitives of the personal pronouns. 5 The pronoun pre-
cedes, and in a few cases is separated from the article by interven-
ing verbs: n, 69, 75, 81, 87, 93, 99, 105, 111, 117, 123, 129,
135 (refrain) ; v, 4, 19, 109 ; vi, 36 ; xv, 31, 69 ; xx, 5 ; xxm,
43 ; xxix, 16 ; xxx, 9. The pronoun follows, occasionally
separated from the noun: n, 126; vn, 119; vin, 15, 63, 82
(cdd. rot) ; x, 36 ; XI, 55, 70 ; xv, 71 ; xxvn, 5. In in, 37,
the genitive stands between the noun and an adjective added in
the third attributive position : 6(f>6a\fji6s fiev 6 Sef uk* In V, 2, to
fiev vd/cos, we find the only exception to the partitive position.
1 See Ziegler, and Wilamowitz, ed., and Textg., p. 91, n. 1.
2 Krueger, i, 47, 9, 12 ; n, 47, 9, 3 and 5. Kuehner, § 464, 4.
3 In the one instance cited for Homer, T. 185. x a ^ w <rev . . . . rbv fivdov
&Ko6<ras, <rev depends on anotiaas.
4 See Merriam, note to Hdt., vi, 30, 7. *
5 Only nev (Znedev), and <T€v occur.
72 The Article in Theocritus,
Few examples of this attributive position are cited from classical
authors, and iu all of them a particle or attributive is added,
except Arist. Lys., 416, T/79 jjlov >yvvai/c6<; (Meineke p>ov t?)?, others
>ot). See Fuller, p. 103, for other examples and compare
Herondas, V, 7, to fiev alfia ; VI, 41, ttjv fiev yXcocraav. The
position may be a late growth, as Cholmeley remarks. In the New
Testament l an emphatic vjjlwv may stand in the attributive position.
/3. With genitives of reflexives. There is no exception to the
regular attributive position in Theocritus : I, 92, rov avrco | awe
TTLKpov eptora 2 ; XV, 131 ; V, 61 ; XXVii, 13.
7. The genitive of the demonstrative follows the same rule : n, 60.
8. The genitive of a relative precedes in x, 4, a? rov iroha.
Omission of the article with nouns accompanied by genitives of
pronouns is comparatively infrequent in Theocritus. Seventeen
cases of omission occur, but of these, six are in epic, and seven
others occur with names of parts of the body.
c. The poets frequently combine the dative with the substantive
as a dative of possession 3 and the dative of personal pronouns then
may stand between the article and its noun. There is much use
■of this dative in Homer. 4 In Herodotus this use and position of
the dative is not infrequent, but this position is also found when
the dative is to be taken with the verb. In Attic prose 5 where
such a position of datives of personal pronouns occurs, the dative
is usually a dative of possession. But when neither sense nor
position demand the possessive interpretation, the dative is to be
taken with the verb. Few cases occur in Theocritus where such
datives stand between the article and noun, and scarcely one is
certainly a dative of possession : in, 1, ral 8e p,oc al7€? ftoo-Kovrai-,
IV, 62, to tol yevos ; VII, 121, to rot koXov avdos airoppel. In
other x cases of this position the pronoun certainly goes with the
'Blass, N. T. Gram., p. 171.
'Cholmeley (and Wilaraowitz), writes airCo, ipsius, ''according to epic usage.
Monro, Horn. Gram., § 252." But if avrG> is Homeric, rbv avrQ> w. %p. is not
Homeric (Monro, 1. c. )
1 Krueger, 11, 48, 12,
4 Dyroff , ' ' Geschichte des Pronomen Reflexivum. ' '
5 Krueger, 1, 48, 12, 2.
The Article in Theocritus. 73
verb: vn, 43; X, 24, (cf. vn, 11); xxix, 22. Other positions
of the dative are more frequent and in no case is the possessive
construction demanded : i, 146 ; n, 1 ; VI, 6 ; XV, 55 ; XX, 28,
(cf. 21,25, 27).
15. The article with interrogatives. In combination with an
interrogative and substantive the article either points back to an
object previously mentioned, or by prolepsis to one that is to be
more closely defined in the following. 1 Theocritus uses this con-
struction twice, and both times the article points back to an object
mentioned by another speaker : v, 5, rav iroiav avpiyya, 8, to
ttoIov . . . vdtcos, both times with contemptuous reference.
16. The article with aWos and erepos. The article is used with
a noun accompanied by aXXos in the first attributive position, as
a rule only when the reference is to the remainder of a given whole,
"the rest." 2 Following examples of the construction occur in
Theocritus, none besides the first attributive position being found :
xvin, 17 ; xxiv, 61 (epic), rbv aXXov . . . iralha (aXXov here =
erepov) ; xxvi, 24 (epic). Omission of the article with aXXos
(aXXoi) and a noun is confined to epic idylls. 3 With aXXos used
substantively, the article is found: xiv, 60; (xxn, 178 (epic),
coXXot, v. 1. aXXoi; xxvi, 15 (epic), aXXai, vulg. aXXai) ;
XXII, 205, rbv aXXov (— rbv erepov), with anaphora, " that other."
With erepos the article refers to a definite one of two individuals.
In Homer the article is thus found occasionally. 4 In a generic
sense erepos may or may not have the article. In Theocritus the
article is found only with erepos used substantively, once in epic :
vn, 36; vni, 91; xi, 32; xn, 14, (Ionic lyric); xxv, 255
(epic). Omission of the article is confined to epic idylls, save
xxix, 15 (Aeolic).
1 Krueger, 50, 4, 7. Kuehner, § 461, A. 6.
2 Cf. Apoll. Synt., i, 11, p. 38, 1. 21 ff. Bekker ; Krueger, I, 50, 4, 9. Tn Theo-
critus occasional shifting between &Wos and Zrepos is noticeable.
*The grammars tell us that oi &X\oi is found everywhere in Homer, (Monro, §
260, a, "passim"), but many of the examples are disputed, and the schol. to
B, 1 says : "AAXot] 8n ZrjvdSoros ypdcpei <3\\oi (or wXXot). 6 5£ TroirjTrfs aaw&pdpios
eMptpei. Where Homer has ol dXXoi, etc., demonstrative interpretation of the
article may be applied, as in the two examples quoted above from epic idylls.
4 Kuehner, § 465, 10.
74 The Article in Theocritus.
17. With eicacrTos the article is used by Theocritus without a
noun, in epic, XX v, 195, to. e/caara, with anaphora. "Efcaaros
occurs but once outside the epic idylls (xiv, 19), without the
article.
18. With 6/caTepos, afx^xo and a^orepo^ nouns are generally
articular in Attic prose, with the pronoun in the predicative
position. The tragic poets aud- Herodotus 1 show examples of the
omission of the article. In Theocritus e/cdrepos does not occur.
"Afujxo, with anarthrous noun, occurs twice in epic idylls : xxiv,
109, < 107 > ; xxv, 260. Elsewhere it is used substantively,
without the article. 'A^ore/jo? occurs once with an articular
noun, XI, 70, tgo? 7ro'Sa? a/AcfroTepcos /iev ; with an anarthrous noun
only in the epic xxn, (13, 30, 130), and elsewhere it is used
substantively without the article.
19. With outo?, 88e, ty/vo?, and eiceivos. When ovtos, 88e, etc.,
are used with a noun, the noun usually has the article. It is,
however, not the presence of the demonstrative that makes the
article necessary. Demonstratives point to defiuite, known objects,
and, since nouns referring to such objects are normally articular,
it follows that nouns accompanied by demonstratives are normally
articular. But, if a noun by itself cannot or regularly does not
take the article, it does not take the article because of the presence
of the demonstrative. 2 The relation of the demonstrative pronouns
to the accompanying nouns is not that of attributives but of
appositives, and hence the position which they occupy in respect
to the article is not attributive, but predicative. In regard to the
Theocritean use of the article with nouns accompanied by demon-
stratives, it may be said that Attic usage is generally followed, with
occasional poetic omissions of the article which would not be
permitted in prose. Ameis, (p. 36), contents himself with the
^rist. Eccl., 837, Fuller, p. 114.
2 See Krueger, I, 50, 11, 19 ff. — Kuehner, § 465, 4.— Fr. Blass, Eh. M., xliv,
1889, pp. 6-23, on otiros in Demosthenes, rev. A. J. P., xi, 107. — H. Kallenberg,
Jahresb. des Phil. Ver. zu Berlin, xxni, 1897, pp. 204 ff., on the article with
demonstratives in Herodotus. — L. Herbst, Philol. xxxviii, 503 ff., 6 wSXefxos 85e
and 68e 6 7r6Xe/xos in Thucydides ; summarized, A. J. P., i, 241. — B. L. Gilder-
sleeve "Problems in Greek Syntax," A. J. P., xxni, pp. 8 and 123 ff.
The Article in Theocritus.
75
simple statement that the article is added and omitted with the
demonstratives (and with clvtos, 7ra?, €/uo'?, cro'?, eo'?, ktL) in the
bucolic poets, referring for particulars to the index of these poets
which he had begun. 1
a. outo?, oSe, r^vos and €/ceti/09, with nouns unaccompanied by
attributives, always stand in the predicative position. The pronoun
may precede (first position), or follow the noun (second position).
Intervening words often separate the demonstrative from the noun.
First position: ovto$, II, 28, 53 ; V, 102 ; Yii, 51 ; VIII, 39 ; x,
41, 42, 45; xv, 44.— S8e, I, 65 (?) ; v, 72. Epigram, vi (xx),
1.— t^ w , ii, 17, 22, 27, 32, 37, 42, 47, 52, 57, 62 ; iv, 15 ; v,
1, 15/16; vin, 26. — i/celvos (actios, Aeolic), xxvin, 24. — Second
position : outo?,' ii, 59 ; v, 30, 32 ; vin, 23 ; xiv, 4 ; XXI, 65.
Epigram, vn (xvi), 1. — oSe, iv, 12; v, 34, 41; vn, 31 ; vtii,
55 ; xvin, 15. — tt/i/o?, ii, 153 ; v, 117 ; xv, 8 ; xvi, 42 (epic) ;
xvii, 118 (epic).
b. With nouns accompanied by attributives. When the articular
noun is accompanied by an attributive, the demonstrative may, as
in Attic, abandon its predicative position, and stand between the
adjective modifier and the noun. So : I, 13, to Karavres tovto
1 A few facts regarding the pronouns themselves, as they appear in Theocritus,
may be of interest and not without value. As shown by the appended table, the
colorless oCros remains in the lead, but 88e, and the Doric ttjvos play important
roles, (10 rijvos in the refrain of id. n), while ticeivos is unimportant.
Without nouns.
W. articular nouns.
W. anarthrous nouns.
Summary.
oOtos...
51 ( 5 in epic).
23 (none in epic).
15 ( 6 in epic).
89 (11 in epic).
88e
30 ( 8 " " ).
11 ( " " " ).
27(14 " M ).
68 (22 " ", ).
T7JV0S...
25 ( 2 " " ).
28(2 " M ).
8(none u " ).
61 ( 4 " " ).
iKUVOS.
8( 6 " " ).
2 (none " " ).
3( " " " ).
3( 6 " " ).
Total..
114(21 " " ).
64(2 u " ).
53(20 " " ).
231 (20 " " ).
[t is to be noted especially, that of the cases of anarthrous nouns accompanied
by a demonstrative, a large percentage (20 in 53) are found in epic idylls (con-
fined to o&tos and 88e), while there are only two cases where the article is used in
epic (xvi, 42 ; xvn, 118), both with substantivized adjectives, and both with the
Doric rrjvos. Interesting too is the preponderance of 88e in epic idylls, and the
frequency of ttjvos with nouns, in Doric idylls.
76 The Article in Theocritus.
ye&Xocfrov ; n, 116 j v, 101. — xxx, 1. — X, 7 ; xiv, 26. — Epigram,
I, 1. In all other cases the demonstrative remains in a predicative
position. The adjective may stand in the first attributive position,
and the demonstrative precede the complex : iv, 59 ; v, 17 ; viii,
86 ; — or follow it : xv, 34. The adjective may occupy the second
attributive position and the demonstrative precede the complex : v,
147 ; vn, 151. Epigram, in (x), 1 f. — or stand between the noun
and the following articular adjective : I, 1/2, 22/23 ; v, 64/65.
The adjective, finally, may stand in the third attributive position
and the demonstrative precede the noun : n, 30, oBe /3o'//./3o? 6
^aX/eeo?, or stand between the noun and the attributive : I, 120.
In two cases, where the noun has more than one attributive, the
article is omitted with the first, which precedes the noun : I, 126 f.
alrrv re aa\xa | ttjvo Av/caoviSao, to /cat ficucdpeo-GLv aynrov ;
Epigram, I, 5 f. tcepabs rpdryos outo? 6 i*a\os | rep^lvOov rpcbyow.
The omission of the article before alirv and /cepaos is poetical.
c. Omission of the article with nouns accompanied by ovtos, 68e,
rrjvos and eiceZvos. As was stated above, a noun which of itself
cannot or regularly does not take the article, remains anarthrous
when used with a demonstrative pronoun. This is the case, for
example, when ovtos (etc.) is subject, the noun predicate, or when
the noun is added as subsidiary predicate to the demonstrative in
the accusative case (f. i. xxin, 21, 35 ; xxvii, 55). Besides
these constructions, there are a number of cases where the omission
of the article is more or less general in Attic Greek. This is true
1), in the case of proper nouns, tho in Theocritus, the only two
proper nouns used with demonstratives have the article : V, 17 and
102 ; 2), when the demonstrative points forward to a relative
clause, as in xvi, 73 (epic) ; xxin, 33, 46 ; xxiv, 84 (epic) ; 3),
when the demonstrative points to an object actually present, as,
oSei, 128; n, 50; vi, 33; xxn, 54, 62 (epic); xxv, 18, 29
(epic); xxvii, 49. Epigram, n (vn), 4; — ovto? ii, 15, 132;
in, 6 ; — tt)i>o? vii, 98 ; 4), when 68e is used with much the same
force as roioaEe: vn, 125. Epigram, in (x), 3. — Of the remain-
ing twenty-six cases in which the article is omitted, and which
cannot be put under these categories, twelve occur in epic,
two in the Ionic xn (12, 34), one in Aeolic (xxix, 14), one in
The Article in Theocritus. 77
the Berenike fragment. The ten cases remaining for Doric are :
ovto<; ii, 65. — 88e vii, 83; xvm, 58. — 1-771/09 1, 36; 11, 84;
V, 43 ; vii, 63 ; XV, 15 ; XXVII, 40. — e/cetvos IX, 29 (tceivoiai
v. 1. ttjvolo-l). Evidently the number of poetic omissions of the
article in Doric idylls is comparatively small.
20. The demonstrative adjectives' TOioOro?, to to?, roioaSe, roaos,
roaoorhe, roao-rjvos and ttjXUos are regularly used by Theocritus
without the article, whether substantively or with nouns. Of
fifty-seven occurrences of these adjectives, only fifteen are adjec-
tival, nine of them in epic idylls. Of the six instances in Doric
idylls only one would in Attic Greek require the article, namely
XXIII, 1 6, roaav (f>\6ya t<x? Kvdepeias, " the fire of Aphrodite, so
great," as just described. The other occurrences are : 11, 161 ;
vii, 149, 153 ; vin, 8 ; xvm, 32.
21. The article with avros. Auto?, "ipse," "self," as a sub-
stantive pronoun, if used with a noun, stands in apposition with
the noun. Hence if the noun is articular, avrfc in this sense
stands in the predicative position. The article is used when the
noun refers to a definite, known person or object. 1 The examples
of this construction in Theocritus are: IV, 5, 15/16 ; 2 V, 14 (?),
cf. xxvii, 35. — vin, 80; x, 19 ; xi, 12 ; xxvn, 61.
Ai/ro'?, " idem," " the same," is an adjective, and, in conjunction
with an articular noun, occupies an attributive position, usually
the first. In Attic Greek, proper nouns, and common nouns used
as proper nouns, omit the article with az/ro'9, " idem." In Theo-
critus auTo? is confined almost entirely to the intensive use
discussed above. Two cases only of 6 avro? were found : xvm,
22, SpofjLos (ovtos (rare position) and xxvi, 23 (epic), teal Avrovoas
pvOfjibs (dvtos. In xi, 34, covtos is a doubtful variant for outo?.
Nouns with avros, " ipse," are anarthrous eight times outside
the epic idylls. Of these, three are cases of proper nouns : vii, 5,
100; xxx, 31. The others are: 11, 89; vn, 70,; xxi, 17;
xxvn, 63. Epigram, v (xni), 6.
^rueger, 1, 50, 11, 14-18. Kuehner, § 465, 4, Anm. 6 and f.
2 avrb. . . . T&o-Tta, " only her bones," cf. II, 89, airrh . . . 3<rrta, "only bones."
For out6s = fxdvos cf. iv, 15 ; v, 85 ; x, 19 ; xi, 12 ; xvni, 12.
78 The Article in Theocritus.
22. The article with 7ra?, airas, (jv\iira% and oko<;. 1 A noun
used with 7ra?, etc., (as with ovtos, etc.,) takes the article if it is
normally articular without 7ra9. A noun used with 7ra? (etc.,) in
the sense " whole " or " all " takes the article, therefore, in Attic
when there is definite reference to known objects. Where there
is no such definite reference, the article may be omitted, but the
generic article may also be used. When 7ra? is used indefinitely
in the sense of "every," the noun is anarthrous. If the noun
with 7ra? has the article, two cases are distinguished. When 7ra9
(irdvres;) is used attributively, in the first attributive position, the
whole is thought of in contrast with its parts. When, on the
other hand, 7ra? (jrdvTes) stands in the predicative position, it
merely adds a further modifier without implying a contrast with
the parts.
In the attributive position 7ra? is found but once in Theocritus :
XXI, 14, O 7Ta? 7TO/30?.
In the predicative position 7ra? (irdvres) occurs as follows :
a. preceding the noun : xxvn, 33 ; xxviii, 25 ; b. following the
noun : I, 139 ; V, 107, ra Or^pCa iravra (generic) ; Vin, 16 ; XIII,
67 ; xxi, 31 ; xxn, 22 ; xxiv, 38, the last two in epic.
Without accompanying noun 7ra? may have the article, individ-
ual or generic. Of the cases found in Theocritus none stand in
epic idylls. They are : in, 18, to irav, adverbial ; cf. VII, 98, ra
nrdvra. — XIV, 50 ; xviil, 22. Epigram, VIII (xvn), 9. In XVI,
102, tois iraai (epic), roi<; is a relative, and in xvn, 85 and xxn,
99, (both epic) the article is a substantive pronoun. Without the
article 7ra? is used in this way thirty-four times in Doric idylls.
Omission of the article with nouns accompanied by 7ra?. When
7ra? =" every " is used with a noun the article is omitted in Attic.
So also in Theocritus: I, 50, 102 ; vn, 26 ; xxi, 45 ; xxv, 53
(epic). Besides these cases, there are fifty instances in Theocritus
where 7ra? is used with anarthrous nouns. Of these, twenty-nine
stand in epic idylls, and one in the Ionic xn. Of the twenty
cases remaining for Doric idylls and epigrams (mostly plurals), the
1 Krueger, i, 50, 11, 8 ; n, 50, 10, 2. Kuehner, § 465, 6. Kallenberg on irar
in Herodotus, J. B. des Phil. Ver. zu Berlin, xxm, 1897, pp. 2042.
The Article in Theocritus, 79
majority contain no definite reference and, hence, are naturally
anarthrous. Actual omission of the article may be noted in the
following instances : n, 89, iraaai rpix&y " all my hair ; " VII,
109, tcara xpoa iravra, " all thy skin ; " IX, 33 ; XI, 31 ; XIX, 3 ;
xxiii, 56 ; xxvn, 33. Epigram, n (vn) 6.
Nouns accompanied by olttos and o-vfiTras (once, xn, 7), are
always anarthrous in Theocritus, even where there is definite
reference, as in n, 56, fiev fieXav . . . alfia . . . airav; 1 xvii, 41
(epic) ; xxn, 86 (epic).
"O\o? appears once with an articular noun, in predicative
position : Epigram, vn (xvi), 6, oXov rbv avhpa ; once with an
anarthrous noun : xxix, 4 (Aeolic), where a/co\as is a variant for
ov/c oXas.
23. The article with cardinal numerals refers to definite objects
well known or previously mentioned : vi, 22, rbv i/xbv rbv eva
y\v/cvv, cf. 36 and xi, 53. — xi, 6 ; xiv, 29 ; xvin, 19. Add
xvi, 90 (epic), where the article may be substantival. — Hence, the
article is used in designating the parts after a whole number has
been mentioned : xxvi, 6 (epic), kol^ov SvoicaiBe/ca /3t»/xov? | to>?
T/aeZ? . . . Tft)? ivvea.
Nouns accompanied by ordinals are frequently anarthrous. 2 A
noun so used is articular but once in Theocritus : I, 3, /xera Hdva
to Sevrepov ad\ov aTroiarj. Elsewhere the article appears only
with ordinal numerals used substantively, or as adverbial neuters :
x, 29 ; xvn, 75 ; xvin, 4 ; xxn, 4 ; xxv, 240.
24. With superlatives, as with ordinal numerals, omission of the
article is easy and frequent. With nouns expressed, the article is
used : vn, 10, cf. xxi, 19. — vin, 62 ; xi, 35 ; xxiv, 63 (epic).
Without accompanying nouns, superlatives with the article are
found a, as substantives : II, 143 ; VII, 98. Epigram, IV (xn),
2, the last two being appositives ; b, as ab verbs : vn, 59 ;
xv, 58 ; xxiii, 40.
1 The only instance in Doric with accompanying noun.
2 For Attic Greek see John Thompson, CI. R, xx, 6, 304.
80 The Article in Theocritus.
25. With comparatives the article generally implies contrast or
anaphora. With nouns Theocritus has the following: xv, 139
(apposition) ; xvm, 6 (anaphora to 1. 1.) ; xx, 43 (apposition).
With comparatives used substantively and adverbially we find the
article in : I, 20 ; v, 71 ; vm, 17 ; xxiv, 72 ; xxvi, 32 (the
last two in epic).
OF ,
UNIV
OF
LIFE.
Winfred George Leutner was born in Cleveland, Ohio, March
1, 1879. He graduated from Adelbert College of Western Reserve
University in 1901. In the fall of the same year, he entered the
Johns Hopkins University as graduate student in Greek, Latin,
and Sanskrit. In 1903, he was appointed Fellow in Greek, but
resigned before entering upon the Fellowship, to become instructor
in Greek at Adelbert College. He resumed graduate work at the
Johns Hopkins University as Fellow by Courtesy in the fall of
1904.
He attended the lectures of Professors Gildersleeve, K. F.
Smith, Bloomfield, Miller, and Wilson, to all of whom he takes
this opportunity to express his indebtedness. To Professors
Gildersleeve and Miller he is especially grateful for constant
inspiration and guidance in the prosecution of his principal
studies.
May, 1905.
THIS Bo °k is DUE T N THE
Book ST AMPED Bliow DATE
Santas'' »»««*y- fa *3; ™ «
J M20 1983
IECC!R.4[g J 33
15w-4 t '24
VC 00551
/