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 
 
 /