This note is not concerned with the reliability of this information, but with the lexical singularity παλλς, which has won widespread acceptance as an ancient sacral term, though our lexica display an uncommon, and indeed misleading, prudishness as to its meaning: ‘maiden-priestess’ ; ‘bei den Griechen in ägypt. Theben noch als sakraler Ausdruck = παρθνος' ; ‘A Thèbes d'Égypte pour désigner une prêtresse = παρθνος' . Pubescent temple-prostitutes had no place in Hellenic religious life, and it might be thought surprising (...) that there was a Greek word for them; yet Strabo offers the term without explanation or speculation as to derivation or dialectal provenance, apparently confident that it is indeed Greek and not a foreign loan-word. The Greeks who frequented Upper Egypt were not a group of largely homogeneous origin, who might have preserved in quasi-colonial isolation an archaism obsolete elsewhere in the Hellenic world. No such usage is mentioned in ancient discussions of the derivation of Pallas, wide though the etymological net is cast in the attempt to explain Athene's title: see, e.g., sch. Il. 1.199–200 , sch. Od. 1.252, P. Oxy. 2260. (shrink)

For E. Badian the story of Pompeius Strabo's desire for a second consulship in 88, though implausible, was too well documented to require citation of sources. In fact it is not well documented and seems to depend solely on one disputed passage: Veil. Pat. 2.21.2. Others, far less cautious than Badian, have not scrupled, however, to accept it as uncontested fact and on it to build unlikely hypotheses, despite the long scholarly controversy as to whether it refers to 88 (...) or 86. It is my belief that it can be shown that the passage almost unquestionably refers to the ambitions Pompeius Strabo entertained in 87 with regard to the consulship of 86. (shrink)

Strabo i. 2. 2O. ἢ τxs22EFν Θρᾴκην oxs1F50κ oxs1FD6δε μxs22EF πρoπxs22EFπτoνσαν πxs22EFραν τxs22EFν Παιoνικxs22EFν καxs22EF Θετταλικxs22EFν xs22EFρxs22EFν ; xs22EFλλxs22EF καxs22EF ταxs22EFτην τxs22EFν xs22EFφεξxs22EFς κατxs22EF τoxs22EFς Θρxs1FB7κας xs025Bxs1F30δ καxs22EF † oxs1F50 κατoνoμxs22EFζων τxs22EFν τxs025B παραλxs22EFαν καxs22EF τxs22EFν μxs025Bσoγαxs22EFαν Mxs22EFγνητας μxs22EFν τινας … καταλxs22EF γxs025Bι κ.τ.λ. It is true that oxs1F50 is contrary to the sense, but those who reject it should explain how it came into the passage. Read xs025Bxs1F56 κατoνoμxs22EFζων ….

Circumstances have allowed me to inspect the Paris MSS. of Strabo and to collate them for a portion of Book IX. , in view of an edition of Strabo's Thessaly which Mr. A. J. B. Wace has in contemplation.

Circumstances have allowed me to inspect the Paris MSS. of Strabo and to collate them for a portion of Book IX., in view of an edition of Strabo's Thessaly which Mr. A. J. B. Wace has in contemplation.

In this discussion note, I put forth evidence to argue against the recent assertions made in favor of the late 1740s or early 1750s date for the composition of Hume’s memoranda. In particular, I show that the claims made regarding Hume’s reference to Strabo in the memoranda do not provide evidence for such a late date of composition but, rather, provide evidence for the date of composition being considerably earlier.

In a recent paper I discussed the origin of the concept of the climata in Greek geography, and adduced reasons for attributing the formulation and elaboration of the concept to Hipparchus . The above passage in Strabo was naturally mentioned in the course of the argument, and I drew attention in a footnote to the unsatisfactory nature of the account given by him of the climata. I now propose to examine the passage in more detail.

There are some passages in Strabo where corruption of the text is not obvious at first reading, because the existing text offers no grammatical difficulty and can even be translated in such a way as to satisfy the less wary reader. One is driven to conclude that emendation is necessary only when one realizes that Strabo's argument demands something different from that which the manuscripts offer. There is an interesting example of such a passage in 11. 7. 4.