In a previous paper I have shown that this is the correct reading, and that the variant єλєν is a clumsy attempt made by a copyist who did not understand Apollonius. Since my elucidation of the matter has now been questioned by Campbell , I find it necessary to return to Apollonius’ line in more detail, and I shall endeavour to demonstrate geometrico more that my explanation of the poet's words is right because supported by the use of Homeric Wortgut (...) made by Hellenistic poets; Campbell's contention is wrong in that it starts from a false assumption and rests on basic methodological errors. (shrink)

None of the emendations proposed so far is satisfactory. As Keydell reminds us, Ap. Rhod. I. 1205 makes Nonnus' untouchable, and thereby disposes of all the conjectures which would alter these words; consequently, the corruption must be hiding in the impossible.

Josephus' pamphlet commonly known under the title Contra Apionem makes rather interesting reading, not only because it represents a more mature stage in the author's stylistic evolution, which shows so many points worth considering, but also and chiefly because it gives us a direct insight into a vehement polemic in which the writer played a leading role.

In the present paper I shall investigate how far the employment of the vocative in Apollonius Rhodius' Argonautica and in Callimachus' Hymns i–iv complies with the Homeric usage as elucidated by Scott. For Apollonius, the relevant attestations have been listed, but hardly analysed, by Gildersleeve and Miller in A.J.P. xxiv , 197–9; the Callimachean material has never been examined, as far as I know. First of all, however, it will be useful to fill a gap in our knowledge and supplement (...) Scott's data by surveying the use of the vocative in the Homeric Hymns i–v. My survey has led me to the following results. (shrink)