18 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



AXki^itj 7rXoK«/icof ifprjv afedrjKe KoKvTrrprjv 

 HpT], KOVpiQioiu (VT (KvprjCTf ya/xwi-. '* ' 



In G6 we have a bare formula clothed in poetic language. 



IloiKtXo/iijp^ni' Epwf, (Toi T0f8 IbpvcraTo irpSjTOS 

 XapfjiOi tnl (TKifpoii TfppafTi yvpvaaiov.^^ 



In 50, as in 25, the poet has taken pleasure in merely exhibiting his 

 skill in composing. 56, which describes a painting or a relief, is im- 

 portant as an early example of a style of epigram very common later. *3 

 59 and CO are by far the most ornate of the early epigrams, but even 

 here the ornament is applied to quite common and familiar phrases.^® 

 In 63 and 64 — the well-known Hipparchus epigrams — we may fancy 

 we see the influence of Solon or some other worthy, or we may agree 

 with Professor Gildersleeve that the "moralizing is national. No 

 Greek lets us off from that." "^^ 



Nearly all conform to the requirements laid down above. ^^ In 49 

 and 55 we may perhaps miss r^Se or some such word, but we miss it 

 equally in 24. The dedicatory inscriptions, because usually set up in 

 temples or on sacred ground, are often less definite in the information 

 they give.'^^ So in 65 — as in 24 — the word of dedicating is lacking ; 

 no one, however, could doubt that it was meant to be inscribed. 21 

 breaks entirely with the established form, but its contents are such 

 that even if we admit that it was actually inscribed,^* we cannot expect 

 to judge it by the same tests as the other epitai)hs. 



E(/x( veKpoi, vfKpoi tf Konpoi, yr] 8 fj Konpoi iariv • 

 fi 8 Tj yrj 6(6s icT , oil veKpos dWa Of us. 



68-73 are manifestly neither sepulchral nor dedicatory. They are not 

 inscriptional at all. But the fact that they are not inscriptions is no 



«' Cf. 51, 52, 54, 57, 58, 61. 68 Cf. 55, 62. 



•9 We have no evidence as to whether this ejiigram was actually inscriljed. The 

 only inscription of this nature (47) is too mutilated to serve as a model and the 

 omission of any indication in the verses themselves that they were inscribed is not 

 more strange than the same omission in the verses that accomjianied honorary statues. 

 See p. 17. Cf. also p. 47, n. 169. For later epigrams of this kind cf. AIM 200, 207. 



'0 With 59 cf. 66 ; with 60 cf. 34, 42. 



'*■ Pindar, Olympian and Pythian Oiles, p. 129. 



" pp. 16 ff. " Cf. p. 17. 



'* If we do not regard this as a possible sentiment for an actual epitajdi, we must 

 suppose the verses later than the 6th century. See pp. 19 tT. ; cf. , however, the Latin 

 inscri[)tion cited by M. Haupt (Opusc. 2. 190). 



Cinis sum, cinis terra est, terra dca est ; 

 Ergo ego mortua non sum. 



