GRAGG. — THE GREEK EPIGRAM BEFORE 300 B.C. 21 



101 and 114. In 101 there is not the slightest indication that the 

 verses are an inscription. 



nalSes \6rjvaicctv Uepcrcov crrpaTov (^fXaauPTfS 

 TjpKeaav apyakirfv Trarpibi. bovKoavvrfv. 



Cf. with this ep. DG (= Sim. 91) where rvSe supplies just what is lacking 

 in Sim. 101.81 



WvpiacTiv TTore Tjj8e TpiaKocrian; (p.a)(0VT0 

 (K YlekoTTOvvaaov ;(tXta8es TfTopts. 



In Sim. 114 the name of the dead man does not appear at all and I 

 cannot feel with Mackail ^2 that its place is adequately supplied by 



'tieptr] Fepai^eia, KaKov XfTraj, co(pe\ev ' larpov 



Trj\{ Koi €S 2iiv6ea>v paKpov opav Tava'iv, 

 fiTjBe TJtXas va'uiv "^KeiputviKuv oihpa OaXaaarjs 



dyea p.aLUopevrji dp<p\ MoXovpidda. 

 viiv 8 6 pel/ iv TTOVTU) Kpvepos PfKvs, o'l Se ^apelav 



vavTiKirjv Keveol Tfjde jioaxri ra(f)oi.^^ 



^^ Not every epigram which contains rrjde, oWe, or similar words is necessarily an 

 epitaph, real or epideictic, since these words might occur in a merely reflective poem 

 and indicate that the author composed it with tlio tomb belbre his eyes ; but every 

 epitaph must contain some such indication of place. 



82 ]). 364. 



83 JIackail (1. c.) quotes K 89 in support of his theory and thinks that " rovoe in 

 that epigram is like the 6 fj.ev of Simonidci here " : 



'Ziijfj.a t68' iv Kever] Keirai x^ovl [auifui 5' eir dypov 



'^pelov KpvwTei iTvpKaCj) (pdipevov. 

 Tovd' ^TL waTTTaivoPT iwl yovvaai Trarpbs pdptj/ai 



"AjSt/s ol (TKOTias dpcpejiaXeu irripvyas, ktX. 



A comparison of the two poems makes it evident at once that they are not parallel 

 and, even if they were, K 89 is later than Simonides. In inscriptions the name is 

 never omitted till the fourth century and very rarely then (five times. See Table I.) 

 For arguments against Bergk's theory that the opening of the epigram, which (con- 

 tained the name, is missing, see Mackail (1. c). 



"VVilamowitz (Goett. Nachr. 1897, pj). 306 ff. ) thinks that this is proved genuine 

 by an imitation by Callimachus (Call. 17 = AP 7. 271). 



"i2(peXe pyjd' eyivovro doal vies • ov yap &v ijpeh 



TTOiSa AiOKXelSov ^uiiroXov icrrivopev. 

 vvv 8' 6 fj-kv eiv d\i tiov (piperat veKvs, dvrl d' iKilvov 



oGvopa Koi Kevebv arjpa wapepxopeda. 



But the case is more likely to be reversed, and we have in Callimachus the model 

 which the nameless poet of Simonides 114 copied. See also Hauvette, pj). 102 ff. 



