40 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



is a greater tendency to separate the distichs sharply in the epigrams 

 preserved in AISS. than in the inscriptions. 



The epigrams composed of more than two distichs are so few that it 

 is not worth while to examine their structure. 



The dialect of the epigram has long been a subject for discussion, 

 and a somewhat unsatisfactory subject, since the only sure testimony 

 is that of the inscriptions, and the material, except possibly for the 

 Attic epigram, is extremely meagre. Among the various views which 

 scholars have held, Fick and v. Mess represent the two extremes- 

 Fick 1*2 claims that we find in inscriptions only such forms as belong 

 to the language of the author or of those for whom the verses were 

 composed. Kirchhofif ^^^ agrees with him so far as the Attic epigram 

 is concerned, v. Mess,^** on the other hand, holds that forms drawn 

 from various dialects may, for different reasons, appear in the same 

 epigram. Other scholars have taken various positions between these 

 two extremes. Wilamowitz i*^ thinks that the dialect is either epi- 

 choric or "die Internationale Form des elegisch-epischen Dialectes." 

 Wagner 1*^ admits the appearance of words of various dialects in one 

 epigram, and thinks it is explained by the adoption of words or phrases 

 taken bodily from different styles of literature and by the fact that the 

 author and those for whom the poem was composed spoke dilTerent 

 dialects. He holds also that when an author wished to write in a 

 dialect not his own, he was satisfied to adopt only the more striking 

 features of that dialect. Reitzenstein ^^"^ contents himself with the 

 following general statement : " Der Dialect ist im wesentlichen epi- 

 chorisch ; wenn der Tote im Ausland begraben ist, der seiner Heimat. 

 Doch hat die Einwirkung des Epos oder der Lyrik ab und an auch die 

 dialektische Form beeinflusst." ^^^ 



Let us first consider the epigrams found in Attica. The following 

 forms are not Attic : 



Seventh and Sixth Centuries. 



aaocppoavvrjs (3) TTarpaiirjs (,')) 'Ai'Sao (9) 



alboiTjv (5) aTrojfpdifiei'oio (7) Kovpr]i (ll, 28, 31) 



^*2 Die Homerische Ilias, Goettiiigen, 1886, pp. v_ff. 

 ^*^ Hermes 5, pp. 56 ff. 



"* Quaestiones de Epigrammate Attico et Tragocdia Antiquiore Dialecticac, Bonn, 

 1898. 



"' Hermes 20, pp. 69 ff. 



^** (Juaestioncs dc Epigrammatis Graecis, Leipzig, 1883. 



^*'' Paiily-Wissowa, s. v. Epigramm, p. 78. 



"» See also H. W. Smyth, Ionic, p. 61. 



