Mne(DS)_Misc_478-497 9/27/04 5:44 PM Page 484

484 MISCELLANEA

6) IG XI (2) 205, A, fr. bc, line 14 (267 BC).

7) ID 298, A, lines 31-2 (240 BC).
8) IG I3 474, Col. I, 41-2 (409/8 BC).
9) Dinsmoor 1950, 192 f.; Boulter 1970, 7-28.
10) The silver gilded eagle appears in the earliest surviving inventory: ID 101,
line 28 (367 BC) dated to the period that the island was controlled by an
Amphictyony. It probably remained in the Artemision until the end and is men-
tioned in one of the latest known lists: ID 1449, c, line 15 (post 145 BC). For the
gilded flppãrion see IG XI (2) 203, B, line 84 (269 BC).

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Boulter, P.N. 1970. The Frieze of the Erechtheion, Antike Plastik 10, 7-28.
Dinsmoor, W.B. 31950. The Architecture of Ancient Greece. An Account of its Historical
Development (London).
Kosmetatou, E., Papalexandrou, N. 2003. Size Matters: Posideippos and the Colossi,
ZPE 143, 53-8.
Prêtre, C. 1997. Imitation et miniature. Étude de quelques suffixes dans le vocabulaire délien
de la parure, BCH 121, 673-80.
Rolley, C. 1994. La sculpture grecque, I: Des origines au milieu du V siècle (Paris).

DEMOCRITUS, FRAGMENTS 68B18 AND B21 DK

Democritus fr. B18 DK, on poets in general, is cited by Clement of

Alexandria, Strom. 5.18.168. Fr. B21 DK, on Homer, is cited at the begin-
ning of the On Homer of Dio Chrysostomus, Or. 53.1.
Thrasyllus’ catalogue of Democritus’ writings at D.L. 9.48 cites a work
entitled On Homer (Per‹ ÑOmÆrou µ Ùryoepe¤hw ka‹ glvss°vn), to which Dio’s
quotation has generally been attributed. As we shall see there is no rea-
son to doubt its authenticity:
ÑO m¢n DhmÒkritow per‹ ÑOmÆrou fhs‹n oÏtvw: “ÜOmhrow fÊsevw lax∆n yeazoÊshw
§p°vn kÒsmon §tektÆnato panto¤vn”: …w oÈk §nÚn êneu ye¤aw ka‹ daimon¤aw
fÊsevw oÏtvw kalå ka‹ sofå ¶ph §rgãsasyai.

‘Democritus speaks as follows about Homer: “Homer, having been given a

divine nature, built a beautiful structure of lines dealing with all sorts of sub-
jects”, thus suggesting that without a divine and superhuman nature it is
impossible to produce lines of such beauty and expertise.’

The formula §p°vn kÒsmon is already found in Solon’s elegy Salamis (fr.
1.2 West ap. Plu. Sol. 8) and in Parmenides’ didactic epic (kÒsmon §m«n
§p°vn fr. B8.52 DK). It also occurs in epigrams of Philetas (§p°vn efid∆w
kÒsmon, fr. 8.3 Diehl) and Antipater Thessalonicensis (§p°vn kÒsmon, Anthologia
Graeca 11.20.3). In prose it occurs in Plutarch, who informs us that ‘Homer,
who excelled in marshalling lines in a beautiful way’, rarely used the arti-
cle (ÜOmhrow §p°vn kÒsmƒ perigenÒmenow, Pl.Qu. 1010E), and in Pausanias,

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2004 Mnemosyne, Vol. LVII, Fasc. 4

Also available online – www.brill.nl
Mne(DS)_Misc_478-497 9/27/04 5:44 PM Page 485

MISCELLANEA 485

who posits that the hymns of Orpheus, because of the beautiful arrange-
ment of the lines (kÒsmƒ m¢n dØ t«n §p«n, 9.30.12), would get the second
prize only because Homer gets the first. It is noteworthy that both Plutarch
and Pausanias, just like Democritus, associate the formula with Homer.
The word yeazoÊshw is remarkable. The only parallel for a form of this
verb is found in the Etymologium Gudianum: YeazÒntvn: mainom°nvn. There
is no need to emend to <§n>yeazoÊshw),1) for where you have a com-
positum you may also have a simplex. The explanation provided seems
apt enough; think of Heraclitus’ Sibylla prophesying ‘with raving mouth’
(mainom°nƒ stÒmati, fr. 92 DK).
Dio’s explanatory paraphrase is good. His quotation of Democritus sets
the tone for his encomium of Homer, where he also cites and discusses a
number of other (for the most part laudatory) views about the poet. But
the Democritus quotation of Clement, though printed by Diels and Kranz
as a verbatim fragment, could very well be no more than a paraphrase
of the text quoted by Dio.
We should first look at the context in the final chapter of the sixth book
of the Stromata. As so often Clement argues in favour of the superiority of
the Judaeo-Christian tradition and teaching as compared with those of the
pagan Greeks. Philosophy, he states, remained a local Greek phenomenon,
whereas Christian doctrine spread over the whole world. Divine scripture
is superior to Greek poetry. To prove the latter point Clement cites the
judgments about poets and poetry by two great Greek philosophers. The
second of these is the Democritus fragment. The first purports to be a
(famous) utterance of Plato’s (Ion 534b):
e‰ta per‹ m¢n poihtik∞w Plãtvn “koËfon gãr ti xr∞ma ka‹ flerÚn poihtØw” grãfei
“ka‹ oÈx oÂÒw te poie›n, pr‹n ín ¶nyeÒw te ka‹ ¶kfrvn g°nhtai”.
‘Next, Plato writes about poetry: “For a poet is some sort of airy and holy
thing, and he is not able to make poetry until he becomes inspired and goes
out of his mind.”’
I have underlined Clement’s ti, which is not in Plato. In Clement’s quo-
tation the word order has been changed,2) and some words have been
omitted. This alteration and abridgement are immediately clear when we
compare the original text (I have underlined words in Plato which are
lacking in Clement):
koËfon går xr∞ma poihtÆw §stin ka‹ pthnÚn ka‹ flerÒn, ka‹ oÈ prÒteron oÂÒw te
poie›n pr‹n ín ¶nyeÒw te g°nhtai ka‹ ¶kfrvn . . .

Plato’s phrase is also cited by Proclus and Theodoret, as well as in

Stobaeus’ anthology (here in a larger section of the dialogue). Proclus and
Stobaeus quote verbatim),3) Theodoret not (GAG 2.30):
ka‹ éllaxoË d¢ ı Plãtvn fhs¤n: “koËfon gãr ti xr∞ma ka‹ flerÚn poihtØw ka‹
oÈx oÂÒw te poie›n, pr‹n ín ¶nyeow ka‹ ¶kfrvn g°nhtai”.