240 BOOK REVIEWS the most original contributions to our understanding of the genre. Her book will serve both as a basis, and as a stimulus and challenge for further research on the satyr playfor a longtime to come. BERND SEIDENSTICKER Institut für Grieschische und Lateinische Philologie, bs1@sedat.fu-berlin.de * * * * * Pythagorean Women: Their History and Writings. By SARAH B. POMEROY. Baltimore : The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. xxii +172. Hardcover, $49.95. ISBN: 978-1-4214-0956-6. Onlyafractionofwhatancientwomenwrotehassurvivedantiquity,andrelatively little of that is prose. The authenticity of what little we do have has been doubted, but since recent research has shown that it was not uncommon for elite girls and womentobeliterateandevenwell-educated,theideathatwomencouldhavewritten prose treatisesand epistlesno longer seemsimplausible. Mary Ellen Waithe began her 1991 Ancient Women Philosophers (A History of Women Philosophers, v.1) with a discussion of the writings attributed to Pythagorean women, along with some translations and commentary by Vicki Lynn Harper . In Pythagorean Women Sarah Pomeroyhas made the hypothesisof authenticity seem even more plausible, by providing a characteristically lucid and comprehensive re-construction of the ambiences in which the Pythagorean women were likelytohavelived.SheshowswhyPythagoreanismwouldhaveofferedimportant advantages to females in propertied families in the prosperous Greek settlements in Southwestern Italy: a healthynutritional regimen,education for girls,and maritalfidelityformenaswellasforwomen .ThecultofHera,thegoddessofmarriage, appears to have particular importance in Croton. The high proportion of female gravesinMetapontummayalsosuggestthattherewaslessfemaleinfanticidethere than in the restof the Greek world. The second half of Pomeroy’s book consists of a selection of letters and sayings attributed to Pythagorean women (some translated by Pomeroy herself), along with helpful introductions and commentaries. There is a final chapter by Vicki Lynn Harper about the Pythagorean women as philosophers, showing how BOOK REVIEWS 241 theyintegratePythagoreantheoriesofharmonyintotheiradviceabouthousehold management and the challengesposed bymarriage and the bearing and raising of children.ThelettersbywomencompriselessthantenpercentofallextantPythagorean letters (compare The Garland of Meleager, where women wrote only three percent of the epigrams). Of the eight Pythagorean women authors, two names (TheanoandPerictione)appeartobelongtoatleasttwodifferentwomen.Pomeroy suggests that the first Perictione might have been Plato’s mother; but if so, wouldn’t a comic poet have said something about it? They liked to make fun of Pythagoreans and their eating habits (e.g., Alexis’ Pythagorean Woman, fr. 201-3 and Men from Tarentum, fr. 223 and Aristophon’s Pythagorean, fr. 10, 12; see S. D. Olsen, Broken Laughter, Oxford2007: 242-8). The possibilitythatPythagorean womencouldhavewritten theirown letters has greater appeal than what they appear to have written. Even as stern a critic of women’s behavior as Semonides of Amorgos would have approved of the sanctimoniousadvicethewomengiveabouttheimportanceofchastity ,modestandunostentatious clothing, and piety, or how to select a wet nurse, raise children, and treat one’s parent. Practically everything they say about women’s lives has analoguesin texts by men. Pomeroysuggests that onlya woman would offer the kind of the advice given by Theano II in two letters advising women not to overreact when their husbands take on a mistress. But Euripides has Andromache say that shenotonlyacceptedHector’sinfidelitybutnursedhisbastardbabies(And.213– 27, cf. Tro. 643–58). Like manyoftheancientliteraryepistlesattributed tomale philosophersand politicians, but composed by rhetoricians, the style of the letters is formal, their content general, and their tone didactic, without any of the little anecdotes and personal details that would make them sound like personal letters from real women. Most do not make much use of the kind of abstract reasoning characteristic of Platonic or Aristotelian philosophy. The exception is the treatise on numbers byAesara (the name ofone of Pythagoras’ daughters) but the attribution depends upon an emendation (Stobaeus 1.49.27 Wachsmuth). In the manuscript tradition ofStobaeus the author of this letter is a male,Aisarosor Aresas. A glimmer of personality comes through only in the apothegms of Pythagoras ’wifeTheano,afewofwhichPomeroyincludesinherchapterabouttheletters. Unlike the Theano of the letters, Theano of the apothegms comes across as a woman who was capable of expressing herself forcefully and who understood Py- 242 BOOK REVIEWS thagoras’ theoryof numbersand its connection to piety (eusebeia), and the consequencesofhistheoryoftransmigration . BytheearlycenturiesAD thisTheanohad become a legendary figure, endowed with wisdom and courage. (She is said to have bitten off her tongue so she could not answer questions posed to her by a tyrant , an act that Iamblichus in his Life of Pythagoras [194] attributes to Timycha...

This article presents an innovative manner to supplement history and foreign language classes with a 3D modeling of ancient Rome by the widely played video game Minecraft. Assuming the persona of an ancient architect, students select a building, research it in primary and secondary sources and recreate it in its original Roman location. Here I discuss the benefits of using 3D software as a learning tool and the theory and methodology behind the implementation used with my Latin I–IV students, ages 13–18. I also analyze the data resulting from two iterations and offer further suggestions for implementation.

BOOK REVIEWS The Amazons: Lives & Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World. By ADRIENNE MAYOR. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2014. Pp. vii + 519. Hardcover, $29.95. ISBN 978-0-691-14720-8. mazons: just reading the name conjures up images in our minds. Where did these images come from? For most classists and ancient historians, the answer has been the imaginations of ancient Greek artists and authors . Mayor challenges this answer and takes us on a journey from Greek poleis through Asia Minor and the Caucasus region into India, even as far as China. Mayor’s goal is to demonstrate that the legends we believe were created by the Greeksare reallytheir spin onother cultures’ tales and historical figures. Mayor criticizes standard interpretations of Amazons by saying that they only look at the legends’ Greek origin. There have been numerous articles and books that do limit their examinations of the Amazons to a legendary or mythic trope as a means to understand the Greeks and their view of their world. If the classicists that Mayor criticizes have an agenda in how they are reading texts and images about Amazons, Mayor herself has two: to prove that the Amazons were real, and to show that a great deal of cross-cultural knowledge is reflected in the Greek tales and images. To prove that there were real Amazons would be quite fantastic. However, even though Mayor documents texts, grave goods, objects, and oral stories throughout the regions she focuses on, she tries to show direct influence between other cultures’ traditions about warrior women and Greek stories about Amazons , which is often difficult to prove. The best we can do is show familiarity and similarity, and in thisMayor does an admirable job. Mayor paraphrases several non-Greek texts without quoting from them, such as a Caucasus legend about the Narts and the Central Asian Manas epic. However, we really need to see the actual passages, not simply because most of us are not familiar with them but also to learn whether they really use the term “Amazon .” This is important, because while the ancient Greeks saw the Amazons as a historical people, they differentiated between them and other nomadic and seminomadic peoples where women were also warriors. The ancient Persians, EgypA 366 BOOK REVIEWS tians, and others also used the word “Amazon” to talk about a distinct people. Yet for Mayor to call a people “Amazons,” it is good enough for them to have women warriors, hunters, or horsewomen and live in the area she is looking at. When we as scholars use the term “Amazon” to refer to anywoman who is a warrior,hunter or leader, we lose sight of what Amazons meant to the ancient cultures that used the name. Aside from potential confusion over who was or was not Amazon, there is also lack of chronological proof. As a historian, I want to see an understanding of the inevitable changes over time and as much evidence as possible to support any influences. Clearly as the Greeks learned about women warriors among those whom they viewed as barbarians, their legends changed, as did their representations of them. Mayor tries to show these influences in several ways but not in as direct a chronological fashion asI hoped. First, she attempts to show unquestioned stories about Amazons as proof that different cultures report the same tale, for example by laying out several variations of the Penthesilea and Achilles legend (pages 302–304). However, she only givesdates for a few of the sources, which range from a lostwork of Stesichorus in the 7th century BCE to the mid-12th century Byzantine Etymologicum magnum and are laid out as if they are all of equal value, even though the societies in which these workswere created varied quite a bit. Secondly, she directs our attention to various archaeological finds of women warriors. Can grave goods from the 6th or 5th centuries BCE show direct influence on stories and images of Amazons created by Greeks in the 7th century BCE? Yes, Mayor does detail a few older finds, but these, like the excavation at Semo Awtschala (73) or the Golden Warrior (76) are dated between 1200...

Whereas Plato's Socrates discusses the Delphic maxim “Know Yourself” frequently, Xenophon's Socrates does so only once (Mem. 4.2.24), in his conversation with Euthydemus, a confident young man zealous about leading the city. Previous scholars have read Socrates as equating “knowing yourself” with “knowing your powers.” But knowing your powers is only one condition of self-knowledge, as a closer reading of Mem. 4.2 shows, in particular Socrates' analogy about judging a horse for purchase. Knowing yourself means coming to act on the basis of your knowledge of justice and goodness, and acting on this basis frees you from a self-imposed enslavement. Xenophon's understanding is thus richer and more philosophically sophisticated than is usually assumed.

This article offers a reading of Penelope's lion-comparison (Odyssey 4.791–3), which has not hitherto received a sustained treatment despite its importance to Penelope's characterization. Framed by her description of Odysseus as θυμολέων, Penelope's comparison to a terrified lion graphically represents how the θυμός-destroying pain she suffers on hearing about Telemachus' departure and the suitors' assassination plans disrupts in her the qualities that define her character and underpin her “like-mindedness” with Odysseus. Because these particular qualities explicitly distinguish Penelope from Clytemnestra and Helen, their disruption leaves her future behavior in doubt during Odysseus' adventures over the next twelve books, perhaps longer.

This article offers some thoughts on Seneca's Medea and especially on lines 905–15 near the end of the play, which are key to understanding the construction of the protagonist's identity throughout the text. They bring to the fore the joint presence of anger and love in the character's psychology and, recurring to elegy as a point of entry, attempt to delineate an intertextual relationship with Ov. Am. 2.18, aiming at evoking the ‘ghostly presence of Ovid's lost Medea. The article falls into two major sections: the first part focuses on distinctive features of Seneca's portrayal of his heroine, like the representation of her intense emotions, the maius-motif, the sophisticated and complex interplay between previous models and the character's poignant self-awareness. The second part revolves around the issue of intertextuality, whereof one specific moment is spotted at a microexegetical level in the epilogue of the play.

Decimatio, or executing a portion, usually a tenth, of a Roman legionary unit, is regarded as a quintessential example of old-fashioned military discipline. It is nonetheless poorly attested in the earlier Republic, though in the first century we find more instances. This paper examines its literary manifestations and scrutinizes its historicity. By considering soldiers' access to provocatio, cultural and legal prescripts on subjecting citizens to corporal punishment, military demography, and civil war crises, it argues that decimatio went into disuse in the wake of legislation de provocatione by the 130s BCE, and was used again in the Late Republic.

While scholars have studied focalization in the Aeneid, they have given less attention to how characters think about the mental states of other characters. Theory of Mind, however, is an especially valuable aspect of the narrative for us as teachers, because understandings and misunderstandings are so relevant to our lives and those of our students.

BOOK REVIEWS Beyond the Second Sophistic: Adventures in Greek Postclassicism. By TIM WHITMARSH. Berkeleyand LosAngeles: UniversityofCalifornia Press, 2013. Pp. xiii +278. Hardcover, $49.95. ISBN 978-0-520-27681-9. hitmarsh’s Goodwin Award-winning “Adventures” lives up to its title: itisindeedasafariintosomewildandwoollyterritory,includingforays intosomeoftheleastcanonicaltextsinanacademicfield—Classics— oftenobsessedwith canonicity.Even the first paragraph includes a shot acrossthe bow: for Whitmarsh, the notion of postclassicism requires us to “rethink classicist categories inherited from the nineteenth century” (1). Thus what might seem a book geared towards contemporary reception—“beyond” in terms of chronology —is really “beyond” in terms of ideology: how (and why) we’ve structured periods of the ancient world so that they seem to flow ineluctably from the previous to the next. For Whitmarsh, one consequence of this sort of macronarrative is a marginalization (almostliteral,here)ofalternativevoicesandliteratures:Jews,Christians, Egyptians, and “bad” (or to put it more economically, under-valued) poets. Indeed , Whitmarsh sees in poetry a more valuable entrance to politics than even prose:inpoetry,thehoarytropesof“antiquity”areredeployedtocunningeffectas poetsrenegotiate, though “traditional” verse, their power and privilege under new regimes. One value—though not necessarily the value—of studying the so-called Second Sophistic is thus to upend previously established “hierarchies of cultural value” (6) and to rethink how we periodize antiquityinto neatcategories and into more(orless!)privilegedauthors.Whitmarshasksus,rather,tosuspendinherited prejudicesand to investigate,with fresh eyes, these upstart artistsof 50 to 300 CE. Of the fifteen essays that comprise the volume, ten are previously published (and here revised), but all contribute to Whitmarsh’s overarching aim: to treat SecondSophisticthinkersasphilosophersofacontestedpastandanuncertainfuture . The book itself is divided into three general arcs: on fiction and fictionality (particularly as touching upon Greek prose); on the cultural significance of both prose and poetry in changed political circumstances; and, in “Beyond the Second W 236 BOOK REVIEWS Sophistic,” on the cultural poetics of Ezekiel’s Exagoge and on specifically Jewish receptionsofprevious Greek literature. Whitmarsh’stourthroughfictionalitybeginswith“TheInventionofFiction,” a sustained critique of teleological accounts of the Imperial Greek novel. (Teleologyisoften thewhipping-boyofthisstudy.)Whitmarsh particularlytargetsnarratives that privilege the importance of Hellenistic fiction over later Roman cultural considerations and which likewise over-emphasize the Greek-ness of the novel at the expense of non-Greek influences. Subsequent chapters variously examine the consequences of Whitmarsh’s will-to-demolish, including a reconsideration of the narrative worlds of the socalled “Romances”(chapter2);theinterplayoftheology,historicity,andfictionality in EuhemerusofMessene’sSacred Inscription (chapter 3);and complementary accountsof the literary“I” and Lucius’ Ass (chapters 4 and 5). (This last featuresa terrific précis of actor and auctor, adapted from Winkler’s ground-breaking narratological study of Apuleius (81–82)). Devotés of now-popular Philostratus will want to consult Whitmarsh’s chapter on Heroicus, which interweaves considerations of cultural identity with geography, genre (i.e. the mise en scene is “superpastoral ” (108)),and, ofcourse, fictionality. Whitmarsh’smiddlesection,“PoetryandProse,”examinestheinterplayofall things Greek and Roman, and his insightful, incisive chapter nine, on the Greek epigram,isamodelofitstype.Atfirstitseemstobetravelingalongwell-wornpaths in its analysis of epigram as an essential component of the Roman system of patronage : poetry as potlatch. But it is a virtue of Whitmarsh’s scholarship that he states exactly what he’s arguing against, in this case both (1) a Bundy-influenced interpretationin whicheveryaspectofa poem contributesto the praiseof the laudandusand (2)deconstructiveinterpretations(à la Newlands)thatemphasizerather the elements of covert criticism (148).1 For Whitmarsh, both schools of interpretation ultimately flatten the complexity of Greek epigram, which triangulates as well the element of the consuming Greco-Roman public. In this way, it is (paradoxically) a public display of private gift-giving and thus a commentary on the relationship between Greek artists and Roman colonizers: who is really “gifting ”culture towhom? Epigramsforclose-readingincludeAntipater2,Crinagoras 24, and the extremely weird Diodorus 1 (with its odd description of the “city of 1 Specifically cited in this context is Carole Newlands, Statius' Silvae and the Poetics of Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. BOOK REVIEWS 237 Remus”); the chapter thus exemplifies Whitmarsh’s style, which ricochets betweencomplextheoreticalconstructsanddetailedreadingsofindividualpassages . The final arc of the study, on Ezekiel’s Exagoge, and on Jewish writers grappling with Greek myth, makes good on the author’s promise to consider Greek literaryhistoryfromneglectedviewpoints;inparticular,Whitmarsh’sexamination of the fragmentary Hellenistic Greek...