Talk:Greek Anthology

Update Needed
This article seems to be little more than a copy of the 1911 article. The article's style has little to do with the typical Wikipedian style while there are no references later than 1903 IIRC. Somebody who actually knows about the Anthology, please do something. Ikokki (talk) 12:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I have an early 70s Penguin Classics selection from the Anthology and had been wondering why it wasn't mentioned in the list of translations.  I had also noticed that the article was more or less citation-free - then I put two and two together.  This is a particularly flagrant example of someone not bothering to write an actual article, but importing 1911 Britannica wholesale instead.  The culprit (as I can see in the History) was Pwqn, who I am glad to see is no longer a user (at least under that name).  Subsequent editors seem to have been either unwilling or unable to make genuine improvements and have merely tinkered with the formatting, in the vain hope of making the article look like the bulk of it is not almost a hundred years old.  As soon as I have a moment, I will do what I can to import more up-to-date info from what sources I have. In the meantime, if there are any classics scholars out there who have more up-to-date information, please get in touch. Lexo (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, we;ve imported most of the 1911 Britannica. It should be marked with the appropriate template. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 06:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if this is the place for this kind of remarks, but the link to the french version is missing in the english page, tought notin the other sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Libmind (talk • contribs) 20:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Clarification of 'Anthologia' or 'Garland'
It may be just me but I find the second para as is slightly confusing as it on first reading it suggests that Antholgia is the greek work for 'Garland' or that they are synonyms, so its not 100% clear that 'Garland' (or 'the Garland') is titular rather than descriptive.

Would anyone object to a slight re-ordering as follows (I've bolded words that are additions) While papyri containing fragments of collections of poetry have been found in Egypt, the earliest known anthology in Greek was compiled by Meleager of Gadara in the first century BC. The work is referred to under the title Anthologia, or "the Garland" as in his preface to his collection, Meleager describes his arrangement of poems as if it were a head-band or garland of flowers woven together. The work contained poems by the compiler himself and forty-six other poets, including Archilochus, Alcaeus, Anacreon, and Simonides, and made the word "Anthology" a synonym for a collection of literary works for future generations.

Let me know if anyone has a concern, or would word differently/keep the same? Bavage (talk) 14:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe it would make the distinction clearer if we gave the Greek being translated as "the Garland": Στέφανος, Stephanos? People with a little bit of Greek on them might still arrive at Anthologia = Meleager's "Garland" since ἀνθολογία = "flower-gathering". In any event, I don't see the need for mentioning Anthologia in connection to all the anthologies since it really is just a technical title.  When I run into people describing the collections of Philip or Meleager, either collection is simply called the Garland or Stephanos.  davidiad.: 20:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I like that solution better as it's even clearer - you're more expert than me by far so do you want to make a change, or shall I try? I should clarify I am also (Bavage) but I use that account for other reasons and accidentally posted yesterday when still logged in as that. This is my volunteer account :) Leela0808 (talk) 09:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikiproject Greek Anthology in Greek Wikisource
Hello, there is a project for the Anthology epigrams in the Greek Wikisource. Please see s:el:Βικιθήκη:Wikiproject Greek Anthology. --FocalPoint (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Greek Anthology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061009174407/http://www.greecetravelblog.com/greek-epigrams/greek-anthology.asp to http://www.greecetravelblog.com/greek-epigrams/greek-anthology.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

List of Poets
As the article currently stands, this section hyperlinks (ostensibly) all of the poets included in the Anthology. However, to my knowledge, the only notable (or extant) information about many of these writers is that they were included in the Anthology. Would their inclusion in this work constitute sufficient notability for their own articles? If not, we ought to remove most of the hyperlinks, as they link to pages that will never be allowed on the encyclopedia; alternatively, we could shorten the list to only those notable enough to receive articles and retitle the section to "Notable Poets Attributed in the Anthology."  anthologetes  ( talk • contribs ) 05:14, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Alternatively (and this might be best overall), we could make a "List of poets featured in the Greek Anthology" article.  anthologetes  ( talk • contribs ) 01:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * (1) The list is useful as it is - please don't trim it. (2) Whether they should all be hyperlinked, I'm not sure. Very many have sufficient discussion in scholarship for wiki articles to be written about them. The fact that some only appear in the Greek Anthology doesn't make them non-notable - discussion of their literary style, etc. may be based entirely on those poems cited in the Greek Anthology. Furius (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Assuming that this convenient list could easily be translated for the German article (de:Griechische Anthologie), I began that work. However, I soon found that verifying the links (target pages) was more of a challenge than expected. So, as a by-product, I've also got some doubts about select links in the present article's list (letter A): Still, I do believe that such a list is justified, even if only to show the vast number of authors, and their range of date, space and topics. Maybe a few descriptive words could be included to cover even those one-epigram poets who will never get an article of their own. -- Martinus KE (talk) 11:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Is Aeschines linked to the correct article? Is Aeschines, the Athenian orator, also the poet of Anthology epigrams, or should the link point to Aeschines of Miletus?
 * 2) Is Ammianus linked to the correct article? Is Ammianus Marcellinus, the 4th-century historian, also the poet of Anthology epigrams, or should the link rather point to a different person (d:Q11905357)?
 * 3) Is Antigonus of Carystus linked to the correct article? As far as I can see, the 3rd-century BC writer Antigonus of Carystus, d:Q554362, wikisource:de:RE:Antigonos 19 should be distinguished from the epigram poet d:Q575585, wikisource:de:RE:Antigonos 20 (1st century).
 * 4) Presumably, all four (or six) poets called Archias are the same person (Beckby, note in the index of his Greek/German edition). But there will probably never be certainty.
 * 5) Is Aristo properly linked? According to RE (1895), the epigram poet wikisource:de:RE:Ariston 51 is not the same person as the peripatetic philosopher d:Q2528551, wikisource:de:RE:Ariston 52.
 * 6) Artemon is linked to Artemon, a Christian theologician in the 3rd century AD. It is very hard to believe that this man would have written verses in praise of an Athenian boy, as included in Book 12(!) of the Anthology. See wikisource:de:RE:Artemon 16 vs. wikisource:de:RE:Artemon 23. – The Catalan Wikipedia article ca:Artemó (poeta) seems to be about yet another Artemon, i.e. wikisource:de:RE:Artemon 15.
 * 7) Asclepiodotus (poet): Who is this? I do not find an Anthology poet of this name (neither in the index of Paton's Greek/English Loeb edition, nor in Beckby's Greek/German edition, nor in Realencyclopädie (RE) vol. II 2 (1896) s. v. Asklepiodotos).

The poet Julianus, prefect of Egypt (d:Q21866973), lived in the 6th century AD (ca. 530). So, the link to Salvius Julianus (d:Q533755) cannot be correct. -- Martinus KE (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I changed the links for Julianus and Piso. Anyway, the list still holds a lot of other identification issues. -- Martinus KE (talk) 09:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Early editions
Currently, the article describes the Brunck, Jacobs (twice) and Tauchnitz editions like this:
 * The copy made by Salmasius was not, however, published until 1776, when Richard François Philippe Brunck included it in his Analecta. The first critical edition was that of F. Jacobs (13 vols. 1794–1803; revised 1813–17).

and:
 * Brunck's edition was superseded by the standard one of Friedrich Jacobs (1794–1814, 13 vols.), the text of which was reprinted in a more convenient form in 1813–1817, and occupies three pocket volumes in the Tauchnitz series of the classics.

If you know the editions, you might be able to understand these lines the right way. If you don't, on the other hand, I'm afraid you'll rather get a wrong picture from them. – I've got two main concerns therefore:
 * 1) The second Jacobs edition is much more than a slight revision. By rearranging the content in such a way that it follows the order of poems as given in the codex Palatinus (and thus, by discarding Brunck's arrangement), the new edition established the default practice which we still apply today. I think this would deserve to be told more clearly.
 * 2) The second Jacobs edition does not “occupy three pocket volumes in the Tauchnitz series”. These are two distinct editions, published by different publishing houses (Dyck vs. Tauchnitz). Jacobs has a lot of critical notes and such, which the Tauchnitz edition has not.

The main difference between the two Jacobs editions is immediately obvious from the book titles: Indices et commentarium adiecit Friedericus Jacobs. (vol. 1 online, for the other volumes see the library catalogue)
 * [vol. 1, 1794:] Anthologia Graeca sive poetarum graecarum lusus. Ex recensione Brunckii. Tom. I.

and: Curavit epigrammata in codice Palatino desiderata et adnotationem criticam adiecit Fridericus Jacobs (...). Tomus primus. (vol. 1 online = books 1–8, vol. 2 online = books 9–16, vol. 3 online = some 1300 pages of critical apparatus, appendices and indices)
 * [vol. 1, 1813:] Anthologia Graeca ad fidem codicis olim Palatini nunc Parisini ex apographo Gothano edita.

I think the title verbiage speaks for itself.

In the pre-copyright era of the early 1800s, if I'm not mistaken, Tauchnitz was happy to reprint what they could get hold of and what seemed to promise profit. I don't have much information on their Anthologia Graeca editions. The first one seems to have been published immediately after Jacobs' (second) original edition. An 1819 printing of the second volume is called an editio stereotypa on the title page. There seem to be 2-volume and 3-volume editions, as well as editions with Latin title pages and ones with Greek title pages. There is no mention of Jacobs or any other scholar on the title pages.

The convenient availability of good PDF copies of the pioneering editions by Jacobs allows to have an easy look for oneself. Recommended for readers with good Latin skills. -- Martinus KE (talk) 06:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposing new article
I'm thinking of moving most of the information in the "Translations and imitations" section to a new article called List of translations and imitations from the Greek Anthology, as the section is becoming unwieldy. I would add a tag linking to the new page. How do others feel about this? Ficaia (talk) 02:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * In line with the proposed new lemma List of ..., I wonder if it might make sense to move the list only to that new page. The remaining descriptive text could easily be kept here in the article.
 * On the other hand, I guess it would be hard to find good arguments why this list should be moved while the much longer list of Greek poets remains here.
 * Obviously, the list is limited to Translations and imitations in English. Are there any plans to include other languages in the new list?
 * Are there any criteria as to what should be included in the list, and what not?
 * For example, has W. R. Paton's complete translation (Loeb Classical Library) intentionally been left out because it is in prose?
 * Gordon L. Fain: Ancient Greek Epigrams. Major Poets in Verse Translation. University of California Press, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London 2010
 * Some of the epigrams were also set to music, usually based on translations, and not very often (if I'm not mistaken). So, that aspect might also be covered in the Translations and imitations section. I think Edward Elgar used verses from the volume by "Graham R. Tomson" (pseud.) for his Five Part-songs from the Greek Anthology op. 45 (1902). -- Martinus KE (talk) 23:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * My idea was to leave the paragraphs summarising the translations in this article and just move the long bulleted list to the new article. I think the broad title List of imitations... leaves room for other languages and media, as you suggest. Ficaia (talk) 17:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)