From: porson (porson@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Thu Jun 26 1997 - 10:24:27 EDT
This isn't the NT, but you will find the anthropic (?) woman in Herodotus
1.60: ...KAI <hOI> EN TWi ASTEI PEIQOMENOI THN GUNAIKA EINAI AUTHN THN
QEON PROSEUXONTA TE THN ANQRWPON KAI EDEKONTO PEISISTRATON.
In 2.74 (and elsewhere) is the use of ANQRWPOS (pl.) as a generic term
for mankind: EISI DE PERI QHBAS hIROI OFIES, ANQRWPWN OUDAMWS DHLHMONES...
In 7.210 there is this elegant distinction: DHLON D'EPOIEUN PANTI TEWi
KAI OUK hHKISTA AUTWi BASILEI hOTI POLLOI MEN ANQRWPOI EIEN, OLIGOI DE
ANDRES.
In 4.106 the Father of History waxes anthropological on dietary habits:
ANDROFAGOI DE AGRIWTATA PANTWN ANQRWPWN EXOUSI HQEA, OUTE DIKHN
NOMIZONTES OUTE NOMWi OUDENI XREWMENOI. NOMADES DE EISI, ESQHTA TE
FOREOUSI THi SKUQIKHi OMOIHN, GLWSSAN DE IDIHN <EXOUSI>, ANQRWPOFAGEOUSI
DE MOUNOI TOUTWN. Do we have here a documented instance of culturally
determined ambivalence among the ANDROFAGOI ANQRWPOFAGEONTES? I would
have thought that true ANDROFAGOI would only be ANDROFAGEONTES.
I guess, in the final analysis, old Herodotus would be in agreement with
Theresa List J on the wisdom of determining translation or equivalence in
context, even though we are snared, between text and critical apparatus,
in the editorial mystery of ANQRWPOFAGEOUSI and ANDROFAGEOUSI.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:20 EDT