From jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu Sun Sep 17 15:10:59 2000 Received: from mxu1.u.washington.edu (mxu1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id PAA39762 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 15:10:58 -0700 Received: from ccat.sas.upenn.edu (CCAT.SAS.UPENN.EDU [165.123.88.70]) by mxu1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id PAA18573 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 15:10:57 -0700 Received: (from jod@localhost) by ccat.sas.upenn.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA01154 for classics@u.washington.edu; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 18:10:57 -0400 (EDT) From: jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu (James J. O'Donnell) Message-Id: <200009172210.SAA01154@ccat.sas.upenn.edu> Subject: Re: pigeon hole legend To: classics@u.washington.edu Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 18:10:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <200009172203.e8HM3UA21081@darwin.helios.nd.edu> from "Alfred M Kriman" at Sep 17, 2000 05:03:30 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23-upenn3.3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David Lupher wrote: > > The ordinary length > came to be closely prescribed by custom. In the Hellenistic > period and later, the subdivision of extensive works of > literature into books (tomoi, libri) was determined as much > by the conventional length of the book roll as by considerations > of content. Older long works (such as those of Herodotus, > Thucydides, and Homer) had divisions imposed on them, and > authors of long new works made their own divisions by taking > the customary length of rolls into account. Thus the physical > unit of the roll tended to function also as a literary unit. > Right, that's the proposition in general (and the pigeon holes as a specific instantiation) that I'd like to see the positive evidence for. Is this inference from practice (in which case the point about the delicacy of Hellenistic laps as opposed to Halicarnassian laps is keen) or is it reflection of some ancient testimony? Jim O'Donnell Classics, U. of Penn jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu .