A Reappraisal of Heitz

Abstract

As part of my appeal to scholars not to limit themselves to the standard collections of fragments (i.e. Rose and Gigon) when studying the Homeric Problems, I argue that Heitz’s 1869 edition of Aristotle’s fragments is a too often overlooked collection (at least with respect to the Homeric Problems). I do this by examining two fragments in Heitz’s collection that were not included in those of Rose and Gigon. One comes from the Etymologicum genuinum, and concerns the identity of a tree (the ἀχερωΐς‎) that appears twice in the Iliad; the other comes from Eustathius’ Commentary on the Odyssey, and concerns the recognition scenes in the Odyssey involving Odysseus’ scar.