FICTITIOUS MS'S. OF BOSIUS By A. C. Clark This book is DUE on the last date stamped below FA 6324 C54 Clark f i cti *b i on s i^ss Southern Branch of the University of California Los Angeles Form L 1 ■£>s Published Monthly with the Exception of January, August and September. Vol. IX. JUNE, 1895. No. 5. The Classical Review CONTENTS PAGE A. C. Clark. The Fictitious MSS. of Bosius . 242 PA<3E F. B. Jevons. Greek Burial Laws and Folklore 247 W. Lock. On the use of 7repi7reTeia in Aristotle's Poetics 251 E. A. Abbott. Notes on some Passages in Lightfoot's Biblical Essays 253 F. C. Conybeare. On the Reading of Acts i. 18 in Papias 258 A. H. J. Greenidge. On the Title ' Quaestor Pro Praetore ' 258 S. B. Platner. Notes on Punctum and Momentum 259 Reviews : Stadtniiiller's Edition of the Palatine Antho- logy. J. W. M 201 Marchant's Edition of Thucydides VII. C. Forster Smith 262 Reviews— Continued. Wilkins' Edition of the Catiline Orations. S. G. Owen 263 Ton's Ancient Ships. W. Ridgeway . . . 265 Church's Historical and Political Oiks of Horace. L. C. Purser 267 Tozer's Selections from Str&bo. J. R. S, Sterrett 268 Archaeology : A. Furtwangler. On the Lemnia of Pheidias and the Parthenon Sculptures ...... 269 Cecil Smith. On the Myth of Ixion ... 277 E. E. Sikes. On Nike and Athena Niko . 280 Monthly Record a Summaries of Periodicals 284 Bibliography 287 ILotriron: DAVID NUTT, 270 and 271, STRAND. Boston: GINN AND COMPANY, 7, 9, and 13, TKEMONT PLACE. ENTERED AT THE POST-OFFICE AT BOSTON, MASS., AS SECOND-CLASS MATTER. Price for Single Numbers, One Shilling and Sixpence (35 cents), except the February Number which is Three Shillings (70 cents). Yearly Subscription (Nine Numbers), Twelve Shillings ($3,00), or Thirteen Shillings and Sixpence, Post Free. OF MR. EDWARD ARNOLD'S LIST OF Messrs. Ginn & Co. s Publications THE COLLEGE SERIES OF GREEK AUTHORS. :.lirr tli. - B 'l rtofaMBr J W. Willi Hand Professor T. I). SEYMOUR. This series comprises a numlier of volumes selected from the works of the best Greek authors, carefully edited for tbe use •I Halve lenti ami the liigh.-r Forms In Bchoole. Each Volume eoutaina a full Introduction, with Isotes, il and explanatory . Rhythmical Bchsmei where necessary, and Appendices giving a brief Bibliography, etc. The Volumes are uniformly bound in sloth, square 8vo. PLATO : PROTAGORAS. By Principal I LE. Of. PLATO : GORGIAS. By G. Lodge. 7s. 6d. SOPHOCLES : ANTIGONE. By Professor Book I. Book HI. Book V. ■ VII By Professor C. D. Bf Professor I By Professor H. By Professor C. THUCYDIDES. Hoajus. "t THUCYDIDES Smith. Ti THUCYDIDES. N. FOVI KB. I • THUCYDIDES. i Sum Be, HOMER : INTRODUCTION TO QUAG1 ASH vkusk By rroftissor HiTMonn HOMER : ILIAD. HOMER: ILIAD. HOMER : ODYSSEY. Profeasoi Psauua, 6*. HOMER: ODYSSEY. Professor Pf.kiun. Be. PLATO : APOLOGY Professor L. Dver. 0*. LAN- ii id. Books I. -III. Books I V.- VI Books I. -IV. Books V.-VIII. AND CRITO. By Professor By Professor By By By H IK. Of. ^SCHYLUS : PROMETHEUS VINCTUS. Wecklein's Edition. Translated by Professor Allen. 7f. 6 QUDBMAN, Ptoflassex of Classical Philology, I '•. . lvania. With nena on the Dialogs, Controversy, Boorees, . -vntax, H aplete critical sp- i >r i! .-. mentsxyj nhm logrsphy mid 1 1 !•_'«, ALLEN AND GREENOUGH'S LATIN i mar for Bi • Oi unmsr. By .1 II AL1 - r\t Harvard Unlrersity, and J. II QREENOI I irTard 1,'niversit v. N>-\v Edition, Revised and Kulai. . BVO, half mom flf. THE GATE TO C/ESAR. By W. 0. COUAB, Author of " P on, "etc. I THE BEGINNERS LATIN BOOK. By Wir <:, A.M., I (Si Iuniki I A M* THE BEGINNERS GREEK BOOK. By in win i wis WHIT1, Ph. D.. Professor of G In i ' : -i 1 1 >■ . Cri oslMeathi i THE GATE TO THE ANA- basis. With Colloquia, Notes and Vocabulary. By C. W. Ci.kason, A.M. Master in the Roxbury Latin School. Small Svo, cloth, 2f. XENOPHON'S ANABASIS. Books I. -IV. With Notes. Edited by WILLIAM W. GOODWIN LL.D., Hi i.., Bliot 1'iofessor of Greek Literature, and .Kil IN WILLIAMS WHITE, Ph. D., Professor ol Greek In Harvard University. Revised Edition. Half-morocco. Of. GREEK COMPOSI- upon Xenophon's Anabasis, M. GRANT DANIEL. THE BEGINNER'S TION. Based mainly B Ok I. By W. C. COLLAR and all svo, i loth, 4f. PRACTICAL LATIN COMPOSITION. By W c. OOLLAB, Author <.f "The Beginner's Latin Book," etc. M8 pages. Crown Rvo, cloth, 6«. A Key, 2f. tjd., (in Teachers' order only. CiESAR: — GALLIC WAR, BOOKS I.-VII. Bdlted with Notes, Introductions, and Vocabulary, by Professors ALLEN and QREENOUGH, and Military Notes by Professor JUD80N. 004 pages. Crown 8vo. red SB, h ilf-n:nr0CC0, flf. -uon: EDWARD ARNOLD, 37 Bedford Street, Strand, W.C. publisher to tbc Jnofa ©fficc. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW— ADVERTISEMENTS. MESSRS. MACMILLAN & CO.'S NEW BOOKS. GREEK STUDIES. A Series of Essays. By Waltek Pater, late Fellow of Brasenose College. Prepared for the Press by Charles L. Shadwell, Fellow of Oriel College. Extra crown Svo, 10*. 6i. ATHENAEUM. — "They form, as they now stand, a harmonious and satisfying work, worthy to take its place with the other charming volumes which represent the life-work of this conscientious artist and thinker." TIMES. — " His true position in contemporary literature as a scholar of rare merits, and not merely as the master of a singularly finished style, will be fixed in the judgment of those whose opinion is best worth having by the re-publication of these admirable essays." ARISTOTLE'S THEORY OF POETRY AND FINE ART. With a Critical Text and a Translation of the Poetics. By S. H. BUTCHER, Litt.D., LL.D., Professor of Greek in the University of Edinburgh. 8vo, 10*. net. TIMES.— "There is no need to tell those who are acquainted with Professor Butcher's high reputation that his work is thoroughly well done." SATURDAY REVIEW.— "No literary project could have been more timely or more truly a desideratum, than that of Professor Butcher ; and it would be hard to picture to the mind an editor more fit for the task. ... He has done for his subject all that a very acute intelligence, and a rarely brilliant style, could effect in the way of elucidation. The translation is perfect. ... A critical edition of the Poetics, well worthy of the great Universities with which he has been and is so intimately connected. ', LATIN PHRASE BOOK. By C. Meissner. Translated from the Sixth German Edition, with the addition of Supplementary Phrases and References, by H. W. AUDEN, M.A. Globe Svo, 4*. 6d. EDUCATIONAL NEWS. — " It cannot fail to improve the prose Latinity of our schools." SCHOOL GUARDIAN.— •" Will prove helpful to the average school-boy, and be almost invaluable to the private student." CLASSICAL LIBRARY.— RECENT VOLUMES. THE POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE. A Revised Text, with Introduction, Analysis, and Commentary. By FRANZ SUSEMIHL, Professor in Greifswald, and R. D. HICKS, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Books I.— V. Svo, 18*. net. TIMES. — "The first volume of an English version, revised throughout, and considerably enlarged by the very competent translator of the well-known standard edition of the Politics by a distinguished German scholar." HERODOTUS. BOOKS IV— VI. Edited with Introduction, Notes and Appendices. By R. W. MACAN, M.A. Reader in Ancient History in the University of Oxford. 2 vols. 8vo. [Nearly ready . CLASSICAL SERIES.— RECENT VOLUMES.. PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF PERICLES. With an Introduction, Critical and Explanatory Notes, and Indices. By Rev. H. A. HOLDEN, M.A., LL.D., Cambridge, Hon. D.Litt, Dublin. Feap. Svo, 4*. 6d. SPECTATOR. — " All who have had the privilege of using, whether as teachers or learners, the admirable editions that have already come from the same hands, will welcome Plutarch's Life of Pericles, with Introduction, Critical and Explanatory Notes, and Indices, by Hubert Ashton Holden, M.A." Q. HORATII FLACCI EPODON LIBER. Edited by T. E. Page, M.A., late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge ; Assistant Master at Charterhouse. Feap. Svo, 2*. THE yENEID OF VIRGIL, BOOKS I.— VI. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by T. E. PAGE, M.A. Feap. 8vo, 6*. CLASSICAL REVIEW. — "The notes are always fresh, always instructive, always to the point. . . . As a whole there can be no doubt that this edition is far and away the best of the smaller ones on JSneid I. — VI. and in good sense and scholarship inferior to none, great or small." THE ALCESTIS OF EURIPIDES. Edited with Introduction and Critical and Explanatory Notes, by M. L. EARLE, Instructor in Greek at Barnard College, New York. Feap. Svo, 3*. Gd. CLASSICAL REVIEW. — "Dr. Earle has brought to the task of editing the Alcestis a. competent knowledge of the literature — especially the later literature— of the criticism of the Greek drama, and a trained sense of the force of Greek words and Greek construction. . . . The book is a valuable addition to the criticism and interpretation of the play." ELEMENTARY CLASSICS. -NEW VOLUMES. OVID.— TRISTIA, LIBER I. Edited, with Explanatory Notes and Vocabulary, by E. S. SHUCKBURGH, M.A., late Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Pot Svo, 1*. Gd. XENOPHON.— Anabasis, Book VII. Edited for the Use of Schools, with Notes, Intro- ductions, Vocabulary, Illustrations, and Map, by the Rev. G. II. NALL, M.A. Pot Svo. 1*. Gd. ELEMENTARY CLASSICS.-RECENT VOLUMES. SELECTIONS ILLUSTRATIVE OF ROMAN LIFE FROM THE LETTERS OF PLINY. Adapted for the use of Beginners, with Vocabulary and Notes. By C. H. KEENE, M.A. Pot Svo, 1*. Gd. THE FABLES OF PH^EDRUS. Edited for the use of Schools. With Introduction, Notes, aiid Vocabulary by the Rev. G. H. NALL, M.A., Pot Svo, 1*. Gd. MACMILLAN AND CO, LONDON. 11 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW.— ADVERTISEMENTS. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH LAW BEFORE THE TIME OF EDW VRD I By SIR FREDERICK POLLOCK, Bart., M.A., LL.D., Corpus Professor of Jurisprudence in the University of Oxford, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law ; and F. W. MAITLAND, LL.D., Downing Professor of the Laws of England in the University of Cambridge, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister- at-Law. Royal 8vo, 2 vols. 40*. A DESCRIPTIVE CATALOGUE OF THE MANUSCRIPTS IN THE FITZWILLIAM MUSEUM. Illustrated with Twenty Pages of Photographic Reproductions. By M. R. JAMES, Litt.D., Director of the Fitzwilliam Museum and Fellow of King's College. Royal 8vo, 25s. net. EURIPIDES, THE RATIONALIST : A Study in the History of Art and Relidon. By A. W. VERRALL. Litt.D., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo, Is. 6d. THE ANCIENT BOEOTIANS : THEIR CHARACTER AND CULTURE AND THEIR REPUTATION. By W. RHYS ROBERTS, M.A., Professor of Greek in the University College of North Wales, Bangor. 5s. [Nearly ready. PUBLILII SYRI MIMI SENTENTIAE. Edited by R. A. H. Bickford SMITH, M.A. Crown Svo. [Immediately. THE FOURTH BOOK OF MACCABEES AND KINDRED DOCUMENTS IN SYRI AC. First edited on Manuscript Authority by the late R. L. BENSLY, M.A., Lord Almoner's Professor of Arabic, and Fellow of Gonville and Cains College, with an Introduction and Translations by W. E. BARNES, B.D., Fellow of Peter- house, formerly Lecturer at Clare College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo, 10s. net. SOPHOCLES : The Plays and Fragments. With Critical Notes, Commentary, and Translation in English Prose, by R. C. JEBB, Litt.D., LL.D., Regius Professor of Greek in the University of Cambridge. Part I. Oedipus Tyrannus. Third Edition. Demy Svo, 12s. 6d. School Edition (Pitt Press Series), 4s. 6d. Part II. Oedipus Coloneus. Second Edition. 'Demy Svo. 12s. 6d. Part III. Antigone. Second Edition. Demy Svo, 12*. 6d. Part IV. Philoctetes. Demy Svo, 128. 6d. Part V. Trachiniae. Demy 8vo, 12s. 6d. Part VI. Electra. Demy 8vo, 12s. 6d. Part VII. Ajax. [In the Prest. GREEK AND LATIN PRONUNCIATION. By E. V. Arnold, M.A., Professor of Latin in the University College of North Wales, Bangor, and R. S. CONWAY, M.A., Professor of Latin in the University College of South Wales, Cardiff. Demy 8vo, Is. [Nearly ready. THE MODERN EGYPTIAN DIALECT OF ARABIC. A Grammar, with Exercises, Reading Lessons, and Glossaries, from the German of Dr. K. VOLLERS. With numerous Additions by the Author. Translated by F. C. BURKITT, M.A., Crown Svo, 10s. 6rf, CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.— New Volume. PSALMS. BOOKS II. and III. PSALMS XLII.— LXXXIX. By A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew in the University of Cambridge. 3s. 6d. PITT PRESS SERIES.— New Volumes. TERENCE HAUTONTIMORUMENOS. With Notes by J. H. Gray, M.A., Fellow and Classical Lecturer of Queens' College, Cambridge. 3s. PLAUTUS.— EPIDICUS from the text of G. Goetz, with an Introduction and Notes at the foot of the page, by J. H. GRAY, M.A. 3s. PLAUTUS.— ASINARIA. By the same Editor. 3s. M. CICERO.— PRO MILONE. Edited by J. S. Reid, Litt.D., Fellow and Tutor of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. 2s. 6rf. Guardian.—" Dr. Reid's work is all that we could desire. His notes, though short and clear, are full of teaching about Latin ami may be commended to the sixth-form boy or honours candidate." ° • CORNELIUS NEPOS.— LIVES OF MILTIADES, THEMISTOCLES SKSfSuSSSJ^-ffl^^U 1 ^ WUh N ° teS anaV0CabU,ar ^ **■ S ' SHUCKBURGH, M.A., late London: C. J. CLAY & SONS, Cambridge University Press Warehouse, Ave Maria Lane. c$* I 1?. The Classical Review JUNE 1895. THE FICTITIOUS MSS. OF BOSIUS. It is now fifty years since Morumsen discovered in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris a volume containing notes upon the last seven books of Cicero's Letters to Atticus, 1 in which he recognized a 'rough draft ' of the commentary published in his edition of 1580 by Simeon Dubois, or Bosius as he is generally termed, a younger contemporary of Lambinus and a brilliant J^atin scholar. He communicated the results of his collation to Haupt, who ten years later, in 1855, made the sensational announcement that the ' Decurtatus ' or ' Seidae,' and the ' Crusellinus ' of Bosius, two MSS. only known from his citations, had never existed except in his imagination. 2 lie showed that very different readings from those assigned to them in the printed edi- tion were attributed to them in the ' rough notes,' these divergences coinciding in a highly suspicious manner with a change in the conjecture made by Bosius, In one very striking case he showed that Bosius contradicts himself in the ' rough draft ' by cancelling a note and rewriting it, attri- buting to the same MS. a new reading in support of a new conjecture. The conse- quences of this article were very important, since the two chief members of the familia Gallicana were now removed, and the remaining representative of this group, the ' Tornaesianus ' or ' Turncsianus,' gravely discredited, since although it had been used by other scholars, and notably by Lambinus, 1 MSS. Lat. 8538, A. 2 Opuscula ii. 84. NO. LXX1X. VOL. IX. so that its existence could not be denied, its readings were largely known from the cita- tions of Bosius, who could no longer be considered a credible witness. The general result therefore was to concentrate the attention of scholars upon the Medicean MS., as supplying the best, if not the only, evidence for the truth. An ingenious reply was made to Haupt a few years later by Detlefsen in an article of singular learning and modesty. 3 He asked in the first place for some further proof that the book in question really contained the ' rough notes,' and hinted that it might represent the curae secundae, or subsequent corrections of Bosius. He showed that the printed edition abounds in errors and mis- prints, 4 that Bosius was careless in his quotations, that in the case of the Tornae- sianus, the existence of which cannot be doubted, different readings are attributed to it by various scholars. Lambinus is particularly inconsistent, and a formidable list can be made of his discrepancies, some of which Deth fsen considers to be as serious as those for which Bosius has been charged with fraud. He therefore argues that we should acquit Bosius of anything 3 Flcckciscn's Jahrb. Suppl. B. iii., 1857—1860, p. 113. 4 In the printed book wo find e.g. Seidae and Dec. quoted together for mcviini enim tuuvi xiii. 33, 4 ; in the MS., however, ' Scid. Turn, ct CruselV Also Dec. is ([noted where it was said to have been deficient, e.g. xi. 7, 1, xv. 29, 2, xvi. 1, 1. The rough notes show that in all these cases Dee. has been erroneously substituted for Crasell. s 6 1352 R 242 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW more than carelessness, unless we are prepared to put Lambinus in the dock beside him. This temperate and clever defence was never replied to l»y Haupt, and although it has interested many critics it has failed to convince them. The question indeed was for many years looked on as closed. Of late, however, the criticism of the Letters to Alliens has entered upon a new phase, and the interest connected with the name of Bosius has deepened. This is largely due to the masterly pamphlet of Lehmann, 1 who has shattered the pretensions of the Medicean MS. to supremacy even among the Italian MSS., and has shown the great superiority of the Transalpine recension, as represented by the MS. used by Cratander, and the Tomaesianus of Lambinus and Bosius. lie sagaciously remarks that in all probability the citations of Bosius from the latter MS. are to be trustod, since he would hardly have ventured to falsify its readings when so much was known of it from other sources. 2 The existence of the French family of MSS. has been further demon- strated by the discovery that the Library of Cluny in the twelfth century contained among its treasures a copy of the Letters to Atticus.' 6 The well-known editor of the Epp. ad Familiares, L. Mendelssohn (Teub- ner 181)3), has dwelt upon the great import- ance of this ' find,' and hinted at a possible connexion between the Cluny MS. and one of the Bosiani codices. He says, ' quippe e tenebris iam emergit familiae Callicanae... testis et antiquus et ab omni suspicione liber, ut necessitas iam existat retractandae totius illius tpiaestionis, quae est de Tornae- siano Lambini deque Bosii et Decurtato...et Novioduuensi [■i.e. < Irusellino]. Fuisse Cluni- acensem umim ex his codicibus si apparuerit, equidem non mirabor — nam Decurtatum et Noviodunensem ut cum M. Hauptio e Bosii capite ortos esse putem multame impediunt, recteque oblocutus est Hauptio D. Detlef sen, sed surdis ceciuit.' 4 The gravity of this statement as coming from so careful a scholar was pointed out by Mr. Purser in the pages of this Review [Class. Review, March,' 1894]. 1 thought: it worth while recently to re- ainine the 'rough notes' of Bosius, comparing them with the printed edition, and the article-, of llaupl and Detlef Sen. I 1 /»• Ciceronia ad Atticum vo-a], the answer being ov. • [B] 'Crusell. UT TUA TO EK TOY TOY, emendavi, ov Tatrro Zk tov avrov, i.e. (TTo/Aaros €K7ri/euo"ct [sic].' xv. 2, 2. nos videmur esse victuri. [ft] ' Turn. VICTOR!, Crusell. VICTOB E, credo Ciceronem scripsisse, VIETO ORE aut VI KIT OBIS.' [B] ' Omnes antiqui nostri non videmur esse victor i : credo Ciceronem scripsisse, non videmur cesse victori, nam cesse pro cessisse veteres dicebant.' xv. 18, 1. in lacu navigarcm. [ft] ' NA VIGITAUK.il . . . reperimus in Crusellino.' i [ B] ' Torn, et in lacuna vigil We//t, Crusell. et in ea cuna vigilarem. Reposui, el in ea cur a vigilarem.' xv. 20, 1. Quis enim haec, ut scribis, t anteno ? \ft\ 'partim ANTENO, partim ATENO in vett. codd. nos ATHENIO.' He refers to the ' princeps fugitivorum ' in the Sicilian servile war. \ft] 'Torn, anteno. Crusell. enteno, reposui, (V KCl'W. xv. 2(3, 1. velle. r2 244 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. [ft] "' pro vellem castigavi ex eodem Crusell. velle.' [B] ' scripsi velim eodeni Crusell. auctore.' ib. 4. octavam partem ftuli luminarum medium ad slrane. \P] •Turn. OCTAVAM PARTEM TULI LUMINARUM MEDIUM ASTRA. Crusell. OCTOVAM PARTEM TULLI ILLUM1 N A 1 : i N T AE DI D ft I A STURA, castigavi, octonam partem Tulli iUuminarim aedium aOvpa.' [B] ' Crusell. octavam partem tuli lumi- mirvm in aedium astiva. Voceui astiva men- dosam puto, iu ceteris nihil mutandum. Repono vero advpa = to. avev Ovpi^wv.' xvi. 11, 8. meque de Torquati negotiolo scit arum puto. [ft] ' prave in editt. SCITURUM PUTO, ex Crusell. correxiinus, SI TUTUM PUTO.' He explains by an ellipse of deero [neque deero]. At the end of the MS. on the last page a new draft of this note appears, 'omnes vett. libri NE QUE et Crusell. pro SCITURUM OSCITURUM, saepe vitiose QUE scribitur pro Q. [i.e. Quintus Cicero]. ' Pro neque reposui NE Q., et OSCITATURUM. NE est particula ad- t'ninandi;' i.e. 'I think Quintus will neglect the matter.' [B] ' recte Crusell. negotiolo stiturum puto.' Bosiu.s finally ascribes to his MS. the conjecture of Malaspina. xvi. 12. bonum animum. [ft] 'BONUM EN1M veteres omnes i. After erasing this, he again wrote BONUM ENIM, which he again struck out. and gave as follows. ' Turn. BONUM ENIM, Crusell. AN BONUM ENIM. Scripsimus, AMBOUNUM ENIM/ [B] ' Torn, bonum enim, Crusell. pono "hi enim. Puto Ciceronem scripsisse, irovov- fiai en/ in.' xvi. 14, 3. Avi tui pronepos. \ft) 'Crusell. QUINCTUS TUI VI PRO- NEPOS, emendavi, TUI AVI PRONEPOS.' [B] 'Crusell. Quinctua out tui pronepos, emendavi, avi lui pronepos. 1 This lasl instance is perhaps the most diking of all. Bosius wished to appro- priate avi tui the correction of Muretus [Q. tui, M. qui tui, ed. lens.]. In ft. however, he gives the words in a different order, the reading ascribed to Crusell. varying accord ingly. [II.] Cases in which a striking reading mentioned in ft is dropped silently in B. x. 10, •>. vel lintriculo, si navis non erit. [ft] 'Turn, et Crusell. LINTR1 D1CILO [lutridiculo, Turn, teste Lambino], nos LINTRI AIKJ2AU, i.e. Sikwt™.' xi. 23, 3. fvel in Metellae. [ft] 'Turn. VEL IN METELLA [Me- tellae, Turn, teste Lambino], scidae, VEL IN ME SELLAE, lego VEL 1MAE SELLAE.' This he fancifully explains of Dolabella's traduclio ad plebem. xiii. 40, 1. fhic autem utfultum est. [ft] < recte legitur in scidis, UT FULTUI EST' xiv. 14, 1. ioca tua...de haeresi Vestoriana et de Pherionum more Puteolano. [ft] 'Dec. DE HARUSI VESTOR1NA, edidimus, de upvaec Vestorina. locum Attici iu Vestorium refert qui Puteolis tamquam e puteo quodam pecuniam haurie- bat, ut earn palam fenori collocaret.' For this extraordinary fancy he quotes Plato, Leg. viii. p. 844 07ra)s p.r] Savei^wrrcu Trap' erepaiv, urjh' e7r' aWorpias Trrjyas ftahitfiidi. xv. 3, 1. acta in aede Apollinis. [ft] 'Turn. ACTA ME IN AEDE, Crusell. ACTxV A ME IN AEDE, puto illud A notani esse, quae significat absente.' [III.] Cases where readings not mentioned in ft are ascribed to MSS. in B. xiv. 20, 5. haec fscripsi. B. 'post scripsi add. citatim, ut diserte in Crusell. exaratum reperi.' xv. 2, 4. de qua t causa laborat. B. ' Crus. de quo causo laborat, conieci, Kavaw laborat.' t [IV.] Cases where the same conjecture is retained, but the readings ascribed to MSS. are modified. I give a selection only. xii. 21, 2. Si vero etiam a Faberio aliquid ^recedit. [ft] 'Dec. ETIAM SI ARARIO ADNO VITIUS ESSET.' [B] ' Dec. etiam si a rario ad novi tuis esset, reposui, etiam si aerario adnovitivs esset,' i.e. 'a new clerk in the treasury.' xii. 38, 4. Kvpos 8' e'. |/3] 'Turn. Kvpo-as, Scidae, KTPOC AE.' [BJ'Torn. KTPCAC, Dec. KTPOCAC, lego Kipos 8' e'.' He learnedly defends this brilliant emendation by a reference to Diogenes Laertius vi. 16. xv. 20, 2. quo causae cursus est. \ft] 'Turn. QUA CAUSSA CURSUS EST, Crusell. QUA CAUSSA AC CURSUS EST.' [I>| ''lorn, qua caussa cursus est, Crusell. qua caussa occur sus est, legend um, qua caussa ac quorsus est.' xv. 24. ^hns. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 245 [ft] 'Crusell. et Turn. H MIS' [B] ' Torn. HNIS, Crusell. H II TT, hoc est, hora quarta.' xv. 26, 1. in audi vi ' L. Pisonem. [ft] 'INAUDIVI ex Crusell. reposuimus, U Turn. IN ADIBILL' IB] ' Crusell. inandihili Pis., conieci, inaudivi L. Pisonem: Bosius obviously got the idea of this beautiful correction from Torn., the reading of which he suppresses in B. All previous editors had kept the unintelligible reading inandibili. ib 4 servitutis putat aliquid habitnros. [ft] ' Turn. APUD TALE, Crusell. APUT TA FjI.' He conjectures a puteali. [B] 'Torn, apud tale, Crusell. apud talis.' xvi. 13 a, 2. via mala. [ft] 'Crusell. VIA MARA.' He con- jectures via ufj.dpa. [B] 'Torn, via viata, Crusell. via amata.' [V.] In many cases he assigns to his MSS. readings conjectured by previous scholars, e.g. xi. 9, 1. constitueraut. Manutius had here conjectured quieveram. Bosius says ' in quibusdam nostris sciueram, in Dec. ciueram, arbitrates sum fuisse cuieram pro quieram...Ka.Ta o-vyKoirty pro quieveram' He does not mention Manu- tius. xii. 1, 2. id est ii Kal. [ft, B] ' Manutium optimum hie fuisse coniectorem probat haec lectio Dec. ii Kal.' xv. 19, 1. epywSes sed ui/cktoV. [B] 'Crusell. ANICTON, unde iudicavi certam esse coniecturam H. Stephani... awa-rov.' This does not appear in ft. xvi. 4, 4. Etesiis utemur. [ft] 'Crusell. ETESIIS, Turn. ET TES- [B] ' MSS. nostri et est is, unde recte Lambinus reposuit Etesiis.' These instances might be greatly multi- plied. 1 In many cases also he ascribes to one of his MSS. good readings previously only known from Torn., e.n .W. i. 6, 115. arrived is that Bosius never had any MS. of importance before him except the Tornae- sianus. It was nearly always the reading or the corruption found in this from which he started, though in the printed book he is frequently at pains to disguise his obligation. Thus on xii. 4, 2 si a sententiis eius dictis, he says in the printed book, ' vulg, sententiis, recte vero Dec. seriis.' In /? he is fuller, adding < sed et in Turnes. SENTIS exara- tum est, quod propius abest a SERIIS quam a SENTENTIIS ' thus supplying the miss- ing link between the ordinary reading and his conjecture. The question as to how far Bosius can be trusted in his quotations from the Tornae- sianus is of great importance on account of the unique value of that MS. I here entirely agree with Lehmann in thinking that he reported these truthfully, since on the one hand falsehood woidd have been soon detected and on the other the motive was wanting, since, although he probably started from the Tornaesianus, it is always to Dec. or Crusell. that he ascribes readings which so suspiciously resemble his conjec- tures. Also the discrepancies in his account of the readings of this MS. are few and unimportant. A very interesting note in the mai'gin of fi shows that the Tornae- sianus was in the possession of Bosius, and that he referred to it to verify his state- ments concerning it. xv. 4, 1. X Kal. hora VIII. He remarks in /?, ' restituimus ex Turn, cod. notam H ante illud VIII, qua nota significatur Hora.' In the margin comes the significant entry Vide in e.rem/Jari Timiesiano an ita sit. In B the note takes a different form, ' explicate scripsi, ut erat in Crusell. hora Villi [a misprint for VIII] fere, in aliis 8iu arjfieiaiv . . . ff. VIII fere.' A similar entry is on xv. 2G, 1. |/3] 'Turn, et Crusell. QUEM ADMO- DTJM ACCIPIANTUR II LUDI DEINDE OMNIA RELIQUORUM LUDORUM IN DIES SINGULOS PEKSEQUARE.' He adds in the margin vide. In B this reading is silently dropped. The explanation probably is to be found in the fact that this reading is assigned to ' Lambinus et v. c.' in the margin of the posthumous edition. Bosius naturally took v.c. to mean Tornaesianus, and according to his custom added the support of his trusty ( 'riist'lNnus. Then on reference to Torn. finding that he was mistaken he dropped the reading. In so far then as it goes to THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 247 show that Bosius was careful to give the true readings of Tom., I hope that the results of this discussion may not be wholly negative. I would conclude with a suggestion con- cerning the jyrovenance of the Tornaesianus or Turuesianus, which I have not seen else- where discussed. The latter name is given to it by Lambinus, and by Bosius in his rough notes ; in his edition he employs the former. It. occurred to me that the adjec- tive was in all probability formed from Johannes Tornaesius, or Jean de Tournes, the printer of Lyons who published for Lambiuus the first edition of his Horace. This- conjecture is confirmed by the fact that in his Preface to Horace Lambinus speaks of a liber Tornaesianus which he obtained from this source : : liber item calamo scriptus vetustissimus a lo. Tornaesio typographo Lugdunensi nuper insperanti Lugduni obla- tus est.' The reference is probably to Jean II, as he is termed, the son of the founder of the house. He was a scholar as well as a printer, and edited Petronius. He was a strong Calvinist and, when compelled in 1585 to leave France on account of his religious opinions, emigrated to Geneva, where he re-opened his business. 1 Albert C. Clark. 1 Bulletin du bibliophile, Sept. 1856, p. 917. Since tin's was sent to press, Mr. Purser lias pointed out that the connexion of the name of the MS. with de Tournes was suggested by Lehmann. GREEK LAW AND FOLK LORE. Between the laws made by Solon about funerals and the laws made by the Boeotians and the provisions of the XII. Tables at Rome on the same subject the resemblance is so great that Plutarch and Cicero thought that the laws of their own countries were 1 (Giro wed from those of Solon. The funeral law of Iulis in Ceos, of which we have a stone record (Roehl, Inscr. Antiquiss. No. 395), is on the same grounds considered by MM. Dareste, Haussoullier and Reinach (Inscriptions Juridiques Grecques i. 11) to have been inspired by Solon's legisla- tion. All these laws are commonly counted as sumptuary laws; but, if they were, they signally failed of their purpose, for the pomp of a Roman funeral was considerable, and in Greece ' the death of a man, with his funeral and monument, often cost more than many years of his life' (Boeckh, P.JE. 114). But the sumptuary idea, though undoubtedly true to some extent, requires some stretching to make it fit all the facts : the only expense saved by the prohibition of loud wailing, for instance, was an expen- diture of breath ; and though the fixing of the burial-hour for the time just before sun-rise might conceivably deter extrava- gant display, still the Athenian who took his seat at the theatre before day- break would probably be prepared to rise betimes in order to see a really good funeral. And there is a point at which the sumptuary idea avowedly breaks down. The law of Iulis forbids (1) the placing of a cup under the bed of the dead man, (2) the poinding out of the water, (3) the carrying of the sweep- ings to the tomb, fxk viroTiBivai kvXlkol t'7roTv)y K.\ivr)V, fie&e to vSwp eV^er, fieSe to. KaWva/xara (f>epev 677-1 to crrjfxa, on which the comment of M. Dareste and his colleagues is 'Interdic- tion de certains usages superstitieux. Nous ne connaissons pas le sens de ces usages.' Superstitious these usages are, and it is to the superstitious mind that we must appeal for their sense. The practice of ' pouring out the water ' was combated in later times by the Christian Church, as appears from the Sammlung der Decrete of Burchard of Worms (fl024), quoting, e decreto Eutychiani papae (t283), cap. 9, the following ' interrogation ' : fe- cisti illas vanitates aut consensisfi, quas stultae mulieres facere solent, dum cadaver mortui hominisadhuc in domo jacet, currunl ad aquam et adducunt tacite vas cum aqua, et cum sublevatur corpus mortui, eandem aquam fundunt subtus feretrum. This quotation brings the actual process before our eyes, but does not give the sense of (lie practice. For its explanation we must ask the German peasant. Wuttke, in his Deutsche, Volksalerglaube der Gegemoart (18G9), gives us two modern instances of this ancient superstition: when the corpse is removed from the house water must be poured out thrice from a (green) jug, else the dead man will return (§ 737) ; and the water in which the corpse has been washed is to be poured out behind the bier, then the dead man, if he does return, cannot 248 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. cross over it and so is prevented from getting into the house (732). The other two prohibitions of the Iulis law have also their exact counterparts in German folk lore ; and are quite intelligible if we remember that, according to the primitive and superstitious view, the soul when it leaves the dead man's lips is a little light and feeble thing which Hits and flutters about and settles here and there, and if the window is open will fly out. Hence the German belief (725) that it is apt to lodge in any open vessel, from which we may infer that the kv\l£ was set to catch the soul. Why the soul should be caught appears from the superstition about the sweepings : the soul may fall to the ground, and the German peasant consequently sweeps out the room as soon as the corpse is removed from it (737). In Rome the room was swept out by the everriatores. The Cean swept the room out and carried the sweepings to the tomb. Evidently, the cup and the sweepings were both emptied into the grave, to make sure that the soul remained there and not in the house. These three superstitious usages then, which are unintelligible to French savants, would be readily understood by the Gewnan peasant. And there are other provisions in the law of Iulis, about which the peasant can give us information. The lawgiver ordains that the corpse on the bier is not to be entirely covered by the grave-clothes (pe Ka\vTTT€V Tab u\o(r\€pia Tot? epaTiois). The German peasant will tell you that, if the corpse is only partially covered, the deceased will become a revenant of the worst type, viz. a Nachzehrer, one who not only ' walks ' but caiTies off the living to his grave (732). From this it seems probable that the Ceans covered their corpses entirely, in the belief that otherwise the deceased would walk, but that the Cean lawgiver for some reason did not encourage this belief. The Ceans also would have liked to leave the bed and all the clothes of the deceased in the tomb with him and to break the pottery used in the funeral libations and leave the potsherds there too, but the lawgiver forbade it (tu Se uyycta aTroepccr6ai Tr/y kXiVTJV U7TO TOW arjfXUTO^ Kttl TU (TTpo'j/XttTa iiTffiepev ivboo-e). In Germany too the straw on which the deceased has lain is to bo taken to the churchyard and left at the church door, in order that the dead man may not come back to look for it (739) ; his pottery is to be broken, for the same reason (729) ; the dead man does not like other people to wear his clothes (742), and genei'ally ho may come back for anything of his own that ho wants and has not got (745) ; so it is intelligible that the Ceans should have wished to bury with him everything that was his and so leave him no excuse for returning. But what of the lawgiver 1 why was he so anxious to keep the soul in the house in the first instance ; and, if that failed, then at any rate to offer the soul no inducement to remain in the tomb 1 A possible answer to these questions is suggested by two provisions in the Cean law, each of which has its counterpart in Solon's funeral legislation. The first is that which, both at Athens and Ceos, forbids any woman (at Athens any woman under sixty years of age) to enter the room from which the deceased has just been removed unless she is the daughter of a cousin of the deceased or is related still more nearly to him (p.^8' eh ra toO awoOa- voVtos elativat orav i^evc^Orj 6 vIkvs yvvatKa fjLYjSe/xiav 7rX?/v oVou cvtos aveif/taSwv elatv, Dem. C. Macart. § 62, pyjrepa ko.1 yvvatKa Kai dSeA^ects Kai Ovyarepas avcif/ttov, Cean law), in fine only the dyy/cn-eis were admitted, that is to say, only those who were qualified to take part in the worship of the deceased's spirit and to inherit ab intestato. The other provision of the Cean law is tols yumi/cas ras toucras €7ri to /0780s a7rierai 7rpoTcpas rwv avbpwv airo tou cnJpaTO?, and the object aimed at by this provision was, as I shall try to show, the same as that of Solon's law which ordered that in going to the tomb the men should walk before the bier and the women after it. Bearing in mind the superstitious concep- tion of the soul as a light, fluttering thing, we can understand certain German super- stitions and apply them to the Greek funeral law. These superstitions are that, when the procession starts, the soul rides on the top of the bier or hearse ; and conse quently any person, riding or driving, who passes the bier is sure to carry the soul back with him to the village ; while if, in the absence of any such rencontre, the soul reaches the grave along with the body, then the bearer who is the first to start home carries the soul back (and must say certain things to get rid of it, Wuttke 746). The effect therefore of tho Cean lawgiver's legislation would be that tho women, starting back first from tho tomb, would convoy the soul home ; while the result of Solon's enactment would be that if, on the way to the tomb, the soul got dislodged from the bier, it would probably alight on THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 249 one of the women behind. On returning to the place in which the deceased had died and from which the Cean legislator was at so much pains to prevent the soul's being ejected, it was again the women cly^tcrm?, both in Ceos and Athens, who alone were admitted. The immediate object then of these regulations may have been to ensure the contact of the soul with the women dy^io-reis, and the purpose of that contact was not liable to be frustrated by the presence of stranger-women of sixty, i.e. past the age of child-bearing. In other words, the purpose was to secure the re-birth of the soul of the deceased in his own family. ' Algonkin women who wished to become mothers nocked to the side of a dying person in the hope of receiving and being impregnated by the passing soul ' (Frazer, Golden Bough i. 239). The Greeks also believed that a soul could be re-born in this way, as is indirectly proved by the existence of the words vo-repo- 7roT/xos and 8euTepo7roT/tos and their interpre- tation by Hesychius, iiroTav rivl ws tcOvcwtl tu vo/xit,6/xeva iyevero koll varepov ai'€(pdvr] t,dv ....no oevrepov otu. yvvaiKtiov koXttov SiaSus' o')S €0os r/v irapa 'AOwvaiois Ik SevTepov yevvacr- 6ai. A man, being abroad, is reported home as dead. His friends perform the usual funeral rites, and then he comes back saying that he never has been dead. This statement may or may not be true. If untrue, then he is what the Germans call a Nachzehrer, and the Slavs a vampire, i.e. a dead man who assumes the guise of life in order to carry off his surviving relatives to the grave. Once to admit him to the house was to give him a right of way and he could come again and again until he had carried off all the living inmates of the house. The best thing therefore was to treat the returned traveller as being really the soul of the deceased. Now apparently there was only one way in Athens in which a soul could return to the family, and that was by being re-born into it. The Seirrepo7roT/Ao? therefore went through a symbolical re-birth, and having been thus re-admitted as a legitimate member of the family was bound to behave as such and not as a vampire (for the Roman way out of tho difficulty, see Plutarch's Roman Questions 5). I would suggest therefore that the regulations about the uyxio-m? were not reforms or innovations introduced by or borrowed from Solon but were ancient customs legalized, and that the other provisions of the Cean law were not directed so much against extravagance as against practices which tended to frustrate the purpose of the ancient customs. Whether tho dyxKrms regulations were or were not inspired by the motive suggested above, the forbidden usages are remarkable. It is interesting to find that they were forbidden by the legislator of lulls just as they wore forbidden by the decroto papae Eutychiani. It is not strange that they were forbidden either by a Legislator who believed in ancestor- worship, or in a country where the spirit of the deceased house-father was regarded as the good spirit of the family and where in early times his body, by a common Aryan custom, was buried actually in the house (Plato Minos 315 D) in order to secure the continual presence of his beneficent spirit. But it is strange that in such a country and amid such beliefs, usages should have grown up, the only purpose and effect of which can have been to drive away his spirit. And, being strange, it invites speculation. But first it may be well, as everything turns on this, to show that a belief in something like vampires did as a matter of fact Qxist in ancient Greece. I might begin by giving instances of the widespi-ead belief in vampires in modern Greek folk-lore, or by quoting the two ancient instances given by Rohde (Psyche p. 651), viz. the tale of Philinnion and Machates (which is hardly a vampire story) in Phlegon Mir. 1, and the Clytemnestra of the Eumenide8 ; but this is an article on Greek law, and therefore I will begin by the Athenian law referred to by Aeschints (contra Ctes. 244) in the words, idv tis o.vti>i> SiaxpywyTat, rrjv x e ^P a T V V T0 ^' T0 Tpa^atrov ^ojjuts tou o-(l)fxaToi' Trpocrcpopds kcu ein^s kuI i^aX/jiwStas Kai tt}s youi£cy/.eVr?s ocria? arreptaOai d£iot), and I am told by a distinguished canonist that ' where ecclesiastica sepultura was forbidden that always I believe meant exclusion from the consecrated ground.' Plato's legislation on suicides is (873 1)), rdcpovs 8' elvat tois oi'toj cpOapitcrL irpMTOv p.ev Kara /xovas /xr?Se /xe0' cvo? £vvTU(pov, eira QditTUV GbcXeeis auroi's, p.y7e crr^Xat? p.y)re. ovo/xacn 8t]XovvTa<; tovs racpovs. In a previous paragraph I spoke of vampires acquiring a ' right of way.' The expression was used advisedly, to indicate the attitude of the superstitious mind to forms of law : in the middle ages vampires were formally prosecuted for trespass, noxious vermin and insects were served with legal notices of ejectment (the- Cxeoponica recommends a similar process), and amongst the Scandinavians by the laws of Haco, the foster-son of Athelstane, the killing of a beaver involved the payment of a fine for bloodwite, as the killing of a man the payment of wer-geld, for the beaver had a domicile and rights as an inhabitant, though ' bear and wolf shall be outlaws in every place ' (Palgrave's English Commonwealth II. cxli.). And this brings us to tv olkcls ( AO. ttoX. C 57) of Attic law. The language of Plato (873 E) and the fact that inanimate objects were formally tried in the court of the Prytaneum by the kings and the tribe-kings, makes it probable that the animal accused of murder actually appeared in court as the prisoner in the dock ; and this is rather confirmed by the eaidy Teutonic laws which decree that the wer-geld for a man killed by a domestic animal shall be paid half by the owner and half by the guilty animal itself, 'ipsum vero quadrupedem qui est auctor criminis pro medietate compositionis restituat ' (dominus pecudis), Leg. Sal. xxxviii., cf. Leges Alaman. xlviii. 22, 'si canis alienus hominem occiderit, medium Weregeldum solvat.' Possibly the well- known trial-scene in the Wasps was not an absolutely novel idea of Aristophanes.' The trial of inanimate objects, twv dipvxw t&v i/nreain'TOiv ko1 diroKTeivdvTinv (Poll. viii. 1 20, cf. Dem. c. Aristocr. 76, idv \i'6o<; ?} £v\ov rj (Tibi/pot; r/Ti toiovtov e/x7rc and p. G8. It rently the action of Danaus himself in is that 7T£pi7r£T£ia is simply any event in arresting Lynceus led to the deliverance of which any agent's intention is overruled to Lynceus and his own doom. Another produce an effect which is the direct oppo- instance of the use of the word is to be site of that intention. It belongs to the found in a late writer who seems to class of actions half-voluntary, half-involun- have been influenced by Aristotle's literary tary, discussed in the Ethics (TIL i.), in criticism, the Venetian Scholiast on Homer : which the action is deliberate, but the result in //. ii. 155 sqq. Agamemnon is anxious to is not intended, but is produced contrary to stir the Greeks to make an attack upon Troy; the agent's intention, owing to his ignorance he tests their courage by proposing that they of the exact circumstances of the case. should give up the war and sail home ; they Iv Towroi? £A.€09 Kcu o-uyyvwp>r o yap tovtmv ti take him at his word and prepare for flight 252 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. and are only stopped by the action of Odysseus under the influence of Hera. Now in this case no reversal of fortune occurs ; all that happens is that a diplo- matic move on the part of Agamemnon is almost overruled to produce the exact opposite of his intention, and the Venetian Scholiast applies to this the word TrcpnreTua : his comment on Homer's treatment of the scene being, as too-oCtov irpodyei tus — epi- — £T€('as (Ls fJ.ll Oi'vairdcu auras uWov el fty llqvov ficraOeivai to Beiov (quoted in Vahlen's criticus apparatus on 1454& 2). A few more instances will make the matter clearer. In the Merchant of Venice, Shylock insists on the exact letter of his bond that he may cause the death of Antonio, but the result of that insistence is the forfeiture of his own life : that is a TrepnreVaa. In the story of Adrastus, as related by Herodotus and followed by W. Morris in 'The Son of Croesus,' Croesus sends Adrastus to take charge of his son and keep him from all danger, but it is the hand of Adrastus that throws the dart which kills his son : that is a TrepnreTeLa, and in this case the reversal of fortune is iden- tical in time with it. In the book of Esther Hainan goes to the king's palace to speak unto the king to hang Mordecai ; but the result is that he goes away arraying Mordecai and causing him to ride through the street of the city and proclaiming ' Thus shall it be done unto the man whom the king delighteth to honour.' This is a 7T£/H7r£Taa, but the reversal of his fortune follows at some time afterwards and is only indirectly due to this. Again, in the book of Genesis, Joseph's brothers sell Joseph that they may be quit of him aud his dreams ; but the result is that the dreams are fulfilled and he saves their lives — ' God sent me before you to preserve you a remnant in the earth and to save you alive I))' a great deliverance : so now it was not you that sent me here but God ' ; but the change in Joseph's fortunes had already taken place : ' he hath made me a father to Pharaoh and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt.' Lastly it will be sufficient to hint at the greatest of all irepiirereuu in the world's history, when the crucifixion which was intended to destroy the impostor of Nazareth and save the Jewish race resulted in the lifting up of the Son of Man and the ruin of Judaism (cf. esp. S. John xi. 47 — 53, Acts iv. 10, 25—28). (/>) This view is confirmed by the fact that Aristotle apparently contemplates that there may be more than one 7r£pi7reVaa in the same play, cf. 1452a 32 KaWio-TT) St nvaypwpicris, orav dfia 7r£pi7i-£T«ai yiVwvrai, olov e^ei f] iv tw OiStTToSi. This may, perhaps, press the use of the plural unduly, but, as a matter of fact, there are two in the Oedijjus Tyrannus. The first is to be found in 709 sqq. where Jocasta quotes the failure of the previous oracle given to Laius in order to make Oedipus distrust the oracle given to himself ; but the result is that both oracles are thereby proved to be true. The second is the case quoted by Aristotle and already discussed. In one case Jocasta's intention is overruled, in the other that of the Corinthian messenger ; but the reversal of fortune is a reversal primarily of the fortunes of neither of these two, but of Oedipus, 1 and is subsequent in time to each 7Tfpi7r£T£(a. (c) It is extremely interesting to note the bearing of this interpretation on the main conception of Greek Tragedy. Mr. Abbott (Hellenica, p. 62) rightly repudiates the statement that the tragedy of the Greeks is no more than a tragedy of destiny, and adds that Aristotle has no allusion to destiny in his Poetics. This is not exactly true ; certainly the Greek tragedy is not primarily fatalistic, it leaves room for the hei'o's free will. Yet here in irepi 7T£T£ia, i.e. in one of the three events which lead to a change of fortunes, we are in the presence of something above the man's free will, something akin to destiny. Such 7r€pi7reTEiai are classed by Aristotle among Oavixao-Ta (Rhet. i. ii.) ; they do show man that he is not always master of his fate, that he is in the presence of powers which may entirely overrule his intention, not merely thwarting it but converting it into the very opposite. In a word Trepiiri'Tua is to actions what irony is to language. In the latter case, words are caught up by circumstances and charged with a fuller meaning than the speaker meant; in the former, deeds are equally caught up out of his grasp and chax-ged with a meaning the very opposite of that which the agent meant. These words from the treatise falsely attributed to Plutarch, wept tov (3iov Kal T7/s 7ronycr£tos 'Ofxtjpov ii. C 120, will exactly illustrate the point : i^yiirai lievroi xat uirros, toenrep koX fitr avrbv oi Soki/xmtutoi tu)v cpiXoo-ocjiW', riAaTwv Kal 'ApioroTfiAr/s Kal Qfoe^paoTOS, oi irdvra KaG" tifiapfievrfv 7rapa- yiveaoai, a/\Aa tl kuI eiri tois dvOpdmois aval, 1 Cf. Soph. Konig Oedipus ed. G. Kern. Gotha 1884. '716 Peripetie— Erste Punkt ; 1021, Peri- petia — Zweiter Punkt.' THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 253 mv vTrdp^eiv p\v to eKOvaiov, tovtu> 6e ttws crvvd-nT(.LV to KaTr/vayKaa/xevov, otolv tis 7rpa£as o (SovXtTai ets o /^»; fSovXerai €/x7recrrj. There is one passage in the Poetics where Ibis technical use of 7T(pnreT€La is probably not used. In 14516 29 tbe recognition of Odysseus by his nurse (Od. xix. 396 sgq.) is described as Ik 7repi7reTeias in opposition to ■mo-Tews eVeKa. Professor Butcher translates it here ' that which results from a turn of fortune ' ; but this can scarcely be right. The recognition does not result from any turn of fortune : that turn in the fortunes of Odysseus has not taken place, Odysseus being still a beggar. Possibly, Vahlen's in- terpretation is admissible here, though neither he nor Susemihl apply it to this pas- sage ; the reference might be to Od. xix. 389-391, where Odysseus deliberately tries to hide the scar but his intention is frus- trated by the nurse. It would thus mean, ' in spite of the person's own efforts,' and this makes an excellent antithesis to 7ti'o-t€ojs eVe/f Irenaeus and should have been at least justified by examples, or mentioned as doubtful. (The brackets apparently indicate that this addition is made by those who edited Lightfoot's MS. ) Far more probable than such a rendering would be the hypothesis that 'ah his' had dropped out ('ab his qui [ab his] didicerant 1 ) as being a repetition : but the Latin may very well represent irapa twv tous airoarSAovs twpa- kotwv teal rQ>v irttp' avrSiv aKovcravniiv. The distinction between those wdio had 'seen' the Apostles (as Irenaeus had 'seen' Polycarp) and those who had 'beard' i.e. received instruction from them, is a very natural one. 2 The words 'from thirty... young ' could hardly have been intended by Lightf. to be printed as a quotation, the original being ' Quia autem triginta 1 1 1 in nil tn aetas prima indoliscst juvenis, et extenditur usque ad quadrageshnum annum, omnis quilibet confitetur': and would Lightf., on revision, have accepted ' young ' as a rendering of 'juvenis' ? 3 Probably, too, Lightf. wrote 'this account,' not • his account ' (napaheSaiKti'ai ravra). THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 257 ;iutem et quinquagesimo anno declinat jam in aetatem seniorem : quam habens Dominus noster docebat.' Now the italicized words must mean ' which age viz. aetatem seniorem,' or ' old age,' ' the Lord had (or, was beginning to have) ' : and although the context demands a different rendering, none different ought to have been given without warning of the deviation from the text. 1 In the face of these words I do not under- stand how Lightfoot can say (B. E. p. 57) ' Irenaens does not commit the elders of the Asiatic School to his own interpretation of the passage quoted from St. John's Gospel, nor to his own view that our Lord was close upon fifty years old. He only asserts that the Gospel and the testimony of all the elders together support the view that our Lord was past middle life.' But Irenaeus' theory is that Jesus (ii. 22, 4) came to sanctify ' every age,' and that he was ' a mature man (juvenis) among mature men ' and 'an old man among old men (senior in seniori- bus) ' ; and for this purpose it would not have sufficed that He should have simply ' declined towards old age (declinasse in seniorem aetatem) : He ought at least so closely to approximate to it that He might be called 'old' ('senior'). Accordingly, his statement is, in effect, ' Dominus noster aetatem seniorem habens docebat ' ; the evidence is given by ' Evangelium et omnes seniores ' — all at least who had met (1) (o-vfxfiefiXvKOTes) John ; these elders say that John handed down 'these things (Gk. TaiTa),' or ' this very thing (Lat. id ipsum).' Some too had heard ' these same things (haec eadem) from the lips of other Apostles.' What can be more definite than this ? No doubt, when we resort to the 'Gospel' to which Irenaeus refers (Jn. viii. 57), ' Thou art not yet fifty years old,' the bubble is pricked. Then we see that on one mere hasty controversial cry of a crowd, and that, too, negative, Irenaeus is willing to build up an elaborate structure to suit his theological theories. But what is the conclusion 1 Not that Irenaeus fails 1 Lijditf.'s 'which was the case with our Lord implies, not that tin' Lord 'had (reached) older age ' hut that He was 'from his fortieth and fiftieth year declining into older age.' The question arises, Why did Irenaeus insert 'ami fiftieth ' < Perhaps to cover the extreme exaggeration of his special pleading. He begins by arguing, 'Old age com- mences from forty — or, say fifty,' and fchen urges that Jesus was probably nearly fifty. It is hardly necessary to call attention to the reckless looseness of such lan'ma^e. to ' commit the Elders ' as well as the Gospel to his theory, but that his recklessness of thought and expression makes him quite untrustworthy as to what the Elders really said. Another misprint affects the important evidence of Papias given in Eus. //. E. iii. 39 and printed thus (£. E. p. 63 n.) : ' Yet Papias himself, in the preface to his dis- courses, certainly does not declare that he himself was a hearer and an eye-witness of the Holy Apostles, but he shows, by the language which he uses, that he received the matters of the faith from those who were his (sic) friends.' For 'his,' read 'their,' the Gk. being twv e/ceiVois yvwp<./x.a>j/, i.e. those who were known to the Apostles. Also, since 6Y wv (f>wo-l Ae'^ewv is Eusebius' phrase for introducing the express words of an author, and since he here uses them to introduce a quotation from Papias, we may render ' But that he (Papias) had received the truths of the faith from those who were known to them (i.e. to the Apostles) he (Papias) informs (8iSao-Kei) us in the following terms, "I will not hesitate....'" On p. 62 Lightfoot says, ' As Irenaeus uses the present tense, " the elders say,'' and yet the persons referred to belonged to a past generation and were no longer living when he wrote, he must be quoting from some written record.' But compare this with his note on Xiyovaiv when used by Papias in Eus. //. E. iii. 39 ri 'Avopeas y ti lle'rpos elTrev d T€ 'AplOTKOV kui 6 ir. 'Ituavnys Xlyovtrtu (S. J!, p. 150) 'The tense should probably be regarded as a historic present introduced for the sake of variety.' May not the present possibly be explained in Irenaeus as in Papias 1 I am disposed to think that Irenaeus is quoting from a written work, the work of Papias : but to say that he 'must be ' thus quoting is an exaggeration. There are many other instances of error, and some of overstatement, in the Johan- nine portion of the Biblical Essays, which place it on an altogether different level from that of Lightfoot' s Pauline work. I may hereafter point out some of these. The present specimens arc taken From ten con secutive pages. 1 doubt whether a critic could pick out as many errors in a hundred or even a thousand pages of his Epistles ol St. Paul. Edwin A. Abbott, no. LXXIX. VOL. IX, 258 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. P API AS AND THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. In Acts i. 18 the established or non- Both these versions were therefore made western text gives the following account from a Greek text in which vs. 18 ran : of the d.'ath of Judas:— oStos. . . . dSiKias kcu tt p q 1 . Seneca, Ep. 5. 9. 3, uses punctum by itself — Punctum est quod vicimus et adhuc puncto minus, sed hoc minimum specie quadam long ioris spatii natura derisit. The almost invariable construction, then, is temporis puncto, except in the two eases 260 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. in Lucilius and Horace. There is no doubt that Horace had Lucilius' picncto uno Jtorai io mind when >he wrote his own puncto mobilis horae. As regards the meaning, it will be seen upon a careful consideration of all the passages quoted, leaving the one in Horace out of the question for a moment, that jmuctum temporis must in every case mean the same thing as our ' moment,' that is, the very shortest period of time. In the passage from Lucilius this sense is also the most natural for puncto uno Jtorai, apart from Donatus' evidence. There is therefore no reason why Horace's puncto mobilis horae should mean anything else, as all require- ments of sense are met by this interpreta- tion. Turning now to momentum we find a greater variety of constructions. No case of momentum in this sense can be cited, so far as I know, before Livy. Used alone it occurs, momento, Livy 3. 63. 1 ; 3. 70. 13; 21. 1 4. 3 ; 24. 22. 9 ; 28. 6. 4. With tempus : momento temporis, Livy 21. 33. 10 ; 35. 11. 13 ; Petronius 28 ; Curtius 8. 13. 24 ; eodem temporis momento, Curtius 6. 7. 27 ; momen- tum temporis, id. 6. 9. 9. With horae : Livy 5. 7. 3 : horae momento ; 9. 16. 9 : momento unius Jtorae ; 40. 15. 14 : momento illo horae ; Curtius 9. 6. 21 : momento unius horae /Plin. Jf. X. 7. 51 : nullo horae momento ; and the passage already cited from Hoi*. Sat. 1. 1. 8 horae momento. It will be observed that momentum is leather more restricted in use that punctum, being mostly confined to Livy and Curtius. It becomes almost a peculiarity of Livy's style. When these passages are studied, it will be seen that in three of the cases where momento temporis occurs, more than a moment is distinctly implied. Thus in Livy 21. 33. 10, 35. 11. 13, Petron. 28, a short time is necessarily meant. In Curtius 6. 7. 27, 6. 9. 9, where the expression is strengthened by eodem or quidem, the mean- ing seems to be ' in a moment,' and in Cur- tius 8. 13. 24 it cannot be asserted whether a short time or mere moment is intended. Ln Livy, where momentum is used alone, it is also appai-ently equivalent to the English ' in a moment.' With momento horae the case is much clearer. In the five passages in Livy, Curtius, and Pliny, sense requires plainly that we interpret the phrase by ' in a short time ' or something similar. These passages are cited in full : — Livy 40. 15. 14,— ille diu ante praeparata meditata in me oratione est usus : ego id tantum temporis, quo accusatus sum, ad cognoscendum, quid ageretur, habui. utrum momento illo horae accusatorem audirem an defensionem meditarer 1 5. 7. 3, — patefacta repente porta ingens multitudo facibus maxime armata ignes coniecit, horaeque momento simul aggerem ac vineas, tarn longi temporis opus, incen- dium hausit. 9. 16. 9,— praesidium necopinato op- pressum est et ab urbe plena hostium clamor sublatus ; momentoque unius horae caesus Samnis, Satricanus captus, et omnia in potestate consulis erant. Curtius 9. 6. 21, — Ex Asia in Europae terminos momento unius horae transivi. Plin. II. X. 7. 51, — Maecenati triennio supremo nullo horae momento contigit som- nus. In all these the emphasis is on the idea suggested by hora not momentum. Compare now one remaining passage in Pliny the Younger, Paneg. 56 : quod momen- tum, quod immo temporis punctum aut bene- ficio sterile aut vacuum laude ? From this it is plain that in Pliny's time there was a distinct difference in the meaning of the two words. The conclusions are : (a) that at all stages of the language punctum temporis was prob- ably the more usual expression for ' a moment '; (b) that in a more restricted way momentum with or without temporis was used sometimes to mean ' a moment,' some- times ' a short time '; (c) that momentum horae meant distinctly a period of time longer than a moment ; (d) that the Scholiast was wrong in making Horace's horae momen- ta and puncto mobilis horae equivalent, and better sense is made by observing the dis- tinction. Samuel Ball Platnek. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 261 STADTMULLER'S EDITION OF THE PALATINE ANTHOLOGY. Anthologia Graeca Epigrammatum Palatina cum Planndea. Edidit Hugo Stadt- muller. Volumen primum : Palatinae Libr. I.— VI. Leipzig : Teubner. 1894. 6 Mk. Pp. xli. 419. On the 9th of July, 1813, Friedrich Jacobs concluded his preface to his great edition of the Palatine Anthology with the ac- knowledgment that much was still wanting towards its criticism and elucidation, and the hope that other scholars would carry on the work for which he had laid the found- ation. It is singular, though not unaccount- able, that from then till now do large or sustained attempt has been made to do so. The very excellence of Jacobs' work must have made many scholars feel unwilling or unable to touch it. No surviving work of antiquity, as he truly said, requires a wider or more profound knowledge of Greek literature in its commentators ; and the specialization in scholarship which has gone on increasingly ever since has made a task of such magnitude and scope more and more difficult. Many scholars have dealt with it partially, and a number of monographs on particular epigrammatists have added largely to the material at the disposal of an editor. But with the exception of the well-known French edition — the practical meritsof which for the reader and not for the scholar I would be the last to undervalue — the work of Jacobs has remained in effect not only the standard but the sole edition. The first volume of the revised text on which Stadtmuller is now engaged appeared last year, and has not till now been followed by a second. A full criticism of his work must be deferred till the appearance of the general preface which he has, on perfectly valid grounds, thought it necessary to defer till the text of the seventh and ninth sec- tions of the Palatine Anthology can be set forth in connexion with it. The appearance of this preface will be awaited with great interest : meanwhile it will be sufficient to indicate briefly the contents of the published volume and the new lights which the editor has been able to throw on the many per- plexing questions involved ; and to note in addition what he has to say on certain specific points of more than common interest. This volume then contains the revised text, with an apparatus criticus, of the first six sections of the Palatine Anthology. The prefatory remarks are brief but repay careful study. They begin with a descrip- tion of the Palatine MS. itself and of the five bands through which it passed after it left the original scribe. This is followed by a similar but briefer description of the Planudean autograph, the so-called Codex Marcianus, and by a catalogue of the editions of the Planudean Anthology which have been used in forming a text. The Appendix Barberino-Vaticana which has recently been unearthed and edited by Sternbach (Classical Pei-iew, November 1890) is also noted. The single remark as to its contents ' epigram- mata amissa a Planude quae e collections Cephalana (quin ex ipso Palatino) videntur sumpta esse ' will no doubt be expanded and defended later : in the meantime it can hardly pass unchallenged. If anything seems certain about this little collection it is that it was taken not from the Palatine Codex but'from a lost and probably collateral MS. Stadtmuller goes on with a few detached observations on the authorship of the epigrams in this volume as given by the two hands which had mainly to do with the Palatine MS., the principal scribe A and the corrector C, and then proceeds to what is the single constructive passage in the pre- face, a division of the 'E/acurtKa into live sections, drawn from what were in his view originally independent collections. Epi- grams 1 — 102 are assigned to a book con- sisting mainly of the work of Rufinus ; 103—132 are from the Anthology of Philip- pus ; 133 — 214 from that of Meleager ; 215 — 301 from that of Agathias ; and eight epigrams (302 — 309) have been afterwards added from various sources. "We are here on highly questionable ground, and it is almost useless to discuss the questions involved until we have Stadtiniillcr's full argument before us. It may be noted thai he does not appear to give his adhesion t<> the theory that Rufinus was. in Sakolowski's words, 'a contemporary of Diogeniamis ami Lucilius.' It Feenis pretty certain that Lucilius was a century before Diogeniamis ; Rufinus may have been a contemporary of the latter, but the old theory which assigns him to the era of Justinian is at all events not disproved. If we take a single well-known piece like the proem of Meleager, this Dew edition shows, more clearly and .succinctly than 262 THE CLASSICAL REVTEW. could be done before, the sort of textual problems one has constantly to deal with in the Anthology, and the wide divergences possible in a modern reconstituted text. Stadtmliller's own method is rather conserv- ative. Thus in 1. 31 he retains the e/< Aei- /-iwvos a/uojArJToio o-tAiva, which seems to make less sense the more one thinks of it ; and in the couplet on Anacreon he keeps the MS. to u.ev yXvKv Ketvo p.eXt.crp.a vtKTapos, els 8 eAe'yous acnropov avOijxiov, where some correc- tion, either the iv 8' eAe'yois of Jacobs or the vcKTaptovs 8' iXcyov; of Hermann, if not absolutely required, at least gets rid of a very difficult and confusing expression. His own conjectures, which he has here and there, but in strict moderation, admitted into the text, do not strike one as very happy. In v. 38 he prints twS' eve/ccv #apow ovvot e'w Otdaovs for the tojj/8' eVe/cev yap io-ws of the MSS. In v. 168, ^8i> depovs 8njjC)VTL ^LUiV TTOTOV, Yj8v Se VaVTaiS €K ^ei/AWVOS iSciv elapivbv a-recpavov, rejecting (rightly as I think) the £e rov kvkXov 7rpos tov TpwyiAov — where Classen and Stahl bracket tov kvkXov 7rp6s tov TporyiAov, and Holden inserts airo with Wblfflin — Mar- chant inserts , i.e. ' on the side of the kl'kAos away from the low ground near the harbour.' In 7, § 1, where Classen and Holden bracket pe'x ot > Stahl pe'xpi T °v iyi tov iyKapcriov Tct'^ous (see p. xv.). In 7, § 3, where the MSS. read TrepaioiOrj Tpoiria oi av iv 6Xicao~iv rj 7rXo60is ^ oEXAws 07rws uv 7rpox<^prj, Marchant writes Tpo7rw o» av ivfj, kt€ = quoquo modo fieri posset. This is the most enticing of his changes. In 28, § 3, where the MSS. read to yap avrovs kt£., Marchant places a comma before to and reads to y av, avrovs ktL, making the following clauses, (1) airoo-Trjvai, (2) dvTt7roXiopKeiv, (3) Troirjcrat, explanatory apposition to the preceding %v, which = (juXoveiKiav. This is not bad ; but the insertion, a few lines below, of
    after oaov, and the change, to balance this, of wore into ol 8e, is making rather free with the text, and is not in itself attractive. For the argument for ol Se instead of wo-re, see appendix ii. and Classical Review vi. p. 303 f. These seem to be the most important of Prof. Marchant's own changes. Certainly his KaroKvovo-t tov ttXovv, 31, § 4, is too far from the MSS. Karakvovo-i tov 7r0A.ep.0v, and inferior on other grounds to Herbst's KaraXvovo-i tov ttXovv. As to the crux in 13, § 2 tV avTopoX/a? 7rpo 1 lie himself points out that rpirjprjs does not mean fitted with three oars, but rather means fitted in three ways. The ten-banked ships of Antony's fleet stood ten feel oul of the water. Tin's would give but one foot of freeboard to each tier of rowers. This seems much too little. When we turn to the pictures of ancient ships most carefully collected by Mr. Torr, we are struck by the fact to which he himself calls attention on p. 51 (hat in no represent a 266 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. tion of an ancient ship do we see more than two tiers of rowers. Thus in the picture of the Attic triremes of about 400 B.C. Mr. Torr has to suppose that the artist has left out one tier of oars, and when we come to the Roman ships from Trajan's Column he has to resort to a similar explanation. We naturally should expect to find that the ancient artist somewhere or other would have given us a picture of three-banked, five-banked, or ten-banked ships, if such things really ever existed in the sense in which Mr. Torr and many more beside him have taken these terms. The coins of Mark Antony, where the ship is a favourite type, ought to show us a ten-banked ship, or at least the artist ought to have made an attempt to show a series of the oar-banks rising one above the other. If the coin-engravers were so particular as to always give correctly the thirteen plates of the carapace of the tortoise on all except the earliest coins of Aegina, it is difficult to understand why the artists were so careless in depicting ships. The engraver of the common English medal of Admiral Vernon, who put a number of ships on the reverse of the medal, makes a clear distinction between three-masted and two-masted ships. Mr. Torr is doubtless right in deriving thranites, the name given to the rower who sat highest up, from threnus. In the Homeric ship it is clear that this means an elevated sort of step or platform at the stern of the ship on which the helmsman stood. The thranitai ought to be men who rowed from this raised portion at the stern, but it is always assumed that they are the rowers in the uppermost of three tiers. There is up to the present no proof that the term 6pf)vvs was ever applied to such a series of banks running along the central part of the ship. It may be possibly worth con- sidering whether the rpi-qp-qs of the Greeks had only two banks of rowers, thalamitai and zugitai, with certain others rowing with long oars from the elevated part towards the stern. Mr. Torr leaves the question of many- banked ships without any attempt at solution. The forty-banked ship described by Athenaeus after Callixenus, he regards with unfeigned scepticism. Her length was 280 cubits, her breadth 38 cubits, whilst her draught was less than 4 cubits. Certainly 40 tiers of rowers rising one above the other would have insured a capsize. The general tendency of modern inquiry is to show that the ancient writers were not such gross liars as it has been the fashion to regard them when scholars met with any difficulty which they could not explain. Perhaps Callixenus was quite right, and we from our imperfect knowledge are judging him too harshly. The term translated as bank or tier is crrot^os. This simply means a row, looked at from any point of view, whether a series of rows rise one over the other as in an old three-decker, or if we place a series of men standing or sitting on deck. Now in the mediaeval galleys we find that three men worked each oar, the larger- sized {galea) had 5 or 6 men at each oar, and the largest (galeazza) had 10 men. In such a ship as the latter, if one looked along from stern or stem, he would see 20 (TTol^ot of rowers, yet such a ship from the side view [showed only a single bank of oars, as in the great Nile barge figured by Mr. Torr. I wish Mr. Torr had given his reasons for believing that the ancients never knew the practice of setting a number of men to each oar. He regards this as an invention of Byzantine times. Of course if he can prove his negative, as he may very well be able, my suggestion for helping to an ex- planation of many-banked ships falls to the ground. In his larger work it is to be hoped that Mr. Torr will deal with other ships of the ancient world besides those of the Mediter- ranean. For instance the ships of the Veneti of Armorica, the rigging and sea- going qualities of which are described by Caesar and Strabo, must always have a great interest for the inhabitants of these islands, and in no less degree the ships of the Norsemen. In the latter case we have the great advantage of having an actual specimen in the well-known Viking ship. A chapter dealing with such matters somewhat on the lines of Mr. Boehmer's monograph on ' Prehistoric Ships' would give completeness to such a work as Mr. Torr has in hand — a work which, if we are to judge by his first effort, will be carried out with great thoroughness and a complete first-hand knowledge of his subject. William Ridgeway. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 267 CHURCH'S HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL ODES OF HORACE. I Forage. — The Historical and Political Odes, with Introduction and Notes, by A. J. Church, M.A. London : Blackie & Son. 1894. 2s. M. The object of this work is to bring together the odes which Horace wrote on the general condition of the state and in the interests of Augustus, in order that, by directing our attention on those to the exclusion of the poems of lighter strain, a clear view may be attained of Horace as a .political poet. It is no doubt desirable that selections from Horace should be occasionally read in this way : but we hardly think that a new volume is required for that purpose. Only students who are somewhat advanced or who have read, or presumably will read, all the odes, will be able to appreciate properly the position of Horace as a political writer : and it is desirable that such students should become the possessors of a complete edition of Horace's works. The object aimed at by the present editor will be best attained by the addition of a short section to the intro- duction of the cheap, attractive and scholarly edition of Mr. poems arranged Page, giving according lists of the to subjects — political, amatory, admonitory, convivial, etc. This selection consists of twenty-five poems, viz. : Epod. vii. xvi. iv. i., Od. i. 14, Epod. ix., Od. i. 37, 2, ii. 7, 1, 15,iii. 1 to 6, 24, i. 35, 12, iv. 4, 14, 5, 2, 15. It is a good selection : but perhaps the editor who wishes to have no mixture of the frivolous and the base might have omitted iii. 6, 21 — 32. We are surprised that neither Carm. Sec. nor the prelude to it iv. 6 appears. The merit of the editor is shown in the sound judgment with which he rejects unsatisfac- tory views even when supported by great names ; Appendix B against Pliiss's view of Epod. ix. 21 — 24 is a good example. The commentary is frankly stated to be a com- pilation from Orelli, Wickham, Page and Marshall. We cannot but think that it lacks finish. Thus, to take the notes on the last five odes given, iv. 4, 26 indoles is not the emotional as opposed to the intellectual part of man, but the capacities belonging to a man by nature, his natural gifts opposed often to what is fully developed by practice. The Greek lines quoted on 29 are from the Alcmaeon not the Alcmena. At iv. 14, 17 young students will not be much assisted when they read ' spectandus according to Wickham = Oavfiao-Tos followed by ocxois,' even when there is added (after due approval has been given to the correct view of Orelli) 'the Greek construction would be preferably Oav/xaa-Tov.' This is too obscure. It is very questionable if /?a^uK?/r»;s (or /ueyaKr/r//?) is a proper parallel for beluosus : those words rather mean 'with deep hollows.' In the passage quoted from Aelian [read V(aria) H(istoria) for Op.] the exact opposite sense to what is intended is given by reading (j>vyoKiv8vvoTaTOv<; for ZER'S SELECTIONS FROM STRABO. Selections from Strabo with an Introduction on Strabo' s Life and Works, by the Rev. 1 1 . F. Tozer, M. A., F.R.G.S. etc. (Oxford : Clarendon Press. 1893.) 12s. The genial author of Researches in the High- lands of Turkey, The Islands of the Aegean, etc., has again appeared before the public. In his former books we have seen him in the light of a champion of the descriptive and historical side of geography, delighting also in everything that relates to manners and customs, to the folk-lore and traditions of the countries under discussion. It was in that character that he first won men's hearts, and many will recall with pleasure the delight with which they read — or rather devoured — his Researches [twenty years ago, alas !]. Later on his chats with us about the Isles of Greece have filled us with longings for the well-loved shores. MaAeus yap K(lfnjjavT£<; ovk l-rreXaBofXtOa tmv oiKaSe, if we may strain the proverb some- what. For Greece is the home of the soul for every Hellenist. And now he challenges our criticism in another line of work, for which his studies, training, and cast of mind make him abundantly fitted — fitted, indeed, as are few. He is now the editor and commentator, who has done his work both well and with his old-time charm. If we have said that he is now working along new lines, we shall have to modify the statement at once, for the present work is a necessary corollary of those which have preceded it. Indeed, judging Mr. Tozer from his writings, we believe that we have noticed in him the peculiar Strabonic mind, for both of them are apostles of historical geography, or, as we might say, of the philosophy of geography. The present work is a chrestomathy of Strabo, for which Mr. Tozer has chosen those passages of his author which are not only most interesting to the general reader, but also best illustrate Strabo's habit of tracing the influence of the features of a land on the character and history of its inhabitants. It is well that Mr. Tozer has given us these Selections, for often Strabo is ineffably dull, and few could endure to read him from cover to cover from sheer love of him. In making these Selections Mr. Tozer follows strictly the order of the different books of Strabo. At first sight this method seems natural, and yet it is open to criticism on the ground that pas- sages with kindred contents or that illus- trate the one the other might with advan tage have been arranged side by side without reference to Strabo's order. Each excerpt is preceded by an introduction which together with the admirable foot-notes gives the reader all the assistance possible with our present lights, and makes the reading of the original instructive as well as delightful. In these introductions and foot-notes Mr. Tozer exhibits a great Belesenheit and a complete mastery of the literature relating to Strabo. For instance his introduction to Strabo's account of the two Comanas gives a summary of what is known concerning the great male and female deities of Asia, i.e. Men and Ma, or Sabazius and Agdistis, or Attis and Rhea-Cybele, that is at once instructive and quite up to date. The same is true of the explanatory foot-notes through- out. In his introduction to the entire work Mr. Tozer has produced the best extant account of Strabo's life, works, and charac- ter. While for him M. Dubois is the most trustworthy of the writers on Strabo, still nothing that has been written about the great geographer has escaped the watchful eye of the editor. Indeed the introduction is worked out with such carefulness and good judgment that we feel ourselves in the hands of one fully able to guide us aright through the doubtful points in the bio- graphy of Strabo. And they are many. The year assigned by various scholars as the birth-year of Strabo varies between 68 and 54 B.C. Mr. Tozer, following Niese, the most voluminous writer on the subject, places Strabo's birth in the year 63 e.c. But this assignment cannot be accepted as unmistakably true, because it is based upon a calculation and a mode of argument too subtle to be at once convincing, as Mr. Tozer himself fears. The same may be said with regard to the date assigned for Strabo's death — 21 a.d. There is certainly an element of probability for such assignment in both cases but, after all has been said, we cannot escape the feeling that it is mainly shrewd guessing. And yet most, or at all events very many, of the dates in Grecian history and biography are fixed by just such arguments. The date and place of composition of the great work of Strabo are questions of great THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 269 interest. The conclusion is that it was not written at a stretch, but that different chaptei's were composed at different periods of the author's life, though this too is based upon a shrewd calculation and mode of argument. Habler claims that Rome was the place of composition, basing his argument chiefly on Strabo's use of Seupo and ivOaSt. Mr. Tozer shows that Habler's argument is by no means conclusive and points to the fact that Strabo's book was wholly unknown in Rome and was unrecog- nized in antiquity in general. Had the book been published in Rome, certainly so diligent a compiler as Pliny would not have been unacquainted with it, as in point of fact he was. The difficulty disappears at once if the book had been published in so remote a place as Amasia — the birth-place of Strabo. The voluminous character of the work, the expense involved in its reproduc- tion, and its publication in Amasia were all unfavourable to its circulation. Indeed Strabo failed of recognition until the Middle Ages, when he was the geographer par excellence. In modern times the estimate of Strabo has varied greatly from tiie unmerited contempt of Mullenhoff, who finds him a dull unin- telligent compiler, to the extravagant praise of Alex, von Humboldt, who believes that ' his work surpassed all other geographical labours of antiquity by the diversity of its subjects, and the grandeur of its composi- tion.' Strabo wrote neither for Greeks nor for Romans but for the general reader, and Mr. Tozer is unquestionably right when in his preface he says, ' It is hardly too much to say, that there is no author on whom our knowledge of the ancient world so much depends as it does on Strabo ; and the information which he imparts is of service, not only to the geographer and the historian. but also to naturalists, and to students of folk-lore and of traditions of various kinds : yet it must be confessed that in our own day, though he is often referred to, he is but little read.' This is due, as has been hinted, to the fact that as a whole Strabo is dull for the general reader — though the specialist will find him entertaining enough — and his Greek is far from being classical. Mr. Tozer' s work is intended to popularize Strabo and his Selections appeal to the general reader and the cultivated man everywhere, as did the original Strabo. To such then it may be warmly commended. J. R. S. Sterrett. Amherst College, Mass. A RCHAEOLOGY. THE LEMNIA OE PHE1DIAS, AND THE PARTHENON SCULPTURES. (i.) My reconstruction of the Athene Lemnia is disputed by M. Paul Jamot, who has attempted an elaborate refutation of it in an article entitled ' Minerve a la ciste ' (Monuments Grecs, Nos. 21-22, 1893-1894). Although M. Jamot's arguments scarcely require an answer, it is due to the high scientific position of that periodical that I should reply to him. It goes without saying that in scientific questions a controversialist is at least expected to have read the opinions which he seeks to controvert ; M. Jamot does indeed assure us that he has read my discussion in the Jfeistemverke a about the Lemnia : but since he is certainly ignorant what is the point, and what statues are under discussion, and since he does not even know what the two plates (I. and II.) of my book represent, I should have supposed, 1 The German edition is here referred l" .<- Germ.', the English as Eng, without this assurance, that his entire knowledge of the matter was based on a newspaper article. Is it possible otherwise that reading and understanding can really be two such different things? I thought I had made it sufficiently clear and obvious to any one who takes the trouble to read attentively ; yet M. Jamot thinks the quee tion turns on a Dresden statue (he speaks of ' le corps,' • le torse de I 'resile ') to which I absolutely arbitrarily assigned the Bologna head; consequently he thinks that his own personal taste and that of his friends and their subjective Bensibility are fully quali- fied to decide as to the correctness of this combination, lie is clearly unaware that two statues in Dresden are referred to. both of which are figured on I'll. I.- II. of my book, and that t lie head of the one ideal de- differentiated in Germ. p. 6 ; Eng. p. -1 foil.) belongs to the torso, since the broken sin- faces exactly lit one another, fracture for fracture. This head is an exact replica of the Rologna head; and for (Id* reason the 270 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. cast of the latter in Dresden was used for the completion of the second torso, fitting the socket of the neck as if it had heen chiselled expressly for the purpose {Germ. p. 6; l^tg. p. 5): this fact was naturally not demonstrable, inasmuch as it is purely a coincidence, seeing that it may just as well have belonged to a third replica. ML J; i mot remarks, still without noticing that two Dresden statues are referred to, ' la partie antique de la tete placee sur le torse de Dresde, identique a la tete de Bologne ' ; yet he thinks that Treu chose ' le parti le plus sage ' when he had this head separated from the torso— certainly ' le parti le plus sage ' for M. Jamot would have been to read my book more attentively before embarking on this question. As however he has pub- lished his opinion, I may remind him that Treu will hardly thank him for praising as ' sagesse ' a former error of his. As a matter of fact, on my pointing out to Treu the uniformity of head and body, the latter, with his natural conscientiousness, at once remedied his former error and replaced the head. Seeing that the two fitted one another, — not, I admit, at the edges, — but break for break on the inner surfaces ; and seeing besides that on the one hand on the torso, and on the other hand on a portion of the neck still adhering to the head, the outlines are traceable of a fragment of marble having been split away, and that these outlines correspond exactly in the two cases, all possibility of doubt as to the head and body formerly belonging to each other is absolutely excluded ; and as my combin- ation had thus convinced the wholly un- biased authorities of the Dresden Museum, the two portions were once more united to each other. Though it is quite super- fluous on my part to go into the question of M. Jamot's arguments, seeing that these are now wholly pointless, I will do so never theless, in order to return him the fullest measure of justice. First be it remarked that, little as he has grasped of the question at issue, still less has he noticed the striking illustration of the statue which is afforded by an ancient gem. This gem (described Germ. p. 8, figured pi. 32, 2 ; Eng. p. G. fig. 1 more clearly) copies sufficiently well the upper part of the Dresden statues put together by me. The short, confined hair, the fillet, the treatment of the waves of hair, which leave the car free, the neck, the modelling of the dress at the breast, no less than the dress itself with the lie of the folds on the breast, the arrangement of the aegis and the posi- tion of the raised left arm, all these details are copied with absolute exactness. The gem might seem to have been carved expressly as the final confirmation of my combination ; but it happens to have been known as long ago as the last century. M. Jamot has never referred to all this ; nay, he has not even obtained a cast from the original in Dresden ; he has only concerned himself with the reproductions in my book, and merely consulted his own taste, which however seems to be still but little trained to the handling of antiques. He experiences a ' malaise ' before the reproduction ; he sees in it a marked disproportion ; the head is much too small for the figure ; he even goes so far as to speak disparagingly of the ' grele et gauche figure, imaginee par M. Furtwangler.' To assert that the head is too small is an error. The breast of the goddess of battle is very powerful and broad : in contrast to this the fine small face with the short confined hair does certainly give the im- pression of being small ; but this contrast is intentional, and serves as a characteristic of the goddess. The measurements show that the head in reality is not in the least degree too small ; it is of eminently normal proportions ; that is to say, the relation of the height of the face to that of the whole figure is exactly the same as in the traditional canon of Vitruvius, the Dory- phoros canon of Polykleitos, and in the female statues which have come down to us of precisely the Pheidian period : x i.e. the height of the face (0T96m., from the edgeof the hair to the end of the chin) is -£§ that of the body (this being l'965m. from crown to sole, without the sandals). If M. Jamot had taken the trouble to study a cast, he could himself easily have corrected his im- pression by means of these mearurements. M. Jamot says further that the Bologna head cannot be from the hand of the same artist who chiselled ' the torso.' But no one has ever asserted that it was. What he really seems to mean is that the grandiose, broad style shown in the drapery does not harmonize with the crisp fine treatment of the head ; if so, this merely betrays the fact that he fails to comprehend the style of the period in question, in which it is actually a characteristic feature that the face and hair are treated in a crisp 1 E.g. the ' Venus Geuetrix ' and the ' Demeter ' in Berlin, which is ret'errecl to Mcisfcrw. p. 116. For the measurements of both statues see Kalkmann, Die Proportionen des Gesichls, pp. 92, 104. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. '271 sharpness with finest chiselling, whereas the woollen stuff of the drapery is rendered with power and solidity. Next he affirms that the Bologna head is that of a man, on account of its headdress : female heads never having the hair so short, nor arranged in this way : the head represents, as he thinks, an athlete. Evidence or example from the art which has come down to us he gives none ; he contents himself with a blank assertion, as if he set himself above all facts. Of course the exact opposite of his assertion is the fact : there is not one single male head in existence which has this arrangement of the hair around the forehead ; it is even a characteristic of female heads. That this arrangement alone was a sufficient mark of the sex as female, and that Conze was consequently wrong when he published the head as male, I have already shown in my book (Germ. p. 22 ; Eng. p. 13). Moreover, every one knows that in the fifth century hair of a length such as we have in the Bologna head (which, if let down, would fall about to the end of the neck, Germ., loc. cit.) is not altogether unusual among women : see for example the women in the E. pediment of Olympia, the Kore of the great Eleusinian relief, and the Polykleitan Hera on the coins of Elis and Argos : also the Amazon of Kresilas had short hair. I have shown at some length in my book (Germ. p. 26 ; Eng. p. 16), that the crisp roll of hair of the Bologna head is frequently found in the type of Athene of the strong style of the fifth century. I trust that M. Jamot will even now consult these references somewhat more fully : and I will therefore call his attention to two further interesting examples which represent Athene with even shorter hair than she has in the Bologna head. Firstly, an Attic krater in Vienna (685) l on which Athene is represented without a helmet and with simply treated hair, not confined, but quite short like that of a youth : on the hair lies a wreath, 2 painted white : I have satisfied myself by personal examin- ation of the original that no restoration or painting-over of any kind whatsoever has been applied. Secondly, a terracotta relief of the Glyptothek at Munich (no. 39e), representing an Athene head of strong style ; here again she is helmet loss, and has loose unconfined short locks, which however only reach to the upper part of the neck : 1 Badly reproduced La Borde, Vases Lamberg, i. 34. - Omitted iu the reproduction. it is just the ends of the locks that are antique, whereas the hair is otherwise con- siderably restored. 3 Lastly, M. Jamot asserts that the Bologna head is not Pheidian, but Poly- kleitan, in style ! It represents an athlete as Diadumenos, and is a work of the Poly- kleitan school. From this point all possi- bility of an understanding between us comes to an end : M. Jamot is ignorant of the most elementary differences which distinguish the Polykleitan head from the Pheidian. He does not seem to be aware that since Conze wrote his Beitrdge we have made some slight advance. — In other re- spects also he takes up a position which for a long time past we have fortunately been enabled to regard as antiquated. Thus for instance he reconstructs an unknown chef d'eeuvre as the type (' le type ') of ' Minerve pacifique,' out of which the Farnese, Hope, Albani, and Velletri statues are developed ! It is difficult to see why he does not at once develop all Athene statues quite simply out of one type. In one point — and it is the only one — ■ M. Jamot is correct ; it is not expressly stated that the Lemnia of Pheidias was helmetless : we infer it from a combination (which however is extremely probable) of two statements. From Lucian we know the exceeding beauty of the Lemnia's face ; the entire outline (evidently therefore not in- terrupted by an Attic helmet) is selected by him for his paragon of beauty, Himerius on the other hand tells us of an Athene by Pheidias which was characterized by its beauty of face and by the absence of helmet, but which otherwise is not more closely specified. Since, then, we may conclude from Lucian that the Lemnia among the late school of rhetoricians was regarded as the famous example of an Athene of Phei- dias distinguished for her beauty, it follows that the identification of the Athene <>t Himerius with the Lemnia is even more than probable. In any ease it is merely arbitrary in M. Jamot to prefer a belmeted, rather than a helmetless. Lemnia. Even admitting that the, absence of the helmet is not directly stated, it is nevertheless ex- tremely probable, in the light of the literary traditions on this point. And to this must be added the monumental evidence, in which we are shown by means of replicas the existence of a famous helmetless Athene ol Pheidian style. The identification of this :t Bruno in his Catalogue wrongly doubta the antiquity of the reliefs 89a ej they are absolutely authentic. 272 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. with the Lemnia of Pheidias is, and must remain, a combination; but, in my opinion, it is one of most extreme probability. The Apoxyomenos of Lysippos, the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, the Marsyas of Myron and other corner-stones of the history of art are also — such is the unfortunate condition of our material — known to us only from combinations. (ii.) Miss Jane E. Harrison (C.li. ante, p. 85 foil.) sits severely in judgment on my explanation of the Parthenon sculptures. She asserts that mythology is my weak point ; she wields the rod like a strict task- master, and deals me out censure such as 'nonsense' and 'confusion.' One would expect from this that she would produce, iif not an entirely new interpretation of the Parthenon sculptures of her own, at least a complete refutation of mine. Instead of this, she adopts my ideas en bloc, and only in a few details differs from me. I am de- lighted that Miss Harrison in reality takes up my position, and I do not give up all hope that, in spite of the severity she assumes, she may even in respect to these details yet be convinced. Her first point is, that the ephebus of the left half of the west pediment is not Erysichthon but Erichthonios, and that the woman beside Kekrops is not one of his three daughters but his wife. I cannot really see that this is any improvement on my interpretation ; it serves to obscure the clearly intelligible scheme of a simple human relationship of the whole, which I claim to see there. According to my scheme we have on the one hand, beside Poseidon, Erechtheus with his three daughters ; on the other, corresponding to it, beside Athene, Kekrops with his family. On this cardinal point Miss Harrison thoroughly agrees with me ; it follows however then as a simple consequence that the band of three daughters of Erechtheus corresponds to that of the Aglaurides, the , A.ypav\ov Kopai rpiyovoi.^ The three female figures in the pediment beside Kekrops are represented in quite a homogeneous manner ; they all press equally towards Kekrops ; they are then beings of a similar nature, — his daughters. Stirred by the same movement is also the ephebus (cf. Germ. p. 234 ; Eng. p. 458); he too belongs to the family group : he is the brother, the Erysichthon who died in his youth. Miss Harrison is wholly wrong in separating 1 Kekrops with his daughters (not his wife) occurs also on tin* tapestry described in Euripides Ion 116a, which was a dedication by an Athenian. the two maidens, and in her assertion that they are concerned with the ephebus. The four figures are rather all alike in violent movement, seized with terror at what is taking place in the centre, and press forward to Kekrops as their protector, their father. Not only from the standpoint of pure ait criticism, but also from the mythological point of view on which she takes her stand, Miss Harrison's interpretation may be con- futed. That Erichthonios as well as Erech- theus was repx"esented in the pediment, is in itself scarcely probable, on account of the original identity of these two personages, too clearly marked for such a juxtaposition. Moreover Erichthonios is only a figure of the legend without any cult of his own (Germ. p. 200; Eng. p. 436). If however, as Miss Harrison thinks, he was represented with the daughters of Kekrops as their ward, he could only be represented as a little child ; for it was only as a child, nay more, as a child concealed in a basket, that these maidens had him to watch over ; when however they opened the basket, — as is clear from the legend which we know was already prevalent in the Parthenon period, — they found their doom. The artist therefore could certainly never have united Erichthonios as an ephebus with the daughters of Kekrops, without setting himself in opposition to the legend, and rendering himself consequently unintel- ligible. On the other hand, every Athenian must have easily recognized in that figure the young brother of the three maidens, Erysichthon. Miss Harrison indeed will have nothing to do with him. She has read an article by Zielinski from which she con- cludes that Erysichthon is in reality nothing else than Poseidon Halirrothios, and there- fore that he cannot be present on the side of Athena. Miss Harrison here forgets entirely that we are not in the least con- cerned with what our mythologists regard as the original element in the personage of Erysichthon (and for that reason I had no cause to quote Zielinski's work) ; we are only concerned with what the artist and his contemporaries thovight of him. And in order to discover what this was, Miss Harrison will pardon me if I hold by what Plato and the Atthidographi tell us, rather than by her conjectures and those of other mythologists. Those writers at any rate only know of a genuinely old Attic local hero Erysichthon, who is named beside Kekrops and Krechtheus ; Phanodemos in particular seems to have left a more detailed account of him and his journey to Delos. THE CLASSICAL REVTEW. 273 He was also mentioned by some in the legend of the contest about the land, as a judge with Kekrops and Kranaos. The extremely probable supposition that ho was originally a strange element attached to the Kekrops family (cf . Crusius in Roscher's Lexicon i. 1383) is a matter of total indiffer- ence to us, since our inquiry only deals with such beliefs as flourished in Athens in the classical period and were embodied in her art. We are even willing to grant that Erysiehthon, as Zielinski says, ' belongs to the same category as the Attic kings Erech- theus and Aigeus, who are hypostaseis of Poseidon.' But this does not concern us here at all ; to the Athenians, Erysiehthon was just a child of Kekrops ; here, and not on the side of Poseidon, in spite of all primary relation with that god, is his place ; moreover, Attic belief knows absolutely nothing Poseidonian of him ; though, it is true, it embodied, as is well known, the close relationship of Athens to Delos. Possibly Miss Harrison has also been led astray by the remark of Zielinski that Erysiehthon in the contest for the land voted for Poseidon. This is however no- where recorded ; Zielinski cites as authority for this Robert, Hermes 16, p. 76; but Robert suggests it merely as a version underlying Varro's account ; the suggestion is quite improbable, and, even if it were true, it would be, like the entire version of the legend which brings in the trial and verdict episode, a version strange to, and later than, the pediment. In other respects also Miss Harrison seems to consider it more important to the inter- pretation of the pediment to devote herself to fancies about the first beginnings of Attic religion, rather than to ascertain the beliefs which existed at the time of the artist. In her passage dealing with the East pediment we learn that the Moirae also signify heaven, earth, and sea ; similarly the Motpat really are fioplai, i.e. olive-trees; — ought we here to add the words of which Miss Harrison is so fond, 1 mythological confusion,' or just 'non- sense ' 1 Miss Harrison regrets that the translator of my hook had not found time to refer to the reconstruction of the central group of the E. pediment given by J. Six in the Jalrrbuclt of 1894. I think it is a pity thai Miss Harrison herself did not find time to examine the translation (the style of which she criticizes so severely at the commence- ment of her article) a little further; she would have found that in the part where NO. LXXJX. VOL. IX, the group of the E. pediment is in question, (Eng. p. 463, note 8) express mention is made of Six' article, which by the bye adds nothing new. The so-called Theseus, for which I sug gested the name of Kephalos, is now- explained )>y Miss Ear ri son as Pan. The interpretation is new; this is however the best that can be said for it, tor it: is down- right bail. She thinks Kephalos does not suit the scheme which I myself suggested, of a cosmic character attaching to the angle figures of the E. pediment. Here she is mistaken ; in any case ' Gottheiten von nur lokal Attischer Bedeutung, die an einen bestimmten Ort (des attischen lindens) gebunden sind ' (Germ. p. 215 ; Kmj. p. 46(1) have no business to come into the question. But it is precisely Kephalos who is carried olf by Eos to the place whence Helios springs forth, the far Okeanos. To Athenian ideas, Kephalos was closely bound up with the sunrise. On the other hand, what business has Pan, the dweller in rock and grotto, the goat-formed leaper and dancer, in this select Olympian society? Miss Harrison moreover entirely forgets that in the fifth century at Athens Tan was never represented but with a beard and goat's legs. The beardless human type of Pan arose in all probability in Peloponnesian art. 1 The actual condition however of the so-called Theseus is quite conclusive againsl her view; he has two things which Pan never had, and which are directly contrary to the being of this child of nature, i.e. a mantle (which is spread over the fell) and footgear (of which traces are preserved) Anil moreover the Statue is wanting in something which Pan is never without, even in his youthful human type, /.chorus. Miss Harrison suspected at any rate that here lay a difficulty j bui with a readiness of belief which is refreshing she settles the matter summarily thus : ' I do not believe that they (the horns) are essential to the god.' That she is bound (•> adduce un doubted examples if her view [s to he taken as scientifically grounded, does not at all occur to her. She has moreover neglected to inform herself of (he literature «'f the ([nest ion ; I would refer her to Satyr Pergamon, p. 27. note i., where I have emphasized the fact that even the noble, beardle s type of Tan is never represented without horns. 8 1 i If. Furtwanglor, Satyr \ regards the t\ pe >.t tin' coina of Panticapai am there discussed, 1 add thai it i. evidently borrowed from the Cyzicene type(2V«»». Chron. L887, PI. 2 18 T 274 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. Miss Harrison's third point concerns the very reason she condemns the theory of the centre of the east side of the Parthenon presentation of the peplos as too local a frieze: she declares herself decidedly against function. This would however mean the old interpretation (which I maintain) of divesting the procession represented of all the presentation of the peplos. Her argu- individuality, whereas it is just the balance ments are as follows ; the central point of of the peplos-scene concerning Athene alone, the frieze is represented, not by the group and the other scene concerned with the in question, but by the priestess. As a theoxenia of the twelve gods, which seems matter of fact, no one has spoken of a to me a fine touch in the composition (Germ. 'central point' in this sense: the whole p. 191 ; Eng. p. 431). scene however between the seated deities Miss Harrison fully agrees with Ernst takes place 'in the centre of the whole com- Curtius' suggestion 1 as regards the explan- position,over the most central intercolumnia- ation of the folded drapery, viz. that it is a tion and over the door '...(Germ. p. 184; Eng. carpet which must be spread before the p. 427) ; it falls into two halves, the reception seats of the gods (in regard to the seats, of the diphros by the priestess, balanced by Curtius also follows my explanation). This the reception of the folded drapery by the suggestion from an authority worthy priestly personage. The scene is unsym- of all respect was well known to me when I metrical for this reason, that whereas there was editing the alterations for the English are several diphroi introduced, there is only edition of my book : but full consideration the single piece of folded drapery. In the led me to the conclusion that it was un- light of the peplos- theory this explanation tenable. Since Miss Harrison challenges adapts itself in the most satisfactory man- me directly on this point, I must here ner. Miss Harrison further objects that in briefly state my reasons. One principal this case it would be a boy bringing the objection I have already raised in the peplos to a man, whereas it would be more English edition, p. 430 note 9, viz. that in suitable for a girl to be bringing it to the the inscription from Magnesia on which priestess. We have no record as to the Curtius relies, I, like 0. Kern (Arch. manner in which the peplos was brought into Anzeiger, 1894, p. 80) understand the the temple ; in any case it was prepared by o-rpco/xveu as Lectisternia, not, as Curtius maidens, but was introduced into the pro- takes them, as carpets. This rendering I cession as a sail on the ship, and this duty must still consider as the only correct one. could scarcely be performed by maidens ; The word o-Tpw/xvr/ in every passage of and then we knOw that in similar cases of Greek literature which with the help of festal presentation in Greek cultus it was the lexicons I have been able to compare, customary to employ 7ral8es afxcfaOaXeis. This signifies a couch, never a carpet. It is objection therefore of Miss Harrison's is not therefore quite unwarrantable to interpret a justifiable one. She further objects that the three o-Tpw/xvai of the Magnesia in scrip- Athena actually turns her back on the tion, which are to be brought near the altar supposed offering of the peplos : but the of the twelve gods, as carpets : they are scene is taking place in the interior of the couches, strati lecti for the gods, according temple, separated from the deities who are to the well-known cultus usage of the tinned towards the procession : and is not Lectisternia. An exactly similar case is the group with the folded drapery repre- offered by the o-n/?aSes of the inscriptions. 2 sented on the side nearest Athene, for the The explanation of the a-Tpoi/xvai as carpets very reason that it is intimately connected moreover is not only incorrect as an witli her, i.e. that it does actually represent expression but also as a fact, for the use of the presentation of the peplos 1 carpets as floor covering is in principle un- M y explanation of the presentation of the Greek. Since however this point is not seats is accepted fully by Miss Harrison. clearly stated in the handbooks of antiquities (hi the other hand she exaggerates and nor yet in the monograph on ancient carpets distorts my suggestion that a 'national by de Ronchaud, Le peplos oV Athene (Rev. Hellenic significance' suits the company of Arch. 23, 245), it is worth while to consider the twelve invited gods, because for this it for a moment. Carpets for floors are where it certainly represents not Pan, but a Satyr. °n\y properly indigenous in countries where The art of Pantieapaeum was certainly in other the custom obtains of sitting or reclining on respects also strongly influenced by Cyzicus. Fine examples of the noble, beardless, horned head of Pan x Arch. Anzeiger 1894, p. 181. occur on Lycian coins (Fellows, PI. 6, 1-4, 9), on - Especially clear is this in lnscr. ins. maris Aegaei Cyzicene coins (Num. Chron. 1887, PI. 1, 25-26— not i. 786, for ras ariPdSas Koaiiuv can only be said of Actaeon !), and on the bronze coinage of Pella. couches ; tiil tov 0w/j.ov i.e. near, before the altar. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 275 the ground \ they have no place in Greek or Roman culture, nor has any reference to them come down to us. The floors were often decorated with painted stucco or with mosaic ; but this decoration has nothing to do with carpets. There was in antiquity a widespread use of them for seats and couches of every kind, stools, klinai, saddles, and further for hangings and portieres, and for coverings of walls and even of ceilings ; but not for floors. The temples must certainly have had their store of dedicated draperies (v^do-fiaTa Upd and TrzirXoi, as they are termed in Eurip. Ion 1141, 1143). They are doubtless, as precious possessions, stored up in chests (ibid. 1141, Xafiwv... Orjcravpwv Trdpa) and were hung up at festivals. In the play Ion decorates with them a tent intended for banquet and festival ; he hangs them, richly decorated with figures, from the ceiling and walls : * no mention is made of the floor. No doubt the famous peplos of Athene was decorated with figures like these ire-TrXoi out of the treasury of Apollo, and was a valuable votive offering and possession of the goddess, but no real clothing for her. In Homer it is usual to find soft coverings and cushions spread on the arm-chair as a seat for the honoured guest : 2 under his feet the footstool is placed ({nrb Se Opr/vv; ttoctIv tjcv). Among the rich Persian gifts which Athenaeus ii. p. 48 d, f, describes, we find costly coverings for couches, but no foot carpets. 3 In the gala tent of Ptolemy II. which Callixenos (in Athe- naeus v. p. 197a) describes in such detail, the klinai are richly spread with rugs, and also the intermediate spaces between the legs of the couches are draped with Persian stuffs hung vertically over them ; here also then no floor covering appears. Couches (/, 249 gives an ex- planation which is evidently incorrect of the passages Odyssey 4, 124 ; 1, 130. a "With the arpiiuara a special attendant is sen! to vnoaTpwvvvav, which process the Hellenes cannol perform in the Persian manner : evidently therefore it is the preparation of the couch and not of the floor which is in question. 4 Brunn, Gesch. cl. Kiinstlcr ii. 258, and Wickhoff, Wiener Genesis § 51 give an entirely wrong inter- pretation of the passage, as referring to carpets. the feet of the klinai are occasionally set upon 8a7ri'8cs, o7rws ptij avr( piiZ-g to BdncSov : even this does not imply an actual floor carpet. It is moreover quite a different matter when, on the occasion of an entry in state, the ground over which the personage to be honoured walks is spread with drapery, as a sign of the highest honour. This is done by the Clytaemnestra of Aeschylus at the home coming of Agamemnon, just as the Jews did at the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem : as the Jews spread their gar- ments in the way (to-rpwa-av iaurwv rd Ip-dria ii> T7J 68w), so Clytaemnestra, to whom Agamemnon says, firjh' e't'/iao-i o-Tpwcrao-' iTri6ovov Tropov rWei ; he resists this honour as too high and as one only suitable for gods (Aesch. Ag. 922) : that is to say, if gods were in his position and came to earth, and wished to be received in state, then he would consider such an honour to be seemly : but he is afraid to soil with his feet the fine and costly robes (1. 9-18 7toAAt) yap aiows (.lp.aTO(p6opelv ttoo-lv...). We see here that the notion of floor carpet is altogether absent. A preliminary spreading of the round with drapery, for the person passing over it, is the height of honour. Since then the deities at the theoxenia are to be imagined not as passing by, but as sitting or reclining and taking part in the festival, there is no occasion to cover the ground for the purposes of this function. Curtius (Joe. cit.), doubtless bearing in mind this pa in the Agamemnon, says 'purple carpets were used to cover the ground winch the feet of the deities would touch ' : I cannot find this anywhere attested. To return now to the frieze : granted that the folded drapery refers, like the diphroi, to the Theoxenia, it could only be intended to be spread over a kline; only with this modification does Curtius' idea admit of discussion. Can the scene really represenl this? If so, the principal object, the kline, would be wanting and would not lie in any way indicated ; the whole thing would be simply unintelligible. Moreover, the introduction of the diphroi excludes the possibility of a kline: (he gods are invited to sit, not to recline. Besides, the inter- pretation must before all things lie suitable to the motive represented : the diphroi are brought by the procession which bas reached its goal; the same applies to the folded drapery in the corresponding scene: it i brought, and has evidently come with the procession, like the peplos. The priestly personage raises it to view, ami tests its quality, a fact which in itself shows the t 2 276 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. importance of the object brought. Curtius says it is ' a carpet given out'; but of this absolutely nothing is to be seen. Again, the folded drapery with its soft folds, its embroidered edge, characteristic of woollen peploi and himatia, and its evident size shown in the numerous folds, corresponds perfectly to the notion of the peplos of Athene, but not to that of a carpet ; what is here repi*esented is an article of dress of excessive size, just in fact what the peplos was. In short, everything brings me once more back to the old interpretation of the peplos as the only one possible — and the only natural one. For why in the world should the one characteristic, principal fact, which distinguishes the Panathenaic from all other processions, the presentation of the peplos, be in no way indicated 1 and why should there be in the middle of the frieze objects suggested which are only accessory and insignificant, while every evidence of what is actually represented, and the most perfect suitability from an antirpiarian as well as an artistic point of view unite in favour of the explanation of the peplos 1 Miss Harrison makes some further re- marks about the Erechtheion. I cannot in- deed go into her fancies about the wooden Hermes in the Polias temple, which she takes to represent Zeus Soter but at the same time Kekrops; but must confine myself to her assertions about the Kekropion. I am grateful to her for her good intention of wishing to instruct me, by means of an excursus borrowed from some grammar or other, as to the general use of 7rpos with the genitive or dative ; but in my opinion she would have done better if, in following my argument, she had examined more fully the usage in the inscription referred to. She would have found that whenever a part of the building is there indicated by reference to a locality lying without it, 7rpos with the genitive is employed : so that, if the Ke- kropion lay outside the building, as Miss Harrison thinks, we should have TrpoaTao-is 7/ 7r/jos Tov K(Kpo7rtov. Since the porch of the Caryatidae is invariably denoted as Ti-pos T(3 KeKpo7rto), I concluded that this stood 'am Kekropion,' attached to it, and there- fore behind it, and that it was (as for other reasons we may conclude from the inscrip- tion) a part of the building. Lastly, Miss Harrison agrees wholly with Dbrpfeld's idea, who places the sacred lamp and the xoanon in the ' old temple' which, according to him, had been left standing. This bold theory, with which I have long been acquainted, thanks to a friendly com- munication from Diirpfeld, I have often thoroughly weighed, and am obliged to con- sider it wholly untenable. But that is neither here nor there. As to Miss Harri- son, I would remark that in terming Kallimachos an ' archaic artist ' she has not a vestige of confirmation. It is even in reference to Dbrpfeld's we hypothesis, to make it clear that the date of Kallimachos is so far fixed that we are justi- fied in asserting that he cannot have flour- ished before the period of the Peloponnesian War. The Corinthian form of capital., of which the invention is ascribed to him, can at any rate not have been created before the time of that war (cf. Germ. p. 201, note 1 ; Eng. p. 437, note 4 and cf. Ussing in Bull, de V Acad, de Danemark 1894) ; and the Hera of Plataea cannot certainly be placed before the building of the temple (about 425 B.C.) ; and lastly, the relief which bears his name, and which must be considered as the copy of a work, if not by him, at least of his style, is of pronounced archaistic style ; i.e. it shows an admixture of quite late elements with a superficial imitation of the archaic. The rhetorical comparison between Kallimachos and Kalainis in Dionys. Halic. refers only to the individual qualities of Ac7TTorri5 and ^apis, and is not the least evidence of their being contemporary. Lastly, all this evi- dence is in keeping with the lamp in the Polias temple, which would suit that date ad- mirably if it was made for the new building, the Erechtheion. We possess so few certain dates in the history of Greek art, that we cannot afford to allow the few we have to be lightly snatched away from us. A. FlJRTWANGLER. THE CLASSICAL KKVIKYV. Ill THE MYTH OF IXION Fig. a. Fig. b. There is in the British Museum a red- figure cantharos of the best period (E 155 in the new Catalogue) which has long been popular as offering an unsolved problem of interpretation. 1 The subject represented on one of the two sides (b) presents very little difficulty, and has been accepted by the more recent of the numerous commentators with practical unanimity as the punishment of Ixion. In this scene the culprit stands before the throne of Hera on the left, his arms held fast on either side by Ares and Hermes respectively ; on the right Athene stands ready with the winged wheel. The scene on the other side (a) is much more uncertain. In the centre is an altar, upon 1 The cats given above arc from new tracings made by Mr. Anderson. Unfortunately, by an error in redaction, the two sccaes arc made to vary in heighi : though varying in length, tiny should of course be the same height. which a bearded figure kneels with left knee, holding up a sword ; a large snake, coiled round his waist, bites him in the shoulder j but without apparently experiencing any physical inconvenience from this detail, he looks to left, where a youth falls dead, with a wound in the left breast, and is received into t he arms of a winged bearded figure who bends over him, (mi the right is a tree, apparently a laurel, beside which a bearded wreathed figure in a Initiation, with a long stall or BCeptre, runs forward tow anls the central scene, brandishing a stone as if to hurl it at the man on the all ar. The older interpreters. Etaoul l.'ochette and Panofka, saw in this subject the murder of Neoptolemos by Orestes, and ex- plained (b) as Oreste before [phigeneia t ayxdnarai ititvwv. IstJim. 2, 26 xpucreas eV yowewn ttitvovtol Ni'kus. Bacchyl. Anth. Pal. 6, .*> I 3 Kovpa rfaAAavTos ttoXvwvv/ac nori'La Nixr], Trpopo)V KpavaiSaJv IpxpoiVTa \npov ahv e7ro7TT€i'ot5 7ro/\.€a5 S' iv aOvpfiaan M.ovao.v Ki]lo> a/x<£m#a Ba\Kv\i8rj oret^urovs. Monumental evidence points in tin' same direction. Nike appears frequently on the coins of various cities from 500 n.c, in Creek proper (Elis), Sicily (Camarina, 1 Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, p. 366. - Op. cit. pp. 1-2, 7, etc. ;i Theog. 383 If. 4 p. 13. 5 Preller-Robert, pp. 216, 494—496. Catana, Gela, Himera, Leontini, Messana, and Syracuse), and Italy (Terina). In an important article, 6 which seems to be unknown to M. Baudrillart, Imhoof-Blumer has pointed out that the earliest coinage of Elis is distinguished from that of all other cities in Greece proper by this type of Nike. Further, he has shown the similarity of design between the early types of Elean and Sicilian Nikes. Several cities in the island became famous for victories in the Pauhellenic games towards the end of the sixth century. Imhoof-Blumer is surely quite justified in drawing an inference that Nike was probably revived at Olympia and represented victory, not in war, but in the games. 7 It is true that the Pauhellenic game.- were regarded, in some sort, as a prepara- tion and training for war ; but the significant silence of poets who treat of military matters — e.ij. Aeschylus — makes it more than probable that Nike had little or nothing to do with baffle until the Persian invasion, at the earliest. .Marathon and Salamis may perhaps have widened her sphere of action. On coins, Xike does not appear in a warlike aspect until the middle of the tilth century, 8 and even then, it seem.-. this connexion is exceptional. In the coin- age of continental ({recce she does not appear at all as a warrior-goddess until late in the fourth century, on the coins of Macedonian kings.'-* In literature, (lie lii t reference to Nike as arbitress of the fortune of war (under Zeus) is in an 'oracle of Bakis ' quoted by Herodotus viii. 77 tot iXevOfpoi 1 BXXaoos <}/'"/> evpvoTra KpovLOi] 1 ; eVuyei mil JTOTVta Nooy. The oracles of Bakis were all spurious, and this prophecy on the Persian war was no doubt, like many other prophecies, written during or after the events which it foretells. It seems, then, that Nike was revived to express the giver of musical ami athletic success. Now, if this \ iew is correct, it must follow that Nike was at. first not connected with A t liena at all, much less an emanatioD or, to use Miss Harrison' pression, a 'characteristic mode' of that " • I tie Flu-. ]■ . .i.ili. ii dot Uhene and N Lki mil M 'iii 'ii,' Huber'a Niimism. Zeitschr. 1871. • Tin., theory is quoted with approval by Knapp, Xil.< in der Vasenmal i Tubin ;en, l v , \ i. tory, "ii a i oin "i ttimei i ( iboul 150 b.i i. holding apluatre bound with a fillet 'She eems connected with naval war rather than with the .' Gardner, ( Types qf ><'* . PI, 1 1.. No. '21). 11 I in h> m.1 - 1 lluiiu l , i'ji. , U. 282 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. goddess. For Athena, though ex officio patroness of the Panathenaea, had no particular authority in the Olympian games, or indeed in any other great Pan- hellenic festival. At Olympia it was Zeus that gave the victory. It was Nike that awarded the prize. Bacchyl. fr. 9 Nuca yXuKl'Sw/DOS £V 7T0\VXPVCT(I) 8' ' OX-V/AWix) Zl]VL 7rapi(TTajxiva K/atVei Te'Aos aOavdrotari re kou 6vt.\6ye\(i><; t€ irap6£vo 'AOrjvav ; but Himerius at all events refers to the proper Nike, as is shown by xpvfOTrrepvyf. ri So the Schol. on Soph. Phil. 134. ovrais r) iroAtovxos 'hQ-rtvu NIkt) KaAelrat iv 'ArriKfi. * Paus. i. 42, 3. Kekule, Die Balustrade des Tempels der Athena Nike, p. 9. Erythrae. 5 Whether the cult in these cities arose independently of that in Athens, it is impossible to say. Nike seems to have lent herself to a similar absorption by other cultus-deities. On the reverse of a well-known coin of Terina (about 480 B.C.), there is a wingless female figure, holding an olive bough, with NSKA retrograde in the field. On the obverse is the head of Terina, with the legend TEP5NA. A little later the ordinary winged Nike appears on the coinage. The unwinged goddess has been thought to represent Terina in the guise of Nike, a ' Terina Nike.' Again, we find a running winged female on coins of Catana, with the inscription KATANE. Mr. Head calls the goddess ' Catana as Nike,' 7 and Prof. Gardner thinks that this view is possibly correct. 8 The presence of wings on the latter figure is perhaps no objection ; Catana may easily have borrowed the art» type as well as the name of Nike. In Alexandrine times, as Imhoof-Blumer points out, there are several instances of coins with the type of a winged Athena. We must now examine some chronological questions in relation to the origin of Nike and Athena Nike. There is no record, in in literature or art, of the existence of Nike until quite the end of the sixth century. She is not represented on coins before 500 B.C., nor on vases before the red-figured period, 9 i.e. not till the last decade of the sixth century. Archermos, it is true, flourished in the first half of the century, 10 and he (or Aglaophon) was thought to have been the first to give Nike wings. 11 But the idea that Nike was originally wingless is no doubt an error arising from a confusion with the so-called Nike Apteros, who was really Athena Nike. Whether the winged statue commonly called the ' Nike of Archermos ' belongs to the base which bears the name of that sculptor is a matter of doubt ; 12 at any rate, although such winged females were commonly called Nikes by later Greeks, it is very improbable that the actual sculptor attached such an idea to his work. Max. Mayer, in Roscher's Lexicon, 1 * 5 Dittenberger, Syll. 370, 27. (An inscript. oi' the third cent, b.c.) G Gardner, Types of Greek Coins, PI. I. 23. Head, Hist. Num. p. 96. 7 Op. cit. p. 114. 8 Op. cit. p. 108. " Knapp, p. 11. M. Mayer in Roscher's Lex. 854. 10 Mitchell, History of Ancient Sculpture, p. 195. 11 Schol. on Arist. Av. 574. 12 Sauer in Alhen. Mitth. 1891, pt. 2. 13 s.v. 'Iris,' 354. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 283 calls the figure Iris, who was worshipped by the Delians, a suggestion which I had already made in a paper on the Nike of Archermos, written in 1891. l Now, if Nike was a new conception in the latter half of the sixth century, if not later, Athena Nike must be still younger, since, according to the view here maintained, Athena Nike presupposes Nike herself. But it may be objected that the cult of Athena Nike must have been very ancient, as the statue of the goddess on the Acropolis is called a £6avov by Harpocration 2 and Pausanias ; 3 the latter of whom, in men- tioning a ' wingless Nike ' dedicated by the Mantineans at Olympia, states that Kalamis is said to have made it in imitation of the £6avov at Athens. Otto Bendorf, 4 however, remarks that cultus-statues in wood continued to be made as late as the fifth and fourth centuries ; for example, there was a £6avov of Hekate by Myron in Aegina, and another of Hermes by Damo- phon at Megalopolis. He thinks that this cult of Athena Nike, if not actually established after the Persian war (as I believe was the case), was then popularized by Kimon ; and that Kalamis was probably the sculptor of the original statue at Athens, of which he subsequently executed a replica for the Mantineans. Benndorf believes that the statue was dedicated on the Acropolis after the battle of Eurymedon. The helmet in one hand of Athena shows that the struggle is over ; the pomegranate which the goddess bears in her other hand refers to Side, a town near the scene of the great battle, celebrated for the worship of Athena, who is often figured with a pome- granate in her hand on coins of the city. The local goddess would thus be brought over to Athens, just as in later times Konon erected a temple to Aphrodite, the patron deity of the Knidians, after the battle of Knidos. This explanation of the art-type seems very plausible, and more attractive than the suggestion of .Miss Harrison that 'the old xoanon with the pomegranate in one hand, the helmet in the other, takes us back to very early days, when Athene was near akin to the goddess 1 This was printed for a special purpose, but QOl published. I have therefore not hesitated to incor- porate some small part of it in the present paper. I was indebted to Prof. Wahlstein for the suggestion of the subject, and to Mr. E. Gardner and Dr. Sandys, among others, for much valuable assistant-. 2 Harpocration, s.v. Ni'«rj '\driva. 8 Paus. v. 26, 6. 4 Ueber das Cultusbild der Athene Nike, Wien, 1879, p. 21. of love and war, Aphrodite.' 5 The statue, or at least its type, must have been prehis- toric indeed. Even if Benndorf's theory as to the origin of the type is rejected, there is no monumental evidence to prove the alleged antiquity of the cult. The type is not known to us from any early vase. A black-figured vase in Altenburg (unpub- lished) shows a sitting Athena with a pomegranate in her left hand ; but she wears her helmet, instead of carrying it. Another vase-painting, also black-figured, represents Athena seated, and holding her helmet in the left hand ; but, instead of the pomegranate, she holds in her right a cup, which she offers to a priestess standing before an altar. 1 '' At most, these vases, taken together, exhibit the motive which was afterwards chosen for the representation of Athena Nike ; they are certainly no proof that Athena was worshipped under that title in the sixth century. The earliest reference to her in literature is Soph. Philokt. 134, Ni'/o/ t 'A0ara HoXtas. Cf. Antig. 148. To sum up, I believe that while Nike was a late conception, Athena Nike was still later, and that the goddess of Victory cannot have originated, either at Athens or elsewhere, from an aspect of Athena. E. E. Sikes. '' Myth, and Mori. p. 3G6. So Stark, Philologus, 1S60. ' 6 Furtwangler in Roscher's Lex. s.r. 'Athene' 689. He advocates a great antiquity for the cult of Athena Nike, but, it seems to me, on insufficient evidence. MONTHLY RECORD. BRITAIN. Silchester. — During the excavations of 1894 the discovery was made of twenty-one -mall hearths or furnaces, Bome circular, Bome oblong. They are supposed to have beon connected with dye-works, among the small objects found are a small gold ring of coarse filigree work in which is mounted a pear- shaped carbunole, an engraved red jasper, a I hinge of pierced work, and a small bronze bell. A hoard of250 8ilvei denarii from Marcus antoniua to Severus) was also discovered, having possibly bei n concealed during the Btruggle between Albums and Severus ( \.i>. 194—197 .' obeu \sv. Anbaeh-Augst, .—In the excavation of the Limes-fort at this place a number of Roman weapons were found, mostly in a tower of the Porta l'i lotoria. The weapons must have been in use at the time of 1 Attn ,1,1,1/ in. .May ■!. 284 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. the evacuation of the fort, i.e. about 260 a.d. The most interesting finds consisted of fragments of artillery (onagt r and ballista) and a well-preserved, peculiarly-constructed pilum. 1 ITALY. l'< nice. — Mariani has been making researches in the Museums, in the course of which he has dis- covered various objects relating to Crete. Among these are a statue of Britomartis and a scarabaeus on which are some thirty-two incised characters similar to those recently published by A. J. Evans from Cretan stones. - GREECE. Delphi. — Homolle has given before the French School a detailed description of the Treasury of the Siphnians. The work of the East Pediment is peculiar, in that the upper parts of the figures are cut away from the background, the lower treated as reliefs. This is probably to obviate the effect of the shadow in which the upper part of the tympanum lies. The style is hard and flat, like that of the ancient Spartan reliefs, and these sculptures are the most archaic of all those on the Treasury. The frieze shows more than one hand, the work of the East and North sides being more advanced than the rest. The explanation of the frieze is of course materially aided by the painted inscriptions, which stand sometimes beside the figures on the back- ground, sometimes on the lower margin. Some of the names are lost, others are illegible, as the colouring of the whole composition began to fade soon after the stones were uncovered. They would have been more important than they are, were it not that inscriptions of exactly the same character are found on the frieze of the Treasury of the^Sikyonians and on the metopes of that of the Athenians. They thus afford no indication of school, and were apparently added by the Delphians themselves as a commentary to the sculptures. 3 J)' lus. — The plan of the harbour of Delos has been laid before the French Academy by Homolle. It is formed by the channel which separates Delos from the two islands of Great and Little Rheumatiari, is about 1200 metres long, and protected on the north by a line of reefs converted in ancient times into a solid breakwater. It was divided into two parts, sacred and profane. At present the commercial quarter has only been partly uncovered. 4 Samos. — A large number of vases has been found in the excavation of an archaic necropolis. 2 /,'• rl. Phil Woch. May"4. Athenaeum, May 11. Berl. Phil Woch. April 27. C. R. clc VAcad. des Inscr. Jan. -Feb. 1895. PALESTINE. Cacsarca. — An inscription has been found on a column among the ruins, mentioning among other things a Hadrianeum, presumably one of the temples or perhaps Thermae built by Hadrian. The inscrip- tion appears to be at the earliest of the sixth century A.D.* EGYl'T. Araqa, S. W. of Farshut. — 'Mycenaean' vases have been found, but no record has been kept of the objects found with them. 5 Abydos. — Some bronze sdujuc and a large silver coin of Athens (archaic 1) have been found in a tomb. 3 Ekhmim. — Fron this [dace has come a strip of wood, with a number of names on one side, and on the other : &p|ai x^P o.ya9i] Kv...'E\\i)voov irpSiTOi is by some con- sidered spurious, but it can be kept if we read 'Apyuot for KpoTajfiffTai. Skylla ein kraJce am vorgebirge Skyllaion, H. Steuding. Explains Horn. fx 73 foil. , 234 foil., ace. to the view that aKvWrj is a myth of the octopus vulgaris which is frequently met with in the Mediterranean and on the coasts of Greece. Uber einem besondern gebrauch des ablativus absolutus bei Caesar, J. Lange. On sentences of the type of B.G. iv. 21, C> quibus auditis liberaliter pollicitus hortatusque, nt in ca sententia j>< rmanerent, eos domum remittit, of which Caesar has many ex- amples. This construction is common in Homer, e.g. 5 392, C46. Die zeit des ersten sklavenkrieges. A. Wilms. Puts the outbreak at Minturnae B.c. 144/143, outbreak under Emms 141/110, defeat of Hypsaeus 139, and the end of the war by Rupilius 132. Deis ivescn der Horazisrh, ,i satire nachgewicsen em Sat. ii. 8, J. Sanneg. Maintains that the satires of Horace are caricatures and most of all this one. Hor. like Goethe sought in poetry a relief for his own sufferings. Zu deii Gronovschen Cieero-seholien, Th. Stangl. A correction of schol. comment, on Verr. ii. 1, 4f> in a previous diss, by the writer. Rheinisches Museum. Vol. 50. Tart 2. 1895. Die vaticanische Ariadne und di ■• drttte Elegie des Properz, Th. Birt. Concluded from last no. [CI. Rev. sup. p. 189]. An Ariadne, like that in the Vatican, became possible at the end of the 4th cent. B.C., but we cannot say more. The superiority of Prop, over Ov. Am. i. 10 in the representation. Die Epigram-me des Deimetsus, M. Ihm. Tests are given for deciding the genuineness of some of these Epigrams. Zu elen Assyriaka eles Ktcsieis, P. Krumbholz. A criticism of Marquardt's essay, in the 6th supplement vol. of Philologus, on the prae-Persian period of Ctesias' history. De Christophori comrnentario in ffermogenis librvm -nep\ araaeuv, H. Rabe. The unknown quo- tations from authors given by Christophorus are here published. Zur Geschichte eler dltcren griechisehen Lyrik, J. heloch. (1) Theognis of Megara. He belonged to Hyblaean Megara in Sicily, not to the Nisaean Megara. (2) Aleaeus and the war for Sigeum. This war is to he identified with that of Peisistratos against Mytilene. Ueher elie Weihin- sehrift der Nike des Paionios, F. Koepp. Maintains that there is nothing strange in the omission in this inscription of the name of those conquered by the Messenians and Naupactians, and that this omission need not be ascribed to fear. Antikritische Streif- ziigc, 0. Ribbeck. A defence of the writer's views upon Aeeius and l'acuvius expressed in his History of Roman Poetry, as against Robert's criticism in his celebrated book ' Bild und Lied.' Romische Dichter auf Inschriften, C. llosius. In these Vergil is i quoted, then at a great interval Ovid, then Lucan. Horace and Martial are more seldom found and others only very rarely. M [SCELLANEOUS. Zu den Moiiatscyklen der by-ant- inischen Kunst in sp&tgriechischer Litteratur, 0. I''. Midler. A number of verses by an unknown author iu cod. Paris. 2991 A are here published with ear, lectt. from other codd. Zmn codex Palatinus Lysias, K. Fuhr. Various corrections and suggestions. Eine lieise des Aelius Arislides in die Mil* W. Schmid. This is written to justify, in the bit'' of the Rhetorician in the forthcoming half vol. of the new Pauly, an omission of a certain journey on the ground that it was an imaginary journey only. Das Alter der Vorstellwng mm panischen Schrecken, W. Schmid. Shows, in opposition to v. Wilamowitz, that this notion was familiar to Herodotus an. I Thueydides. Die Eroberung Jerusalems durch Werodes, V. Gardthausen. In opposition to Kio- mayer, puts the siege between 3rd May (or 3rd .line B.O. 37 and 3rd October. Ad Poreii Licini <1< Terentio versus, O.R. An attempt to restore these lines. Zu latcinischen Dichtern, M. Manitius. A continuation, (1) on the florilegium of Micon. Shows the source of the quotations. Der Vornanu HI,, i,,es Seneca, E. Yvoltllin. As Quintilian refers to the philosopher only as Seneca, it is probable that his father had the same praenomen, viz. Lucius, and not Marcus for which there is no authority. Transactions of the American Philological Association. 1894. Vol. xxv. The chief articles that concern classical philology are as follows : (I.) Those published in full. on the Prepositions in Gellvus, by C. Knapp. Tin- excessive use of prepositions in Gellius is due not only to decay in the language hut much more to G.'i anhaism and the influence of the sermo plebeius. Various instances are examined. On Urbs Aeterna and Urbs Sacra, V. (i. Moore. The former ex- pression as applied to Home became official in the time of Hadrian. The city was sacra as being the abode of the deified emperors. Sonu poetical structions in Thueydides, C. 1*'. Smith. Examples are given under the following heads: (1) prepo sitional constructions, (2) two dative constructions, viz. after verbs of motion, and the dat. of the agent, (3) adjectives and participles, viz. neut. plur. as predicate and as cognate accus., ami the articular neut. adj. or partcp. as an abstract noun, (4) sub- stantives used adjectively. Literary frauds among the Romans, A. Gudeman. A most interesting paper, a companion to that on literary frauds among the Greeks recently published in 'classical Studies in honour of Henry Drisler ' [see CI. Rev. viii. 124], Compared with the apocryphal literature of the Greeks, tint Roman ^(vte-niypaa in Latin literature. This may be illustrated by the 1'seiido- Yetgiliana, as the Culex, (iris, Dirae, Copa, Catalepta, Aetna. (II.) Those artii les of wlucli summaries only are given. The Song "/" the Brothers, by E. W. Lay. An attempt to elm this, followed by am on th* manes worship, in which it is maintained thai the Greeks woi hipped their ancestors as Hie Romans did the Mams ami the Hindus the /' The Athenian Polemarch, r, . \. Thompi His power began to decline as early as the end of the seventh century, bul we do ii, ,i l. now exactly when he lost Ins actual military command. On tlie inscriptional Uymn to Apollo recently discovered at Delphi, L. Dittlen. I 'ate after 279 b.c. but cannol he fixed, Th.' k< \ i Phrygian. The melodj exemplifies one of the more complex development of ancient art. I fiow, prandium, tpiaroy, \V. S. Scarboron , Trr.ir like cena varied as to time froi >n to midnight, 286 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. apiarov like prandium frcm eaily mom to mid day. Notes on Th.ucydid.es i. 8, 1 ; 9, 3 ; 28, 3, H. N, Fowler. A discussion of Horace, Carm. iii. 30, 10 — 14, C. Knapp. Explains ' The Apulians will sing of me as one who rose from low estate to high renown, and as the first (Roman) who made Aeolic song at home among Aeolic measures.' Critical notes on Sophocles, J. H. Wright. The Opisthodomus on the Acropolis at Athens, J. W. White. It is maintained that this was a separate building. On a liter eery judgment of Fronto, M. AVarren. An ex- planation of the sentence : In poetis autem quis ignorat ut gracilis sit Lucilius, Albucius arichis, sublimis Lucretius, mediocris Pacuvius, inacqualis Accius, Ennius multiformis ? Naber's ed. p. 113 f. On Vclleius Patcrculus, E. G. Sihler. The desire of V. to write for the sake of fine writing and to improve upon the diction of the Ciceronian era seems palpable enough. The date of the poet Lycophron, W. N. Bates. Born B.C. 325—320, wrote his Alexandra about 295, flourished about 280 as a tragic poet, and died before. 250. The Saturnians of Livius Andronicus and Nacrius according to the quantitative theory, K. P. Harrington. They cannot be shown to bear any quantitative test. Perhaps they were only 'rhythmical prose.' Jacio compounds in the present system with prefix ending in a consonant, M. W. Mather. These compounds in all Roman poets before the death of Augustus have the prefix syllable long, except in four exx., three in Plautus and one in Naevius. A note on the Gnomic Aorist, H. C. Elmer. It is maintained, in opposition to the common view as expressed by Prof. Goodwin, that the true function of the gnomic aorist is to express an act in the present with the idea of progress left out. A critical note on Eur. Ion 1-3, M. L. Earle. Dr. Earle rewrites the passage thus : "AT\a pp. Miin- chen, Beck. 5 Mk. 50. (Aus ' Baumeister's Handbnch der Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre.') Eickhoff (P.) Der horaziscbe Doppelbau der sapphi- schen Strophe und seine Geschiehte. 8vo. vi, 54 pp. Wandsbeck. 3 Mk. Euripides. Holzner (Eug. ) Studien zu Euripides. 8vo. iv, 123 pp. Wien, Tempsky. 4 Mk." Festschrift zum SOjahrigen Doctorjubilaeum Ludvvig Friedlander dargebracht von seinen Schiilera. 8vo. iii, 554 pp. Leipzig, Hirzel. 12 Mk. Friedlaender (Ulr.) De Zoilo aliisque Homeri obtrectatoribus. 8vo. 85 pp. Konigsberg, Koch. 1 Mk. 80. Glycas. Krumbacher (K.) Michael Glycas. Fine Skizze seiner Biographie und seiner litterarischen Thiitigkeit, nebst einem unedirten Gedichte und Briefe desselben. 8vo. 70 pp. Miinchen, Franz. 1 Mk. 60. (Aus ' Sitzungsberiehten tier K. bayr. Akademie der Wissenschaften. ') Gaomici Graeci. Elter (A.) De Gnomologiorum Graecorum historia atque origine commentatio part. VIII. (de Aristobulo Judaeo IV.) 4to. 7 pp. Bonn. Grosspietsch (A.) De rerpanAun' vocabulorum quodam genere pars I. 8vo. 34 j>p. Breslau. Herbst (H.) Ueber das korinthische Puteal. 4to. 13 pp. Altenburg. Herodot. Nehmeyer. Syntaktische Bemerkungen zu Herodot. 4to. 24 pp. Darmstadt. Himerius. Teuber (F. ) De laeunis Himerii in oration ibus integris a Duehnero editore notatis. 4to. 12 pp. Breslau. Hirt (O.) Der Poseidontempel in Pasturo. Fine archaologische Studie. 4to. 19 pp., 1 plate. Sorau. Holland (R. ) IleroenviJgel in der grieehischen Mythologie mit einem Anhange iiber Diomedes in Italian. 4to. 37 pp. Leipzig. Homer. Albracht. Kampf und Kampfschilderung bei Homer. II. 4to. 25 pp. Naumburg. Kraut (K.) und Rdsch (W. ) Anthologie aus grie- ehischen Prosaikern, zum Uebersetzen ins Deutsche, IVir obere Klassen. Heft II. 8vo. 80 jip. Stuttgart, Kohlhammer. 80 Pf. Lucian. Rentsch (J.) Lucianstudien. I. 4to. 44 pp. Plauen. as. Biichle (A.) Lysias' Rede gegen Pbilon. 4to. 16 pp. Durlach. Mair(G.) Jenseits der Rhipaen. B. Ultima Tbule. Kin Beitrag zur Geschiehte des Bemsteinhandels. 8vo. 31 pp. Villach. May (M.) Der Antheil der Keltgermanen an der europaisehen Bildung im Altertbmn. 8vo. 15 pp. Frankfurt. Mela (Pomponius). Zimmermann (H.) De Pom- ponii Melae sermone. 4to. 30 pp. Dresden. Meyer (Gust.) Neugriechisehe Studien. III. Die lateinisehen Lehmvorte im Neugriechisehen. 8vo. 84 pp. Wien, Tempsky. 1 Mk. 70. Mucke(E.) De consonarum in Graeea lingua praeter Asiaticorurii dialectum Aeolicam geminatione. III. 4to. 30 pp. Freiburg. Orpheus. Maass (K. ) Orpheus. Uutersuehungen zur grieehischen, riiiniscben und altchristlichen Jen- seitsdichtung und Religion. 8vo. viii, 334 pp., 2 plates. Miinchen, Beck. 8 Mk. Pascal (C.) Tre questioni di Fonologia. 8vo. 33 pp. Firenze. Pesch (W. ) Einige Bemerkungen iiber das Wesen und die Arten der dramatischen Poesie (angekniipft an die Poetik des Aristoteles). 4 to. 17 pp. Trier. Plautus. Roppenecker (H.) De emendatione metrica canticorum Plautinorum. Svo. 41 pp. Freising. Poland (b\) De collegiis artiticum Dionysiaenrum. 4to. 26 pp. Dresden. Raillard (J.) Die Anordnungen des M. Antonius im Orient in den .Tahren 42 bis 31 v. C. Svo. 58 pp. Zurich. Rohde (E.) Die Religion der Griechen. 4to. 28 pp. Heidelberg. Eoscher (W. H.) Nachtrage zu mcinem Buche : ' Ueber Selene und Venvandtes.' 4to. 80 pp, Wurzen. Rudolph (V.) Die Schlacht von Platliii und deren UeberlielVrung. 4to. 58 pp. Dresden. Sallustius. Pajk (J.) Sallust als Fthiker. II. Svo. 19 pp. Wien. Sehildt(A..) Die Giebelgruppen von Aegina. 8vo. 148 pp., 2 plates. Leipzig. Sehnegelsberg (A.) De Liberi apud Romanos eultu capita duo. Svo. 48 pp. Marburg. Srhoa (G. ) Die romischen Inschriften in Cilli. Svo. 44 pp. Cilli. Schulze (W.) Orthographica. II. 4to. 33 pp. Marburg. Seneca. Dittenberger (W.) De L. Annaei Senecae epistularum loco observationes. 4to. 8 pp. Halle. Sophocles. Hermann (F. ) Sophokles' Konig Oedi- pus iibersetzt. 8vo. 64 pp. Norden. Studi italiani di filologia classica. Vol. III. 8vo. 548 pp. Firenze, Sansoni. 20 Lire. Studien (Leij)ziger) zur classischen Pliilologie, herausgegeben von O. Ribbeck, II. Lipsius, C. Wachsmutb. Vol. XVII. Part I. 8vo. ii, 274 pp. Leipzig, Hirzel. 7 Mk. Thucydides. H°l'ue.s (D. H.) Die mit Praeposi- tionen zusammengesetzten Verben bei Thucydides. 8vo. 47 pp. Berlin, Weidmann. 1 Mk. 20. Tibullus. Hennig (F. ) Uutersuehungen zu Tilmll, ein Beitrag zur Echtheitsfrage. 4to. IS pp. Wittenberg. Vergilius. Segebade (J.) Vergil als Seemann. 4to. 19 pp. Oldenburg. JValcher de Molthein (Chev. Leop. ) Catalogue de la collection des medailles grecques. Svo. viii, 294 pp., 31 plates and portrait of Welzl de Wellenheini, the Numismatist. Wien, Holz- hausen. 12 Mk. Waser (O.) Skylla und Charybdis in der Litteratur und Kunst der Griechen und Riimer. 8vo. 147 p]). Zurich. Wattenbach (W.) Anleitung zur grieehischen Palaeo- graphy. 3rd Edition. Svo. iii, 127 pp. Leip- zig, Hirzel. 3 Mk. 60. Wiesenthal (M.) Quaestiones de nominibus propriis, quae Graecis bominibus in proverbio fuerunt. Svo. 63 pp. Barmen. Xenophon. Brans (J.) De Xenophontis Agesilai capite undecimo. Svo. 21 pp. Kiel. MR, DAVI D NUTT S LIST LATEST PUBLICATIONS IN MR. W. E. HENLEY'S TUDOR TRANSLATIONS. PLUTARCH'S LIVES OF THE NOBLE GRECIANS AND ROMANS. Englished by Sir THOMAS NORTH, anno 1579. With au Introdi-jtion by GEORGE WYNDHAM. To be completed in 6 vols., small 4to, averaging 432 pages. Vols. I. and II. are now ready. Subscription price for the 6 volumes, exclusive of carriage and postage, £3 12s. net. The price will be raised after completion of the issue. A Prospectus of the work and of the Tudor Translations will he sent on application. THE NEW CRITICAL EDITION OF THE HEBREW BIBLE. THE SACRED BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. A critical edition of the Hebrew Text printed in colours with Notes. Under the general editorship of Professor PAUL HAUPT of the Johns Hopkins University. JUST ISSUED. PART II. THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH, arranged in chronological order with Notes by C. H. CORNILU, Professor in the University of Koiiigsberg. 4to, 79 pages. 5«. net. PART VI. THE BOOK OF JOSHUA, printed in colours exhibiting the composite structure of the book. With Notes by W. II. BENNETT, Professor of Hackney New College. 4to, 32 pages, 3*. net. PREVIOUSLY ISSUED. JOB (edited by SIEGFRIED) 3s. Gd. nett ; LEVITICUS (DRIVER) 3*. Gd. nett ; SAMUEL (BUDDE)6*. Gd. nett. Prospectus of the Series on application. LEGENDS OF FLORENCE: Collected from the People and Retold by CHARLES GODFREY LELAND. First Series. Crown Svo, 288 pages, handsomely printed on laid paper, in fancy cloth, gilt top, 5». ESSAYS ON SCANDINAVIAN LITERATURE. By H. H. BOYESEN. Crown 8vo, 288 pages, cloth, gilt top, 5s. Contents: — Bjornson — Kielland — Jonas Lie — II. C. Andersen— G. Brandes— E. Tegner — Contemporary Danish Literature. DANIEL DEFOE— OF ROY ALE EDUCATION : a Treatise edited for the first time by K. D. BL'ELBRING. Demy 8TO, 112 pages, 2s. net. LOHENGRIN— FIFTY YEARS AFTER. By ONE OF THE FOLK. 16ino, 26 pages, stiff wrapper. 6d. TALES OF THE FAIRIES AND OF THE GHOST WORLD. Collected from Oral Tradition in South-West Munster, by J. CURTIN. 210 pages, fancy cloth, uncut, 3«. 6d. STUDIES IN BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY. By JOSEPH JACOBS. 16mo, 172 pages, cloth, uncut, 3s. 6rf. Contents : —Recent Research in Biblical Archaeology and in Comparative Religion — Junior Right in Genesis— Totem Clans in the Old Testament — The Nethenim— The Indian Origin of the Book (if Proverbs. CLAN TRADITIONS AND POPULAR TALES OF THE WESTERN HIGHLANDS and ISLANDS. Collected from Oi by the late Rev. S. G. CAMPBELL, With Memoir Of the Author. Portrait and Illustrations. Demy bvo, XX.-150 pages, clotn, 5«. i, fancy oloth, Be, Bel BEGINNINGS OF WRITING IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN ASIA; or, Notes 450 Embryo-Writings and Scripts, by TERBIEN de LA001 PERIE Demj Bvo, 810 pp., oloth, x\ i» 1). M IT, 270, 271, STRAND. CLARENDON PRESS LIST, Just published, demy Hvo, cloth, 8s. Qd. M. TULLI CICERONIS PRO T. ANNIO MILONE AD JUDICES ORATIO. Edited, Avith Introduction and Commentary, by ALBERT C. CLARK, M.A., Fellow anclj; Tutor of Queen's College, Oxford. BY THE SAME EDITOR. Crown 4ta, stiff covers, 7s. Qd. COLLATIONS FROM THE HARLEIAN MSS. OF CICERO, 2682. With a Facsimile. (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Classical Series. Part VII.) Just published, demy 8vo, cloth, 8s. 6rf. THUCYDIDES. Book I. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Maps, by' W. H. FORBES, M.A., Balliol College, Oxford. Just published, crown Svo, cloth, 2s. NEW AND REVISED EDITION FOR SCHOOLS. SOPHOCLES.— OSDIPUS COLONEUS. Edited, with Introductions and English: Notes, by LEWIS CAMPBELL, M.A., LL.D., Emeritus Professor of Greek in the University of St.- Andrews ; and EVELYN ABBOTT, M.A., LL.D , Balliol College, Oxford. BY THE SAME EDITORS. SOPHOCLES. Edited, with Introductions and English Notes, by Lewis Campbeli M.A., and EVELYN ABBOTT, M.A. New Edition. 2 vols. Extra fcap. 8vo, 10s. 6d Sold separately : Vol. I., Text, 4s. Qd. ; Vol. II. , Explanatory Notes, 6s. Or in Single Plays : — Antigone, Is. 9d.; OSdipus Coloneus, OCdipus Tyrannus, Ajax, Electra. Trachiniae, Philoctetes, 2s. each. Just published, New Edition, Vol. II., £1 16s. THE CHINESE CLASSICS. With a Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. By JAMES LEGGE, D.D., LL.D. In 8 vols, royal 8vo. Vol. I., Second Edition, £1 10s. Vol. IV. in Two Parts, £1 10s. each. Vol. III., in Two Parts, £1 10s. each. '" Vol. V. in Two Parts, £1 10s. each. Just published, 4