Home > Full text of "Transactions .."

Full text of "Transactions .."


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I


BBBB— — ■laanDBBt




University of Michigan.


'feT^.a.J, i89a_.



? J"



Camlinijge ^l^ilolosital ^otittv*



CambnDge ^l^iloloQital


OF THE ^ / / ? 2

Cambrttige ^{jtlologttal ^otietj.

FOE 1881 AND 1882.


J. P. P08TGATE, M.A.,

TESBNEK S CO., 57 im 59, LtTDflATE HILL.

{All righU reierved.)




In the present volume of Transactions are included in
extenso or in abstract the papers read before the Society
in the years 1881, and some of those read before it in
1882, the remainder of the latter have been already
published separately in the Proceedings of the Society for

For the sake of convenience some of the papers have
been taken out of the chronological arrangement and are
printed separately at the beginning of the volume.

The paper by H. I. H. Prince L.-L. Bonaparte is pub-
lished in concert with the Philological Society of London.
Of the other papers and notes contained in the volume
none have been published before except two which are
given in abstract.

Some reviews are included in this volume as in the
previous one. The one on English Etymology by Professor
Zupitza has been translated from the German.

An Index to the first two volumes has been added.
It may be however pointed out that a full Table of
Contents has been also prefixed to each.


Hon. Sec.
Dec, 6, 1883.



Prepace V


N'eo-Latin Dialects, HJ.H. PRINCE L.-L, BONA-


Spelling Eepoem in its Relation to the Histoby op

CtanaacttonjS of tfje Cambrftse PJifalosfcal Societg,



On page 264 of Volume II. in law 11 of the Society, for "in the
" Michaelmas Term," read " in the Lent Term."


On Propertius II 2. 3, 4, JAMES GOW 157

ei as AN Icelandic Umlaut, E, MAGNUSSON . . . . 157

Meaning of EPPEIN, W, RIDGE WAY 160

Sophocles OEDIPUS TYRANNUS 328, 329, B. H,


POSTGATE), •. 162

" Lend me your Ear " in Aristophanes, A, W.




Preface v


I^eo-Latin Dialects, H.LH. PRINCE L.-L. BONA-

Spelling Eepoem in its Kelation to the Histoby op

English Liteeattjee, H- SWEET 62

Notes on the Text op Plato's PHAEDO, HENRY


Theee Homeeic EttmoLogies, WALTER LEAF, ... 78


On some Woeds and Questions connected with the


H % ROBY 95

On Aeistotlb POLITICS I 6 and IV (VII) 16, HENRY


On Aeistotle POLITICS I 6, J- P^ POSTGATE ... 119
Some ITotes on the POLITICS of Aeistotle, WILLIAM



On Peopeetius II 2. 3, 4, JAMES GOW 157

ei AS AN Icelandic Umlaut, E. MAGNUSSON .... 157

Meaning of EPPEIN, W. RIDGEWAY 160

Sophocles OEDIPUS TYRANNUS 328, 329, B, H,


POSTGATE), ^ 162

" Lend me youe Eae " in Aeistophanes, A. W.




Note on EYeENEIN, A, W. VERRALL 165

Notes on Lucan, y. P^ POSTGATE 166

On Plato MENO, 86 e, E, S, THOMPSON {H, JACKSON), 169

CiCEBO ACADEMICS I 39-42, R- D. HICKS .... 170
Sophocles ANTIGONE 413-4, A. H. COOKE {H. W.


Sophocles OEDIPUS TYRANNUS 328, 329, B, H.


Meeting on Spelling Refoem 176

English Etymologies, W. W. SKEAT. 177

On Ababia in Pontus, W, RIDGE WAY 179

Notes on Thttcydides, 7- P^ POSTGATE 180

Notes on Plautus MILES GLORIOSUS and MOSTEL.


PiNDAB OLYMPIANS 11 56 TO end, A, GRAY. ... 183

On KAAZQ, etc., A. W, VERRALL 185

On the Ionic Tebminations in -aiai^ -aro, fV. RIDGE WA Y, 186

Annual Meeting 187

BmjTATioix ov AKiKBOy E.. MAGN17SS0N, 188

Oix Aeschylus AGAMEMNON 1221, A. W, VERRALL, . 190

Refobm op Latin Pbonunciation, y. P^ POSTGATE . 191

On the boots SAK, SKA, SKAR in English, W, W. SKEAT 194


HoMEB IN 1881 AND 1882, W, LEAF 199

Plato in England in 1881 and 1882, R- D, HICKS . 215

YiBGiL IN 1881 AND 1882, H^ NETTLESHIP .... 222

Pbopebtiits IN 1881 and 1882, 7- P. POSTGATE , , . 227


Asia, H. F. TOZER 237

English Etymology in 1881 and 1883, 7- ZUPITZA, . 243


Laws as bevised, 1883 263

Oppicebs pob 1883 265

List op Membebs pob 1883 266

Index 273


of tie

188X— 1882*



Professor J. P. Postgate's very interesting paper " On the
Latin words for grapes," printed in the first volume of the
"Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society,"^
induces me to extract from my manuscript " Lexicon Com-
parativum omnium Linguarum Europaearum" and present
to the Cambridge Philological Society the following list of
words connected with the vine and numbering over two
hundred, not only in Latin, Low Latin, and in what I
consider its fifteen derivative languages, but also in as
many of their dialects, sub-dialects and varieties (about one
hundred and forty) as it has been possible for me to collect,
either from the most accredited lexicographers, or during
my frequent excursions, undertaken with a merely linguistical
object, from 1843 to 1869, throughout numerous localities
of France, Switzerland, the two Neo-Latin Peninsulas, and
their adjacent islands. This list, notwithstanding its being
nothing more than a rich comparative collection of words
without any etymological comment, yet may be useful, as a
supplementary help, to those who might feel inclined to
continue or extend Prof. Postgate's etymological researches
on this attractive topic.

My object then, at present, is simply comparative ; and,
in order to obtain the nearest equivalent of each English

1 Pp. 302 foU.

VOL. II. 1


word or definition in the several languages, dialects, eub-
dialects, and varieties, I have not so much depended on
bi-lingual lexical works, as on definitions given by the
most accredited native authors of classical and standard
national dictionaries, vocabularies, collections of words, etc.
In languages or dialects, however, which I have spoken
from childhoodj or of which I have a practical knowledge
acquired on the spot, I have acted on my own responsibility.
Such are Italian, French, Spanish, and Portuguese, as well
as the vulgar Florentine and Roman Italian dialects and
the Gallo- Italic Bologneso.

Besides the numerous manuscript collections of words,
which I have been able to gather from the countries where
Neo-Latin dialects are spoken, the following are the principal
printed works which my linguistic library has permitted me
to consult, and which I have generally followed as being the
best authorities.


1�. 1. Olabsicai. Latin: Forcellini, Facciolati, Fiirlanetta —
Totius Latinitatis Lexicon. Patavii, 1827— 41, 5 vol. 4to.;
Pasini — Vocabolario italiano-latino, Vocabula Latina et
Italica. Venezia, 1841, 2 vol. 4to. ; Valluena — Diccionario
espafiol-latino. Paris, 1852, 8vo. ; Salvd — ^Diccionario latino-
espanol. Pari8,1846,8vo.; Fonseca{da) — Diccionario port uguez
e latino. Lisboa, 1852, foL; Ferrelm — Magnum Lexicon
Latinum et Lusifanum. Parisiis, 1843, 4to.; Noel — Diction-
naire fran^ais-latin. Paris, 1840, 8to. ; Noel- — Dictionariuna
Latino-Gallicnm. Paris, 1841, 8vo.; Theil — Dictionnaire
latin-francais, Paris, 1853, 8vo.; Ainswortk — Thesaurus
LioguiD Latina; compendiarius : English-Latin and Latin-
English Dictionary, improved and revised by Eeatson and
Ellis, London, 8vo. ; Wltiie and Middle — Latin-English
Dictionary, London, 1863, 8vo.

2. Low Latin : Cant/e (du) — Gloasarium mediae et infimte
Latinitatis. Parisiis, 1840-50, 7 vol. 4to. ; Diefenback —
Olossarium Latino- German icum medi% et infima; setatis.
Francofurtj ad Moenum, 1857, 4to.


n�. I.Italian: Fot?�6o/�n<) degli Accademici della Crusca.
Firenze, 1729-38, 6 vol. foL; id. 1843, 1 vol. fol.; id. 1863-81,
4 vol. 4to. ; Manuzzi — ^Vocabolario della lingua italiana. Fi-
renze, 1833-40, 4 vol. 4to. ; Rigutini and Fanfani — Vocabolario
italiano della lingua parlata. Firenze, 1875-76, 8vo.; Fanfani
— Vocabolario della pronunzia toscana. Firenze, 1863, 16mo. ;
Barberi, Basti, and Cerati — Grand dictionnaire fran9ais-
italien et italien-fran9ais. Paris, 1838-39, 2 vol. 4to. ; Alberti
— Grand dictionnaire fran9oi8-italien et italien-fran9oi8.
Milan, 1826-28, 2 vol. 4to. ; Baretti — Dizionario italiano
ed inglese. English and Italian Dictionary. Bologna and
Florence, 1830-32, 2 vol. 4to.

2. Italian dialects: Nerucci — Vemacolo montalese
(contado) del sotto-dialetto di Pistoia. Milano, 1865, 8vo. ;
Politi — Indice delle voci del dialetto senese. Venetia, 1615,
8vo. ; Raccolta di voci romane e marcbiane. Osimo, 1768, 8vo. ;
Avoli — Saggio sopra alcune voci del dialetto alatrino. Homa,
1880, 8vo. ; Marcoaldi — Vocaboli piu genuini del vemacolo
fabrianese. Fabriano, 1875, 8vo. ; Mattei — Pruverbj, detti e
massime corse. Paris, 1867, 12mo. ; Traina — Vocabolario
siciliano-italiano. Palermo, 1873, 8vo. ; Vincentiis (de) — Vo-
cabolario del dialetto tarantino. Taranto, 1872, 8vo. ; Santis
{de) — Saggio di vocabolario vemacolo barese-italiano. Bari,
1857, 4to. ; Mnamore — Vocabolario delF uso abruzzese. Lan-
ciano, 1880, 8vo. ; Savini — La grammatica ed il lessico del
dialetto teramano. Torino, Roma, Firenze, 1881, 8vo. ; Ritia
{de) — ^Vocabolario napoletano lessigrafico e storico, Napoli,
1845, 2 vol. fol.; Ambra {d') — Vocabolario napolitano-toscano
domestico d'arti e mestieri. Indice Toscano e Napolitano.
Napoli, 1873, 8vo. ; Boerio — Dizionario del dialetto veneziano.
Indice italiano- veneto. Venezia, 1856, 4to. ; Patriarchi —
Vocabolario veneziano e padovano. Padova, 1821, 4to. ;
Schio {da) — ^Baccolta di voci usate a Vicenza. Padova, 1855,
8vo.; Nazari — ^Dizionario vicentino- italiano. Oderzo, 1876,
8vo.; Angeli — Piccolo vocabolario Veronese e toscano. Verona,
1821, 8vo. ; Nazari — Parallelo fra il dialetto bellunese rustico
e la lingua italiana. Belluno, 1873, 8vo. ; Azzolini — Vocabo-
lario vernacolo-italiano pei distretti roveretano e trentino.


Yenezia, 1856, 8vo. ; Schneller — Die romanischen Volksmun-
darten in SadtiroL Die itaUenischen Mondarten. Gera, 1870,
8yo. ; Dictiannaire de la langoe firanqae oa petit mauresque.
Marseille, 1830, 12mo.

111�. Sardinian : Spano — Vocabolario sardo-italiano e
italiano-sardo. Cagliari, 1851-52, 3 voL 4to. ; Porru —
Dizionariu muTersali sarda-italiano. Castedda, 1832, fol.

IV�. 1. Spanish : Diccionario de la lengua castellana por
la Academia Espaiiola. Madrid, 1852, fol. ; Dominguez —
Diccionario universal francos -espanol. Espanol-frances.
Madrid, Paris, 1853-54, 2 vol. 8vo. ; Francimni — ^Vocabolario
italiano e spagnolo. Yocabulario espanol e italiano. Yenezia,
1796, 2 vol. 8vo.; Diccionario espanol-italiano ^ italiano-
espanol. Paris, 1860, 2 vol. 12mo. ; Connelly and Higgins —
Dictionary of the Spanish and English languages. Espanol-
ingles. Ingl^s-espanol. Madrid, 1797-98, 4 vol. 4to. ; Velaz-
quez de la Cadena — Spanish-English and English-Spanish
pronouncing Dictionary. Paris, 2 vol. 8vo.

2. Spanish dialects: Borao — Diccionario de voces ara-
gonesas. Zaragoza, 1859, 4to. ; Hollandsche Spraakkunst
ten gebruike des eiland Ourafao. Santa-Eosa, 1849-53,
3 vol. 8vo.

Y�. 1. Portuguese: Moraes Silva — Diccionario da lingua
portugueza. Lisboa, 1844, 2 vol. 4to. ; Carvalho, Joao de
Deus — Diccionario prosodico de Portugal e Brasil. Lisboa,
1878, 16mo. ; Fonseca (da), Hoqtiete — Diccionario francez-
portuguez. Portugais-fran9ais. Pariz, 1841, 2 vol. 8vo. ;
Costa (da) e 8d — ^Dizionario italiano e portoghese. Lisboa,
1773-4, 2 vol. fol. ; Borda — ^Dizionario italiano-portoghese e
portoghese-italiano. Rio de Janeiro, 1853-54, 2 vol. 8vo. ;
Canto {do) e Castro Mascarenhas Valdez — Diccionario espanol-
portugues. Lisboa, 1864-66, 3 vol. 4to. ; Bluteau — Tabla de
palabras portuguezas, remotas de la lengua castellana. Lisboa,
1721, fol. ; Vi^yra — Portuguese-English and English-Portu-
guese Dictionary. London, 1827, 2 vol. 8vo.

2. Portuguese dialects: Bluteau — Yocabulario de pala-


vras do Minho e Beira. Lisboa, 1728, fol. ; Ctweiro Pmol—
Diccionario gallego. Barcelona, 1876, 8vo. ; Cubi y 8oler —
Cat&logo de voces del sub-dialecto berciano. Leon, 1861,
Svo. ; Berrenger — Method of learning the corrupted Portu-
guese spoken in India. Colombo, 1811, 8vo. ; Callaway —
English, Portuguese, and Cingalese Vocabulary, Colombo,
1818, 8vo.; Fox — Ceylon-Portuguese, Singhalese, and English
Dictionary. Colombo, 1819, 8vo.

VP. Oenobse : Casaecia — Dizionario genovese-italiano.
Geneva, 1876, 8vo. ; Olivieri — ^Dizionario genovese-italiano.
Geneva, 1841, 16mo. ; Paganini — ^Vocabolario domestico
genovese-italiano. Geneva, 1857, 4to.; Andrews — ^Vocabulaire
�ran9ais-mentonais. Nice, 1877, 8vo.

VII^. Gallo-Italic : BiondeUi — Saggio sui dialetti gallo-
italici. Milano, 1853, 8vo. ; Cherubim — Vocabolario milanese-
italiano. Milano, 1839-56, 5 vol. 8vo.; Monti — ^Vocabolario
del dialetti della cittd e diocesi di Como. Appendice. Milano,
1845-56, 2 vol. 8vo.; Tiraboschi — Vocabolario dei dialetti
bergamaschi antichi e modemi. Bergamo, 1873, 8vo. ;
Zappettini — ^Vocabolario bergamasco-i^aliano. Bergamo, 1859,
18mo.; Tiraboschi — Parre ed il gergo de' suoi pastori.
Bergamo, 1864, 8vo.; Mehhiorri — Vocabolario bresciano-
italiano. Brescia, 1817-20, 3 vol. 8vo. ; Vocabolario
bresciano e toscano. Indice toscano e bresciano. Brescia,
1759, 8vo. ; Samarani — Vocabolario cremasco-italiano.
Crema, 1852, 8vo. ; Peri" — ^Vocabolario cremonese italiano.
Cremona, 1847, 8vo. ; Coronedi-Berti — ^Vocabolario bolognese-
italiano. Prontuario italia^no-bolognese. Bologna, 1869-72,
2 voL 8vo.; Ferrari — Vocabolario bolognese-italiano coUe voci
francesi. Bologna, 1835, 4to. ; id. bolognese-italiano. Bologna,
1853, 8vo.; Maranesi — Vocabolarietto domestico modenese e
italiano. Modena, 1867-68, 8vo.; Oalvani — Saggio di un
glossario modenese. Modena, 1867, 8vo.; Focafto^no reggiano-
italiano. Reggie, 1832, 2 vol. 8vo.; Morri — ^Vocabolario
romagnolo-italiano. Faenza, 1840, 4to.; id. Persiceto, 1863,
Svo.; Mattioli — Vocabolario romagnolo-italiano. Imola, 1879,


8vo.; Tozzoli — Dizionario domestico imoleae-italiano. Ii
1867, 8vo.; ^asi— Vocabolario domestico feirareae-italiano.
Ferrara, 1857, 4to.; Nannini — Vocaboliirio ferrareBe-italiaoo.
Perrara, 1805, 8vo. ; MescMeri — Vocabolario mirandolcBe-
italiano. Bologca, 1876, 8vo.; Gherubini — Vocabolario
mantovano-italiano. Milano, 1827, 8vo, ; Malaspbta — Voca-
bi^rio parmigiano-italiano. Parma, 1856-59, 4 vol. Svo.;
Peschieri — Dizionario parmigiano-italiano. Borgo San Don-
niuo, Parma, 1836-53, 3 vol. Svo. ; ForesU — Vocabolario
piacentino-italiano. Piacenza, 1855, 8vo. ; Gambini — Voca-
bolario pavese-italiano ed italiaoo-paveae. Pavia, 1850, 4to. ;
id. DizioQario domestico pavese-italiano. Italiano-pavese.
Pavift, 1889, Svo. ; Manfredt — Dizionario paveae-italiano.
Favia, 1874, 8vo.; Sant' Albino — Gran Dizionario piemonteae-
italiano. Torino, 1859, fol.; Fonza — Vocabolario piemonteee-
italiano e italiano-piemontese. Torino, 1847, 16mo. ; Zalli —
Dizionario pieraontese, italiano, latino e francese. Carmagnola,
1830, 2 vol. 4to. ; Capello — Dictionnaire piemontaie-fran9ais.
Turin, 1814, 2 vol. 8vo.


Vni�. Frioclan : Pirona — Vocabolario friulano.
bolario italiano-friiilano. Veoezia, 1871, Svo. ; Malnati-
Dialogbi piaeevoli in dialetto vernacolo triestino (dead bs a
Fiioulan dialect) coUa versione italiana. Trieste, 1828, Svo.

IX�. BoMANESE : Camch — Tascbenworterbuch der rhato-
Tomaniachen Spracbe in Oraubunden. Chur, 1848, 16mo. ;
id. Deutsch-italieniscb-romaniHche Wortei'sammlung. Chur,
1836, 8vo.; id. id. Chur, 1848, 8vo.; id. id. Chur, 1821,
8vo.; Conradi — Tascbenworterbuch der deutsch-romanischen
Spracbe. Zurich, 1828, 12mo.; id. id. romaniacb-deutsch.
Ziiricb, 1823, 12mo. ; Flaminio da Sale — Fundamenti deila
lingua retica o griggiona, all' uao di Sopraselva e di
Sorset. Coll' aggiunta d'un vocabolario italiano e reto di
duelingue romancie. Disentia, 1729, 4to. ; Carigiet — Ratoro-
maniBchea Wtirterbuch, aurselvisch-deutacb, Bonn, Chur,
1882, 16mo. ; Codmch da liger an dialect de Surmeir. Coira,
1857, 12mo. ; Coppol (r.) — Nomenclatura romauscha e


todaischa. 1770, 8vo.; Devy Die, Das oder Nomenclatura.
Scuol, 1744, 8vo.; Pallioppi — Ortografia et Ortoepia del
idiom romauntsch d'Engiadin'ota. Coira, 1857, 16mo.;
Heinrich — Fuormas grammaticalas del linguach tudaisch.
Seguonda ediziun. Coira, 16mo. ; Alton — Die ladinischen
Idiome in Ladinien, GrodoD, Fassa, Buchenstein, Ampezzo.
Innsbmck, 1879, 8vo. ; Schnelkr — Die romanischeii Volks-
mundarten in Siidtirol. Die ladinischen Mundarten. Gera,
1870, 8vo.; Bottiger — Rhetoromanska spr&kets Dialekter.
XJpsala, 1854, 8vo. ; Chvden, der Grodner und seine Sprache.
Bozen, 1864, 8vo.; Gartner — Die Gredner Mundart. Linz,
1879, 4to.

X�. Old PROVEN9AL : Raynouard — Lexique roman. Paris,
1838, 6 vol. 8vo.; Diez — Altromanische Glossare. Bonn,
1865, 8vo. ; Bartsch — Chrestomathie, grammaire, glossaire de
la langue proven9ale. Elberfeld, 1868, 8vo.

XP. Catalonian : Dicciomzri catald-castell&-llati-frances-
itali&. Barcelona, 1839, 2 vol. 8vo. ; Diccionario de la lengua
castellana con la correspondencia catalana. For una sociedad
literaria. Barcelona, 2 vol. 8vo.; Labemia — Diccionario
castellano-catalano-latino. Barcelona, 1844-48, 2 vol. 8vo.;
id, Diccionari catald-castella-Uati. Barcelona, 1864-65, 2
voL8vo.; Saura — ^Diccionario castellano-catalano. Barcelona,
1862, 16mo.; id. Diccionario catalano-castellano. Barcelona,
1869, 16mo. ; Lacavallena, Dulach — Gazophylacium Catalano-
Latinum. Barcinone, 1696, fol. ; Jffebrissensis — Lexicon
Catalano-Latinum et Latino-Catalanum. Barcinone, 1560-63,
3 vol. fol.; Escrig — Diccionario valenciano-castellano. Va-
lencia, 1861, 8vo. ; March Ausia^ — Las obras, con el vocabu-
lario. Valladolid, 1555, 8vo. ; Palmyreno — ^Vocabulario del
hamanista. Valentiae, 1569, 3 vol. 8vo. ; Figuera — Diccionari
mallorqui-castelld. Palma, 1840, fol.; Diccionario completo
mallorquin-castellano. Palma, 1859, 8vo.; Sokr — Gram&tica
de la lengua menorquina. Mahon, 1858, 8vo.

XII�, Provencal : Honnorat — Dictionnaire proven9al-


franjais et fran^ais -proven 5 al. Digne, 1846-48, 4 vol. 4to!^' '
id. Vocabulaire fraii9ai8-proven9al. Digne, 1848, ISmo. ; Aita'is
— Dictionnaire des idiomes romana du midi de la France.
Montpollier, 1877, 3 vol. 8vo. ; Mistral — Dictionnaire pro-
ven 5 al-f ran cais. Aix, 1879, 4to. ; Craig — Vocabulary of im-
portant Provencal words (Nizza). London, 1863, 12nao. ;
Chabrand, Mochm (de), Atglun (</') — Patois des Alpes Cot-
tiennes (Brian^onnaia et valleee Vaudoises). GIoBsaire quey-
rassien. Mota brianpoonais. Grenoble, Paris, 1877, 8vo. ;
Motitier — Grammaire dauphinoise. Dialecte do la valine de la
Dr6rae. Mont^limar, 1882, 8vo. ; Couzinie — Dictionnaire ca�-
traia. Castrea, 1850, 4to. ; Garij — Dictionnaire patois-fran 5 a ia
a 1' usage du Tarn. Castres, 1845, 12mo. ; Ciiiac Moncaat —
Dictionnaire gaacon-fran^aia. Dialecte du Gers. Paris, 1863,
8vo. ; Cauderan — Dialecte- bordelais. Paris, 1861, 8vo.; Leapy
— Vocabulaire franpais-bearnais. Pan, 1858, 8vo. ; Lespy —
Vocabulaire beamais-frangaiB. Paris, 1880, 8vo. ; Guide (&)
des Gascons, ou Dictionnaire patois-franpais ( Upper Bearnais).
Tarbes, 1858, 4to. ; La Fmitame — Fablea causides en bers
gascoana. Dicciounariot gaacoun e francea. Bayoune, 1776,
8to.; Lagravere — Po^aiea en gascoun. Dictiounariot. Bayonne,
1865, 8vo.; Ruben — Gloasaire haut-limousin. Paris, 1850,
Svo. ; Bironie — Dictionnaire bas-limousin. Tulle, 4to.;
Vayssier — Dictionnaire patoia-franpaia de I'Aveyron. Eodez,
1879, 4to.; Doniol — Les Patois de la Basse- Auvergne. Paris,
1877, Svo. ; Mahal — Tableau comparatifs des mots fran^aia,
pi^raontaia et baa-auvergnata. Clermont-Ferrand, 1877,
Svo. obi.

XIII�. FRANCO-PROvENipAL : Bridel — Glossairo du patoia
de la Suisse romando. Lausanne, 1866, 8vo.; Iteciieil de
morceaux en dialectes de la Suisse franjaiae, Vocabulaire
patois-fran^ais. Lausanne, 1849, 12rao.; Le Ditc — Lea Noels
bresaaiis de Bourg, de Pont de Vaux et dea paroissea voisines,
auivis de six noela bugistea. Bourg, 1845, 12mo. ; Mounter —
Vocabulaire de la laugue rusfique et populaire du Jura.
Paris, 1831, Svo,; Tiasot — Le Patois des Fourga, arrondisse-
ment de Pontarlier, Doubs. Gloasaire. Paris, 1865, Svo,;



Sdfelin — Die Neuenburger Mundarten. Berlin, 1874, 8vo. ;
Champollion-Figeac — ^Vocabulaire du patois de Tls^re. Paris,
1809, 12ino.; Rivikre-Bertratid — Muereglie. Traduction en
dialecte dauphinois de Mireille, de Mistral, pr^c^d^e de notes
8ur le langage de Saint-Maurice de I'Exil. Montpellier, 1881,
8vo.; Oras — Dictionnaire du patois for^zien. Lyon, 1863,
8vo. ; Onofrio — Essai d'un glossaire des patois de Lyonnais,
Forez et Beaujolais. Lyon, 1864, 8vo.; Glossaire g^nevois.
Geneve, Paris, 1827, 8vo.; Humbert — Glossaire genevois.
Gteneve, 1852, 2 vol. 12mo. ; GHUiiron — Glossaire du patois
de la commune de Vionnaz (Bas-Valais). Paris, 1880, 8vo. ;
Vermch iiber den Kanton Wallis. Worter. Zurich, 1820,
32mo.; Versuch iiber den Kanton Waat. Zurich, 1815,
32mo; Callet — Glossaire vaudois. Lausanne, 1881, 8vo. ;
Hafelin — Glossaire des patois romans du canton de Fribourg.
Leipzig, 1879, 8vo. ; Dartok — Coup-d'oeil sur les patois de la
Franche-Comt^. Vocabulaires. Besangon, l855,8vo.; Paulet —
Essai d'un vocabulaire du patois de Plancher-les-Mines
(Haute-Sa6ne). Paris, 1878, 18mo. ; Dictionnaire patois-
fran9ai8 & I'usage des ^coles des Yosges. Nancy, 1842,

XIV�. Old French : Roquefort — Glossaire de la langue
romane. Paris, 1808-20, 3 vol. 8vo.; Burguy — Glossaire
de la langue d*o*il. Paris, 1870, 8vo. ; Bartsch — Glossaire de
Tancien fran9ais. Leipzig, 1866, 8vo.; Gachet — Glossaire
roman des chroniques rim^es. Bruxelles, 1859, 4to. ; Chassant
^Vocabulaire latin-fran9ais du xiiie Si^cle. Paris, 1857,
12mo. ; Oodefroy — Dictionnaire de I'ancienne langue franyaise
et de tons ses dialectes du xi� au xv� siecle. Paris, 1880,
4to. ; Cange (du) — Glossarium Gallicum. Parisiis, 1850, 4to. ;
Kelham — ^Dictionary of the Norman or Old French language.
London, 8vo.

XV�. 1. French : Dictionnaire de T Academic Francaise.
Paris, 1876, 2 vol. 4to.; Complement du dictionnaire de
1' Academic Fran9aise. Paris, 1842, 4to.; Littrd — Diction-
naire de la langue fran9ai8e. Paris, 1863-77, 5 vol. 4to. ;,


Fleming, Tibbim — English and French and Freni
English Dictionary. Paris, 1841-44, 2 vol. 4to. ; Spiers —
Dictionnaire fran^aia-anglaia ; id. id. anglai8-frau9ai3. Paris,
1851, 2 vol. 8vo.

2, French dialects : Bracket — Vocabulaire tourangeau.
Paris, 1872, 8vo. ; Jaubert — Glossaire du centre do la France.
Paris, 1864-fi9, 2 vol. 4to.; VaUerange — Glossaire percheron.
Paris, 1861, 8vo.; FocaiK/aiVeduHaut- Maine. Le Mans, Paris,
1859, 8vo. ; rarSd— Glossaire de Champagne, Reims, 1851,
8to. ; Chambure — Glossaire du Morvan. Paris, Autun, 1878,
4to. ; Qui Barozai — Glossaire bourguignon. Chatillon'
Seino, 1825, 12mo. ; Mignard — Glossaire bonrgnignon.
Dijon, 1856, 8vo, ; id. Vocabulaire du dialecte de Bour-
gogne. Paris, Dijon, 1870, 8vo. ; Adam — Les Patois lor-
raius. Vocabulaire patois-frangais et fran^ais-patois. Paris,
1881, 8vo.; Contejean — Glossaire du patois de Montb^liard.
Montb^liard, 1876, 8vo. ; Oherlin — Esaai sur le patois lorraiti
du Bau de la Roche, Glossaire patois-lorrain. Index francois.
Strasbourg, 1775, 8vo. ; Conlier — Vocabulaire des mots
patois de la Meuse. Paris, 1833, 8vo, ; Jaclot, de Saulny —
Vocabulaire patois messin. Paris, 1854, 12rao. ; Lorrain —
Glossaire du patois messin. Nancy, 1876, 8vo. ; Rollmid —
Vocabulaire du patois messin de Remiily, "Woippy et LandrofT.
Paris, 1873-76, 2 vol. 8vo.; Orandgagnage — Dictionnaire
etymologique de la langue wallonne. Liege, 1845-80, 2 vol.
8vo.; Fovir — Dictionnaire liegois-fran^ais. Li<5ge, 1866-74,
2 vol. 8vo. ; Hubert — Dictionnaire walton-fran^ais, Liege,
1857, 12mo.; ficMacfe — Dictionnaire wallon et fran^ais.
Li^ge, 1839-43, 2 vol. 8vo. ; CAwc^c— Franjais et wallon.
BrnseUea, 1817, 18mo. ; Dictionnaire roman, walon, celtiquo
et tudesque. Bouillon, 1777, 4to. ; Oorblet — Glossaire du
patois picard. Paris, 1851, 8vo, ; Legrand — Dictionnaire du
patois de Lille. Lille, 1856, 18rao. ; Debuire — Glossaire
liiloia. Lille, 1867, 8vo. ; Vertitesse — Vocabulaire du patois
lillois, Lille, 12nio.; id. Dictionnaire du patoia de la Flandre
francaise. Douai, 1867, 8vo. ; Hicart — Dictionnaire rouohi-
frant^ats. Valenciennes, 183|, 8vo. ; Sig/tri — Glossaire mou-
toia. Bruxelles et Leipzig, 11BC6, 8vo, ; Edilcduini, Dum^rM.-



— Dictionnaire du patois normaDd, Caen, 1849, 8vo, ; Bois
(rfu) — Glossaire du patois normaDd. Caen, 1856, 8vo.; Le
Hirioher — Hiatoire et Glosaaire du normand, de I'anglais et
du fran9aia, Paris, Avranchea, 3 vol. 8vo. ; Decorde — Dictiou-
aaire du patoia du pays de Dray. Faris, Rouen, Neufchatel,
J852, 8vo.; Vasnier — Dictionnaire du patois normand de
Pont-Andemer. Rouen, 1862, 8vo. ; Phiquet — Noma triviaux
du patois de Bayeux. Rouen, 1834, 8vo. ; Laniarche — Extrait
d'un diotionuaire du patoia de Cherbourg, Valognes et
Saint-Lo. Cherbourg, 1843. Saint-Lo, 1851, 2 vol. 8vo. ;
Joret — ^Dictionnaire du patois normand du Bessin. Paris,
1881, 8vo. ; Miticier — Dictionnaire du dialeote de Guernesey.
London, Edinburgh, 1870, 8vo. ; Favre — Giosaaire du Poitou,
de la Saintonge et de I'Aunia. Niort, 1867, 8vo. ; Rousseau —
Oloaaaire poitevin. Niort, 1869, 8vo.; Beancbet-FUkaii —
Glossaire des mots poitevins de Chef-Boutonne. Niort,
Melle, 1864, 8vo. ; L^vrier — Dictionnaire du patois poitevin.
Niort, 1867, 8vo. ; Bouekerie — Patoia de la Saintonge. Glos-
saire. AngoulSme, 1865, 8vo. ; Jdnain — Dictionnaire du
patois aaintongeaia. Royan, 1869, 8vo. ; Mhti&re — Glossairo
angevin. Angers, 1880, 8vo.

XVI�. WAi.LAcni.4N : Bobb — Dictionariu rumanesc,
lateinesc si ungureac. Olus, 1823-S3, 2 vol. Svo. ;
Lexicon ValacMco-Latino-Hungarico-Germanicum. Budic,
1825. Svo,; BaJasiescu — Dictionarium Latino-Romanic uni.
Gibinii, 1848, Svo. ; Schiniuigl — Lettiunariu latinu. Dic-
tiunariu latinu. Blasiu, 1864, Svo. ; Frollo — Vocabo-
lario italiano-romanesco. Pest, 1868, Svo. ; VtUlaul —
Tocabulaire franfaia-roumain et roumain-fran^ais. Bou-
coureati, 1S40, 2 vol. Svo. ; Poyenaar, Aaron, Hill — Voca-
bulaire francais-valaque. Boucoureat, 1840—11, 3 vol. Svo.;
Codresco — Dictionariu franc eao-romanu. laaii, 1859, 2 vol.
ISmo. ; Pontbriant (de) — Dictiunara romftno-franceau. Bucu-
resci, Gottinge, IS62, 4to. ; Ci/iao {de) — Dictionnaire d'^tymo-
logie daco-romane. Elements latins. Francfort s/M., 1870,
8vo.; id. id. Elements slaves, magyara, turca, greca-modeme et
albanais. id., 1879, Svo.; Miklosicli — Istro- und macedo-


rumunisclieSprachdenkniahler.Istro- und macedo-rumunischen
Worterbucher. Italienisclier Index zum istro-rumunisclien
Vocabular. Wien, 1881-82, 2 vol. 4to.

Explanation of the Abbreviations used in the

following List,

N,B. — T?ie figures show the languages according to the list {which see).


Abruzzese, dial. 2.


Daupbinois, subd.



Agenois, subd. 12.

dial. 13.


AlaU'iiLO, var. 2.


Engadinese, dial.



Angevin, subd. 15.

var. 9.


AoBlan, dial. 13.


Ferrarese, dial. 7.


Aragonese, subd. 4.


Floeentine, dial. 2


Ardennois, subd. 15.


Fob:^z�en, dial. 13.


Aslurian, dial. 4.


Fourgois, var. 13.


Auvergnat, dial. 12.


Franc-Comtois, dial.



Barese, subd. 2.


Fribourgeois, dial. 13.


Bayonnais, var. 12.


Galician, subd. 5.


Bearnais, subd. 12.


Gascon, dial. 12.


Beirao, var. 5.


Genevese, var. 13.


Bellunese, subd. 2.


Gruerin, subd. 13.


Berciano, var. 5.


Guemesiais, var. 15



Bergamasco, dial. 7.


Jurassien, subd. 13.


Berrichon, subd. 15.


Languedocien, dial.



Bolognese, dial. 2.


Lillois, subd. 15.


Bresciano, subd. 7.


Limousin, dial.



Bressan, dial. 13.

subd. 12.


Brivadois, subd. 12.


Lorrain, dial. 15.


Broyard, dial. 13.


Luccbese, var. 2.


Burgundian, dial. 15.


Majorcan, var. 11.


Caslraia, subd. 12.


Manceau, subd. 15.


Cevenol, subd. 12.


Mantovano, subd. 7.


, Cbampenois, subd. 15.


Marcbigiano, var.



Comasco, var. 5.

subd. 2.


Corsican, subd. 2.


Mentonese, dial. 6.


Cremasco, var. 7.


Messin, subd. 15.


Cremonese, subd. 7.


Milanese, dial. 7.

^ Names printed in small capitals show the dialects which represent the whole




Minorcan, var. 11.



Minhoto, var. 5.



Mirandolese, var. 7.



Modenese, subd. 7.



Montois, subd. 15.



Montbeliardais, subd. 1 5 .



Montpelli^rain, subd. 12.



Morvandeau, subd. 15.



l^amurois, subd. 15.



JN'arbonnais, subd. 12.



JN'eapolitan, dial. 2.



Ifeufchatelois, dial. 13.



I^i9ard, subd. 12.



Ifivemais, subd. 15.



JN'orman, dial. 15.





subd. 9.


^ Oherl.

Oberla^disch:, dial. 9.


Padovano, subd. 2.



Parmesan, dial. 7.



Pavese, subd. 7.



Percberon, subd. 15.



Piacentino, subd. 7.



Picard, dial. 15.



Piedmontese, dial. 7.



Pisan, var. 2.



Poitevin, dial. 15.



Quercinois, var. 12.



Queyrassien, var. 12.



Reggiano, subd. 7.


Riojauo, var. 4.


Eoman, var. 2.
Bomagnuolo, dial. 7.
Eoucbi, subd. 15.
Eouergat, dial. 12.
Roveretano, subd. 2.
Saintongeais, subd. 15.
Sassarese, dial. 2.
Savoyard, dial. 13.
Sicilian, dial. 2.
Siennese, var. 2.
Tarantino, dial. 2.
Tempiese, subd. 2.
Teramano, subd. 2.
Ticinese, subd. 7.
Toulousain, subd. 12.
Tourangeau, var. 15.
Triestino, var. 2 ;

subd. 8.
Tyrolese, dial. 9.
Yalaisan, dial. 13.
Yaldese, var. 7.'
Yalenciano, var. 11.
YaltelHnese, subd. 7.
Yaudois, dial. 13.
Yenitian, dial. 2.
Yeronese, subd. 2.
Yiervetois, var. 15.
Yicentino, subd. 2.
Yosgien, dial. 13 ;

subd. 15.
Walloon, dial. 15.

Other Explajtations aih) Abbreviations.

aec. according; accus. accusative ; coll. collectively; dial, dialect;
East. Eastern; fern, feminine; North. Northern; ji?/. plural; South.
Southern ; suhd. sub-dialect ; var. variety ; West. Western ; + plus.

"By Bible, after a Wallachian word, the edition of Jassy, 1865-69,
is exclusively meant.

** indicate the Low Latin words, and * is prefixed in every

^ Karnes printed in small .capitals show the dialects which represent the whole


language, dialect, subdialect, or variety to those words which are
antiquated, or obsolete, or uncommon, or not very common, or less
used, or not principally used, or used in a figurative sense.

Names of localities or explicative words are put in a parenthesis ;
and, if they be authors* names or titles of works, they are always
preceded by the words, ace, to, in order to distinguish them from
local names.

When the name of one of the sixteen languages is immediately
followed by that of its dialect, the word quoted belongs only to the
dialect and not to the literary or principal dialect itself by which
the whole language is represented.

Orthographical and other Remarks.

This list, although very rich in words connected with
the vine, has no pretension to be complete. It is not such
for two reasons : firstly, because it has not been in my power
to collect all the words of this kind in all the Neo-
Latin dialects, sub-dialects, and varieties ; and, secondly,
because I have purposely excluded from it : 1�, All definitions
and compound words (except the English) ; 2�. Words not
exclusively used in speaking of the vine, or at least not more
particularly applicable to it ; 3�. Regular diminutive or
augmentative forms of words, when no accessory idea is added
to that of diminution or augmentation ; 4�. Names of peculiar
qualities of vines or grapes, and those indicating their par-
ticular diseases; 5�. Names of operation^ relating to the
culture of the vine ; 6�. Names of vessels, etc. ; 7�. Adjec-
tives, verbs, and similar words indicating no material object.

The Low Latin and dialectal Italian, Spanish, Portuguese,
and French names are not given when they do not differ
more or less in form, meaning, or orthography from those
still in use in the standard language to which they belong.

This applies also : 1�. To the Sardinian, Genoese, Gallo-
Italic, Friulano, and Romanese words, when they are similar
in every respect to the Italian ; 2�. To the Gatalonian words,
when they do not differ from the Spanish and Old Proven9al;
3�. To the Proven�al words, when they are similar to those
of French and Old Proven9al ; 4�. To the Franco-Proven9al



"words, if they be the same as those of French, Old French,
and Old Proven9al ; 5�. To the Old French words, if they
he similar to the French ; 6�. To the French dialectal words,
when they do not differ from the Old French ; and, when
a dialectal word is given in one of the principal dialects of a
language, it is not repeated in the other dialects of the same

The words of the various languages, dialects, sub-dialects,
and varieties contained in this list are generally given in the
orthography adopted by the best authors of dialectal dic-
tionaries. To write all these words in a strictly phonetical
orthography common to all these forms of speech would have
been very desirable ; but, unfortunately, what is desirable is
not always possible. This is certainly the case at present,
not only because a great number of these dialects have never
been treated phonetically in any work, but also because the
most competent phonetists, even belonging to the same
locality, disagree very often amongst themselves in their
appreciation of the sounds. In a great number of instances,
however, and when it has been possible for me to give my
own appreciation of the sounds of those dialects which I
know practically or have heard spoken by natives, I have taken
upon myself (in the impossibility of applying to them a
strictly phonetic orthography) to assist the future phonetists,
by adopting several new means ^ for the rendering of certain
sounds, as italic letters, small capitals, suppressions of letters,
apostrophes, etc., excluding, however, all new characters,
which would have altered too much the orthography in
general use. I enter into some details :

1. (fl?, 8b) are pronounced as a in fat,

2. (a) is pronounced as the Scotch a in " man,** man.

3. (a), nearly as u in much. In Latin, as a in father^ but

4. (e, e) express generally the French ^, but (e) sounds
Bometimes as semi-open e ; and in the Portuguese usual

^ Latin, Low Latin, Old Proven9al, Old French, and French words are given
^ their estahlished ortho^phy, and Italian and Spanish words are also, with
very few exceptions, retained unaltered. The adoption of these new means,
*l^ore, does not apply, or applies very seldom, to these languages.


orthography (which I have not dared to alter in this por^^
ticular), (e) sounds as the French h. This applies also U^
the Portuguese dialects.

5. (e) is pronounced as the French ^.

6. (6), generally, as the French ^, except in Portuguese
and its dialects, where it sounds as the French e, and in
Bomg.y where it receives a peculiar sound of (4. e), -verging
slightly to (10. eu), as in " and6," to go,

7. (e), as (4. d), but it occurs only in Romg.

8. (e, in, iw), as the French in in "vin," winey (e) being
always atonic.

9. [Cy *), both as the French e in " cheval/' horse.

10. (eu), as the French eu in "pen," Uttky but it occurs in
the list with this sound only in Genoese, Piedm., Auv., Jur.,
Gen., and Franc. Anywhere else (eu) sounds (4. e+21. u).

11. (i), as the "Wallachian deep I.

12. (i , iriy im), as the Portuguese im in " marfim," ivort/.

13. (6, o), as the French o in " devot/* devout, but (o)
sounds sometimes as a semi-open o ; and (6), in Portuguese,
as the French o in " devote," fem. of *'d^vot." This applies
also to the Portuguese dialects.

14. (6), as the French o in " devote.'*

15. (6), generally, as the French 6, but in Portuguese and
its dialects, as the French o in "d^vot," and in Romg.,
as (13. o), verging slightly to (18. oe), as in " c6r," heart,

16. (o), as (13. 6), but it occurs only in Romg.

17. (o), as 00 in food, but short.

18. (od), as the French eu in " veuf," widower.

19. (ou), as (21. u), but it occurs in the list with this sound
only in Proven9al, Franco-Proven9al, French, and their
dialects. Anywhere else (ou) is (13. 0+21. u).

20. (du), ^s (2. 4+21. u), or nearly so.

21. (u), as 00 in food, but short, except in Proven9al,
Franco-Proven 9al, French, and their dialects, where (u) is
(24. u).

22. (A), as 00 in good, or nearly so.

23. (un, nm), as French " un," one.

24. (w), as the French u.


25. (6, �?), as the Spanish J, a continuous bi-labial sound, as
in " haba/* bean.

26. (c), before a, a?, I, o, w, and the consonants, or at the
end of a word, is generally pronounced as o in calf^ but before
e and i it receives the sound (50. tch) in Italian and its
dialects, in the Non-Italian dialects of Italy, and in Walla-
chian ; the sound of (51. th), in Spanish and its dialects and
in the Portuguese dialects of Spain ; and the sound of 8 in sOy
anywhere else, including Northern Qal.

27. (ch) is pronounced as c in calf in Italian and its dialects,
in the Non-Italian dialects of Italy, and in Wallachian ; as
(50. tch), in Spanish and its dialects and in the Portuguese
dialects of Spain ; as the German ch in " nacht," night, in
Saint. ; and as the English ch anywhere else.

28. (chj), as a sound intermediate between (50. tch) and
the palatalized A; ; as in Friulano " ras-chje," a small bunch of

29. (dh), as th in the.

30. (dj), as the English /.

31. (dz), as the Italian z in "la zona,*' the zone.

32. {dd)y as a strong velar dd ; as in Sic. " ariddaru,"

33. (g), as g in go^ before er, o, u, and the consonants,
but before e and �, as (30. dj), in Italian and its dialects, in
the Non-Italian dialects of Italy, and in Kutzo- Wallachian ;
as the German ch in '' nacht," in Spanish and its dialects ; as
(50. tch), in Yalenc. ; as the German guttural continuous g
in " tage," days, in Saint. ; and as s in pleasure, anywhere

34. (ghj), as a sound intermediate between (30. dj) and
the palatalized hard g] as in Temp, "scalughja," a small
bunch left behind by vintagers.

35. (gl) before i not followed by a vowel and (gli) before
any other vowel than i are pronounced as (39. Ih) in Italian,
its dialects, and Romanese. Anywhere else, as hard ^+/.

36. (h), as the German A, in Gasc, Lorr., Vosg., Mess.,
and Wall. Anywhere else it is mute.

37. (hh)^ as the Arabian ^



38. (j), as y in yes, it occurs only in the Italian and Non-
Italian dialects of Italy ; as the German ch in " nacht/^
in Spanish and its dialects ; as (60. tch), in Yalenc; as the
German g in " tage/' in Saint. ; and as s in pleasure^ any-
where else.

39. (Ih, ly), as the Italian gl in " figli/' som.

40. (11), as the preceding, but only in Spanish, its dialects^
in the Non-Spanish dialects of Spain, and also frequently in
French and its dialects. The Italian // is pronounced as a
strong /, which applies also to the Central and Southern
Italian. Anywhere else (11) is pronounced as a single /.

41. (lc)j as a strong German ch in " nacht." ^

42. {ld)y as a strong Manx dental I in " ooyl,'* apple}

43. {lt)y as the strong Welsh // in " colli," to lose. ^

44. (m, n) are not pronounced, but the preceding vowel
becomes nasal.

45. (n), as ng in singer.

46. (nh, ny, fi), as the French gn in '^digne," worthy.

47. (s), as s in so, when it does not occur between two
vowels, in all the words of the list ; and, generally, as the
English 2, when it does. In a very great number, however,
of Italian, Tuscan, and Central or even Northern March,
words, and in all those belonging to the Roman and Southern
Italian dialects, to Spanish and its dialects, to the Portuguese
dialects of Spain, to Yalenc, and to "Wallachian, s occurring
between two vowels is not pronounced as an English s, but as
s in so.

48. (ss), as s in so, except in Italian and in its Central and
Southern dialects, where it is pronounced as a strong voice-
less s, as in " osso,'* hone.

49. (s), as the English z.

50. (tch, tx), as ch in child.

51. (th), as th in thick.

52. (ts), as the Italian % in "la zappa,'* the spade.

53. (ty), as a palatalized d\ as in B^arn. "bitatye,"

* See my ** Observations on, the pronunciation of the Sassarese dialect of,
Sardinia,'* in the *• Transactions of the Society of Cymmrodorion of London.'*
Vol. 4, p. 11, for {U) and {It), and p. 12, for {Id).


54. (x), as the English sh^ except in Cagl. and Genoese,
where it sounds as s in pleasure,

55. (z), generally, as the English s, but in Italian and its
dialects and the Non-Italian dialects of Italy, as (52. ts); and
in Spanish and in the Portuguese dialects of Spain, as (51. th).
In Northern Gal., however, it is pronounced as s in so.

66. (2), as (31. dz).

57. (" ). Tonic accent. These two signs show very often
tone- and quality of sound at the same time, as in (4. e ; 5 S ;
13. 6; 14.6; 20. dv). Whenever they indicate merely the
tone, they are found expressed in print only : 1�., in the last
syllable of words ended with a vowel ; 2�., in the last syllable
but one of words ended with a consonant ; 3�., in the tonic
syllable of words of more than two syllables. And every word
bearing no printed accent is understood to have it : 1�., in
the last syllable of words ended with a consonant ; 2�., in
the last syllable but one of words ended with a vowel.

These rules do not apply to French and its dialects, where
the indication of the tonic accent is unnecessary on account
of the total absence in them not only of proparoxytona, but
even of real paroxytona. In fact, the numerous French
words ended with e bearing no accent are paroxytona for the
eyes, but real oxytona for the ears.

58. (■). Long quantity.

59. ("). Short Latin quantity. (See 3. S).

Note that double consonants between two vowels are, in
the Non-Italian dialects of Italy, almost always pronounced
as if they were written single.

List of Neo-Latin Words connected with the Vine.

(1.) Vineyard: a.) An extent of ground planted with vines.

1. Latin: vineS, *vinia, *palmes; **binea, **vignea,

**vinera, **vitis, **ceppa, **sarmentum {ace, to,
Biefenbach) , saramentum (id,),

2. Italian : vigna, vigneto, *vignazzo ; Central March,
cortina {ace. to " Raccolta " ) ; North, Cors, bigna.

3. Sardinian : Central : binza ; South, bingia.


4. Spanish : vina ; Ast. �?ineu.

5. Portuguese: vinha; Indo-Portuguese : uzera, ouzera,
Tinho, orti, orte, orta.

7. Gallo-Italic: Berg, egna, igna, vidur, vign6l (iZo-

mano) ; BoL vegna ; Romg. *vign6 ; Farm. vignaB.

8. JFriulano : vignaal, *vigne.

9. RoMANESE : OberL v^gna {ace. to Carigiet) ; Tyr. vignae.

10. Old PR0VEN9AL : vinha, vinna.

11. Catalonian: vmya\ Valenc. vinya.

12. PROVEN9AL : vigno ; Lang, iigno ; Montp. Mgna ; Bay.

bigne ; Auv. vigna ; Briv, Yegna.

13. Franco-Provencal : Jur. vena (Saint-Amour) ; Fourg,

v'gneu ; Lower Val. yegn'; Vaud. v^gna ; Gruer. vign' ;
South-East. Vosg. vegn' (Vagney); v^gn' (id.).

14. Old French: vingne, vine, visne.

15. French: vigne; Berr. *chapon; Perch. Yirm; Upper
Mane, viwgne ; Champ, viwgg (Mame) ; Champ, v^gn
(Aube) ; Burg, v^gn ; Lorr. vi� {Lalceuf)^ v^na
(Pexonne), veenn {id.), v^nn (id.) ; Vosg. y&n {Le
Tholy)y vigneu (Ban^sur-Meurthe), vigni {Moyen-
moutier), vigneu (Provench^res), v^gni (Saaks), v^nhi
( Vea^aincourt) ; Wall, viegn, vignob ; Pic, vingn; Saint.

16. Wallachian: vie, ji'e (popularly), v'iS (ace. to the
Bible), vinia (ace. to Schinnagl) ; Kutzo- Wallachian :
ginye; Istro -Wallachian : terta.

(2.) Yineyard : b.) An extent of land laid out in vineyards a.).

1. Latin: vinetum; **biniale, **vignalis, **vignoblum,

**vinablium, **vinata, **vineale, **vinearium, **vi-
neatica, **vineatus, **vinena, **vinenea, **vinericia,
**vineta, **viniale, **vinoblium, **vinobre, **vino-

2. Italian : vigneto, *vignaio, *vignato, *vignata ; Sic.
vignitu, *vignetu, vignali, *vignera, vignazzu; Abr.
vignal'; Neap, vignak, vetimma; Pad. vignale, videga;
Bell, vidigd ; Rov. vignal.

3. Sardinian: Central: binzada.


4. Spanish : vinedo, *veduno, *viduiio, *vidueno.

5. Portuguese : vinh^do, Ninhar.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. vidor; Berg, yidur, vign61 (^t-
mano) ; Parm. vid6ur.

8. Friulano : vignaal.

10. Old Provencal: vinnal, *vinnar, vinher, *vinhier,
vinayres, *vinares.

11. Catalonian : ^?inyer, dnyar, *vmjet, viayeial; Vaknc.
vinyedo, vinyedo, *vinyero ; Mqf. vinyet.

12. PROVEN9AL: vignoble, vigneiredo, Tignar^s; Lang.

Mgneir^do ; TouL ftigne, Jign^s ; Biarn. Jitaty^ ;
Central Rouerg, Jignouople, *6ignople, Jignal {Saint-
Geniez) ; Auv, paw.
13! rRANCo-PRovEN9AL : Lower Dauph. YignohloM; Vaud.
Vgnoublho, v'noublho, v'gnoladzo, vignoladjo ; Sauth-
East. Vosg. vignob'.

14. Old French : .vignou, vignoy, vignau, vigno, vignole,

vignol, Tigneul, ? vignon.

15. French: vignoble; Berr. vinobl, *cuvaj.

16. "Wallachian: Viet (ace. to Bobb), vinet (id.).

(3.) A plantation of vines made up of several portions of land.
1. Latin; **complanatum, **complanctum, **complan-

6. Portuguese: haceUsida.

15. French : complant ; Poit. pUawte.

(4.) A district of vineyards.

15. French : Berr. bann^e^ ba;mi.

(5.) A farm formed of vineyards held on condition of the
proprietor's receiving some portion of the produce.
15. French : Mess, mou^tross.

(6.) A plantation of young vines.

1. Latin : novelletum; **planterium, **maleollus, **mal-
heolus, **malholiu8, **malhollium, **maliolus, **mal-
leoUus, **malliolu8, **mallolius, **vinale, **vinhale,
**malones j9/., malhones, pi., malolem accus^


2. Italian : Tar. past^n.

4. Spanish : majuelo, *6acillar, *Jacelar.

6. Portuguese: haciMo.

11. Catalonian: mallola, mayola, mallol, m�yol; Maj.

12. PR0VEN9AL: planti^, plantado; iaw^. malhol, "planti^,
*plaN ; Civ, malhaou, malhoou, *malhou, *mayou ;
Montp, plantada ; 6asc. planto ; Central Rouerg.
plontado, *ploiiti6, *ploN, plontou, molhouol, *molhol.

13. FRANCO-PROVEN9AL : Jur. pla7^t^e ; Broy. tchapounar.

14. Old French : mailhol, malhol, mailole.

15. French : *plantat ; Poit pUawtt.

(7.) A nursery-ground of vines.
1. Latin : vitiarium.

7. Gallo-Italic : Romg, videra.

12. PR0VEN9AL : Central Bouerg. plontado, *plonti6.
15. French : mess, pipinn ; Lower Mane, poupinierr {ace.
to Lorrain),

(8.) An enclosed vineyard.
15. French : Berr. ma.

(9.) A vineyard all in one portion.
15. French : Saint, pyawti, pyawtitt.

(10.) A detached portion of a vineyard.
15. French : Berr. ^car.

(11.) Vineyard of which the rows are laid out in trellises.
4. Spanish : ftacelar, *Jacillar.
7. Gallg-Italic : Piem. autiN.

(12). A vineyard laid out after the fashion of "garnet " vine-
15. French : Champ, gami^rr (Aube).

(13.) A vineyard upon a hill.
7. GalijO-Italic : Mil. rowch.


16. Wallachian : d^al, podgorie, podgoria {ace. to Pont-
briant), viet {ace. to Bobb)^ vinet {id,).

(14.) Vineyards upon hills {coll,).
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil- rowcaja.

(15.) Yineyards upon hills, laid out in terraces of steps
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. rowcaja ; Com. ro�ch.
8. . Friulano : roNch.
15. French : Ang. chapio.

(16.) A place where male vines grow.
1. Latin : masciiletum.

(17.) A plantation of undressed vines abounding with shoots.
4. Spanish : j^acelar^ *Jacillal:,

(18.) A vineyard of wild vines.

12. PROVEN9AL : Cin. lambrusquieiro. .

(19.) Vine : The plant which produces grapes.

1. Latin: vltis, *vin6a, *palmes, *uva; **trelhia, **ceppa.

2. Italian : vite, *vigna ; Central March^ ite {Fahriano) ;
North, Core, bita ; Sass. viddi ; Sic. viti ; Tar. cipp6n ;
Neap, vita ; Ven. vida ; Vic visela ; Hov. guida.

3. Sardinian : Central : bide, *bin�a ; South, sermentu,
*sarmentu, idi {in some places).

4. Spanish : vid, *parra, *vifia ; Ast. t'ide.

6. Portuguese : vidfeira, vid^, *vinhfl ; Indo-Portugtcese :

vinha, vid6, vida.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. vit ; Berg, it, viit, Crem. ida ;
Bol. vid ; Romg. vida ; Farm, vidae ; Piedm. vis, vi.

8. Friulano : vid, vit ; Triest. wi.

9. EoBiANESE : Oberl, vit ; Tyr. vignsB.

10. Old Provencal : vit.

11. Catalonian : cep, *vmja, parra ; Maj\ cep.

12. PR0VEN9AL : vigno, vigna {Nimes) ; Lang. Jigno ;
Montp. Mgna; Gasc. bit; Bay. oube; Lower Lim.
trelho ; Auv. vigna ; Briv. yegna.


13. Francjo-Pbovbn^al : Bre%8. cepa ; Fottrg. v'gneu ;

Lower Val. vegn'; Vai^d. vi ; Souih-JEast Vosg. vegn'
{Vagney)y vegn' {id,).

14. Old French : vit, *vingne, *vine, *vlsne.

15. French : vigne; Perch, vinn ; Tipper Mane, vingne ;

Champ, viwgg (Manie) ; Charnp. v^gn {Aube) ; Morv.
viwgn ; Burg. vSgn ; Lorr. win (Lalceuf)j venn
(Pexonne), v^enn (id.), venn Od.); Vosg. yen {Le
Tholy)y vigneu {Ban-sur-Meurthe) , vigni (Moyeu'
moutier), vigneu (Provenchires), v^gni {Soaks), venhi
{Vexaincourt) ; TFalLYignoh; Pic. yangn; Saint. Yegn.

16. Wallachian: \ii8^,]itB&{popularlp),Yitae{aec. foBobb),

vie (flcc. ^0 M� Bible), viS (tV^.) ; Kutzo-Wallachian :
gite ; /s^ro- Wallachian : ruje, braidS, bro&idS, vinyal.

(20.) Quality and kind of vine.

2. Italian : vitigno, *vizzato ; Sienn. vitazzo ; Neap.
vetimma; Ven. vignal.

4. Spanish : veduiio, *viduno, *vidueno.

5. Portuguese : vidonho.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. vidor ; Com, vid6o ; Berg, yidur ;
BoL vidour ; Romg. vdez, *videz, vid^r, vid^ra.

14. Old French: cepage.

15. French : *c^page ; Berr. viiw, cupi/i ; Saint. visa�

{ace. to Jonain.).

(21.) Quantity of vines,

2. Italian : Ven. vignal ; Vic. vignale,
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. vidor ; Com. vid6o ; Berg, vidur ;
Bol. viddur ; Romg. vdez, *videz, videra.

(22.) Yines arranged quincuncially.
12. Provencal : platissado.

(23.) A shrublike vine.
1. Latin: ** see (51.).

(24.) A vine keeping itself up by the twining of its branches,
14. Old French: trexe.


C25.) A vine-trellis.

1. Latin: pergiil^, trfchlla, *trichilum, *tricla, *tr][clea,
♦triclrS; **trelia, **trigila, **trigula, **trilia, **trilla,
**trillia, **parrale, **topia.

2. Italian : pergola, *pergolato, *pergolaria ; Temp.
trigghja ; 8m8. parrali ; Sic. preula, pergola ; Tar.
prev'l ; Neap, pr^la, pregola, pr^vola.

3. Sardinian : Central : pergula, triga, trija, *tricla ;
North, parra, parrali,

4. Spanish: parral.

5. Portuguese : parrfeiral.

6. Genoese : angi6u, teupia, *topia ; Ment. trajft.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. t6pia, pelgora ; Romg. pergula ;
Ferr. pergula ; Farm. paergolsD ; Piac. t6ppia ; Pav.

8. Friulano : pifergule, pidrgule.

1 0. Old PR0VEN9AL : treilla, *trelha, *trilla.

1 1. Catalonia N : parral, *trilla.

i2, PROVEN9AL: trelho, trelha (Nimes), treyou (Arks),
aoutiN, *ooutiN, *fielagno, *fieragno, filagno (Var),
baN pi. (Hiires), baNc pi. (id.) ; Lang, trelho ; Oaac.

13. Franco-Pro venial: Lower Dauph, trelh.' ; Lower FaL
. X4. Old French : troille, traille, treuUe, trelle.

i 5. French : treille ; Berr. chad^enn ( West) ; Saint.

(^^•) Several vine- trellises united together.

1. Latin: **pergolatus, **trilhatum.

2. Italian : pergolato, *pergoleto ; Sic. priulatu, pir-

gulatu, pergulatu ; Tar. privulit ; Ven. pergold.
4. Spanish : emparrado.
6. Portuguese : latada.
?• Gallo-Italic : Mil. topiaa, pelgorda ; Com. topiada ;

JBol. pergolat ; Pegg. pergleda ; Pomg, pergulet ;

Parm. psQrgold ; Puv. tupia.
11. Catalonian: ^mparrat; F^/^nc. emparrat.


12. Provencal : Aoutinado, *ooutinado ; Lang* trelh A- �
Oasc. trilhado ; Central Rouerg. trelbat, *trelliadj
North. Bouerg. trilhat (JEntrai/gues).

15. French: Berr. trillaj, trillaj, *tr^illaj ; Champ.
(Aube), panno {id.).

(27.) A vine climbing a wall or a tree.

1. Latin: pergdlan^; **pergula, **camborta.

4. Spanish: parra.

5. Portuguese : parrSim.

6. Genoese : Ment traja.

11. Catalonian : parra.

12. PROVEN9AL: trelho, trelha (Nimes), tr^you {Arle
Lang, trelho ; Gasc. trilho ; Auv. treglha.

13. Franco-Provencal : Lower Dauph. trelh'*

14. Old French : treix, traix, chambry {ace. to Lorrai^"^ )�
chambord {id,).

15. French : treille ; Berr. trill, trillaj, trillaj, tr^ill^t^J*

chad^enn ( West) ; Champ, oiin {Aube), utiw {t(I^
Morv. rajignee {neighbourhood of Avallon) ; Lo^
chawbr^ {Attain) ; Mess, chawbri, ch&bri {Bimill^^
Ard. chabli.

(28.) A vine growing on props,

2. Italian : broncone {ace. to Manuzzi) ; Neap. iett. -
necchia ; Ven. tir^la.

7. Gallo-Italic : Bomg. tirela {Imola) ; Piac. iivbs.
15. French : Berr. jouel.

(29.) Yines growing on props {coll.).

2. Italian : broncone {ace. to Manuzzi).
12. Provencal: *cavaliero.

(30.) A vine climbing over very high props.

14. Old French: hautaigne.

(31.) A vine growing on props parallel to the ground.

15. French : Champ, fourch {Marne)^ grapillon {id,) ;

Champ. 6chamm {Aube), 6cham^ {id.)



(32.) A straight and long row of vines held together by
stakes and poles.

2. Italian: anguillare; 8ass. 6^ini; Tar. impalat ;
B,ov, bina.

3. Sardinian : Central : 6rdine ; South giuali.

7. Gallo- Italic : Berg, trosa ; Bresc. filil, tiradur ; BoL
alva ; Eegg. pergle ; Romg, laz^ra ; Farm, tiradae ;
Pav, topisB ; Pied, taragna,. filagn, *filagna, ressa [a
country word).

14. Old French : bairigne.

15. French : Berr. jouel^e ; Ard. b^rign,

(33.) Two or more straight and long rows of vines held
together by stakes and poles.
2. Italian : pancata ; Sienn. anguillare, anguillaccio.
7. Gallo- Italic : Bresc. palada ; Mod. pruvana ; Romg.
laz^ra ; Mant. tirela ; Parm. filagn.
13. Franco - Pro VEN 9AL : VoMd. utin pi. (Coppet), oiin
pi. (id.).

(34.) Vine carried along from tree to tree.

1. Latin : rumpus, tradux, funetum ; **travice8 pi.

2. Italian : arbuscello (ace. to Manuzzi), *arbuse^lla (id.),

*arbucello {id.), *arbucella (id.) ; Countrt/ Tmcan (ace.
to Mattioli) : pergola (near Fhrence) ; tira ( Valdamo) ;
salciaia ( Valdichiana) ; tralciaia (Mugello) ; trecciaia
' (Valdinievole) ; ritbrta, (Casentino), catena, (id.); pendia
(Versiglia) ; /^�ls. pendagli61a {ace. to id.); Lucch. pen-
dana; Central March, carneali j�/. (Fabriano), tirate
pi. (id.) ; Ven. tirela.

7. Gallo-Italic : 2%. rowp; jBo/. biwdana ; Jfod tirela;
Romg. tirS, tirela (Imola).

8. Friulano: trauli.

(35.) A place planted with vines carried along from tree
to tree.
1. Latin: rumpotinetum.
7. Gallo-Italic : Ptac, filagn ; Pav. vidur.


(36.) A tree to whicli a vine clings and which it climbs.
5. Portuguese : uveira.
12. Provencal : trelh&s, trelhfc, *trilha.
14. Old French : hautain.

(37.) The utmost ranks of vines.
1. Latin: antes j^/.
16. Wallachian : cep.

(38.) A vine-stock.

1. Latin: mat^r]^, matSries; **ceppa, **viti8, **trad:

2. Italian : North. Cors. calzu ; Tar. cipp6n ; J^^sstr.


4. Spanish : cepa.

5. Portuguese : c^pa ; Beir. uv^ira.

6. Genoese : Ment. sep.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. vidascia.

10. Old Provencal: cep.

11. Catalonian : cep ; Maj. cep.

12. Proven9al: souco, souca (i^Tlwes) ; Ag^n.b\A.ot\ O^^'

tral Rouerg, meto.

13. Franco - Provencal : Lower Dauph. cepa ; Y^"^^ '
gourgna, grougna, *grolha, *gourlh', *gorgfi^�-*'

14. Old French: racimal.

15. French : cep ; Berr. c&, coss, sar, beurtt, burtt, qupv^ �
Mesa, hhou^ill ; Wall. Ifep ; Ard. sap ; Saint, cett.

(39.) A vine-stock bent round.
15. French : Lorr. chloounn.

(40.) A row of vine-stocks.

11. Catalonian : tim.

12. PROVEN9AL : fielagno, *fieragno, filagno (Var), baN
pi. (Sieres), baNc pi. (id.) ; Lang, filholo, *lago ;

C^v. bidd.

13. Franco-Provencal : Vaud. aorgna> *orgna, *oma ;
Franc, ordow, ourdow, oudow, oudion^ poler'.



15. French: Niv, ourdow {Clamecy)\ Champ, ordow
(Marne) ;

(41.) A young vine.

1. Latin: **maleollu8, **malheolu8, **malholIu8, **raal-
hollium, **inaliolu8,**malleollu8, **malKolu8, **mallo-
. Iiu8.
4. Spanish : Hioj. majuelo.
6. Portuguese : bacello ; Gal, maliolo.

10. Old Provencal : maillol, malhol.

12. PROVEN9AL: C4v. malhaou, malhoou, *malhou, *mayou.
15. French: Saint, visaw (ace. to Boucherie).

(42 ) A young vine-stock pruned for the first time.
15. French : Poit. ravalur.

(43.) A vine-stock until five years old,
15. French : Saint pyawtt.

(44.) An old vine.

15. French : Saint, coss.

(45.) An old vine-stock rooted out for fuel.
4. Spanish: ceporro.

(46.) A vine dying off.

15. French : Champ, mahonn (Aube).

(47.) A vine-stock bearing no grapes.

13. FRANCO-PROVEN9AL : Frib. Broy. tchapow.

(48.) A deserted vine the sprigs of which entwine.
15. French : Ard. tre.

(49.) An undressed vine abounding with shoots.
4. Spanish: parral.

11. Catalonian: parraL


(50.) An uncultivated old vine.
2. Italian : Sic, vitusa.

(51.) A wild vine.

1. Latin : **labrusca, **labru8ta, **labu8tra, **laberosca,
**labro8ca {all five also occurring, as well as lambrusca,
ace. to Diefenbach, in the sense of (8, 23, 52, 177, 179,

2. Italian : Bell. vidis6N.

4. Spanish : laJrusca, parriza, *parron.

5. Portuguese: labrusca.

10. Old Provencal : labrusca, lambrusquieira.

11. Catalonian : Wambrusca ; Valenc. parrissa.

12. PR0VEN9AL : lambrusco, lambruscou (Aries), emhrusca

{Nimes), *lambru8quiero, treilhiero, eigrassiero, b^di-
gana {Nimes) ; Nig. bedigana ; Upper Dauph. law-
brutso ; Lang, lamftruisso, lam Jresquieiro, trelh^iro ;
Civ. lambrusquieiro ; Montp. lamftrusca ; Lower Lim.
lomftrustso; Rouerg. Jit-haougue {ace. to Amis),

13. Franco-Proven9AL : Jur. lawbrutsa, lawbritsa ; Lower
Dauph. lawibrusca ; Franc, lambrutch', la;wbritch\

14. Old French : lambrunche.

15. French : *lambruche, *lambrusque, *lambrot, *la-
brusque ; Berr. lambreuch, embriwch {Ldrd), embruwch.
{id.), viann, vigann ( We^st.), vicann {id.) ; Upper Mane.
la/wbreuche, lambruw ; Poit, resinett.

16. Wallachian: curpene.

(N.B. — The Latin labruscS, labruscum, and the Italian
lambrusca, *lambrusco, *lambruzza, do not mean so. much " a
wild vine," as a peculiar kind of it.)

(52.) A large wild vine.
1. Latin: **see (51.).

(53.) Wood left by a vine-dresser after cutting the vine.
13. Franco-Pro VEN9AL : Oen. porteur.
15. French : *cource.


(54.) The dead wood of a vine.
12. Provencal: iaw^. souquet; Oiors^r. souquilliou, souquil.

(55.) A vine-root.
J5. French: Champ, cour^ (Aube).

(56.) Vine-roots (call,).
15. French : Mess, hhou^ill.

(57.) Roots of the vine remaining underground after the
vineyard has been puUed up.
2. Italian : Tar. vitiis.

(58.) The filaments of the roots of the vine.
15. French : Champ, chevlu {Marne).

(59.) A vine-branch.

1. Latin : sarmentum, *duramen, *durumentura, palmes,
*palma ; **8aramentum, **8armenta, ** sermons,
**trauci8, **tranix^ **tranex, ** trance.

2. Italian : sermento, *8armento, *sermente, tralcio,
*tralce ; Central March, sciarmiento {Fahriano) ; Sass.
sermentu; Sic. sarmentu; Neap, chiaccone, tennecchia ;
Fad. tirela {ace. to Fatriarchi) ; Ver. tiroN ; BelL
ref5s ; Rov. monzina.

3. Sardinian: Cfe/i^ra/: sermentu, *sarmentu, bidighinsu ;

South pertia.

4. Spanish : sarmiento.

5. Portuguese: sarm^wto, vid^ ; Gal. sarmento, gromo,


6. Genoese : puassa ; Ment, traja.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. tros, m^rza. {Upper Mil.); Com.
vidascia ; Berg, mader ; Bresc. sermeta, tr6sa ; BoL
sermeiwt, sarmeiwt; Mod. pl6oN; Regg. ploN ; Romg.
sarmewt, *sermewt, cadnaza {a cotmtry word) ; Mant.
maedar, graspa ; Farm. msDder, maedersanae ; Fiac,
parfil ; Fiedm. s^rmenta, *sarmenta, meil, *meir, meje,
majeul, *majeu ; Vald. sarmanta, mae.


8. Friulano: vidiz6N,

10. Old Provencal : serment, *eisermen, *i88ermen,

11. Catalonian : sarm^nt, *serm^nt; Fias/ienc. eixarment,
*sarment ; Maj, sarment.

12. PR0VEN9AL : avis, vis, *vi8e, *vi8i, *avi, sarmeiN,
einsirmeiN, gavel (Nimes), paraNgouN, *paravouN;
Upper Dauph, vi; Lang. 6is, iise, ftisi, aMt, *aM8,
sarmeN, eissirnaeN *8ermew, *i88ermeN, *ei8ermeN ;

' TouL ei88ermeN ; Agin. ensirmeN ; Oobc. charmex,

eicharmeN, *gaouero : BSarn. chenneN ; Lower Lim,
sirmeN ; Central Houerg, *goli8 ; Auv. parasou.

13. Franco- Pro VEN9AL : Br ess, sarman; Neuf. serm'
{North-Eastern Vignohle) ; Lower Dauph. sarma^ta.

14. Old French: serment.

15. French : sarment ; Berr. ch^, *ma ; Lorr. sarmott

{Domgermain)y marm (Landremont) ; Month. Berman;
Wall, vi ; Pic. gavel ; Saint, essarmen, essermen.

16. Wallachian : vitsS, jitsS {popularly), vitse {ace. to

Bobb), cep {ace, to Frollo), vlSstar, vlSstare {ace. to
** Leancon^')^ vlSjar, curpen {ace. to Cihac), curpSn
{id.)y curpene {id.), curpena {id,).

(60.) Vine-branches {coll.).

2. Italian : Central March, poderi pi. {Fahnano) ; Tar.

*capidd pi. {only used in the locution " in eapidd").
5. Portuguese : vidonho.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. trosada; Com. trosfila; S.omg.
videra; Piedm. mdaja {ace. to "Psal. 80-11/* JEd.
of 18^0).
13. Franco-Provencal : Vaud. boulai, boulay'.
16. French: Lorr. fShhatt^/. {Mailly).

(61.) Vine-branches cut to the size of the vine {coll.).
15. French : Morv. javal.

(62.) The chief branch of a vine.

1. Latin : rSsex^ custos^ sagitta^ pollex.



2. Italian : sa^ppolo, sa^ttolo, *guardia ; Sienn. saetta ;

Tar, pedar61; Abr. rds'cli*, scarpetta; Ven. supioN,

matoN ; Rov. sgarz, garz.
4. Spanish : perchon.
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, popolanna ; Bresc, trap^l ; Farm.


11. Catalonian : pistola, *p61z^.
15. French ; Mess, mariin.

(63.) A strong vine-brancli, capable of bearing from seven to
eight buds.
15. French : Ang, couest.

(64.) A vine-branch cut shorter than the other.

12. Provencal : souquilhouN.

(65.) A vine-branch growing from a new one and hanging
attached to the soft part.

1. Latin : materia, materies.

(€6.) A vine-branch grown at the base of the vine.

2. Italian : viticcio^ vignu61o ; Central March, roccetta

{ace. to " Raccolta ") ; Ven, troza.
7. Gallo-Italic : Bol, pWu/i.

(67.) A vine-branch turned W-wise, with the top set in
the ground.

1. Latin : mergus, *candosoccus.

2. Italian: capogatto, *m^rgo.

4. Spanish: codadura.

7. Gallo-Italic : Bresc, gobada ; Piedm. cugi6ira.
11. Catalonian : capficat, toria, colgat.

14. Old French : marcot, margoute, margote, marguotte,
planteis, planteir.

15. French : Berr. jacol, Jacob ; Champ, ploya/i {Marne) ;
Lorr. beuildiw (Domgermain), caiw (Allain).

(68.) A vine-branch containing many bunches.

5. Portuguese : Berc, carrena.

13. Franco-Proven^al : For. vilouw.




(69.) A vine-branch covered with buds.

3. Sardinian : South. carriadr5xa.

4. Spanish : Arag, alargadera.

(70.) A vine-branch with its leaves.
2. Italian : Ven, pampano.

6. Genoese : pampanu, *pampinu.

7. Gallo-Italic : Romg. pa3?wpan, *p8empen.

10. Old PR0VEN9AL : pampol.

12. Provencal : pampo ; Upper Dauph. vi ; Lang, *pam-

pre ; Upper Beam, pampou ; Loiver Lim, *mouso ;
Central Rouerg. pompo, *pouompe, *pampe, *espampe,
*romo, *ramo ; Auv, pampre.

13. Franco-Provencal : For. bra/^.

15. French : pampre.

16. Wallachian: curpen {ace. to Cihac), curpSn (id.),

curpene (id.) curpena (id.).

(71.) A thin and barren vine-branch grown on the lower
part and near the trunk of the vine.

4. Spanish: jerpa.

5. Portuguese : Oal. xerpa.

7. Gallo-Italic : Valt. r6gne pi.

11. Oatalonian: podrastre.

(72.) A cut vine-branch.

7. Gallo-Italic: Com. vidascia.

(73.) Out vine-branches (coll.).

7. Gallo-Italic : Valt. vidisciof^.

(74.) A vine-branch transplanted with its roots.

2. Italian: barbatella; Sienn. barbatello; Central March.
barbate (Fabriano) ; Sic, varvotta, *barbotta ; Neap.

4. Spanish : JarJado, * JarJudo.

5. Portuguese : Oal. Jar Jada.


7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. rdsol, rasoe, magnoe {a country
word) ; Berg, roersur, roersii ; Bresc. predessa ; BoL
tajol ; Regg. tratora ; Romg. caviluta, *cavluda ; Piac,
pruvaneiN ; Piedm. barbatela, capuN.

12. Provencal: barb^ (Vakmole), courbe {Lea Mees) ;

Upper Dauph. barba; Lang, ftarftot, Jarftiot; TouL
iarftoulat ; Lower Lim. eouidzodi, *6or6ado ; Central
Rouerg, borbuio.

13. Franco-Provencal: Jbr. barbie; 6r^n. barbua; Vatid.

barbuva, barbua.

14. Old French : chevelue.

15. French: sautelle; Poit. chWohir; Saint oh* yhx.

(75.) A bundle of vine-branches.

1. Latin: **javella, **gavelli j^/.

6. Genoese : Ment. gavele pL

7. Gallo-Italic : Mir, vlup, *vidoN ; Parm, vidaeroel.
12. Pro'\t:n9al : gaveou, *djaveou ; Lang, gaftel ; C^v.

*bis^ ; Lower Lim. dzovelo ; Central Rouerg, monoul,
goJelo (Millau) ; South Rouerg. gobel {Nant) ; Querc,
15. French : javelle ; Poit. jsLvelon {Niort) ; Saint, javel.

(76.) A bundle of vine-branches with the grapes hanging
to them.

2. Italian : p^nzolo, pendolo ; Sic. pennula ; Tar,
privular ; Neap, piennole ; Ven, picagia, rozzada.

3. Sardinian : Central : pesu, appesile, pesile (Goceano) ;

South, appicconi.

6. Genoese : pendessa.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, r6sch, fiocch (a country word),
fiocchet {id.)y mazzet {id,) ; Berg, rbs, trosa (ace. to
Zappettini); Bresc. picaja, pendoes; Regg. ulz; Parm.
via, *T08 ; Piac, roezz.

8. Friulano : rawezz, arwezz, riwezz.

11. Catalonian : p^njoy, *penjoll; Valenc. pentxoll :
Maj, penj6y.


12. PROVEN9AL: cargueto, mouissino, visado, *trellieto;
Nig. visada ; Lang, andot, Jisado ; Oasc. *mouis8eno;
Central Rouerg. pigno, *pino, *pinSlo, *piiidl, *cargo.

14. Old French : moessine, moisine^ mainnesine (jacc. to


15. French : moissine ; Tour, mosill ; Berr. moussinn,
mouiwsinn, mousslinn ; Wall. ploy.

16. Wallachian : vislS {ace. to Codresco).

(77.) A packet consisting of several bundles of vine-branches
with the grapes hanging to them.
12. Provencal : Central Rouerg. pinelo.

(78.) Twelve bundles of vine-branches tied with a withe.
15. French : Saint, javel.

(79.) A small bundle of vine-branches.
15. French : Morv. z^val {part of Morvan nivemais).

(80.) A small bundle of vine-branches roughly representing
a child coiffed with a biggin.
15. French : Saint, beyinn.

(81.) An old hardened vine-branch.
1. Latin : drSco, juniciilus.

4. Spanish : serpa.

5. Portuguese : Gal. serpa.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, bemardow.
11. Catalonian; t^erguer.

(82.) A dry vine-branch.

1. Latin: sarmentum.

2. Italian: sermento, *sarmento, *sermente; Sic. sar-
mentu; Neap, chiaccon^; Rov, sarmenta.

5. Portuguese : s�rm^nto ; Gal. tides pi.

6. Genoese : puassa.



7. Gallo-Italic: MiLirbsi Serg,s^Tmed.eL{Valle Imagna);
Bresc, trbBo,, sermeta ; BoL sermemt, sarm^int ; Mod.
vlop; Bomg. sarme/it, *sermewt, cadnaza {a country
word); Mant msBdar; Piedm. s^rmenta, *sarmenta;
Vald. sarmanta.
10. Old PROVEN9AL : serment, *eisermen, *issermen.

12. PBOVEN9AL : avis, vis, *vise, *visi, *avi, sarmeiN,

einsirmeiN, gavel {Nimes) ; Lang. 6is, Jise, Jisi, aftit,
*alwi3, sarmeN, eissirmeN, *sermeN, *issermeN, *eiser-
meN ; TouL eissermeN ; Agin. ensirmeN ; Oasc. char-
meN, *eicharmeN, *gaouero ; Beam, chermeN ; Lower
Lim. sirmeN ; Central Rouerg. Jitch, *6it, *6its, *oJise,
oJit (Miilau), *oJio {id.)y *a6ise, *goJit.

13. FKANCO-PROVEN9AL : Bress. sarma/i.

14. Old French: serment.

15. French: sarment.

16. Wallachian : vitsS, jits^ (popularly)^ vitse (ace. to.
Bohb)y cep {axic. to Frollo), surcea {ace, to Vaillant),
surcel {ace. to *^ Lexicon "), gStej {ace. to the Bible).

CS3.) A bundle of dry vine-branches.
2. Italian : Rov. sarmenta.
7. Gallo-Italic : Regg. vidoN.
15. French : Berr. beurtt, burtt.

C€4.) A dead vine-branch used for the purpose of joining
the extremities of two young vine-shoots.
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. posca (Brianza).

(€5.) Vine-branches of the wild vine.
15. French : Poit. treuillaj.

C€6.) A flexible branch of a wild vine.
12. PR0VEN9AL: Lang. Jissano.

^87.) The portion of the vine-branch of the preceding year,
remaining after the vine has been pruned.
12. PR0VEN9AL : cargo, cornovi ; Central Rouerg, ouoJro,
*oJro, *courretcho, courredjo {Monthazens).


15. French : *viete, *viette ; Berr. ar9ow, piq-e�-t^er ;
Champ, arc {Mame)y courg6e {id.) ; Champ, plion
{Auhe)^ ployon [id.)\ Ang. arch^, dag (Beaufort),
couran (id.).

(88.) The tip of a vine-branch.

1. Latin : flagellum.

2. Italian : Stenn. cacchio.

6. Portuguese : pimp61ho, gomo, gommo ; Gal. iacelo.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. garzfe ; Farm. pl6uN ; Piedm.

10. Old Provencal: flagel.

12. PR0VEN9AL: aparouN, apanouN.

15. French: -B^rr. vargou; Champ, hron (Marne) ; Champ.
tal (Aube) ; Mess, mariin (R^milly) ; Poit. pouss.

(89.) The extremities of the vine-branches all together.

2. Italian : capaia {only used in the locution " a capaia " ).

' (90.) The tip of the vine-branch remaining on the vine-stock
after pruning.
4. Spanish: saeta.

11. Catalonian : g�let.

(91.) A vine-shoot.

1. Latin: pampmus.

3. Sardinian : South. pud6ni, caftudiana.

4. Spanish : p&mpano.

5. Portuguese: pampano.

6. Genoese : pampanu, *pampinu.

7. Gallo-Italic : Bresc. trosa. ; Crem. mader, madirol ;
Romg. psempan, *p8ewpen ; Parm. pl6uN, sprouN ;
Piedm. brumbu.

11. Catalonian: *r^dolta; Jfm. pdmpol.

(92.) A cutting of a vine.

15. French : Lorr. m^yeuy (Landremont).


(93.) Bemains of the pruning of the vine (colL),
16. French : Morv, javal.

(94.) Abundance of vine-shoots.
4. Spanish : pampanaje.
11. Catalonian : pampolada.

(^95.) Second shooting of the vine.

13. FRANC0-PR0VEN9AL : Lower Val. ^*byolof^.

(96.) Vine-shoots united and following the direction of a row
of plants.
7. Gallo-Italic : Piac. parfil.

(97.) Braided vine-shoots (colL).

2. Italian : Central March, cortina (ace, to a private and

reliable informant).
7. Gallo-Italic : Com. tr6sa ; Bresc. trosa.

(98.) A vine-shoot tied to a small stake.
7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. trbs ; Com. tr6sa.

(99.) A vine-shoot growing between two vine-branches.
2. Italian : Tar. custar61.

(100.) A vine-shoot with bunches, cut off from the vine.
15. French : Mess, mennch^e.

(101.) A vine-shoot with two bunches, cut off from the vine*
2. Italian : Bell, zempede.

(102.) A brittle young vine-shoot.
13. Franco-Proven^al : Gen. bro.

(103.) A sterile vine-shoot.
1. Latin : racemarius.

(104.) The juice of the vine-shoots.
4. Spanish: pampanada.



(105.) A bundle consisting of a few vine-shoots.
2. Italian : Pad. tir^la.

(106.) A vine-shoot cut down to two eyes.
15. French : Berr, arte, arte, pousso.

(107.) A vine-shoot cut down to two, three, or four eyes.
2. Italian: cursonc^Uo, *bazzu61o, *sagoncello; Tar,
test ; Ven, rslsolo ; Ter, cacch-j.

4. Spanish : pulgar.

5. Portuguese : poll^gar.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. caved {Upper Mil.) : BoL sg^un;
Farm. spr6uN.

11. Catalonian : ftrocada ; Valenc. breed, brocada.

12. PR0VEN9AL: cargo, comovi, escoue, pourtadour; Cen-

tral Bxmerg. conot.
15. French : courson, coursonne, *billon ; Berr. varj,
*verj, come, courj ; Champ, course ; Poit. broch.

(108.) A layer of a vine.

1. Latin: propago, propages; **propagatio, **propa-

gans (both also occurring y as well as ^^ propago^* ace. to
Diefenbachy in, the sense of (19, 27, 38, 41, 51, 59,

2. Italian : propglggine, prop^gine ; Temp, prubedna ;

Sass. prubb^ina; Sic. purpaina, *prupp8lina, *pur-
pania; Tar. prubasc'n; Neap, prop^yena, calatur^;
Ven. refosso ; Ver. tratora.

3. Sardinian: Central: profislina, praftslina {Marghine)\

South. bra&�iina.

4. Spanish: provena, mugron, *codal, *rastro; Arag.

5. Portuguese: m^rgulhao, *m^rgulho, *m^rgulhifl, *pro-


6. Genoese : Ment. cabt^s.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. provanna, retraccia {Brianza)
Berg, proana, ref6s {Olera) ; Bresc. provana, tratura
Bol. pruvana, prupagin ; Mod. trat6ora ; Mant. arf6s
Parm. trsetouras ; Par, pruvaense ; Piedm. pruvaNa.


8. Friolano ; rifweaa, rafwfisa, rivieas, 'riviesae.

10. Old Proven^^al : probage.

11. Catalonian : colgat •proMOff.

_12. pRovENrAL : cabus, "tchabus, •cabuss^, cabiissado
{ Vaknsole), 'couaduro, "soto, 'courbado, "probaino ;
Lang, ca&ussal, ca&ussado, caiuBset, Boumeaso, sou-
mes�ou, 'prouio ; Ce-c. cougaduro, aoumeisao, prou-
badjo, proubatcbo ; Toid. proutajo ; Agen. prouiaino ;
Gate, couriagno, 'reiosto ; B^am. prouftagno ; Lower
Lim. •ofonzoii; Central Roverg. coSoussado, •cofius-
sado, *prou';auie, prouiaino {Marcillac), "prouiatche ;
South. Rouertj. cubussou {Samt-Affrigtte), cofiuaHet {id.),
coiuasat {(tft),co6u8Bol(irf.),caiiaaou(jfif.)j ^Mi". veraadi.

13. Franco-Provencal: jPo*-. r'bouna^ ; Sor, provignura ;

Vatid. provegnura,

14. Old French : provain, pourvain, prouvin, prouvaia,

15. French : proviu ; Berr. proui�., p'roiiiM, prouaill,
preugQur, progni, prun; Poit. pr'bi�; Saint, nigiaa,

(109.) A layer of a vine during the firat three yeara.
7. Qallo Italic : Pav. vidur.

(110.) A layer of a vine where a portion of the wood of the
preceding year has been left.

1. Latin; mallPolua; ••maleolua, ••malleulua, "■mallolua,

••mellolus, ••palleoluB, • 'inalholtiiia.

2. Italian : magliuolo ; Flor. maiuolo (Maiano) ; Piat.

maggbiolo {Moniak) ; North Com. magliolu ; Sic

inagghiolu ; Tar.

rdaolo; Ver. tagiol.
. Genoese : Ment. majwe.
. Gallo-Italic ; Mil. n

r^Bola ; Breec. oscigta ;

Sontg. 'tajol, *taj6, tajo

uiord) J Mani. TidoN ; P<

A ; JVeap. magli61ii ; Ven.

iletta (Upper Mil.); Com.

Cremn. madeer; Mod. tajol;

(Iimla), agoH {a country

titjail, miKJtcI ; Piac,

i Pav. raaa^; Piedvi. riefiir^, mujeul, •majei, meil,
*meir, mej^.


8. Friulano : rasizz^ resizz, risizz, rasul.

10. Old Provencal : maillol, *malhol.

11. Catalonian : mallol, m�yol, mallola, m^ola.

12. PROVEN9AL : malhoou, mayoou, *maUiou^ ; Lanf ""•
malholo, plaN ; Cev, malhaou, ^malhoii, *mayou 1
pariaiseN ; Central Rouerg, Jout, *cap ; South. Rouerg
molhouol (Belmont), molhol (id.) ; Auv. iuaglh6,
maglheti, madj6^ madju.

13. Franco-Proven9al : Lower Dauph. ^mayan ; For.
chavouw, chapou/^ ; Vaud. chapon, tchapon, tsapo^.

14. Old French : mailhol, malhol, crocete, crossete.

15. French: crossette, *avantin, *maillot, ^mailleton
Berr. chabo, chapon, *cros8 ; Aug.^oucAik.

16. Wallachian : vitsS, jitsS {popularly), vitse {ace.


(111.) A bastard cast of a clipped vine.

1. Latin : **vitulamen, **vitulo, **vituligo, **vitidatuft -

**vitiligo, **bituligo, **butiligo.

2. Italian : femminella.
4. Spanish: esforrocino.

6. Portuguese : Gal. *6orda, *Jorde.

7. Gallo-Italic : Farm. baestsDrdoN.
15. French: *6cuyer.

(112.) A vine-leaf.

1. Latin: pampinus; **pampenus, **pampilus, **pan^
phinus, **papinus, **pSpinus {all five also occurring^
ace. to Diefenhach^ in the sense of (38).

2. Italian : palmpano, *pdmpino, *pampana ; Sass. p^m-
pinu ; Sic. pampina ; Neap, chiaccone.

3. Sardinian : Central : pglmpinu.

4. Spanish : p4mpana.

5. Portuguese : parra, *pdmpflno.

7. Gallo-Italic : Romg. p^mpaewna ; Ferr. p&mpan ;
Mir. ploN.

8. Friulano: p^mpul.
10. Old Provencal: pampol.


11. Catalonian : pampol, *pampa, *pdmpana.
14. Old French: tain {ace. to Chassant).
16. Wallachian : ctirpen (ace. to Frollo), curpan {id.),
ctirpene {id,), curpenS {id.),

CI 13.) Vine-leaves {coll.).

2. Italian : Central March, cama (Fabriano).

C i 14.) A vine-leaf rolled up.
1. Latin : pampinus.

C ^-15.) AbundanQjB of vine-leaves.

11. Catalonian : pampolatge, ^pampolam. *

C il6.) The bud of a vine.

1. Latin: gemma; **tradux {ace. to Diefenbaeh).

2. Italian : Neap, jemmola, jemma.

7. Gallo-Italic : Romg. zema, gema ; Piac. pl6N ;
JPiedm. gema.

12. PR0VEN9AL : paraNgouN, *paravouN ; Toul. ftourrou ;

Central Rouerg, ftourre, *o6is.

13. FRANCO-PROVEN9AL : Vaud. bolow ; Franc, bouss',
boss', boussott', bossott', beussott*.

15. French : Ang. gemm.

(X17.) Vine-buds taken away from the vine {coll.).
12. PR0VEN9AL : abroutouN.

(118.) A vine-bud beginning to come up.

12. Provencal : bourro ; Lang. Jourre ; Central Rouerg.
Jourrou, *espaoume, espaoune {Segala), modjeNc
{Asprihres), *matseNc; South Rouerg. pampe {Re-
quista) ; North, Rouerg. espompel ( Viadene) ; Querc,
15. French: bourre; Berr. roxxsLok {only used in the loeution
" ew roudch*'), rouch {id.).

(119.) A bud of the vine, despoiled of its leaves.
12. PROVEN9AL : avis.


(120.) A bud of the vine, showing the grapes.
13. Francx)-Pro VENIAL : Franc, aparu.
15. French : Month. Spferu.

(121.) A vine-bud growing from the collar of the root.
15. French : Champ, s^rviniin (Auhe) ; Champ, noueu,
nouou, nouo {Tonne).

(122.) A small lateral bud of the vine.
12. PR0VEN9AL: CfewiJra/iJower^. tra6ourrou,*sa6oretratcho.

(123.) An unfruitful vine-bud.

' 15. French : Champ, loubo (Marne).

(124.) A useless bud of the vine.

12. PR0VEN9AL: Central Rouerg. traftourre, *traJourrou,

*tchuco6i, *tchutchoJi ; South. Rouerg. ftouorlhe {Saint-
Sermtn), *6ouorlho {id.), *Jorlhe {id,), *Jouorli {id.),
Jorlho ; North Rouerg. ftouorlio {Laguiole).

13. Franco-Proven9al : Vaud. laou, leou.

(125.) A knot of the vine.
15. French : Berr. corn^.

(126.) A bunch of grapes.

W V w

1. Latin : uvS, botryo, *botrio, *botryon, *botrus,
*botruus, rScemus ; **rasemu8, **nacermus {both also
occurring, as well as " racemus," ace. to Diefenhach, in
the sense of (1, 19, 38, 41, 69, 70, 134, 155, 161, 174,
177, 184), **botria, **botro, **potrus {the three
occurring, as well as " hotrus,*^ ace. to Diefenhach, in the
sense of {\4Q), **grappus, **grapa, **grappa, **raspa,

2. Italian: grdppolo, *grappo, *raspo, *racimolo, *gra8po,
*pigna ; Rom. rampazzo ; Alatr, pennia ; Temp, butroni ;
Sass. buddr6ni ; Sic. rappa, *rappu, *gr�lppulu ; Tar.
grap, grap'l; Bar. cannech'l; Ahr. racci�lp'l,*schianda;
Ter. ciapparsBtt' ; Neap. *grappa ; Ven. *graspa; Ver.
arzimo ; Bell, regia ; Rov. picca, rasim, br6ccol.


3. Sardinian : Central : budrbne ; South, gurd6ni.

4. Spanish : racimo ; Arag. uva ; Ast. recimo.

5. Portuguese : cacho, *racimo ; Beir. gaipo ; 6aL

recimo ; Indo-Portuguese : escol, ouva, uva.

6. Genoese : rappu ; Ment. rap, raca, rasime pL

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. sgrazza, grappa, wga ; Com. sgraz,
sgraza ; Berg, grata ; Crem, grap^l, sgratd, rd.mpol ;
Cremn. grapell ; Bol, grap ; Mant, s-chjaNch ; Pav.
sgras, grap^ ; Piedm. rapa.

8. Friulano : rapp, *grapp, *grasp.

9. Bomanese : Oberl. madargnuN, *madergnuN, *bar-

dagliuN, *batuN, eua, *euva, *jeua, *jua, *juva, *uga,
*iva, *aua ; Oherh, *barduN ; Lower Eng. zoch, *soch,
wa, *tga, *t^va ; Upper Eng, puNchjel, puNchjer ; Tyr,
piccse (Fasm)j rusgiN {Oardena), rosin {id.y ace. to

10. Old PROVEN9AL : uva, razims pL, *ra8im8 (id.),
*razains (id.),

11. Catalonian : rahim ; Valenc. rahim ; Maj. r^ym,

reym ; Min. rem.

12. Provencal : grapo, *ratcho, *rapugo, *galaspo, *pein-

doii, peindoi (Orasse), rasiN, *riN, *rei'N; Queyr. aro;
Lower Dauph. rasin ; Lang. *lam6ru8CO ; Cdv. raco ;
B4am. gaspe; Montp. grapa; Bay. grape; Central
Bomrg. pigno, *ro8iN, *roiN ; South Bouerg. mouisselo
[Saint'Affrique) ; Auv. grapa.

13. Franco-Provencal : Vaud. rapa ; Franc, rap' {Plan-
cher-leS' Mines).

14. Old French : grape, crape, bourgon, bourgeoun,
borjoun, bromest.

16. French : grappe, raisins pi. ; Lorr. grSp {Luneville) ;

Month, r^p ; Mess, r'bo ; Wall, tree, rehin ( Tillers) ;

Nam, tropp ; Ard. brom^ ; Lower Norm, cral^e ; Poit,

rapp ; Saint, rasin,
16. Wallachian : strugur, strugure (ace. to the Bible),

ciorchinS,, ciorchin {ace. to Frollo), grap^ {ace. to the



(127.) Bunches of grapes (colL),

1. Latin : •*aciiiarium, **acinatium, **acinacium,

(128.) A suspended bunch of grapes.

4. Spanish : colgajo.

5. Portuguese : pewdura.

12. PR0VEN9AL : peindilhado ; Cev, pendilhado.

13. Franco-Provencal : Jur. biu, blu.

(129.) A bunch of grapes preserved.

W w �

1. Latin : botryo, *botrio, *botryon.

(130.) A large bunch of grapes.

1 . Latin : **bumastha,**bumasta, **buma8tu8, **bumastes,
**bumastis, **buma8te, **bamaste, **brumasta, **bru-

14. Old French: bromest.

(131.) A small bunch of grapes.

1. Latin : **grapium.

2. Italian : Sic, sgaNgu ; Ven. rechjo ; Ver, rechja.

4. Spanish : Arag. carrazo.

5. Portuguese : Gal, caNga ; Berc, gallo.

6. Genoese : sc-chjaNcu.

7. Gallo-Italic : Berg, gramostel ( Valie Gandino), gra-
m6stol (id.), gremostel (id,), grem6stol (id,) ; Romg,
garavel ; Pav, sgraeslei, sgraesliN, sgraesle.

8. Friulano : ras-chje.

9. Romanese : Oberl, *torclet, *turclet.

12. PROVEN9AL : rapugo, souNgl^ ; Lang, lamJret ; Civ,
lambro ; Narh, cascamel ; Lower Lim, orlot ; Central
Rouerg. Joutel, *Joutil, *lomJrot, traSout (Estaing),
mouisselo {Peyrelau) ; South, Rouerg, lamJrot ( Ville-
franque), pineloti {id,), Jraousselhoti {id,), mouissel
{8aint'Affriqu�), *em6ouissel (id,),

15. French : Month, grepillow ; Wall, rmhal.


(132.) A very small bunch of grapes.
12. Provencal : Gobc. chiNglouN.
15. French : Wall riwhtal.

(133.) A bit of a bunch of grapes.

2. Italian : Central March, rancischia.
7. Gallo-Italic : Piedm. s'chjaNch.
12. Provencal : rapugo, souNgl^ ; Gaac, chiNglouN.

(134.) A stalk of a bunch of grapes.

Latin: scapus; **acinarium [ace, to Diefenhach),

2. Italian : raspo, graspo ; Pist racchio (Montale) ;

Central March, ticcio (Fabriano), ticchio (id,) ; Temp,
scapdcciula, scapacciulu ; Sass, i/cubazzulu ; Tar, rasp ;
Neap, streppon^, streppa^, raspa ; Ven, graspa.

3. Sardinian : Central, carena ; South, scoeJili.

4. Spanish : escoJajo, raspa, *rampojo ; Arag, garraspa.

5. Portuguese : engaqo ; Berc. SaNgallo.

6. Genoese : rappwssu, *ra8pwssu ; Ment. raca.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, sgrazza ; Bresc, rdspol, spelegata ;

Cremn, gratta ; Bol, sgrapoja, graspoja ; Mod, graspa ;
Regg* vinazz pi. ; Romg, rasp ; Ferr. graspuja ; Parm,
grasp ; Piac. racca ; Pav, grapse ; Piedm, rapus.

8. Friulano: raspol6w.

11. Catalonian : rapa ; Valenc, raspall.

12. Provencal : raco, *ratcho, rac� {Nimes), *racado,
*visado, *inesque; Lang, grapo, gaspo, rapugo; Montp,
grapa ; Agen, gaspil ; Lower Lim, lierpi, nierpi ; Cen-
tral Rouerg, *crapo, carpo (Campagnac), *grepe.

13. Franco-Proven9al : Franc, tchaco, tchaco.

14. Old French: rape.

15. French : rafle, rape, *raffe ; Champ, ribo (Marne) ;

iorr. r'bo (Landrenwnt); Wall, hemm, h^nn, *hey6mm,
Poit, rapp.

16. Wallachian: ciorchinS {ace. to Vaillant and to Frollo)

carcel {ace. to Cihac),

(135.) A stalk of a bunch of grapes dried on the plant.
12. PR0VEN9AL : arasto.


(136.) Sour taste of the stalk of a bunch of grapes.
2. Italian : raspo.

7. Gallo-Italic: J5r^c. raspi; iJow^. rasp; Jferr. raspiN;
Farm. raespeiN.

(137.) A bunch left behind by vintagers.
13. Francjo-Proven^al : For. r'simola.

(138.) A small bunch left behind by vintagers.

2. Italian: raspoUo, *raspo, *racchio ; T(?/wp. scalughja;

Sass. i^aluggia ; Sic, racioppu ; Tar, raciiep ; Ter,
schiand'; JVeap.rdspolCjgrdspole; Few. rechjo, rechjoto;
Ver, rechja.

3. Sardinian : Central, iscaluza ; South, 8ciscill6ni.

4. Spanish: redrojo,*redruejo,cencerron,re6usca,re6usco;

Arag, racimo.

5. Portuguese : rabisco, rcbusca, rAusco ; Gal, refugallo.

6. Genoese : sc-chjaNcu.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, grappell ; Berg, rslmpol ; Bresc,
rdbsem, roesembol ; BoL garavsel ; Romg, garavel ;
Farm, s-chjaNch; Fav. raespws, sgraeslei, sgraesliN,

8. Friulano: ras-chje.

11. Catalonian : gotim, *Jagot, *agra8Sot, *8inglot,

12. Provencal : rapugo ; Ch, tchabrioule.

13. Franco-Proven9AL : For, boutilhouw.

(139.) Unripe small bunch left behind by vintagers.
2. Italian : agrestino.

(140.) A bunch with few clusters of grapes.

2. Italian : racimolo, *gracimolo ; Tar, raciiep ; Neap,
rippok, rapp^, grappa.

(141.) Small bunches of grapes which are late in ripening
12. PROVEN9AL : Central Eouerg, rouiJrado (Feyrelau),
*re^ouiJrado (id,).


{^X4z2.) An unripe small bunch with few vine-berries.
2. Italian: racchio.

6. Genoese : sc-chjaNcu.

7. Gallo-Italic : Romg. garavel.

X5. French: Berr. albott, *ablott, *damosel.

(X43.) Small bunches of grapes that never ripen (coll.).

4. Spanish: agrazon.

11. Catalonian: Fafewc. agrasso.

ISf. Fran(X)-Proven9AL : Vaud^agrepl.

(144.) A bunch of sour grapes.

5. Portuguese: Gal. axiio.

12. Provencal : Upper Dauph. aigra.

(145.) A small bunch of sour grapes.
11. Catalonian : agrassot.

(146.) A bunch of grapes not yet developed.

16. French: Berr. lamm, atach; Upper Mane, lame;
Pott, form ; Saint, formawss.

(14:7.) An abortive bunch of grapes.

16. French: Champ. e�veuill, vrill, vrillett (Aube);
Champ, ^polo^ (Tonne).

(14:8.) Refuse bunches of grapes (coll.).
15. French: Champ, detour (Marne).

(I49.) A cluster of grapes in a bunch.

1. Latin : rScemus.

2. Italian : racimolo, *gracimolo, schiantolo (ace. to
Foresti) ; Sic. sgaNgu ; Neap, rdppole, rappc, grappa.

4. Spanish : gajo ; Arag. raspa.

5. Portuguese : e^ckA.ea ; Minh. gaipo ; Berc. gallo.

6. Genoese : sc-chjaNcu ; Ment. rapwgh.

7. Gallo-Italic: Berg, r^mpol; Cremn. s-chjaNchell ;
Bol. gB,Ta,Y2dl; Bomg. gSLTSLYel; Parw. s-chjaNch ; Piac.
rasanell, s-chjaNchell ; Par. sgraeslei, sgreesliN, sgraesle.

VOL. II. 4


8. Friulano : ras-chje.

11. Catalonian : gotim, *J�got, *agrfl�8ot, *8inglot,
*x^glot ; Valenc, txinglot ; Min, penjoy.

12. PROVBN9AL : rapugo, *grapilhouN, souNgl^, alo, ^aro ;
Lang, lamftret; CVt?. lambro, broutigno, *broutillio,
tcbabrioule ; Narh, cascamel ; Castr. lam Jrusco ; Cen-
tral Rouerg. Joutel, *^outil, *lomJrot, traJout {Estaing),
mouisselo {Peyrelau) ; South Rouerg. lam&rot ( Fi7^-
franque)y pinelou {id.), firaousselhou {id.), monissel

{Saint- Affrique), ^emdouissel {id.) ; Querc. mouissolo.

13. Fran(X)-Proven9Al : Neuf, ressai (La Paroisse), resein

{id,) ; Lower Dauph, Ihicota ; Lower Val. grap'dhow ;
Vaud. grap'lhow.
15. French : grappillon ; Berr. rapillow.

(150.) Clusters of buncbes of grapes {coll.).

12. Provencal : Lang. mouisseluN.

(151.) A cluster of grapes cut from a bunch.
4. Spanish : carpa.
11. Catalonian : gotim ; Valenc. txinglot.

(152.) A cluster at the top of a bunch of grapes.

13. Franoo-Proven5al : Gen. epok,

(153.) The stalk of a cluster of grapes in a bunch.
1. Latin: r9,cemus; **moissina, **marcum.

(154.) Tendrils and bunches appendant to the vine-branches
15. French : Berr. atach ; Champ, assizz.

(155.) The tendril of the vine.

1. Latin : cl^vicul^, caprCOlus ; **corimbus, **corymbus,

**corinibus, **corinibi, **cornubius.

2. Italian : viticcio, vignu61o ; Central March, roccetta

{ace. to " Baccolta"); Abr. gravijuol' pi.; Neap.
corriule ; Ven. p^Lmpano, vigiarole pL ; Bov* cavriol.


3. Sardinian: Cfew^ra/. lorighitta; Sow^A. sinzillu, inzillu.

4. Spanish : tijereta, tijeriUa.

5. Portuguese : tesoun nha.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. cavriob ; Berg, cavrioel ; Crem.
cavriol; Cremn. cavriool; BoL pWun, *p8lmpen,
caiiulein, caveriol ; Momg. cariulen, *cavari6l, caveiio
(Imoia) ; Mir. cavaiiol ; Farm. caBvaBiioel ; Piae*
cavaricie; Pav. riss.

8. Friulano : cwarn, raculiN, gritul, vidizze,

11. Catalonian : tisoreta, ^stisoreta, ^spotsim.

12. PROVEN5AL : filheirouN, *filheiroou, *fureirouN, *fioii,

*filholo, *fiolo.

15. French : vrille, *cirre, *nille; Champ, vrillett (Aube).

16. Wallachian : circeiu, c^rceiu^ carcel, cep (ace. to

Frollo)^ curpen {ace. to CT^ac),curpan (Vc?.), ciirpene
{id.), curpend {id.).

(156.) The string coming out of the wood when the vine is
15. French: -4rfl?. pampinee.

(157.) The blossom of the vine.

4. Spanish: cierne {only used in the locution '* en cierne^').

(158.) An abortive vine-blossom.
11. Catalonian: caragolet,

(159.) The blossom of the wild vine.
11. Catalonian: UamJrusca.

(160.) The stamen of the blossom of the vine.
4. Spanish : cierna.

(161.) Grapes (coll.) : The fruit of the vine.

1. Latin : iivS, *vltis {metonymy), *rSceinu8 {synecdoche).

2. Italian : uva ; Sass. u6a ; Sic. racina ; Ven. ua ;

Lingua .Franca \ rasiN {Algiers).

3. Sardinian: Central, ua, ighina {Marghene), aghi-
nidda, {Olzai) ; South, dxina.


4. Spanish: uva;-4�^. recimos pL; Curassao Spanish:
weindreif (a Dutch word), raseentji,

5. Portuguese : uva ; Indo-Portuguese : ouva.

6. Genoese : uga ; Ment. rasim.

7. GaI/LO-Italic : Mil. uga ; Berg, cea ; Jargon of the
shepherds of the Province of Bergamo: limbroesca,
mocia ; Bol. u ; Romg. ova, ova (Imola) ; Ferr. vo ;
Parm. uvae ; Piedm. wva, ua.

8. Friulano : ue, uve.

9. Eomanese : Oberl. eua, *euva, *jeua, *jua, *juva, *uga,
*aua ; Oberh. iva, jeva ; Lower JEng. ua, *wja, *t*va ;
Tt/r. USB (Ladin), uae (Gardena).

10. Old Provencal : razim, *rasim, *razaiii, *uva.

11. Catalonian : rahim ; Valenc. rahim ; Maj. rfeym,
reym ; Min. rem.

12. PR0VEN9AL : rasiN, *riN, *rem ; Nig. ra'iN ; Upper

Dauph. rasiN ; Gasc. arrasiN ; Biarn. arrasim ; Bay,
arresiN; Central Rouerg.ToAs^Tois; Auv.TB&inyGei^an.

13. FRANCO-PROVENgAL I Ncuf, rcssai {La Paroisse), res^m

{id.) ; 8av. r^ssfe ; Vaud. r'siw, r'si ; Aost^ r^sw ;
South.'JEast. Vosg. resm.

14. Old French : reisin, roisin, rosin, rasin, ragin, resin.

15. French : raisin ; Berr. *ve�(iawj ; Perch, reeisin ;

Champ, r'siw (Marne), r'saw {id.), rijiw {id.), risiw {id.),
rusin {id. at Somme-Tourhe) ; Champ, rajin {Auhe) ;
Morv. rasiw ; Lorr. rajiw {Domgermain), rahhm {Lund-
ville) ; Month, resin, rejin ; Ban-de- la-Roche : resin ;
Mess. r6hhin, r'jin, r'hhin {R^milly) ; Wall, troc ;
Nam. reujiw ; Ard. r^chiw, r^ssiw, rou^ssi;^ ; Pic.
rou^saw; Lill. rojiw; Rouch. reusiw {Bavai)-; Mont.
roujiw ; Gfuern. grapp.

16. Wallachian: strugure, strugur, poama ; Kutzo-WaU

lachian : auS, ; Istro- Wallachian : grozd^, grozge,
grozda, grojd^.

(162.) Fresh grapes put in to restore wine.
6. Genoese : Ment. vinassa.
15. French : rS,pe.


(163.) Grapes growing at the latter end of the eeawn.
12. Provencal : rapugo ; Toul. lamfirusco.

(164.) Small grapes produced after the �rat growth,
15. Febnch : Mess, rwayno, r'vnott.

(165.) A second growth of grapes showing itself at the
extremities of the branches.
15. French ; Champ, bouvieu {Mnrne).

(166.) Abundance of grapes.
4. Spanish : nvada.

11. CATAiONiAN : rahimadrt ; Yalenc. rahim4, rahimada ;

Maj. reymadff.

12. PsovEN^AL : Toul. gnimo.

(167.^ A strewing of grapes lying on the ground.

12. Provencal: Central Rouerg. gz\aiaA.o,^o-aaAo{AuUn).

(168.) Grapes left behind by vintagers {coll.).
15. French : Berr. albott, 'ablott.

(169.) Gathered grapes not yet pressed.

13. Franco-Provencal : Vaud. v'nijidj' (Lavaux).

(170.) The result of the gleaning of grapes.
15. French : �err. graptaill.

(171.) The quantity of grapes whic-h a wine-press can contain.
15. French : Berr. parsoueree.

(172.) The quantity of grapes filling the wooden vessel
called "b&ss'."
15. French : Berr. bass^e.

(173.) Grapes when they become darkened by the heat.
2. Italian : saracini pL
7. Gallo- Italic : Bresc. saraai pi.



^H (174.) Baisms {coll.): DHed grapes. ^^^


Latin: '"paaaacua, **paB8aDeria, ""paasanella, "*pa8s- T

Tiva, ••acinacium {ace. to Siefenbach). J


Italian: Rom. passarma {ace. to " ItaccoUa ") i .j|i^J

pclaaula ; Tar. pa^'l ; Heap, paasol^. ^^^^|



Spanish : pasa. ^^^


Portuguese: pasaa ; Imlo- Portuguese: cascas;)?.


Genoese : Meni. Jensibu.


EoMANESE : Oherl. eueta, •jeueta, "jueta, ueta {ace. to

Carigiet), euveta {ace. to the Bible); Oberh. 'juet;

Lower Eng. weta.


Cataloni'an : pansffl; Fofejif. pansa.


Provencal : paneo, "paaaurelo, pasaeriyra {Mines) ;

Ch: passarilho j Central Eouerg. posaorilloa pi..

'passarilloa {id-), ooudjeii {Millau).


Olh Fkench ; paaaerilles pi.


French : Wall, rou^sin, rosiH ; Ard. passreill, paasrill.


"Wallachian: atafidfi, stafide {ace. to Vaillant and

Bobb), atrafida, atrafide {ace. to the Bible) ; Kutzo-

Wallachian: stafidhL

^■' (175.) Grapea dried by the sun {coll.).


"Wallachiam : roscicbina, rosicbina {ncc. to Vaillant). |

^^H (176.) Grapes begmning to ripen {coll.). ;^^^|


French : Champ, able {Mame). ^^H


Sour grapes.


Italian : agreato ; Sie. agreata, agr^atu ; Ven. gresta ;

Rov. agrSst. i


Sardinian: Central: agrazzu; 5oh(!A. agresti. '


Spanish : agraz.


Portuguese : agrafe ; Gal. aeio.


Genoese : agrasaiu ; Ment. aigret.


Gallo-Italic : Bal. agrsBat, agherst^uM; Pieilm. agr^st.


Fhiulano : agr^st, 'gr^st.


Old Provencal : agras, •eygraa.


11. Catalonian : agr&a ; Valenc. agras.

12. Provencal : aigras, eigras, eigrasaado ; Lower Daitph.

aigrd ; Gasc. ierjus j Central Rouerg. ograa.

14. Old French : aigrest.

15. French: verjus ; 5er*-. egre, *varju; Champ, egrun

{Mame) ; Ard. fegra, ^grin.

16. Wallachian: aguridS, aguride (ace. to the Bible).

{178,} Sour gropes of the extremity of the vine-branch,
15. FttENCH : Berr. vardiH, 'verdiK.

(179.) Wild grapes.

4, Spanish : agrazon.

5. Portuguese : labrusco.

11. Catalonian: llamfiruaca ; Kb/ctic. agrasso.

13. Franco-Pro VENIAL : Jar. lambrutsa, lawbritsa.

14. Old French : lambrusche.

15. French : 'lambruche, •lambrusque, 'lambrot, 'la-
e ; Berr. trillo.

(180.) Grapes of the wild vine when it flourishes.

I. Latih : CDDanthii.

(181.) Picked grapes separated from the bunches.
4. Spanish : granuja,

II. Oataloniam : Valenc. granuUa, *granutsa,

(182.) Picked grapes which remain in the basket where the
bunches were.

4, Spanish: garulla.

5. Portuguese : Ga/. garula, garulla.
11. Catalonian: granflladn.

(183.) Vine-berries acoumuiated at the bung.

15.' French : Champ, chapo {Mame) ; Ang. chapio.

(184.) Grape : A berry of the vine.

1. Latin : ScJnus, 3cTnum, '.loiiiiS, "racemi pL, iivS {ace. to

Fottgate) .


2. Italian : sU^ino, *uye pL ; Rom. vaco ; Central March.
vago (Fabriano) ; Sass. pupi6ni ; Sic. coociu ; Abr. vach*.

3. Sardinian : Central: pupuj6ne; South. -pibibni.

4. Spanish : *uva8 pi,

6. Portuguese : *uva, *doino ; Gal. fiago ; Indo-Portu-
guese : carni.

6. Genoese : axinella, *wga,

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil. piwciros ; Piedm. asinM^ *t�ve
pl.f we {id.).

8. Friulano : stsin.

9. Eomanese : Oberl. *eua8 pL^ *euvas pi., *juva8 pi. ;

Oberh. *ivasjo/., *jevasj9/. ; Lower Eng. *uaBpl., *ujaspL

10. Old PROVEN9AL : *razims pl.y *rasim8 pL, *razains pL,
*uva8 pi.

11. Catalonian : Valenc. *rahim8 pi. ; MaJ. *reym8 pl.^
r^yms pi. ; Min. rems pi.

12. Provencal : adji, aidje, *uvo8 pi.; Lang, adje, atche ;

Gasc, gruN, *gru, gruo, chiNglouN ; Central Rouerg.
grut, *grup, *grudo, *grud, *gruno ; Auv. ground.

15. French : Champ, grumm (Aube) ; Morv. greumniy

gr^nim ; Wall, rehin, rinhin.

16. Wallachian: acinS {ace. to Frollo), boanS (ace. to
�alasiescu)y broboanS (id.), borboanS, (ace. to " Lexicon "),
*8truguri pi. ; Kutzo- Wallachian : agoridhfi, ; Istro-
Wallachian : grozde pi., grojde id.

(185.) A large grape.

1. Latin: **buma8tha, **buma8ta, **buma8tu8, **bu-
mastes,**bumastis, **buma8te, **bama8te, **bruma9tft,

(186.) A grape with its stalk.

1. Latin : botryo, *botrio, botryon.

(187.) A stalk of a grape.

1. Latin: scopio, scopium, scopus^ *botryo, *bofcrio�


botry5n, *8armentum ; **e8na,**raspatium, **moi88ina,


7. GAiiLOilTAMC : (7om. pmclrce.
14. Old French : raste.

(188.) A small grape that dries before ripening.

13. FRANCO-PROVEN9AL : Vaud. mdh'ri;^.

(189.) A raisin : A dried grape.

1. Latin : **pa8sula.

2. Italian : pglssola, pslssula ; Neap, pass^.

9. RoMANESE : Oberh euetas pL, *jeueta8 {id,), *j uetas {id,),
uetas (id,, ace. to Carigiet), *euvetas {id,, ace. to the
Bible, Ed, of Coire, 1818) .

11. Catalonian : pansa ; Valenc, pansa.

12. Provencal : pansos pi., passurelos {id,), passeriya (id.,
Nimes) ; Cev. passarilhos pi, ; Central Bouerg. possorillos
pi., *pa8sarillos {id,).

14. Old French : passerilles pi.

15. French : Ard, passreill pi. passrill {id.).

16. "Wallachian: stafida (ace. to *' Lexicon '').

(190.) A grape dried by the sun.

16. "Wallachian : roscichin^^ rosichin^ {ace. to Vaillant).

(191.) Vine-berries beginning to grow.

13. FRANCO-PROVEN9AL : Oen. agr^ pi. {only used in the
locution " en agr^ ").

(192.) Small abortive vine-berries without juice {coll.).

13. Franoo-Proven9al : Vatid, desannei pi. {Montreux).

(193.) A wild grape.

1. Latin : **, see (51).

(194.) The skin of a grape.

1. Latin : vinacSus ; **vinacium, **vTnaceum.

2. Italian : fi6cine ; Sienn. fi6cino ; Tar. scarp.

3. Sardinian r South, foddi.
6. Genoese : beretta.


7. Gallo-Italtc : Bol gofla; Ferr, graspuja; Piedm.
buset^ bur86t.

8. Friulano: ciful.

11. Catalonian : Maj, p^Uofa^ *peller6fo.
16. French : Berr. bourss.

(195.) The skin of the trodden grapes.
11. Catalonian : p^llofa, *pallofo.

(196.) Grape-skins and grape-stones either to be trodden or
already trodden.
7. Gallo- Italic : Com, vinasc.

(197.) Pressed grapes (colL).
15. French : Ard. trul^e.

(198.) Pressed grapes from which the must has not been
2. Italian : Tar. past ; Ten. grandua.
13. Franco-Proven9AL : For. g^nou.
15. French: Ifiv. jon {Chmecy).

(199.) Residuum of grapes after expression.

1. Latin: vinacCa, vinaceajo/., *brisa; **vinacia, **vina-

cium, **vinatium, •*vinasium, **vinaceum, **vina-
cinum, **vinarium, **acinarium.

2. Italian : vinaccia, *grasse pi. ; Central March, frisco-
lata {Fahriano) ; Sass. binazza ; Sic. vinazza, vinazzu,
Tar. vinaz ; Neap, venaccia, venacciar^ ; Ven. graspe
pl.^ sarpe {id.) ; Pad. graspajole; Vic. zarpepl. ; BelL

3. Sardinian: Central: binatta; Sow^A. binazza, binaccia.

4. Spanish : orujo, casca, *Ka ; Arag. Jrisa.

5. Portuguese: b�ga90, buruso; Gal.bsigxxiloiPerc.builo.

6. Genoese : rappt^ssu, rappu ; Ment, asene.

7. Gallo-Italic : Com. vinascia ; Berg, grate pi. ; Bol.

vinazza, graspa, graspoja; Ferr. grapa; Mir. graspi
pi. ; Mant. graspe pi. ; Parm. vinass ; Piac. racca ;
Pav. gussd pL, craspi (id.).


8. FrIulano : trape, ciarpe.

9. Romanese: Lower Bng. arauclas j:>^.

10. Old Pkotencal : vmaci.

11. Catai.onian : Srisrt ; Valenc. brisa.

12. Provencal : destregnado, •destrigoado, raoo ; Upper

Daitph. mer, dratei ; Biai-n. druse ; Lower Lim. aaeno ;
Central Mouerg. treeo, •draco; North. Rouerg. traco
{Entrayguei) ; Atw. aase.

13. Fhanco-Provex^ai, : Neiif. dzlgno {Soitth-West. Vig-

voble); Loirer Baitph. yi€na; For. troulha, drouaeha;
Vaiid. djeino {Lavaux), dzetno {id.) ; Franc, djea'.

14. Old Feencii : aisue, esne, aesne, aiesne, ainsne, asne,
aine, ayne, anne, gen, genne.

15. French; marc; Berr. rap; Month, djennn ; Meas.
in^er; Wail, pacin, hemm, *hey6mm, *mor; Foil.
rapp ; Ang. eep.

16. Wallachian : tiscovinS, tesCTivina [ace. to VaiUant and

Ponlbriant), tescoinS {ace. to Cihac], tescuime {ace. to
Frollo), trevere, "treavele {aoc. to JPonthriant and
"Lexicon"), treavere {id., id.); Kutzo-Wallachian :

(200.) What is trodden at a time of grapes.
12. pROTEN^.iL : destregnado, "deatrignado, destretcho ;

Lang, racado, prenaado, prenso.
16. French: marc; Champ, ^ev {Marne); Snijii. treuill^e.

(201.) The palp of a grape.

7. Gailo-Italic : Farm, grass.

(202.) Must : unfennented wine.

1. Latin: mustum, racemua; * 'mustaticmn.

3. Italian : moato ; North. Cors, mostu ; Sass, mvilta. ;

jSic. mustu; Tar.mMBt; Abr.miioBti Neap, mnsle;

Bop. most.

3. Sardinian: Central: muatu.

4. Spanish : mosto.

&. Pokttigvese: mosto.





Genoese ; moatu ; Meiit. moat.



Gallo-Italic: Mil. moat; Cremn. "muster; Bol. raduat; ]


Regg. most ; Mir. mos'c ; Pkdm. must.


Friulano: moat.


Romanese: Oftcr^. miiost, "must, •moat, mClat
to Carigiet).



Old Provencal : most.


Provencal : mous, •moustouiro ; Lang, moust ;



J'ranco-Provejs-^al : Jur. ni6ta ; Nenf. mot' (North \


and Soulh-EasL Vignoble); Lower Daiiph. mo

iioda ;


Vaud. m6da, •motha, •moflta.


Old French : mouat ; Norm, moutardd.


French: moilt ; Champ, mem. {Marne).


Wallachian: must; Etitzo-Wallachian: muatu;
Wallachian) : moatu.



The must that comes out of the grapes before
are pressed.



Italian: presmone; Few. moatadura ; i'arf. raoataiira; |


Ver. mostiN.


Provekcal : Auv. ramei.


The must that comes �rat out from the press.


French: Champ, goutt {Auhe).

^^M (205.) Strong thick muat.



Catalonian : Valenc. moatit, mostaa.


Weaker must procured by the last presaure.


Frakco-Proven9AL : Vaud.iTcXka {Lamux).


The quantity of must coming out from a charged



Franco-Peo VENIAL : Valid, trolha.

^^1 (20S.) Verjuice : The juice of sour grapes.



Latin: omphacium; **omphacum, ••oinphax, \


••agreata, ••agreatia, ••agrascum, •'verjutum



2. Italian : agresto ; Neap, agr^sta ; Ven. grest� ; Rov.

4. Spanish : agrazo.

5. Portuguese : �gra9o ; Gal, acio.

6. Genoese : agrassiu ; Ment, aigret.

7. Gallo-Italic: jBo/. agr8est,agherst^un; Peec?m. agrest.

8. Friulano : agreat, *gre8t.

10. Old PR0VEN9AL : agras, *eygras.

11. Catalonian : �grds ; Valenc. agras.

12. PR0VEN9AL : aigras, eigras ; Upper Danph. aigrd.

14. Old French : vergus.

15. French : verjus ; Month, vdrdju ; Wall, verdju ;

Vierv. v^rdjeu ; 8aint verju.

(209,) A grape-stone.

!• Latin : vinaceum ; **arillus, **arillum, **vinacium,
**vinatium, **vina8ium, **vinacmum, ** acinus,
**acinum, **acimen, **acmen, **acrimen, **acermen,
**acium, **acimus, **acinatium, **acinacium, **anna,
**moissina, **pepinus.

N.B. — acinus and acinum also occur, according to
Diefenbach, in the sense of (112, 161, 177).

2. Italian : vinacciudlo, *dcino, *fi6cine ; Central March.
graniello {Fahriano) ; Sic. vinazzolu, vinazzu, ari^fl?aru,
*arilla ; Tar. gridd ; Neap, arille, agrille ; Ven. zigolo ;
Rov. vinazz61.

4. Spanish: granuja.

5. Portuguese : b^gulho, grrtinha, graulbo.

7. Gallo-Italic : Mil, vinascioe ; Berg, vinassoel ; Bresc.
venassoel ; Crem. vinassol ; Cremn, vinazzool ; BoL
vinazzol, *gramusteiw ; Jfoa?. gramustew ; i2o;w^.vinaz61,
vinazo (Imola) ; Ferr. gramostiN ; Farm, vinaessoelj
Piac. racchitt.

8. Friulano: dsin.

11. Catalonian : br\m ; Valenc, granulla, *granutxa.




The following paper is founded on an address on the dboTe
subject delivered on the 5th of May, 1881, at the Guildhall,
Cambridge, the meeting having been convened by the Cam-
bridge Philological Society.

Its object is to show that spelling-reform is as mucli de-
manded by historical and etymological considerations as by
purely practical ones ; which, of course, necessitates a sketcli
of the history of English pronunciation and speUing.

The subject is so vast and complex that anything more
than a sketch cannot be attempted here. It has also as yet
been but imperfectly investigated, its serious study dating
only from the appearance of the first part of Mr. Ellis's
Early English Pronunciation (1869), still in progress, vrhicli
has laid the foundation of the historical study, not only
of English pronunciation, but of pronunciation generally,
although his views require to be supplemented, and some-
times corrected or modified, by the results of Comparative

Our Anglo-Saxon ancestors first learned the use of the
Roman alphabet mainly from the Celts, as is clearly shown
by comparing the shapes of the letters, which in the oldest
English, Welsh, and Irish MSS. are substantially identical,
and quite distinct from the Continental modifications of the
Roman alphabet.^ The agreement is especially striking in
the case of p (=/), f (�), and ji (r). They supplemented
it by adding from their own Runic alphabet (which was

* See Rhys*s Lectures on Welsh Philology,


probably a very early modification of some North-Etruscan
alphabet), the letter p {w) to take the place of the clumsy
uuy and ]> for the sound they originally expressed by th^ or d
(between vowels).

The sounds they attached to the letters were, as nearly as
possible, those they had in the contemporary Celtic tradition.
Hence they used c before all vowels to express the sound of
ky as in cetel * kettle,' as is still done in Welsh ; while on the
Continent c before i and e had already become tsh or ta^ so
that even in the oldest High German we find cit written for
mt (Mod. G. zeit). The vowels a, e, i, 0, u were, of course,
pronounced as in Italian and German, e expressing the close
sound of French ^, the open ^ sound being expressed by cb in
Old English, y had its original sound of French �, which
it keeps to the present day in Swedish and Danish, having
been introduced into those languages through intercourse
with England, oe was used to express the sound of French
eUy which it doubtless had already in later classical Latin.
The English were thus in possession of a remarkably full
and accurate alphabet — at least as far as the vowels were
concerned, and consequently their system of spelling was,
on the whole, not only phonetic, but accurately phonetic.
It could not have been anything but phonetic, for there was
no tradition to fall back on.

With the Norman Conquest (and, indeed, some time
before it) the Old French orthography was introduced into
this Country, and soon began to modify that of English.
This acted unfortunately in many ways.

In the first place, Old French spelling, although phonetic
in its application, was not so in its basis, the older values of
many of the Roman letters having been corrupted and lost
by the time French began to be reduced to writing. Thus
Latin c before e and i had become {tsy and (s), although
still kept in writing. In the vowels ce had been entirely

^ To preyent confusion letters used phonetically will be enclosed in parentheses.
In the notation here used (a, i, u) have their Italian yalues, (e, 0) =Fr. 4, close
It. Oy {$, o)s=the corresponding open sounds, (a}) = �. a in mnn^ (y) =Fr. m, (o)
s=�. er in ervy father, (b) s=E. m m but. In the conss. (zh) as in azure, (dh) as
in then. Long yoweb are doubled.


disused, so that e was used to express both close and open e.
Latin long u, as in lunay had become (yy), although lune^
nnCy etc., were still written with u. Indeed, there was no
letter to represent the sound; for the Latin y had become
completely confused with i. Latin short u and long o
changed into a sound between (u) and (o), which was con-
sequently written indiscriminately with either letter, as in
curty cort (Latin curtum), and amur, amor (L. amorem), the
long vowel being afterwards written ou (amour) ^ the sound
also becoming pure (uu), as in Modern French.

All these confusions passed into Middle English ortho-
graphy. Such pairs as Old E. her ' here,' and />^r ' there *'
came to be confused imder the spellings her and ther, though
the sounds remained unchanged. Old E. see * sea ' and sio

* (I) see ' were at first distinguished as see (:=Bee, open) and se
(see, close), but by Chaucer's time they were written indis-
criminately see, se, though they have been kept distinct in
the archaic Irish-English pronunciation to the present day.
The French u was introduced to express the sound of O.E-
p, not only in Jwsy=O.E. bt/sig, where the u is still kept, but
in all other words as well. Hence the O.E. u in hus (huus)

* house* could not be kept, but the later French ou was
adopted, so that though the pronunciation was retained, the
new spelling /lous was introduced. So also in nou, cou from
O.E. nu *now,' cu 'cow.' But ou was also used to denote
diphthongs, as in knou (knoou) from O.E. cndican * know,' Jlou
(floou) from flowan Vflow.' Even in Modern E. the vowel of
noio from O.E. nu is still quite distinct from that of know
from cndican. As in French, o was written for short (u) as
in comen, sone from O.E. cuman * to come,' sunu * son.'

But the Middle English use of these partially unphonetio
symbols was still entirely phonetic almost down to the time
of Caxton — that is to say, people tried to represent the sounds
of the words they wrote down as closely as their defective
means would allow. But meanwhile in later Old French
the influence of the fixed Latin orthography began to show
itself in such spellings as debte for the older dette, dete on the
analogy of debita, which passed over into English, the infec-


tion spreading to English words as well, as in island for
iland, O.E. egiand, through confusion with French isle (quasi

The printing-press made the spelling more and more fixed,
while the pronunciation underwent great changes. In
Tudor English (ii) and (uu), as in Old and Middle E. win,
hue, became diphthongized, till at last they assumed their
present sounds of (ai) and (au), as in tmne, home. Close (ee)
and (oo), as in see (vb.) and moone became (ii) and (uu), as in
the present pronunciation of see and moon, while the opeu
(ee) and (oo), as in see (mare), stoon (lapis) became close (ee,
oo). By the end of the 17th cent, (u), as in come up, had
assumed its present sound of (�), and (ee) became (ii), as in
sea. Equally marked changes are going on at the present
moment. In the rising generation a broadening of the
diphthongs is very noticeable, by which, for instance, (ou),
as in no, is approximated to (au), nearly as in now. By the
end of the next century a pronunciation will probably prevail
among the educated which will be an exaggeration of the
Yulgarest uneducated pronunciation now existing.

We may sum up by saying that the cause of the unphonetic
character of our present orthography is the retention of
older speUings after the pronunciation had changed, which
divergence is increasing. It is important to observe that
English spelling was always in intention phonetic, apart
from a few etymological vagaries, only a few of which (such
88 island) became permanently fixed. Sbakespere himself
spelt as phonetically as he could, and many of the best
classical scholars before him, such as Cheke, were ardent
spelling-reformers. They failed in making the spelling
wholly phonetic because of the want of phonetic science^
without which the difficulties of a complex and rapidly
changing sound-system could not be grappled with. I^ever-
theless many important changes were introduced, such as
the differentiation of u and v, by which such spellings as
" reuiue vs, saue vs from euil, leaue vs not vnto ourselues ''
were reformed to '' revive us, save us from evil, leave us
not to ourselves." Also the introduction of ea and oa to

YOL. n.


distinguish ee^ 00= (ee, 00) from ee, oo=(ii, uu), as in �eflf,
see; moan, moon.

The stock argument against spelling-reform has been that
it would obscure the history of the language. Mr. Freeman,
for instance, declaims against it as a " reckless wiping out
of the whole history of the English language/' This is
somewhat curious reasoning from a historian. Mr. Freeman
himself would probably be the first to admit that history
is nothing else but a record of development, that develop-
ment is a progressive series of changes, and that consequently
where there is no change, or no record of change, there can
be no history. Now, the facts of the development of lan-
guage are its phonetic changes, and these phonetic changes
can be adequately recorded only by phonetic spellings- If
the phonetic changes which constitute an important linguistio
generalization like Grimm's Law had not been recorded in
phonetic spelling by the Hindoos, Greeks, Romans, and our
own ancestors, we should have been utterly unable to trace
them, and consequently should have remained for ever ignorant
of the history of the law in question. In short, linguistio
history and etymology can be based only on a continuous
series of phonetic spellings. The people who are loudest
against spelling-reform are those who are most ignorant of
the facts of the history of English, and most strenuously
oppose any attempt to make English literature and language
a part of University studies.

The expression " etymological spelling " in its conven-
tional application is really unmeaning. Properly speaking,
all spellings are etymological : however much a word is
reduced, it still retains some traces of its origin. Even such
a word as age still bears plain marks of its origin from
aetaticum. In its conventional sense, ''etymological spelling"
implies the retention of the phonetic spellings of earlier periods
after they have become unphonetic ; the gh in such a word as
night is dignified with thetitle of etymological simply because
it is no longer pronounced, while the etymological merits of
the consonants of such words as same arid sister, compared
with the Greek homos and the Latin soror^ are ignored.


Again, what etymological information is really afforded by

such a spelling as night ? None at all ; for night itself is not

an etymology, but merely one of the isolated facts of which

etymologies are made up : it is a link in a chain, not the

chain itself. All that night tells us is that a certain word

existed in a certain form in Middle English ; it tells us

nothing about the living English form, or those of .the earlier

periods. In fact, etymological spelling involves writing the

same word at least twice over : night (or nikht), nait. So also

aetaticumy €idzh, and there are many intermediate stages:

^dagey cage, age (=aadzha). If the spelling aeicUicuni had

been kept throughout, we should have lost all traces of interr

mediate changes, as we have in the case of night, and still

more strikingly in that of name. The Old E. form was

nama with two short (a)s. In Middle E. the final vowel

became e (=e), and the (a) was lengthened. In Tador E.

the final vowel was dropped. In the seventeenth century

the (aa) passed through (ee) into (ee), which has been diph*

thongized into (ei), this diphthong being now in process of

broadening into (ai). Under the two spellings na;/^;, name

is, therefore, disguised the long series nama, name, naame,

naam, naem (=^^), neem, neim, naim.

When we say that all spellings are etymological, we mean^
of course, all correct spellings, or, in other words, all phonetic
spellings. The only unetymological spellings are the un-
phonetic ones. The a of island is etymologlcally incorrect,
because it never was phonetic — ^never was pronounced at any
period whatever. The k of knee and the g of gnaw are
etymologlcally correct, because in the Tudor period, when
the spelling became fixed, these consonants were still pro^

We see then that historical considerations call for a
series of phonetic spellings, as far as possible on such
A uniform basis as will best facilitate comparison — a basis
which, as regards the vowels, is best afforded by a return
to the original. Eoman values of the letters. There is also a
growing tendency among spelling-reformers to consider this


as the true solution of the practical queation of spellmg-

The result of such considerations as those briefly set forth
in this paper has been that philologists and linguistic students
as a body, who a generation ugo were almost unaninioas in
their opposition to spelling-reform, are now as unanimoua in
its favour. The great practical difficulty is that of coming
to an agreement on the details of a reformed alphabet. This
has suggested the introduction of partial reforms, "WTiy not,
it has been aaked, begin with reforming those spellings,
which, like inland for Hand, must be condemned by every
one, both oa phonetic and etymological grounds P This
argument was taken up by the President of the Philological
Society, Dr. J. A. H. Murray (editor of the Society's great
English dictionary), and he urged it eloquently and forcibly
in his presidential address in 1880, which finally resulted in
the provisional adoption by the Society of a number of
partial corrections of English spellings (printed in the
Transactions of the Society for 1880-1). Negociations ara
now in progress for putting out a revised list under the
joint authority of the Philological Society and the American
Philological Association, and a preliminary agreement has
already been arrived at.

So far from having anything revolutionary about them,
most of these changes will be in full harmony with others
that have actually been made. One of the most important
reforms of the 17th century was the dropping of phonetically
useless e, as in soul, mad, for the Shakesperian souk, madde,
etc. But unphonetic e was kept after i', which was a tradi-
tion of the Tudor period when a was written for i' as well as
?( : if the e had been dropt, *falii=-vake would have been
confused with value, *liti=.live would have been pronounced as
diphthong, etc. Now, however, when v is firmly fixed, there
is no obstacle whatever to our carrying out the reform com-
pleted in nearly all other classes of words, and writing vah,
lis, etc. Again, by writing luv, cum, etc., for love, come, we
are merely returning to the etymologically correct spelling


of early Middle and Old English (O.E. lufu^ cuman). Nor is
the useful distinction between learnt and learned^ bkat and
blessed, anything but the revival of earlier spellings, some
of which are still retained. Corrections of etymological
blunders need no advocacy, as in the Chaucerian. e^/tY^ for
delight, coud for could (O.E. cupe), which owes its I to the
analogy of would and should (O.E. wolde, scolde), iland for
island, soverein for sovereign, which has nothing ta da with
reign, hole for whole (cp. heal and O.E. hdl).

� ••




� 1. Interpolatioks.

In a recent paper ' On Plato's Republic vi 509 d * {Journal of
Philology, x 132), having occasion, p. 148, to quote Phaedo
101 c sqq., I pointed out that the sentence el Se tl<; avTrjt: lifi
VTTo^ecrea)? expvroy 'xalpeiv ianj^ av koX ovk airoKplvaio, elw? av
ra air iKclmj^ opfJt/rjOevra aKe^aio, et aoi ciXKrikoi.^ ^viKfxovd
fj SuKpcovei, though apparently the very echo of its surround-
ings, is in reality alien and irrelevant, and should therefore
be bracketed as the gloss of some studious but injudicious
reader. Several similar interpolations, due, it may be, to the
same hand, have been already detected by the commentators,
and are bracketed by Schanz in his admirable edition : e.g.
T0Z9 Sk 7roX\o?9 airunUiv irapi'xet 69 E ; Kal Tai<; fiiv 7' ar/aOcu^
afieivov elvac ral^ Bk Kaxai^ kolklov 72 D ; on irpoOvfJueirac fikv
irdvra roiavr elvai olov eKecPo, eanu he avrov ^av\oT€pa 76 B :
but I am inclined to think that the list of rofi&VTa irrjfiara is
by no means complete, and that I can myself make two or
three additions to it.

(1) ^Ap oJw OUT�? €f)(ei, eifyrj, ripZv, & Stfifila ; el fikv eariv
h OpvXovfiev aeiy KoiXov re koI aryaSov Kal iraaa rj Toiavrrf
ovaia^ Kal em ravrrjv ra eK tcov aladrjaeaiv irdvra dva<f>epofi€v,
virdp'x^ovaav irporepov dvevpLaKovre^i fnierepav oZaavy
Kal ravra eKeivy direLKd^ofieVy dvcuyKalov, ovro}<i &<nrep
Kal ravra eoTLV, ovrto Kal rrjp rifierepav '^v')^rjv elvav Kal irplv
fyeyovepai rum^' el he fir) eari ravra, a\Xeo9 &v 6 \0709 oSrof;
€lpr)fi€vo<; etr). 76 e. Socrates here invites Simmias' assent to the
propositions : ' if there are ideas to which we refer our sensa-



tions, our eouls existed before we were bom ; if there
are not ideas, the present arguineot will fall to the ground.'
This ia clear from the context. But what are we to say
to the words in spaced type ? The words vvdpxowav irpo-
■repoi/ are superfluous iu application to t^w Tota\iTr,v avalav;
the worda dvevpla-KOPre^ fip.eTepav ovaav can hardly mean
' whicli we discover to be already known to ua ;' and the
whole phrase vTrdp)(ov(Tav -rrpoTepov dvevpicKovrev ^tterepav
oua-au is an irrelevant and ill-expreased summary of 7K a sqq.
Then again the sentence Kal raOra iKelvj/ d-n-etKa^otiif is a
repetition of kcu hrl TavTi)v rh sk twu airrdijrreatv Trdvra dva-
ipepo/t-ev, the word aTretKu^ofiev being however less appropriate
than dva^kpofiev, and the pronouns ravTa and eKtivr) being
incorrectly used; for, whereas, in the sentences immediately
preceding and succeeding, toi^ijc and Tama are the reat
existeuces, here (as in 75 a b) eKeiifr) is the real existence,
ravra being Ta eie tmv aluOi'iaetov. Finally the recurrence of
0VT(t)9 is, to say the least, awkward. That the passage as a
whole gains by the excision of the words t-o which I have
taken exception, seems clear; and, for my own part, I
think that avcuyKiuov also might be dispensed with.'

(2) opw avZpa rp ii.h vqi ovSev "Xp^iKVOV oiihiriva'; alriat
iTratTttofievov �'; ro BiaKO<Tfitii/ -rh -TrpdrffiaTa, depa^ Se ical
aidkpa'i Koi vBara alrid>fievov jvat aWa wdXXa Koi otottk. 98 B.
In this well-known passage the realityof Anaxagoras' teaching
ia contrasted with the Platonic Socrates' anticipation in regard
to it. 'I never thought,' Socrates says, ' that Anaxagoras,
who professed that things were ordered by uoik, would recog-
nize any additional cause save only the good, i.e. the final
eanse : judge then of my disappointment when I discovered
that, instead of making use of his vovs and recognising a

' In tlie very neit sentence — Sp" ohm ^X"t ■"' ^1 hvir^tai tsSttA -re Ami id
T^ ^(Tcpas i^x^^'P^" '^"^ ^itiAsy^ovifai, Hccl tl fi.^ TauTa, obht "riSt; I eti
lertain grave duu))tB about the hni six words ; ue the prapuidtiuti ' it there are m
idna, neither do our soola raist beforo no ore- bom differs widely from its atii
lugne in the formi>i sentence, � ii nii lim raiiT-a, &\Aut iiv i \6-/as alns etiniiifn
ilq, nnd in so far m it differs from it, is not jiinilinble, while koI ci ^Jg Tai>ri
lUi TiUti ton hardly stand for kqI ti nij Tai>ra ^itti;', DiJIt ari-riai ritt cTrai.


series of additional canst
airs, ethers, waters, etc'

to order things, he took as causes
Now, when we compare the words
TJi /iei' vat avhev )(pm/tevov ovSi tivo.^ atna'; en-amai/ievov, first,
with the antecedent context, where Socratea states his antici-
pation, and, secondly, with the subsequent context, where he
states Anaxagoraa' position, we observe that the words ov&i
Ttj'os' a'nia'i eTratTtai/j.evov are inconsistent with both : with
the antecedent context, because, whereas Socratea there
expects Anaxagoras to recognize, besides vo&j, one cause
only, i.e. the good, he here desiderates a plurality of additional
causes ; and with the subsequent context, because, whereas
he there aaaerta Anaxagoraa to have recognized, besides four,
a plurality of causes, he here complains that he did not do so.
It will be seen further that these inconsistencies are empha-
sized by the paraJlelistn of nvm ahiwi eTvatTMiievov, on the
one hand with oXXiji* tiv^ avriav hreveyiceiu, and on the other
■with atTioifieyov, and that the imperfect echo in hraLTiMfienv,
ahiwiievov is injurious to the rhythm of the sentence. Let
'jSe Tivat alrlav e7TaiTioi/i.evov be dropped as the
a reader who has misapprehended the sentence
TTOTc auTov w/iTj!', tf>d(TKovrd -ye vtto vov ain&
, dWtiv Tivk aiirolt aiTiav eTreveynelv ^ ort
iiT^ oSto)! ej(eiv icrrlv ioaw€p eyei, and we at
required meaning: 'I find a man making
3� to order things [/.p. omitting to provide

the words c
comment of
ov yap dp
^e\Tit7Tov a
once obtain the
no use of his vo

that vovi shall direct its efforts to the attainment of the good],
and introducing instead of a final cause a plurality of physical

(3) So far I have been concerned with passages not preju-
diced by previous controversy. I now turn to the vexed
passage about suicide in chap, 6 — taa^ fieinoL Oavimaroii trot
(paveiTai, el rovro ftovop iStv oKKtav d'Trdvriov aTrXovv eari �c�i
ovScTTOTe Tvyxdvet. rip dvOpdnr^ mtrirep KaX rdWa
eariu ore Kal ol? ^eXriov t e&vdvai fj f-^f, ob; he ^eKrtov

Tofi avvprntroiv fj.t) oatov Ktniv atrrow €avrov^ ev traieti/,
dW aWov Set Trepi/Meveiv euepyertju. t)2 a.


At 61b Socrates has said to Cebes, 'That is the answer
which you should give to Evenus, bidding him at the same
time farewell and follow me with all the speed he may/
Hereupon Simmias expresses his surprise that Socrates should
send such a message as this to Evenus. ' I thought he was
a philosopher/ Socrates replies : * if he is a philosopher, he
will be willing to follow the dying man : though he will not,
I presume, do violence to himself; for that, we are told, is
wrong/ * But,* asks Cebes, * how do you reconcile the rule
which prohibits suicide with your doctrine that the philoso-
pher will be willing to follow the dying man ? ' (ilo)? toSto
Xe76&9, S} So>KpaTe:, to /nfj defitrov etvcu eavrhv fiid^€a-0cu, iOe-
Xeiv 8' av tA airodvrjaKoim rov ^CKSaoi^ov hreaOai ; 61 n)
Socrates thinks that Cebes and Simmias must have heard the
subject {Le, the prohibition of suicide) discussed by Philolaus :
but, on hearing that this is not the case, professes himself
willing to state his own views. This brings us to the end of
chapter 5.

Now, in ch. 6 the phrase irepl r&v tolovtcdv, which I have
understood to mean * about the prohibition of suicide,' might
perhaps mean 'about the philosopher's willingness to die'
or * about the philosopher's willingness to die as well as about
the prohibition of suicide,' but (1) the first sentence of ch. 6
Karh rl &) oSj/ irork ov (f)aav 0€/JLtTov elvcu avrov eavrhv airo'
jcranruvac, & Soi)KpaT€<:; (2) the general tenour of the chapter,
exclusive of the debatable sentence which I have transcribed
4it the beginning of this note, and, above all, (3) the opening
words of ch. 7 ^AX)C e^/co?, €<]yq 6 Ke^r^, tovto ye [sc. to fitf
SefiiTov elvcu kavrov jScd^eaOai] ^alverai, h fiivroi vuv Srj eXeye?,
^0 T0V9 tf>CKoa6^v^ pa^Uo^ civ iOeKevv airoBvrjaKeWf eoiice tovto,
& So>KpaT€^, aToirtp^ /c.r.X., show conclusively that in ch. 6
it is the prohibition of suicide which is alone under discussion,
and accordingly that in 62 a tovto is equivalent, not to the two
propositions firj 0€/utov elvcu eaxrrov ^La^eaOaty iOeXetv &v t^
ifn-oOvriaKovTi tov if>CK6<T0^v lireaOac, nor to the single propo-
sition ideXeiv &v t& airoOvrja-KovTb tov ^CKoao^v eireaOai, but
^ the single proposition fiij OeficTov elvai eavTov ficd^eaffau
This view of the meaning of tovto is confirmed by the reflec-*


tion that, wheteas toOto is declared to be airkovvy i.e. a rule of
universal application, iii) Oefinov elvoA f-axnov ^ia^e<r0(u i�
correspondingly supposed to be a rule of universal applies-
tion, but iOekcLv av t& airoOvrjaKOvri, erreaOat is acknowledged
to be a rule which applies only to a limited class, that of the
philosophers. Now, this being so, in the two sentences, lam
fikvTOL OavfjLoaTov aoL ^avelrai,, el tovto iwvov r&v a\'Xja>v
airdintov airkovv iarlv and 0I9 ^eKnov redvdvai^ ffavfiaarov lano^
aoi ffyalverat, el T0VT0i<f roi^ dvOpdyrroi^ fjufj oacov i<mv aurov?
eauTou? ei TroLclv, dW' aXKov Sel irepifieveiv evefyyerrfVy the
paradox is stated twice. The one sentence says, ' You will na
doubt be surprised to find that the prohibition of suicide iai
absolute, not limited by any qualifications : * the other says,
* You are no doubt surprised to find that those for whom death;
is better than life are not at liberty to do what is for their
advantage.' In fact, the two sentences state consistently and
correctly what it is which surprises Cebes in Socrates' teach-
ing; but as the terms of the former sentence are vaguely
general, the iteration is not otiose. It would seem then that,
if we omit the words koI ovSerrore rvy^dvec t� dvOpmrtp
&(Tir€p Kol ToXKa eaTCV ore Kai oh /SeXriov reOvdvai fj ^jv, the
remainder of the extract will give a perfect sense ; and it is
immediately obvious that, if we further omit the superfluous
words OavfiaoTOV taoDf; aoi (ftalveraiy el tovtol^ roh dv9payiroi<;y
we at once obtain an unexceptionable and perspicuous

Next, let us suppose the words tovto fwvov t&v aWoov
airdvTwv dirXovv ecrri koll to be omitted. The residue, it
would seem, will now mean : ' you will be surprised to hear,
(1) that, whereas other rules are qualified, it is not at some
times and in some cases only, but at all times and in all cas^s,
that death is better for a man than life, and (2) that it is
wrong for those for whom death is better to do what is for
their advantage.' Thus, whereas when we started from el
TOVTO fiovov T&v aXkcov aTravTiov dirXovp earl the unqualified
rule was found to be firj OeficTovehac eavTov iSid^eaffat, when we
start from el ovBerroTe Tirfxdvec t� dvOpwirto Sxnrep /cat roXXa
ecTiv oTe Koi oh ^ekTiov TeOvdvai ff ^v the unqualified rule



S to be 0€\tiov etvai TeSfdvai 4/ ^v. And now we note
an important difference between tho two rules here declared
to be unqualified. The rule fiij Beftnov elveu kavrov ^uifya-Bai
JB throughout the whole passage held to be unqualified : the
rule ^sKtiov elvai reBvavat ^ ^v is, except in the single sen-
tenoe before ua, limited to the case of the philosopher, and
therefore can hardly be said to bo aTrXovv. Furthermore the
sentence teal ovSewoTe myj^dvei tw dv0po)irip mtrTrep kcu ToXKa
iarai ore koX ok ^iXnov reSudvai ^ iflc is faulty in its detail ;
since (1) ovBen-ore is unmeaning and hardly grammatical;
and (2) ™ dvOpoyrrq} and iimv oU are mutually inconsistent,
not in point of syntax only, but also in point of sense; for, if,
as the words t(o uv0pa>-7ra indicate, we are referring to the
case of one man, qualification in regard to persons, such as is
implied in ea-Tiv oJ?, becomes impossible.

The two clauses which I have examined in the preceding
paragraphs are then, though like, in so far as both assert
some rule to be unqualified, unKke, in so far as they refer to
different rules ; and, inasmuch as one of them is inconsistent
with the general context and incorrectly expressed, it would
iiirther appear that we must not attempt to escape the diffi-
culty by supposing both to fiJ] defiiTov elvai eavrw fiui^eadat
and TO ffeXriov elvai reOpdvai j) ^ijv to be separately referred to.
Indeed it would almost seem that the emphatic words fiowv
T&v aWiDv oTTiivrav positively preclude any such attempt.

It only remains, I think, to bracket the words which
are in spaced type. What surprises Cebes is, in reality,
that, though for the philosopher death is better than
life, the rule against suicide admits of uo exception in
bis favour. Some student however, assuming that here, as
at 61 D, the two doctrines which Cebes finds it difficult to
reconcile are brought explicitly into Juxtaposition, and there-
fore that TovTo means ffeXnov elvai, reBvavar, ^ ^v, has era-
bodied his interpretation in a marginal note, and this note,
finding ita way into the text, has converted the correct state-
ment that the rule ni; Be/itTOf elvai. ^td^errSai kaxrviiv admits
of no exceptions into the incorrect statement that the rule
. ^eXtiov eiyai. reBvavM -tj ^i' admits of no exceptions. As


usual, the interpolator borrows his phraseologjr from iha
context. It is noteworthy that the gloss, if gloss it is, is
ancient ; see Simplicius in Upictetum, p. 63, cited by Schanz.^

� 2. CoRRUFnONS.

(1) Elpyd^ero hiye^ wepirTi] ; Nal. 104 D. i.e. ^Anditwas
the idea of odd which made three odd P Yes.* But can fi
TrepiTTi] stand for the ide?, of odd? We know avro to Treptr-
rSvy and to h Sari irepcTTov, and ij rod Trepirrov iBea, and tf
irepiTTOTTj^f just as we know avro to kqXop, to h e<m KCLKoVf V
Tov KoKov IBia, and to koXXo^ : but we do not know 17 ireprnff
any more than we know r) kclKti. Hence I cannot doubt that
we ought to read here, as in 105 c, 1} irepiTTOT/j^.

(S) 'ilaavra^y olfiai,, K&if ei to ayjrvKTOp dva>\€0pov ^v^ oirore
errl to irvp '^r/xpov tl iirpet, ovttot'* &p aireafieinnrro oxiS
airdXKvTOf dWh a&v &v direKdov w^cto. 106 a.

In the antecedent context Socrates has spoken of to fiii
hexpP'^vov TTjv tov dpTiov ISiav as dvapnov ; of to huccuov firj
Sexpficvoi/ Kol h &v fjLovaiKov fit) Sixv^^^ ^ SZikov koX afiorxrov ;
of hv OdvaTOV fiT) ZiyriTai as dOdvarov ; of t^ [ir) 8€)(6fi€vov
TTJV TOV depfjLov iZkav as aOepfiop ; the compound in some cases

^ I take the o^iportanity of noting another interpolation which has occasioned
trouhle in a very important passage. In 100 d the hooks giye tovto 8^ aw\w5 nccU
iirdxv^s Kcd f<ra>s €uii6�s tx^ ^^* iixaxn^, tri oitK &Wo ri iroi€i alrh KoXhy ^ ^
iKttvov TOV KdKov cTtc TTopovaria ttre Koivcavla eXre tmff 8^ KciX tv(os wpotryeroftdyri'
oh yhp fri tovto Su<rxvpi(ofmif &AA.* Uri r^ Ka\^ t& KdKh ylyvtTai icaA.<�. That
the text cannot stand, is universally admitted ; and various attempts have heen
made to rectify it. Thus, for rrpotrytvoyi^irn (which, if it is retained, clearly
requires the addition of the words ri I8^a), Wyttenhach, followed by the Ziirich
editors, substitutes irpoarayopcvofi^vTiy a friend of Heindorf s vpoaycy6/A€yorj Stall-
baum irpoayiyv6fjL€yov ; while Daehne, followed by Madvig and Schanz, brackets
ctre berore 5iq7, and Ueberweg at once brackets etre before Zttp and substitutes
irpo(ry€vofx4vov for irpooytvofi^yyi. For my own part, I am convinced that wpoC"
y^vofidifTi is an interpolation, the phrase elre Hirn 8^ kolI fh-ots needing no supple*
ment : cf . laws 899 b c!r€ iv (rdifuuriv ivovtraij %^a tvTa^ KOfffiovari frdm-a ohpayhv
cfrc 89177 re Koi fhrtas. But I should hardly have ventured to propound this solution
of the difficulty, if I had not found unexpected confirmation 01 my conjecture in
the commentary of Ol3anpiodorus, who says plainly (ed. Finckh, p. 148) 6 94 tf^iiriy,


sting ready to hand, but in others {avdfyriov, aOepfiov) being
ented for the occasion. To keep up the parallelism, we
it in this place, not ayfrv/croVf but ou^-xpov : and of this
ling a trace is perhaps preserved in the MSS. of Stobaeus,
phys. I 41 � 16, which have to yfrvxpov.
[fuming to Schanz, I find that I am anticipated in this
:gestion by Wyttenbach. I must confess to a feeling of
prise that the correction has not been accepted by the




dfi<l)tyvi]€i^y dfjL<f>tyvo^, dfi<f)ii\iaa(U

€( Jt

dfi^iyvTjeif; (yvtov vett. 'xpSXisi) utriraque validls artubas
instructus Goebel, utraque manu agilis Doed. " is the un-
usually meagre account of the word in Ebeling's Lexicon.
That is to say, the ancients derive the word from yvt6<:=>
lame, the moderns from 7v^i/= member. Both are unsatis-
factory, as they take no account of the i which appears
in both words ; the derivation from yvm is additionally
unsound, because adjectives in -et? are always derived from
substantives, not from adjectives (see Goebel, flfe JEpithetis
Homericia in -e*9 desinentibus, Vienna, 1858, especially with
reference to 6^v6€i<;, p. 24) : while if it came from yviop^ it
would mean indeed " utrimque ar tubus instructus," but the
indispensable " validis'' would be absent.

It is far more satisfactory to refer the word at once to a
substantive *yv7) in the sense of " crook," " curve." Though
the word is not found in this simple sense, yet we have 7iJiy?
=:"the curved piece of wood in a plough," and hence "a
field" or "plough-gate," iitger; while the existence of a
root yv implying curvature is abundantly proved by yvoKov
= the hollow of the hand {ey-yvaX-l^cLv), or the curved
breastplate ; yvp6<; bent round, Od, xix 246. Probably yavX6^=z
"jug," 7ai)\o9 = merchant vessel (Curtius, Or. EL no. 127),
come from the same root, and are named from their round-
ness; and I would also suggest that the XliiirqTvyairi {IL ii 865)
{Tv-y-auq^ with "broken reduplication") belongs here, and
means strictly " the Lake of the Hollow." (Strabo, by the
way, says that it was afterwards called KoXorj, which seems to



suggest leoiXri). r^inn} also occurs as a by-form of tcvntf
= cave, hollow, in Heaych. (Curt. Et. No. 83 5) (Vanicek
shortly discusaeB the rootj Et. Wtbmh. p. 230). Thus we
have yv-i-ou used of the moveable extremities, the bending
parts of the body, hands and feet; 70-1-09 ci-ovked in the
bad sense, maimed.

Without, therefore, adopting either of the two derivations
hitherto given, wo may obtain a perfectly satisfactory
meaning and formation by starting from *<yiiri or 71^9, and
explaining, "with a crook on both sides," i.e. bandylegged.
Any aesthetic objections to such a word may be disposed of
by reference to nvKKo-rrohUitv, which undoubtedly has the same
meaning, and ia used of the same god.

afi.tfii'yvo'; is used some eight or nine timos in Homer as
an epithet of the spear, and is commonly explained to mean
" utrimque manibus instructus," t . e. with a point at each end.
The objections to this are numerous, d/i^/ means " on both
ddes," not "at each end," Even if afiipiKinreWov means "a
double cup," as Aristarchus thought, it does not aflect the
question, for with such an object it is indififerent which line
we take as the axis in our mental view. For afi<j}te\ia(7a, the
only other word quoted in this connexion, see below. Nor is
there any analogy for the omission of the ( of 70101' in a
derived adjective ; while even if we waive these objections,
we have to face the still more serious question, whether
Homer could really have called the metal points at the butt
end and "business" end of the spear fvta or hands. Homer,
it is true, goes so far as to attribute desires to his spears
(\Ouu6fj.€va -xpoov Strai, etc.), but to call the points " hands,"
appears to me to go beyond all the limits of early �pic
"personification. Add to this that the hands and feet are
called •yvla, as I have said, in virtue of their flexibility, and
it becomes impossible to use the word of the solid joints of a

Furthermore, 70101' does not mean " a hand " specifically,
"hat includes feet aa well, so that we cannot take the word to
mean " two-handed," i.e. " wielded in both hands," aa has


been suggested ; unless we go back to iyyvri, a pledge,
apparently as being ''put into the hollow of the hand,"^
which comes straight from the root, but not exactly by the
same process, which gives fyviov. This hardly authorizes us
to assume *7V97=hand in a general sense, including the hand
which grasps as well as the hollowed hand which passively

. Hoffmann and Doderlein have attempted to refer the epithet
to the point of the spear only, and explain " curved on both
sides'' as of a flat point, more or less oval, with cutting edges.
But this is hardly satisfactory ; such a property of the point
would not be sufficiently obvious to give an epithet to the
whole spear. Diintzer again would have it = " wounding on
both sides," i.e. " two-edged," from a root yv to hurt, whose
existence remains to be proved.

A much more obvious quality of the long shaft would be
its elasticity y which is alluded to in passages such as II. xm
504, alxjii) S' Alvelao KpaZaivofievri Kark yali]^ ^€to. For"
want of a better interpretation, I would therefore explain th^
word to mean ''bending both ways" from its elasticity. Thie^
appears to give a sufficiently true and graphic epithet for a-
spear eleven cubits long (II. vi 319), and is unobjectionable
as to formation.

afi^LeXiaaa. The received explanations of this epithet
of the Homeric ship generally assume that the latter portion
of the word means "curved"; and the qualities of the ship
described are said to be either (1) "curved at both ends,"
i.e. with rising prow and poop; (2) "with curved ribs";
(3) " curved " in plan, i.e. of a qumi-oY^ shape. But all
these appear to do violence to the very definite meaning of
the root FeK (twl-u-o, etc.), which invariably expresses the
idea of "wheeling," "revolving," or "twisting"; an idea
which does not pass into that of simple curvature, or in-
considerable deviation from a straight line, so far as I can
judge from an examination of the uses of iXlaaecp and

^ The word then corresponds to the Latin manus, mancipium, in being used
in the sense of marriage, betrothal.


. ita chief derivatives quoted in L. and S. It is hardly worth
while to quote thera at length, as that easily acceBsible
source will, I believe, prove at once that the word is only
used of lines or moving objects whose direction turns round
spon itself ; e.g. of the oar (Soph. AJ. 358) whose blade
approximately describes an oval ; of the foot in circling
dances (Eur, Or. 171} ; of spirals of all sorta, in Homer of
chariots wheeling round, or warriors rallying from flight for
a charge. 'SVe have only to transhite literally " twisted both
ways" to see how little the word expresses the gradual curves
of a ship's form. The interpretation (1) seeras nowto be moat
generally accepted, and will be found supported and illustrated
at p, 414 of Jlessra. Butcher and Lang's Odyssey; but the
type of ship there depicted is not known to be Greek, nor
does the best available evidence tend to show that the Homeric
war-ship had the curving prow : the oldest vases all give the
projecting "rara," Here again too we have the difficulty,
as La Roche has pointed out, that afitpC never means " at both
m</s" — a remark which cannot, aa I have shown, be rebutted
by the very doubtful analogy of afj,^iywi.

Another suggested interpretation is " rocking, swaying "
loth ways, but this equally lacks support from any use of
ekiaaeiv. I should, however, greatly prefer it, were no yet
simpler explanation possible.

The old interpretation is " rowed on both sides " ; but this
is obviously not to be defended by aXtov ekiairaiv -TrXaTav
(Aj. 358j already mentioned; nor can there be any connexion
^ith root ep- to row, which never had an initial consonant, and
thus could only make o.fuji'^fnj'i (Eur. Cffcl. 15) or the like. Schol.
IB on //. II 1G5 however gives a^^teXi'tro-as] afiipoTepaffep
^TTpetftofieva^ Kal epeaaaiieva^, where the word aTpfipoftevai
&ay perhaps indicate the interpretation which to me appears
Bimplest and most suitable ; viz., " wheeling round both tcai/s,"
t.e. easily steered, " handy." This seems to fit in excellently
to the use of k\ii7iTiLv of chariots ; the meaning is at least un-
objectionable, and may be supported by ^Spw afitf>iiJTpo(}>o<i,
Aesch. Sujjp, 882. Moreover, the later application of the
Word to a strap (IftdaOXri) and impulse (^tenotinj sc. ueraatilk)


thus find their proper place without causing any of the
difiiculty which lexicographers appear to have felt in corre-
lating them. It has been urged against the sense "swaying/*
and might equally be suggested here, that the epithet is
generally used of ships drawn up on the land. This is
literally true; it is used so in fourteen passages out of
twenty. But such a fact has little weight in the face of the
very conventional use of epithets in Homer.

I may mention that Dr. Goebel translates " auf beiden
Seiten glutroth," from root FaX to bum (?). The word might,
it is true, mean " shining on both sides,'* without violating
phonetic laws, if referred to root (T€\ ; but when Dr. Goebel
draws us a pretty picture of the "tarred ship under the bright
sky and sunshine coming over the violet-blue sea, and the
ship's * cheeks ' glittering with the reflexion from sun and
sea," he must bo reminded that in order to give reflexions
from both sides of the ship, at least two judiciously disposed
suns would be required.



The learned historian of the University of Cambridge, where
he deals with the life of Richard Croke, paases briefly over
the years that scholar spent abroad. " From Oxford Croko
went on to Paria," he says (p. 527), " and having completed
there his course of study as an ' artist,' and acquired a con-
siderable reputation, he nest proceeded to Germany in the
capacity of a teacher. He taught at Cologne, Louvain,
Leipsicj and Dresden with remarkable success." But these
years spent abroad deserve perhaps more than such a passing

When in Germany last summer I took up this question as
a diversion from other work, and having through the kindness
of the librarians of the Leipsic University and of the Dresden
library had access to some sources of information hitherto I
"believe overlooked, I learned several facts not given in the
latest biographical notice of Croke, that by Horawitz in
Allgemeine Deutsche Biographic, vol. iv. 1876. These facts
I propose to embody in the present paper.

As regards Croke's stay in Paris, I can add but little to
what is already known, viz., that whilst there he attended
the lectures of Hieron. Alcander. Horawitz mentions a
letter from Budaeus to Croke as a proof of their intimacy ;
but the letter (A) reads to me rather as a polite disclaimer of
any such intimate friendship. Erasmus, who took a kindly
interest in Croke, tried to raise the necessary funds for de-
fraying the expenses of his stay in Paria, for " destituitur ille
a nonnullis qui promiserant subsidium " (Eraam. Epp. L.B.
1706, p. 132). In two letters to J. Colet (p. 131 and p. 132,



of the year 1613) he asks him if he has any money entrusted
to him for charitable purposes, and recommends Croke as a
worthy recipient of such bounty. But no help comes from
that quarter ; Colet waxes angry at such a supposition, and
replies : " Quod scribis de R. Croco miror, quid ego cum
pecuniis aliorum ? undo judices aut suspicere apud me esse
pecunias quoquo modo mihi creditas ? non adsto morituris,
non blandior pecuniosis viduis, non immisceo me in testa-
mentis divitum, non quaere familiaritates locupletum, non
laudo peccata eorum, non jubeo redimant scelera sua pecuniis
arbitrio meo positis. crede, apud nos qui non est id genus
hominum, non facile habebit pecunias eleemosynarias "
(p. 1524).

It is not possible to trace with absolute certainty Croke's
movements after leaving Paris. We know (1) that he
matriculated at Cologne, March 20th, 1615 : Magister
Richardus croce angelicus dioc. lundenen. professor literarum
grecarum iuravit et solvit universitati tantum (0. Kraffb in
Zeitschrift f. preuss. Gesch. vol. v. p. 491) ; and (2) that he
matriculated at Leipsic, in the summer semester of the same
year, i,e, after April 23rd (St. George's Day, when the
new rector is elected) : " Mgr Richardus Crocus Britannus
Londoniensis equestris ordinis qui Graecas professus fuit
litteras" (copied from the original). (3) In a letter dated
March 2nd, 1515, from G. Spalatin to J. Lange, the follow-
ing sentence occurs : Scio enim Crocum Lipsiae frequens
habuisse auditorium, neque solum Scholasticos gregarios, sed
etiam doctores Theologiae celeberrimos discipulos, et quidem
eos quorum fortassis quatuor aut sex plus mercedis ei dederunt,
quam multi tribuent (Briefe u.-Documente aus d. Zeit d. Re-
form, etc. V. K. und W. Krafft, p. 135) ; (4) in a letter
usually dated 1514 Erasmus writes to Linacre : Crocus
regnat in Academia Lipsiensi publicitus Graecas docens
literas (p. 136) (but this date is more than doubtful) ; and (5)*
Mutianus in a letter to Reuchlin dated September 13th (year
not given) refers to a recent visit paid him by Croke : Nuper
Crocus Britannus (qualem ipse se facit, quanquam ob linguae
mobilitatem et mores graecanicos videatur esse graeculus.


nam Theocritum iucundissime legit et cum gratia balbutit)
cum apud me quiesceret et Grocinum et Aleandrum et nescio
quos magistros laudaret, deesse sibi dixit hebraicam scientiam
etc. (quoted by Booking, Hutten. oper. Suppl. ii. p. 352);
and it was probably on this occasion that Mutianus called
Croke's attention to the fine library lately founded at

Krafft, mainly relying upon the date of Erasmus' letter (4)^
supposes that Croke made two stays in Leipzig: viz. in 1514
before his stay at Cologne, and again after it in 1515 ; but in
a note added in the Preface (p. 2) he calls this arrangement
doubtftil, since the date is uncertain, and indeed it would,
seem strange to suppose a double stay at Leipsic, since in his
Encomiiun Croke does not refer to it at all. Yet what in that
case becomes of Spalatin's statement (3) ?

After leaving Paris Croke probably proceeded first to
Louvain ; for in his Encomium Congratulatorium (1515) he
says : '' Louanii, fateor me summa cum humanitate exceptum
opera Joannis Paludani, Rhetoris, viri cum ipsa canitie, tum
amni litterarum et virtutum cumulo venerandi. Coloniae
concessumy vbiuis scholarum, occlusa etiam nisi mercedem
porrigentibus, ianua praelegere. Sed & ttottol quanto plus
de vestra Lipsia mihi nunc poUiceor ? " It is true, in the
concluding words of the Preface to his Edition of Ausonius,
the order is inverted : " Vale et Crocum tuum primum
Kterarum Graecarum Colonic Louanii Lypsieque tue publicum
professorem ama,'' but remembering the dates of the matricu-
lations at Cologne and Leipsic, we cannot arrange his visit to *
Louvain otherwise. His stay cannot have been long enough
to allow of his making a mark there ; for I have not been
able- to find mention of his name in several works on the
history of that University.

In Cblogne he must have been lecturing for some time

^ To this Croke refers in a letter addressed to Frederick III. : Bibliothecam
ereiisse te narrabat tuus Mucianus, omni delectissimorum quorumque librorum
g^eiiere refertam. Cuius fama quum me in has regiones impulerit, ita et ad te,
c^iins Yultus argento ductos non sine magna veneratione saej^e contemplatus sum,
^t; Academiam visendam tuam ita accendit, ut numquam mihi satisfackim putem,
donee Optimum Principem Fridericum meo obsequio fuero demeritus propitium
(<Iuoted by Bohme, de literat. Lips, op. Acad.).


previous to his matriculation ; he left it almost imme
afterwards, for P. Mosellanus, who left Cologne quite in the
beginning of 1515, had been his pupil there; and when he
came to Leipsic in the same year (he matriculated between
St. John's Day and Micbaelmae) he found Croke already

Now as to Croke's work at Leipsic, we must state at once
that he was not the first who taught Greek there, but he was
the first who taught it with Buccess ; as Camerarius has it :
Primus putabatur ita docuiaae Graecam linguam in Germania,
ut plane perdisci illam poase et quid momenti ad omnem
doctrinae eruditionem atque cultum huiua cognitio adlatura
esaa Tideretur, nostri homines seso intelligere arbitrEtrentur
(Camer, narratio de Helio E. Hesso, p. 4). There is no lack
of evidence to show how great his success was. MuUinger
quotes the passage given above from Camerarius, who was
wont to tell, in after life, how he had suddenly found himself
famous simply from having been the pupil of so renowned
a teacher ; he also refers to Erasmus' letter to Linacre
(above 4), and to Eraser's letter to Erasmus (6) : Ceterum D.
Kichardua Crocus Anglus, qui bienniohic Graecae litteraturae
rudimenta cum summa laude et morum honestate seminavit,
etc. (Erasm. Epp. p. 1592). Let me add what Casp. Cruciger
says : Negabat mens pater credibile nunc ease id quod ipse
tunc cognouerit, Tamquam caelitus demisaum Crocum omiies
venerates ease aiebat, unum quemque se felJcem iudi-
casse, si in familiaritatem ipaiua insinuarotur : docenti vero
et mercedem, quae poatidaretur, persoluere et quocumque loco
temporeque praeato esse, recuaauissc neminem. Si concubia

' From Musler'a Funebris or. in lacdem Petri MoeeUani quoted by E. end W.
Erafft, p. 132 : PoBtquam—Agrippiime Tero Ecbolae Hon Bdmudum lingnannn
stadio caperentnr (Eiqnidem et Crocaa ipse a <|no bic naater aliqnot saltern grsecu
literoB uiagnD quidem prononciare didicit non admodum frequent! mB^egebiit
anditorio), etc., and p. 125 : Advenerimt uatem (■'.�. MosellanuB and Bomer) e*

doctorii YTratJalauiani— (nimptlbuB hnc deductua erat.

finblicam babebst. Senatus boapitale domton offert, pbilcwopbonim Mnmi
quam facultatem voonnt) banigne tractat, illnstriaBinraa princaps et stmdiJwnm
noBtrotum MacaeEflfi iibetalisaimna Dm Georgiua gtaecae lectioni atipendio novo
prefecit. Adliaeu auditoreB prinati eius Ifiborea niagno redimebunt, adeo nt ntm
immerilo Crociu e Lipaia anrsun lediisse, ab Erasmo doctissime scribatur.


nocte 86 conTeniri^ si quamuis longe extra oppidum ins-

sisset, omnes libenter, inquit, obsequuti fuissent (quoted by

Bohme L 1.) ; nor must we forget Spalatin's letter (3) and

what Croke himself says in his Encomium of the professors

of philosophy, law, and divinity : " Postremo tarn pii, tarn

humiles, ut ne lectiones quidem meas adire erubescatis idque

grandiori adfectaque prope aetate, Catonem nimirum imitati

qui Graecas litteras canus discere inceperat." Or can there

be a stronger proof of his great success as a teacher than the

hatred of the Sophists, one of whom is made to say : " Et

alius est hie qui etiam legit in Graeco, vocatus Ricardua

Crocus et venit ex Anglia. ego dixi nuper ' Diabole, venit iste

ex Anglia P Ego credo quod si esset unus poeta ibi ubi

piper crescit, ipse etiam veniret Liptzick " (Booking, Hutt,

oper., p. 276, 19 foil., cf. carmen Rithmicale magistri Phil,

Schlaoraff, p. 200, 48 foil.). By the wish of George, Duke

of Saxony, the Faculty of Arts decreed Croke 10 guilders

**ut ad famam nostre Achademie et profectum studiosorum

legeret gratis unam lectionem in grecis litteris.'* Soon the

IPaculty petitioned the Duke when he visited Leipsic for a

stipend of 100 guilders for Croke, and when no immediate

Qx^tion was taken, and the same sum was offered him from

I^rague, a petition (B) was sent up to Dresden, signed by

X5 masters of arts (March 12th), repeating their request iu

still more urgent terms. Whether their prayer was granted

not, we do not know ; but so much is certain, that Croke

in every way satisfied with the Senate of the University

dnd with the Duke, whose generosity to scholars he greatly


Ill 1517 Croke returned to Cambridge, where he proceeded
tx> his M.A* in the same year.^ Mullinger makes Croke stay
in Dresden for two years after leaving Leipsic, probably be-

^ In P. Mosellanus' letter, dated March 24th, 1517 : Jam turn enim hinc in
patriam solvere parabat ; and in Emser^s, March 17th, 1517 : Et nunc patriam
x^petiturus, etc. ; and in a letter dated August 25th, 1517, Mosellanus writes to
Joh. Gaesarius of Cologne : ^< Nam quia Illustrissimus princeps mens Georgius
Saxonnm dux magnificentissimus studia nostra in hoc sua fovet munificentia, ut
Hjipsica haec Academia jam ante latinis artibus quantum fieri potuit florentissima
nunc nostra opera graecis qupque studiis illustretur,*' etc.


cause of Emaer's letter being dated from Dresden (yet tto
reply ia to be aent to Leipaic) ; but that ' biennium' can (for
chronologieal reasons) only refer to Croke's stay at Leipsic.^

And now, in conclusion, what do we know of Crete's
literary activity at Leipaic P

In 1515 he published an edition of Ausonius, and lectured
on the poet, " qui ut est difHcillimus, ita diligenttssima docti
interpretis opera eget," hut he considers himself well prepared
for the task, having heard Aleander's lectures on Ausonius
in Paris. His Achademie Lipaeosis Encomium Congratula-
torium serves as a kind of introductory lecture. The motto
ia, ffpovrav ovk e/iov aXXa Sto; a8vpo(rro/i,ia Beoicpnov aveiKev ^
vo/io<; icat xoi/ju, and in the prooemium (dated December 2Stb)
he exclaims : " Utut ergo mihi oblocuturi sunt qui Lypaenai
Gymnasio parum bene volunt : ov tppovTK (TrXKXaSi),' Ego
enim cuiuis obnoxius fieri velim inuidie : modo voa omare
possem. Vestrum erit viri sapientisaimi : hoc nostrum munus-
culum, tali cum fronte suscipere, quali litteratorum omnia
aoletia, Sed quid Joui a/cOTrvo? dvcrta* Nimirum vt tabellas :
quaa de grecorura verborum et nominum formationibus
non inepte (vti aperaraus) collectas : vestro quoque nomini
inscripsimus : precederet oratio ea, que raeum erga vos
animum poaset reddere teatatiorem." Ia the Encomium
Croke quotes Greek freely ; there are altogether ten quota-
tions 1 ^ five from Homer, four from Hesiod opera, and one
from Plutarch. "With doubtful taste he shows off his Greek
on the fly-leaf of the edition of Ausonius, where we read:
EvTvTTtDdri ev Air\fria Trapa OvaXeinivin Tw AaiiapTi}pm Ttjv
avTrft ttoXem? ttKiti eret tw dTTO tij? j(pT]aTov yewriaew; •^iKuxTra
irevTaKOtnoiTTo} ■n-efi-trro) Ktu BeKaro). From the type, the
absence of accents and spiritus and i subscriptura, we may
clearly say that the art of printing Greek was not yet far
advanced. The printer's name, as given at the end of the

' Cf . " Cttmerarina narrat. de E. E. Hesao : qaiim Lipaine vixiBBeni anna
quinqua (before 1518), ct dmiita operam dedisaem Kicardu Crooo Britano qui
priiniiB tsspJicoit ductriuam G-iaecarum literamm ia Germaaia."

' Pint, de edoc. puer., p. 11 C iui r^t iBvjH)(noidns—&rt'iKf rht BfiKferat.

' Herod. Ti. 129. * Lnc. Amor. *.

•^ Od. i. 32-34, iy. 3B2, ivii. 218 ; n. i, 218, li. 6H ; Hes. On. 224, 225-37,
238, 71T.


book, was Yalentin Schumaii; is Aafiavrqpo^ a translation of
Scliiiman P {vTroSrf/jba, Stj/j/i, Bafia, Sa/jLomrjp, something like
arjfULy (nffidvTCDp ?)

In 1616 he published his " Tabulae graecas literas com-
pendio diseere cupientibus sane quam necessariae/' Schuman
being the printer. This is in many respects a most interest-
ing work. It was considered for a time the first Greek book
printed with movable type in Saxony ; it can no longer claim
this distinction, since five years before a reader had been
printed in Wittenberg elcrar/oyi] irpocr tcov ypafi/jutreov eWr)'
voDv, yet it marks a great advance on the Wittenberg print,
where all accents are omitted, and only those capitals occur
which could be taken from Latin type (cf. Kohler, Lebens-
beschreibungen merkwiirdiger deutscher Gelehrter, bd. 1).
It is dedicated Academic, Senatui et Philosophorum : in vrbe
Lipsiensi, corone, by whose wish, as he states in the preface
(dated February 26th), he had undertaken the work. The
concluding sentence of the preface runs : In quo {ue. in his
own rules about the formation of the tenses) si quid peccatum
sit, id candidus lector amice precor admoneat, et nos corrigat
Hon eg^ perlaturos, nihil enim minus de me dici velim quam
o8to9 fiijff avTOD voirjf p/ryT SXKjov cucovtov iv 6vp.& l3dXKr)Tau
In its sixty pages he treats his subject in the following order:
declinatio articulorum, decl. nominum (prima (aarfa), secunda
(a 1;), tertia (oa ov)^ quarta (wo*) ; de imparisyllabis ; decli-
nationes nominum contractorum : prima to octava, then vooa).
Then follow numeralia, de formatione Comparativorum et
Superlativorum, de verbis (five conjugations Tepira), itTUkco,
cLirinta '^aXXo), and verbs in [ii ; de verbis circumflexis) ; de
pronomine, de adverbio ex quarto Theodori.^ Not the least
interesting point about these Tabulae are two poems printed
together with them, addressed to Mutianus : '* Ad librum ut
•™uttianum Vtriusque juris doctorem amicum suum plurimum
^�Herandiun salutet," and a shorter one on the motto of
Mutianus " Beata Tranquillitas '' (C).

A. second edition by his pupil, Philippus Nonenianus (Neumann), 1521,
'^d.ditis solum in calce pe? nos verbis anomalis huius linguae studiosis maxi-


'^^Pei-e -"— •" "

In the same year (Horawitz aays in 1519, but tlie Leipaic
edition clearly has : Lipsiae in aedibus Valentini Schumann,
Anno MDxvi) Croke published a translation of the 4th Book
of Theodonia Gaza, which he dedicated to the Archbishop of
Mayence and Magdeburg (although he allows that the Duke
George and the University have a prior claim to this honour),
ppomiaing to undertake iilso a translation of the first three
books at the request of Th. More. The coat of arms of the
Archbishop : one eagle, two lions, and four griffins suggest
to Croke the following elegy (D). In the Preface Croke
again quotes Greek, applying to the Archbishop iicirpejre h)
•TToWoicri Kal e^o'^ov ijptoeaaiv (II. ii. 483), citing i<r oiipavov
v/j./J.tv a\evfiai (from Theocr. v. 144), and remarking with
regard to the difficulties he had had to overcome in the
translation ; " Et si graeci aliqui Bi/Xiou koKv/j.^'^tov (Diog.
Laert. ii. 5. 7), euum Theodorum egere affirment. Habitant
enim ei apud nos dei (ut inquit Heracletus)."

The Senate of the University granted Croke copyright for
four years for this, and all other publications (Cautum est ne
quis hunc lihrum D. R. C aut quemvis alium ah eodem in
hac inclyta urbe versura, compositum, aut excusum intra
quadriennium imprimat, aliunde ne impressum hue aduehat).

There ia only one more poem to be raentioued, and this
marks Croke's position in regard to the religious movements
of the time; he accompanied the Reprobatio orationia ex-
cuaatoriae picardorum etc. of Hieronymus de Ocbsenfurt
with a poem, beginning : Quia banc perfidiam tuam

Such was Croke's work at Leipsic, and it bore rich fruit
For we cannot be far wrong in supposing that when in the
statutes of 1519 Greek was formally recognized as part of
the University curriculum (de illustrissimi principis Georgii
atipendio graeca Theodori Gazae grammatica interpretabitur
[sic]), this waa mainly the result of his teaching ; for when
he left Leipsic, he left behind him a pupil well qualified to
become his successor, P. Mosellanus. Croke was greatest
as a teacher of grammar, as Camerarius saya. This was
perhaps the most pressing need of his time; but he lectured




I also on Plutarch,' and aa we see from the above quotations, his

acquaintance with Greek literature was extensive. He seenaa

to have Ijeen widely known amongst the German scholars of

the day, aa is testified by his correspondence (two letters

from Hutten to Croke, amico et literate et probo graecas

pariter ac latinas Liptzae Kteras profitenti ; Aug. 9th and

22nd, 1516; Croke'a letter to Eeuchlin, with a copy of

Theodorua Gaza, bk. iv. quoted by Bocking), and even after

his return to England this intercourse was not entirely

I broken off. His attempt, however, to induce Mosellanua

j to migrate to England failed ; Mosellanua writea in a letter

' to Pflug: "Is noster Crocus in Aula Hegis sui agit, etme

iam litteris in Angliam vocat. Sed an fidendum ait, neacio."

Thia sketch of the years Croke spent abroad is necessarily

Gomewhat scrappy, and leaves yet some gaps which one would

gladly see filled up ; yet I trust enough has been shown

to prove the great importance to the progress of Greek

studies in Northern Germany of thia visit of the English

scholar, whose Tabulae inspired a pupil with the following

epigram :—

Tavra opmaa Kpoicov BaiBdXea trjfi^fiar' jiStjvr)

oi/TTor' ^AOrjvaioiv tridfTrrpa aTfaiXeij' eipi]
aXX' Sfia Tepfidvav re apfiuptKmu t€ Bpejavvom
'iroK'\aKpar&. tS)v -Trplv ^TjSec 'iKarrov ex"'-

(Gregor. Coelius, quoted by Leichius, de orig. et increm.
typographiae Lips. p. 37.)

TbB OlVBNa COLLBOE, April 19, If

^ "Qui ptudani libellos Flutarchi ei


■e nobis poeris aolebait,'' Cuner,



A. — Quilelmi Budaei, regii secretarii episiolae. Basil, a.
1521, p. 168.

rov\i€\fJLo<; BovSaio^ Kpiictp
ei irpdrreLv,

MeXXet? fxkv & Kpoxe dfKfyl to, t&v iW'qvcDV ov fierpho^ etri-
Sdoaecv, 89 Srf irpb^ avSpa \arlvov ifie Xa/rlvo^ &v auro?, eK^V
vl^GLv TTpo'pprjaac t^ XoytOf f^ewaico^ Br) teal d^teTrau/ax;. or*
pAvTOL tQ? ^CKUis; 'qpxbv t?)? ircLKaias; ip,vi]a0i]^, iv<T<f>opeiv '^
€Ot,Ka<: Ta ea")(ara <f>ep6p^vo<; rrj^ oIk€l6tijto^ vvv irap ipLoXf Ttov
TTpeoreuov ye Tt/y^dvecv aol TrpoarrJKov, p,vr}p,6aw6v tl irap^X^
a0ai <re XPV^ '^^^ yvdypiapM ovk dp,vSpov rrj^ ofitXla^ fipMV. tci^
yap Tov Kpo/cov ovopuTO^ w? ye pMi yvmpip^v dvSpof; teal oiKcCoi^
expvro^, ov irdw tl Toye vvv e'xpv pip,vripMv. ov p,ijv rovrov O^
Ivexa hv<rape<TT(d^ ae Bet Bca/ceta0ac ^ otto)? Brj dvia0rjvai. 01
TLVL ^Oovrjaat, t&v vp^eSair&v, oft? iJSe�? re daird^opMi Sv ei
ToX&v /cal Bid Tcp,r]^ ar/o), eZ/coT�?. avBpe^ ydp elaiv iKeiPC^^^
ep>OL T€ /cal TToWo?? T&v €p>ov Bia^epovTODV (TOfpia Ke'^fapiapLePC^ *•
aoi ye p,rjv eveoTC teal t&v 6/jbo(a)v avTol<; irap* ip^v TV^elv rjv C^^^
TOVT €7rcp^\k<i ij. <f)€pe Brj irpoaep^eprf ae tovtol^ toZ? Bperr^^^^'
vol<; irapexov to?9 aol^, lad re d^Upaarov, Kor/co aoi laa K^^^
TOVTOi^ ^CKiKW TTpoaolaop^v. ladi p.kv Bfj rf) eTnaroXy avBp^^
TTpoKaXetrdpevo^ ovk d7)B&<: dvTC^evcovvTa aoi, et irov aol toO"^^^
KaTadvp,L0v eXKTjviaTl dvremaTeKKetv f)p^^. rjaop^t ydp K^^^
Tavry t^ yXdaar) ttjv ^CKoiroviav daK&v, eppcoao, xal t&v ^-
Bo^eov TOirrcovl xal Xoyiayv t&v aZdi, tou9 aoL <f>i\TdTov^ irpo*
etire p^u ip, Haprjaloi^ dvdearrjpi&vo^ TpCTy larapLevov
vexva^ Ty vaTepaia.

B. — Codex Diplom. Saxoniae Beg., p. ii. vol. 11, p. 406.

Cum celsitudo tua novissime hinc discederet, illustrlssi
princeps, supplicatum est serenitati tue, ut domino RicarT'
Croco, qui in hoc gymnasio in tuum summum honorem



!ocrem grecas litter as profit-
decemeretur. Ceteruoi
la tua aiiia ncgotiia prepedita

Btudiosorum utilitatera Don med:
etur, centum aureorum stipend]
interim quo escellentisaima grati
nihil nobis respondit, ea quam a te postulavimua pecunia illi
ex Bohemia offertur, de qua re tideliter ad archetypum de-
Bcriptas Htteras nunc ad te cuTavimus deterendas, ne ecilicet
tunc virum a te et tuia patiare ea pecunia avelli praeaentem,
quam abaenti Bohemie offert domicellus, non sine tue, si dia-
cesserit, achademie magna juctura. Rogamua ergo te, seren-
iBsime princeps, ut hunc tuo et aenatus stipendio devictuin in
imum saltern annum quoad ho littere altiorea radices egerint,
luDC abire non sinas. Quantopere enim ad christiaaam reli-
gionem grece littere faciant, abunde docet divus Augustinus,
qui ia secundo de doctrina Christiana libro iubet nos ad
grecum codicem recurrere, si quid in sacra novi instrumenti
aariptura titubaverit. Addimua quod in clementinia banc
linguam in quattuor gymnasiia precipitur ad exatirpaudua
hereses prelegi. TJt omittamus nuUas litteraa ex doctiaai-
morum omni consensu ease, que lingne grece auxilio non
egeaut, tu sereniasirae princeps pro tua iu doctos omnea
liberalitate diutius nos bunc sperare non siuas, sed quid ais
in hac re facturua, nobis per tuaa litteras iam nunc aigni-
fieea. Vale feliciter, illuatriaaime et serenisaime princeps.
Tui subditi tibi deditiaaimi pro omnibua noa pauci. Lipak
sii. martii.

In beatam tranquillitatem Muttiani.
Beata qui tninquillitaa
Rufi leges in ostio
Pictam notia nigellulis
Lignani aureis aententiam
Ne vellicaueria virum
Kibil quod auri admiscuit
Pascendam enim mentera putat
Non biandiendura ocellulia
Vir omnium iam calculia
Bonus piuaque et i



Gryphes habent Aquilamque et habent tua signa Leoaet
Sic leo quadrapedum gloria, vt ilia auium.

Eostro alisque aquila est^ leo corpore gryphus et unus
Est duo, sunt cuncta et singula vita tua

Namque ale doctrine aquilam : te nobile stemma leonem.
Fecit utrumque deus, iunxit utrumque deus.


1. Two words occur frequently in the Gromatki, of which
the etymology is a puzzle to modern writers — nrciJiniuB (or
aivifi/ta/is) and decumam^s. They eeem to me to be expli-
cahle without difficulty.

In the first sentence of Prontinus (according to Lachmann's
edition) we have three great classes of land described. One
iaager diuisus et <td�ignatus, i.e. land divided into plots and
marked as the private property o� citizens ; another is ager
mensurri per fxtremUtitcm eoiiiprehejisus, i.e. land surrounded
by a measured boundary ; the last is ager arcifinius qui
nalla mcnmra tontine tur, i.e. land with no measured

Three derivations of ardfiuim are given by the ancients.

(�) Vurro, quoted by Prontinus (p. 6), derives it �S arcendis

(h) An aiithor on p. 284 derives it ab arcendo uicinoa; and
Pliny is apparently supposed by Schwegler (R. JI. ii. p. 441)
lo refer to it in hia words annoiiac uilitns non e latifundiis
aingvlorum conUngebat arcettliuin tiiciiios (N'. H. xviii. � 17).

(c] Isidore (p. 369] says it is so called because certis
tnmmris fion condnelur sed arcentur fines eius obieciu fluminum
nonUum nrbonim. His derivation is therefore ab arcendo

Siculus riaccns (p. 137) gives both these last two.


Rudorff (Grom. Inst. p. 251) Bays tbat this derivation ah
arcendo contitinB a thought right in language as well aa ia
fact ; he does not decide positively upon the other part of the
derivation, and apparently thinks arcere may he here used
both in the sense o( prohi'bere and in that of munire or coercere,
for which he quotes a precious etymology from Festua
of nmierca a.a arcendne fanuhae giatia. Huschke (on Festus
T. posaessiones, p. 83) translates it die Begrenaiing ahcehrte,
I have seen no hint from any one that these derivations of
arcifinius are unsatisfactory. I fancy the favourite is ab
arcendo fines, and is connected with a confusion of absence of
measured boundaries with absence of boundaries altogether.

Now the fact that an etymology has ancient authority is,
aa a general rule, not in its favour. If we judge from the
specimens which we find in Varro, an ancient etymology ia
usually wrong. In the present case the rules of Latin com-
position are absolutely fatal to any of these derivations. If
arcifinius come from arcere uicinos or arcere fines, the order of
the elements of composition would be exactly reversed, i.e.
the substantive vioald precede the verb ; if it came from arcere
in the sense of arcere hoads, we should have to suppose arcere
to bo used adjectivally with finh and arcifinius to mean
" with coercive or prohibitive bounds." I know of no such
compound, and the meaning is unsuitable ; for such a descrip-
tion would apply quite aa well to the other classea of laud as
to that specially called arcifinius.

But the true derivation is, I submit, almost demonstrable,
arci- points clearly to arx or to areas. The latter gives
exactly the meaning required.

The shape of an ancient bow commonly (though not in-
variably) was a double, or rather a twice double, curve, being
composed of two horns joined by a straight piece in the
centre. Such a shape is an apt symbol of a wavy line. And a
wavy boundary — a boundary per flexus or fiexuosus — is exactly
what ager arcifinim bad. See Balbus' words (p. 98), extremi-
iatium genera sunt duo, unttm quod per rigorem obseruaiur,
allerum quod pei- fiescus : rigor est quicguid inter duo sigrta
ueluti in modum lineae rectum perspicilur : per flexua quicguid



Atffl hcomm naturam cunialur ut t� aijrin araijiuiis sokt.
And again (p. 99), after describing a recta linea and a cir-
eumferens, lie says, flexuom linea est tnultiformis uehit uruorum
aut iugorum ant fluminum ; in quorum similitudinem et areifi-
niorum agroi-um extremiias finitur et multarum rerum similiier
quae natura inaeguali linea formala aunt. Again, Prontinus, '
p. 12, speaka of flexua quibm arcifinii agri continentur, and
p. 31, speaking of ordinary fields, says, omnium agrortiin ex-
tremiias flexuom et inaequaH chiditur flnitione. Oa p. 342,
a boundary stone is described as cut so as to represent flexuod-
tatem Umitis. A figure is given, No. 312, where the profile is
like a bow with exaggerated curvatures.

Ager nrcifiiuus is land with wavy natural boundaries, as
opposed to the land which has been meaBured and marked
out by the straight lines of the Roman surveyors. Boic-
boutided is the meaning of arciflnius, and its composition is
aimilar to tnuriformia^ anguimanus, capricormis (Lat. Gr. �989);
or, if any one likes, the last part of the word may he taken
fi^m the verb Jtnire instead of the subst. flnis, though that
class of composition is not common (Lat. Gr, g 996).

I pass to tlecumatiUB.

2. Decumanus, as the name of a balk between centuries,
normally running E. and "W., has been the subject of some
wild etymologies.

(rt) Frontinus (p. 28) and Hyginus (p. 167) thought that
aa it divided the land into two parts, it came from duo, not
from decern, and was contracted for duodecimauus.

(b) Isidore (p. 367) says the decuman balk was so called
because it makes tho figure of an 5 with the cardo. Niebuhr
says this ia probably the true derivation {Hist. Rom. ii. 628
Eng. Tr.).

(c) Siculus Flaeeus (p. 153) says that all balks were called
dwumani from the measure of dent actus, but does not explain
it &rther.

- (rfj Giittling {Staahtei-f. 209, 2), aa quoted by Rudorff



(Orom. ImL p. 343), derives it from dick or hlxri and mane
{sunrise), I suppose this to mean ^^ After the fashion of

(e) Rudorff {Orom. Inst. pp. 342, 343) considers the mean-
ing to he two-cutter y and though attributing without sufficient
evidence a derivation to Varro, refrains &om adopting it
This derivation is from duo and caedere.

(/) Nissen {Templum^ p. 12) takes decumanu^ to be from
decern, and thinks that it was so called partly because ten was
with the Romans the perfect number that made the row
complete (10 rods to a uorsus, 10 feet to a rod, 10 men to
a decury, etc), and partly to the use of decumanus for a larj
thing, i.e. decumana oua, and decumani fluctus {Fest. p. 71).

Now it seems to me that it would require very stron
reasons to make a sober etymologist believe that decuman
had in this, or in other uses, any other original meanin

than * of or relating to the tenth/ decern is * ten,' decumu^^-^^
is 'tenth,' decumanus is 'of the tenth/ So much I tak^^—
to be certain. And I can suggest an easy origin for itr
application. The century was a square plot divided inl
iugera. Two iugera formed an heredium, which was thi
size of the original allotments. The century containecrrd
(10 X 10 = ) 100 heredia, which were not separated bi
balks, but only by marks erected by the proprietoi
Measuring along a side, after the tenth heredium, com(
between this century and the next, a limes or balk, whict^:::^^^
may easily therefore have been called Um�s decumanus, Le
the division line, in this case a balk, belonging to the
heredium. In the same way the uia quintana in* the cam]
was in Polybius* time (vi. 30) adjoining the fifth manciple
Originally it may have been applicable to all balks, but
as the word cardo came to be applied to the North an<
South lines, decumanus was left for the East and West
lines. The first line drawn by the Augur in whatev(
direction would of course divide the whole district inl
two parts. It was his practice, probably from the simple
observation of the rising sun, to draw first the line


East to West, and then another lino crossing it at right
angles. This other representing the hinge on which the
heBvens moved waa called cardo, the decumanits was an East
and West line, and the balks parallel to each wore called
respectively eardmes and decumaiiL

3. Two other words may deserve a passing remark, oc-
cupatorim agsr is clearly laud 'open to, or belonging to,
occuptitores,' or 'squatters.' There was a doubt in the
ancient world and in the modern whether it refers to the
occupation of enemy's land by the conquering Roman
people, or to the occupation of Roman public land by
the Roman nobles {Q>-om. p. 138; Rudorfl', p. 252). The
point is not of much importance, but the latter seems to
me far the most probable. It is land not sold by the
quaestors {ager quaestoritts), nor land leased (ager uectigalii),
nor land assigned in full property to citizens (_ager diuisus
adsignalus), but squatters' land.

In several places of the Oromatid we read of inierctsinia
Jimitihus. I do not know whether Rudorff has at all con-
fused this adjective in his mind with interneciuus, but he
translates it zer�ch>icidendv odir vernichtende {Qrom. Inst. pp.
296, 362), and is quite eloquent on the division of land
per strigas et scamna, i.e. by oblong plots (with which he
connects these balks), as denoting the defeated and subject
character of the provincial inhabitants and lands. I take
it, whether spelt inteycisiuua or inlcrseciiius (as the Lexicons
seem to wish), merely to mean ' intermediate ' or ' cross,'
implying that these balks were anbaequent to a previous,
or additional to a usual, mode of allotment. An imagina-
tion is a great assistance in understanding past times, but
the world is on the whole arranged in a matter-of-fact
way, and carried on by Bomewhat dull methods. Symbolism
is more often found in the brilliant interpreter than in the
original constructor, who did not take the airy flights in
dealing with his materials which were taken by the ancient
etymologers and are taken by some modern phUologers.

4, Mommsen, whose labours are so vast, and guided by


such an uawearied search for the best evidence that one
hesitates to suspect an error, has, in commenting on the
lex agraria of A.U.O. 743, in the first volume of the Berlin
Collection of Inscriptions (pp. 88, 89), specially treated of
what he calls ager uiritanus. His views are referred to and
adopted byothersf^.i/. Marquardt Stant&verf. ii. 148, cf. i. 101, sq.
ed. 2 ; Willems' Droit Rom., p. 348, ed. 4). I do not know
that it has over been disputed that distributions of public land
did not always imply the foundiug of a new colony. Some-
timea the allottees were incorporated in an independent form
as a (new) colony. Sometimes they were incorporated into an
existing colony or borough. Sometimes, in early days, they
remained at Rome and bad their allotments also. Mommsen,
however, thinks the distinction between agcr uiritanua and
nger coloniarim went further. Colonial land was divided into
centuries by balks, it was given by lot, and only to a relatively
small number of persons, the number being fixed by a law
authorizing the distribution, ager nirUnnuB was divided into
mltiis ; it was not given by lot, it was given to all Homan
citizens, subject only to the two limits of willingness to receive
it and sufficient extent of distributable territory. His proofs
are three passages which alone {^oU fere) treat of this kind
of allotment in general, and he enumerates seven instances of
distribution where niritini diiiisun ager is distinctly mentioned.

Now unless Momrasen were to go as far as to say that uiritim
cannot be applied to a colony (and he expressly says he does
not assert this), these instances prove nothing. In two of
them indeed the distribution icas according to Livy a colonial
distribution, one at Labici (Liv. iv. 47, 48), another among
the Volsci (Liv. v. 24). Mommsen says Livy was wrong,
and gives other grounds for thinking so. Be that as it may,
it is clear that Livy did not recognize the distinction which
Mommseu puts forward.

The stress of the argument rests on the three passages
treating of the subject generally. The first is Festus in
Paulus' Epitome, p. 373 : uiriltDiiis ager dicitur qui tnritim
populo dktribuitur. This is the only place in Latin in which
viritanm occurs. It is in Paulus, who epitomized Festus,


who epitomized Verrius Flaecus, who was a freedman in the
reign of Augustus. We know nothing of the circumstances
in which the expression ager uiritanus was used : and it would
be rash to rest much on the word populo as implying that the
distribution did not take the form of a colony.

The second passage is Varr. R.R. i. 10, where he says,

guatticor eenturiae coniunctae appellantur in agris (fivim uiritim

publice rnUus, Siculus Flaecus says saltus is the name given

to 25 centuries. Nothing more is known of either kind of

'Salttis. The libri coloniarum as they are called speak of terri-

toria in saltibus adsignata (p. 211). There is no reason why

this should mean Varro's saltus rather than Siculus Flaecus'

saltus. As the sallus of 4 centuries is not mentioned in the

Corpus Ghornaticorum and the saltus of 25 centuries is, the

presumption is the other way.

The third passage adduced by Mommsen is . much the

most important, and has, I think, been quite misunderstood.

Siculus Flaecus says: diuisi et adsignati agri non^ unius sunt

acndicionis, nam et dimduntur sine assignatione et redduntur sine

diuisione, dimduntur ergo agri limitihus institutis per centurias,

ctsaignantur uiritim nominibus. (Mommsen quotes only the

L&st sentence diuiduntur . . . nominibus,) I translate freely.

*^ Divided and assigned lands are not all held on the same

f;enure. You may have a division of lands without their

being assigned, and you may have a restoration of lands

-^irithout their being divided. Division is the separation of

t>lie land into centuries by regular balks. Assignment is the

ax>propriation of the land to individuals by name." That is

to say, division and assignment are diJQferent things, and are

not always found together. Usually they were parts of one

p'^ocess : first the land was regularly divided into square

blocks, then each of these blocks was appropriated to 100, or

50, or 10, or 3 persons, according to the extent of allotment

allowed, and their names were entered in the register as

holding so many iugera each in that century. Suppose there

w-ere 1000 men, and the measure allowed was eight iugera^

' ^on is not in the MSS., but all agree in inserting it, and it seems to
^^ required.



and the whole extent of the land was fit for assignment.
The land was not divided into 1000 plots of eight iugera
each, but into forty centuries ; each century containing 200
iugera, would accommodate twenty-five men. The register
contained all the centuries in order, described by their position,
and under the name of the century the names of the allottees
in that century. Ballot decided, first, which group of eight
had first place ; secondly, which century belonged to the
first group (Crivm. pp. 113, 200). Division was made without
assignment following, when more land was divided than
there were persons requiring it ((/. p. 163), or when there
were persons in the plotted land who were allowed to retain
their possessions. Restoration was made without division
in the case of the lands of the priests, and Vestal Virgins
(p. 162): and assignment was made without division in
certain cases mentioned hy Frontinue on p. 4, and in the
circumstances mentioned by Siculus Flaccus himself on
p. 160 — a passage which seems to have escaped Mommsen'a
attention, when writing his account of agei- uirilaims. There
Siculus Flaccus says that occasionally, if enough land has not
been taken for the survey, and the founder wishes to add
some citizens to the colonies, and to assign them lands, he enters
in the register the fact that to A. B. is assigned so many iugei'a
on such a mountain in such a township (pagus), or that A, B. is
to have such a field which was formerly so and so's. Siculus
Flaccus here refers to and repeats the words quoted by
Mommsen. But hois speakingcontinuouslyof a distribution
in connexion with the foundatiou of a colony ; he has just
taken the case of there being too much land for his number
of colonists, and then takes the case of there being too many
colonists for the lands surveyed. Further, there is no hint
here or anywhere in the Gromatici of a distribution by saltia
of four centuries, though pertinent occasionswere not wanting,
as, for instance, where the fact is mentioned of centuries in
some places having a different area and different shape from
the square century of 200 iugera.

There are two words which may require brief treatment —
noininibus and uiritim. nominibus amgnare is not opposed to




per centurias diuidere as a different mode of assignment, but
Bs s di&rent part of the one process by which (as a rule) all
lands for distribution as private property were divided and
aasigued (so Schwegler, R. 0. ii. p. 416n.) nomina are often
used for the persons whose namea as proprietors were entered
in the register (e.g. Grom. pp. 157, 162, 199, etc.), as they
were used for persona whose namea as debtors were entered
in a man's ledger. The instances of in nominibus adaigimtus '
used in the lihri eoloniariim (pp. 238, 239), refer to something
of the kind mentioned by Siculus Flaccus. They are expressly
connected with limiten, and in two of the five instances
with colonies, Rudorff (Grom. Inst pp. 302, 356) translates
nominibns adsignare, " to assign to the clans" {Geachkcktern),
referring to the fact that the land thus assigned was heritable
property (Aeredtum), and that estates were spoken of by
gentile names, e.g./undiis Conielianns (p. 380). This line of
argument would surely proTe also that laws were brought
forward by a clan, and that this is the meaning of kx IiiUa,
lex Cornelia, eto. But as a matter of fact the names entered
on the register were not the clans, but the individual names,
i.e. the person is designated by the praenomen, nomen,
and father's praenomen, e.g. Lucio Terentio Luci filio
[Grom. p. 201).

uiritim does not of itself mean " to all the people " ; its
extent is defined by its context. It merely means taking
separately individuals of the body or number specified, uiritim
diuidere by itself applied to lands would, I conceive, simply
mean "to divide and allot them," and ofcourseiii the usual way.

There is no evidence at all that a distribution unacconipanied
by the foundation of a colony was not made by lot, and no
evidence for the suggestion thrown out by Mommsen that
perhaps in some way it depended on the order of application.

5, Before leaving Mommsen's comments on the Aw Agraria
of which fragments on bronze are preserved at Naples and

' I am iatlimid to ngree with Mommsen in thinliing that, in paga !)i (line 10),
the US. reading; hoiHinibia Ehmtld be- retnined, nod not chntigea to mminihut as
Lnchmum has done on BudortI 'i suggeetiua.



Vienna, I may refer to his reaaona for refusing it the title of *

ks Tkoria {Corp. I. Horn. i. 77). Appian {-B. Ciu. l 27)
briefly gives the history of the public land after C. Qraechus, _^
The Gracchi had prohibited the sale of the allotments and,
imposed a tax on the holdera. Three lawa followed, Thes
first removed the prohibition of sale, Tho second put t
to any further allotments and allowed the holders of laudi
yet undistributed to retain them by paying a tax or rent, tb(
revenues thence accruing to be distributed to the people ii
lieu of the lands. The third law removed the rent^ Appiai
gives the name of Jwoupto? Bopto-; to the author of the secone
law. Now Cicero {Jind. 3(i, g 136) says: Sp. Thoi-iug satC
ualuit inpoptilari genere dieendi, is qui agi-um publicum uitiom p
inutili lege wctigali levauit} It certainlyia an easy correctioi
to substitute Qopiav in Appian for S6pui% a name otherwi*.
unknown. And Mommseii says there is no difficulty of fae
in doing so, for both writers are giving the same descriptioi
of the law " if only we understand Cicero rightly." lie there
fore translates " who by imposing a rent on the public lane
relieved it from the faulty and impolitic law of the Graochi.^^ -J
This explanation has been adopted by Rudorff (Eec/ilsgesek
i. � 16, p, 41), and is followed with some hesitation by Mar
quardt {Staatsverf. i. p. 108, ed. 2), Piderit ad, loc. and Pro�
Willtina (note on Cic. Orat. ii. 70, S 284). Peter and Ihne
are quoted as dissenting. So also Wordsworth {Fragment
etc., p. 441).

Now to me such a translation of Cicero's words seems ahso-
lutely impossible, I should hesitate to think that Cicero,
in describing a law the main purport of which was :
deal with but to impose a rent on the public land, would us
uectigali by itself and omit imposito or tho like altogether.
But that be should put this bare uectigali between lege and
leuauit would be strange indeed. Cicero meant by his words
that Sp. Thorius by a faulty and impolitic law relieved the
public land from rent. What difficulty is there in the waj;
of this interpretation of Cicero P Appian very probably

' AppiBn'a words are cnrimialy aimilur ; ilraf Sc tdu (rofilirfiaai Tolait 70—



I. Thoriua by Sp. Boriua : his only mistake (if Bopto';
is due to the copyists) is in connecting Thorius' name with
the second law instead of with the third. The law of
which fragments are extant is clearly this third law : so far
Mommsen and Rudocff are right. It ia a law removing a
rent and dealing with rights of pasture, and this corresponds
very well with Cicero's description of the law of Sp, Thorins
and his reference to it in the Dc orafore. Mommsen objects
that Cicero would not have spoken, aa I aupposo him to havo
done, of a law which the optimates favoured. AVe really know
nothing of the circumstances, and circumstances are every-
thing in politics. And Cicero was anything but consistent
in his language about political measures. But after all the
question is one of fact between him and Appian. Cicero
wrote within seventy years of the law and Appian scarcely
within 250 years. And Cicero, whether he understood legal
history or not, did understand how to express a meaning in
Latin words.

I should be glad to know if any passage can be produced

which would Justify Mommsen's mode of taking Cicero's

*ord3. The passages most nearly analogous that I can find

are : Oio. Lael. 20, � 72 : sunt enim quidam qui moleatas amtatias

fitciunt cum ipsi ae contemni putant ; quod non fere contingit nisi

ify qui etiam coniemnendos se arbitrantur, qui kac opinione non

fnodo uerbis ted etiam opere leuandisunt. Oic. Orat. i. 36, � 166,

He ia pro quo ipse diceret turpi tutelae iudicio otqne omni molestia

Btultiiia admrsarii liberaretur. In both these passages we have

&u instrumental ablative placed between knni-e or Uberare and

the ablative of the thing from which the subject is freed.

But no one will feel any doubt about the meaning of these

sentences, the theoretical ambiguity being prevented by the

meaning of the words. Taking Cicero's words in our passage

in the ordinary way, the construction is eaay and the exprea-

eions such as no one can object to ; tiectigali liberare " to free

from tax" is found in Oic. Q. Fi: i. 1, 9, � 26; Phil. ii. 38,

1 97. I have not found /euare with uect.igali. In Liv. xliii. 17,

5 3, is k'talos se oneribus inpensisque, in Cic. AU. vi. 2, g 4, ita

tmUae eiuitates omni aerc alieno libcratae, muliae uafde Icuatae


aviit . . . his ego diiobus generibm /aciilMem ad se aere alieno
liberandas aid leumidas dedi. " To relieve the public land of rent
by a bad law" ie a very suitable expresalon : "to relieve the
public land of a bad law by a rent " seems to me a very strange
one. But that Cicero should use words apparently conveying
the former, but intended to convey the latter, seema to me the
strangest thing of all, except that one who is at the head of
Homan historians and one of the first Latin philologere should
impute this to Cicero, in order to save a writer of the second
century a.d. from having made a confusion in the authorship
of two laws which were passed towards the end of the second
century B.C.

6. Niebuhr in the famous chapter on the Public Land and
its occupation, which has been the basis of modern inquiry
into the Agrarian laws, and directed attention to the writings
of the Gromalici, argues against the notion that the State let
its lands in the modern sense of the term. What the State
let was, according to Niebuhr, the tithe or tax. And he
adduces {ii. 140} a passage from Hyginus which treats of the
Roman dealings with conquered lands, and justifying the
expression ememni ins uectignlis, understands it of taking a
lease of the tithe, described as a purchase of the right to
the tithe for a sum, not paid down once for all, but payable
yearly. Niebuhr expresses doubts of the value of Hyginus'
authority, and finds a difficulty in the concluding sentence
of the passage,

Now Hyginus was not an antiquary or historian inquiring
into the use of the public land in the early times of the
Republic, but a practical land surveyor, with public records
of the tenure of land before him. What he describes or
alludes to are the facts of the land and of the records, and
the inferences a land surveyor would draw from them. I
believe he found nothing mentioned in the records or
visible on the land of a date earlier than the Gracchi ;
and the assignments of public land which he saw recorded
were in the main those of Julius Caisar and the earlier
emperors. It is hazardous therefore to apply his statements



to dealings with the public land at the time of the early
agrarian laws. But for the later period, I take it, his
authority and that of the other Gromatm are more trust-
'worthy than the ordinary run of historians.

Hy ginus found four classes of land : occupatorim, quaestorim,
• ^ectigalis, diuisus adsignatm. The first had no state balks and
'boundaries ; the second was land divided by balks into plots
of fifty iugera, i.e. quarter centuries, and had been public
land sold by the quaestors ; the fourth I have already spoken
of ; the third he describes in the passage from which Niebuhr
makes an extract. It was land bound by a rent, and belonging
oither to the Roman people, or to a colony or borough or
other local organization. Its origin was this. When lands had
"been captured in war, and divided into centuries for assign-
ment to the soldiers, there was more than was required for
"the number of allottees, qui super/uerant agri uectigaiibm
jsuhiecti sunt, alii per annos (some supply quinos) alii uero
.^naneipibm ementibm, id est conducentibus in annos centenos

j[)luresue (so Huschke and Mommsen for plures uero) : finite

4Uo tempore iterum ueneunt locanturque ita ut uectigalibus est

4:on8uetvdo . . . mancipes autem qui emerunt lege dicta ius uecti-

^alis ipsi per centurias locauerunt aut uendiderunt proximis

quibusque possessoribus. Niebuhr says : " If this writer, whose

csonceptions were certainly not clear, attached any distinct

jneaning to the last sentence, it must be understood of a

snodus or composition, for the tenth sheaf." I am not certain

of Niebuhr's meaning, but I suppose his view to be this.

'IThe state imposed a tax of a tenth of the produce on these

Xands. Contractors bought from the state the right to this

,'fcithe and engaged with the nearest occupiers to take the

• -fcithe and give them money for it. Rudorff {Ghrom. Inst.,

jp. 315, n. 225) supposes the nearest occupiers to be the

persons who were themselves charged with the payment of the

'tithe, and explains per centurias as meaning per annos centenos,

X)egenkolb {Platzrecht, p. 328) has made some objections

*o -these views, which I partly reproduce.

1. Hyginus speaks- of letting the lands : why should we


BUppoae the state first impoaed a tax or ground-rent of a tithe
and then let that only ? This notion of a tax or tithe
implies, apparently, some recognition of the existing cultiva-
tors. Nothing whatever is said about thorn here, but on the
same page we read of lands being restored to their former
owners, and in that case no uectigul was imposed {ogri
non ohligantiir uecligiilibm). It is difficult to see that the
state or municipality bad any other rights to respect. They
sold some land : they gave and assigned other : a third
class is ager ttectigalh : why should we not suppose that it
waa let on lease, the uectigal being what we call rent, i.e.
the share of the produce which the landlord claims from
the cultivator aa the condition of his having the remainder ?

2, lus ueetigalis is a natural expression to use for this,
where emerunt has preceded. In older Roman law, letting
and hiring was regarded aa only a kind of selling and buying
(Gai. iii. 143 ; Dig. xix. 9, 1. 2). Letting is seUing, not the
property out and out, but the enjoyment and fruits of the
property for the term of the lease, entennt agros would
give a wrong idea ; emerunt ins uecHgalis meana a purchase
of the rent or profits. But the contractors who bought this
ills wore not, so far as I see, restricted to take from the
actual cultivators only such rent or share aa the State
had previously fixed. They were lessees and could make
their own bargain with the peasants, provided they paid to
the State the rent agreed on between themselves and the

3. Per centurins occurs much too often in the Gromatid for
division of land to allow of our giving it the meaning of
'for a hundred years.' It may mean here in plots of a
century ; but it is better to understand it of ' going through
the centuries,' 'taking each century,' i.e. 'in the several
centuries.' We have it uaed by Hyginus in this sense
where he speaks of not reckoning in the plots assigned
the ground taken up by a public road or river ; saepe enim
ft uiarum pubHcarum per cmdiriaa modm excrplus est (Grom.


p. 121) ; ncio quibusdam regionibita cum addgnarentur agri
adsci-iptum nliquidper cenlurias et JImnim (ib. p. 125).

4. And with this accords very well proitimis qiiihmque
possessoribus. The lands which were now being dealt with
vere in some cases whole conturica, in others oddments
(etibBcciua) , i.e. parts of a century not assigned, because not'
suitable for the veterans. The occupiers of adjoining plots
would be just the persons who would be most disposed to
take and work the lands. But they seem to me very un-
suitable persons for converting the tithe of com or other
produce into money, as Niebuhr seems to suppose; and
the expression is a strange one for the persons from whoso
lands the ttecligiil issued, as RudorfF supposes, proximiis ipse
m'lhi is scarcely the language to be expected from a land-

5. Leases for 100 years or more seem not an unnatural
transition to the leases in perpeliiitm, which wc meet with
in Gai. iif, 143 and Dig. vi. 3 (cf. Mommsen Staatsrec/d, ii.
452, ed. 2) ; there we are told of naunicipalities being in the
habit of letting their lands for a uscfigal, the tenant to hold
the land as long as be paid the rent. This is a somewhat
similar tenure to what English lawyers called a fee-farm
rent. When one reads of the lands of priesta and vestal
virgins being let for a uccHijal [Grom. p. 117}, one is
naturally reminded of church and college leases ; and the
tenure in perpelaum which was established in Roman law
is just what was attempted to be established by the lessees
of church lands, and by lessees, I believe, of college
lands also.

It is hardly necessary to say now that Niebuhr was wrong
in inferring, apparently from the word maiicejts, that the
form used in these cases was mancipation. Neither the
tithe nor the lands were conveyed to the mancipes. They
hod merely a personal contract with the state, and sub-let
in a similar way.


A very similar passage to this of Hyginus is seen
Siculus Flaccus, p. 162 (cf. also pp. 136, 137), and helpis
to show that what was before the eyes and mind of botfc:
writers were the leased lands lying near and among th^
assigned lands ; and that these are but distantly related t-^
the occupation of the public land which was the groun.^
of the old agrarian laws.


IV (Vnj 16, 1335a 32—34.

(1) I 6, 1255a 7 sqq.

TovTo Slj TO Sixatov TToXXol tq>v iv toi^ vofioii mmrep p'^opa
ypa^ovrai Trapavofunv, w^ hea/hv el rov ^uiaaadai Buvafievau
KoX Kara hwap-iv Kpeinovo<i earai BovXov leal ap^ofievov
TO ffiacrOev Kal tok fih/ oCtoi Boael rot? 8' eVetwoi! ical tiSv
aa^mv. avriov hk raunj? t^9 ajj.^ur^i^Triaeoi';, KaX 8 TTOiet tou!
Xo70in; e-KaXKarreiv, OTt Tpowov riv^ aperii Tirfjfdvovaa
\oprniai Kal ^id^eaBai Biiuarat fidXicrTa, xal limv ael to
Kparovv eV ijirepo-)(r) ar/adov th'os', ojore Bojeein fii) dveu dperrj';
fheu TTjv ^tav oKKa irepi rou Sixalov fiovov elvat Ttjv afi^ta-
ff^Tr/iTa'. Bia yap rovro TOts fieu euvaia BoksI to SiKatop elfm,
T0�? S' avro TOVTO Siicaiov, to tov KpiiTTOva apy^eiv. e-rreX
twujTavTav ye ')(<i>plv Toineav twv Xoyav out' Itryyphu ovSep
e)(ovau/ oCre inBavhv wrepoi Xdyoi, oi^ ou Set to ^eXriov kut'
aperi}V ap^feiv Kal Becnro^eiii. SXon 8' aVTej^o/ievoi twie?, w?
dovTai, SiKaiov Tivoi (o yap vo/ioi hUaiov rt) t>jv /coto
TToXe/ioi' Bovketay TiQearn, Biieaiav, a/ia B' ov i^aaiv, Trpi re
yap ap-)(iiv lvhe-)(eTai /it) Si/calap etvat tiov ■n'oKe/iav, Kal toc
ana^uiv SovXevetv ovBafi^^ &v ^alri tk BoSXoe elvat,

Whereas the commentators seem to assume that the inter-
pretation of the three obscure phrases, & voiei Toix; Xoyov^
eTraKXaTTeiv, Btaa-Tainmp ye x<^pi5 tovtcov twv Xoyoiv, aTepoi
Xoyoi, may, nay must, precede any attempt to ascertain the



general drift of Aristotle's remarka about slavery, I am
inclined to demur to both propositions ; to the latter, because
the sentences in which the debatable phrases occur, atriov hk
TavTtj'i rijv afi^uT^T/T^trea^ — dpjfeip koI hemro^eiv 1255a
12 — 21, clearly belong, not to Aristotle's statement of the
doctrines in question, but to hia criticism of them, and ought
therefore to be capable of removal without injury to their
aurroimdings ; and to the former, because the difficulty of
the debatable phrascB themaolvca consists for the moat part
in the ambiguity of their reference to certain \oyoi, which
may be any two or more of the three or moreA^Tot mentioned
in the context. Under these circumatancea, it would aeem
reasonable to begin by inquiring what \6yot are mentioned
in the context, and to postpone to a later stage the attempt
to interpret the aentencca in which certain Xoyoi are am-
biguoualy referred to. Accordingly I shall adopt this cotirse
in the following paraphrase.

The question under discussion is atated in unmistakable
terms at the beginning of ch. 5 ; -rroTepov ^eXnov koX
Bucaioi/ Tivi Bou\eveiv, tj ov, oKXa iraua hovXeia irapa tpviriv
iiniv; To this question Aristotle makca anawer, that, as it ia
advantageous to both aad to each, and therefore juat and
natural, that body, appetite, beast, and female should be
respectively subject to aoiil, reason, man, and male, so it is
advantageoua to both and to each, and therefore juat and
natural, that a man who ia inferior in aperrj of soul should
be subject to a man who is in that respect superior. At the
same time he recognizes the obvious fact that tbe custom of
selling prisonera taken in war, might, and sometimes did,
reduce to slavery men who by right of apeTr) should be free.
His contention is then, in brief, that since theoretically Set
TO /3i\Tuiir KuT^ aperi/ii S.pj(Eiv koX heinro^iv, in practice some
slavery ia juat aod natural, some slavery is unjust and

The wording of the question put at tho beginning of
cb. 5 indicates however that among Ariatotle's contem-
poraries there were some who maintained that all slavery
ia unjust and unnatural; and at the beginning of ch. 6


we are expressly told that this theory had emerged in a
eontroversy about the Juatice of the law or convention by
which the prisoner taken in war became the property of the
conqueror. The grounds upon which the theory was asserted,
as well OS those upon which it was denied, are indicated in
1255a 7—26 :

i. X argues that all slavery is unjust and unnatural, because

violence is wrong ;
ii. Y argues that all slavery is just and natural, because

might is right ;
iii. Z argues that all slavery is just and natural, because
what is legal is just.

Thus, while Aristotle declares that in praetice Some slavery
is just, some slavery unjust, X holds that All slavery is
unjust, Y aud Z hold, though ou different grounds, that All
■ slavery is just.

The sentences 1255a 7 nqq., contain however, besides tha
statement of the views entertained by contemporary contro-
versialists, an inquiry into the relation in which these views
stand to the doctrine of Aristotle himself. Thus at 1255a
21 he examines the theory of Z, who, "holding fast in a
general way to a sort of juatice," declares t^v Karb, ■rroXefiOj'
tovXeiav to be jnst because it is legal. First noting that Z's
justification breaks down if the war is unjust, Aristotle
proceeds to remark that Z himself would admit that a highly
cultivated Greek, though legally sold into slavery, ought not
to be a slave ; and that this admission is tantamount to the
acceptance of the doctrine maintained in the preceding
chapter, namely, that it is aper^ and /taida, which mark out
men for freedom and slavery respectively.

Similarly, in the sentences at-riov Se timJttjs t^? dfufjier-
^Tp-^aem'; — ap)(eiii Koi SeffTTotTeic 1255a 12 — 21, (from which
I have hitherto borrowed nothing except the statement that
T bases hia assertion of the justice of all slavery upon the
dogma aiiTo toCto Biicaiov, to toc Kpeinova dp^eiv,) Aristotle
seeks to show that the positions of X and Y are open to
attack precisely in so far as they differ from his own.




Now the \070t of X and Y

i. All slavery is unjust
ii. All slavery is just
hraXKaTTovatv:^ i.e. slaveries which X pronounces unjiirr st,
Y pronounces just. How is it^ then, that these Xoyot hrai
TovaLP? What is the reason of the controversy betw<
X and Y ?

The reason is, Aristotle tells us, that, as open] with pro]
appliances is able to exert force or violence, while force
violence implies ar/aOop of some sort or other, X and Y agi- ee
in assuming that where there is ^la, there there is ape^nj,
and consequently suppose that they differ fundamentally in
their notions of BUaiov. That is to say, on the assumptL^n
that ^ia is always accompanied by apen], X, who concei^^'es
that in the cases which he has examined ^la is detestaWIle,
and does not see anything to distinguish these cases frc3�m
other cases, condemns all relations between inferior a-.'xnd

^ That, as Heitland remarks {Notes Critical and Explanatory^ etc., Cambric5L^�
1876, p. 11), ivaWdmiv means primarily to * overlap,' whether by 8nj>*r"
position, e.g. t� ivaWd^€i rS>v haKr<t\nv rd %p 8i5o ^cdv^rai. ip 2. 460b SO,
firipuv iirdXKci^is airpfirfis. Plutarch de audiendo 46 d, or by juxtaposition, ^'9*
Kopx'O'P^^ovra yip iffriv B<ra ivaWdTTei robs 696pras rohs h^eis. Zi/S 1. 601a ^Oi
seems to me certain. For secondary uses of the word, I may quote Hiad :^KJn
368 rol 8* eptbos Kpareprii Koi dfMiiov Tro\4fJLOio Trupap iiraWd^oarrfS H' i^u^c^"^*'
poiffi rdwa-aay. Plato sophist 240 c �. Kiv8vrc^€i rotadrriy riyk wer\4^iC^^
ovfiirKoi^v rh fiif ty r^ 5rrt, ico) fxd\a Aroiroy. H. IIws yhp oIk irovoy; ^0^
yovy tin koX yvv hih r^y i'KaKKni^idas ra^ris 6 Tro\vK4<t>a\os (TO^mot^s ^ydyxoK,^^
^fias rh fJL^ hy ovx Myras SfioKoyfTy ehcU irots. Aristot. ZijS 1. 601a 22 ^ **
<l>^icfj Kapxap6douy iarl ircurt rois oSovciy, &s inaWdTTOvaa ry y4y€t r&y Ix^i^^"''
nf 1. 1317a 1 ravra . . . voieT rhs voKirclas iTraKKdrrew, &<rr€ iipiirroKparla^ ^
6\iyapxiKhs tlyai K<d voKirtlas htawKpariKoiripas. fiK.. 1. 464b 28 hrakki''^'^^
rk yoardbTj r^y (t>6(riy (rt&fjLara to7s fipaxvfiiois. But when may proposiiionm ^
said to * overlap ' P At first sight two cases suggest themselves : (1) All X i^ ^
might be said to overlap 8wm Z ts F, and (2) Some X is Fand Some Xit ^***
F might be said to overlap one another, provided that these subcontrarieB ^
incompatible. It appears however that iTraWdTrciy marks not 'so mnch '■J�
transgression of a limit, as the invasion of a region beyond, and conseque^^^T
that All X is Y could not be said to ^iroXA.t�TT6*i' Some X is Y. For this ^"

as well as because ivaWdTTeiy understood in the former of the two
indicated above, would not find a proper antithesis in dicurrdyrvy x^^y I
hraKKidrriiv here in the latter of these senses, the whole field of slavery ^^^^^^^J!
debatable ground which from opposite quarters X and Y have ovezron. ^^^ y
the phrase diaardyrwy x^P'-^t wnich represents the relative position of X •'i^^Jj
when they have withdrawn to their own sides of the field, compare the kir"^
use of K€X(&pt<rTM in /uic 1. 464b 27. Thus while I agree witn Heitland

•overlap* is the best English equivalent for ivaWdtr^iy, I demur to _ v^^
unqualified statement that the latter word expresses the relation in which s^'^" "
contraries stand to one another. [In the above Aristotle is quoted by Boniti.


superior which are not based upon * loyalty/ ^ i.e. the willing
obedience which an inferior renders to a kind and considerate
superior ; while Y, who conceives that in the cases which he
has examined ^ia is respectable, and does not see anything
to distinguish these cases from other cases, takes as his
principle ' might is right/

When however the two theories are withdrawn within
their proper limits, so that they hvetnaai, x^pt? and no longer
iTTcCKKoLTTovai,, the theory which X advances against Y and
the theory which Y advances against X {arepoc \6yoc) have
neither force nor plausibility as against the modified doctrine
€09 Set TO fieXrtop Kar aperrjv apx^ip /cat hetrjro^eiv?

In short, X and Y, jumping to the conclusion that ^ia is
always accompanied by aperrj, and consequently overlooking
the distinction drawn by Aristotle between ^ia which has
Jiperri and ^ia which has not apenfj, suppose that all other
slaveries resemble those which they have respectively studied,
and accordingly pronounce, the one, all slavery unjust, the
other, all slavery just. Let X only realize that he is arguing
froux cases in which /Sui rests upon ar^aOov tl to cases in

^ The commentators take for granted that ^fivota is the * henevolence * of the
superior, and it must he admitted that my interpretation, * loyalty,* * the willing
obedience which an inferior renders to a kind and considerate superior/ is not
lecognized by the lexicographers. See however Xenophon oeeon. 7 � 37 ; 9 �� 6,
12 ; 12 �� 5-8 ; 15 � 5 (in all which cases the olK4rt\s is eHvovs to his master and
mistress) ; Aristot. nic. eth. ix 5 �� 3, 4 6 fiJkv yhp evepyerrjOels kvff &v ireiroyOev
iL'trov4fi€t r^v cCyotav, rk 9lKaia Bpup' . . . B\as 8' rj ttvoia 81* iper^v Koi iirielKeidu
Twa yly€Tou 3tov ry <patrp Ka\6i ris ^ i,y9p€7os ff ri toiovtov : Polus Pythag. ap.
Stob.^onY. T. 9. p. 106 oiKerayKorl 8e<nr<Jras eHvoia, Seffvorau 5i .iroTi Qepivovras
McJi€fiovia (in a list of the various forms in which justice appears) : Herodotus
"V. 24 ovd4va ctval ffcv ikhvoicrrcpov . . . KTrifjutrav irivrav ^ffrX TifAK&TotTov iuf^p
^\os ffvveros re koI etiyous (where Darius addresses Histiaeus). Similarly in an
Inscriptiou published in the report of the Archaeological Institute of America,
4)n the investigations at Assos, 1881, the inhabitants of Assos swear loyalty to
Caligula — 9hvoi\tr€iv Taitp Kal<rapi ^eficurr^ — asking him in return ^x^^^ ''^ t*^t*-vs
jvol Kijli^fjuovlai r^v fr6Kiv : and in an epitaph on a dog contained in the same
^volume we read Hcrv^ didkoy a-Topyjjs Upa Koi Kualv, &5 w koL f}5€ efivovs od<ra
^rpo^e? aijfJLa \4\oPx,€ t<J5€.

' In other words, so long as X maintains that All slavery is unjust, and Y that
,AJ1 slavery is just, Y has something l^xop^v and tFiBaviv to urge a^inst X,
2 has something i<rxvp6v and Tri0av6v to urge against Y. But when X and Y
respectively fall back from their advanced and untenable positions to the position
tyi Aristotle, Y has no longer anything Icrx^P^v or iciBav6v to urge agamst X,
X has no longer anything i<rxvp6v or Tridauou to urge against Y. It wfll be seen
^ibat I take robs \&yous and rav \6yav to be * the theories of X and Y,' irtpoi
^^yai to be * the theory adverse to X's theory and the theory adverse to Y's theory,*
^' * the theories of Y'^and X.'


which fiia rests upon aperrj^ and let Y only realize that he i
arguing from cases in which /8wt rests upon aperrj to cases i:
which ^ia rests upon a/^aOov rt, and both will immediate!
see that the doctrine w? Bel to ^iXriov Kar apen^v dpx^i^
h€<nr6^€Lv includes just so much of their respective theories
has a solid foundation.

(2) IV (YII) 16, 1335a 32—34.

eri he i} BuzSo^rj t&v reicvcov Tok fi^v apy(pfi€uri^ e<n (u

TiJ? CLKfirj^ eav yivrfrat Karct Xoyov evOif^ fi jiv€<n^, T^r^fe
Bk ^8r) KarciKeKvfievT}^ t^9 fjkiKlaf; irpof; top t&v e^hofi/qKOir^^^d
€T&p dpi0/M)p. As my interpretation of this passage appesB^ rs
to be novel, it may be worth while to put it on recoET^
At the beginning of the chapter (1334b 32 sqq.) Aristo"^^!�
has said that in framing regulations about marria .^go
the legislator should take three things into account : (i) t- I^e
ages of the man and the woman should be such that th-^^y
shall simultaneously reach the t€\o(; rrjv ^evvrjaeto^^ — ^^
other words, should be such that, when the man is sevenCr^J*
the woman shall be about fifty; (ii) regard should be h^^^
to the BcaSo')(r} tcjv t€kvq>p ; i.e, there should not be too gre^ -^^
a disparity of age between father and children, lest tfc=^�
father should have no comfort from the children, and tB^�
children no protection from the father ; nor yet too great *
parity, lest familiarity should breed contempt ; (iii) in ord^^^
that the children may be strong and healthy, the parents ^^^
the time of procreation should not be immature. Now
scheme, Aristotle continues, which provides that marria<
shall take place between a man of 37 and a woman of
(1335b 28), and that procreation shall cease when the mi
is 54 or 65 (1335a 35), satisfies each of the three conditioi
laid down above : for, (iii) the period of procreation, whic
lasts for the man from 37 to 54 or 55, and for the womi
from 18 to 35 or 36, falls within the years of the axfii] of tl
body (1335a 30) ; (i) there is a disparity of nineteen y(
between husband and wife, so that when the woman ia 50


51, the raan will bo 69 or 70 (1335a 31) ; (ii) the StaSoxlf
Tap Teiamp happens appropriately (1335a 32) ; for the first
child, if he is born in duo oourae when the father is 38,
StaBey(eTat, i.e. arrives at puberty, when the father is 52, at
which age his intellectual d�^jj ia beginning (1335h 32 Sto
Kara tt/u t^? Siavoia'i aKfiiiv aurr) S' earlv ev tdi? -rrKeUr-
Tot? . . . -rrepi Tov ■)^6vov tov tSiv Trein-qKovra rrwi'), and
the last child, begotten when the father is 54 or 55
and bom when the father is 55 or 56, BiaBexerm, i.e. arrives
at puberty, when the father is 69 or 70, at which age
^Jj) KaToXiXvrai -q fiKiKia ; thus, on the one hand, all the
children are out of childhood by the time the father is 70, bo
that thev have the benefit of his protection during their early
years, and he has the comfort of their affection during the
remainder of his life, and, on the other hand, as the father is
38 years older than his eldest son, there is no fear of undue
familiarity on the part of the children.

If at this point I am aaked why I take rots fiku, tok Be to
be the elder and the younger children respectiTely, I answer
that it ia only by taking account of a// the childrea born
under the Aristoteh'an rule, that that rule can be shown lo
satisfy the conditions in regard to BtaBoxv ^^^^ down at
1334b 38.

If again I am asked why I assume that the children
&tahi-)(p)rrai at the age of puberty (^/Sj; 1336b 39), I answer
that, if any other period ia meant, Aristotle's statement that
his regulations satisfy the conditions ia utterly incorrect.
Per, if the child were said BtaSe'^etrdat either at the moment
of birth or at the age of seven, it would not be true to say
that the child born when the father is 55 or 56 succeeds ^Sij
icaraXeXvfiePTjv T^i ^XcwW Trpo? Toe toiv e^SofiiJKOVTa
cTav apiBftov ; and if the child were said BiaSe)(ea9at at the
ageof 21 or upwards, it would not he true to say that the child
bom when the father ia 38 succeeds when the father (who is
now 59 at least) ap^erai t^s aKfiij'i. If however the children
hiaSexom-ai at 14, all Aristotle's statements are exactly

It remains for me to say a few words about the other
interpretations with which I am acquainted.


(1) The sentence in question is commonly paraphrased
" when the child dpjferat Tfj<! aicfi^^, the ^\iicia of the
father ^Sij KaTdkeXurcu irpa^ toc roiii e^Bo/i^JKovra etmc
apid/j.6v," no attempt being made to give a precise meaning
to the passaf^e. To this paraphrase I object that the
passage ought to have a precise meaning, and that, when a
precise meaning is put upon it, it is only the children bom
before the father ia 50 of whom the statement can possibly
be true.

(2) Mr. Eiidgeway, in a paper read before the Cambridge
Philological Society {see Pyoceedmgs for Michaelmas Term,
1882, p. 33), reading Tots iJ.ev in place of tois ^ih, supposes
the sentence to refer to " the adjustment of the ages "
of the husband and the wife : the children are born when
the mother dp^eTai ■nit uKfi.7it and the father's ^XtKia ^&)
KaraXiXirrai Trpb<; tov tcoj/ effSofi^Kovra ixiBv apiGfidv, i.e. when
the mother ia aged 18 to 35, the father 37 to 54, To this
interpretation I object (a) that, though at the beginning of
the chapter three conditions, having reference respectively to
TeXos Ttji •yevvrjaeait, hia.hoyi] raiv TeKvav, and aKfii) too
(Ta>iuno<;, are clearly distinguished, Mr. Ridgeway makes
Aristotle here merge the second condition in the third, eo
that, while the a^/i^ toO a-aifiarot of the parents is taken into
account twice, the requirements in respect of the SiaBoj^ twp
TeKvav, specified 1334b 38, are wholly ignored ; (6) that,
when on the strength of rhetoric ii 14, Mr. Ridgeway fixes
the man's physical tucfiri at 35, he forgets that in the immediate
context of the passage before us the physical atcfiri includes a
later period ; (c) that Mr. Ridgeway interpTets the phrase ^Stj
KaToKeKviikm^t t^? rjXiKia^ as though it were^Si; KaTaXvoftemfi
Ttji aKu.rj'; ; (d) that the words Trpot tov toiv e^SofM^Kovra
irmv apidfiov, which Mr. Ridgeway practically ignores, prove
conclusively that the phrase tjSt} KaTdXeXv/thrq^ t�}1 ^Xueioi
does not mean, as on Mr. Eidgeway's theory it should do,
" between the ages of 37 and 54,"



ATr. Jackson's paper, as read before the Cambridge Philo-
logical Society and published in the foregoing pages of its
Tkajnsactions, has done good service towards the elucidation
of this difficult passage. Amongst the special points of his
interpretation which will comniaad the assent or the con-
sideration of scholars I may mentioa (1) hia method of
setting forth its general drift before proceeding to the
examination of particular disputed expressions ; (2) his
discussion of the meanings of hraWdrreiv ; (3) hia inter-
pretation of evvoia ; (4) hia clear recognition of a third set
of theorizers (Z), who however do not go yery deep into the
matter, in oKmi S' avT^^ofiepoi K.r,\. Still I am of opinion
lihat the desirability of a fresh statement or reinforcement of
the argument in this passage of Aristotle is not superseded
ty Mr. Jackson's paper.

Aristotle, after unfolding and supporting in ch. 5 his own
view that iu certain cases slavery is natural and just, goes
on to consider and reconcile with it the views which were
current on the subject. He saya at the beginning of ch. 6
that "It may be easily seen that those who maintain opposite
views are right in a sense," and he explains that this is due
to the fact that ' slavery ' and ' slaves ' include two distinct
species, slaves and slavery by ' nature ' (tjiv(T€i) and slaves
and slavery by ' convention ' (vo/ifi).^ The 'opposite views'
(TowoiTto) seem to be those of the people who considered all
slavery to be unjust and unnatural. Ho then defines this
convention as a tacit international compact, according to

' It ifl to bo noted na one of tbe minor difliKultiea in tlia paasago thiit IoDAoi

atato iti b1uth7, i

io 01 not. Thia is its eei

i sluvor)','


which everything belonging to a conquered nation passe^^
into the hands of its conquerors. This ' principle ' c
juBtice— it is to be observed that BUaiov here deaignat^^gi
an assumed proposition or compact of international la^^r
— is attacked by a certain school of constitutional write:^cra
on the ground of its outrageous unfairness. They appfr^I
to the inherent feelings of men and make out mi Beivov-
el Tod ^tdaauSai hvvafievov koX Kara Bvnafiii/ ^yjeiTTOfoy
eoTdt BoCKov ical ap'j^ofiepou to 0iair$ev. Aristotle goes on.
to say that even thinkers are divided on this point, sooao
taking the view just stated (outws) and others the other vie"^
(eiceivcoi). It is not at first sight clear what is the preoiso-
reference in exeivuv. But a close consideration of tb-&
passage leads to a conviction that it means the justice of tilio
' rule of war ' already referred to.

Aristotle has now pointed out that ' natural ' slavery is rxo*
identical with 'conventional' slavery; and he has stated t^**
opposing theories, one of which asserts absolutely and fcl*^
other of which denies absolutely the justice of ' conventional-
slavery, viz. the justice of the conquering state's enslaving i*'
unsuccessful opponents. But it is to be remarked here tti^"
this absolute assertion or denial of the justice of 'conveO'
tional' slavery involves a judgment upon naturjil slavery-
For the two kinds, though not co-extensive, are not eitli^'
mutually exclusive. And a man who is naturally a slave m.s'3'
ha conventionally free, and one who ia naturally free ioa-3'
be conventionally in slavery. Aristotle was of course w^W
aware of this, as is clear, e.g., from i 8 � 12. Sio xai, "*>
TToXe/itw) (f>ua-ei xttituoj ttoi? earat. i) yhp dTjpevnKf] fUf^^'
aini}^ (ic. KTijTiKTii) 5 Set ■^(prjirBat ■n-p6<i re rk Brjpia koX t"�*"
avSpcoTTtov Saoi Tretfsv/eoTf^ apj^etrSai, fit) BeKovaiv wt ^v*^^
BIkmov tovtov oina tov •KoKepav. If such a war as this *
successful, those who were previously naturally slaves but cc� ^^
"ventionally free are both naturally and conventionally sla^^'
If then the justice of this war convention is asserted withc^*-*-
qualification, it will be asserted at the same time that all slav^**
is just. If, on the other hand, it is denied without qualifi.^^^
tion, it will at the same time be denied that any slavery in pir *^


Tbese propositions, lehick, tcith the arguments supporting

*�j, a/iri the eonclasiom drawn from them or adopted in

.^^'nueqitence of them, are called by Aristotle \oyat, are said by

^-^m eTraWd-rreiv. This word expresses equally well that the
*^Mo theories are. not in clear and diametrical opposition to each
^ther, that they do not meet aduer sis front ibm ; and that they
^re not unconnected with and independent of each other.
They erraXKa-rrovaiv, or they 'cross' or 'overlap' — for I
think tbiit it matters little which of these two tranalations
we adopt — or in other words they have some ground in
common which is reprcHGUted in the notion of mutually
passing over and beyond, which is at the root of eVaXXaTTetw.
My meaning will be clear if X state the starting-points of the
two diflferent theories. X sees that a superior in brute force
has no right to subject and make a slave of hia inferior,
or that /9['a is no just title to rule. Y sees that a moral
and intellectual superior has a right to subject and make
a slave of his inferior, or that aper^ is a just title to rule.
These views are completely independent, compatible, and
uncon dieting. There is no eTraXXa^t? as yet. Where does
the ewaXXtxft? come in p It comes in when both parties
assume the false and fallacious proposition that superiority in
brute force ami mperiorify in merit are inseparable. This ia
the point where the arguments cross and which entangles
them in a mutual opposition, X is driven to deny the
justice of all slavery, and to take his stand upon a principle
cf eiivota,^ and logic further would compel him to assert the

' I differ slightlif from. Mr. Jaclison in the aense wliich I gire to cffvaia.
Tlioagh full)| cunceding that Ibe use of etvam in the seora of 'the willing
obedielice wliich an inferinr reoilers to a kind nod cnnsiderale superior ' ia com-
plMe1je5tBbli?hed, I tllinkit is somewhat too narrow iin idea to bocuUod a Sfnuov;
and 1 prefer tlie geaeral political sense which, ttiraus boa, e.i/., in Pol. ni S J 10.
I320i, ^KfT™! yiip kdivI iroioiJifTH ri kt^/mto rail iTripon M riiv XPV""
ttrauy iranaiTittudfDuol ri rhJjBos; c(. } 5 of the same lihaptarand other passages.
It may bo ileflned us contented aeqniesceace in a subordinate portion and is the
oppoaile of ' dLfflffeution.' Even giring the word this larger sense, the use of
liiHMii may aeem etmn^e, bat only to those who do not appreoiate the popular nsa
of Buuh phrases as ' it is right, ' or Aristotle's own usage m the Politics, for whiDb
maj be quoted m 12 � 1, 1282S. ^tt*! J" iv wimit /liy rait iirun^iuut md
Tix'<"t iyoBhr Ti T^Xat niyurtor Si mil fiiUioTo iy rf KupurrdTji iriurir aUnj B'
lariv i iroAiTicJ; iiyau''- tan t\ iroAiTiKbi- lYBeav tI ilnmor tdEto �'
isT\ ti Kotvn aiiL^ipov; cf. m 13 } 23, l2Mb. The question ia whether
fAwia here iniucalea primarily the afiocCiati of the single slavoa to the single
nuatera, or tlmt of tho sIutos >n masse to the maslera en m<um, that ia, to the
�(i\iT4ii)j Kgivutfa. I prefer the latter.


further step that superiority in u/jerij is no title to rule, an
extreme view that does not seem to have been often taken.
T is driven to assert the justice of all slavery and to mention
as his SUaiov that might ia right (to tw Kpeirrova a.pj(eip).
This then is the entanglement which Aristotle seeks to clear
up, and which consists in the two parties being misled
through acquiescence in the same fallacy into supposing that
their theories are inconaiateut and upholding without necessity
contradictory propositions. In elucidating the confusion
Aristotle points out the external facts which have given
occasion to it. These are twofold, one which appeals more
directly to the champions of slavery, viz. that apenj, if
supplied with external appliances, is most of all capable of
applying force effectually, and another appealing chiefly to
its opponents, that force is never employed except by the
possessor of some advantage (0.70^01'). This mode of dealing
with a question, viz. of first pointing out in what an error
consists, and then what is the extrinsic cause of men falling
into it, may be compared with that adopted in ch, 9, where
the same word eTraXKriTrei occurs. In �g 14 sqq. Aristotle is
explaining why it is that people suppose that the acquisition
of wealth is without limits, ovBei/ TrXovrov irepa'i ; and he first
gives the trap into which they fall. This is to crvpeyytfi
ainaiv, {i.e. the proximity of both kinds of ■^(pii/jMTUTTtKy, the
natural and unnatural,) i-TraWdTTeL jap f/ ^pijiris rov avrov
ovaa eKUrepa r^? yji-qfuiTtmiKri^, in other words, the fact
that the practical applications of the two kinds of jfprifiarut'
Tuc^ overlap or cross through being concerned with the same
article. This is the external cause of error. In � 16 he
gives the reason why men fall into it, airiov 8e Tavrrjv t^
Btadeaeco'! (viz. Toi) SiaTsKeii' ^ fftli^eiv olofievot Belu ij aS^eiu ttju
Tov vofiifffiaToii 6(5 wTreipov), he says, to TrrovSdl^etv Trepi to ^1/
d\Xa p.r} TO ev ^rjv . , , . oaot he KOi tov et ^v eTri^dWovrai,
TO Tfpo'i T^S aTToXaiKreK T&f rrwfiaTiKa.'i ^i^Tovcnv, wctt' CTTci
Kai tout' ev ttj KTiJo-et ^aiverai imapxeiv, traaa f) SuiTpi^ii
■jrepl rov j(pr)naTia'/j.6v icTi koI to erepov e'So? t^ j^fnjfiaTio'-
TucTji Si,a ToCr' eki'jXvSev. It maybe added that, just as here
two ^?Jo-�(9 ^TraWciTTOvatv because they have the same object



; 80 in our passage two Xoyoi or views erraXkAT

-rovaiv, because they huve the same (false) proposition in

<:;ominon.^ Aristotle adds that, when the fi-oyoi are Tiewed

^part from this entanglement {hioardinav xw/>'? Toinav t&v

'^&Ya>p) , ovr' Kj^upov ovOh/ l')^ovai,v ovT€ irtSai'ov arepoi \6yot

<i? ov Bel TO ^i\Tiov Kar' aperijv apyeiv koX SecrTro^eiv. This

opens the last question with which I propose to deal. What

ia or are the CTepat XoyoL ? Aristotle, it will he noticed, says

they deny the right of the superior in aperij to rule over

the inferior, and, if need be, to make him his slave. Now Y

does not deny this explicitly nor indeed implicitly, unless a

stress be laid upon xar aper^v to the effect that merU alone

entitles to rule. Por this reason, and from the fact that in

the previous context it is the views of those who condemn all

slavery that are chiefly regarded, I incline to the belief that

arepoi fuiyoi. means the views of X, and that \oyoi is here, aa

it were, a singular, whereas Xayoi. in roimuv raiv Xaya>v and

T0V9 \6yoiK (8 '6) is a plural, arepa^ \6ya^ would no doubt

be clearer; but this is no strong argument in the case of the

Politics,^ It may be added that the views of F as stated

without qualification and those ot 'Z' are refuted by

practical arguments in the sequel g 5-

' Althnitgli I trust that a comparison of the forpgoinp and Mr. Jackson's paper
wiU moke the dllfereuce hetweeu us as reg;ardii the kAyai of X and i' quite
peispiDaaoB, jct as ne cumiot be too oareful to SToid miseuriception in a passage
like the present, I will place our respective expknationa in immediate juita-
portion. Hi. lackmathiak&thatxiyaimeaiia' prapoaitioni' or theories; I think
it meaoB viVwi or reaiinmfft, a more eitensive term induding ' propositioos ' and
Bmch besides. Mr. Jackson thinks the propasitioas or theones ore said iraMAr-
�tir becaose they have been strelthM so as to include cases which do not
properly fall withm their raDge ; I tbink that these ' Tievs ' or ' reasonings ' are
nid twBMii-rrtiv becauBO they assume the same fallacy or have in common the
same (false) prnpoeitiou. 1 hare purposely chosen Ihia word ' views ' as a tranS'
latkui of lijyai because it pnsenta exactly the same amhiguity aa Arjyot. We can
•ay in English both [a) ' hit view ' and (B) ' taj views,' each baling a diHtinct
msaaing ; but the plural of both (a) and (fl) ia the same, via. ' our yiews.'

* ll will be seen that I differ fnmv Mr. Jacksou in the iuterpretatton of Safpoi.
liiyat. I should be less inclined to do 30 if the contrast tdiWu* -r&r K&yuv, Srtpoi
tJrm. did not seem to me to necessitate nur ei]ppo>iing tbat diffirmt hiyoi are
relerred to, and not the same Ai^toi, even in a diucrent order or aspect.



This paper consista chiefly of two others read before the
Cambridge Philological Society in Miohaelmas Term, 1881,
and llichaelmaa Term, 1882. To these I have added some
notes on other passages, which I either omitted to save time
when reading ray papers, or have since written on a further
study of the Politics.

I trust the notes are as little polemical in tone, as is
possible in such cases, where the whole object is to find, if
possible, something better, than what has beea atbatned. by,
the previous efforts of scholars.

Aa a matter of course, the name of Professor Susemihl
occurs constantly in these pages. The reason is that his
three admirable editions of the Politics form the indispeneabla
groundwork for aR study of the subject, whether critical,
or exegetical, "Wherever, then, I differ from Dr. Susenaihl,
I feel like an ingrate who seeks to assail his benefactor with,
the very weapons provided for him by that benefaotor's
indefatigable skill and industry.

Passages are cited according to the Berlin pagination,
which is that of Susemibl's test (Teubner, 1882), and also
the chapters and sections as in Congreve.

Keferencea to Liddell and Scott are to the so-called
"Definitive Edition."

I. 1, 3, 1252f7, 34. tjivaet fihf o^p Bi^purrat to 6lj\v jcol ji
SovKoP {ovSev yap r/ i^vok irai-ei toiovtov oIqv at yaKKO-nnrot T^w
Ae\<f>iKr]v iidxMpav irevixpai'i, aKX' h "Jrpos h k.t.X. The
most natural idea to form of the nature of the " Delphic
kuife" is that it was suited for iwo functions only. Aristotls
seeka to mark clearly the fiafiiral distinction between to
6>j\v, and to BovXov, though amongst barbarians to 6^\u, koI


10 hovKov -riiv avTr/v ej(ei rd^iv, therefore he will contraat
the tiro separate functions of to B'ljXv and to hov\ov with an
instrument that combines fivo functions in itself. Gottling
"thought it was a combination of knife and apoon for sacrificial
purposes, Oncken thinks it could be used as a knife, a file,
�ad a hammer (vidfi Susemihl nd loemn). In vii. 15, 12995, 9,
Aristotle used the word o^ekiincoKvyyiov in a similar way for
illustration. Now Julius Pollux, x. 26 says : to Ik oQeKia--
KoKuyyiov arpaTueTiKov fiku Tt y^p^fia, etpT^Tai Zk vtrit
OeoTTOfJ/irov tov xio/iiitoD iv Eipijvr)'

opeXiaKoXvjfviov Koi ^i^oiuV)(aipa'; Tntcpaf
(of. Bothe Frugm. Comic, p. 305). May not the AeXtf>iic7)
pA^atpa associated in Aristotle's mind with 6f3ekia-KoXv')(viov
be the same kind of weapon as the ^i<f>o/idj(^ai.pa associated
with the same instrument in the line of Theopompua ?
^ii^ofidj^atpa would seem to be a weapon, like the old Scotch
dirk. A glimpse of light may perhaps be thrown on the
name AeX^iK-j by Pindar, Ncm. vii. 42 : —
iVo Kpe&v VLV virep /ittyas'
iXiurev arriTu^oW avrip fia^alpa.
Perhaps the name may have been given to a large kind of
knife which could be used for either fighting, or carving,
from the sacrificial knife having been used as a weapon to
slay Pyrrbua.

I. 2, 5, 12526, 13. Ti fikir ovv et? iraaav tjfiepav aweaTr^Kvia.
KOiVfovia KaT^ <pvaiv oJico^ i<mp, oi); 6 ftev XapdivBa^ jeaXet
ofioai'TrvoiKi'ETrip.eviSri'iBeo Kp^? op-otcaTrovi' tj S' etc •a-Xeioi/mv
oiKimv icotiitDvia irpiiyrij ^pijueai? evSKev p.}/ itf>rip,epou Kiitp/i).
fLaXiara S" eoiice Kara <^vaiv r) Kiitpri uwoiKia oikuk elvat, o&s
KoKavai. rivet; ap,oydXaicTa<i TratSii-; re ical •rraitaiv TratSa?.

Here the best family of MSS. (21^) give apMad-jvav^, whilst
the second beat family (H') give o^o/caTruou!.

opOKaTTovi! has hitherto been read with the penult short,
as if a compound of Kann]. Aa Epimenides wrote in hexameter
verse, this can hardly be right. Again as Kiiw] is always
used of the mangers or cribs of animals, it is not a likely
epithet for human beings. ofiOKavuovv, the reading preferred
by Mr. Qrote, is more likely to bo a corrxiption from the


less familiar form ofioKairov^ than ofioKairov^ from it, and
furthermore the desire to get a word adapted to hexameter
metre would tend to its introduction into the text. That
however kottvo^ can be taken as equivalent to ktrria is more
than doubtful, when we remember the strong religious feeling
for the hearth in early times. The word is evidently meant
to express the same idea as the ofioahrvoi of Gharondas,
which means people having a common store of food, I
would therefore propose to read the word as ofioicmmy
with the penult long, taking it as the Doric form of ofMoici^oiSi
meaning those who have a common plot of ground. What
is more likely than to have a Doric form from the Cretan
Epimenides P In this case ofioahrvoi and ofioKairoi represent
exactly the same idea regarded from slightly different points
of view. ofWKairoi implies a common piece of land to fumkh
foody ofioaiTTvoc a common store of the food produced by tM
land, just as in ii. 6, 5, we read of a common ^rfireiav, and a
common KapirS^;. It would appear that the stage of social
development implied in this passage is what is known as
the Joint Family of the Hindus. There we find, as Sir H.
Maine tells us, that the proceeds of the undivided property
must be brought into the common chest or purse.^

Aristotle then goes on to say that the village is composed
of several families, and states that the /cdfirj is xark ^iffiv
as it were an airoiKia of the olKia, This represents the fully
developed village community as in Russia. The words wxtA
^xxTiv refer to their having a common ancestry, just as all
the Russian peasants of the same village believe in their
common ancestry.

Here I must dissent from Mr. Heitland's expungement oi
airoLKuiy and from his reading air olKia^;, For we shool^
rather expect ^Irfvea-Oai i/c than elvat airo, (cf. i. 6, 2, 1255^,
1 ; VIII. 3, 10, 1303fl, 26) ; and (2) Aristotle does rxo"^
explicitly say that the village is an aTrotKui, but that ^^
resembles one (eocKc). It may be worth pointing out the w^^

* For further illustration cf. L. H. Morgan, Ancient Society, pp. 69" *
** They (the Iroquois) cultivated maize, beans, squashes and tobacco in gar^^
beds. . . . They constructed long joint tenement houses, large enough to cott-'^
five, ten, and twenty families, and each family practised communism in liTing'-


olictK is used for what I take to be the joint family, whereas

the village is formed from oiKiai, i.e. separate dwellings,
and it is regarded as an atroiKta of the original oUta, in
which the oi�o9 or joint family first dwelt, before they
advanced to the stage of a full village community, in which
stage they were called by some ofioyaKanTei. This last word,
explained by L. and 8, as Jbsit'r-bro/hi.'rs,^ and translated by
Susemihl by Mikh(j('no�nen or Mikhtdttrn, seems sufficient
even by itself to prove that descent was originally reckoned
through females amongst the Greeks as elsewhere (cf. L.
H. Morgan, Ancient Society, p. 348, seqg.). It is ex-
plained by Philochorus (Fragm. 91-94) by the words
feiiirjjTai opye&vei. If then 6/i,oya\aiiTe'; are " members of a
fhioi," the name itself demonstrates that this membership
in the yevoi depended on their having bad the same mother's
milk. E. Gurtius (History of Greece, i, p. 83, jiote) says
this custom " is rooted in primitive conditions of society, in
which monogamy was not yet established with sufficient
certainty to enable descent on the father's side to be affirmed
with assurance." "

I. 2, 7, 12026, 24. �al tou? deoii^ Be Std tovto travrei 0ao-l
^atrtXeveirdai,, on ital aurol ol fj,ei/ en icaX vvv ol Se to apxoMH
i^atrt\evoiTO, Sinrep Be Koi to, e'lBij eai/Toi? a^QiLoLovmv ol
otrBptDiroi, avTos Kal tous ^iovs twv OeOrn.

This seems to be a reminiscence of the famous saying of
Xenopbanes given by Clem, Alex. vu. p. 711 u.

"E\X?ji/e? Se wffTrep twOpwrrofiopi^ov; oStoj? koI av9piinrOTra6el<i
Tovi ffeoii'; vTrOTidevrai, Kal xadajrep ras /j.opipa': avrGtv ofioui'i
mvToXi; iKomoL Sia^aiyptKfioucnv, eu? ^atv o EtTo^awj?"
AWioirei re fieXavai aifiovi re, 0paicei re irvppoiK koI
yXavieovi, oiJtw? k.t.X.

For the rest of the saying, cf. Clem. Alex. v. 601 c. :

oW etrot xeifti? 7' e'X"" ^�^^ V^ XeoiTC? k.t.X.

' Suth, too, I tale to be the view nf the -writer in the Alhenmum (April 22,
1882) of R pasaage pointed out to me by Mr. H. D. HitkB : " Same etlinologistB
iqjwd th� ^nB as a BurviTal from a most remote anticjnitf , when ' eating out of
the tame toough,' ' sharing the same Hmoke ' {inoirlwim, J/iiliKmvoi) uia ' being
mtrtOKd by the Eume milk ' (dFioTcUoiiTd) and nut iuheiitance of the same blood,
mmtituted the rudimentary ideas of kinship." IncidantuUy the writer euema to
WDfilBe j^DctlTmai and J/uJuflTai.

' cf. Od. 1 216, (i-frnjp jIm'i' t' ifii ^ijiri toS ?fif(ei�ii- oOrlj) eyory*
a^K oli'. otryap rti Tis ihv yAyof ainbj iky4'ynf.


I, 6, 1, 1255a, 1, seqq. oti /ien roivui/eiai ^itrei nvk of
fiep e\.tvdepoi ol Se SovXoi, iftavepov, ois Kal tnifitfjipa t�
SovXeveiv xal Siicaiov ianv' OTt Se �al ol ravavrui ijniaiamK
rpoTTOv Ttua X&yov<TiP opdoi^, ov j(iiKewou ISeai, Sij(w tof
Xeyerat to BovT^vtiv Kal 6 SoDXof. eu-ri yap Tts leal (CfflTa
vofiof SouXd? Kal SovKevtou' o yap vofio^ 6/i6\oyla rk iarai, h
^ tA RaTO. TToXtfiop KpaTovfieva rmv KpaTovvTtDV flval liiatnv.
TovTo B>} TO StKaiav iroXKol rmf €P Tots vofioi^ toirTrep pifTopa
ypdifiovTai, irapavo/i^v, fu; Setpou el rov ^iiiaaaSai Swajiesov
Kol Kara Buva/iiv Kpeirrovo^ eurai BovXov koX apj(6fievw to
^laaQev. koI Toh fiev oSrai? Soicer roll Be eVe/wu?, kcu tww
aotfimv. atrtov Be tqutt^s afi^ia-^Tyrrjaeeo^ Koi 8 iraiel tow*
\q^ov^ hraliXaTTeiv, ort Tpo-rrov Ttvo aperif -nr/yavifiirt^
j(opT}yiav Kal ^id^eaStu Svvarai p-dkitrra, Kal ecrnv ati to
KpOTovv ev inrepo'xi} aya6ov ticd?, aurre Soieeiv fiij auev apET^'S
etvat TT^v ^lav, aixk wepl rov BiKalov fiovov elvai rrjp a/i^i*
^^TTfaip (Blo, ykp toDto tok ^ei' eijpota SoKel to BUaiop Bttt*-�
row S' avro tovto BiKatoi', to top Kpeinova a,p-)(ew) he*
BuKTrdvToip ye X'^P'-^ tovtcop twv Xoytav oiiTe Icrxyphv oiSft*
t)(ovaiv 0UT6 widapov orepot \oyoi, to? ov Set to ffeKTWV as*'
dperijp dp^eiv Kal Beawo^eip" o\^<i B' dvTeypfifPoi Ttws, ��
o'ovTOi, SiKaiov Tipos {6 yip vofiot StKauiv Tt) -rijp �oT^*
'TToXtfiov SovXeuw TiBea(jL BiKalav dfia Be ou ^aa-ip. t^v t^
yap dp'}Q)v epBex^rat fiij BiKaiap elpai to>p TToKe/iotp, xrai TW**
apd^tov Sovkeveiv ouSajiiw? av ^a^i/ Tt? SovXop elpai,' el Si /"?•
avp-^^frerat Top'i eiiyeveordTowi eivai, Bokovvto^ BovKoui tifct^
Kal SK hovXaiv, idp avfi0jj "n-paffijpai \t)<p6ePTa^.

It may well seem impertinence to make a fresh attempt a-t
a difficulty, whicli has baffled so many first-rate Bcholars,
hut the feeling that I shall fail in such good company
emboldens me to make one more effort for its solution.

As Mr. Hcitland hns pointed out, the chief difficulties li^
in the words eTraXKaTTeiP, and Biaa^dvriop ye x^P'S toutW
Twi/ \6yriiv ovre lij)(ypop ovSep e-^^ovcrip, ovre -TnSaPov arepo*
\6yoi. I will now give briefly my view of the paaaag�'
Aristotle has in view three theories of Slavery.

Already in Chapter ni. ^ 3, he has indicated the t*'*'
commonly received doctrines {twv vvp viroKaix^aponeptDv) *^^
the subject. vpSnop Be irepl Bea-mrov Kal Bav\ov ei-rr^iLev, �*"*
TO, re rvpo^ rrjp avayicalav ■)(peiap tBmfi^p, k&p et ri ■jrph'jro etSe*'^^'
irepl auTwi' BvpalfieBa'Xa^elp ^e\riop tqip pup vrTo\a^^apo[i.evt^*^\
TOW fikp yap BoKei eViffTfj/tjj Te t(! elvai f] BtairoreUt, Kat>

�WT^ oucovo/iia xal SeaTTorela xal iroXntiei} xal ^aaiKixri,
^adairep eWofUV upxo/J^vov rol^ Se -n-apa (ftva-iv to BeaTro^iv.
3'6/i^ yap TOP p-iv ?iovKov elvai rov B' eXevSepov, ipvtrei S ovSeu
�taij>ipetv. BioTrep oiihe hiKaiov ^iaiov "yap. Ho has also
arrived at his own doctrine on tte subject in tbe previous
chapter. These three theories may be briefly stated as follows :

A. Aristotle's own, viz. oxt (i,iv Toivw elul (fiiraei rmh ol
jiiu iXevBepoi, oi Be Sov\oi,. Slavery if>vcret is just, slavery
vofi^ is unjust.

B. Slavery, whether i^uo-et or v6/icp is just.

C. Slavery, whether ipva-ei or p6fi(p is unjust.
B and C are said to eVaWtiTTetJ'.

A reference to the IndexAristotelicuawiU show the meaning
of evaXXaTTeiv. Bonilz, st(b rore, aays (in reference to its
intransitive use metaphorically), " inde transfertur iiraKXaTretp
ad ea, quae inter duo genera ita sunt interposita ut cum.
utroque cohaereant, uel omnino cum alio genera certissima
similitudine coniuncta sunt." As instances we may compare
PoL I. 9, 12576, 3C, eVaXXttTret ■>/ ■)(piiiTi^ rov aiiTov ovaa
eiearepai rij^ ^i;^aT�rn�^? ; Pol. vi. 1, 1317a, 2, Tavra
votet Ta<i TToXnela'i eiraXKaTrew wtne apiTTOitpaTia^ re
oKi/yap^txa^ etvai fcal iroXireia'i Si}fj,oKpaTi.Ka)TepcK ', and again,
H.A. xii. I, 501(7, 22, i] ijiroKt;, eTraWtiTTavaa TJl Yflfet TWi*
l^Cam. Tbe meaning to be given to iiraWttrretv ia evidently
" to overlap," " run into one another." The cause of dispute
is that B holds that ySi'a always implies aper^ (ori rpinrav
Tiva aperr) rvy)(avov<Ta ^o/jjjy^a? Ka\ ^la^eaffat Bvvarai
fiaXurTa real eaiiv ael to Kparovv Iv urrepo^ ayadov Ttwis,
utrre Soaeiv fiij avev apcTiji elvai rijv ySioi/j and holds that
dper^ implies the existence of ^ia.. This mistake arises from
B and C confusing tiioriil and phynkal apertj. The question
then depends on what is to Blxaiop. B holds that might is
right {tA tov KpetTTOva apj(etv). C holds that it ia djvoia.
Now Aristotle means that the B and C are each partly right,
partly wrong, and that tbe true theory — hia own — will hs
found, if we take B's statement that slavery i^vaei, is just,
and C's that slavery v6/j.q> is unjust. By the words oi
Tavavria tpaa-Homei he means the two parties {B and C), why


told the two commonly received (ri vvv ii-Trokafi^avoiKiia)
opposition theories. The words cannot be used of perBons
who are contrasted with himself, as neither the B nor the
C theory is ivamioi; to Aristotle's own. Further, Tavainia
could not be used of more than lico parties, as three or four
different parties could not he said to Tavavrla <f)aiTK€iv. For
ci- evl ivavrlov, ovk ev&exerai evl TrXe/to evavruj. elvat, Met X.
4, 1055�, 20. Now the words tiaaravriev ye xtoph rovmi
Tojv Xoyav mean, when the theories of B and C no longer
overlap, hut get clear of each other, disentangled, with the
overlapping parts cut off, viz. B's statement that slavery vo^a
is just, and C's that slavery ^vaei is unj uat. hta<m'tvTWV yofk
is contrasted strongly with e'TraXKarreii'. "What then are
arepoi Xoyai ? They are the overlapping parts, the overstale-
ments of B and C, of which Aristotls at once gives C'j,
namely, pre-eminence in aperq gives no claim to mastery,
because, as they imagine, aper^ implies ffla. Now then,
instead of giving B's overstatement, viz. that pre-erainencfl
in ^ia gives a claim to mastery, because, as B wrongly enp-
poses, ^la implies aper^, Aristotle, referring hack to � 1
(o yap vofiO'i ofiokoyia tk ianv, in ^ ra Kara voMfiOV
Kparov/ieva rmv Kpa/rovvTiav elval ipatrtv), proceeds to fltalfl
generally (oXm?) the error of B, and show their inconsistency
in consequence of their confusing vofio'i with to hiKaiov. For
though they declare slavery vo^ai is just, they virtually
deny it, as after all they make it depend on the queatioOt
whether a person is fitted to be a slave, which comes to th�
same thing as Aristotle's own 0tJ<7�- slavery.

That no fresh theory is referred to in the sentence beginning
oXw? he, as some think, will he made plain by a reference t<5
the Index, sub voce oKan;, where Bonitz says, " ab enumerat*^
singulis rebus transitum parat ad universum genus," aa
further, " in principio enunciationum positum legitiir oXw"
oXqi? 2e, KoX oXro? Sij, ubi ad propositionem uel rationeC*^
magis gcneralem transitur." oXwi is never used when son* *
fresh matter is being added to what has gone before. ^--'
Aristotle was enunciating another theory here, he would ha'
used ert 5e, his almost invariable formula in such cases.



I have printed the passage without the stop which is
usually put at d/Kpi^^^miTiv, and put in a parenthesis the
words Sia y&p toCto down to ap^eiv. Some have gone wrong
in identifying evuota and <f>i\ia, to which Aristotle attaches
distinct ideas ; of, Nic Eth. viii, 2, 11556, 33, segq., and id.
IX. 5, 1167�, 3.

By evvoia he means the 'benevolence' of the Anti-slavery
party (C), whom, higher up, he describes as thinking it co?
Sea^v el toO Btdaairdai Svua/ievov Kal Kara SwafiLv Kpeenovo^
earai SovKov ical dpj(ofj,ei/ov to 0ia<x$ev.

1. 9, 8, 1257^, 35. Bio Trp'oi to? dWaya.'i toiovtov ti
(TWeBevra — o twc j^pria-ifirDv avro av eij^e TTjir ^eiav eiftera-
j^eipiffTov ■TrpO'i TO ^jv, ohp fftSij/jos Kai dpyvpo^ Kal et t*

Byzantium is an instance of tlie use of iron money; cf.
Plato Com. Peis. 3, ^^aXeTriws' tif olierjffai/tev iv Bv^avrloK
oTTou ffiBapioiffi Tois vo flier fi-arnv ■}(p5ivTai. These coins were
commonly called ol tnBdpeoi ; ef. At. Nub. 249.

Tt towOtov erspov. Aristotle has in mind some such
coinage as the electrum money used at Cyzieua.

I. 10, 4, 1258S, 1. e.vK(r/iiiTaTa (utreiTai ^ o^oKoerraTiicri
hid TO dtr avTou toO vo/iiafiaToi eivat tijv KTrjatv koi oiiic i(f>'
urjrep e-n-opia-dfieda. fieTa^oXrjj ydp i-yevero jfdpiv, 6 hi tSko^
avTo TTOict ifKeov. o6ev KaX ToijfOfia tovt ei\ti<pev o/Miia
lap TO TLKTOfieva Tot? '^evvwertv avrd icrrtv, 6 Bi toko? y{-
virai vo/iLapa eic i-o^ia-^etTo?. This is perliaps borrowed by
Aristotle from Pluto, Eep. 555, E. ot Sg S^ j(pt)pMricTral
hfiev\^avTe<;, ouSe BoKoOvre^ tovtov^ apav, riov XoLirihf toc dei
vrreiKOPra eviaTfi apyvpiov TiTpaianovres Kal rov •srarpoi
iicyovovs TOKOV^ "TToWa-TrXaaiov; K0fj,i^6p,€voi ttoXvi/ tov KT]i}irjva
mi TTTfiyjfpv ep.TroioviTt t^ 7r6\e(. But we find this idea still
earlier, in Aristophanes, Thesmoph. 846 neqq.

a^ia yovv el roKov, t

II. 4, 8, 12626, 18. aairep ydp p.iicpov yXvKv eh troXii v&ap
lu/)(6ev aualadijTov ■n-otet 7i}v Kpdaiv, ovra av/j.^aivet Kal t^i*
olKeiorrtra Tf)V Trpoi dXXijXovi t^v airo twc ovofmrwv rovrmv
iio^owx/Jetv ?iKttna dvayxcuov 6v ev rji iroXneltf Tp Toiavrjj, ^



irarepa &^ vl&v fj vlov w irarpo^y fj co? aZek^v^ ciXKrjKonv, The
diflSculty here is how to manage t^i/ otxeioTijTa and iia^ih
rl^eiv. Susemihl and others take it as a loose accasatiYe;
others propose Kara for Ka( before ti]v, and make irarkpa etc.
the subject of hia^pomlt/eLV, Congreve governs the accusative
olKeLOTTjTa by BiatlypojnL^eiv, and then proceeds as Susemihl,
making hta^povTi^euv change its construction suddenly and
take a genitive. Furthermore, why have we �9 before the
vi&v and Trarpo^; ? May it not be better to govern oliceumfta
by Bia(l)povTi^€Lv, as Congreve does; but, then, instead of
changing the construction, let us regard fj Traripa, etc., as
exegetical of the wide term ot/cetoT?;?, in which case I would
construe somewhat thus : " So the result is that in such a
constitution as Plato's, least of all is it necessary to have
regard for the mutual family feelings implied in these names
(of father and son), namely, father in relation to son, or a son
in relation to father, or brothers with their correlative
brothers." Aristotle wants to show that the relations implied
by such relative terras as father, son, brother, will disappear.
For such an expression as irarr^p 0)9 vlovy we may compare
Aristotle's term for a logical species, e2So9 to? yevov*;, that is an
€lBo(; viewed in relation to a genus ; cf. Met. x. � 1079i, 34,
and rafila^ to? Koivcav in Pol. viti. 11, 13146, 17, o\fi)9 ^e
avTov irapaaKevd^eiv <f>v\aKa xal rafiiav co? koiv&v flXX*
fjLTj CO? IZicjdv, In any case I would alter the position of the o)9
which stands before aSeX^ou?, and place it before aXXiJXw^-
For Sta<f)povTi^€iv with an accusative, cf. Hippoc. Aer. 280.
II. 5, 22, 1264flf, 34. dWa woXv /jloXXov ewco? elvcu yoKjeifd^
Kal ^povrj/Jbdroov irkrjpeifi fj Ta<; Trap* ivloc<; €tXa)T€ta9 t€ ^O**
ireveoTeia^; Kal BovXeiat;, The words Kal BovXeia^ are obnoxiou^
to many editors for no just cause. Susemihl is inclined to
eject them. Schneider reads irepioiiciaj^^ Schmidt fivait'^*
which means a class of Cretan serfs. Now Thuc. r. 2*^
gives the name BovXeia to the Helot population of Sparta-
By the word BovX€La<; here Ar. means the serf populatioC^^
of states like Argos and Crete, which were called Tviivr^f'^^^
at Argos, and 'A(j)afita)Tai, or 'Afi(j>afiia)Tai at Crete.

II. 7, 15, 1267flr, 26. oi 8* expvre^ dfivveip ov Bwi^ffovr^^



TOi/? eiriovrm. The use of the active a/ivveuf is bo very
unusual, that though the editors leave it without a murmur,
I should like to read afivveaOtu.

II. 8, 1, 1267S, '25. In the interpolated description of
that antique Oscar Wilde, Uippodamus, the architect, the
sentence tmTTe SoKetv ei/i'ow ifli* irepLepyorepoi' Tpexpt" '^^
•7r\T)8eL KaX Ko<rfj.tp TroKuTeXet, en Zk eVfli^TO? eureXoOs p-hi
aXeetvi)^ hh k.t.X. presents a difficulty. There Ja no construc-
tion for the genitive iaBPiTo^, Susemihl rejects ■jroKineket
altogether us having insufficient MS. authority, but his
conjecture /eo^j;s for Koap-fo is not satisfactory. Moreover,
fr( Se is wanting in some M1S8. Bender has conjectured
KaXXamiap,^, and Bernays ett' for ert. I believe the corrup-
tion has been ail due to eureXoDs. A copyist who could not
understand such a coxcomb wearing a cheap garment, wrote
on the margin ■jvdKvTeXoik, which was subsequently introduced
to go with Koa-ptp; en Be was then introduced in an eifort to
make some construction. My remedy for the sentence is to
expol TToXyreXet en Se, and to construct ia&ijTa^ directly
on icD<TfifB : it will then run rpi^Ssv re trKi^dei koX Koafj,^
itrSiJTO^ etc,

Koffp.o'i means the fashion or style of his dress. For its
use in this sense compare Aeschylus Suppl, 246, etptjictvi afi<j>l
icoafiov aip'evBjj Xoyov,

It. 9, 17, 1270�, '6a. Speaking of Sparta Ar. says, Xeyovffi B'
<B? ettI ^^1' T&v irpoTepoiv Qaaiikemv p,ereh!�o<Tav TJjs TroKneiaa,
ucrre ov ylveaSai tots aXiyavOponrlav TroXep/ivvJcov iroXw y^povon.
Congreve is mistaken, I think, in hjiding a difficulty in this
statement, because Herodotus says (ix. So) that only two
strangers ever were granted tho Spartan citineuship. Nor
jet again does it simply refer to pre-historie times, as some
think, nor yet to the Mothakcs as Susemihl suggests, I
think Aristotle is referring to the Neodamodes, who as is
supposed by Mueller, Dorians ii. 45, were a stage higher than
emancipated Helots. Dr. Arnold in an instructive note on
Thuc- V, 34, points out that there is no mentiou of Neoda-
modes being employed in the early part of the Pelopounesian
War, for the reason that as Sparta had been at peace for a




long time, there had been no opportnaity for Helots acquiring
their freedom. This implies that they were only a temporary
class on the way to full citizenship. Such a system would
prevent the very evil pointed out by Ar. here, oXvyavOpa-n-ia
•KoK^fiovi'Tiov •rroXiiv jfpopov. Now it was quite natural that
Sparta when, after overthrowing Athens, she arrived at
the zenith of her power, would be very jealous of admitting
noui homities amongst her citizens. As a caste grows weaker,
it grows prouder, and it is to the abandonment of this
custom, still in vogue in the Pelopounesian War, that
Aristotle refers.

II. 9, 20, 12706, 13. In the sentence xat Sti rd t^v apj^v
eivat \Cav (ieyii\7}v Koi, laoTupavvov Sij/mvyaryeu/ aiirovi ^var/Ka-
^ovTo Koi ol patriXeK etc., I would alter avTov^ t� avroL
Susemihl reads ouroij? ^vdyKa^air Kal rov^ ^aaiKeK. The
corruption arose from a scribe thinking that it was necessary
to have an object for Bt]fj.ar/QyfeiV, which is quite unnecessoiy,
as may bo seen from vii. 11.

The kings were driven to try and outbid the Epbora with
the people, and by this surrender of their dignity, the trans-
ition to Democracy was precipitated. If the kings had tried
to curry favour with the Ephors, it could have only been
for the purpose of maintaining their own prerogatives, which
clearly is not Aristotle's meaning.

11. 10, 6, 1272n, 10. eV/cXijtruxs Be iJ.eTi)(pu(n TrdmeT KVpia S'
ovBevoi ecrnv uXK' ^ crvve-jrii^^ia'ai to, ho^avra rot? -yepovtri leai
roi<; K6<Ttioi<i. Susemihl, L, and S., and Congreve all render
rTvveTnyjnj^ia-ai, " to joia in ratifying a law." To make his
meaning clear, Susemihl adds in parenthesis oder zii verwe>[tm.
Now the verb ^wtT^^tfew is the word specially used of putting
a question to the vote and is never found in tho sense of
ratifying in the active until Dionysius of Halicarnasaus. By
the compound verb here, Aristotle wants to show how utterly
powerless the eceleaia was in Crete. They have not even
tho power of ratifijing the decrees of the gerousia and Koerftoi,
but simply, as the French say, OHmtent at the promulgation
of the decrees without any power of rejection as Susemihl
supposes. The <tvv means that they are simply powerless
adjuncts to the putting of the question by the Koa-fwi.


In VIII. 1. orav €7nyjrr)(f)i^7)Tac dp'xij T49, the simple verb
dnn'\ln]<f>c^€cv is used passively, is put to the vote, where L. and
S. wrongly take it as ratified,

II. 12, 7, 1274a, 29. 0aX7;TO9 S' aKpoarr^v AvKovpyov
scai ZaKevKov k,t,\.

To the arguments advanced against the genuineness of this
entire chapter by Gottling, and by Suseraihl and others
against all of it from vofioderai, S' iyipovro to the end, I
would add one derived from the fact that here we have
OaXriTO^ as the form of the genitive, whilst in the assuredly
genuine passage, i. 11, 8, 1259a, 7 — olov to GaXea rod
Ali^Xaialov — we have the Ionic genitive, Aristotle as elsewhere
using the proper dialectic form, cf. ojjLOKdirov^ supra, and
^Ryyra, v. 6, 1340^, 26, and the quotation from Alcaeus (iii.
J- 4-, 10) Tov KOKOTrdrpiSa UlrTaKov iroXeay^; ra^ a^o\a> koL
PoLpxjSa�fiovo(: iaTdaairro rupawov fiey' eiraiveovre^ doXKee^.
Plctto on the other hand regularly changes into Attic quota-
tions from other dialects, cf. Gorg. 485 e, 505 e, with Dr.
Thompson's note.

III. 2, 2, 1275J, 26-30. Topyla<; fiep oZv 6 Aeomlvo^;, rd
M'CMf UTO^ dirop&p rd S' elpcovevo^evo^, €<f)7], KO^direp oKfiov^
^LM/cLi, TOv<: inrb r&v oXfjLoiroc&v ireiroi/qfievov^, ovt(o kclL Aapi,-
<^clIov^ T0V9 VTTO T&v Sr)iJLiovpyS)v TreTTOcrjfjLivoxj^, elvac ydp rtva^
^^^ptaoTTObov^, Commentators since Schneider, not content
^^tt the double meaning of Brjfiiovpyol, have striven to force
^ double meaning on Aapcaaiov^;, and L. and S. from this
Passage alone give Aapia-aLo^iz^*^ a kettle.''

QDhe object of this note is (i.) to examine the evidence for
^bis view, (11.) to show that the words ehac ydp riva^ Xapir-
^o^rotou9 (XapiaaLOTrocov^ Camerarius) are an interpolation.

"With reference to the first, {a) the point of the comparison
"*^*^B between oXfiov^ and Aapiaaiov<: — Kaddirep . . . ovt(o.
"^hy drag in another comparison which leaves the original
^ixe out in the cold? {b) What are the data for (a) the
^^istence of vessels made at Larisa and deriving a name
*roia thence, (/9) for determining the form of that name ?
(a ). The existence of such vessels is proved by the line
TO)? Aafftaaco)^ KVToydaropa^; eyjrrjrrjpa^.

Leonidas Tarent. (Anth. Pal. vi. 305).


[P) Our data for determining the form of the name are,
(i) The line just quoted, (ii) Xapva'07rocov<:, MSS. Pol. Ix, (iii)
Tdvar/paz=SL copper kettle, (Hesych.) ; Tavcuypk, Pollux, 10.
156 ; (iv) The supposed play on Aapiaaiov^, I.e.

With reference to (i), observe that Aapuaalo^ is not used
as a noun, but is only the adjective with iyfrrjrrjp; with
reference to (ii) Tutpiaoiroio^ can only = a larisa-maker, not a
larisaean-makeT ; (iii) on the analogy of rdvar/pa, Tdv(v>fpKt
we should expect Xaptaa, Aapiaif;; (iv) Dr. Thompson
justly remarks that "it seems unlikely thsit Aapuram without
a substantive would have suggested any other notion but
that of a man of Larisa^' (Grorg. p. 180). These considera-
tions make it veri/ improbable that Aapiaaio^ was the name of
a kind of vessel, but make it slight ly probable that some such
vessel was called a Xaptaa. If this inference is correct, the
double-barrelled joke is exploded.

Now I come to the second object of my note. Let us turn
the bon mot of Gorgias from the indirect narration into his
actual words, viz. : — KaOdirep oXfioi elalv ol inro rcav oXfioirom
w€7roi7jfievoi, ovtg) koI AapLaacoc ol vtto t&v ^fiLovfrf&v
'TreiroiTjfiivoc, elal ydp tlv€<; XapiaoTroioL Now notice (a) that
Gorgias is not content with his jest, but he must needs add
its interpretation, for the words ehai ydp rtva^ 'kapuTtmoviv^
depend on e<^, whilst Aristotle resumes his own discourse
with ecTTi S' cLTrKovv ; (b) that the comparison is between
oXfjLov^ and oXfJbOTroi&v {KaOdirep) and AapLaalov^ and &?/�*"
ovpy&v (ovTco Kal). The oXfWL are a main constituent, and
no interpretation which throws them into the background
can be right. A gloss-writer, perhaps not understanding
that the point of the jest lay in the double meaning of
Sr)fiiovpy6(; (both magistrate, and mechanic)^ and who knew oi
the manufacture of some kind of hardware at Larisa, an^
perceived that Gorgias evidently alluded to the existence o-^
some such manufacture there, wrote an explanatory note to tt^
effect that there was a class of artizans called /ama-maker^^
which subsequently was put into the text. The point of ih^'^
jest is that Larisaean citizens were manufactured just lik
(Larisaean) o\/jlol, and the agreement in gender of oXfiotr^


and Aapiaalov^ lends force to the allusion. Thus we both
preserve the reference to the peculiar industry of Larisa,
and give due prominence to the important word oXfiov<;,
which is utterly ignored by Schneider's explanation. The
only illustration I can think of for the joke is that similarly
it might be remarked of Sheffield that the Master-Cutler
{hqfiLovfyyo^) manufactures cutlers, just as blade-makers manu-
facture blades. I have retained XapLaoiroioi^, the reading
of the MSS., as preferable on critical grounds. If XapL-
<rauyrroLov<i was the genuine reading, it would be patent that
the gloss-writer understanding . (as did likewise all the early
commentators) BrjfjLLovpyoi in the sense of mechanics only,
proceeded to explain it by making a compound of Xapiaaiof:,
and TToietv to <jorrespond to oKfioTroio^. If what I have
said with reference to the importance of oXfiov^ is correct,
the correction aapca-oiroLov^, ascribed to Victorius by Eaton,
may be discarded. I may add that William translates by
Larisso-factivos showing that his MS. read Xapia-oiroiov^.

In reference to this passage it is worth quoting a few lines
from the great Larisaean inscription recently found by H. G.
Lolling, and published by him in the Mittheilungen des
deutschen archdologischen Instifuts in Athen vii. 61 seqq., and
also by Th. Mommsen in Hermes (1882), xvii. 467 seqq.
Wcuf>c^a/i€va<; rd^ ttoX^o? 'slrd(f>L<rfjLa to VTroyeypafJUfiipov Ha-
vdfifioL rd ifcra hr IfcdSc avvickeLTO^ {-tol Mommsen) yevofieva^
ar/opavojjihnovv lovv ra/yovv iravTOW ^CkiinroL roi iSaaiXelo^
fypdfifjLOTa irefi'^avTO^; iror T09 rayo^; koI tclv ttoKlv, Bik kI
Tlerp(iio<i kol Avdr/KiTnro^ KoXApiGTovoo^, ov? (=ft)9) dr rd^
irpeafieias: iyivovOo, €ve(f>avi(Tcroev avTOv, ttok kl koX d dfi/Jbiovv
7r6\^9 Bl€ T09 7ro\e/jLO<; TroreSeero irKeiovow rouu KaroLKeKTovrow
psawoBi K€ ovv Kal €T€po9 eiTLVoeCaovfiev d^LO^ roi Trap afifjLC
voTurevfjuaro^ eV toI irapeomo^ xpevvefiev ylrtKJyi^aadeiv afifie,
09 K€ Tol<i KaroLK6VT€acrc Trap dfifie Il€T6[a]Xovv {^=Gea'aa\a)v)
Kal Tovv dWovv 'EWdvovv BoOel d woXcreui.

It contains two letters from Philip Y. of Macedon. The
date is 214 b.c. The following points may be noticed : (1) It
18 conclusive in favour of the spelling. Larisa. (2) The cause
if the deficiency of population is given. (3) The kind of


persons to be enrolled as citizens. (4) The important !iot
that the niag;iatrates are not styled BTjfiiovpyoi, but Torpi,
which added to the fact that Aristotle himself (viir. 6, 130Si,
29) calls them ■jroKiToifjv'KaKev {otov ev Aapiaji at woXtTOi^uXatR
Sia TO alpeio'Bai avroii^ tojj ox^ov iBrjiMvydiyovp) seeraa to indi-
cate that Gorgias merely employed the common Dorian ssd
iEolian term BTifiiovpyo-; for the sake of his pun, and nol
because it was the special name of the magistrates of Loiin
in his time. To sum up, Brj/j-iovpyoi was simply a gemvl
name applied to them by Gorgias, TroXiTo^vXaicei a general
descriptive name employed by Aristotle (cf. 11. 8, 1268(J, 22,
avayicii yap eie rmv to oirXa Ixomwv KaBimaaOtu KaX arparif
70U? KoX iroKiTO^vXa.Ka'i leal ri? /cvptaJTiirwi ap-x^^i w eiwetf)
whilst To/yoi is the native Larisaean special appellation. Ona
and the same office is meant by the three names, ttoXKuv inf
fiiircoir fu>p<i>i] fita.

III. 3, 2, 1276ff, 13. e'iirep otm Koi Btj/iOKparovVTal tbW,
KUT^ Tov TpoTTOV 6/ioici3i K.T.\. William renders, in democraHsn
iiersav faerunf ; hence Susom,^'- read Kara BTifio/cpariav kfo^
iroirro, but in third edition says, " aed quam reddidit (Guilal-
mus) lectionem, eadem hand dubie erat atque codicum
nostrorum : comma non ante kuto. tov rpoTrov tovtov powuti
Bed post haec uerba ut plerique recentiorum aduersante recta
Schneidero." Did William take ZtniOKpaTovvrai as if from
a form Brf/WKpaTom and hence bis version P

HI. 3, 6, 12 76a, 37. Stcnvep Koi, Trora/AOLf elaida/j.ev Xey'"'
TOW auTov^ Koi Kpi^vw; tA? a^Tos?, xaiirep ael rov pkv eTriyi""'
fjAvav i/dfiaToi rov 8' vTre^iaiTo^ k.t.X. This is an allusion
to the famous dicla of Heraclitus ; TroTa/iolt tow aiT*"^
e/j.0alvo/j,h' t6 xai oiiic ip^aivoftev, Heraclid. Allegor. ftP'
Schleiermacher, Heraclitus, p. 529. ■jrorapA yap ouk eer"^'
ep^rivai, Sk to! avTa> koS' 'HpdieKetrov, Plut. de EI ap. Delpb**^
0. 18. Fragments, 41, 42, 81, of By water's Edition.

III. 3, 7, 12766, 1, etTTep yap Koivavia Ti? y woXts, cot*
Kotvavia TToXiron' iroXtreui? yniopMin)<i eripa'; k.t.X. 80 *
M8S. Susem.^ says, "TroXiToiv secludendum esse ci. Suse-
TToXiTcta? superuacaneura et corruptelam fortasae in bis uer*^
esse oenaet Eaton; ttoXitsui acripsit Congreueua." The i*- ■"


reading is to be retained. Make iroKii the subject of Koivtovla
voK -TToX : — " For if the state is a kind of community, but it
(^ TToXi?) is in fact a community possessed by citizens in a
constitution," elc. For the sense cf. 111. 4, 1, mcnrep ovv o
TrKtarijp el? Tif t&v kqivmvSiv eariv ovrai koX tov iroXt-rrjV (fM/iev.
As regards cooatruction, Kotvwuia, is found commonly with
either kind of genitive; and at ni. 9, 14, 12806, 40, ia found
with a similar double genitive, troKf: Se f/ 'yevap Kal mofi&v
Koipavia �0)^; TeXet'a? xal avrapKovf, though Suaem. adds
yapiv after Scaliger, evidently on account of the sentences
preceding, ovit eanv fj ttoXi? Koiviovia towou Kal roO fiif
a&ueetv vcfiai avrovi; Kal r^s fieraSoo'etifi yapiv, and r/ rov eJJ
^ir Koweovla koL Tats oiKiaii koX tow yeveai, �0)^9 rekeiai
j(iiptv Ktd avTupKov^. But it is evident that these two cases
are not analogous. For whilst in the latter the two genitives
are of objecta lo be participated hi, in Koivotvla ttoKitoji/ -ttoKi-
Teia^, and ^ Kiop.iav xal yevfav KoivavUi ^tui}; k.t.\., one genitive
is of the participator — ttoXituiu, ymiwv koX Kcufitov — the other
of the object of participation — rroXtTeta? and ij"')?.

III. 4, 9, 1277(1, 24. koL Bia tovt' i<7w? 'Idaiov e^ Treti^n
OTe fii] Tvpavvol o)'i ovk eirvardfievQ^ l&uimj'i elvai, Cf. Cic.
iTusc. Disp. 111. 12, 26, est autem impudens lactus maerore
8e conficientis, quod imperare nou liceat liberia. Dionysiua
quidem tyrannua Syrucuais expulsus Corinthi pueros docebat ;
Usque eo imperio carere non poterat,

III. 4, 17, 1277i, 23. koX ywij XaXo?, el ourti) tcorrfila etf)
&rrjrep o dvijp a ayaOot. For XdXo'i of IT' and Bekker, P*
gives a\dko<:, Aldine aXXja?, iiihoitesta Aretinus, all the reat
a.\Ko<i. Susera, reads uKoXatrrcK. Xa\os is probably right.
It is commonly applied in reproach to women, cf, Theocr. v.
78. inhoiiesta would be a natural translation for it.

in. 5, 9, 1278(1. Stavep fieroiKO^ yap iariv 6 Tmir TLfjMV /irf
HeTe)(a)V. aXK' ottov to toioutov hriKeKpvnfi.ivov eirriv, airaTiii
Xdpai Totv a-woiKoinnasv eariv, A solution for this difficult
passage can be found by referring to viii. 3, 1 1 — 12, 1303a, Sto
Soot ^S)7 avvoLKOvs eSe^avro rj eTroixoifi, 01 "TfKeiaToi, hieaTaaUurav
olav Tpoi^i/iiiois 'A)(aio'i, rrwancijaav Xv0apai, k.t.X. ; and a few
lines after rots' avvoiicijaaa'tv ia used absolutely as hore. From



tbia it is plain that tn!i'ot�o(= joint settlers of aliea blood
(to ^j) 6ii6<^v\ov), in the original d-TroiKUi; eTrot�;ot=iranii-
granta of alien blood into an already established i-jroiKla.
Now in tbia passage the meaning ia that at the founding of a
city, the main body of citizens of the same race are as yet
afraid of offending the smaller bodies of a different race, who
are their uvvotKoi, Consequently, j;a'p(i' a-tTdTri<!, they do not
openly state in tbeir laws the doctrine that fieroiKoiK y-rj
fiere)(eiv Tiof Tt/i^v, though fully intending to put it into
practice in due time, when they feel themBelyea strong

in. 9, 11: — 14, 1280S. ^vephv toIvw on fj troXi^ ovk etrn
KOiviavia roirov koX tov fif) aBiKeiP trtpa^ avroi/^ xal rtji fiera-
Sotreats '^apiv aWa Tavra /j,ev avay/caiou inrdp^etv etTrep earai
ttoXk, oil p.J}v ot/S' inrapjfpvTtov tovtiov (VTraVTiav r/Bi] ttoXk
uXK' fj TOV ev ^rjv KOivoivia koX tuk ottticwi Koi tok yeveen,
�(B^? TsXeia^ X"/"" "'"' "•vrdpi^ovi;. oiiK earat ftevTOt touto fiij
TOV avrov Kal eva leaToiieavvTiop tqhop xai ypinfieviiiv eVt-ya/^wtt!.
Zio Kjjheial t eyiifovro Kara ri^ Tro\e(? Kal tfiparpiai Kal Bva'iai
Kal htarfoyyal tov av^rjv reXos /^ev ovv ttoX^wt to tii ^-jv, Taina
he TOV TeKov^ y_dpi,v. TroXts he rj yevwv xal Kionmv Koivoivia
tfurj^ TeXet'tt? /cat ainapKov^. On rat? oIkuik Kal rot? yivetri
Congreve remarks, " wi/AOt? in the place of yevem. would hare
been more consistent with his general language." Mr. Helt-
land (p S) 8 8 — ' The identity of the kw/^jj and y€vo<i is
appa en 1 nl a ed in iii. 9, �� 13 — 14, where we have the
TToXt defined as ( } ^ rov eB ^v Kauvcovia. leal rais olniatv koI
TOK y D- and (h) t) yevaiv koX Kiufimp Koipmuta. The former
would e m o allude to the steps by which the community ia
formed , while in the latter case xai means no more than our
' or,' perhaps ' that is,' ' in fact,' as in iv. 11, � 7, ipiXla^ leai
KOHKOviaf •rTo\iTiKri<;, � 12 urdirei'^ Kal BiaardtreK."

Now, why Aristotle makes no mention of yevi) in bk. i.
c. 1, but does so here, will be plain from the following
consideration. In bk. I, he ia getting at the iroXt? syntheii-
calli/ ; first the oIkm, then the Kaip/r}, lastly the KWfiai, are
as it were lost to sight within the walls of the TroXt?. In
bk. III., on the contrary, he ia proceeding anali/tically.



Starting from the 7rd\(! he perceivea as units within it,
first oliciai, then '^spt}, as evidenced hy tf>parpiai, dvalai, etc.
Next, the sutures of the •yeur/ within tho wo'X.is reveal the
divisions formerly esiating between the separate Kotfiai., prior
to their <TVV0LKiafj.6<;. Thus in the process of analyttin the
7e'i'�) are of the utmost importance, whilst in that of �yntheak
they have no place, as the work of si/tiihesis ceases on the
combination of the KWfi-at into the TrdXi^. This gives an
answer to Mr. Congreve's remark, and furthermore shows
that Jlr. Heitland is incorrect in his statement that "the
former (i.e. tow otKiiit? Koi tow yeveai) would seem to allude
to the stcp8 by which the community is formed," and that
K^/j-T} and yevo<; are identical. We sliould rather say that the
Kwfjiri is the earlier stage of that of which the •yevoi within.
the city is tlie later representative.

in. 12, 6, 1'283�, 3. el yap fiaXKov to tI p,eye6oi, koI oKo)<;
&v TO fieyeOoif iva/iiX\oii eli] Kal Trpos wXovrov Kal irpo^
^Xev6fpiav. fioKXov has to suffer great violence to extract
from it the sense required. W'liy not expel it, unless we
adopt Dr. Ingram's suggestion evdp.ihXov P In that case we
need simply carry on avp.^\t)T6v from the foregoing sentence.
fMMbKKov crept in from ivdfuXKov in the nest line.

IV, J. 1, 13336, 39. erepoM ydp earw epyov <7;^oX^f ravra,
a.nd also vm. 11 (13136, 3), (T)(o\a<! p.rjre aXKovt a-vWdyov:
^•TTiTpeTreiv yiveaQcu crxo^'^o-TiKov-i, The most natural meaning
"to give iT)(pK-^ in each place would he " lecture," " discussion,"
That o';^oX.iJ was the recognized term for such in the time
c�f Plato is shown by tho sarcasm of Diogenes the Cynic,
-T^ii fiev EvkKsiBov c^oX^v eXeye ^oX^n rijv 8e TLXaTiovov
SitiTpi^'i" KaTaTpi^j'jv, Diog. Laurt. vr. 49 ; cf. also Cic.
Tuac. Disp. 1. 7, 8, " ut iani etiara scholas Graecorum more
liabere auderemus — itaque dierum quinque scholas, ut Graeoi
appellant, in totidem lihroa contuli. Compare the use of the
l^erm "schools" in Oxford and Cambridge.

IT, 2,10,13246,1. ip ivloii} yap Kal vo/Mii Tivh elen -jrapo^v-
voine^ irpbi T^f dpeiijp ravrtjif, KaBd-rrep ev Kapj^rjSdvi ipaal
Tof iit T(2(^ KpiKav Kotrp-ov \ap.^dveLV offat &v oTpaTeuaaJvrai
arpuTeiat. Does this throw any light on the real significance


of the story of Hannibal sending by his brother Mago the
rings of the Roman equites, as told by Livy, xxiii. 12 P " ad
fidem deinde tam luetarum rerum, effundi in uestibulo curiae
iussit (Mngo) annulos aureos, qui tantus acoruus fuit, ut
metientibus dimidium super tres modios explesse sint quidam
auctores. faraa tenuit, quae propior uero est, hand plus
fuisae modio. adiecit deinde uerbis, quo maioris cladis
indicium esaet, neminem, nisi equitem, atque eorura ipsorum
primores, id gerere insigne." From this Carthaginian
custom Ilannibal thought that the rings would be the best
way of proving to the One Hundred that the flower of the
Roman army had been annihilated. Mago's statement about
the equites may be' only the addition of a Roman, who was
ignorant of this custom at Carthage,

IV. 8, 3, 1328i7, 30. o-rav 8' ji to fiev tovtov eueKev to he ob
eve/ceu, oi/Bev ev ye tovtok kowov dXX' f) toi /lec woiijcrai tw &i
"Ka^elf K.T.X.. Here Mr. Postgate, to whose general treat-
ment of this difficult passage I give my adherence, changes
'Ka^elv to tradelv. It does not seem likely that TraOeiv, the
natural word to use, would be ousted by 'Ka^elv. Further-
more, this use of 'Ka^etf, said of the thing acted upon,
in antithesis to troteiv, can be supported by Plato Apol.
25 E, pyw Bk Si} eh touovtov afiadla<i ■^k(o, ware xal tovt
aryvou), oTi edv Tiva fi.ay(Oripoti Troiijaa rStv ^vvauriov, Kivhwevffta
KaKov n Xa^elv air' avroD.

IT, 11, 3, 1330t, 4. vSilrav 8e xal vafiaTtav fiaXiara fief
V7ru,pj(eiv ttXij^o? oiKiiov, el Be /j,^, tovto ye evp^rai, Sia toO
KaToa-Kevu^etv vwoSoj^^a^ ofi^piois vBaaiv ajidovoM^ koX /leyaKat,
&(TTe /iijSeTToTe v-rroXeiTveur etpyofiepou^ Tij^ ^fuysa? Sta •TroKefiov.
Bekker after Coraes reads iiriXeiireiv. Madvig turns elpyofU-
vovi into elpyofievoK. Suaemihl is right in saying that both
are unnecessary, but wrong in saying in the index to his
third edition that vKoXeiiretv is intransitive, doubtless taking
etpyo/ievov^ as its subject. vBara is rather the natural
subject — thai water may never fail them, and that this is
Aristotle's regular use of the verb is plain from Rhet. i. 13,
20, vTroXeiTToi yap av o etlijn Biaptdfiovma ; and again Rhet.
III. 17, 21, oirx vTToXehrei. avTov 6 Xoyoi.


IV. 12, 2, ]331�. Koi rairra fiev Si) toOtov Sv tis hiaxoa-

jnria-ei€ tov rpinrov. Tar Se Toi? Qeioii iiTToSe^o/ieua? otici^aeit

^vai ra KvptiinaTa tSjv apj^eioii/ trvaalria apfiOTrei rinrov

^e.T.X. Suaemihl coujecturea t� tSiv KvpiMraTwi/ apxelav,

"^vhilst Spengel miaaes the sense of tlie entire passage by

"fcracketiiig (rva-aiTia. Aristotle's idea la that the messes

of the several divisions of citizens shall be held at the imme-

�i!ate sphere of their employment. In the preceding section

!Sie ordains that the messes of the ifivKaicei shall be in the

^liKaKTTipia and wvpyoi where they are on duty. Similarly

■the common meal of the SpyovTe<i is to be held in the town-

liaU. As a matter of course the mess of the chiefs of the

state is the most important. I would therefore insert ra

after KvpimraTa, which would easily fall out as the eams

syllable occurs twice in immediate proximity, ra tcvpuoTara

is opposed to epia in the preceding sentence. Purtber

<iown at 13316, 4, occur the difficult words eVel Bk to

•3r\T}8(K Biaipetrat tj}? TroXeai? fh Upeh, et? ap-j^ovra^, Trpevei.

xal -rStv lepemv avrrahia -rrepi ryv twv lepaiv ouco&ofiTjfiaTOiv

^)(e.iv Ttjv Ta^iv. Susemihl is inclined to change a/)^ocTa? into

either ffr/jaTwuras or o-TrXlrai. This is unnecessary. The

"whole body of citizens can be called equally well dp^omev

or 6ir\irai. For they are each Kara fUpiK, cf. c. 9, � 10. Now

in the next clause it is important to note that tiju before

T&v lepoiv is wanting in IT', one of the families of the good

MSS., and that it is not translated by Aretinus, Hext we

lave iepCiV used as an adjective, although twice in this very

chapter, g 2 above, and � 8 lower down, we have it as a

noun meaning temples. Just as already Aristotle wishes that

the 01/XaKW and apxeta should have their common meals at

the scene of their employment, so here he intends the same

for the priests, and that their meal should be served in the

ecclesiastical edifices. Let us then omit riji' with H', and

Aretinus, and read in its place rd, and change olKoBofi7]/idTmii

to oticaBofiijfiaTa. This gives the sense required, and it is easy

to see that the disorder of the sentence has arisen from a

�opyial altering olKoBo/i^fiaTa to agree with iep&v; rd, then had

nothing to lean on, and was omitted in one family of MSS.,



TO fiepof BriXou
e-^eiv, KoX Bel tcl
hvvafiivoi.<; rvyxui'ei

whilst in the others it was altered into tjJc in a vain effort to
get a conatniction. oLKoBoft^/iaTa ia emphatic. The priesta
are to have their moss in purt of the actual buildings of the
temples. If any one objects to the use of Trepi, lot him look
at the words o "jrepl Ti/v avarfKalav ayopav tottos in the next

IV. 14, 11, 1333n, 25. 6 fteir -yap trpanri.nav eari X070?
oUTMs ouii avdyici] Bij)pjjadai Kal toGto
. Koi To.'i TTpd^eit B' avaXoyoii ipov/i.ei'
V ipvirei ^eKriovo^ aiptrcoTepai elvat tow-
^ Tra/rap ^ roiv Suo7v. For the last
words many remedies have been proposed, such aa to bracket
rj ira^Sjv fj, (Suaetn.), Tali' for rolv (Liudau), the insertion of
TQJi' before toIv (Mueller), I will add another, more simple
critically, and giving good sense. Remove the ^ before
wao'mv, Now take -rrairoiv aa object of rvyj^aueiv. The sense
is where ice have in our power Che choice of all -n-pa^ei^, we
must choose (he actions of the higher part to the entire
exclusion of the -rrpd^eK} of the loicer part. It is easy to see
how likely it was that 7} should get inserted before Traa-av.

IV, 16, lC95fl, 2. ev -yhp ttHiti fftioe; aTeKi} tA roiv ve<av
eicfova Kai dtjXvroKa fiaiXKov kiu /tucpa Trju /Miptfjiiv, aurre
ai/ajKalov avrb touto trvfijBaiveiv STri rSiv andporrrrai/. With
this doctrine of the weakness of the offspring of too youthful
parents, cf, Shakspere, Macbeth iii. 4, 106,

If trembling I inhabit, then protest me
The bahij of a girl.
Dr. Schmidt (Shakespeare-Lexicon) makes baby =z doll,
although he can quote no other instance of this use from

IV. 16, 133-5ff, 18. en Be hi rots roieois a! vmi -rravavai re
IxaXKov KoX BiatpOeipovrai TrXelovs Bio ical rov j^riafidv
yeveerdai TLve<s ^am Bio. TOiauTijii alriav Toit Tpoi^j/vioK, to?
•jToXKmv Btatf>detpOfieitov Bia to yafiicrKetrffai Ta<; itwTepo?, aXX'
ou irpoi Tijv TtBw Kapir&v Ko/uBtjii. There is a gloss on this
paaaage which givea the oracle, or rather a fragment of it,
which runs p-ij repve veav oKoKa. Gtittling prefers to read
veas L=yoing woraanj and thinks there is a pun on veat (^a



if allow field). But the lexicoiia sho'vno trace of aword vea^
-^lOitale, although ^ veioi is found (cf. eeiola iflti^etjj?, II. x.
Soii, and ^ peo^ is used in Attic Greek. In any case the
tf^hange is uuiieceesary, as dXo^ is used in this couiiexion,
<if. �ur. Phoen. 18, trrreipetp T^/a/mi' dXo/ca, and Sopli. Oed.
rTyr. 1210, Trajpoiai aXoKei. For a very similar metaphor
-vre may compare the oracle given in Pansanias ix, 37, 4.
^X^ofTi (sc. 'Epyiv^) i^ JeXi^ou? koI epofiep^ Tvepl -jvaihwu
"^(pa. ToSe T] n.v6ta.

'Epytve, KXvp.kvoio Trdi IIpea^coi'idBao,
o^' ^XOev yeverji/ Bi^^jj.evoi, aXK' ert xal vuv
iaTo^o>}'i fepovTL verjv ■jrorl^aXKe KopiavijV.

^There is doubtless the same play on xopaiinjv here, as in the
"well-known line exKopti xopei Kopmi/ijv, truv Kopot^ tc koX
^patt with which may likewise be compared the Hesiodic
fragment, or dp' Ttr^u? eyrj/ie Kopavip. viile Donaldson's
IPindar Pyth in. 15).

IV. 16, 9, 1335a, 2S. fito ra? fikv apfiorrei. irepl tt]ii tmv
^KTioKaiSexa €7wv rjXiKtav au^evyvvvai, tou? S' eTrra �al
TpiaKovra [^ p.iicp6v\- ev ToaoVTifi yap uKp-u^ovtri re rot?
�Tuifi.ain (7i!fei/^n earaA, KoX Trpoi Tr]V vavXav rfjii TeKvoTroiiat
■^Tvy/taTa^ija-eTai toi? ^ovok euieaipajf eji &e r) SutBo)(ii rStv
■"re'/fi'Qjf Toi? fiev ap^o/j,evtj<i {ap')(p(Levoi^ IP) ea-TM t�}9 aKfiTji, i^v
■*yii^ai Kari Xo7(ti' ei/6v^ ij 'ykvvrjcn'i roi^ Se ^Sj) uaTaXekvfieif]^
~Trj<t i)\(�MK TTpoi; Tov rmv k^hoix,riKovTa irSiv apidiiov. The words
■i) ZiaZoxh ''■'"*' rexPMv k.t.X., have always been a difficulty.
<Jongreve says roli pMv, sc. tok reKvoit, tow Se, sc. toi?
■yomJo't. Susemihl does not offer any explanation. Wow
"the whole passage deals with the adjustment of the ages of
the sexes. Ar. taking as his point of departure the syn-
tbronous cessation of fertility in the man and woman, strives
to adjust their ages in such a way that their offspring may
te as vigorous as possible both mentalli/ and phy�ically. He
cannot let the men marry before 37, for (o) the women would
be under eighteen, and too weak to be mothers, and (fi) the
men would not be in thair iitlel/ectiml prime which is at 49;
cf. B.het. It. 14, 13906, 9. ax/td^ei Se to fiep aoifta atro twv


Tpta/covra eruv fii}(pi rmv irevTEKoiTpiaKovra, t) he ^vy}}
irepX TO. hiiyi Setv "TreiT^Kovra. The men have only just
reached thoir phi/nical prime at 37, and though physically
going down the hill, this ia counterhalanced by the fact that
the women are are only just coming to their physical ax/iTj
(ap')(Ofj.evi}'; t^s a.Kfirj';) whilst at the same time the man ia
steadily approaching his mental aKfi^. Thus when the limit
of TEKvoTToUa ia reached, i.e. when the man ia about 64, the
woman will be 35, i.e. just at the end of her physical a.Kfj,'^,
when the man is at the end of his mental oKfi-q. Now we
can see what to do with tok fiev, tdk Se. The mention of
e^Sofi^icovTa shows at once that tok Be can only refer to the
men, the mothers cannot be included in it. But since the
contrast throughout is between the sexes, as in the first
sentence quoted Ta9 ftev apfiOTrei . , . jov^ S^ �.t.X., it ia
evident that if we read rdi^ ftee for to� fUv, the sense is at
once made plain. Thus the woman's physical a�^�J is waxing,
as the man's wanes, and this will produce evenness in the
offspring. If ap-)(Ofj.h'oi<;, the reading of IP, is preferred, the
change to up-)(pp.evtu'i presents but slight critical difficulty.

IV. 16, 11, iy35�, 39. hethe icaX avroi)^ ^Sjj Beapeiv Trpos t^h
TeKvoTTouav rd re Trapa riov larptov Xeyafiiva, koX to. vropii
Tcui' ipvmKav oi T€ yap larpoi tov^ Kaipov^ twv eratiiaTiiiv
Xeyov(TLV iKavoK. KolTrepl r^vrrvev/iaTrav oi ipufftKol, to, ^opeia
Tffli' voTltuv iiratvoviiTe^ fiaXkov. CI. Ar, wepi tiI ^wOy
674(1, 1, Koi ^opeioi^ i*ev 6-)(ev6p,eva appevoroKei /iaXXow, vothiki

S^ 6TjXvT0Kel.

IV. 16, 13, 13355, 8. -Tretrovrniemiv /tec avu ex^tv Sei rijv e^tv,
ir€woi'rjfiei'7)v 8e irovot^ fi,i] 0idioi';, /j/tjSe 'rrpo'i eua fiouov . . ,,
wa-n-ep ?} tqji/ aSXrjToiv eft? k.t.X. So Susera.^ in text, but he
proposes p.6vov [tTKOTTOi'], or else would accept Sv for Sva.
If any word is needed, read travov, but eva refers to tto'voi?
with quile sufficient clearness. Similarly (v. 3, 1338i, 15)
Suaem. prints ovre Trpot fiiav . , , ovre itpo'i fioXiaTa Tavrijv,
and proposes /iiav [^aper-^v]. If anything was needed, S^tv is
the word, but this is quite sufficiently understood from what
goes before, and really there is no lacuna.

IV, 16, 14, 13356, 18. awoKavovra yhp ^ii/erai ra •yevvai-

OjV some passages of asistotle's politics.


fieua T^i eyovaT}^, wtrrrep to ^vo/J-eva -nji y^v. Suaem. and
Congreve take aTro\avovTa=" affected by." I cannot find
such a meaning of aTroXaveu/ in Aristotle, a-n-oXaveiv meana
commonly to draw good from something, and thence is used
ironically to draw evil, but in the latter case the word for eril
is always expressed, cf. 13366, 2, and L. and S. The moaning
iiere thoo rather is that tho foetus is a drain on the strength
of the pregnant woman, just as plants draw the good out of
the ground,

IV. 17, 1, 1336(/, 5. tpaiverat Si Sui re tSiv aXKav ^axov
^TruTKOTTOvai xal Sth rwv Wvaiv oil inifieXi'; iariv elauyetv
■TTjc TToXffiiKijv e^iv, J) Tou yoKoKTO'; TrKijOavtra. rpo^i} fidXirrr
<iticeia TOK iT^iLaaiv-, aaivorkpa Se Sta tA votr^funa. This is
"Veil illustrated by the following words of ilr. L. H. Morgan :
*' In the Eastern hemisphere, the domestication of animals
enabled the thrifty and industrious to secure for themselves
^ permanent supply of animal food, including milk ; the
lealthful and Invigorating influence of which upon the race,
�nd especially upon children, was undoubtedly remarkable,
~It is at least supposable that the Aryan and Semitic families
�we their pre-eminent endowments to the great scale upon
■vhich, as far back as our knowledge extends, they have
identified themselves with the maintenance in numbers of
�iomestic animals. No other family of mankind have done
this to an equal extent, and the Aryan have done it to a
^greater extent than the Semitic " (Ancient Society, p. 25).

rv. 17, 3, 1336a, 15. Sio irapa ■jroWot? ia-ri t&v ^apffdpatv
�^os TotV fih/ fh irarap-Qv diro^aTrreiv rh yevop-eva, k.t.\. The
tnodcrn Beloochees plunge the new-born infant into a tub of
enow water.

IV. 17, 5, 1336(7, 33, tlo ras Tralhldt dual Set to! ■jtoXKo.';
^i/j.'^aeK Ta�i varepov aTrovBaaofievaiii. So Susem. after Coraea,
�nd perhaps F; but the fut. middle can hardly be right.
"Why not read tnTovSaa-pAreov ? A noun is rather wanted in
antithesis to ■jraiBt.d'i. For the word inrovSaiTfJ.a. cf Plato,
3'haedru9, 249 v.

IV. 17, 6, 1336(7, 34. tAs Be Siardaei.^ twu iralhrov xajh, roin
tt\av6fU)v^ oi/K 6p0w airarfopevovaw oi KinXvoVTe^ hi toi; vo-


fioL^ trvfKpipoviTt yip "irpoi au^rriv. ylverai yap Tpmrov Ttv^
yvfivaala rot? ffto/wwii'' ij yap Tou irvevnaTOi icdBe^K
Trjv i(r)(vv TOK wouoCffti', 3 avfiffahei. Kot to� it a 1
hiaTsivofievoi'i. Ought we to read trvevfLotTiv, ike i
The MSS. of Aristotle are divided between the forma
TTifev/Mov and TrXevfuav. Ar. De Respirat. 47Bo, 9, derives
■jTvevfuov from irveu/jM, which favours the form with ^

IV. 17, 9, 13366. eirel Be to Xeyetv tl twc Totovrm'
e^apl^ofiev, iftavepov ort /cal to Oewpetir j) ^pa^tt? ^ \6yavs
aa^'^fiovtK. Cf. Propert. 11. 6, 27 — 34.

quae manus obscaeuas depiuxit prima tabellas

et posuit casta turpia uisa domoP
ilia puoUarum iugenuos corrupit ocellos

nequiciaeque suae noluit esse rudea.

aad better still, Juvenal, xiv. 44.

nil dictu foedum uisuque haec limina tangat,
intra quae puer est.

v. 2. 5, 1337&,15, e(rTi,�eKaXTa)veKev6epL0iveiria~rrjij,aivfie'Xpt
fiev Tmi<i iptroi/ /Lere^eiv avK avekevBepov, TrpoaeBpeveiii Se \iai/
■jvpim aiepL^eiav evo-^ov thw eipij/ieuaii pXaffats. Why is a
freeman to be allowed to leam aciencea fit for a freeman only
up to a certain point P Head aveXevdepoiv for eKevdepitov.
Aristotle means that know/edge of such arts does not make a
man banausic ; but aa the next clause shows, it is making
them the business of one's life which makes the jSaVBiwo?.
To be able to light your own fire is not banausic ; but to turn
bed-maker and light fires for others for gain is highly so.-
If the reading uv€Xev6epieav of P.' a few lines higher up is
correct, we should read the same here, not a.ve\ev0iptov, thus
involving less change.

VI. (iv.) 1, 1, 12886, 13. olau damia-ii; o-afiaTi iroia re
Tvoitp ffv/iififpei, Kal rh apian) (raJ yap KoKKirrTa 'rre(^VK6Ti xal
K€XopvyVf^^'"P "^V" aplcFTijv avarfKoiav ap/iorreiv) Hal Tt9 7tM?
wXct'iTTois fiia Traaiv, k.t.X. to� TrXe/oTots' and iramv joined
together create a difficulty, especially as the order of the .


^rords prevents us explaining roh TrXeloTot^ as epexegetical of
'TTounv. Aristotle is dealing with the case of aaKrjai^, What
is the material on which the aatcijTijf; works? Surely
iraiS€<:, Therefore read iraiaiv ; and for form of phrase cf.
TCU9 TrXewrrat? iroKeat below, 1289^, 17, and 1295a, 25, ta9 S'
a^picmj iroKi/reia, koX rk dpiaro^ ^lo^ Ta�9 TfKei<TTaL<; irokeat
KoX T0A9 TrXeuTTot? Twv dv6payrra)v,

VI. 1, 6, 1289fl, 2. 'xpi) Be roiavrrjv elarjyeia-Bac rd^cv i)v
poBico^ €K Tduv wrap'xpvaoov koL irevaOriaovTai Kal hvvrjaovrai
Kivelv, k,tX. Susemihl and Mad vig think ivtmi/ is corrupt.
The former proposed Ki'^elv (which he has now given up)
influenced by William's jorosegm, and reeipere of Aretinus. In
iis third edition he suggests, doubtfully, either Kpiveiv or
jcarac/cevd^eiv. Madvig proposes either /eacvovv or Kaivorofielv.
That alteration is needless, and that Ktvelv is used by Aristotle
in the sense needed here, cf. 1304�, 39, 1298fl5, 38, and also
ul KLvrjaei^, 1300 J, 38.

VI. 4, 25, 1292a, 6. tovto hi yivercu orav rh '^^lafiaTa
KVpLa y oKKd fifj 6 vofio^. crvfiffalvec Sk tovto Bed Toij<: Brj/Mi'
r^ayyovf;, iv fiev yap Tal<; KUTa vopbov BrffioKpUTOVfiivat^ ov
^iverat Brffuxr/aryo^:, dW' oi fieXTcaToc t&v ttoXlt&v elaXv iv
irpoeBpla* oirov S' oi vo/jloi fit] elac Kvpioi, hnavOa ylvomai, Br)'
fLorfdorfoL On this Congreve remarks : — " This seems an odd
remark with the history of Greece such as we have it. It seems
to require the attaching a rather limited sense to the term
Sijfuxrycayo^, not such as would have been attached to it in any
Greek state by the party which would have claimed to be ol
fiiXTUTToc T&v ttoXlt&v. Wc Tcquire a more extended ac-
quaintance with the internal workings of other Greek
democracies to estimate the remark. Athens is, in fact, the
only one which we can fairly judge of, and it is not true of
Athens. The Athenian democracy was eminently legal and
constitutional, and yet there were demagogues in the ordinary
sense, and there, as well as everywhere else,— in fact, it is a
necessity of government, — ylnj(l>lafiaTa were frequent, without
superseding the real eflBcacy of law." As regards what sense
"the 01 peKTiaroL t&v ttoXit&v would have attached to the
"word BrjfKVYcoyo^, I am unable to speak, but surely it is



here used by Aristotle in the senBe which he attaches to it
everywhere in the Politics, ^jiltyfuna. are certainly necessary,
but not auch outrageous i^<{tlafiara as were proposed by the
hi}(iafyttrfoi, and ratified by the people at the so-called trial of
the Six Generals. Such is the state of things that Aristotle
has in view, when the people, instead of adhering to the way
provided by the laws for dealing with any matter, eagerly
catch at the proposal of any " decree- monger " under the
passions and whims of the moment. It was to provide
against this danger that ypaipi] wapavofiav was constituted at
Athens ; but, in the case of the Generals, the rfpa^rj irapa-
vofitov itself was flung aside (fide Ourtius's Greek Ilistory,
III. 510). In fact, the mongeriug of novel decrees was
evidently so part and parcel of the Sti/i-a^ar/o^ in what I take
to be the ordinary meaning of the term, that Aristophanes
introduces the ^i^i<r^oT(�7r�Xi)s as a dramatis persona in the
Birds, 1035, seq. Most persons will be inclined, I fancy, to
admit that the decrees dealing with the Six Generals
" superseded the efficacy of law."

VI. 7, 1, 1293(7, 39. TTifj-TTTTj B' itrrlv fj irpoaarfopeverai,
TO KOivov 6vo/Mi "Traa&v ('jrokireUtv y^p Ka\ourrivj aXXa
Bta TO fJ.T) TToXKuKK yiveffdai Xai/Sdvfi tou? Treipwfievov^
api6[i.eiv TO, Ttav troKLTeiSiv eiSij koI y^pwmati rah rerrapat
fiomv, Sicrtrep UXdrav iu tqi? -TroknelaK. Susemihl charges
Aristotle with inaccuracy in this assertion, on the grounds
that Plato called his ideal state apunoKpaTia, like Aristotle
himself ; and that Plato uses rifuiicpajla to express what
Aristotle divides into improper aristocracy and TvoKiTeia,
Plato, in Hep. 544 d. aeq., is consistent in keeping the term
dpio-TOKpaTia for the ideai state ; so he is therefore driven to
use such terms as 6 Kara rijv AoKayvimiv -roKiTelav, ^ ^Xo-
Tt/iO! trdhiTeia, — ovop^i y^p avK ej(o> Xeyop-evov aXXc ^ ti/j.ok-
parlap rj Tip-apyiav avriju KKyreov. Aristotle escapes this
difficulty by the phrase of ij KoXovfiiv^ apicrroicpaTui, He ia
here simply dealing with actually existing forms of govern-
ment, and is quite justified in thus dealing with Plato's
division of actual governments.

VI. 1299�, c. 15, � 8. oil yap ifiiroSioSiTiv aXk^Xatl, KoX ,



"TTpov Ti]v o\trfav6pa>Triav dvar/Koiov to, dpj(eta otov o^eKiaKO-
X-yj^wto TroteHi, See note on i. 1, -3 (^ Aekt^iicrj fidyaipa).

VI. 16, 3, 13006, 28. olov 'Adr,v^<Tt Xe^erat Kai to iit
^pearrol Sueatrrijpcov. Pausaniiia i. 28, 1 1 , gives the iiominat.
^peaTTv^, According to Etymologicum Maguum the form is
^peaTO^, with single t. ^peaTroi as it stands must come
from ^pearrrii, of which there is no trace. Mav there not be
a. confusion between iv ^pearrvi, dative of ^peaTTV';, and
^pearrot an old locative P In which case we ought to read
either to ^pea-noi SiKoimipiov, or to ev ^pearrvl hi/caarqpiov.
Tor the form of expression we may compare to IIpoa-waXToi
■jftoplov, the farm at UpoijTraXTa, Isaeus xi. 49, For the
insertion of iv by copyists before the locative, the expression
17 Siapadmii fidyi} is an excellent example. (See Gobet,
Variae Lection es.)

VII. 5, 7, 1320a, 31. o Terprj/iivo^ ydp iari, wiSo^ ij
Toiavrrj ^o^0eui tok aTTopoK. Tliis is plainly an allusion to
the saying of some KOfiijfoi dvrjp given in the Gorgias, 493 a :
T^ he. 'ifvyjfi toOto ei/ w iirtOvftiat ettrl Tirf)(avet on olov
^vaTreidetrOat kiu p-eva-rrhrTeLV avm Karw. Koi tovto apa tc^
fi^vdoKoywu Koffi}rh<i di'ijp (Va)f StKeXiKoi tk ^ JtoXiot?
•wrapdytDP k.t.X. twc 8e afLWjTwv tovto t^s '^"X^^' "" **'
^riSviiifu eliri to d/coXcurroi' airrov ical au OTeyavov, wt
TtTpiip.evo'i et'q Ttidof Bid ttjv d-!r\t)iTTiav aTret/catras ; cf.
^so an epigram of Lucian, Anth. Pul. ix. 120 :

iJMiSKoi dvi/p tri&o^ ioTi Terpijp.evo'i, et<i ov dirdaa'i
dvTX&v Tat xdptTa'i et? xevov e^e^eai.
Tii. 8, 7, 13216, 39. p-vrifiove^. For the use of the word
^v^fuov in the sense evidently reqnired here, it is worth
comparing the Lygdamis inscription found by Mr. Newton
�t Halicarnassus (Cauer, No. 1^1; Hicks, No. 21).

VII. S, 8, 1322(T, 40. iieTa he TaCTTjv i-^^op^hni flip apay-
�C(MOTttTTj 8e o'^eSoi' koI jfaXeTraTaTTj twc dpj(oiv ia-Tip ^ ■n'tpl
tA? Ti-pd^eK To>p KaTaBiKa(T0ec/TO)v Kal tmp -TTpoTiBepAvoiP
tcaTa Tii! eyypa^ds k.t.X Now in � 7 above we read : — erepa
i' dpx'l xpo? ^c dpaypiitfterrdai Sei -rd re iSia avp.06\ai.a leaX
Tat Kpta-CK iic Tiiw hmacrrqplmv. Again, in � 10, we read; —
xoi TTepi Tfls trpoffeaeit TrnK dpwyeypap,ii.kpiav, �.t.X, Oommen-


tators have taken these sentences as if there was no diflference ■ ^
between avar/pd<f>€LV and €yypd<f>€i,Vf difarfpa(f>i] and iyypa^, ^^ ;
This is quite incoiTect. By dvarypd(f)€a'6at,, dvarypa^, Aristotl^^^
refers to a registration of deeds and of decisions in purely civd__7
cases, as is plain from the passage I first quoted, and froi^^
dvaypa<l>d<i a-vvaXKaryfjbdTcov in � 22. €r/ypd(f)€vv on the ofchefe- it
hand is the regular word used of the register of state debtor^ ^
in the Acropolis, for which cf. Plat. Legg 784 d. Deinosttm-.
1074, iyypd^€a-0at Toh irpdicTopa-LV^ and again iyyeypa/ifim^'^
iv rfi aKpoTToXev, Demosth. 771, 6.

VIII. 10, 16, 13116, 3. Koi fj (iirideao^) rov euvovxcm-m^
Evar/opa to) Kvirpltp' Bed yap to ttjv yvvavKa TrapeXiadcu
vlov avTov d7r€KT€tv€p w9 v^ptcfMcvo^;, Some commentatorj
puzzled at a married eunuch, proposed to read Ein/oi/xp^
a proper name, but unfortunately his name is given
Thrasydaeus by Theopompus, Frag. 111. That such, howeve:^'^
was by no means uncommon, it is sufficient to quote the ca^^
of Potiphar (Genesis xxxvii. 36), where the Septuagia.*
version states, oi Se MaBtrjvaiot direhovro rov *Ia}a'r}(f> Here^p^
rat (nrdZovTL ^apaoD apx^^fwrfeiptp. Again, Montesquiem.^
Esprit des Lois, xv. 19, says : " Au Tonquin, dit Dampiei'^
tons les Mandarins civils et militaires sent eunuques.
mSme Dampier nous dit que dans ce pays les eunuques
peuvent se passer de femmes et qu'ils se marient."

Juvenal (i. 22), alludes to the same custom.

cum tener uxorem ducat spado, Maeuia Tuscum
figat aprum cett.

VIII. (v). 11, 31, 1315a, 29. d^eihok yap kavr&v exovac^^^
oi Bid OvfJLov eTTLX^Lpovvre^y KaOdirep xal ^ HpdKKeLro^; elir^^*
j(o>X€7r6v <f>da'K(ov elvat Ovfim fjbdx^o'Oac, "^^vj^? yap atvelaOa- ^ **
Aristotle evidently means to paraphrase ylrvxfj^; oaveiaOai
d(f)€i,S&<; eavTwv e^pvaLv ; this sense however it is difficult
get out of wvelaOaiy which furthermore is sadly in lack of
object. If we read the good Ionic word oveaOai, it give
exactly the sense required, "/or they despise^ make light
their lifeJ^^ For oveadai with the genitive cf. Od. v 37^^*
Copyists would easily have mistaken a word unknown L
Attic, especially too as i^ctypelaOat occurs some half doze^

Imnea above above. Tbat bowever it is a mistake of great
antiquity ia evident on conaulting Mr. Bywater'a Heriielitas,
^"ragm. 105, wbere he gives it in the form Ov/j-i^ fia')(ea6ai
•y^aKeTTof a Tt 'yap Aii ^yuj/Jp yevecdai, ■'l^fj^^! apeerai. Here
■^we have a clause inserted to give an object to mpeitrffai.
Similarly Plutarch quotes it with oti y^p &ir 6ekr) -^x^^
tMvetTai, and again in a more padded form art ryap air dek^qaj}
*eal "^vyfi'i oii/elrai ital ^JifiuTiov koX Sofi;?. Mr, Bywater
gives it in the form quoted by lamblichua. Now in the
-Ariatotelcan writings it is quoted thrice, viz. Nic. Eth. ir. 2,
1 1 Ooa, 7, Fri Se X'*^"''^'''*/^'*'' V^oi'V l*aj(ea'9ai 17 8v/iw, KaOtiTrep
tf>7]<rXv 'HpaKKeiTov, where I would bracket the words Ka$direp
*lyt]<T\v 'HpaxXeirat as a gloss on dvfiat. For H. never made any
eucli statement aa ^^aXeTTtoTepoi/ riSovy fj,d-xetr$ai tj 8vp.if; in
the Eudemian Ethics, 11. 7, ;^aXe7roi' "yap, i^al, Svp-m fidye-
trdaf ^vxv'! 'yo.p wceirat, and in the present paaaage.
Notice there, as in the Politics, it is given briefly, without an
object for Mveladai. The fact is that Aristotle and the
writer of the Eudemian Ethics wrote it as oveaBai and overat;
but the late authors, Plutarch and lambKobus, did not
xinderstand it, and reading it as oivetaQai., felt constrained to
insert a whole clause, varying in form, as I have shown,
to act aa an object for oivetaStu. Mr. Bywater in any case
ehould have given it in the shorter form, considering that
the authority of Aristotle is superior in age and weight to
the other authors. I omitted also to mentiou that it is quoted,
in the fragments of pseudo-Democritus, with the like on yap
^v 6e\y clause. In case tiyveladat ia retained, I would read
the Ionic form mvieirBiu, as Aristotle quotes words in their
J>ropep dialectic form, for example 6p.oxa,-n-ow, QdXeu), Apj^vra
(mde note on n 12, 7).*


■ Note. — Owing to oircumBtrmoos Mr. Ritlgewi
■writlan without refotenca to Mr. Jaclaon's cri
-which he hcFpea to supply on a future occasion. — On ths

IT 16. 9, p. 145, was

p. 118— an omiBsioQ

. idam [oup. 142) ot a

(Jfo/Mon tlie Tejet atid Matter of the Telilici, Cambridge, 1"""

Cnbet Fiir. Leel. p. 116 ' Scriburnm natiD in psnnntiuidtB kafiiir

; nStif ludere eolet.' — Ed.










Thursday, February 10. At a meeting held in St. John's
College, the President, Professor Mayor, in the Chair, the
following new members were elected :

Eev. E. W. Blore, M.A., Trinity College.

Rev. James Mayo, B.D., Trinity College.

3Ir. Gow communicated a note on Propertius ii 2. 3, 4.

cur haec in terris fades humana moratur ?
luppiter, ignoro pristina furta tua.

The pentameter only requires a note of interrogation at

^*^^^ end to make it intelligible. " Am I ignorant of your old

^^*^*3ours, Jupiter P " is Propertius' way of saying, " Were

^■^^^86 amours realities?" The argument is that Jupiter's

^■U-owing Cynthia to remain on earth among men (^humana)

^^ a reason for doubting the truth of the stories of his attach-

^^*^�nt to the heroines of old.

Mr. Magnusson read a few notes " On ei as an Umlaut
^J/* a in Icelandic.''

There were certain cases in which ei did occur as an
^tidoubted derivative of d by no other conceivable process
'^lian that of umlaut. In these cases the nature of the


phonetic relation between the primitive and denTative bchbI
had not yet received proper attention by grammariaJis and
lexicographers. The figure d-ei ranged neither witlun the
law of ablaut, nor that of Steigenmg ; it could not be treated
properly in any other way than as a case of umlaut. Pre-
Bumably the cause of it waa i in the termination, but
that waa by no means always apparent. In the present
communication the ei- Umlaut of a waa considered only in
cases where the a waa clearly a deep palatal or even guttiasl
outcome of rt+ a nasal, or of n+ a naaal and a dental; there
being other sources to which the a was traceable as wdL
Mr, MaguuBson adduced amongst other examples the cawrf
land and Id/S, both meaning land, and being from the wan
root, lund : the original nasal root, /rt'S that nasal root gnttn-
ralized ; Id^ differed in sense from land so far, that at
e^oyrfv it meant humus, solum, ground, earth, soil. The
etymology which made /d'S-=./d)i^loait^QeTTD. lehn,^A itoi,
merited no attention at all. In fact, the language itself wu
the best proof of what the real and primitive sense of Wi
was. The direct proof of it could be established by scores ef
examples, out of which it was sufficient on this occasion to
adduce the alliterative phrase Id^ ok I'ogr land and 'low,' land
and water. The indirect evidence was more to the point in
the present case, because it turned on the hinge of the unM
now under consideration. A common and well-known veii
in Icelandic was the verb lei^a (sign-forms : leiddi, kiddr), to
lead. Lexicographers and etymologists all agreed to foist on
this verb the strange signification, ' to bury,' adding, by
way of etymological explanation, ' to lead to the grove.
although such a phrase as le.%^a iU grafnr, as an equivalent
for h?Sa, or to bury, did not, so far as Mr. Magnusson kneWi ||
exist. Nothing could be plainer than that ki'&a, in the sbO^* n
of to bury, waa a verb of action only, not of motion. A fs* i,
examples would suffice to prove thia : When Steinar, in t"*
relation of Egils saga, found the body of his dead aerrt**:
and: leiddi hann uppi i hoUunum,':=\^ him (^buried hi ***r
up there in(^among) the knolls, it was evident that 'leid*^
could have no connexion with 'lead' to cause to move; *^


what, in that case, became of the stationary preposition uppi?
and what of the dative hoHunutn following i ? how, if lei^a
was ^ 'lead,' are we to deal with such very plain language aa
that of the following phrases : Thomas of Canterbury trans-
lates the relics of Edward the Conf eesor : er leiddr haf%i verit
i Lundunum-^-who had been 'led' in London; concerning
the same Thomas it is stated : fyrir alfari hei/ags Johannis
vat np slei�]'rd o^r iiibiiin ok i ]>essari (dat.) lei^a ]ieir hinn
signa^a Thomam eM'i6^�A-((p= before the altar of St. John was
there a new stone -sepulchre already made and in thia one
' lead' they the blessed Thomas. It would be to no purpose
to multiply illustrations of the use of ' leiBa ' in this sense.
It is as plain aa plain can be, that it means to 'entomb,' in-
humare, and is thus identical in sense with Icel. jar'^a to
' earth,' to bury ; and is proved by the phonetic laws of the
language to be unmistakably a direct derivative from Id'A,
and altogether a dilferent word from leiVa to lead, though
identical with it in accidence,

A somewhat similar case of mistaken etymology we had
in the case of the verb beifa. In all but one of its senses
•Vfus the origin of the verb traceable back to bila, to bite,
and in all those senses it was a transitive verb=to let bite,
to ' bait,' etc. The sense which constituted the exception
'vras of nautical import, and was set before us by the lexico-
graphers in this etymological interpretation: 'to cruise, prop,
to let the ship bite the wind,' and yet, in thia one sense and
application the verb was invariably an intransitive one.
In this use the word never meant anything but to sail, and
to heat, to tack. Its primitive sense was certainly to sail^
to move on board boat over water. By derivation it meant
to 'boat,' for no doubt the word was derived frora lidlr.
That word again, llr. Magnnsson submitted, was to be taken
S8 a guttural outcome of the root band-, the bound-together,
the tied-together craft ; for, as elsewhere, we knew that in
the North tough wooden fibres or the sinews of slain animals
supplied in primitive naval architecture the place of the nail
and rivet of a later and more advanced age. Naturally beifa
could have had the common signification to ' boat ' only until


the intelligence of the toilers of the deep had unrayelled the
mystery of the sail. Immediately that great discovery in
maritime science was made, to sail became the general word
for moving in ships over water, while beita naturally would
be a special term for that manifestation of the progress
known as beating or tacking, which was easily and
cunningly performed by the familiar oar, but could not,
or at least only with difficulty, be executed by the newly-
invented unmanageable square sail.

Vei^Vy a catch, Mr. Magnusson derived from vd^ a net;
where the d^ corresponded to and in Germ, wand (Gewand,
etc.). Lexicographers derived it from German F%fe,
pasture ; the connexion between animal and pasture was in
many cases obvious, but in none such as to warrant the
assumption of the two words standing in the relation of
a primitive and derivative to each other. Fi9t^r,=the act
of netting, as well as that which is netted, a catch, agreed
thoroughly with primitive methods of hunting. By further
examples Mr, Magnusson illustrated the d-ei Umlaut, con-
cluding by observing that a further investigation into this
chapter of Icelandic etymology could not fail to be pro-
ductive of results which bore importantly on Teutonic
philology in general.

Prof. Skeat, in agreeing with these derivations, observed
that for �?^i^r= fishing, the English had an equivalent in
waithy e.g. in Wallace. He caught some fish : some English-
men came to him and demanded a share, saying, '^ Waith suld
be delt, in all place, with fre hart.*' "Wallace, 6. 1,1. 386.

Mr. RiDGEWAY read a paper on eppevv in Homer and ^
Olympian Inscription.^

He showed that lexicographers, being led astray by the
peculiar Attic usage of eppew in a bad sense, had endeavoured
to force a like sense on all the passages in Homer where i^ ^
found. He maintained that, wherever it does bear such a seti�^
it is closely joined to some qualifying word, e.g. Od. rv 36 •

^ Journal of Philology y vol. xii. p. 32 (1883).



and that it ia purely gratuitous to give the word a bad sense
IB II. vin 229, IX 364, xxii 498, Od. x 75, H. xxiv 239.
-Above all, Od. v 139 proves its use in a good sense, where
Calypao uses it of Odysseug, though doing everytbiog to
xxiake hia departure from her island safe. II. xviii 421
jDrobably shows its primitive meaning. Taaiuek connects it
"^with fai-s {wrroFeprre, epvui, uello). He proposed to connect
it rather with far {eiKvw, uoluo)^^"to go with a rolling
�33otion." Thua eppeiv was originally a simple verb of
3:notion. An inscription {incorporated in Mr. Roberts'
forthcoming Greet Inscriptions) found in the temple of
2eus at Olympia in 1877, in the same alphabet and dialect,
^nd probably of the same age, as the Elean Inscription, runs
�s follows, according to Ahrens :—A Fpdrpa rolp XaXa-
^_S)pio(i.)p Koi AevKaXicovi,' XaXaZpiov ^fj-ev aiiTov xal yovov
J-i(70Trp6^€VQV, Fiaohap-iapyov rav he 70.(1') eyrjv t^v iv Ula-tu'
�ii Be Ti,<; avKaii), Fep(p)'rjv avrbv iroT{r]ov Aia, at /ajj
�dfioi, Boieeoi. The latter part has hitherto been taken
■thus : " that he is to have the estate at Pisa, and if any one
invade his rights, such person shall be banished {and seek pro-
tection hj going) to Zeus, onhj proeicled the people do not approve
cfsuch invasion." eppetv aurov is supposed to contain a threat
against o avXSip, and to refer to banishment. Kirchhoff,
finding a want of sense in negative expression of last clause,
proposes at fieBd/u)i=at (Lsrh, Sdftoi. Ahrens, objecting to
this, defends it by Laconic brevity and supplies to avXdu with
Soiceoi. The amount of meaning crammed into eppav is
aatoundiag, avTov is made to refer to a different person from
the previous avrov, and a large part of a very short document
is thua made to provide for a possible wrongdoer in case
a very unlikely contingency should arise. Instead of forcing
its Attic sense on eppeiv, let us give it the simple Homeric
one of 'to go.' The avrou then refers, like its predecessor,
to Deucalion ; there will be no straining of eppeiv tro-rrov
Ata, and the negative in last clause wiU present no difficulty.
It will then run " and if any one should invade hia righto,
that he (Deucalion) should go to Zeua, i.e. go and seek
redress from the temple-court of Zens (before which if a man


wad condemned, he became a servant of the offended god, and
could only be ransomed by paying a heavy sum, and which
had jurisdiction over the Sacred lands, of which DeucaUon
was a tenant) unless the people should make a decree." The
whole of the document is thus made to refer to Dencalioa
and the Chaladrians.

Thursday, March 10. At a meeting held in St. John's
College, the President, Professor Mayor, in the Chair, the
following new members were elected :

A. H. Cooke, Esq., B.A., King's College,
Professor A. Palmer, M.A., Trinity College, Dublin.

The following were elected honorary members :

Professor G. G. Cobet, Leyden.
Professor G. Curtius, Leipzig.
Professor K. Halm, Munich.
Professonj J. Zupitza, Berlin.

The Secretary read a paper by Professor Kennedy on
Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus 328, 329.

" The seer Teiresias, refusing to disclose to king Oedipus
and his councillors the terrible secret which he knows, says

e7ft) ov firj TTore
ra/Lt' (09 civ elirta fjui) ret a iK<f>i]va) kukcL

Oed. T. 328-9.

The first thing which occurs here is that ov firj ir(yf^
requires an aorist subjunctive ; this cannot be iK(f>i]vo>, which
with fjLTj means lest I disclose. It must then be etTrta ; and i*
is ewTG). But what of �9 av which also demands a subjunctive?
Can cItto) suffice for the two ? Surely it must; but how expls^^^
this ? Here lies the difficulty. What help does context gi^^^
Let us see, rdfjud my things, and ra <ra your things, are ^^
manifest antithesis. This indicates that /caKci is not to ^
treated as a substantive, but as an adjective : * lest I disc^
your things (to be) evil,^ eK^v(o has for its correspondi^?
word etTTO), but KaKa has no correspondence. Can ^^

1881 MARCH 10. SOPHOCLES OED, T. 328, 9. 163

supply one by the remaining phrase (s&9 iiv {elTrtei) P Yes, I
answer, we can. Teiresias characterises the conditions in
which Oedipus stands {tcl ad) as KaKoi. So much he lets out :
but for the present he delicately refrains from characterising
his own conditions {Le. the secret confided to him by heaven)
as arfoBd fraught with good to Thebes by terminating the
pestilence. Therefore, instead of an epithet to rdfji^dy he
interposes �9 av (ecTra)) however I may call them (whatever
they may deserve to be called). This, I doubt not, is the
true meaning : * / will never speak my things y call them what I
may, lest I disclose your things as evil,* Examples of this use
of w av are : Hom. //. 11 139 (09 av iyoDV ecTro) TreiOdo/jueOa
irdvT€<;. Soph. AJ, 1369 m av 7roti]a7j<;, iravraxov 'xprjaro^;
7' eaet. Dem. de Cor. 292 to irepa^y m av 6 BaifMov /SovXrjOy
irdvTcov yiyverau.

With this interpretation may be compared the treatment
of this passage by the late Mr. Linwood, an excellent scholar.

He emends it thus

irdvre^ yctp ov ^poveiT** iyob B* ov fxri irorc
Tcifjb C09 hv eliroDV fjJq ra a eK^rjvm /ca/cd.

His notes {Theban Trilogy, 1878) are :

" Oif ^povelre are not wise, ijo) S' ov fjuq ttotc sc. ov ^povqafo,
but never will I be so,

rdfju — KaKd, That I may not, by divulging what I would
say {ra ifid), bring your misfortunes to light J*

(1) My interpretation leaves the MS. text unchanged,
and explains so as to give the particles C09 av (jointly) a
virtually adverbial force, reppsing on the ellipse of elTrca,
howsoever (I may call them). Mr. Linwood doubly emends,
by his colon after Trore, and by ehrwv for eXira),

(2) As to Mr. Linwood's explanation. If any scholars
are inclined to think such an ellipsis as ov fjurj irore ov <f>povria(o
in any way tenable, I would remind them that ov ^povehe
lere does not mean * ye are unwise ' in our ordinary sense,
*ye judge wrongly' or * ye act wrongly'; but simply *ye
do not know,' 'ye are ignorant,' as often: for instance 302.


<f>pov€i^ oca voa-fp ^vveariv. 569, €<^* oh yap fit) (l>pov& avfcof
<f>iX&, Teiresias does know, as he says above 316, ^ponhim
Setvov. It is therefore absurd to suppose him saying here :
* I will (or shall) never not know, that I may not by divulg-
ing,' etc.

(3) By this colon, the reading elirayv, and the treatment of
/caKci as substantive (which I make a proleptic predicative
adjective), Lin wood destroys the studied and fine antitheses
of the clauses — .

eiTTQ) 0)9 &v (ehro))

ov firj


ra aa


(4) My present view (in which I rest with full assurance)
is the outcome of long mental incubation. I had myself
adopted elirtov, but so as to supply from it etirco with ov jiV
7roT€. See Studia Sophoclea p. 62. This however equally
loses the exquisite antithetic construction."

Prof. Mayor doubted the possibility of the ellipse of €wr�.

Mr. Peile agreed with Dr. Kennedy's translation of �?
av and with the proposal to make Kaxd a predicate.

Mr. PosTGATE thought it possible to adopt Dr. Kennedy^s
interpretation in the main, and to take fir] — eKif>rivo) together
as one word 'fail to disclose.' For the use of p/q Plat.
Phaedr. 106 might be compared a"xp\y yap av rv oXSjo <l>0opO'Tf
fit) Bi'XpiTO el TO y€ addvarov dtStov ov (pOophv Bi^erat (compare
also Ar. Han, 42 ov toi, /id rrjv Arjp/qrpay huvap^a^, p^fj y€K&y\'
The sense would then be that, however Teir. might express
the secrets entrusted to him, he would be forced (hence tla�
strong double negative) to reveal the dreadful truth abo^^

Mr. Verrall read the following notes :
" Lend me your ear^^ in Aristophanes.

The Scholiast upon Ar. Av, 1647,

SeOp' C&9 €/^' diro^oi>p7)aov Xva rl col Xeyco,

cites as a parallel Eur. Ion, 1521,

Seup' €X0'' 69 o39 ydp aoi X070V9 ehreiv deKco.


Considering the rarity of such illustrations in the Scholia
and the simplicity of the line to which the note is appended,
it is difficult to see the occasion or point of the citation.
This difficulty would disappear if the text of Aristophanes
were slightly modified thus :

Come, lend me your ear that I may speak a word in it.

Here there is a peculiar expression calling for notice ; and
the line from Euripides offers a suitable paraphrase.

Note on the verb evOevelv.

This verb (connected, it is said, with the Sanskrit dhana,
wealth) is somewhat too largely defined in the Lexicon. It
does not mean, primarily at least, to flourish^ but to flourish
in a particular respect, namely, that of prodtcce or offspring.
GFood examples occur in two passages describing the blessings
cjonferred by the Eumenides, Aesch. Eum. 907 :

tcafyjrov re yaia<: /cal I3ot&v eirippvrov
doTolo'Cv evdeuovvra fiff /cdfivecv 'xpovtp,

and again, ibid. 944 :

lirfKa T* evOevovvra ya
^ifv htifkolaLV ifJbjSpvoc^

This primary use continues to have an important influence
upon the use of the word. It explains, for example, Dem.
P. L. 413, T0U9 fi€V XPVf^^'^* etkrjifyoTa^ Kol S&pa . . . a(f)€l<Tav
Kol vovv e'xeiv fjyovirro koX ttjv itoKlv evOeveurOab' rov Sk KaTrj-
yopovvra tl; ifM^e/SpovTrjaOai,, ttjv itoKlv ayvoelv, /c.t.X. Here
the words ty}v ttoKlv evdeveladav should in some way be a
compliment to the Macedonian party. The common transla-
tion and that their country trns flourishing is pointless. Trans-
late rather they acquitted them, thought them sensible men, and
the country happy in such children. It should be considered
whether this narrower meaning of evOevelv does not give the
^e explanation of the remaining example in Aeschylus
(Eum. 892 foil.) :


XO, avaaa ^Addva, rlva fjbi (fyp^ €^€iv eSpav ;

XO. Kal Br) BiSeyfiac' rk Se fioi rtfjurj fjukifei, ;
A0. ft)9 fit] TLV^ oIkov evOevelv avev aedev.
XO. crif TOVTO 7rpd^€i^, &<jt€ fi€ crOivecv toctov ;
897 A0. T^ yap ae^ovTi ^vfi<f)opa(; opOdxrofiei/.

Following the analogy of the other two passages alreaL
cited from the same play, we should suppose that the blessi
which the Eumenides were supposed to confer upon the homise
of their worshipper was not general prosperity, but tlxe
special boon of offspring ; and indeed a prerogative specjia-l
and limited is implied by the word Tifjuri. If so, we must
render 897 accordingly: ^vfKJyopai signifies " the deed <>J
kind^^ (Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice, Act iii Sc. i.). Ttia-t
such a meaning is possible is proved by Aristoph. Lysistr'.

ovyap ovheiroT ev^pavOrjaercu
dv7)p eav fiif rfj ywaiKi, avfufyepUf

which is a jest upon Eur. Med. 12,

avTT] T€ irdvra ^vfi(j)€pova'' 'Idcrovi
rfirep fieyloTi] ylr/verac acorrjpla
orav yvvT) tt/jo? dvBpa firj SLjf^oararrj,
(that is, in all things complying with Ja^son.)

Mr. PosTGATB read the following notes on Lucan, Boob ^*
(Messrs. Heitland and Haskins* edition).

Lines 44, 45. multiim Roma tamen debet ciuilibus armis

quod tibi res actast.

In these lines, which form part of a passage where Imc^^'^
addresses the Emperor Nero in a strain of unrepubli^:^^''^
eulogy, it is much more in keeping with 33 sqq. quod si T^^^^
aliam uenturo fata Neroni inuenere uiam, etc. iam nihi^^ ^
superi, querimur ; scelera ipsa nefasque hac mercede placenta e
to take res actast in the sense of actumst, " since ^ it was
thee that all was lost."



1-51 sqq. qualit-er exprenmm uentia per nuhila fidmen
aetheris tt/ipulsi sonittt mundique /ragore
emicuit rupitque diem, populosgue paiientes
temtit obliqua praeatnngem lumina flamma,
in sua templa furit nullaqm exire tietante
materia maijitamque eadeiti magnamque reuertem
dat stragem late sparsosque recolligii ignes.

in ana templa fureita ia not ' against the quarter from
^which it came,' which, is hardly consistent with the rest of
the description. It rather indicatea that Caeaar, whoae fervent
daring and impetuosity is directed against his own country,
resembles th& fulmen Tonantis which does not apare ita own

164, 5 cultus geetare decoros

uix nuribus rapuere mares.
Huribus 18 ' brides,' 'youDg wives,' rather than ' matrons.'
167 sqq. turn hngos iungere fines

agrorum et quondam duro sulcata Camilli
uomere et antiquos Curiorum passa ligones
longa sub ignotis extendere rura colonia.

ignoiis hardly means 'the estates were so large that the
^^■Vners did not know the cultivators' (H. and H.). It
�~^ther refers to the latifundia which were cultivated by
.^^reigners, i.e. sfavea.

1320 sqq. primus in ohliqimm sonipes opponitur amnem
exeepttirtis aquas : mo Hi turn cetera rumpit
turba uadofaciks iam fracti Jtuminis undas.
wo//i='thiiB made easy,' a proleptic use of the adjective,
*cund elsewhere in Lucan.

327 iitque ferae tigres numquam posuere farorem

quas nemore Hgrcano, matrum dum liistra sequuntiir,
altuB caesorum panit cnior armentorum.
alius cruor hardly ' heart's blood,' but ' pooU of blood '
(or perhaps 'a deep draught of blood'). Compare Lucau 3.
573, 7. 731, 2. 214.


413 an sidere mota secundo

Tethyoa unda uagae lunaribm aestuat horis.

Not by the * second ' planet, but through the ' favourixig
influence ' of the moon.

452, 453. solis nosse deos et caeli numina uobis

aut solis nescihe datum.

The sense of these lines, which refer to the Druids^ is
obscure. But it may be noted first that Weise's uos aut soli
nostis deos aut soli nescitis is far too obvious a truism to
have been intended by Lucan. And the passage quoted is
H. and H/s notes, 3. 416 tantum terroribus addit quos timeant
non nosse deos is not in point. In nescire Lucan's scepticism
peeps out. 'You are the sole depositaries of all human
knowledge or rather of that ignorance which stands in its

453, 4. nemora alta remotis

incoUtis lucis.

nemora are the open spaces^ the glades surrounded by the
sacred trees. See Prop. 4 (5). 9. 24 lucus uhi umbroso fecerat
orbe nemus, (Compare my remarks on lucus in the Traa-
sactions of the Philological Society (London), 1882-3-4,
Part L p. 149.)

694 noua da mihi litora Ponti

telluremque nouam. uidi iam, Phoebe, Philippos.

It is incredible that Lucan should have thought Pharsalus
and Philippi were on the Black Sea. Besides da, as cox^""
trasted with the indicatives adjoining, shows that sometbii^K
is referred to that the prophetess does not see, but wishes ^
see. iam indicates a climax. This must be the battle ^^
Philippi which extinguished republican hopes. Readjo^^^*
with a small p. The sense is 'Let us have a new ear^
and sea. The last touch has been put to the pollution of t^�
old world/



Thursday March 24. At a meeting beld in St. John's
College, Professor Kennedy, in the absence of the President,
iQ the Chair, the following were elected honorary members:

ProfesBor J. N. Madvig, Copenhagen.

Professor W. W. Goodwin, U.S.A.

Professor B. L. Gildersleeve, U.S.A.

Mr. E. S. Thompson read the following paper on Plato,
Jifeno, 86 e. Xiyw Bk to tf vTTodeaeco'i a>Be, mtnrtp 01 yemfierpat
iroXA�K� aKoirovvrai, i-n-ettdv tl<; eprjrai avToii^, olov -TtepX
j(fi>plov, et olov re i^ TovSe top kvkKov ToSe to yaipiov Tpiyaivov,
evradTjvai. eiTroi dv Tt? oti Oirwco olZa el eart tovto Toiovroir,
aXK' dJo-irep fiev Tiva vvoOemv irpovpyav ol/xat e^etv irpot; to
TTparffia TOtafSe' et pAf iart to j^mpi'oi/ toiovtov, olov wapa
Ti(w BoBelaav avTov ypa/J.p.ijV TrapaTeivavra eXX^iVetf Toioin^
ytapiip otov av avTO to irapaTerapivov 'p dXko n avfiffai-
i/eiv fWi Boicei Koi oKko av el ciBvvaTov ioTi Tavra TraBelv.
VKoBip.evo'; o5u e^eXm etTrew' (toi to <rvp,^a,lvQv nrepl r^s
etrraaeat avrov e� tov kvkKov elre a&ivaTov etre p.^.

As it is impossible to translate the words ToSe to ')(fopiov

T-^irpovov "this triangular figure," he proposed to read ro'Se

■w~a ■}(fitplov rpir/tovov <oj'>. The accusative Trapareivavra,

fc-tfcough auacoluthic, should not be altered. The genitive

o^^T- dative, which various scholars have substituted for it,

^•^^"■^Duld make the construction less unarahiguons than does

*-^SziBe form in the text. With regard to the meaning of the

^^^schnical terms evTelveiv and -rrapaTuveiv, Mr. Thompson

^^ ^Endeavoured to show that the assumption that they cor-

*^^Sspoud to Euclid's iy-ypiitpetv and ■jrapa^aXkeiv respectively,

*^^38ted on very insufficient ground. The word ivreiveiv occurs

*--"^vice in Proclus ; August restores Trapareiveiv in one

^*^ce in Proclus, by a tolerably certain conjecture. But

^-*"wing to the long interval of time between the age of Plato

^*-�id that of Proclus, as well as for other reasons, no con-

*ilusion could he drawn thence as to the meaning of these

'^vords, which, except where they occur in Proclus, have

dropped entirely out of geom&triual terminology after the



time of Plato. While not professing to have arrived at
any satisfactory view regarding the passage, he thought
that justice had hardly been done to the view put forward
by Mollweide, who holds that the question throughout deals
with the shape of the figures, not their size ; that the problem
virtually is, ^' What sort of triangle is capable of being in-
scribed in a semicircle ? " and that the answer given is that
this will be possible if the triangle is capable of being
divided into two triangles similar to the whole, since, under
these circumstances, and only under these circumstanceSi
will the triangle be a right-angled one. Though Benecke,
in his important tract on this passage, pours contempt on
this solution, it is a matter for argument whether the solu-
tion he himself proposes is not open to at least equal

Mr. Jackson argued that two similar triangles, e.g. the
triangles ADC, BAC in Euclid vi 8, could not be spoken of
as the same ; and consequently that the words el fiep iari toCto
TO )(a)piov TOCovTOV, olov irapa rrjv hoOelaav avTOV ypofiji/riv
irapaTeivavra iXXehreiv Totovrcp 'Xf^pltp, olov hv axno to
iraparerafievov y could not be rendered (as proposed by Moll-
weide and Mr. Thompson) ' if the triangle BAG is of such a
shape that when you apply it (i.e. not the triangle BAC, bvt
the similar triangle ADC) to the side AC, it (i.e. the triangle
ADC) falls ^hort of it (i.e. the whole triangle BAC) by another
similar triangle BDA.' He understood the problem to be
' to determine whether a triangle equal to a given square (*.�.
one of the squares mentioned at 82 b sqq.) can be inscribed in
a given circle,' and he thought that, whether irapareiveof
meant ' to extend ' or ' to apply,' Socrates' conditional answer
was in efiect * if the radius of the circle is equal to the side o�
the square, a triangle equal to the square can be inscribed in.
the circle.'

Mr. Hicks read the following observations on Cicer"^
Academica i 39 — 42 :

Comprehemio KaToKrfy^tf; (to be distinguished from visuf^
acceptum et approbatum � 41, which is more precisely KaroLkiijfn "

1881 MARCH 24. CICERO ACADEMICS I 39-42. iji

■nidi i^nvraaia) is generieally adsensiis : as is plain from
Sextua P. R. u 4, iii 341, mitt. Math, viii 398, 399 : compare Cic.
Acad. II Z% qtti percipit adseiififur statim. This 'act of assent'
was a judgment, voluntary i !( 40 in a sense va. which merely
having the sense impression was not, as such ao element of
emotion i g 39 : it is one of four effects produced by Xo^to-jiid?,
ratio dis homhiibusque communis, which is the same in man as
the ruling part of the soul, ps.-P/iit. Plac. Vf 21. 1. Hence
in man as a rational creature ipaifTaaia, becomes ^avraaia.
XoyMc^ and vor}<Ti<!: Diog, L. vii 61, Stob. r p. 782, The act
of judgment which constitutes 'assent' and consequently
' apprehension ' ia one and the same whether it refers to
ow-ftjra, white and black, &c., which are ivapyij, or to things
which as being a^\a are known only by reasoning, e.g. the
existence of the gods, Diog. vii 52.

The intermediate position of Ka.TaXtjyfn';, halfway between
knowledge and ignorance, ia due to the comparative strength
of the ' assent ' which conatitutea it. When very strong,
irrefutable by argument, Mo-0aX>i?, a^rraTTTQiTo? vtto \6yov,
it riaea to absolute knowledge, elsewhere described as towo?
iKcnra; ia toi icpiveiv, Stob, ii 110. In the perception of
external objecta ordinary men feel lesa atrength of conviction.
Yet this ia always superior to the weak mistaken judgment
here called inscieriHa, by Sextus in the parallel passage adp.
Math. VII 151 Sofa [cp. a'h 432 -rraaa tj>av\ov tTTDX-jji^c?
Syvoia), which the wise man avoids by suspending hia
jadgment when the evidence of sense is obscure or per-
plexing, Cic. Acad, ii 53.

Zeller, Griech. Philosopkie iir 1, p. 83, n. 2, 3rd ed., thus
explains this " dialectic subtlety " characteristic of Zeno :
KflToXijiIrt? lies between knowing and not knowing because
it forms the transition from the one to the other : not know-
ing ceases when /caraXTiy^K begins, knowledge only enters
when it is completed. This explanation is open to the
objection that it implies the recurrence of ignorance, which
IS not merely ffrepTjaii ^7r(t7T�i/iij! but e^ii fioj^diip^ Kal ijtto-
Tij^i^, with every KaToKrjyfrK — even in the wise man. And
yet in the wise man every KOTaXiji^i? is a good ; Plut, de
comm. noiitiin 7.



One or two conclusions seem to be suggested. In tbi
iStoic theory of knowledge apprehension or perception it
much more than, ia eaaentially different from, a merely
mechanical process. According to Sextua adu. Math. vm407
eren ^avraaiai, are to be referred to the origination of the
mind. If this he bo, the Stoics cannot have maintained �ay
consistent theory of immediate perception of the extenul
object. The judgment of the mind must relate to its own
ideas, to the circle of which it is neeeasarily confined.

In Acad, ii 99 Cicero quotes from Clitomachus de swfiif
endw adsensionibm, Trepl erro^f, an account of Camefide^
division of uim. The same passage must he the authority
of Sextus for a similar account adu, Mafh. vii 167-169:
which as the fuller of the two throws light upon the passigs
in Cicero. A sense impression is an impression (1) of flie
object from which it comes, (2) of the person who haa it,
and being such will have two relations. In relation to the
object from which it comes it will be true or false, tmo if
it agrees with the object, false if it does not. In relfttieii
to the person who has it the impressions will be seem-
ingly true. I.e. probable : or seemingly false, i.e. improbable.

Evidently these two modes of dividing impressions are not
co-ordinate in Sextus : and, as Mr. Beid has pointed oat,
they are not co-ordinate in Cicero ; duo genera imorum being
intended for two clnssifications of ima. As to the seooirf
mode of dividing, into probable and improbable, Sextua and
Cicero agree. In the first Sextua says " true " " false,"
Cicero "quae percipi possint" "quae percipi titm pomat'
which are his stock translations of KaTaXrfjrrcicat and axani-
Xtjittoi, ipavTaaiai (see e.g. Acad, ii 40, 77); it is scarcely
necessary to add the KaToKijirTLKif t^inarria was to the StOie
true. As regards the accuracy of the translation, no doubt
K(iTaX?j7rTtKiJ= properly, ' apprehensive ' ' which can lay hol"-
of, grasp the object," quod percipere possit. But the initt*�-
assents to the impression — irdQo^ evSftKiWfJ.ei'ov ev aurf t'
■7reTvotj}Km ps.-Flut. Plac. iv 12. 1 — which grasps the objeet-
and in a theory of mediate perception this much variation
in phrase is naturally allowed.

Acad. II 131 shows further traces of Glicomachus,

1881 MARCS 24. SOPHOCLES ANTiaOSE 413, t


Bclieine of Ethical EndB there given presents the seven
Bctnally maintained out of the nine conceivable in all which
Gameades enumerated, as may be seen by comparing de Fin.
V 20, 21.'

Ifr, CooKF, read a paper on Soph, Antig. 413-414 (Dindorf):

iyepTl Kivaiv avhp avr/p e^ippoSoK

KtucotaLV, et tw tdOS' aipeiSricroi ttovov.

Mr, Cooke introduced the remarks he had to make on this

passage by a reference to a paper on the same lines that was

read before the Society by Mr, Fulfordof Clareafew terms ago.

Mr. Fulford rightly, he thought, divided the difficulty

contained in the word a^eiZ-rjaot under two heads :

(1) the meaning of the word,

(2) the reading ;

coming to the conclusion that a^eih^lv never means " to be
careless of," but always " to be lavish of." Without denying
that the latter was the raore usual sense applied to the verb
and its derivatives, Mr. Cooke urged that the former was at
least possible and could be supported by quotation. For,
when a man was 'lavish' of anything, e.g. money, ships,
life, it naturally followed that he is 'careless' of the same.
And this was the only possible meaning of the word in the
passages quoted by Mr. Fulford from ApoUoniua Rhodius
(il 98,869)98, ouS' apa. Bi^pvicei avhpe'i a^eihr^aav ^aaiKTJo^ —
tie scene being a fight between the Argonautic and Bebry-
cian champions — " nor were the Bebrycians careless of their

' [When tho above was written I had not apen the Programm o� M. Heinle,
2itr ErieaHlmitleAre det- Sloikiv (Leipzig, 1880). Heinze there (p. 27) RdmitB
IliRt on general groiinds, aa well as, on the erideuce of paFfJunlBr posBaeee, there
is mnoh in Ibtout of the view that naraAijimK)! ^amaaia = a presentation which
lij� hold of reality, iyriXijjfTiK)) 7™!" bvoKttiiiriiiii. He inolineB however to
iateipreC it rather aa that which lays hold of the subj ect and compele him to
��Bnt to it, apllj quoting Sestus adu. M, vii 257, irAijKTiicij iiduoy oux' TiSy
T^X"". ♦""■'i ^iimS�'"""'> umiurwaiaa iifias ah auyKariSfBir. What Heinze
ngiuds aa decisive ia the faut Chat ttiero may be true presentBtions which foil to
prodoee convictioa, iAijAf?! but o6 KoraATiirTiKnf {ada. M. vo 247) ; yet it ifl not
Mpagjible, he thinks, that the Stoics put up with an ambiguous reference in the
�<irt KOTiiAiiirTiK^, " apprehenaive," in relation (1) to toe Bubiact, (2) to the
obJMt.— R.D.H.]


king" — and again, 1. 869, ttS? kcCKov a^ihfjcroan'cu; aWkm
ryalrf iv aXXoSdiry Srjv €fifi€vaL ; (two chieftains murmuring
together) ' how is it right that we should linger on in a
foreign land, careless of the contests ? ' Again, to illustrate
the author from himself, in the only other passage in which
he uses the verb d(f)€tB€iv {Elect, 980, '^fruxr}^ o^iBrjcaine
irpoixnrjTqv <l>6vov) "careless of '' or "lavish of their lives''
we have exactly the same sense. He saw then no reason to
doubt the universal opinion, that the word here meant
* to be careless of,' which was the obvious sense required.

Secondly, to turn to the question of the reading. The
MSS. with one consent read the future optative, a^t&{ffw.
The alteration to d(f>€iS7]<rai., the so-called optative of ** in-
definite frequency,'' was obvious, but why then the consensns
of the MSS. the other way ? Plainly we must keep a^e�8jj(j�i
and seek an explanation of the future optative which would
be in keeping with its usage in Greek, viz. after a past tense,
representing the future of the oratio recta. This Mr. Fulford
saw ; but his version was strange — " in order that one and
another might be unsparing of this toil " — explaining ei as=:
ei TTG)?. But, as a matter of fact, this was no explanation at
all, simply because it did not make the clause part of oratio
obliqua^ but merely a dependent final clause.

To illustrate the passage, he quoted 0, T, 796, €<f)€vyov bia
fi7]7roT oylroifirjv, &c., which Mr. Cooke thought bore no like-
ness whatever to the present case, except that it contained
the same tense.

There was, however, a very simple explanation of the
passage, which would be best seen by comparing Philoct, 376 :

Kdrf(b ')(p'ka)6e\^ €v0v<i rjpaa-aov Ka/cot^

� � � � �

el rdfia icelvo^ oifs! a(f>aLprjaoLT6 fie,

A clear parallel.

Now, recollecting the idiomatic usage of el, not only aft--^
6 av fiasco, ^7j\(b^ iiraivcS, but also after arfava/cT&^ oy^rKiiX^^

and the like, we translate this, "I assailed him with i

preaches, that he should rob me of...," the el clause, in fac::^

18B1 MARCH 24. SOPHOCLES OED. 7. 3S8, 9.

containing the " kokov,"" and ^paaa-ov kokok practically being .
equivalent to i/caKi^ov.

Precisely fiimilar was the construction in the passage under
consideration ; " man stirring np man with bandied reproach
that any should be careless of this toil" — the xaKov being
explained by the et clause, KaKoh kiv&v being equivalent to
KaKL^tiiv, and finally, the future optative following the imperfect
participle xtviin'.

Mr. FuLFOBT) observed that (1) aijiEiSeii; in the sense of ' to
neglect a duty ' was unknown to Sophocles' contemporaries.
(2) To reproach those who were merely ' about to neglect '
a duty would he an unusual proceeding. (3) The future
optative in what is practically the protasis of a conditional
sentence is almost without pitrallel. Its use in the passage
in the Pkiloctetea might be justified by regarding it as part
of the paaaionate utterances of a man constantly haunted by
the dread of losing hia arms; but here the (f>v\a^, who is
consistently represented as an ' absolute knave ' — a pedant in
his language, to whom the unusual is the wicked (c/. 223) —
would hardly be betrayed into such unusual phraseology as
(on Mr. Cooke's supposition) he was using.

Dr. Kfnnedy observed, with reference to his paper on
Soph. Ofrf. T. 328, 329,

(1) That, if Sophocles had meant Teiresias to say, 'if
1 apeak my things, I cannot help disclosing yours to be evil,'
he could easily have put in his mouth the only true Greek
for that sense ; namely

-**Ht Sophocles means to put an absolute refusal to speak in
^OG eeer's mouth, as twice afterwards ; and that is done in the
''SuqI Greek form ov /i^ ttotc eiirfu, ' never will I speak {fi^

■'e�t, &c.).'

^2) Here, as afterwards (420, &c,), the poet makes the

^^^�^'8 language studiously obscure, by the ra/t' (u? av,


and by eliding ad, and we must suppose the words spoken
slowly and solemnly.'

Thunday, May 5. At a public meeting held in the small
room at the Guildhall, the President, Professor Mayor, in
the Chair, the following new member was elected ;
W. T. Lendrum, Esq., CaiuB College.

And Professor Th. Mommsen

was elected an honorary member.

Mr, H. Sweet, late President of the London Philological
Society, delivered an address on Spelling Reform in relation to
the Hktory of the English Language}

Mr. F. J. Candy offered some remarks on the phonetic
representation of the ti sound in love.

Professor Skeat, in proposing a vote of thanks to the
Lecturer, expressed his complete concurrence with his views.

The vote was seconded by the Secretary, who dwelt
upon the practical advantages of the reform, and carried by

Mr. Sweet, in acknowledging it, suggested that his
audience should use the proposed reforms in their private

The President confirmed the statement of Mr. Sweet
about the interest taken in spelling reform, by the great

' The notice in my edition of Old. T. in the Saturday Review was written by
a Bclioiar of no narrow calibre, as appears from tas Tilling acceptanca of jaj
■Bggestion tliat r^t {u/ifwpoiin v. 99 means ' compliance,' not ' caluiiiity ' ng itu
usually rendered. Sut of my interpretation here (319-SO) he flnds nothing
hetter to sav than this : that il is like the getting a beaver up a tree, because he
must eo- ^J Tvply is, that my cauteoua critic baa mistaken for a bearer Vhat
is really another snimai. The verb dirgt m tie text belongg to ab /iiiiroTt in tha
' conEtrnctdpn, not ta in iv. iij fo is a eanjimction eiBrcialog tie fimctiona of an
adverb, by virtue (I grant) of an ellipae of rf™. In this there is nothmg
abnormal except its position immediately before the leitnal diru, a peculiaiily
eufflcientljr justified by the obvious fact, that a seer who desires not to speak out
and to mptify those who would force him to do so, is made by the dramatist to
use language studiously obscure. If m^ critic will bear in mind this, and obserre
the ranouB poeitians which ir assuinas m tragedy, I venture to think he will Gnd
his beaver turnrf into an opoasum or a aijuirreL At aD events so it is in my point
of view : bnd I must caudidly assure hiin that, although it took me many yean to
reach that point, yet from the moment I did so I have felt no doubt wbatever
that it is absolutely and certainly the true one, — S, H. E.
• See p. 02.



Classical Scholars of the Renaissance, and pointed out that
there was no antagonism between scholarship and phonetic
spelling, but rather the contrary.

Tlnmdaij, Mmj 26. At a meeting held in St. John's
College, Professor Sjceat, Vice-President, in the absence of
the President, in the Chair, the following were elected
members :

Rev. T. Gwatkin, M.A., St. John's College.

S. A. Donaldson, Esq., M.A., Trinity College.

A letter from the Treasuker (Mr. J". E. Sandys) was read,
tendering hia resignation and enclosing the accounts of last
year. Mr, Sandys pointed out that the Society's tenure of
Mr. C. B. Drake's rooms expired at the end of the Long
Vacation ; but that he would be able to place a part of his
rooms at its disposal then.^ He also suggested the desirability
of the Society's undertaking the publication of any unedited
adversaria of Bentley, Porson, etc.

Professor Skeat read a paper on the etymology of the
following words :

Shw-itoi-m did not originally mean a slow worm, as it ia
nuw usually explained, but the worm or snake that slai/s or
strikes, from the old notion that it was very deadly, which
ia happily untrue. This is proved by the Anglo-Saxon form
of the word dd-iBi/rm (in manuscripts), and by the Swedish
and Norwegian names.

Talk is the only word in English of Lithuanian origin.
It was borrowed by us from Scandinavian, and meant
originally to interpret, as is the case with the modern
Swedish toika, Dan. tolke. But the Scandinavians, in their
turn, borrowed it from Lithuanian, which has the verb
ittlkoli, to interpret, and lu//cfis, an interpreter. Thus the

' This WHS BiibMHjuently foiuid imprttotiGable.
Sociotj- are at prDsenl placacl in the Council room
Societj in tile Kew Museums.


word points back to some distant period when some cot^
munication passed between these races by means of ^
interpreter. It has nothing whatever to do with our wor*
tell, of which the old meaning was simply to count ; cf . �*uac
tolkovate, which means both ' to interpret ' and * to talk/

Wench is short for wenchely which in Middle Eoglisli
meant simply an infant, whether male or female, and is used
in the Ormulum with reference to the babe bom at Bethleheoa.
This has been pointed out before ; but we may go further,
and observe that it is allied to A.-S. winclu, children, and
waned, unsteady, tottering. The original sense is unsteady ;
and the reference is to the tottering gait of children learning
to walk. This explains its application to both sexes, whilst,
at the same time, the modern restriction of its application to
the weaker sex is not inappropriate.

Weary is A.-S. werig, with long e. Now the A.-S. long e
is invariably modified from long 0. We therefore at once
obtain its etymology, from the A.-S. uorian, to tramp about.
Again, like other verbs in -tan, this verb must be a secondary
one, from a substantive wor, which meant both a moor and
sea- weed. Thus worian is to tramp over a moor, which is
certainly wearying. Further, the r stands for an older s, as
shown by the use of woos in the sense of sea- weed, noted by
Webster. But icoos, A.-S. wos^ is the usual word for ' moisture,
juice, wet, mud, swamp,' and is still preserved, without its
initial letter, in the modern English ooze. Hence the true
sense of weary is 'tired with tramping over oozy ground.
This is strikingly confirmed by the Icel. vds, explained to
mean * wetness, toil, fatigue, from storm, sea, frost, bad
weather, or the like.' Weariness is the result of struggling
against wet, whether it be that of the swamp beneath our
feet or of the storm that beats upon us. Perhaps some of us
can remember having to contend against both swamp and
Mtorm at once, and can recall our feelings at the time*

Wraith is properly a Lowland Scotch word. Jamieson
explains it as connected with ward, because the wraith ^
properly, the apparition of a man's guardian angel, warning
him against future peril. The transposition of the r causes

1881 MAT 2G. tlT AnjB/A hV POXTIS. 179

no difficulty, but he docs not tell us wliy the word ends
with Ifi. This is solved by the Scandiuavian origin of the
word; the Icelandic for tc/inl is vartha, in connection with
which is the very substantive required, viz, rartha, a beacon,
a pile of stones set up as a mark to warn a way-farer. This
pile of warning-atones, seen in the dim twilight, has doubtless
frequently been thought to be a wraith. The Norwegian
varde likewise means a pile of stones for a mark ; but the
derived word mrdyvle (lit. ward-evil) means exactly a ivrntth,
a ghost or spirit that goes before or follows a man in a lone

• Wyvern is a curious heraldic term for a. fabulous creature,
but the etymology is easy. The h is an English addition,
precisely as in bittern, Ibrraerly ditoure. The rest of the
word is the Old French iriere, a viper, from the latin uipera.
It is amusing to find that a viper is described by heralds as
'a monster of the dragon order, but having only two legs;
it has wings and u serpent-like tail, nowed and barbed.'
Atr. Magnusson pointed out that the same word as s/oic-
Kortn appeared in Icelandic where it was a translation of the
Anglo-Saxon. Thus the Icelandic h'oggoritif was the York-
shire hagicorm with the same meaning. Wi-aith, he thought,
was connected with the Icelandic hrte^a ' bogie.'

Mr. RlDGEWAY read the following paper on Aeschylus
J^vom. Vinci. 420, ''Apa^iav t apuov ai'8o<;:

'The word apa^iav, though found in the Medicean MS.,
■J^Ba incurred the spite of commentators.

Mr. Paley impales it with an obelus, and seems favourably
**^clined to Hermann's XnptiaTau. Mr. Burgea suggests
�f3(3d^ies, whilst Dindorf after Heimsoeth boldly thrusts it
'"•at and reads XoKklSov.

Now there is a passage in the Trinummus, 933, where one
^^ the characters says

^^wnino primum in Pontiim aduccti ad Arahiam termrn mnius.
The other says :
Eko ! ail etlain Ariibiu est lit Ponlo ?


The reply is :

Est; non ilia uhi tus gignitur
sed uhi apsinthium atque cunila gallinacea.

Brix, Wagner, Liademann pass it over in ailence, and'
Weiae remarka : locorum nomina quae narrat ficta.

These two passages seom to have the Bame solution, Oom-
menfators thinking only of Araby the Blest have shaken
their heads over them.

Xenophon who has a good right to be heard tells ub of
another Arabia. In the Ci/ropaedia vii 4, he tells us that
Cyrua starting on his homeward march from the Hellespont
towards Babj'lon, subdued the Phrygians in Great PhrygiSf
the Cappadociana, aad the Arabians. (Mark the order.)
In VIII 6 we read how Cyrus sent Satraps to Arabia, to
Cappadocia, and to the Great Phrygia, just reversing the
previous order, because Cyrus was sending them from
Babylon. Again in vii 5 the Babylonians laugh at Cyrus
for leaving the Phrygians, Lydians, Arabians, and Cappado-
cians to keep up the siege, all of them the recently annexed
states far to the northward of Babylon.

The Arabians meant are the people called Mpa^e?
oKtjviTai, inhabiting a long atrip of country far north of
Babylon near the upper waters of the Euphrates, and
running up to the confines of Cappadocia and Armenia.
They would thus dwell at no great distance from the shore
of the Euxine, and would be easily known to the Greeks
who visited the coasts of Pontus. Aeschylus, wishing to
show the universal sorrow for Prometheus' fate, first enume-
rates Colchis oa the east end of the Eusine, then takes the
Scythians on its north, and then the Arabians on its south.

Thia explanation, I venture to think, does away with any
need of conjectural emendation, and at the same time helps
to relieve Aeachylua from one of the many charges of geo-
graphical ignorance that have been heaped upon him.'

Mr. PoMTGATE communicated some notes on Thucydidev,
aaaongst which were the following :

III 48. l-7rei6e<T6i fioi MvrtXrjpaieev ot? fteti Ilaj(7)^ dweiref-'^ev


<�^ aZiKOvvTw; Kplvav koB* f](T\r)(iav tov^ S' aWov? ^ov olKelv.
"^S^e should strike out ohcelv. It was a question of life and
death, not of being settled or not. Classen^s parallels " olxetv,
pi*a.gnant, s.v. a oklvSvpco^ (i 124. 3), aa^aXA^ (vi 92. 5) "
are not really to the point.

IV 86. 1. el TO irdrpiov irapel^ to irkkov rofe 6\lrfoi<; fj
TO iKaaaov toa9 irda-t BovXcoaaLfii, If Mr. VerralFs ingenious
cliange of irapek into irdpeK in Soph. 0,0. 1212 tov fierpiov
'rrapcK, in Eur. Ale, 939 irdpeK to fiopa-tfiov and Plato Laws
192 c irdpcK TO ficTpLov be correct, this would seem to be
another example. In any case the usage of iraplrj/jbt requires
more support. The scholiast's explanation ra irdTpia KaTa*
Xi5<7a9 is justly doubted by Poppo.

Thursdat/, June 2. At a meeting held in St. John's
College, Professor Skeat, Vice-President, in the Chair, the
following were elected members :

F. J. Candy, Esq., M.A., Emmanuel.

Sir H. J. S. Maine, LL.D., Master of Trinity HaU.

Rev. J. B. Pearson, D.D., Emmanuel.

Mr. Verrall read a paper on some passages of Plautus,
Jfiles Gloriosua and Mostellaria.

In the Miles Gloriosua several of the lacunae assumed by or
after Ritschl are unnecessary.

Mies Gl. 635 sqq, (iii 1. 40.)

u Immo, hospes^ magis quom periclum fades, magisnosces meam
comitatem erga te amantem.

PL, quid opmt nota noscere ?

ut apud ted exemplum experiundo habeas, ne quaeras /oris,
526 (II 6. 46).

?. si hie non uidehit mulierem * * ♦ ♦

♦ * ♦ ♦ ♦ aperitur /oris.
I, uerum quom multos multa admisse aeceperim

inhonesta propter amorem atque aliena a bonis,

* � � � � � •

mitto tarn ut occidi Achiles ciuis passm est.


In tlie first example the j uncture is perfect ; in the two latter
there is an inteDtionul aad dramatic interruption.

So alao M. G. 895 (iii 3. 23), elicited from the MSS. by
Brix, 18 really complete and should be read without any

AC. dum tie sctentes qiiitl bonuin faciamtis, ne/ormidn.

PE. mala mulier mers eat. AC. ne pane, peioribus conueniuni.

'Women are a had lot.' 'Never you fear; they have to
match a lot still worse.' Compare Mrs. Poyser's retort to
Jiartle Maasey, 'The women are foolish ; the Almighty made
'em to match the. men.' (George Eliot, Adam BerJe.)

In M. G. 936 foil, (in 3. 65) the supposed lacuna may be
avoided by a slight correction.

PE. si hodie himc dolum dolamus,
quid libi ego mittam munens ?

AC. dat ne ab se mulier operamt-

Bead dat earn ah �e mulier operant, 'A woman gices such
service of free will,' deception, according to Acroteleutium,
bein^ her natural employment and therefore its own reward.
It would spoil the scene to introduce a bargain for payment,
For ab s€=iq)onfe, see the Dictionaries, s.v. ab.

M. G. 881 (iTi 3. 8) merelricem commoneri

quant mne magiti referat, fnil clamstj:

For the objections to this, see Prof Tyrrell ad he, ; guam
has been taken for the interrogative adverb ; it aeenas better
to take it aa the relative, reading,

merelricem commoneri,
quam sane magni referat, nil lam est.

'To give instructions to a mcretrix, if instructions are of
much importance to her, is no good anyhow;' if her know-
ledge of the world does not enable her to do without them,
she cannot he clever enough to do much with them. For the
elliptical tam~tamen {eisi comtiwnueris), compare the phrase



1881 J^^^E 2. PiimAn oltmpians n sssqq.

Mm gratia esf, and for the palaeography compare Professor
Tyrrell oqM.O. 100.

MosteUana 62 [Usemg), (i 1. 62).

esie ecfercite uos -fiagiiiam caedife (or cedile)f.

Bead aaginae creditae, comparing M. G. 937 hono suppromo
^ t promo eellam credifam and ibid. 840 sagina cellaria : ' Eat,
^tuff yourselves full of the good things entrusted to your

Id. 460 (ii 2. 38).

acdes ne adtigaila ; ftangere
tfos qmqite terrain f.

Thav.l. tangite, which is generally adopted, looks like a
OoDJecture, while the explanations offered are extremely far-
fetched. For VOSaVOaVETERAM read VOS" QYOQVE-
~VETARIM, tangere uos quoque iietnrim, ' I would not have
you (the servants) touch the house either,' the prohibitions
in the former part of the scene being addressed to Theopro-
pidea. Tho two letters VE wero lost through the juxtaposi-
tion of the same two in quogue. After uetarim there is hiatus,
j nstified by the caesura and the change of speakers.

Mr. Ghat read a paper on Pindar, 01. ii 56 — end as
follows :

From the traditional interpretation of lines 83-S I dissent
in two particulars.

First, I maintain that the reference in ao^o'i 6 -ttoWo, elBox;
^va is not to Pindar himself but to Theron, He is spoken of
^s Aiof Spvtya Betov, and the uaual device on the obverse of
<2oin8 of Acragas is an eagle, or sometimes two eagles : in
Bome cases the eagle is rending a serpent or hare ; is it pos-
sible that a similar device may have represented the eagle as
lending two orowa (yapveTov, dual)? The sense then will
"be : — ■ Theron is /rotfio'i <}>va ; bis enemies have only a spuri-
ous BtBaieTT) appTij, and idly attempt to vilify him ; I however
(87 foil.) more truly and generously maintain that he is the
most munificent and hospitable of men.'


Second,in the (iiKea ySeXij which P. keeps unused in his quiver
and which are only ^covavra owerouri there ia a veiled allusion
to the Eleuainiun mysteries. 'I could say much more on this
theme, i.e. the condition of the deud, but I refrain ; what I
might udd would be cohipreliensible to the initiated {eruveroC),
but for the many it would require interpretation.' Lines
61-2 (where read la-av Se . . laa S' ip) should he compared
with fragm. 95, which also depicts the lot of the happy dead,
and especially the eternal mmhine which they enjoy even
when it is night in the upper world. Again in Ar. Hanae
155, Heracles, who has himself been initiated, and who we
should recollect was especially connected with the foundation
of the lesser Eleusinia, is describing to Dionysus the after-
world of the initiated, and among other sights and aounda
tells him oTfrei re <f>bi^ koKXiotov aurrrep ivSdSe. Again the
curious notion in 68 that the souls of the just pass through
three cycles before they attain the consummation of reaching
the tower of Cronos reappears in an adapted form in the
Phaedrus, 249 a. In that passage (which, Dr. Thompaon
remarks, 'is full of phrases borrowed from the Eleusinian
rites '), we are told that the human soul before reaching the
consummation called ■jrrepaa-K; passes through ten periods,
each of 1000 years, and at the end of eaeh period is
offered its choice of any form of life into which to pass
next; but the philosophic soul, if after tJtree such periods
it persists in its choice of the philosophic life, at once obtains
its wings. The same passage speaks of the KdX\o<; 'Kafj.wpou
and auyt] KaOapa. witnessed by the eVoTTTtiiovre?. In Hdt.
II 123 we find mention of a similar cycle of. 3000 years,
associated with tho worship of Demcter and Dionysus.
This idea of a periodic revolution, says Hdt., was borrowed
from the Egyptians by the Greeks, by some at an earlier, by
some at a later date ; and he adds with noteworthy caution, t5>v
eya> etSw ra ovop-aTo, ov ypa^ai. Here we see in Hdt. the
same shrinking as in Pindar from what was regarded as a for-
bidden. subject, the same which restrained Pausanias (i 38. 6)
i'rora describing what was within the Upov at Eleusis. Hdt.
is perhaps right in supposing that the cycle theory oame to

1881 OCT. 20, iVOTES ON AESCffTLUS. 185

Greece from an Egyptian sourco, but the same conception
reappears in an almost identical form ia the religioa of
Buddha. Compare Edwin Arnold's Light of Asia, — •

Below the highest sphere four Regents ait
"Who rule our world, and under them are zones
Nearei" but high, where saintlieat spirits dead
"Wait thrice ten thousand years, then live again.

It might be suggested that the earlier Greek appropriators
of the Egyptian doctrine were the Eleusinian hierophants,
the later Empedocles, in whose fragments occurs a somewhat
similar idea (Hitter and Preller S 141), that if a SaCfiwv {i.e.
an immortal aoul) pollutes his members with murder or per-
jury, he ia compelled to wander thrice 10,000 years from
the presence of the gods, passing from one form of life to
another. Finally, the cycle of 1000 years appears again in
Virgil, Aen. vi 748.

Line 70 ia undoubtedly yery obscure. The ^tos oSos may
perhaps be compared with the roadways which in the P/inednis
247 are described as leading on to the outer rim of heaven,
along which Zeus and the other gods travel, and which
the unfledged soul with better or worse success attempts to
traverse: compare also ibid. 250 fiera tov Aiii^i ^fi.eh k-rroiievoi.

Thurailaij, October 20. At a Meeting held in St. John's
College, the Rev. S. S. Lewis, in the absence of the Presi-
dent, in the Chair,

A vote of condolence with Madame Littre on the loss of
her husband, the late Mons. E. Littre, who was proposed as
an honorary member of the society but died before election,
was passed unanimously.

Mr. Terrall read a paper upon the following passages,
Maah. Ag. 161-76, 680 foil, 99:3-3, being a supplement to
a previous paper {Journal of Philology, ix 115 " On a Chorus
of the Choephorae with remarks on the verb rowdi^a, etc.).
The author considered the criticisms of Mr. A, Sidgwick
<Edition of the Agamemnon, 1881, Appendix II.), and in


part accepted them so far as concerned tlie last two paBBages,

but defeoded his previous view of 161—176 Zei"; otmt -ttot' '

ecTTt K.T.\., and in particular the corrections hucelv for fiaXetv, i

Kk^^av for xXa^oiii, and Toirdv for to Tray. In connexion ■

with the second he examined the use of uXd^m and xXa'yy^ in i

tragedy and in Greek literature generally, to show that these ■]

words, both as applied to inarticulate sounds and still more ,
as applied to the human voice, were proper to harsh and
disagreeable noises only.

Sir. RiDGEWAT read a paper on the Ionic 3rd plural ter-
minations -arat, -aTo, and -uito (-oiaTO, -oulto). After
going through all the instances of the Ionic 3rd plural
middle in the Attic dramatists, viz., eKato^auiTo Pers. 451,
t^ev^oMTo id. 369, i'^deupoiaro Suppl, 754, kti^omto Cheoph.
484, oXoiaro Sept. 552, oXoiaTO Ai. 842 (?), oyfraiaS', yvataoiaTo-
O.T. 1274, Se^alaro O.C. 44, irefi-falaTO id. 602, trvBalaTo id.
921, Ze^aiaro id. 945, awovaiaTo El. 211, avTihtaprjaalaTo Hel.


Her. Fur. 547, .


> Iph. T. 1314, alaOt

vaiaro Pax 209, ipyaa-auiTo At.' 1147, Lys. 42, vj>€KolaTo
Nub. 1199, — he found an important difference between tha
usage of Attic and Homeric and Herodotean Greek. When
the Attics use the termination -laro, the thematic vowel is in-
variably preceded by a consonant. Homer has a, form ^taara, and
Herodotus such forms as Xvireoiara, avuoaro, ftJi-)^avwaro etc.
Curtius points out that Attic -arat, -evro only survived
after consonants, and only then in the perfect. Now the 19
instances that Curtius gives of hia rule that in Homer -arat
and -aro are necessary after consonants and i, possible after v
and long 'hard' vowels, impossible after short 'hard' vowels,
whether radical or thematic, are all either ^er/t'c/s ot pluper-
fects. In this we find an agreement between Homer and Old
Attic. Herodotus uses these terminations with other tenses,
e.g. TidiaTcu, aireBeiKPuaro. Attic limits them to consonantal
stems, Homer extends to i regularly and occasionally to v
and long hard vowels e.g. ^e^XT/arai,, Herodotus uses them
■with all kinds of stems. So too with the optative : Attic
limits -laro to consonantal stems, Homer has the form

SiwaTQ, though otherwise observing the
IHerodotas extends it to all kinds of Btems.


rule, whilst

Attic. , Homkb. "




also other tenses



1, sometimes u,

lorg hari



lon^ and short
hatd ynweh




and short
hard TowelB

From this table we may infer (1) that these suffixes were
originally confined to consonantal stems, (3) that -arat, tvro
were originally confined to the perfect, Tbiis the usage of
the Attic dramatists of -oiaro, -aMTo, is like the old Attic
perfect a relic of an early stage of the language, and we may
lay down as a dictum for verse-writers that -oiaro mvBt he
vsed with consonantal stems only.

Thuradmj, November 3. The Annual Meeting was held in
St. John's College, the President, Professor Mayor, in the
Chair, The following new member was elected :

T. P. Ileslop, Esq., M.D., Trustee of Sir Josiah Mason's
College, Birniinghain.

The Srcuetakt read his Annual Report.
The outgoing officers having resigned the following were
elected for the ensuing year :
President : Mr. Munro.

Tice-Presidents: Mr, W. A, Wright, Professor Cowell,
Professor Skeat.


Treasurer : Mr. Nixon.
Seci-etary : Mr. Postgate.

New membera of Council : Professor Mayor, Dr. Eort,
Mr. Sandys, Mr. Jackson.

Votes of thanks were passed unanimously to Professor
Mayor and the Public Orator on their resigning their offices.

Mr. Maqkiisson read a paper on Akimbo, a compound
which, he observed, in its present state must be taken to
represent an older compound in which the elements of com-
position came more clearly to light. Aa it now stood, it could
not be made up of any two words which in form were iden-
tical with the component elements, /■('�* and bo. It clearly
bore the stamp of strong wear and tear upon its face. The
hitherto proposed etymology from Celtic cam ' crooked,' could
not be admitted on the ground, that it gave no such clear
sense as would satisfy the mind, and warred altogether against
the logical method in which languages built up their com-
pounda. Fort'frm, attenuated to ^('/Wj^'bent,' and fco^'bent'
would make limbo with a sense ' bent-bent ' or ' bowed-bowed,'
which scarcely could have any meaning. A clearer light was
thrown on this obscure word by the Icelandic keng-boginn
and the Middle- English kcne-howe. Keng-boginn meant * bent
aa a crook.' Keiig was the stem of kengr, which in Icelandic
was the name for the object which in English was called
a ' staple,' a hook or crook of metal driven into uprights of
timber, posts, etc., for various purposes ; boginn was the past
part, of a lost strong verb, of which it was the only remnant
left. Kengr was found mentioned chiefly in connection with
doors and door-posts, gates and gate-posts, though it was also
found used in connection with other domestic appointments.
In primitive times it waa undoubtedly chiefly used as a con-
trivance to fasten doors by, and was the rude primitive
forerunner of the elegant instrument which, with advancing
civilization and retiring honesty, took the shape of a key.
In a derived sense kengr meant the bend of the body such aa,
for instance, the cat made when it set up its back. It waa


not, lioweTer, used in Icelandic to signify any bight- formed
appearance of the limbs.

In one point, therefore, the Icelandic ieng-hoginn and the
English aldmho stood quite disconnected, namely in their
application. While the Icelandic referred exclusively to the
bend of the body or of the spine, the English referred chiefly
to the bend of the arms.. This point was of paramount
importance for the derivation of alumbo. The word occurred
now chiefly in the phrase ' to stand akimbo,' or ' to stand, one
arm,' or 'both arms akimbo,' which meant to stand with the
arms bent out, and the hand on the flank, in such a way that
the bight so formed by the arm or arms resembled the
appearance of a staple driven into a post. This was a,
purely English development of the sense and quite foreign
to the Icelandic kvng-boginn. How did Ihat happen ? Of
the three possible ways in which it might have come about,
Mr, Magnusson preferred that which seemed the moat
natural, namely, that the Englishman of old must have had
ready at hand in his daily language both the elements of
which the proto- com pound of akimbo was made up. But
this assumption involved another, namely, that the English
then possessed a name for 'staple' whose form was capable of
naturally changing into kim. This Mr. Magnusson thought
was the case with the first element of the compound kciie-boice,
which Prof, Skeat had adduced under akimbo from the Talo
of Beryn. Here kene could mean nothing but a ' staple ; ' it
stood for kewg, Mr, Magnusson thought, the g having been
dropped before b in order to avoid harshness of sound, as waa
so frequently the case in Anglo-Saxon under similar circum-
stances, e.g. oyne-Jiot for ci/nvg-bot, ci/ne-bo//, for cyneg-hotl,
etc. The g once dropped, the transition from Jcene-boire to
ken-boip, and of that again into fnn-how, to become finally
kimbo, was of such a common type that the matter need not
he gone into. Bo was then the pp. bogen of A.-S. strong verb
biigan, to ' bend ' j an obviously natural case of denudation in
a language which had been busj' for centuries in eliminating
ita weak terminations. Although the form koieg waa not on
record, the corresponding Icel. kiiigy made ita existence quite


probable, for the correspondence of the two forms illustrates^
a general law of parallelism between such forms in IcelandL^S
and Anglo-Saxon ; such for instance was the case with A.
cyneg and Icelandic kongvy and a similar one that of tine (fi
older tined ?), Icel. tindry the * tooth * of a rake or a harro
That keneg therefore was once upon a time the Early Englii
name for a staple, was thus rendered not only quite probab-
from the formal point of view, but from the point of view
the sense it bore in kene-bo, kimbo, quite certain.

Finally, Mr. Magnusson suggested that A.-S. cceg, a 'ke
was an outcome of the older ceneg, a staple, which must ha'^^s
done duty among the primitive Teutons for fastening iooimrs,
as kengr had done among their Scandinavian neighbour's;
kengr, ceneg and cceg^ therefore, were, in all probability, QX>g*
nate names for one and the same object. The base of kmgr
was kang (kag), and remained still observable in the collo-
quial saying in Iceland at kanga m^ hur^, * to rattle with the
key in a door/ which showed that key with its base cagan
was a cognate to kengr. But kinga, though connected with
kengr by the Lexicographers, had nothing to do with that
word, but was a Low Latin introduction, from cingula, *a
round, coin-formed ornament.'

Mr. Verrall read a paper on the simile of the fuarfnj
Kvwv ^sch. Ag. 12*27 sqq}

ve&v t' €7rap'xp(; 'IXiov t' dvaaraTTj^

f ovtc oltev ola yXaxraa fiKrrjTrjf; kvvo^

Xi^aaa fca/creLvaaa i^aiZpovov^ Si/crjv

aT?79 XaOpalov rev^erai KaKJj tv^V t*

The most plausible correction proposed for this passage w

that of Madvig, substituting Xei^aa-a for Xe^cwa, ^atZfiov ow

for <f>aiBp6vovf; and Bij^eTac for Tev^erac, but

(1) the metaphor yk&a-a-a iKTe&aa-a oiJ? Sij^eTat is absurd.

(2) Si/crjv arrj'; XaOpaiov is pointless and inconsistent With
the use of the adverbial hlicriv elsewhere.

1 See Journal of PhUology, x p. 299 sqq, (1881).

1881 XOr. 3. !\'OTE ON AESCH. AG. 1227.


111 examining this, Eur. Sri\ 1172 was discussed, and the
following reading suggested ;

KevTovm •Koicia'i, at Se TToXmroSoiv Sl/cijv
^vvapTrdaaaat to? e/ias el^Qi' xepa.i

tJtfiy seized my Hmls and held me down like devil-fieh. MSS.

Madvig's correction of Agtim. I.e. eeema however to give
rightly the required sense, viz, that the pretended welcome
of Olytemnestra by putting Agamemnon off his guard will
facilitate the intended murder, as a treacherous dog licks
the hand in sign of joy and being thus encouraged bites it.
Following this Mr. Verrall proposed the reading—

Xel^atra Ka/CTeiuatra ^atSpo'i/ow \i)(i)v,
aTTjs \a0paLov reu^erat Kcucriv Tvyriv,

he knows not how the tongue of the defeated hound, bij proffering
the lick of ghdneea, will find an evil chance for treacherous hurt.
Here the accusative X(;^^i/ (related to Xel^oj as vkoKij, "ttv^tj,
rv)(T}, etc., to their respective verba) depends both upon
Xeifoffo and enTeivaaa. The genitive arijs is governed by
•nyT^v, itself accusative cognate to rev^eTai. The corruption
of AIXHN to AlKHN is of a common iEachylean type.

Thtmday, November 17, At a meeting held in St. John's
College, the President, Mr. ITcjiro, in the Chair,

On the recommendation of the Council, two alterations in
the Laws were adopted, the iirat, changing the date of tlie
Annual Meeting from the October to the Lent Term ; the
second, allowing Resident Members of the University to he
present at the meetings on the introduction of a member of
the Council.

It was agreed that the next Annual Meeting should be
the first meeting in the Lent Term, 1883,

Mr. PosTGATE then read i

paper I

I the Reform of the


FronunciatioQ of Latia and Greek, considered as a practic^^
tlniversity question.

After answering some preliminary objections he brieftj
indicated the argumente in favoar of corrections in pronu^j.
ciation, and, beginning witb Latin, showed how rauoh wa*
lost by the present anomalous system. On this subject 'he
quoted an illustration from Dr. Henry's Aeneidea, vol. iii p, 72,
note, on immaim /liafii, " These words are no less happy in
sound than iu sense, and a good reader or reciter will opea
his mouth wide in pronouncing them, and dwell on the Ion;
a in the middle of each ao as to symbolize the wide yawning
mouth of the cave. ... I do not hesitate to give mj
adhesion to the Ennian commentator (Hessel, p. 243) when is
says, sed nescio quid occultioris artiBcii in his latent ut CUDt
Acherontis meminerunt poetae semper fere a literam incnl-
cent crebrisque utautur collisionibus quod in illis etiam patet
Tersibua quos in Andromache retuKmus :

Acberusia templa alta Orci pallida
leti obnubila obsita tenebria loca."

He dwelt in particular on the necessity of reforming it if we
■were to teach Etymology satisfactorily. What was the goodr
he asked, of our impressing on a class the regularity of llw
laws of phonetic change and the fact that s never becomes ti
when immediately after wa may have to say that repla^l
(replicitus) is syncopated into repUktm (replictus) ? Wlw'
was the use of telling them that the root 'uhidh' appears U^
monophthong in fides and is diphthongized in foedm, when
all the time we were diphthongizing fidea as ftjtdes aii^
monophthongizing foedus to fedus ?

Then passing on to Greek, Mr. Postgate mentioned sonw
points iu which the present Greek pronunciation was superior
ta that of Latin, viz. (1) the non-assibilation of �1, eta;
(2) the retention of TI ; (3) the preservation of the quantity.
Against these bad to be sot the serious drawback of neglecting
the accent. He commented on the absurdity of neglecting
this in pronunciation while insisting on it in writing. He


pointed out that it was possible to preserve the position of
the accent in many cases, even if we gave it in our English
fashion a stress value : and that we might pronounce oikh<5-
menos, oikhom^nous, kalds and kallos as the- Greeks did.
This might be done in all cases except where the accent fell
on a vowel which closed a syllable and was followed by
another, where the stress accent would lengthen the vowel as
in eremian. He however further observed that if we gave
the words a pitch accent, and such as the Greek accent really
was, the difficulty disappeared, and in illustration of this he
read a passage from the beginning of the Persae^ giving the
words a pitch accent on the proper syllable.

Mr. Postgate concluded by again pointing out the necessity
of some action being taken by the University in the reform
of the pronunciation of the ancient languages, especially in
that of Latin.

A discussion followed in which the President, Professor
Mayor, Professor Skeat, Mr. Verrall, Mr. Candy, Mr.
BiDGEWAY and others took part.

A resolution was passed that a Committee be appointed for
the purpose of drawing up a scheme for the reform of the
present pronunciation of Latin, to be submitted to the
Society at a subsequent meeting.

Thursday, December 1. At a meeting held in St. John's
College, the President, Mr. Munro, in the Chair, the follow -
new members were elected :

F. T. Arnold, Esq., Trinity College.

F. J. H. Jenkinson, Esq., M.A., Trinity College.

W. Wyse, Esq., Trinity College.

The Secretary announced that Dr. Hayman intended to
dedicate his Odyssey, vol. iii, to the Society. It was
resolved to send Dr. Hayman a suitable acknowledgment of
the compliment.

TOL. II. 13



A Committee with power to add to their number
appointed to draw up a scheme for the reform of Lati^

Mr. Jackson read a paper on Passages in Plato's Phaedommmmm

Professor Skeat read a paper on the roots sak, ska, sk,^,^
in English.

The root sak, to cut, appears in Lat. secure, to cut. Belat�^
words are secant, section, segment, bisect, insect, etc.* JiJao
sickle, of Latin origin ; saxifrage, sassi/ras ; scion, of Frenci
origin ; and probably serrated. English roots from the same
root are saw, see-saw, scythe, sedge. Risk is Spanish, bom
resecare, as shown by Diez.

The root ska, to cut, appears in the extended forms skak,
SKAD, skap, skar. The base skan accounts for E. scathe and
(possibly) for coney ; also for canal, channel, kennel^ of Latiii
origin ; the initial s being lost in some cases.

The base skad accounts for schedule, of Greek origm;
and the E. scatter, originally to burst asunder ; whilst the
E. shed, to part, is closely allied. It also appears in the
weakened form skid, whence schism, schist, zest, squill, abscind^
rescind, abscissa, shingle in the old sense of * wooden tile,
sheath, sheathe, shide, an old word signifying a thin piece of
board, and skid. With loss of initial s, we have Lat. caedere,
to cut, connected with which are caesura, concise, decide, pre-
cise, homicide ; also chisel and scissors, the last being misspelt
owing to a false popular etymology from scindere. The base
SKAP, also KAP, to cut, accouuts for apocope, syncope, commdi
chop, chump, scoop, capon, sheep, shape, ship, shave, scab, shabbjji
shaft. The base skar, to shear, accounts for shear, share, shif^^
shore, score, shirt, skirt, shard, sherd, scaur, skerry, scari/^^
sheer q^ (which is Dutch for ' to cut away'), and even/^^'"'
Also for character, cuirass, scourge, scorch, and perhaps cts^^'
This base also appears as skal, whence scale, scall, skull, sh^^^

* Printed on p. 70. ,

* The etymologies of all the words here mentioned are given in Sk^^
Etymological Dictionary of the English Language.


ehell^ scallop, scalp, shelf. There is also a form skur or skru,
to cut, whence scrutiny^ scruple, shroud, shred, screed, scroll^
and probably screw. The base skar is also extended to skarf
or SK ALP, to cut ; hence excerpt, scarce, scalpel, sculpture, sharp^
scarf; also harvest, grave, grove, groove, graphic, graft; also
scrap, scrip, scarp, escarpment. All these can be fairly traced,
explained, and accounted for; and show that the Aryan
root SAK, to cut, with its various developments, is a well-
attested fact which is worthy of being carefully considered.


HOMER IN 1881 AND 1882.

Someriaehen Redlien, Von Br. E. 3uchhoh ; Zweiier Band ; Oeffentliehea

tdnd Frivates Zeben, Urste Abtheilung, das OeffentlieJte Zeben, Leipzig,

�ngelmaim, 1881. pp. 436.

Gebrauch der Konjunetiv und Optativ bei Homer, Von Dr. Wilhelm Ooeeke

(^Frogr.). Malmedy, 1881. pp. 24.

' Eanke. Die Doloneia, Teubner, Leipzig, 1881. pp. 82.

^mann. Meise in der Troas im Mai, 1881. Mit einer Karte. Brockbaus,

Xeipzig, 1881. pp. 77.

Odysseam eiuaque Sckoliastas curae seeundae. Scripait JT*. /. Polak. Faae,

t�rior. Leyden, E. J. Brill, 1881. pp. 275. Fasc. posterior, 1882.

J?. Brentano. Zur Losung der Trojanisehen Frage. Nebst einem Anhang :

dnige Bemerkungen zu Schliemann's Ilios. Mit einer Karte der Troisehen

JEbene und zwei Fliinen. Heilbronn, Henninger, 1881. pp.138.

t^dolf Kiene. I>i& Epen des Homer. Hannover, 1881. pp.123.

'^, Kayser^s Somerische Abhandlungen. Heramg, von Hermann Usener.

Leipzig, Teubner, 1881. pp. xlviii, 106.

inii Kochly Opuscula Fhilologica, Vol. i: Opuscula Latina. Edidit Godo-

fredus Kinlcel. Leipzig, Teubner, 1881.

s/s lUaSy fur den Schulgebrauch erkldrt von K. F. Ameis. 2ter Band, 2fe8

Heft, Ges. xvi-xviii, bearbeitet von Br. C. Hentze. Leipzig, Teubner, 1880.

pp. 135.

^ng zu Homer's Ilias, Schulauagabe von K. F. Ameis. 6te8 Heft. Erlduter'

tijigen zu Ges. xvi-xviii, von Br. C. Hentze, Leipzig, Teubner, 1881.

pp. 155.

ersibus apud Homerum perperam iteratis. (JProgramm des Gymnasiums zu

Bartenstein). Vom Gymnasiallehrer E. Lenz. Bartenstein, 1881. pp. 32.

erische Aufsdtze, von Rudolf Her cher. Berlin, "Weidmann'scbe Bucbhand-

lung, 1881. pp. 96.

C Thiemann. Grundziige der Homerischen Modus-Syntax, sowie Lehre vom

Gebrauch und Unterschied der Fartikeln &p und Kiv. Berlin, Mayer &

lliiller, 1881. pp. 55.

A. Gemoll, Einleitung in die Homerischen Gediehte. Mit zwei Kdrtehen,

Xeipzig, Teubner, 1881. pp. 30.


Baenitz, Bemerku^gen zum ersten und zweiten Buehe der Ilias, Inawroalaw,

1881. pp. 30.

Br. Heteseche, Bie Entstehung des ersten Buehes der Ilias, Binteln, 1881.

pp. 26.
Br, Richard Siegfried. Ad Compositionem Librorum Hiadis xviii ad xxii.

Brogrammabhandlung des Gymnasiums zu Fuerstenwalde. 1881. pp. 16.
Etymologische Erkl'drung Homerischer Worter. Ztcsammengestellt von Br. S.

Anton. Fortsetzung aus dem Vorjdhrigen Programm. Bie Mannliehat

Qottheiten : Zeus, Poseidon y Hades y Apolloy Aresy Hephaistos, Hermes.
Br. Emit Brocks. Zu Ilias xvii dZO. Schwetz, 1881. pp.4:.
Verbum Homericum. Bie Homerischen Verbalformen zusammengestelU vm

Eugen Frohwein, Leipzig, Teubner, 1881. pp. 144.
Homer. Von Karl Frey. Bern, Maxfiala, 1881. pp.48.
Br. K. Burehardi. Ueber den Gebrauch der Pronomen oXos bet Homer. Fr.

"Wagner, Duderstadt, 1881. pp. 16 (Program).
J. E. Harrison: Myths of the Odyssey in Art and Literature, London^

Rivingtons, 1881. pp. 219.
Homeric Grammar y by B. B. Monro. Oxford, 1882.
Karl Sittl, Bie Wiederjiolungen in der Odyssee. Miinclien, Ackermann, 1882.

pp. 192.
G. Kobilinski : Be Ay' 7, Yy Vocalium apud Homerum Mensura. Koenigsbeig^

Leupold, 1882. pp. 33.
Hechty M. Quaestiones Homericae. Koenigsberg, Kiewning, 1882. pp. 29.
Be Monumentis ad Odysseam Pertinentibus Capita Selecta scripsit Johannes SoUe^

Berlin, Mayer and Mueller, 1882. pp. 68.
Homerische Siudieny von Br. Ad. Faust. Strassburg, Triibner, 1882. pp. 41�
Etymologische Erkldrung Homerischer Wortery von H. S. Anton. Erfnrt>

Villaret, 1882. pp. 143.
Bie Entwickelung der Homerischen Poesie, von Benedictus Niese. Berliii�

Weidmannsche Buchh. 1882. pp. 261.
C. Rothe. Be Vetere quern ex Odyssea Kirchhoffius eruit U6arr^. Frogramnt

du College Royal Frangais. Berlin, 1882. pp.219.
G. Hinrichs. Bie Homerische Chryseisepisode. *' Hermes" xvii. Parti.

1882. pp. 68-123.

It is, I trust, not by any oversight that I have failed to
discover any works published during 1881, with the ex-
ception of the first two on my list, which can claim to be
contributions of any importance to Homeric scholarship-
England appears to have been nearly barren. I have come
across only two works in our own language, a small school
edition of the first book of the Iliad by Mr. Paley, which is
singularly free from the occasional eccentricities which so
often intrude themselves in the midst of that scholar's best
work; and a translation of the Iliad by Mr. Hailstonb

TTOMER T?r 1881-2. 201

(Cambridge, Johnson), which succeeds in being literal rather
than literary. The Germaa works are of bo miscellaneous
a character that I have not tried to classify thera.

It ia pleasant to find the third instalment of Prof.
BccHHOLZ's great work introduced by a most hearty and
elaborate dedication to Mr. Gladstone. The two parts of
the first volume, publiahed in 1871 and 1873, were devoted
to Homeric cosmography and geography, and to Homeric
mineralogy, botany, and zoology respectively. Tlie second
volume treats of Homeric men, and enters upon ground
where it is much more difficult to keep within tlie limits of
positive facts which a hook of "llculien" professes to register.
Almost every page contains disputed matter, and deals there-
fore rather with views than facts ; and as it ia obviously
impossible to bring even a bare list of views within the
limits of any reasonable book, the general result must appear
to minute students partial and one-sided ; for which reason it
is greatly to be regretted that references to modern works
are almost entirely omitted. To give an idea of the space
covered, the following abstract of the index will suffice:
"Erates Buch, der Staat im Frieden;" a general review
of the constitution of the state, king, council, nation (in-
cluding all social classes named in Homer) and law. Property,
agriculture, cattle, hunting. Trade and industry, economical
conditions, division of labour. Special trading classes. Metal-'
working, wagon -building, etc. (the wagon and the ship dis-
cussed in detail). Arts, music, dancing, gymnastics and
games. " Zweites Buch. Der Staat ira Kriege." Motives
for war, styles of fighting, treatment of dead and wounded ;
armies and camps. Armour and clothing of warriors, arms of
ofience and defence.

Dr. W, GoiicKE gives a catalogue of the passages in
Homer which contain either of the two moods, arranged
as follows : — I. Independent sentences. (1) Conj. without av
(�v). (2) Conj. with av (,Kkv). (a) Opt. of wishing. (4)
Potential opt. II. Dependent sentences. (5) Conj. with
future sense. (6) Opt. of wishing. (7) Potential opt,
(8) Complementary sentences [Erffiiuzungssdlze, i.e. relative


or interrogative clauses expressing the content of tbe
principal verb), (9) "Tentative" sentencea (expressing an
attempt by el, at xe, or ^v) ; (10) Final sentencea; (llj /i^
with conj. or opt. after verbs of fearing. No attempt it
made to give any theory of the moods, the object being
merely to anpply the bare materials for such, with occasioDal
short comments.

The thesis of Ranee's programme is that the tenth book of
the Iliad is an " EinzelUed," the work of a later poet, wbo
attempted to imitate Homer, and had a superlicial auocegj.
The book, though composed to follow 6 and the introdno-
tion — but not the bulk — of I, is useless, if not prejudicial, to
the general plan of the Iliad. It ehows numerous deviations
I'rom the manners and customs of the Homeric age, and from
the Homeric delineation of character. The motives of the
plot are confused, and truth of narrative is sacrificed to
striking dramatic effects ; exaggeration constantly appear),
and contradictions abound ; while a general effect of Hotaerlo
diction is only obtained by the wholesale borrowing of liuH
and phrases from other parts of the Iliad and Odyssey.

English scholars will probably find this less repellent than
most German works of the same class ; for though the search
after contradictions is often pushed to extravagant lengtiJ.
the inquiry appears fairly impartial ; and the severest
"unitarians" hardly feel themselves bound to hold a brief
for the authenticity of a book which even Mure only wealdy
struggles to defend.

Dr. Schliemann's diary of a short excursion in the
Troad made between the 13th and 23rd May last is simply
and pleasantly written. He followed the coast-line fiw
a short distance south of Besika Bay all the way to Adra-
mytteion, and then struck inland, returning in almoet ■
straight line to Alexandria Troas, and ascending on the w>y
Mount Gargaroa. He gives conjectural identifications of thfl
sites of many towns mentioned in Homer and elsewhere, but
lays chief stress on the negative side of his observation •■
proving that there are no prehistoric remains in Troas btyoBO
those he bad previously unearthed.

HOMER IN 1881-2. 203

This first instalment of Polak's long-promised work on the
Scholiasts consiats entirely of textual emendations, which the
author found grew so rapidly on his hands that he decided
to publish them separately, reserving the main portion
of hia studies, n thorough critical history of the Homeric
Scholiasts and Lexicon. It is needless to say that they
are throughout inspired by Cobet, and show little trace
of Gferman influence ; but I have not been able to examine
them with sufficient care to say if they are more than neat
and ingenious.

Dr. Brent ANo returns to the support of a former pamphlet,
and reiterates the view, which he is probably alone in holding,
that Homer's Ilios lay in the " Dumhrek-su" ; the valley,
that is, which runs almost due east from Hissarlik. The
positive portion of hia argument consists chiefly in a repeti-
tion of the arguments of Demetrios of Skepsis, who supported
the claims of a village called 'IXUtav icaifii] thirtv stadia east of
Ilium Novum. This theory demands the hypothesis of a great
change in the coast-line, which in heroic times, according to
Dr. Brentano, must have formed a narrow bay nearly five miles
long, running south from the mouth of the Mendereh, past
the mound of Hissarlik. This he defends against the ordinary
supposition, required by Schliemann, of a change in the bed
of the Mendereh (Slcaraandros). It seems however to be
generally admitted that Jlr, Calvert's investigations have
decided finally in favour of the latter of the two hj-potheses ;
and if this be so, Dr. Brentano's theory must fall. He
defends it however with vigour and ability ; but unfortu-
nately he has not visited the district, and Dr. Schliemann
asserts that he entirely misrepresents the nature of the brook
or watercourse called Eveii-Kjoi, which has to play the part
of the Skamandros. The latter, or negative, part of the
pamphlet is a lively attack upon the claims of Hissarlik and
the exaggerated descriptions of Dr. Schliemann. The whole
work was suggested by an article by Prof. Virchow, on the
geography of the Troas; and it is not hard to see that
Dr. Brentano is fighting with very unequal force against his
powerful antagonist.


Dr. EJENE, taking aa Lib motto Goethe's vords

" "VTer den Dicliter will TerateheE
Muas in Dichter'a tande gehen,"

walks in poet's land i

indeed. Wa

,' curious

already known as aa entlmsiastic defender of the perBondi^
of Homer, and the unity — with, the exception of a few intSN
polations — of the two poems. Beginning with a brirf
" Befutation of Wolf's hypothesis " — a fight of pop-gun
against Armstrongs — he proceeds to lay down the division of
the two poems into rhapaodies, as he conceives them to b�fa
been originally produced ; the Ihad comprising eight, varyiny
from 1802 to 2216 lines ; and the Odyssey six, from 164014
2534 lines long. These are first analysed superficially, aid
the spiritual development of their contents ia then presented
dramatically, in a remarkable dialogue between two heaiWB
of the first recitation by Uomer of his new poem, the Odyu^-
One of thera, Klearchos, is a rhapsode of the old Behod,
which knew only of " Einzellioder " ; a school which Hom*
is represented as having superseded by his gigantic creatiffli
of great poems, weaving together single songs into a HupeA
unity never before dreamed of. The other hearer, Gharilda,
is employed only to anticipate the criticisms of the nineteenth
century, and so to call forth Elearchos' enthusiastic elucida-
tion of the aims and motives of the new creation. Fortunately
Dr. Kicne is not su�B.ciently master of dramatic presentSHOil'
to delude us for a moment into the idea that the men in
Poet's Land were as dreary and metaphysical as Gennail'
professors. The work concludes with somewhat disconnectei
remarks on Blood -revenge, the Realm of the Dead, and
the possibility that Homer may have known the u*
of writing.

The main work of Dr. Katsek's life of sixty-four yeW
was devoted to Philostratos ; but it appears, from tw
affectionate memoir prefixed to these collected essays, tDM
from his 23rd to his 35th year (1831-1843) Homer filled •
large part of his thoughts and studies. The present volume
contains five essays: (1) "Versuch einw Geschichte d^s

HOMER TN 1881-2.


HomerischenEpoB," (2) " Disputatio de diversa Homericorura
carminura origine," (3) " De interpolatore Homerico," (4)
" Betrachtungen iiber H 6 K," (5) " Ueber die Anwend-
barkeit prosodischer Beobachtungen zu Scbliissen iiber die
Entstehimg der Homerischen Epen," the last being part of a
review of Hoffmann's " Quaestionea Horaericae " written aa
late as 1S50.

Kayser'a view seema to tave approximated to Lachmann.
He coneidera tbe firjvit in the Iliad (^4 to H) and the koo-ti
in the Odyasey {i 39 — /i 450) to be the foundation of tbe whoh
both being the work of a single poet, who was followed by
a series of imitators, each taking advantage of all that had
gone before. Thus arose a number a number of independent
lays, JlarpoKKeia, ' A-}(00^'^i'>, TtVi? fivrjaT^pm', etc., which
were finally combined into the poems aa we now have them
by a not too skilful diaaceuaat.

Of tbe 597 pages of Kochlv's closely printed volume, the
first 212 deal with Homer. They contain ten dissertations
written from 1850 to 1863; their nature is of course easily
to be guessed, as Ktichly was an eminent member, and
indeed with Lachmann a principal founder, of the " Klein-
liederjiiger " school. They have been sufficiently long'
before the public, in an isolated form, to make comment
needless. The subjects of the ten essays are : (1) the com-
posite character of B 1-483 : (2) the restitution of the
"catalogue" in B to its "original" form, a poem in five-
line strophes : (3j disintegration of the interpolated portions
of A (after 347) : (4) disintegration, of T A E : {5) and (6)
of Z and R 1-312 : (7) of H 313—0 488 : (8) (9) and (10)
deal with tbe Odyssey in the same spirit.

Dr. Hentze's last additions to his most valuable work
require little comment. The notes, though somewhat over-
burdened with matter scarcely needed in a school edition, are
as full and as sound as those which have preceded them ;
while the Appendix pvesenta those sensible views to which
Btndents of the Iliad turn all the more gladly from the mass
of German criticism because they know that they will find
German thoroughness in the exposition of conflicting views


and the catalogues of literature bearing upon the subject. On
the whole Dr. Ilentze is perhaps somewhat leas conserTatiTO
than he has previously shown himself, and admits a greater
Dumber of " Eindichtungen " and " Umdichtungen " than is
quite necessary. Still he accepts the "Shield," with lie
exception of the choral dance, as genuinely archaic, apparently
accepting Brunn'a view that it is a Greek arrangement of
Assyrian material. It is a pity that Dr. Hentze shoiiid
apparently not have come across Mr. Murray's intereetmg
chapter in his " History of Greek Sculpture."

E. Lenz is an Aristarchean of the school of Lehn, uul
writes from a conservative standpoint. He inyastigata
sundry dder^a-eK made by Aristarchus on the ground of
wrong repetition of lines, and adds a few of his own, tracinj
them to slips in the memory of rhapsodiats, who, repeating
by heart, would naturally be easily led into such mistakes by
manifold associations with the language and situations of tha
passages they might be reciting from time to time. Littli
will be found here of much importance or interest.

Hercher's Homerische Aufsdlze consist of five papen^
apparently reprinted from various sources after the authors
death. The last two are merely short notes on Od, xvii 302;
three longer ones deal with Homer's geography, as shown in
his conceptions of Ithaca, the Trojan plain, and the riTere
named in II. xii 16-24, respectively. The author's aim ia lo
show that the poet had no personal knowledge of the soena
of his poems, and employs the few geographical (/i7(i of the
legend in a purely arbitrary way ; he argues especially that
the original story spoke only of the Skamandros, and that the
introduction of the Simoeia ia the work of a " Nachdichter."
Though writing in 1875, a full year after the publication of
Schliemann's results, he makes no mention of them ; though
indeed no possible discoveries could touch the basis of h"
argument, which deserves careful attention.

Dr. Thiema�k's book is avowedly based upon -Delbruck's
" Syntaktische Forschungen" (Halle, 1871}, and aims �t
carrying out the principles there laid down as far aa a BoieO"
tific theory of the distinction between an and Kev, a poin'

ROMER IN 1881-2. 207

which Delbriick expreaaly declined to inTestigate. So difficult
is the question in itself, and so condensed Dr. Thiemann's
style, that it is very hard to say how far the object ia attained.
The author laya down the following distinctions (p. 37).
"The pure Conjunctive (i.e. av or xev) signifies a requirement
(ForderungJ on the part of circumstancea known generally,
from which the occurrence of the event (ffaiid/ung, the
'action' of the principal verb) necessarily results." "The
particle tcev has to represent thia idea of 'Must' (SoUen)
contained in the Conjunctive aa a requirement on the
part of the Subject who ia speaking ... so that the
realization of the event ia a postulate of the "Will, the Ex-
pectation, or the Presumption of the Subject wlio is speaking "
{p. 2. Will, Expectation, Presumption are Delbriick's three
"degrees of intensity of Will"). "The particle av, by
virtue of its demonstrative force, has to indicate quite special
circumstances, present to the mind of the subject who is
speaking, and also intelligible to the hearer " (p. 37). In
other words, /cev means " in existing circumstances generally,
OS I regard them," av " in such and such particular circum-
stances." It seems hopeless even to state intelligibly, much
less to discuss, such subtle distinctions in a limited space ;
the whole question hinges upon examination of tlie largest
possible number of examples, and the larger number one
examines, the more one feels that a consistent ayatera of inter-
pretation requires the application of riolence to perfectly
plain sentences. Any original difference between the par-
ticles had so far died out at the time of the composition of
the Iliad and Odyssey, that no really crucial sentence can be
looked for ; and the materials give no ground for more than
a purely subjective solution, since comparative philology
appears quite unable to supply any suggestive analogies. In
other words, Dr. Thiemann is on the right tack, but has
sailed out of sight of land without compass or sextant.

Dr. Gemoll's Eiiileitiiug cannot be considered a good
book for the introduction of a schoolboy to the study of
Homer. It comprises four chapters : "Homer und die Hom.
Oedichte," "Troja und Ilion," "Ithaka," "die Berechnung


der Tage in Ilias und Odyssee.*' The first gives a scanty
sketch of a few of the elements of the Homeric questior::^
laying far inore stress upon inconsistencies than is advisabl!^
for beginners. The second and third give a very bri.^,
account (illustrated by two maps borrowed from other boo^::^^
of the localities, and insisting on the impossibility of cc^^i
ciliating them with the poems. The last chapter is a b^^Tg
analysis of the Iliad and Odyssey divided according to tie
days of the narrative ; a piece of work which the author
himself very wisely depreciates, when he says " the Homerzc
poems do not bind themselves to time ; they begin or end
a day whenever the situation appears to demand it/'

The two school-programmes by Baenitz and Haesecke
deal with the same well-worn problem in the same
weU-worn way. Dr. Baenitz is not satisfied with Lacli-
mann's resolution of the first book into three distinct
Lieder, but finds that it consists of five sections by five
diflFerent poets ; his analysis being mainly directed to
proving that the scene in Olympus is by a different hand
from the " plaint of AchiUes " in which Thetis first appears.
The remarks on the second book aim chiefly at establishing
two theses : first, that the speech of Agamemnon in the
assembly was serious advice, and not meant merely to test
the people ; secondly, that the " catalogue " was written
strophically, and that all lines which interfere with this
arrangement are interpolated.

Dr. Haesecke would show that the first book, as we have
it, is formed by the fusing of three forms in which the /tt^m
was sung at different periods, with a few lines interpolated
by the commission of Peisistratos.

It is to be hoped that Lachmann would blush at tha
arguments of his disciples.

Dr. Siegfried, though far from being a defender of the
unity of the Iliad, is chiefly concerned in this programme
with rebutting the arguments of the many critics who have
endeavoured to make out that the five books which form
Lachmann's ^*Achilieis" are an inferior patchwork by
numerous and late hands. While rejecting, with almost all

HOMER IN 1881-2. 2C9

commentators, the battle of the gods in xvii, as well as the
incident of the slaying of Asteropaios, he maintains that,
"with the exception of several short passages in each book,
the story hangs well together, and does not deserve the
animadversions of its assailants. He even defends with
great ingenuity the much-disputed lines xvn 228-232, and
altogether shows a spirit of moderation and good sense which
it is pleasant to find in German criticism. Though not very
original, the pamphlet may be found useful by scholars
interested in the minuter study of the Homeric question.

Dr. Anton's continuation of an essay of which 32 pages
were published last year consists of a very brief resum^ of
the derivatiolis of names and epithets of gods which have
been proposed by various etymologists ; with the very
pbvious intention of bringing Dr. Goebel — " mit dem iiber-
haupt," Dr. Anton asserts, " eine neue Epoche der Worter-
klarung beginnt" — into the most favourable light. Time
will judge Dr. Goebel, if he ever gets a hearing ; meanwhile
this little work is too compressed to be of value for practical
purposes, and too one-sided and partial for those who would
wish to form a fair opinion on the merits of the new departure
in etymology ; which if it is worth anything, deserves a very
careful study in the original work.

Dr. Brocks ingeniously conjectures xnrep Aui,in ILxvii 330,
for the very obscure xmephea of the vulgate ; a word which
has puzzled ancient and modern commentators alike, hrjfiov
exovra^ he translates " guarding their folk," and compares
IL XXIV 729. He unfortunately does not attempt to explain
away the obvious difficulty that there is no sufficient reason
why so easy a phrase should ever have been altered into an
obscure one ; perhaps he supposes the explanation to lie
in the apparent impiety of supposing that a city could ever
have been saved "in spite of Zeus."

Frohwein's Verbum Homericum is a posthumous work,
introduced by a few words by Dr. Delbriick. It consists of
^ complete index to all the verbal forms in Homer, arranged
in all cases under their primaries ; a method which has its
advantages in certain scientific investigationS| but will hardly

TOL. II. 14


be found so aaefiU for general porposo a* tie ^mAj a^bt-
betical order. The work however is not mtended to nnl
•uch convordsnces ss Seber's or Dr. DtmlMr'm: vlule it doM
not tana to offer anytbing that cannot be got from Ebding'i
Ivxicon. It 18 indeed a task oi eelf.deiirin' Ikbottr which
on� cannot but think might have be^i more nsefoll;

Next comen K. Fhey's lively, almost rollicking, but
trenchant attack upon A. KirchhoffandLachmaim'streaCaient
of the Odyasoy and the Iliad, especially the former. TTie
writer ii a strong upholder of the unity of the IW;
whotlier he ie a chorizont or no he does uot tell ns. He
freely admits inconsii^tencies in the poems, hut by enttiiuiae-
tiuilly appealing to poetic genius and the impulse to dn�
(tuch picture as an indepeudent unit in the brightest cdoai^
Im ovorridoii all such difficulties. The pamphlet will repay
hiilfiin liour'a reading.

Dr. JluitciiAKDi deduces the two main uses of oI� id
Ilomor, the " oxulamative " and the relative, from the origtn^
domoMNtrati vo sense, and shows how the old paratactic ooii'
■truotion gradually passed, as with other relative proooum,
into the hypotactio. The work, as may be gathered from ib
miiall oompasa, gives merely an outline, and very fewdisnfr
■ion* of individual paaaivges are attempted. It seems a pity
that nothing more should have been done in this direetion.
Tho dUHouIt phrase oXm tm 7* XeaiTe Sum, for instancy of
Bf /ifi4, might well have received a more careful examinatiini
u� it ii nut easily to be fitted into a general theory c^tto
Itomeric uao of the pronoun.

Misa Harbison's vei-y interesting book is designed notM
muoh for atudenta of Homer as for those who desire to be
introduoed to aivhaeology by pleasant paths; and by thaio^'
will bo found full of sound instruction. The illostratioDS ot
the iidvenl�ri>a of Odysseus which ancient art supplies us tn
abundance ar� trucod with all thoroughneas from the ^'^
tuvUaio vast) to the lutrat contorniate, and the vitality of ^^
myth ol' Uii) sirona is proved by its power ot" development ^
y�t more utodera times.

HOMER IN 1881-2. 211

Last year, 1882, brought us one work of capital importance,
Mr. D. B. Monro's Homeric Orammar; the most considerable
contribution of English scholarship to Homeric philology.
Of course no account of it can be needed here.

Fick's short paper in Bezzenherger's Beiirdge, vii, p. 139 sq.,
presents an entirely new view of the Homeric dialect, and one
which deserves the most careful consideration. The sketch
which he there presented has since been developed at length
in a restoration of the Odyssey to what he maintains to be its
original form, the Aeolic dialect.

Dr. SiTTL analyses with great fullness all the cases where
lines in the Odyssey are repeated either from other books or
from the Iliad, in order to find the indications which may
exist as to the priority of one or other of the duplicate
passages. He proceeds with a good deal of sound sense, and
his results are well worth consideration. His main conclu-
sions, which may pass for a sort of " left-centre " creed in the
line of Homeric parties, are roughly these. That the Odyssey
was originally based on the older nostos contained in books v
to IX, but interspersed with considerable interpolations.
This was then extended by the addition of the later nostos,
books X to XII, and the poem '' Odysseus in Ithaca " scattered
over the last twelve books. But these two additions he is at
least inclined to believe were by the original poet; he thus
decisively differs from Kirchhoff. Then came the Telemachia
and the large addition from the middle of the 23rd book to
the end of the 24th ; and finally many interpolations, notably
the Theoklymenos episodes.

The greater part of the Iliad, including the catalogue and
the funeral games, and probably the Presbeia, is older
than the whole of the Odyssey ; the Doloneia and the 24th
book are however younger than the original parts of the
Odyssey, but older than the Telemachia.

KoBiLiNSKi's dissertation starts from the assumption — no
doubt a correct one — ^that short vowels can be lengthened by
the arsis but that they must remain short in the thesis.
The passages which contravene this law are considered and


emended or pronounced apurioua ; but the work is immature

1 by no meana satisfactory.

Hecht's dissertation consists of criticisms on parts of Lebr's
work, De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis. He shows in several
instances the failure of AristarchuB' attempt to establish
absolute uniformity in the Homeric use of words, and his
suggestions, if not strikingly new or important, are sound and
sensible. The words discussed are evrea, evapa, &c. (explained
to mean originally " deadly weapons "), '^vla, Ba(<i, eOeipat,

i tract is purely archaeological, a catalogue raisonn^
of the known works of ancient art referring to the Odyssey.
There are also three short appendices, on the representation
of metamorphoses in ancient art, on the potter Nikostheues,
and on the origin of the fish-tailed type of the siren.

Dr. Ad. Faust gives ua but a poor specimen of the Homeric
He thinks that Peisistratos, the son of Nestor, was
not in the original Odyssey, but was interpolated by Peisis-
tratos the Tyrant of Athens, in order to confirm the legend of
the Neleid origin of his family. The arguments throughout
are extravagant and tasteless, as might be expected.

Dr. Anton has now completed the list of the epithets of
the gods, and the first part of the comprehensive work which
he promises, and which he has been bringing out in fragments
for several years in school programmes. It may be useful aa
a book of reference to the difierent authorities ; but it is
somewhat disfigured by a too obvious partiality for the lucu-
brations of Dr. Goebel. The extravagant importance which
was assigned to him in the earber preface however does not
now find open expression.

Niese's book is the most ambitious production of the year
in the dreary field of the ' higher criticism.' His main thesis
is that the Iliad and Odyssey are not founded, as is generally
supposed, upon an old legend of Troy ; but that the story is
itself the creation of the poet. Niese even goes so far as to
deny the existence of any earlier ' Volkapoesie ' at all. On
the base of the comparatively short poems in which the tala

HOMER IN 1881-2. 213

was first brought to light succeeding rhapsodes built up in
gradual layers the structure as we have it^ each taking
advantage of the work of his predecessors without being
able to add much from his own store. The bulk of the work
is taken up in an exposition of these later strata, and is about
as dreary as the rest of the myriad of similar productions with
which Germany has favoured us. It is hardly to be conceived
that Niese will find many followers.

Dr. RoTHE is in the main a devoted follower of Kirchhoff ;
the first portion of his essay aims at proving the correctness
of that critic's analysis of the first half of the Odyssey, and
supporting it by tracing out the vexed question of the sup-
planting of the motive of the wrath of Poseidon by the
motive of the wrath of Zeus on behalf of Helios. To this
end Dr. Eothe conjecturally reads Iloa-eiS&v for Kpovlxov in
XII 405, and makes up the original account of the shipwreck
from XII 403-414, 420, 421, vii 251-253. The second part
of the programme however combats Kirchhoff 's view that the
"first continuation " which brought Odysseus home to his
house was the work of a later hand than the " first nostos."
Dr. EoTHE shows good reason for considering that the oldest
form of "Odysseus in Ithaca" — in which there were only
twenty suitors and they were slain, not in the palace, but in
the grove of Apollo outside the town — was an integral part
of the oldest Odyssey.

The thesis of Hinrichs's elaborate essay is that the episode
of the restoration of Ohryseis to her father, II. i 428-492, is
a piece of miserable patchwork composed of reminiscences not
only from the Iliad and Odyssey, but also to a great extent
from the hymn to the Pythian Apollo. He gives a table
showing that some portion at least of every line throughout the
passage is borrowed, almost always losing its appropriateness
in the process. His method is thus the same as that of Sittl in
the work above noticed ; a method which is at the present
moment the principal instrument of the advanced criticism in
Germany. The " Flickmeister " to whom we owe the cento he
considers to be the same as the unfortunate " Redactor " who
has had to endure such outpourings of contempt from Kirchhoff


and his followers for the way in which he reduced the Odyssey
to the miserable condition in which we now have it.

Note, — It is necessary to call attention to the fact that
various circumstances have made it impossible for me to claim
any pretence to completeness in the above list of Homeric
work for the last two years. The programme literature for
1882, in particular, I have hardly been able to touch, and I
fear that my apologies may be due to more than one author
whose work may have deserved especial respect.



JT. Jaehatm : On Flatd's RepubliCy vi 609 d sqq. in Journal of Philology ^ x

132-150 ; Flato'a Later Theory of Ideas, i, ib, x 263-298 ; n, ib. xi

J?. D. Archer-Hind: On some difficulties in the Platonic Psychology, ib. x 120-131.
W, S. Thompson : Introductory Memarhs on the Philebus, ib. xi 1-22.
L. Campbell : A Neglected MantMcript of Plato, ib. xi 195-200.
/. Gow : The Nuptial Number, Republic vm 246, ib. xii 91-102.
J. Bywater : Atakta, ib. x 72-78.
C. Badham : Platonica, in Mnemosyne^ x 290-294, 324 ; Ad libr. x de legibus,

ib. X 337-354, xi 47-68 ; Ad libr. viii de legibus, ib. xi 190-202 ; Parali-

pomena, ib. xi 237-245.

A. W. Benn : The Greek Philosophers, i 171-274. Kegan Panl, 1882.

B, H. Kennedy : The Theaetetus, with Translation and Notes. Cambridge

University Press, 1881.
L. Campbell : The Theaetetus with English Notes. 2nd edition. Clarendon Press,

T. Maguire : The Parmenides with Introduction Analysis and Notes. Dublin, 1882.
/. Purves : Selections from the Dialogues. Clarendon Press, 1883.

English work upon Plato is headed by three articles of
Mr. H. Jackson in the Journal of Philology, vols, x, xi, the
commencement of what bids fair to be the most important
enterprise of recent years in this department. The first or
introductory paper modifies considerably the usual interpre-
tation of rep. VI 509 D. It begins (� 1) by rejecting the
ordinary views, (1) that the universe is compared to a quadri-
partite line, and (2) that three of the four sections correspond
to the alaOffrd, /jLoOrj/MaTtKci, iSicu of Arist. metaph, i 6. On
the contrary, the simile is put forward to teach that as
particulars have 'images,' Le. shadows or reflexions, so the


ideas have ' images ' or reflexioiiB. And tliia ia found to
accord (| 2) with the eimile of the cave, when right!/
explained. Thus two methods of study are contrasted (� 3);
that of Dialectic, in which the soul uses hypotheses u
starting-points to ascend to a first principle, and the inferior
method by which the soul, using visible repreaentatioDi,
d9Hcends from unverified hypotheses to conclusionB alike
unverified. What then are the objects of study by the latter
method P Not raathorantical conceptions exclusively, bat
quite generally Xoyoi, general definitions, which are inroBeatii
because assumed to correspond with the ideas of which tliey
are the ' images,' representations often imperfect and at the
best incapable of verification. The method of study to be
pursued with the inferior section of voitrav is, in short, tbs
Bevrepoi ttXoik oi Phaedo 101 c-E, only that in the PAsida
Socrates despairs of attaining a first principle from which to
deduce hia wvoBeaeti, thereby converting them into eact
representations of ideas.

The next article, ' on the Phihbiis and Arist. tnetaph. i fi '
opens with a summary of the ideal theory as presented in
republic and Phaedo : an idea answering to every oomnioa
term (^v eVt iroWatv), and the presence of the idea in
particulars making them what they are. With this is con-
trasted Aristotle's precise indications of a Platonism very
unlike this: (i) ideas of natural objects only, (ii) coininon
elements of ideas and particulars, (iii) a theory of idefil
numbers, like the Pythagorean. Attempts have been made
to explain this inconsistency, hut mostly at the expense of
Aristotle's accuracy : he either misunderstood or miarepre-
aented his master (Zeller, Bonitz). Mr, Jackson argiu*
cogently and acutely that on the contrary Plato broke ffilli
the phase of the ideal theory to he found in repuhUc X 8(m
Phaedo, and he claims to verify from the other dialogue*
Arifltotle'a at first sight startling statements. With thw
object he examines the ontological part of the Phikhvi-
Whatever may be the verdict of succeeding time upon 'U'
main thesis, the invaluable aids rendered to the right unoW-
standing of this single dialogue deserve the highest praise-


I may single out the treatment of tlie different paradoxes of
the One and the Many (14 c), of the passage 25 c — ^e, of the
different but allied functions of fierpiov and iroa-op, and the
confirmation derived from a new interpretation of politicus
283 B — 287 A. The results obtained are then shown (with
one or two exceptions) to agree to the letter with the
summary of Platonism given in Arist. metaph. i 6, which
chapter receives a thorough discussion and elucidation.

The paper on the Farmenides is no less rich in valuable
results. Grote had accustomed English scholars to the view
that in cc. i-vii of that dialogue Plato is urging against his
own theory, the theory of rep, x and Phaedo, objections that
lie has nowhere answered. But Grote failed duly to recog-
nize the positive side of the criticism, or to call attention to
the suggestion {Farm. 132 d) that Forms or Kinds {ei^) are
models and types established in nature, whereof particular^
are copies and likenesses. This suggestion Mr. Jackson takes
to be the foundation of the maturer Platonism ; as he puts it,
the theory of immanent ideas is superseded by a theory of
paradeigmatic ideas. The idea is incognizable by man. At
the same time its assumption is indispensable for the attain-
ment of knowledge. Ideas served to Plato as a basis for
a theory of knowledge, to which the latter part of the
Farmenides is found to afford contributions at the same time
that it determines to some extent (1) the contents of the
world of ideas, (2) the relation of idea to particular. Space
forbids a further summary of the results of this masterly
investigation. The hypotheses of the latter half of the
dialogue are explained in an entirely novel way, as pre-
senting distinct contemporary theories, Eleatic, Socratic,
Cynic, Platonic, of the relations of h and raXKa, theories which
are successively passed under review to ascertain what account
they give of predication and knowledge. The explanation
bears upon it the stamp of reasonable probability, and
additional confirmation is afforded by the agreement (1) of
the Farmenides with the Fhilebus, (2) of both with the
Platonic system as depicted by Aristotle.

Lastly^ it should be noticed as characteristic of these


admirable articles that they are based on careful and aoom^
philological study of the text. They may lead us to modi^
our whole conception of the Platonic system and of the order
of the dialogues ; but their author starts with the sober and
determined purpose of arriving at Plato's meaning in pK-
ticular dialogues, taken separately and in relation to each
other. We shall look eagerly for the continuation of tlw

The Journal of Philology, x 120-131, also contains a psper
by Mr. Akcher-Hind on the Platonic Psychology, in wliicli
he offers an explanation of two well-known difficnltios; (i)
that desire, fear, and other passions are sometimes assigned
to the body, Phaedo G6 c, sometimes to the soul, P/ii/f 6m� 35 e,
Timmus 64 bc ; (ii) that while an argument in the Platk
(80 B, cf. 78 c) rests upon the assumed unity of sonl, in
Pkaedrus 246 d, republic 434-441, Timaem 69 c, soul appears
as threefold and composite. The writer protests against
Grote's arbitrary assumption that Plato modified his dodriaa
to suit the purpose of each dialogue ; a protest much needed
when Grote's great authority has induced a belief that Plato
was not prepared with a system, that when seen ' as he truly
was ' he appears ' inconsistent, contradictory, following the
argument from one point of view only and therefore arriving
at opposite conclusions.' Zeller holds literally that tliree
different parts of the soul are meant, but this is shown to
lead to the hopeless inconsistencies of a soul extended in
space and mortaL The writer's own solution ia that $v/ioci^
and eiridvtiijTiKov, which make up the di/TjTov eZSo? -^v)^,
are modes of the soul's operation dependent on its oonneiioii
with the body and perishable because that connexion is only
temporary. All soul as such is eternal and uniform ; liere
is only one kind of soul. The argument in the Phaedo is not
affected by the threefold division, for the demonstration
applies to soul aa such, not to modes of its operation. If this
solution be admitted for the second and graver difficulty, the
earlier one vanishes. Whether the passions bo ascribed W
the body or to the soul is indifferent : they cannot affect W^
except when it is in connexion with matter. It ffow^



however be more correct to describe them as affections of
the Boul through the body, matter itself being insensate.

Dr. Thompson's Introductory Remarks on the Phikhis,
Journal of Philologi/, xi 1-22, written aa far back aa 18-55,
are a model of skilful exposition. They were designed as a
help to beginners, but the advanced student cannot fail to
profit by the valuable suggestions they contain, and to
admire the pbilosopbic insight and fertility of illustration
with which the difficulties of the earlier part of the dialogue
[11b-30e) are treated.

The neglected MS. of Plato, Tvhioh Prof. Campbell
describes in the Journal of Philology xi 195-200, is one in
the Maltestian Library now connected with the public
Gymnasium in the town of Cesena, between Bologna and
Brindiai. If not of the xii century, it is at least older than
any MS. at Venice except T and IT. It is of thick cotton
paper in large folio, about 40 lines to the page, with various
readings and scholia, mostly by a nearly contemporary hand.
It contains (besides Table of Contents and the Life of
Diogenes Laertius) 36 dialogues in the Thrasyllean order,
induding the 7 vo6ev6/j.evoi,. The Clifoplioii ia the last of
these 36, after which come, in the order given, Tiiiiaeiis
Locrtts, Tivtaeus, Critias, Minos, 68 golden verses of Pytha-
goras, and the books of the republic, with two leaves lost. Cf.
BcliaiU! Studieu, pp. 9, 67. The text agrees closely with_T in
'the Theaetelue, and the MS. has some of the ' new scholia '
i^eculiar to T. But at politiois 275a it has in the text
Xvithont error the words 8eoi/ . . . Sieiirofiev which are found
CDnly in the margin of T with an omission of 8 letters. Also
icrtain various readings of T are here found in the test. Its
)riginal may have been a copy of T, but the corrector bad
^access to other MSS. In the republic however it does not
agree with T, but sometimes with JI (Schauz' D), sometimes
Krith A against IT, and is most nearly in agreement (at any
tate for the later books) with Bekker's lit (Vat. 61). If
Schanz is right in assuming Rl to be derived from A, then
the MS. in question has como through a copy of A which
^ad been corrected from IT,


Mr, Gow's article oa the Flatonic Number {rep. Tin 2iB)^
Journal of Philology xn 91-103, proposes 6000 and 7500 u
the first and second parts of the whole 'geometrical number*
which is therefore 13,500. The various interpretations pa-
Bible for the several mathematical technical phrases m
exhaustively enumerated and criticized with care and diflcern-
ment. ^Vhile admitting that the problem is to a certain
extent indeterminate, the writer takes 4800, 2700 to belie
two apfioviru: their sum 7500=3 xSx 4x5x5xS,
and it is shown that the words i-rrlrptTo^ Trudft^v Tnimik
av^vyel^ rpli av^T}dei'i (or, aa Aristotle says, orof lyai^rai
trrepeov) may be interpreted to mean this number.

To the criticism of the test Mr. BtWATEK contributo a
few well-considered emendations of passages in the repuhk.
Our chief representative in this field, Dr. Badham, has ugan
been actively engaged upon the laws. His recent contribu-
tions towards rendering this dialogue more intelligible extend
over fifty pages in Oobet's journal, and are as acute and bold,
and not unfrequently as convincing, as ever.

In the two vigorous chapters on Plato in Tlie Gfeei
Philosopher Mr. Benn has given proof of no commDB
ability which may serve for the advancement no less than
the popularization of knowledge. lie represents Plato u
at first an agnostic, and the earliest dialogues (Charmidn,
Laches, Lysis, Euthyphron) as attempts to turn Socralu
method against Socratic doctrine. He thinks the apok^i
unhistorical, though (p. 215) he allows that it reprodiiceii
one important feature of Socratic teaching, the distinc-
tion between soul and body and the relatively greater
importance of the former. The scheme of the republic wsi
derived from a consideration of the older simpler and subor-
dinate forms of political association. Mr. Benn is disposed
strongly to emphasize the social and political influences at
work upon the great philosophic reformer, before all things
" an Hellene and an Aristocrat." But he goes too far when
he affirms that Plato cared for knowledge no more than W
a means to an end — the end being the preservation of the
state. The book is interesting for its freah, stimulatxi^


presentation of views which deeper research will Bometimea
confirm but oftener correct.

Prof. Kennedt's edition of the Theaetetus is especially
valuable for its careful rendering of the text and the opinion
of 8o competent an authority on the grammatical construction.
It does not enter much into detail upon the philosophical
questions involved — sufficiently however for the needs of
schoolboys for whom the book was in some measure intended.

Prof. Campbell has a second, enlarged edition of the same
dialogue ; a work too well known both here and in Germany
to require fresh commendation. With much satisfaction
Prof. Campbell points in the preface to the steady advance in
Platonic studies since 1861 when his edition first appeared.

Prof. Maguire has edited the Parmenides with introduction
and notes that are subtle and erudite. Without noticing the
attempts of his predecessors, he comes forward afresh to solve
the difficulties of the dialogue ; but while all that he writes is
entitled to attentive study, it may he doubted if he has suc-
ceeded in clearing away its impenetrable obscurity.

Amongst a number of recent school editions of the easier
dialogues the Sekdiona edited by Mr. Pcrves, with intro-
duction by Prof, Jowett (1883), deserves especial mention.
The notes are clear and helpful and the work well fitted to
introduce the student to some of Plato's literary masterpieces.

VIRGIL m 1881 AND 1882.


W. H. Kohter, VergiVs Eklogen in ihrer Strophisehen Oliederung naehgtrnm

mit Kommentar. Leipzig, Teubner, 1882.
Clement L. Smith, VirgiVa instructions for ploughing , fallotoing, and rota^

of crops {Qeorg. i 43-83). American Journal of Philology, Vol. iii No. 8.
Oonington and Nettleship. The Works of Virgil, with a Commentary by Joh�

Coning ton f M,A, Vol. i., Eclogues and Oeorgics, fourth edition, rtviidi

with corrected orthography and additional notes and essays, by S, NettMPt

M.A, London, TVbittaker and Bell, 1881.


Dr, James Henry. Aeneidea, or critical, exegetical, and aesthetieal remarh �
the Aeneid. Vol. iii. Dublin, Printed for the Trustees of the Aaiiluiri
1881 and 1882.

Zadewig's Virgil, Vol, ii. ed, Schaper.

Johann Kvicala. Neue Beitrage zur Erkldrung der Aeneis, nebst mhrtrt^
Excursen und Abhandlungen, Prag, Tempsky, 1881.


E. Albrecht. Wiederholte Verse und Verstheile bei Vergil. Hermes, VoL xri

part 3.
JVenzel Kloucek, Zu Vergilius. Zeitschrift fiir die Oesterreichischen Gymnasienf

1881. Parts viii and ix.
T. L. Papillon, M.A, Virgil, with an Introduction and Notes. Oxfoid,

Clarendon Press, 1882.

Mr. Kolster's commentary is elaborate and careful; the
main characteristic of the book, however, is the author's
attempt to re-establish the principle of a atrophic division of
the Eclogues. Bibbeck's strophic arrangement is^ in Mr*

TIROIL IN 1881-2.


Eolflter's opinion, a failure owing to the fact tliat it doea
not sufficiently follow the meaning of the words; and it is
accordingly on the order of the aoutencea that the partition
before us is based. Whether Mr. Kolster has proved his
point I think more than doubtful. Except in the case
of the seventh and eighth eclogues, in which the strophic
arrangement is obvious, the schemes proposed in his edition
seem to me forced and unnatural : they not seldom override
the natural divisions between the speakers in the dialogue,
and sometimes violate the sequence of ideas ; e.g. in Eel. II
38-9 ei dixit moriens, 'te nunc habet kta secundum.' dixit
Dainwtas, inuidit siullm Amijntas, there is no natural separa-
tion between the lines. The same holds good of 11 69-70
A Corydon, Corydon, quae te dementia cepit : iemiptdala tibi
Ji-ondma m'lis in uhno est : iii 34-5 binque die numerant ambo
peeus, alfei' ei ^nedos. uenim id quod, etc. As might be ex-
pected, the theory sometimes requires the hypothesis of a
lacuna. 13ut what is to be said of the proposal to insert
between 39 and 40 of the tenth Eclogue the following
hexameter :

quanta tunc forem fcHcitate beatits ?

Mr, 0. L. Smith's Essay contains valuable and suggestive
notes, and ia well worth reading.

In the fourth edition of Messrs. Coktsoton and Nettle-
SHip's Tirgil, the editor has re\-ised the orthography, which
had been that of Wagner's school edition, and corrected and
enlarged the commentary. The Berne Scholia have been
consulted throughout, so far as the editor knows, for the first
time by any modem commentator. The additional essays
are (1) on the Life of Virgil, (2) on Virgil and his ancient
critics, (3) on the ancient commentators on Virgil, (4) on the
text of Virgil, with an account of the Virgil manuscripts in
the Bodleian Library by Mr. F. Madan, one of the sub-
librariaos. The Life of Virgil is based upon the memoir by
Suetonius. The second essay is an attempt to trace to other
sources the Virgilian criticisms in Macrobius, Gelliua, and
Servius, the conclusions arrived at being that the Macrobian
Serviua cannot be the same as the Servius of the commentary.



but is probably a mere persona in the dialogue,
much of the critieiam is ultimately to be referred to tte''
Aeneidomadix of Carvilius Pictor, the works of Herennius ds
tiitiis, and of PerelHus Fauatua de fuHis Vergilii, the o/laob/-
TJ^Tfis of Octavius Avitua, and Aaconiua contra obtredatom
Vergilii. The essay on the ancient commentators ia in greui
part an attempt to ascertain the period to which the Tirgihan
notes common to Nonius and the later oommentators should
be assigned.

Probably moat English students of Virgil are fsnuliiF
with the first two volumes of Dr. Henry's work. This
volume contains notes on the fifth, sixth, and sevei^
Aeueids. The length of the commentary has abated oon-
siderably since the first volume ; but in other respeota we
have just what might have been expected, the remarks of
a man of a singular genius for interpretation, nnflaggii^
humour and vivacity, strong common sense, wide reading
and observation, but altogether insufficient training in tilfl
art of criticism. Lovers of literature will find the Aem^
highly racy and interesting. An intending commentatOT
ought to read every one of Dr. Henry's notes, or he may nuM
something good ; on the other hand it is provoking to CWM
across so much writing for which I know no better epithat
than amateurish. What justification, for instance, can be
adduced for Dr. Henry's gibes at Wagner and Ribbeckf
Such mere prejudice, however amusing and characteristic, ii
unworthy of the position which he holds among scholars.

ScniAPER has published a ninth edition of the seoond
volume of Ladewig's Virgil. Aa a school- edition (and ai
such it must be judged) the book is a model of scholarly

Kvioala's volume conaiats partly of a number of valuable an*
suggestive notes, mostly on the first four books and especially
on the fourth, partly of essays on various points. I. and IL
treatof the second book, comparing Virgil's account of the �ieg*
of Troy with other aecounta. Ill, is a discuaaion on the begin-
nings and conclusions of speechea in the Aeneid. A cat�logi�
of passages is given in which speeches do or do not

VIRGIL IN 1881-2. 225

with the beginning of the line. In lY. the author discusses
the symmetry of words in the Aeneid under the following
heads : {a) an adjective at the beginning, a substantive at the
end (omnes — annos) : a genitive at the beginning, another
case at the end {Tithoni — cubile) : {b) substantive at the be-
ginning, adjective at the end {ductores — ferentes) : and other
words in adjectival connexion similarly balanced ; e.g. nulla
— sororum : quidquid — curae : quos — maritos. (c) Balance
between two verbs: accipiunt — fatiscunt: cedebat — trahebat;
with many other grammatical correspondences. V. In this
essay the question of alliteration in the Aeneid is treated
with extraordinary industry. It must however be remarked
that the subjects of these essays hardly seem to deserve the
pains bestowed upon them.

It is noteworthy that Henry, Schaper, and Kvicala all
maintain the genuineness of Aeneid 11 567-88 {iamque adeo
^-ferebar). Kvicala thinks that Virgil struck these lines out
after he had written vi 511 foil, (a passage inconsistent with
them), and that Varius and Tucca therefore published the
Aeneid without them. In answer to this it may be urged
that the editors of the Aeneid had no compunction about
leaving other inconsistencies in the narrative untouched.
But the problem really reduces itself to a simple issue. The
lines in question exist in none of the oldest manuscripts;
they are unknown to Tiberius Donatus, and not one of them
is quoted by a single grammarian, but Servius asserts that
they were expunged by Varius and Tucca. Apart from the
unquestionable merit of the verses themselves, this is tha
only piece of evidence that we have on the subject ; and
what is it worth ? Varius and Tucca were intimate friends
of Virgil, and Varius was an epic poet second only, if
second at all, to Virgil himself. Is it conceivable that two
such men would have been guilty of the Vandalism of
destroying twenty genuine lines of Virgil P

Secondly, had they really done so, we may be pretty
certain that no record of the fact would have remained.
There is absolutely no proof of any copy of the Aeneid ever
seeing the light but that which they edited.

TOL. IX. 16


But, thirdly, we may dismiss the statement of Servius as
worthless. For if we believe it, we are also entitled to
believe his other assertion (which indeed has much older
authority in its favour) that the Aeneid began with ilk ego
qui quondam. . . The fact seems to be that it was easy for
any clever interpolator of the Aeneid to allege that his Knes
had been expunged by Virgil's literary executors. Oa
III 204 and vi 289 Servius quotes four very passable hexa-
meters, which no one, so far as I know, now supposes to
have come from the hand of Virgil, but which have just
the same external evidence in their favour as those in
the second book : ab eius emendatoribus suhlati sunt.

Albrecht's paper is a very careful study of a point of

Kloucek's Notes are of more or less value on isokted
passages. The writer proposes some absurd conjectures, as
Veneris proelia for praemia, Aen. iv 33, and igneus for ingem
XII 894.

Mr. Papillon's edition embodies. In a serviceable and
attractive form, the results of most of the recent Virgilian



Select Elegies of Fropertius, with Introductions, Notes, and Appendices, by

J, F. Fostgate (Macmillans, 1881, pp. cxlviii, 272).
Fropertitts in 1880 with some new Emendations^ J, F. Fostgate. {Transactions of

the Cambridge Fhilologieal Society , i pp. 372-86, 1881, London, Triibner.)
Beitrdge zur JBerichtigung der Elegien des Fropertius, J. Vahlen. {Monatsbericht

der konigl. preuss. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1881, pp. 335-362.)
Quaesiionum Fropertianarum specimen, L. Folster, Frogramm des konigl. Gymna-
siums zu Ostrowo, 1881, pp. 17.
Zu lateinischen dichtern, E. Baehrens, {Eleckeisen N. J. fiir Fhihlogie, 1881,

p. 408-410.)
Quaestiones Fropertianae, scr. JR. Scharf. {Inatcgural Dissertation, Oottingen.)

Halle, Nietschmann, 1881, pp. 73.
Zu Frop. II 21. 11 sqq., E. Bitschopfsky. ( Wiener Studien iii p. 303, 1881.)
Eine Froperzhandschrift, S. Schenkl. [Wiener Studien ni p. 160, 1881.)
Quaestiones Fropertianae {Dissertalio Inauguralis), Carolus Brandt, Berlin,

pp. 60.
JTeber zwei elegien des Fropertius von J. Vahlen. {Aus den Sitzungsberichten der

koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin vomjahre 1882, p. 263.)
€iuae8tiones Fropertianae ii, /. Weidgen. {Frogr. des konigl. Gymnasiums.)

Goblenz, 1882.
jKritische Bemerkungen v. Guido KUhlewein. {Festgruss dem Dr. S. FCeerwagen,

pp. 1-17. Erlangen, 1882.)

ngen der antiken Buchform: Froperz, Th, Birt. {Das antike Buchwesen,

pp. 413-426. Berlin, Hertz.)

ianum, E. Ellis. {Journal of Fhilology, xi 174. 1882.)
ikdieibus Fropertianis Dissertatio Fhilologica, soripsit E. Solbisky. pp. 36.

^jcipzig, Tenbner, 1882.

My own contribution to Propertian studies may be first
briefly disposed of. Its contents are as follows : — Introduction
oa the Life and Works of Fropertius (Ch. i Life and Character,


Ch. II Works and Style, Ch. iii Grammar and Vocabulary,
Ch. IV Metre and Prosody, Ch. v Literary History) ; Fasti
Propertiani ; Text (about 30 elegies) ; Notes ; Table of the
Relations of Cornelia ; Appendix A. Manuscripts and Com-
parison of Readings with those of Baehrens' and Palmer's
edition; Appendix -B. On fulcire and its cognates ; Appendix
C. Comparison with the numbering of other editions ; Index
to notes. I take this opportunity of acknowledging the
numerous appreciative and helpful criticisms of my booL I
must mention in particular those of Prof. Ellis 'in the
Academy of July 9, 1881, Prof. Palmer in SCermatkenaf'So,
viii p. 326, 1882, and of Dr. Magnus in the Philologidi
Wochemchrift of Sept. 9, 1882; and in ikiQ Athenaeum of Sept.
3, 1881, and the Spectator of Dec. 3, 1881. I also take the
opportunity of correcting some errata which had escaped me.
P. xxiii (note 2) for ii 8. 3 read ii 8. 39, p. xl I Y! for allayed
read alloyed, p. Ivi, note 1 (end)/(?r Argynnus reflc^Argennum,
p. cxxiv/(?r alteration read alternation, p. cxlvii (margin) /of
Petrarch and read Petrarch etc. Text: p. 42 v, 80/or reddita
read credita. Notes : p. 94 n. on v, 14 line 7 for untried rmi
unfelt, p, 105 w. on v. 8 last line /or land read hand, p. 133 n.
on r. 22 line 3 /or texts read stems, p. 138 v. 14: for 'nymphs*
read * nymph,' p. 163 foot-note /or G. T. read W. T., p. 165 �.
on V. 47 for hunc readlaiQ, (the same mistake occurs in the text,)
p, 180 n, on v. 67, for ear read car, p. 205 n, on v. 52/orper-
fidia read perfida. Index : p. 264 prefatory note /or line read
verse, col. 2, 1. 3 for scribendo >rad scribendi, p. 266 coL 2
euertere should be auertere and is consequently out of its
place, 267 col. 1 s.v. forma the second reference should be
206. 61. On p. xxxii of the preface, note 1, the reference
to the pseudo-Donatus would have been better omitted. On p.
191, note on v. 6, the Greek illustration should be expunged.
It illustrates nothing but infatuation.

Nor need I say much about my review of Propertian
literature in the Transactions of 1880. It consists of eleven
pages on the books published in that year, to which is sub-
joined a sort of appendix of four pages more, containing emen-
dations and critical observations on about twelve passages.

PR0PERTIU8 IN 1881-2. 229

In these Beitrdge Herr Vahlen gives an account of the
changes which he introduced into Haupt's text of Propertius
(1879) ^ and the grounds which induced him to make them^
In the course of this he is led to speak of Baehrens' MSS. (of
which he seems to have formed a too favourable opinion) as
compared with the Neapolitanus and Groninganus (G), the
interpolated character of which latter he shows by several
examples. He deals with the following passages (Haupt's
edition) i 4. 4, i 14. 4, 11 18. 5, 11 27. 13, iv 10. 20 (where
he quotes other exx. of the accumulation of final a). In 1 2. 7
he reads quo submittat, taking the quo with melius (= quanto
melius) after Lachmann Lucret p. 226. He places a full stop
at uias and in t?. 13 retains the MSS. litora natiuis persuadent
picta lapillis for persuadent se picta [esse) — an improbable pro-
posal, not sufficiently supported by Yahlen. In 11 16. 12 he
reads una with N. and defends it by a somewhat indis-
criminate collection of passages. In 11 2. 28 he would give
peraeque with N (rightly). He departs from the MSS. in
the following cases : 11 10. 25 culmen (MSS. carmen, which is
better, see my note on the passage), iii 10. 25 conuicia for
MS. cowwm/flf (rightly). In some cases he has abandoned
Haupt's emendations for the received text, as 1 15. 8 ; 11 10.
26 nandum etiam (H. etenim) and rightly so ; although so
common a phrase as nondum etiam does not require Vahlen's
array of illustrations. So in i 6. 4 domos Memnonias which
he well illustrates by iii 13. 3-8 clausas — pudicas (EL, puellas:
other changes of H. here might have also been abandoned
with advantage). In 11 13. 47 he reads quis (nom.) tarn
longaeuae minuisset fata senectae Gallicus Iliacis miles in aggeri-
btis ? making it a wish ; but query ? In iv 8. 88 he keeps
. respondi which he illustrates from Seneca de ira iii 6. 3,
I 5. 5. In I. 3. 16 he keeps et arma.

Emendations which he does not put in the text are iv 4. 55
si poeces tor sic kospes (?), iii 8. 19 in iurgia uertas (?), 11 25. 33
sepelire {?), 11 32. 56 at (for et), also suggested by others, 11 26.

^ I take this opportunity of assuring Dr. Magnus that my taking no notice of
this edition (which appeared to him so surprising) was due to its heing a hare text
with 1^0 critical apparatus.



49 nam (?), ii 32. 36 prim for Parim (P). Vahlen's paper
concludes with a mention of some transpositions wliich he
regards as necessary, ii 9. 3-16 and iii 8. 9-26.

Herr Polster's ^Specimen ' is worth attention. Amongst the
best of his proposals is the suggestion that in iii 3. (Tenbner
text 1880) V, 8 regiaque Aemilia uecta tropaea rate^ which he
refers to Aemilius Paulus, and v. 12 anseris et tutum uou
Juisse louem should change places, a change which in any
case improves the chronological order of the events. In iv3.
7 he would read te modo uiderunt mitratos Bactrajo^^to
et modo munito Neuricus kostis equo, a very tempting conjectnie.
In IV 4. 39, 40 quid mirum in patrios Scyllam saeuisse capUioi
candidaque in s(a)euos ingtdna uersa canes he propoees
senos, the best conjecture that has been made here. See
however for the text my Propertius Introd. p. Ixv note. In
rv 11. 26 he is again ingenious, reading /allax T ant alee
o corripiare liquor for Tantaleo, The change however is not
quite convincing. In iv 11. 50 he is possibly right in
reading accessu for assensu, though he dwells too much on
the fact that adsessu is a aira^ Xeyofievov. In 53 of the same
elegy he reads cui sacratos for cuius rasos. In rv 2. 43
caeruleus ctccumis tumidoque cucurbita uentre me necat el
iunco brassica uincta leui he reads decet, comparing n
4. 53 te toga picta decety iv 3. 34 et Tyria in ra�oi
uellera sect a suos he reads serta, comparing Ov. Met
6. 56. In rv 8. 13 52 tulerint castae is certainly an im-
provement on si fuerint castae ; but it is a case in which
it is impossible to decide. He concludes with two sug-
gestions on Tibullus, one, a plausible defence of the MS.
reading iv 5. 11 mane Geniy cape tura libens which he
contends is the adj. manuSy and one, in which the inevitable
Nemesis appears, on ii 1. 67 inter dgnos, which might be
considered if it would scan. Polster's work, of which the
above are selections, is marked throughout by ingenuity and
attention to palaeographical probability.

Herr Baehrens proposes to alter ii 33. 9 cum te iussit hahere
puellam comua luno, iii 6. 25 non me moribus ilia sed herbis
improba uicit, and iv 7. 41 et grauiora rependit iniquisf&^

PR0PERTIU8 IN 1881-2. 23 1

quasillis becauae of tho absence of a strong caeaura in the 2nd
foot. I wonder who will follow him. In 111 22. 6 nee
desideria. Tulle, mouere meo he wishes to read tuae, bc. urbis.
This could Lardly mean anything but ' regret for your

Herr Scharf's Quaestiones Propertianae shows the qualities
whiot characterize the average German inaugural dissertation.
He divides hia subject into the following parts : I. De poesis
Propertianae ratione et consilio (1-11). II. Discrimina quae
intercedunt inter liiros singulo� a) De argumentis (11-43)
b) De itersuam arte (43-45). Ill, Causae a quibus repe-
tendae (sic) sunt librorum inter se discrimina {45-61). IT.
De libri V. ekgiarum compositione (61-73).

Herr Bitschopfsky wishes to read in 11 21. 11 f.

Colchida sic kospes quondam decepit lason.
electa est. tenuit namque Creusa domos.

There is nothing new in this except the plural (for which
he cites i 6. 4, 111 11. 12, iv 11. 40). The sentiment is well
illustrated from Eur. Andr. 155 sq., 34 aq.

Herr Schenkl caUa attention to the Codex Corsimanus. It
agrees in general with 1) V (Baehrens) and is therefore
' worthless ' as an authority : it has however many agreements
with the corrections in V and again many divergenciea. It
thus represents an older tradition than Y and comes nearer to
N (the Neapolitan), regarding the place of which Scbenhl
agrees with Leo'a paper in the liheinisches Museum of 1880.

Herr Brandt begins with a defence of the readings of N
in a number of passages where Baehrens has attacked it,
which ia in most instances successful though not strikingly
originaL Then (p. 14) he shows that N has preserved the
right reading or traces of tho same in several inatances where
the reading of the Groninganua (Q) has been adopted by
critics, e.g. in 11 1, 31 aut canerem Aegyptum aut Nilum cum
attractus in urbem septem captiuis debilis ibat aquis be finds
ah tractus in attractus and compares 1 11. 5 ah diicere where N
has adducere. He next argues in favour of ita superiority to
Valla's codex, taking the four passages 11 22. 48, iii 7. 22, iv 1.



73, IV 4. 55, la the first passage he wishes to read CKrr�5�"
quam non nouerit ilk uetat ? N having cur . . . quae jkw . ■ .
icetaL In part III (p. 20) he argues against Lachmann's fire
book theory and his assumption of hiatus in n 6. In the
fourteenth section (p. 25) he discusses the dates of the SBvend
books and well points out the difference of the metrical trat-
ment in the second and third (p. 27). The 5th section da^
with the last book, the elegies composing whicb he examines in
detail. He defends iv 10. 5 imbuis exemplum palmae by in 14.
5, IV 11, 80 etc. On tv. 43, 44 of the same poem he Buggata
that illi refers to Claudius. The dissertation concludes with
some transpositions in the Paetus elegy ii 26. 31, 32 and ii 34
and emendation of 1 11. 21 an mi/ii non maior cara cuile&i
matre ea ? for carae mairis, and of ii 22, 44 aut si es iwi
net/a. sin es non dura, uenito. quid iuiiat baec nullopontrt
uerba loco? for et. Brandt's work ia careful and thoughtful
throughout. But the subjects of his dieaertation are nW
very hackneyed.

Herr Vahlen first discusses i 8, He now rejects Soali-
ger's proposal to interchange the places of couplets 15, 16)
and 13, 14 and reads ut instead of et in i\ 15. His argument!
are inconclusive. He would have it that the natural divisions
of the first part of the poem 1-8, 9-16, 17-26 or 8, 8, W
Knes respectively, is a strong argument. Yet quite as natural
divisions are 1-8; 9-12, 15, 16; 13, 14, 17-20; 21-26, vij!,
8, C, 6, 6 lines respectively. He does not state the case for
the transposition, which he admits however gives a good
syntax, fairly. It is not correct to say that this connexion m
patiatur with aura involves or assumes the suppression
of an almost indispensable intermediate step in the concep-
tion. He gives the meaning of the lines as ' Moge kem
feindseliger Windhauch meine Bitten verwehen und weniR A
absegelst micham einsamen Strande festgebannt diet grauaamfl
rufen lassen ; ' but he leaves out of eight the fact that the
hostile wind that makes light of Propertius' prayers is regarded
as the same wind which leaves him to complain on vA
shore. Again talcs uentos are not ' die jetzt wehenden on-
gunstigen Winde,' but the atirae inimieae to Propertius, M


I have pointed out elsewhere. He is more successful in
defending the voc. praeuecta in v, 19. On 22 he propounds
a view of uerba querar taken absolutely, which is in inde-
pendent agreement with mine. In 11 1. 5 sine illam Cois
fulgentem incedere cogis, a passage which he discusses
with great minuteness, he defends the MS. reading, taking
cogis in the sense of causing or something of that kind, and
as referring only to the result. He compares Hor. Ep. i 9.
2, II 1. 226, etc. His arguments are worthy of attention ;
but they hardly reach the point of conviction. Lastly
(p. 279) he defends the genuineness of 11 34. 37, 8
Theseus infemis, superis testatur Achilles hie Ixioniden ille

Herr Weidgen discusses twelve passages of the last two
books. Perhaps. his most fortunate proposal is to read in iv
(v) 9. 42 aspicite haec fesso uix mihi tecta patent for
accipit . . . terra patety though here tecta must be called
doubtful. Where the words occur again in v. 66 he would
TQQ.di accipit, haec fesso nunc mihi terra patet, Iniv(v)4. 65
he would read si capies, patria metuar regina sub aulayi\iQ
latter part of which is ingenious. In iii 18. 3 (iv 17) 31 he
would read ut tihi—nauta sin as hominum qui traicis umbras
— hac animae portent corpus inane citae, comparing 1 19. 16.
In IV 9. 24 he proposes Incus ubi umbroso segregat (for
fecerat) orbe nemus, an unnecessary emendation, as indeed is
shown by a passage which he quotes himself, Ov. A. A. iii
689 silua nemus non alta facit. His proposals are some-
times much too rash, e.g. iv (v) 4. 55 for a duce Tarpeio he
would read hac uice turpe louis.

Herr KiJHLEWEiN has observations and emendations on
about ^4 places of Propertius of which the most likely are
intexta for intecta iv (v) 11. 7 and Atossa (referring to
JXerxes' army) for Etru^ca iii 4. 1 (L. Miiller's text) non
tot Achaemeniis armatur Atossa sagittis. In iii 30. 35
he wishes to read quamquam Idaea parens (Cybele) for quamvis
Ida parens and defends the proposal at great length.

Following out his views upon the 'ancient book' with
a view to Propertius, Herr Birt seeks to show that the


traditional division . of four books is erroneous and that
the poems should be divided into a single book {Cyntim
Monobiblos) and a collection of four books {rerpd^ipk^
avvra^L^) which were published together. The theory
has a good deal to recommend it. Besides the argu-
ments adduced by Lachmann in favour of a five book
arrangement which Birt reinforces, e.g. the argument
from the subject of ii 13 sed temptiSy etc. (on which
however Birt lays too much stress^) and the inordinate
length of book ' ii,' it has the advantage of explaining the
curious title Monobiblos, which no doubt represents a correct
tradition as it appears in the Martial lemma, and also of
accounting (which Lachmann's theory does not) for Nonius*
quotation of iam liquidum navtis aura secundat iter (in 21.
14) from the 3rd book. It is curious that the Cynthia was
much less known than the Tetrabiblos, which supplies 11 out
of the 12 quotations from the grammarians. The following
table represents the traditional order and that of Lachmann
compared with that of Birt :







Cynthia Monobiblos.





I, II '




do. Ill



do. rv

In order however to estimate properly the force of Birts
arguments it would be necessary to consider his book as a
whole ; and to do this is foreign to our present purpose.

^ His transposition of 7, 8 after 20 is unnecessary, as quando can well m^
qmniamy and there is no need to trouble about the characteristic Fropertiao
exaggeration in extrema.

PROPERTIUS IN 1881-2. 235

Mr. Ellis's Propertianum is a proposal to read hmom
'boggy' for the first word in iv (vi) 7. 81 ramosis Anio qua
pomifer incubat amis for the pomosis of the edd. spumifer
he regards as * l^eyond doubt/

Herr Solbisky's dissertation reached me late and has only
been able to receive a cursory examination. So far as I can
judge from this, it is a production which is well abreast of
recent criticism and well worthy of consideration. He takes
Baehrens' nomenclature of the MSS. and discusses the fol-
lowing points in regard to them. I. De fide familiae AF, under
the three following heads : 1) (A)FN uerum seruauerunt, D V
grauioribus corruptelis aut interpolationihus deformatis ; e.g.
1 17. 25 Candida felici soluite uela choro AFN, noto DY.
Then he adds nonnulli loci ubi uestigia tantum ueri seruata
sunt in (A) FN, altera familia ab integritate magis deflexa,

2) DVN praeferendi sunt libris AF aut corruptis aut inter-
polatiSy e.g. 1 1. 13 (D)YN uulnere^ AF arbore. He goes on:
nonnullis locis aut D aut V ad alteram stirpem AF prauam
scripturam exhibentem deflexus est ; e. g. in 11 12. 92 nee
quisquam ex illo uulnere sanus abit VN rightly, but FD erit.

3) F solus paucissimis locis genuinam lectionem praebet, e. g.
n 15. 25 atque haerentes sic nos uincire catena uellet uti
nunquam solueret ulla dies where F alone has uellet. The
second division of the dissertation is entitled De auctoritate
Neapolitani et familiae D V and embraces the following sub-
divisions. 1) N preserves the true reading or traces of
it (a) against the other MSS. (b) with F^ V^ as in iii 13.
47 minuisset (c) with F^ in a few places e.g. 11 24. 10.
2) DV(A)F have preserved the true reading or traces of it
where N is corrupt,. e.g. iii 18. 24 scandendast torui publica
cymba senis. The next deals with the places where N shows
a lacuna in which, rightly as I think, he maintains that too
much weight has been attached to the lacunae. 3) Contains
cases where DV has the true reading as against N(AF) ; e. g.
I 8. 7 pruinas^ N ruinas. V has the right reading by itself
in 111 3. 42 nil tibi sit rauco praeconia classica comu fiare
nee Aonium cingere Marte nemus. In two places iv 11.
25 laxa catena, F lapsa and iv 11. 70 aucturis, uncturis DV,


nupturis F, DY are nearer to the true reading than F. In
fine Solbisky thinks crisin Propertianam niti Neapolitano et
familia D V. He gives N the place of honour and places
the consensus of DV next. AF he considers to be made
up from the source of N and the source of D V and to be of
little importance.

He then gives the following stemma : —




An index locorum concludes the dissertation.




;, iff Joieph Thaeher Clarht: wit\
■a Astat sni Zcibei, and Fapert iff

1. Sepnrt on thl Invatigatieni at Asm>, ]

an Appendix, eoiilaining Inuiiplimia _

W. G. Lawton and J. S. Dillir. BoBton, 1S82.
S. Sie AusgrabuHgtn eu Objmpia i Theit V. Ucieriicht dtr Arbdim und Fundt

mm Winltr und Fi-Sijahr 1878-80 and 1880-81. Berlin, 1831.
3. Ueier dit Lagt van Tigranoksrta : van Edttard Saehau, Berlin, 18S1.

1. Among the many important sites which present themselvea
for investigation in the neighbourhood of the Aegean, that
which has been selected by the American Exploring Expedi-
tion as the field of their operations is the city of Assos, in
the south of the Troad, on the &ulf of Adramyttiuni, opposite
the north coast of Lesbos, and beneath the spurs of Mount
Ida. Tlie justification of this choice is to bo found in the
remarkable position of the place, which attracted attention
"even in antiquity among a people who found nothing
remarkable in the elevation of the Acrocorinthoa or the Acro-
polis of Segesta"; in the importance of the fortifications as
monuments of Greek military engineeriog, which is so great
that, "were their publication to be the only result of the
expedition, the undertaking would be amply repaid"; and,
above all, in its works of art, which "illustrate, as does no
other series of connected works, the gradual Hellenization of
Oriental types and artistic methods."

The report before us is mainly devoted to the general
description of the place, and to the excavation of the temple,
'vbile during the present year the fortifications are to be


thoroughly investigated. The ruins of Assos occupy a
volcanic crater, on the summit of which was the Acropolis,
while from this the ground descends to the sea in a succession
of terraces, separated from one another by precipitous cHffi.
Its break-neck position laid it open to a sarcasm of the
Athenian wit, Stratonicus, preserved for us by Strabo, who
said, adapting a line of the sixth book of the Iliad —

^Aaaov W\ 0)9 Kev daaaoV 6\i0pov irelpad* ifcrjai.

The summit, besides being naturally steep at the sides, was
escarped, and by the construction of enclosing walls was ren-
dered impregnable. A fissure in the rock formed a natural
well, and at this point deep cisterns were excavated. Thus
nature and art combined to make it a stronghold. At different
points between this and the sea were a stoa and a theatre,
and below the town a mole projected into the sea, which
secured to the place a monopoly of the export and import
trade of the Southern Troad, and was thus the great source of
its prosperity. At the same time the cornucopia on the coins
of Assos testifies to the fertility of its territory.

The temple, which was most probably dedicated to Athena,
stood on the Acropolis, and seems to have been the only
public building in that area. Its position was singularly
imposing, for " the peak rose so steep, that, standing within
the peribolos of the fane, one could look down into the holds
of the vessels in the port beneath." It was constructed in an
archaic Doric style, and is the only known Doric peripteral
temple in all Asia Minor, with the exception of that of
Athena Polias, recently excavated at Pergamon, which was
built at a much later period. One noticeable point about it
is the remarkable similarity of its dimensions to those of the
Theseium at Athens. Mr. Clarke gives a restoration of the
front. But the sculptures of its epistyle and metopes are its
greatest treasures. Thirteen reliefs of this series are already
in the Louvre, having been removed to Paris in 1838, hut
eight more have now been discovered. The subject which
they represent is believed to be some part of the story 01
Heracles, and among the figures are introduced both winged
sphinxes and centaurs whith human forelegs. The latter


feature, which has been so fully treated by Mr. Sidney Colvin
in his paper " On Representations of Centaurs in Greek Vase-
painting," in the " Journal of Hellenic Studies for 1880," is
suflSciently common upon early painted vases and engraved
gems, but had not before been discovered in monumental
stone-carving. In other respects, also, these sculptures,
which are at once archaic and original, are of great value in
the history of Greek art.

Another object, which attracted the attention of the
American archaeologists, is " the only known example of an
ancient Greek bridge." To say this is to take for granted
that the bridge of Xerocampo, in the valley of Sparta, which
is arched and composed of polygonal stones, dates from
Boman times ; and this seems probable, notwithstanding that
the polygonal style is usually characteristic of Hellenic work
of an early date. In the bridge at Assos the principle of the
lintel has been consistently carried out. A number of the
piers which supported it have been discovered, and in one
place the stone beams of the platform are still in position.

The value of this book is greatly enhanced by the numerous
and excellent plans and views that accompany it. It also
contains a valuable essay on sites in the Troad by Mr. Lawton,
in which it is suggested that further excavations should be
made on the Bali-dagh or Hill of Bunarbashi, and a complete
account of the geology of Assos by Mr. Diller.

2. This is the fifth and concluding part of the publication of
the discoveries of the German Government's Expedition at
Olympia. The whole of the area of the Altis, or consecrated
enclosure, has now been laid bare, and within it one important
object, which had hitherto escaped the excavators, was found
at the end of 1879, viz. the great altar of Zeus. The found-
ations of this were brought to light, not far from the centre
of the Altis, halfway between the temple of Zeus and the
Metroum. The German archaeologists are thus able to say,
"The Altis of Olympia is now at last unrolled like a manu-
script, which, though often written over, and containing
many blank or damaged places, yet on the whole lies complete



before us." But the principal excavations of tlua later period
were made outside tbe consecrated area. Near the south-irart
angle was discovered the most extensive building that edated
at Olympia, though its name is not known — a square edifice
with a central court, and an outer corridor in the Ionic s^k
Northward of this, between the west wall of the Altis and
the river Cladeus, is the old Byzantine church, which ii
believed to stand on the foundations of the stadio of PludiiL
Excavations on the northern side of this brought to hgbt i
court containing a spring, and by its aide a circular HeroKB.
The Palaestra, which lies between the north-weat portion of
the Altis and the Cladeus, was further cleared of rubbish, and
the corridors on two sides of the Gymnasium, which stood
further to the north, were exposed to view. At the soutli'
eastern angle a building called the Lcouidaeum was exca-
vated. But perhaps the most imi>ortant discovery in the
outer area was that of the arrangements for starting tbe
competitors in the foot-race. At the entrance of the Stadinni,
which is near the north-eaat corner of the Altis, a threaholdof
white limestone was found, with holes at intervals for poat^
by means of which a row of separate starting places VU
formed, one for each of those who entered. Ground-plans of
these are given, and with them a plan and section of the
private entrance from the Altis into the Stadium. The
Stadium ran, not, as was supposed previously to excavationi
in a line with the eastern wall of the Altis, but at right angles
to it, in an easterly direction. To the south-east and eMt of
this, between it and the Alpheus, was the Hippodrome. It is
the principal disappointment in the discoveries, that all trace
of this place, so important in the celebrations at Olympia, hfia
vanished. But such is the case; for in the course of the middle
ages the river changed its course, first advancing towards
Olympia, and then retiring again ; and in so doing it carried
away most of the ground in that direction. In respect of
statuary, the principal discoveries that were made during the
last two campaigns were the foot of the Hermea of ProxiteH
and the head of the infant Dionysus whom he was cariyingi
though the features of the latter are somewhat mntilsted.


Photographs of these are given, and also of heads of several
�gures from both the eastern and western pediments of the
temple of Zeus. As in former issues of the results of the
explorers' discoveries, the letterpress and illustrations are
accompanied by a ground-plan of the excavations ; and while
those which have previously appeared have a value of their
own in describing the progress of the work, this one has the
most permanent interest, as showing the entire work, when

3. Professor Sachau, when travelling in Syria and Meso-
potamia in the winter of 1879-80, undertook to investigate
the site of the later capital of Armenia, which had been up
to that time one of the most disputed points in ancient
geography. Sir H. Rawlinson, and Kiepert following him, had
placed Tigranocerta at Tel Abad near the Tigris ; others at
Diarbekir, and elsewhere. The ancient authorities on whom
Prof. Sachau mainly relies, and whose statements in his
opinion have not hitherto had sufficient weight attached to
them, are Strabo and Tacitus. He proves that Tigranocerta
was situated in Mesopotamia, and by determining the
boundaries of that country shows that Diarbekir lay outside
of them. The part of the Taurus range which was south of
Diarbekir was called Mount Masius, and Tel Abad was
situated in a valley in the heart of that range ; but Professor
Sachau is opposed to its claims, because Strabo states that
Tigranocerta and Nisibis were under Masius, and this in the
case of Nisibis certainly means that it was in the level
ground at its foot. He ultimately fixes the site of Tigrano-
certa at a village called Tel Ermen, a little distance to the
south-west of Mardin, at which considerable remains of
antiquity are found, and the position of which exactly corre-
sponds to the data given by Tacitus, viz. that it is thirty-seven
miles from Nisibis, and on the banks of a river. This site
he considers to be favourable for a capital, and to correspond
to the account of LucuUus's campaign in those parts which
is given by Plutarch and Appian. Apparently we are
forbidden to look for greater certainty than this, for Prof.

VOL. II. 16


Sachau holds out little hope of discovering evidences of the
early history of the place by excavation, owing to the short-
ness of the period during which the city flourished.

The Journal of Hellenic Studies for 1881 contains two
papers by Mr. W. M. Ramsay, entitled, " Contributions to
the History of Southern Aeolis " ; and in the same journal for
1882 are "Studies in Asia Minor'* by the same writer,
relating to (1) the Rock-Necropoleis of Phrygia, and (2)
Sipylos and Cybele.

In the Mittheilungen des deutschen Archaeologischen Instituiei
in Athen for 1881 is found an account by Herr Treu of the
excavations on the site of Tegea made by Signer Cavadias,
and his discovery of the foundations of the temple of Athena
Alea, together with a description of the works of art, some
of them from the pediment of the temple, which have been
found at that place.



2. A Cctiriae Etymological DictioHary iif the English Lajiguags. By thf Sev.

Waller W. Skeat. Oxford, Clarendon PrasB, 1882. pp. xii. and 6ie.

8vo. 5i. 6d.
S. CmMtfd Mymolegifi in thf J5irtionorj/ of (he Sev. W. W. Skiat. Bg

Saialeigh Wtdgmood. London, Triibner & Co., 1882. pp. yiii, and 1B3.

4. Folk-Elymotogy, a JJietianary of rerbal Oirniptitmi or Worda Ftrvcrltd in
Foim or Meaiiiig, lig Falm Birivntim or Miitaken AaalBgy. By the Bcv.
A. Smylhe Fiilmer. I,aiidon, Geai^ Bell & Sons, 1882. pp. xxviii. and
66*. LsigB 8vo. �1 la.

I WAS unwilling to decline Mr. Poatgate's invitation to con-
tribute a " reeieie of what has been done in Englkh Elymohgy
in the years 1881, 1882," for the Transactions, though I was
conscious of not being able to do Justice to the task in its
full compass. I hope I shall ha pQcdoued for taking no
notice of the new editions of the varioua " E/i/itiohgtcat and
J'ronoiinciiig Diclionaries " for school and other purposes :
the public Libraries of Berlin buy such books only excep-
tionally, and for my part I think I can spend my money
more profitably. But it aeema to me a more serious matter
that I cannot give a summary of what is to be found
Bcattered in periodicals; but even if I had found the
necessary time, it would nevertheless have been an in-
euperable obstacle, that most numbers of them are at present


neither on view in the periodical-rooms of our Libraries, nor
on the shelveSy bat are inaccessible while waiting to be boand.
The importance of Skeat's etj^ological labours has been
nnanimonslj recognized by critics. Whoever wishes to
pronounce judgment on them must not think so much of
the corrections which tbey have already reoeiired in detail
and still must receive, as of the quantity of good which
they contain, as compared with the works of Skeat's im-
mediate predecessors. Of these the best was undoubtedly
, the Etymological Dictionary of E. Miiller; but even this
cannot claim independent merit. One can hardly say more
in its praise than that it is a careful English etymological
index to Grrimm, Diez, Matzner, Koch, etc. Between Skeat
and Wedgwood, however, the difference is enormous !

The first praiseworthy point in Skeat is the clear arrange-
ment of his material. After the word in question follows
first a brief definition of its meaning. After that the reader
finds indicated in brackets by means of regular abbreviations,
whether the word is genuinely English, i.e. whether it is
the continuation of an originally Germanic expression, or
if this is not the case, from what language English has
borrowed the word. If in that language also it is not
original, it is indicated by one and sometimes several
abbreviations, by what stages the word has found its way
into the language from which English took it. Skeat
rightly draws attention to this point, p. ix. Then follow
quotations, intended to show which were the older forms,
and in the case of borrowed words when the word gained
a footing in English : in doing so Skeat has rightly seldom
contented himself with the quotations of others, but has
verified them whenever he could. He has intentionally
made an exception only in the case of Shakspere, by
generally trusting to Alexander Schmidt^s Lexicon. Every
one who knows this excellent work, will allow that he
could do so with a good conscience. Skeat next cites in
the case of genuine English words, the identical or related
words of the other Germanic or Indo-European languages,
or in the. case of borrowed words, their preyious history. }^


the end of every article he points out kindred English words,
collects derivatives, rejects obvious but false etymologies, etc.^
as the case may be. Only we fail to find in the case of words,
whose origin is not at once plain, a statement as to the scholar,
who was the first to propose the etymology given. At the
end of the book, besides corrections, various useful lists are
given : 1) Prefixes, 2) Suffixes, 3) Aryan roots, 4) Words-
arranged according to their origin, 6) Examples of Lautver-
Bchiebung (Grimm's Law), 6) Homonyms, 7) Doublets.

In the smaller book Skeat has omitted the quotations and
complete explanations, but has always given everything that
is essential, so that it ought to suffice for every one except
specialists. The arrangement is different, in so far as kindred
words stand next each other ; but references in alphabetical
order are alwaya to be found.

Whether Skeat was always obliged to go so far back as
he has, admits of a difference of opinion. It seems to me
remote from the function of an English etymological dictionary
to trace not only the native, but also the borrowed words
to their (as is now pretty generally believed) somewhat
problematical roots.

The great pains, which Skeat has spent on this portion of
the work, would have been more profitably applied in clearing
away further difficulties, which concern the etymology of
English as such.

In his observance of phonetic laws Skeat far surpasses all
his predecessors, though here and there even he has over-
ridden them. In particular the Keltic etymologies stand in
need of revision.

After these general remarks I beg to make a few common ta
on single articles, as they presented themselves to me in using
the book.

AngeL Skeat assumes thia to be Old Engl, engel^ cengel,
but in that case the word would now be engle, as e.g. Old
Eng. angel has given Mod. Eng. angle. The pronunciation
of the g in Mod. Eng. angel and the Mid. Eng. form aungeh
prove that the word engel derived directly from the Latin
Was afterwards superseded by the corresponding French word
{angele, angle, now anffe).


Bid. Skeat separates bid " to pray " from bid " to com-
mand;" the latter, which according to him oaght properly to
be bead, he refers to Mid. Eng. beden. Old Eng. biodan, and
only the former to hiddan. I do not think that thia is oorreot
In form, both words bid coincide perfectly and can aeoording
to phonetic laws be referred only to hiddau, which, similarfyto
Old Norse bi^Ja and M.II.G biten, has also the meaning "to
command" (heiasen). The result of this circumstanca w�
that in Mid. Eng. the forms of the two verba biddan and
biodan got merged into one, and that also in Mod. Eng. iti)
to forbid where in Mid. Eng. it hforbeden and Old Eng.Ji^
bSodait, so that in form it is Mod. H. G, verbitten, though in
meaning it corresponds to Mod. H. G. rerbieten.

BieatingB. Phonetic laws prevent us from identifying this
word with Goth, beist Goth, *biiist or *bittsfs would corre-
spond to Old Eng. b^ost J, Schmidt in Kuhn's Zeitschrifl 26,
347 note, compares Trueria, itvtul and Skt. plyilsha.

Clothe. " Not found in A,S.," says Skeat. But the ten.
give the participle gecladed from the Northumbrian Gospel
Glosses Marc 5, 15 "vestHum gecladed veJ gegerelad," from
which North, dadja, "West. S. cldl^Jan follows. This giTM
Mid. Eng. clathen, elothen, Mod. Eng. to clothe. But besides
that there is also found Old Eng. cldr&an. In the Glow
to the North. Gosp. Bouterwek quotes clte'ia, referring to
Matt. 35, 36, where we find operuistis glossed by gie elw'idtni
vel wrigon. CM^rfeeould become by assimilation clwdde, chMi,
as cij^de from ci/^an becomes eydde, cijdde. As then fiwMi
ItBdde became Mid. Eng. ladde and kddf, and the latter again
became Mod. Eng. led, so also cltedde became Mid. Eng. clM
and c/edde, the former of which became Mod, Eng. clad, wtitli
accordingly presupposes another Infinitive than to clothe.

Crowd (1). Mod. E. o-oitid. Mid. E. crouden, cannot posffl-
bly come from O.E. cr4odaii, which again would have yielded
Mid. E. "creedeti, Mod. E. 'creed (cf. e.g. creopan, creepen.
creep). I have already expressed my opinion elsewbefe,
that, the only known form in the present tense being cry^i
we should follow Stratmann in assuming crMan as O.E. Inf.

Faith. " The siijfu: -th teas added after the adoption qf (^
word, ill order to make it analogous in form tvifA truth, ruth,


wealth, health, and other similar sbs.*' So Skeat. I only
need to refer to Yarnhagen in the Anzeiger fur deutsches.
alfertum, ix. 179, where he collects several examples of
E&gl. J or ^A=Lat. d, t I add asseth (cf. Skeat s.V. assets),
and O.E. 56ono^=Lat. synodus.

Fallow. " The G. fal-b as compared mth fal (fahl) shows
that fall-ow is an extension o/'fal=pal in pale/* This is based
on a misunderstanding of the German forms. New K.Gt.fahl
is the successor of M.H.G. val, which again, by the M.H.G*
law for unaccented e, stands for vale, which again, according
to rule, stands for O.H.G. valo, the of the termination
growing out of �r. But the other N.H.G. form owes its
origin to a casus obliquus, e.g. falbes, which stands for
M.M.Gt. falwes (cf, N.H.G. schwalbe^M JH.G. swalwe). There-
fore fahl like falb presupposes the BtQiafalwa,

Fledge. Phonetic laws do not allow a derivation of flegge^
fliggCy from Old Worse fleygr. EttmiiUer quotes without any
proof ^^flycgCy adj, id quod uolare potest." Even were the
existence of the word never to be established, we should, I
think, nevertheless be obliged to assume such a one=O.H.G,
fluechiy M.H.G. vliwke, W.H.G. fiugge, Mid.E. Jlegge is then
the Kentish form.

Forehead. This word is found as early as the O.E. periodi
cf Bosworth-Toller under /orA^a/bc?.

Giddy.. Skeat quotes examples only from Mid.English, and
remarks expressly, " The A. 8. gidig is unauthorized, being
only found in Somner's dictionary.'' In Bosworth-Toller also
there is only a reference to Somner. But the word is found
in the Glosses to Aldhelm de virginitate, published first
by Mono and then by Bouterwek : />aene gidigan. i. vecordem
(Haupt^s Zeitschrift fur deutsches altertum 9, 620b). Against
the derivation of giddy from O.E. gidd song, giddjan sing,
which Skeat accepts without hesitation, there is 1) thQ
meaning of O.E. gidig; 2) the circumstance that in O.E^
and Mid.E. the word is written with only one d; 3) thq
circumstance that the g in the adjective does not become
y in Mid.E.

Ooad. Skeat rightly takes the word = Mid.E. gode, O.K


g&d. He adds, however, " We find also gadu, a goad,"
and quotes Grein to show thia. From the references in
Grein, however, no gailii follows : they all oorrespond with
g&d, which is therefore without doubt to be taken as their
nominative. Skeat then further states that g&d stands for
gasd=zQ\A Norse gaddr, Goth, gazds. He might quote m&d
by the side of meord. Still in that case not gad but g4d
would probably have been the result. But I have no doubt
that, as Grimm, Qeschichte der deutsahen sprache, p. 641,
(*480), has already remarked, g&d ia the Longobardic gaida.

Look. Skeat, in accordance with the universal custom,
regards this word as identical with N.H.G. lugen, O.H.G.
hiogiii. He remarks : " The O.H.G. verb is said to mean ' to
peep thi-otigh a hole' mark; and to be derived from O.H.G.
looc, M.H.G. luoc, G.> loch a hoh. If so, the A.S. locian
i� to Jjp comieded tdth A.S. loca, a prison, and loc, a
locfc." Skeat's last statement is due to the circumstance
that he has misunderstood his chief source for older German,
"Wackernagel's Old German Dictionary. Wackernagel derives
liiogin, to see or look attentively (out of concealment in a
cave), from looc, luoc, and for the latter he gives as the
meaning, " Cave for lying in wait ; cave ; hole." That loch
is etymologically connected with hoc, luoc, he does not say ;
on the contrary, he connects looc with ligeii (liegen) to lie.
Further, I deny the identity of to look and lugen. The O.H.G.
looc, luog, I join Grimm {RechtmUertiimer, p. 955) in con-
eidering as identical with Old Frisian I6ch, I6g place,
meeting-place, court of justice, and O.E. loh place, spot.
The same relation as between O.H.G. luogSii and luog exists
between the corresponding substantives in Old Frisian and
O.E. and the verbs. Old Frisian Idgia marry, be married (,ef,
Lat. coUocare, which ia used absolutely for in matrimomum,
or IB matrimonio or nuj?lum collocnre), and O.E. I6gjan
{geldgjaii is common), to place, to dispose, to regulate,
etc. This is accordingly N.H.G. lugen, and so we must
regard O.E. Idcjan as a different word = Old Saxon 16c&h,
which occurs in the Strassburg glosses in the compound.
umhil6c6n (Heyne, Kleine altniederdeutsche denkmdler, '93b).


Vnle. Skeat refers mule to the Mid.E. mule^ and this
again to O.E. muly and this to the Lat. mulus, and ac-
cordingly describes the word as borrowed directly from Latin.
It cannot, however, be doubted, in my opinion, that mule is
rather to be assigned to the French contingent. The Mod.E.
pronunciation of mule proves that in Mid.E. mitle the u was
pronounced like French u, for which reason it can only be
French �iw7e=Lat. mula. So also the final e. in Mid.E. is
explained. In Old English, by the way, mul should be
written with long u : that is proved not only by Lat. mulus,
but also O.H.G. and M.H.G. mill, N.H.Q-. maul ^nd maultier.
Had not in Mid.E. the word borrowed from French re-
placed that borrowed from Latin, we should find Mid.E.
*moul, Mod.E. *moul or mowl.

Buddy. Skeat remarks: "A.S. rudig*, not found ; formed
with suffix 'ig from rud-on, the pt. t, pL o/*re6dan, to redden."
I have made a note of the O.E. adj. out of the Glosses, p. 475a,
already quoted under giddy : purpureus, rubicundus, rudi (of
course for an older form rudig). If Skeat ^jsrudig is derived
from rudoUj he presumably only means that it has the same
Towel as the Plural Preterite of the strong verb. It comes
surely primarily from rudu * redness.*

School. Skeat explains it as a doublet of shoal. That this
is not right has been shown by Sievers in Paul and Braune's
Beitrdgen, i. 418, cf. my remarks in the Anzeiger f d, altert.
6, 30. School, O.E. scdl (not scdlu, at least not in the best
period), is a word borrowed early {cf O.H.G. scuola, N.H.G.
schule) ; on the other hand shoal, O.E. scolu, is a genuine
Germanic word = Old Saxon scola.

Scold. Skeat considers the verb older than the substantive.
*^ Not in A�8. Formed from Du, schold, pt. t. of the strong
mrb schelden to scold '^ I am not quite sure how Skeat means
this. He defines the English word not as " Dutch " but as
"Old Low German." He uses this definition according to
p. xiv. for " a not very large class of words, the precise origin
of which is wrapped in some obscurity,'^ I venture upon an
explanation in which I make the substantive my starting-
point, as Stratmann gives six quotations for it, while for


the verb there is only one passage. In one of the passages
quoted, from a northern text, it is written scalde : Stratmana
has put a note of interrogation to this form, as I believe,
without reason. I identify this scalde with Old Norse skdldi,
which Vigfusson explains as follows, " a poetaster, a nickmm
given in Iceland to vagrant extemporizing versemakers . . . the
word is never given to really good poets.'' A really good poet
is indicated by skald, and it is surely to that that the Plural
skaldess in Ormulum 2192 is to be referred. Both words
are derivatives from a strong verb i= N.H.Q-. schelten. Ct
especially skdldskapr ' a libel in verse.' To scold as a verb can
be classified with skdlda ** to make verses, but in rather a bad
sense" I will end by calling attention to M.H.G. scheltcBre
(Weinhold, Deutsche frauen II ^ 133).

Show. Perhaps it would be in place with regard to this and
other similar cases to call attention to the not quite regular
course of the sound changes : cf. Anzeiger f. d. altert. 2, 6.
Skeat writes the O.E. word without accent '^ sceaician," re-
marking expressly at the end of his article : " Grein -4j&
sce&wian, with an accetit; but cf. the Gothic form J* On this
we must remark 1) that the Groth. skawjan does not corre-
spond exactly to the English word, as the former is conju-
gated like Gk>th. na^an = O.E. nerjan^ and the latter like
O.E. ��i/i^Vi�=Gk>t. saibon ; 2) even if we allow that the
OJS. sceaurian comes from the same proto-Germanic adjectiye
(C/t GK)th. us^^afcs), as Groth. skatc/an, that nevertheless in
0.K scfanrian the ea ought to be marked with an accent, as
it does not correspond to the Gh>th. a so much as to au, wUcIi
has developed itself out of a before ic.

Sprout As this is the same as Mid.�. sprouten, i^ruUnt
it cannot be O.E. sprMan. But instead of explaining the
word as Frisian, as Skeat does^ I ask what right have we
to asBSume for the JB. present a form with io? I conclude
fKnu the MidJB� and Mod.K iorms of the word, that the
0X� liko the Ftisiaa had m in the present {cf. above, under

Sltf . Sikeat� like all his predecessors^ has Mled to notice
Uiat the wtNrd ali^tdr occois in the Laws of Canute : regale�


Jeram^ quam Angli staggon appellant (Schmidt Oesetze der
Ags. p. 320). The derivation of the word from stlgan seems
to me very doubtful.

Stand. By an oversight Skeat states that : " the A.8, p.t.
stod may be explained as put for stond= stand, the long o being
dm to the loss of n" But in English, n only falls off before
/, /, �, h. occurs in the preterite, because the verb is con-
jugated like faran, fdr. The n was originally only in the
present {cf Old-Norse standa^ std^, std^um, sta'^inn), but in
the West Germanic languages has also penetrated to the
participle, in some (though not in English) even to the

Thrash. The O.E. form pirscan, quoted by Skeat by the
side of perscan^ ought to be struck out. He probably as-
sumed it on account of pirsce^ in Grein, but even then it
is as little justified as it would be to assume biran by the
side of beran on account of bire^. For other forms, than
the present, Skeat seems to have no illustrations. I have
made a note of : he sloh hi and pcersc (2nd MS. hearse) =zquos
caedebat Greg. Dial. 3, 26 ; purhsun, purcson, ^urscon, ^urscun,
Luke 22, 63, 64 ; ge^urscon, Mt. 21, 35 (North.GL).

Till (2). To derive this preposition and conjunction from
the Old Norse, as is generally done, will not answer, because
the word does not occur in the Northumbrian Glosses for the
first time, but as early as the Northumbrian version of
Gaedmon's Hymn {heben til hrdfezzzWest Saxon heofan td
hrd/e), which was written down before the visitation of
England by the Danes; cf Zeitschr. f d, altert. 22, 214).
It also occurs on the cross of Ruthwell : aeppilae til dnum.
In Frisian also til occurs as a preposition.

Tread. Skeat quotes the Old Norse tro^a, tro^inn, to ex-
plain the Mod.E. part, trodden by the side of O.E. treden. This
is unnecessary, as for older e occurs also in the participle
of other verbs: cf. spoken over against O.E. sprecen (not
found in Old Norse) ; gotten O.E. begeten (West S. begieten^
begyten, begiten; Old Norse getinn). The change is due
to the analogy of verbs with original e before a liquid in
the present.



Wallow. This is of course, as Skeat says, O.E. weahcjan. But
to this theGotli. ivalicjan (occurring in cora pounds) correspond!
no more than, as I proved above under shoic, Goth. shutJBV
to O.E. sc^airjan. O.E. weahcjan would be in Gothio 'tcaiaSn
*wahe6da (or *walwan 'icalwaida). On the other hand we should
expect a verb like giencan gierede, etc. io West S. corresponding
to the Goth. lealu-Jan walwida. In the Blickling Homiliea
157 we read : fia hrape bead drihlen Gabnele pmm heahensic,
pmt he wylede pone sfdn /ram pare, hyrgtnne dura. In ths
glossary wylede is not referred to its Infinitive : this would of
course have to be tri/lwaii. The MS. of the Gospels in ths
TJuiveraity Libi-ary at Cambridge has wijbean or Aieylm*
repeatedly, instead of tci/iCan or aici/Han, which the other
MSS. of this translation have. Of. Mt. 15, 46 wylede instesd
of v>ylte aduoluit; Mk, 16, a and Lk. 24, 2 awyledM
instead of awyllne revolutum (Part. Praet. Ace. Sg. Mac);
Mk, 16, 3 atcyle^ instead of mpylt = awi/lie^ revoluit
{aici/le'S as 3 Pers. Sing. Pres. Ind. without w, as gier^i
Sievers' Gramm. g 405 note 2); Mt. 2.S, 2 awijlede instead
of awylte revoluit : here also in the Bushworth Glosses aieiileii
(^West S. mci/kde) over against awwUe (^West S. ajcylU]\&
the Durham Book. I will take the opportunity of remarldng
that in the new edition of Bosworth'a Dictionary, s.v, a-mkit
y different verbs, aicdlan, awielican, dwielian, have beett

Ware. The word quoted by Skeat after Leo from Hsupfs
Zemchnft, 9, 439, is not O.E. want, but w^r (ef. Mullenho?
ihld. 16, 148). We find merx want in Aelfrio's Glosaa^
{303, 10. 11 of my edition). Accordingly there ia no reason
to assume a Scandinavian origin.

Whore. The existence of O.E. hdre has been estahliaked
by Leo, and after him b3' Toller, by reference to Haapt'�
Zeilschrift. Here, too, a derivation from Scandinavian ia not
to be thought of. In the passage quoted by Skeat from ths
Laws of Canute, h6ruw&ii. does not occur, but hdroweiie (PL
h&rcwemn, with the variant horewEonan), Cwin is Mod.E.
queen, whereas cicene is Mod.E. quean. Skeat (under
"queen") makes the common mistake of calling queen and


quean absolutely tlie same: queen, cwSn is the Goth, kwins,
O.If . ktdn, an i-stem with a long vowel. Quean, cwene, on the
other hand, is Goth, kmnd, O.N. kona, an �-stem with an
originally short vowel. I can only repeat what I have lately
said in the Anzeiger fur d. altert. 9, 191: "Everything
points to the supposition that the vowels of the two words
were distinguished in pronunciation, as they are to this day
in spelling, till the time when the e-sound (written ea) passed
into 2."

Wile. It is usually regarded as a genuine Germanio
word, but I believe it to be just as much Romance as guile,
I here briefly repeat the opinion which I expressed in the
Zeitachrift fur das gymnasialwesen, xxiv. p. 488 : wile in the
Saxon Chronicle of the year 1128 may be a French word,
and flygewilum ought to be altered with Ettmiiller into

I hope that Skeat will concur with my remarks com-
paratively oftener than with those of Wedgwood, who has
treated about 200 words in such a way as to repeat in most
cases the explanations in his Etymological Dictionary, He
deals principally with cases in which the facts as at present
known to us do not afford material for a definite decision.
Wedgwood's Dictionary shows everywhere, that when he
wrote it, he had no notion of the phonetic laws of the Indo-
Germanic languages. That he has since supplied these un-
pardonable deficiencies in an etymologist, I am very much
inclined to doubt, judging by what he says under dairy, gate,
prison {cf my notice in the "Deutsche Litteraturzeitung,*'
1883, p. 13sq.). It is rarely the case that I can adopt his

Mr. Palmer, the author of Folk-etymology, expresses him-
self as follows with regard to his task, p. vii, '* By Folk- etymo-
logy is meant the influence exercised upon words, both as to their
form and meaning, by the popular use and misuse of them. In
a special sense, it is meant to denote the corruption which words
undergo, ounng either to false ideas about their derivation, or to
a mistaken analogy with other words to which they are supposed
Jo be related,'* ^ Besides the Introduction and Appendices, the



work falls under the followmg divieious: 1. Englkh mi-it
corrupted ; 2. Foreign words corrupted ; 3. Proper noma w-
rupted; 4. Corruptions due to the coakscence qf the Arikli;
5. Corruptions due to mista/Ks about number.

I have here to do only with the articles of the book oon-
cerning English. It appears clear to me that no one is in i
condition to point out with certainty the effects of folk
etymology in English, who is not quite familiar with ths
history of the language, and especially with its phonology;
he must know how far the changes of words in course of
time are purely phonetic, in order to be able in single casM
to verify with certainty when an effect proceeds from extonal
causes. Similarly it seems to me indisputable, that a thoroogb
knowledge of the English language, especially when W
take account of the unoriginal English vowel system, 15
impossible without a knowledge of the phonetic system of
the so-culled proto -Germanic language (" urgerinaniseh ").
Much to my regret I feci obliged to say that Mr. Palmet
does not in this respect give the necessary guarantees.

We turn, to begin with, onr attention to the article on
aghast, p. 7 : ' Aghmt, so spelt from a mistaken anttlogij uith
ghastly, " ghosl-like," is an incorrect form qf O.E. agaat,
a parlecipial/orm from A.S. e^esiRn, to terrify, Goth, usgaisjan,
from A.S, figesa, 6ge, " aiee,"fear, Goth, agia.' The question,
whether ghastly is equivalent to ghostlike may rest on its own
merits. But why should n.^Afl^f instead of agast be less correct
than ghastly or ghost? These words also were originally
spelt with g only. But furthermore agasi is made out to
be a participle from O.E. egey'an ! What would ilr. Pulmer
say to any one who wanted for instance to take adltus in Lat.
aa the participle from audire ? The participle of ege^n in
O.E. conld only be egesod and therefore Mid.E, ejesprf, ei�6i'-
the verb was however abandoned, because it coincided in
form with the Romance c/se/i=Mod.E. to ease. FurthermoB
then egesjan is made out to be the Goth, usgaisjan ! But Gotb.
*aiiiz6ii (of. hiitiz6ii) would correspond to the O.E. egesirm wul
vice versa O.E. *&gieran {ef. Goth, urraisjan, i.e. 'us-raiyate^
O.E. &r<Bran) to the Goth, usgaisjan. Finally how do ^�


and ige come by a mark of length, while egesian is without

P. 211, s.v. LEAVE, " A.S. leaf (permission),*' is made out
to come ^\from lyfan to permits If one word has the accent,
why not the other too P But what would Palmer say if any
one tried to derive the Lat. ordo from ordinare ? P. 437, s.v.
WHORE, he explains, " A.S. ceafes, cyfes," as " akin to ce&pjan
to huy^ He does not, therefore, perceive that except the
initial consonant, everything in both words is so different
that a connection is absolutely out of the question. As a proof
that "y often interchanges with j," the author quotes p. 453,
8.V. yellows^ among other things, " yoke, Ger. joch; young,
Ger. Jung J' The context shows that the question is about J
with the English sound of the letter : that the German J in
the words quoted has not this sound, Palmer does not seem
to be aware. One more instance only of this kind : p. 699,
KNEE, he says, " Knee is in O.E. know {Chaucer . . .), cneo
(Ancren JRiwle), A. 8, cneo, cneow . . . Perhaps the modern
form is due to internal vowel-change denoting the plural^ like
O.E. geet {Caxton) plur. of goat, teeth 0/* tooth, etc.'* In the
explanation of Mod.E. knee, it is self-evident that the form
know ought not to serve as the starting-point, but knee, which
is established also for Chaucer by the rhyme with he, charitee,
he. This is, of course, O.E. cnio. So all is perfectly regular.

In other cases besides this the * author must be taxed
with taking for granted a disturbance of the regular
development. P. 171 he says, ^^^ Sights the perfect tense
of the O.E. verb hatan to call or be called=O.E. hSt, hSht,
corresponding to the reduplicated perfect in Gothic haihait
from haitan. The g seems to have crept in from a mistaken
analogy with pight= pitched, tight=tied," etc. We may just
remark by the way, that Palmer is not consistent in his termi-
nology, as he here calls O.E. what is generally denominated
by him 'AS.,' and that heht should be written with a short
vowel. But what I principally wish to point out here is
that ght is the regular substitute for O.E. ht.

P. 220. load-star and load-stone are called " misspellings
from false analogy o/* lode-star and lode-stone." But in these


words oa is no less justified than e.g. in road=^rdd, goad=gdd
woad=iwddy toad:=itddje.

P. 636. ^' Mass, the Roman celebration of the JEucharidy
seems to be an arbitrary assimilation of O.E. messe, from Lot,
missa, to the familiar word mass, Lat. massa, a lump . . . or
perhaps a connection teas imagined with Heb. mazzah, the un-
leavened bread eaten at the Passover J^^ In Mid.E. the word is
not only messe, but also masse. Mod.E. mass is of course
based upon the latter, which again is the regular continua-
tion of O.E. mcBsse. — Ght for an older A^, ft for /^, Palmer
(s.v. DROUGHT, p. 104 ; HEIGHT, p. 168 and 630) explains by
analogy with thought, might, etc. It is, however, certainly a
purely phonetic process parallel to the change of sp to si in
nostrils, hustings, etc.

P. 633 he says, "Judge, being derived directly from Fr. juge,
has no right to the d, which has been inserted to bring the word
into visible connection with Latin index, judicature," etc. That
is however not to be thought of; Mod. Eng. judge stands for
'M.idL.'E. jugge, as Mod.E. bridge for Mid.E. brigge, Mod.E. edge
for Mid.E. egge, etc. Dg is written for g (Mod.E. j) as the
double letter, just as,^c^ is written for older cch, which stood
for chch.

Palmer overshoots the mark still more often, in cases
where on account of the meaning exhibited by the word, he
does not content himself with the Etymon, which the form
of the word points to, but assumes the influence of another.
I will, to begin with, quote a few examples in the case of which
similar changes of meaning in other languages, particularly
in German, prove Mr. Palmer's assumption to be groundless.

" Become, to suit, fit, set off to advantage, as when a certain
dress or colour is said to become one (decere),.fl5 distinct word
from become, to happen, be-cuman, is the modern form of
A. Sax. be-cw^man, from cweman, to please or profit; cf.
German bequem, convenient. — See Comely (p. 25)." To
begin with, be it noticed that we look in vain for comeln^
to which we are referred, on p. 72 where it ought to be
found. In the next place, I think that Palmer's view is ex-
ceedingly doubtful, for the reason that O.E. becwiman or Mid.E*


bequemen are not established. But Palmer's assumption must
seem quite unnecessary when we consider that M.H.G. 6e-
komen (Lexer I., 167) and (early) Mod.H.G. bekommen (Grimm
L, 1426 nr. 3) occur in the same sense. 'Dog-sleep, an
expression medin Ireland for a light slumber easily broken,
might be conjecturally identified with the Icelandic phrase, " a^
sitja upp vi^ dogg" to recline upon a high pillow^ to lie half erect
in bed, where dogg seems to be a pillow' (p. 101). I will not
stop to show how bold Palmer's explanation would be, even
if we were obliged to allow that dog could not in this case
mean "dog." But that I am not in a position to do, as
the dog, as is well known, is a very light sleeper. In
German, too, we say "er schlaft so leise, wie ein hund"
(he sleeps as lightly as a dog) ; cf. Lucretius 5, 861, leui-
somna canum fido cum pectore corda, — ' Leather, used in
Scotland, Ireland, and Prov. English, for to flog or beat soundly^
as if to lash with leather thongs (A.S. le]?er). It is the 0,E,
li^ere, used in the same sense; cf. A.S. (t6-)li'5ian to tear
{to limb, from li'Su, a limb), li^ere, a sling ; Prov, Eng. lither,
supple, pliant, lithe, to make supple, Cleveland leo^the' (p. 211).
About some of the words quoted by the author I am
unable to judge ; but so much is certain, that tdli^j'an with
short i has nothing to do with lither and lithe, which are
traceable to O.E. IfSe with long l=Mod.H.G. linde (gelinde).
As to " to leather " in the above sense, it is exactly the
German ledern, which, according to Grimm vi. 496, means
1) ' to prepare leather, to tan leather ' ; 2) (metaphori-
cally), to beat, in lower-class speech, and widely extended
through the dialects. Cf. "einem das leder voUhaun" or
"gerben" (leder = human skin). — Thick, '* as colloquially
used in the sense of familiar, intimate as bosom-friends are^^
Palmer, p. 387, separates from the ordinary word thicks
and traces it to Old Norse pykkja. Cf. however Mod.H.G.
"dicke freundschaft," "sie sind sehr dick mit einander,"
and so on. — Thief, " a popular name for an inequality in the
wick of a candle, or loose portion of it that falls, causing it
to waste and smoke, so called as if it stole so much of the candle.
It may be a derivative of the A.S. ]>efian, to rage, originally

VOL. II. 17


to be hot or burning ^^ (p. 388), In German, however, ^dkV
is used in quite the same sense, as also " wolf'* and "rauber"
{cf. Grimm, ii. 1087).

The author's anxiety to discover folketymologies every-
where causes him to fall into the most extraordinary
conjectures. He says, for instance, p. 240: "Milk, in
Shakespeare's * milk of human kindness ' (Macbeth, i. 5), may
possibly be a reminiscence of the Old English word milce,
mercy y confused with mylche milk" Instead then of a beauti-
ful poetic use of a word (cf. Schiller's imitation " die milch der
frommen denkart," Tell 3, 3), a senseless reminiscence!—
" Able is Old JEng. hable, Fr. habile, Lat. habilis. . . The
word seems to have been assimilated to, perhaps confused M
Old JEng. abal, strength, ability. '^ In the O.E. word b stands
as the remains of an older orthography for /, with which the
word is generally written. The word able has no A, for the
simple reason that at the time of its adoption into English,
it had none in French either : the spelling with h, occurring
in early Mod.Eng., is caused by Mod. Fr. habile or Lat. habilis.
— * Honey- Moon, as if mollis luna, " The first sweet month
of matrimony y" is no doubt the same icord as IceL hjon, a
wedded pair, man and wife, hjona-band, matrimony, hjona-
sseng, marriage-bed. Another related word is Icel. hynottar-
manu^r, " wedding-night month/* and so on,' To begin with,
the author has made a slip in quoting a word invented
by Vigfusson as a really existent one. Under hyndtt
Vigfusson says, *' May not the English honeymoon be de-
rived from this old wordy qs. hynottar mdnu^r=^^6 wedding-
night month ? " Further, whoever wants to prove the agency
of folketymology in the word honeymoon, which to any
unprejudiced person is quite transparent, must first estab-
lish an older form for it, which is less transparent. The
word, the history of which I am not in a position here to
follow up further, seems tolerably new, and for that reason
alone the derivation of Palmer or rather Vigfusson is to be
rejected quite definitely. Palmer himself points out an
Irish expression, which is a literal reproduction of ^^ honey-
moonJ* I do not dispute that we have to deal with an


Irish imitation. In the same w^y I regard the Fr. lune de
miel, Mod.H.G. honig-monat, honig-mond (Lessing, Goethe ;
Grimm. 4, 2, 1790) as appropriated from English. These
instances show, however, that we have no internal reason for
taking honeymoon in any but the obvious way. And who is
to adduce an extetnal one ?

I sincerely regret that the undeniably great perseverance
of the author is not accompanied by a thorough knowledge
of language and above all things by a sounder method. I feel
bound to give the warning all the more emphatically to re-
ceive his statements with caution, as the large mass of quota-
tions might easily make the impression of great thoroughness
and trustworthiness on one who was not at home in the sub-
ject. But I do not therefore deny that a critical reader can
learn a good deal from this book. Palmer's introduction may
be recommended to any one with a turn for philology as both
instructive and highly interesting.

In conclusion I beg to call attention to two works, whose
professed subject is not indeed English Etymology, but which
will be of use to every English etymologist. One is entitled :

Altdeutsches Worterhuch von Oscar Schade. Zweite urn*
gearbeitete und vergehrte Auflage. nalle-a-S, 1872-1882.

It is far more copious than Wackernagers, and, above
all, especially refers to English for comparison. The other
is entitled :

Etymologischea Worterbiich der deutschen Sprache von Dr.
Friedrich Kluge, Strassburg.

It is at present in four parts, but is intended ultimately
to contain six or seven. Kluge knows the English language
thoroughly, especially its oldest period, and is very fond of
taking it into account.


February, 1883.


Cambritige jSljilologtcfll Stocictp.

1 The design of the Society lb to promote and to puhliah
critical resoarcheB into the languages and literatures of the Indo-
European group of nations, and to promote philological studies
in general.

2 Any student of philology is eligible aa a member of the

3 The annual subaoription of each memhoF of the Society is
one guinea, due on the first of January in each year.

4 Any member may compound for all future subscriptions by
one payment of ten guineas, or after ten years' subscription have
been paid by one payment of fivr guineas.

5 Every member vhoso eubBcription for any year is paid is
entitled to a copy of all the publications of the Society for that year.

6 Any person Tho is desirous of becoming a member of the
Society may be proposed by two members of the Society at any
of its ordinary meetings, and, if approved by the Council, may
be elected by ballot at the next meeting.

7 No candidate shall be declared elected, unless he have in bis
favoor at least two-thirds of the members voting.

8 Distinguished philological acholare who are resident abroad
may he elected honorary or coirospoading members in the same
way as onlinary members. They shall pay no subscription, but
shall be entitled to receive the Transactions and other documents
published or printed by the Society and to be present at and to
communicnte papers to tho meetings.

9 The general direction of tho Society shall ha committed to a
Council, consisting of a president, three vice-presidents, a treasurer,
two secretaries, and not more than twelve nor less than seven other
members. Each member of the Council shall have notice of tlie
meetings of that body, at which not less than five shall constitute


10 All questions involving extraordinary expenditure shall be
submitted to a general meeting.

11 The president, treasurer and secretaries and at least three
ordinary members of the Council, shall be elected annually by
ballot, at a general meeting to be held in the Michaelmas Term, the
three senior members of the Council retiring annually, and the
president being capable of being elected three years in successioii
and no more.

12 Of the three vice-presidents, one shall retire annually
by rotation, and be incapable of re-election for the two yean
next following.

13 No member whose subscription is more than one year in
arrear shall be entitled to vote or read papers at any meeting.

14 The names of any members whose subscription is more
than two years in arrear may, after due notice, be removed from
the list of the Society, and such removal may be announced at
the next general meeting and published in the proceedings of the
Society at the discretion of the Council.

15 The president, or in his absence, the chairman pro tem.j shall
have, in addition to his own vote, a casting vote in case of equality
of numbers in any division.

16 The accounts of the Society shall be audited annually by
two auditors, to be elected at a general meeting in the Lent Term.

17 A meeting of the Society shall take place at least once in
each term ; the time and place of meeting being determined by the
Council from time to time.

18 Members may introduce to the meetings of the Society
strangers, not being resident members of the University, who may,
with the sanction of the Council, read communications to the

19 "No communication shall be read to or published by the
Society without the approval of the Council and the author's name.

20 Any proposed change in these laws shall first be submitted
to the Council, and, if approved of by them, to the Society at one
of its general meetings.

21 'No law shall be altered or repealed and no fresh law enacted
without the concurrence of at least two-thirds of the members

tambriDge 0!)tlolO9tcdl ^oeietp*


Eev. Prof. "W. W. Skeat, M.A., Christ's.


Prof. E. B. CowELL, M.A., Corpus Christi. Auditor.
Rev. R. Burn, M.A., Trinity,
H. Jackson, M.A., Trinity.


Eev. Prof. B. H. Kennedy, D.D., St. John's.

J. Peile, M.A., Christ's.

Eev. W. F. MouLTON, M.A.

A. W. Verrall, M.A.

Eev. Prof. J. E. B. Mayor, M.A., St. John's.

Eev. Prof. F. J. A. Hort, D.D., Emmanuel.

J. E. Sandys, M.A., St. John's. Auditor,

J. B. Allen, M.A., St. John's.

Eev. S. S. Lewis, M.A., Corpus Christi.

Prof. W. Wright, LL.D., Queens'.

Eev. H. A. J. MuNRO, M.A., Trinity.

W. EiDGEWAY, M.A., Caius.

J. E. Nixon, M.A., King's.

J. P. PosTGATE, M.A., Trinity.




CambriDge )^l)tlologicdl ^octet^

Decembeb 1, 1883.

♦ denotes compounder. Where no date of election is given, the member
joined the Society in 1872, the year of its commencement.


1881. Professor J. N. Madvig, Copenhagen, Denmark.
1881. Professor C. G. Cobet, Leyden, Holland.
1881. Professor T. Mommsen, Charlottenburg, Berlin.
1881. Professor G. Curtius, Leipzig, Germany.
1881. Professor J. Zupitza, Berlin.

1881. Professor W. "W. Goodwin, Harvard College, Massachu-
setts,. U.S. A.

1881. Professor B. L. Gildersleeve, Johns Hopkins University,

Baltimore, U.S.A.

1882. Rev. Prof. C. Badham, The University, Sidney; care of
Messrs. Triibner & Co., Lndgate Hill, London, E.C.


1 880. Philological Society (London): Secretary, F. J. Fumivall, Esq.,
3, St. George's Square, Primrose Hill, London, N.W.


80. Oxford Pliilological Society: Secretary, Prof. Kettleship,

17, Bradmore Eoad, Oidord.
80. Hellenic Society : Secretary, G. A. Macmillan, Esq., 22,

Albemarle Street, London, W,
80. Smithsonian Institute : "Washington City, U.S.A.


Abbott, Kev. E., D.D. (St. John^s), City of London School:
32, Abbey Eoad, St. John's Wood, N.W.

79. Allen, J. B., M.A. (St. John's); New (Oxon.) : 13, Free

School Lane.
Allen, S., M.A. (Corpus) : 1, Northumberland Place, Kings-
town, L'eland.

80. Arblaster, E., M.A. (Clare) : Grammar School, Cork.

74. Archer-Hind, E. D., M.A., Trinity.
80.*Ainold, E. Y., M.A., Trinity.

81. Arnold, F. T., Trinity.

*Atkinson, Eev. E., D.D., Master of Clare College.
*Au8ten-Leigh, Eev. A., M.A., King's.
Babington, Eev. Prof. C, D.D. (St. John's): Cockfield
Eectory, Sudbury, Suffolk.
76. Balfour, G. W., M.A., Trinity.
78. BeU, Eev. W., M.A. (Christ's) : The College, Dover, Kent.

75. Bensly, E. L., M.A., Caius.

73.*Beresford-Hope, A. J. B., LL.D. (Trinity) : Arklow House,

Connaught Place, London, W.
74. Birks, Eev. E. B., M.A. (Trinity) : The Yicarage, Trump-

81. Blore, Eev. E. W., M.A., Trinity.

Bowling, Eev. E. "W., M.A. (St. John's) : Houghton-Conquest
Eectory, Ampthill, Beds. 1
*Bum, Eev. E., M.A. (Trinity) : St. Chad's, Cambridge.
74. Butcher, Prof. S. H., M.A. (Trinity) : The University,
Butler, Eev. H. M., D.D. (Trinity) : The School, Harrow-
*Canterbury, The Lord Archbishop of, D.D, (Trinity): The
Palace, Lambeth.
81. Candy, F. J., M.A. (Emmanuel) : Ditton, Cambridge.


1872.*Carver, Rev. A. J., M.A. (D.D.), Queens' : Lynliursl;,
Streatham Common, Dulwich, S.E.
♦Cliambers, C. E., Trinity.

1880. Chase, Rev. F. H., M.A. (Christ's) : 14, Brookside, Cam-

1876. Chawner, W., M.A., Emmanuel.

1875. Colvin, Prof. Sidney, M.A., Trinity.

1881. Cooke, Rev. A. H., M.A., King's.

♦Cowell, Prof. E. B., M.A., Corpus : 10, Scrope Terrace,
1880. Cox, J., M.A. (Trinity) : Warden of Cavendish College.

1880. Dale, A. W. W., M.A., Trinity Hall.

1872.*Davis, Israel, M.A. (Christ's): King's Bench Valk,

Temple, E.C.
1883. Davies, Rev. J., M.A. (St. John's): 16, Belsize Square, South

Hampstead, London.

1881. Donaldson, S. A., M.A. (Trinity) : The College, Eton,

*Durham, Lord Bishop of, D.D. (Trinity) : Bishop Auckland,

1876. Edleston, Rev. J., LL.D. (Trinity): Gainford Vicarage,

1880. Edwards, G. M., M.A., Sidney Sussex.

Elwyn, Rev. R., M.A. (Trinity) : "Vicarage, Ramsgate, Kent.
England, E. B., M.A. (Trinity) : The Owens College, Man-
Fanshawe, H. E., M.A. (Corpus) : 17, Botolph Lane,
♦FenneU, C. A. M., M.A. (Jesus) : The Villa, Trumpington,
1879. Elather, J. H., M.A. (Emmanuel): Cavendish College.
Francis, A. L., M.A. (Jesus) : Blundells School, Tiverton.

1877. Francis, H. T., M.A., Caius.
1883. Frazer, J. G., M.A., Trinity.

1879. Fulford, Rev. H. W., M.A., Clare.

1880. Fynes Clinton, E., M.A. (St. John's) : The Grammar School,

"Wimbome, Dorset.
1880. Gill, W. A., M.A. (Magdalene): East Down Park, Lewisham,

London, S.E.
1873. Gotobed, Henry, 13, Hill's Road, Cambridge
1880. Gow, James, M.A. (Trinity) : 35, Fitzroy Square, London, W.


1876. Grant, C. E., M.A., King's.

1878. Gray, A., M.A., Jesus.

♦Green, Eev. W. C, M.A. (King's) : The School, Rngby.
1875. Greenwood, Prof. J. G., LL.D., The Owens College, Man-
1881. Gwatkin, Rev. T., M.A., St. John's : 1, St. Mary's Passage,

1883. Hadley, W. S., B.A., Pembroke.

1880. Hager, Dr. H., 1, Derby Road, Fallowfield, Manchester.
*Haskin8, C.E., M.A., St. John's.

1879. Hayman, Rev. Henry, D.D. (St. John's, Oxon.): Aldingham

Rectory, Ulverston.

1880. Heathcote, W. E., M.A. (Trinity) : Round Coppice, Ivor

Heath, TJxbridge, Bucks.

1881. Heslop, T. P., M.D., Sir Josiah Mason's College, Bir-


1880. Hicks, R. D., M.A., Trinity.

1874. Holden, Rev. H. A., LL.D. (Trinity): 20, Redcliffe Square,
London, S."W.
Hort, Rev. Prof. F. J. A., D.D. (Emmanuel) : 6, St. Peter's

Hutchinson, Rev. C. B., M.A. (St. John's) : The School, Rugby.

1882. Hiigel, Baron Friedrich von: 4, Holford Road, Hamp-

stead, K.W.
♦Image, J. M., M.A., Trinity.

*Jackson, Henry, M.A., Trinity.

*Jebb, Prof. R. C, M.A. (Trinity) : The University, Glasgow.

1883. James, S. R., M.A. (Trinity) : Eton College, Windsor.

1881. Jenkinson, F. J. H., M.A., Trinity.

1873. Jessopp, Rev. A., M.A. (St. John's) : Seaming Rectory,
♦Kennedy, Rev. Prof. B. H., D.D. (St. John's) : The Elms,
1873. Kirkpatrick, Rev. Prof. A. F., M.A., Trinity.
1880.^Leaf, Walter, M.A. (Trinity) : Old Change, London, E.C.

1881. Lendrum, W. T. (Caius).

1882. Levander, H. C, M.A. (Pembroke College, Oxon.): 30,

Korth Villas, Camden Square, !N'.W.
♦Lewis, Rev. S. S., M.A., Corpus.
♦Lumby, Rev. Prof. J. R., D.D., St. Catharine's.
1882. Macmillan, G. A. : 29, Bedford Street, Covent Garden, W.C.


1882. Macmillan, M. C, M.A. (Christ's): 29, Bedford Street,

Covent Garden, W.C.
1873. Maddock, Eev. H. E., M.A., Clare.

1873. Magnusson, E., M.A., University Library: 26, Bateman

Street, Cambridge.
1881. Maine, Sir H. J. S., LL.D., Master .of Trinity HaU.

1881. Mayo, Eev. James, B.D. (Trinity): 6, Warkworth Terrace,

Mayor, Eev. Prof. J. B., M.A. (St. Jobn's): ftueensgate
House, Kingston Hill, Surrey.
♦Mayor, Rev. Prof. J. E. B., M.A., St. John's.
Merivale, Very Eev. C, D.D. (St. John's): The Deanery, Ely.

1882. MicheU, W. G., M.A. (Trinity) : The School, Eugby.

1874. Monro, C. H., M.A., Cains.

*Moss, Eev.H. W., M.A. (St. John's) : The School, Slirews-
1872. Moule, C. W., M.A., Corpus.

1875. Moulton, Eev. W. F., M.A., The Leys School, Cambridge.
*Munro, Eev. H. A. J., M.A., Trinity.

1883. Murton, G., B.A. (Trinity).

1876. Neil, E. A., M.A., Pembroke.
1874.*Mxon, Prof. J. E., M.A., King's.

1877. Orpen, Rev. T. H., M.A., Pembroke.

Paley, Prof. P. A., M.A., Apthorp, Boscombe, Bournemouth.
1881. Palmer, Prof. A., M.A. : Trinity College, Dublin.

1880. Parry, E. St. John, M.A., Trinity.

1881. Pearson, Eev. J. B., D.D., Emmanuel.
^Peile, J., M.A., Christ's.

Perowne, Eev. E. H., D.D., Master of Corpus.
1876. Peskett, A. G., M.A., Magdalene.
1879.*Postgate, Prof. J. P., M.A., Trinity.
1876.*Eawlins, P. H., M.A. (King's) : Eton College, Windsor.
1883. Eaikes, Eight Hon. H. C, LL.D. (Trinity) : Llwynegrin,
Mold, Elintshire.
*Eeid, J. S., M.A., Cains : The Croft, Newnham, Cambridge.
1875.*EendaU, Prof. G. H., M.A. (Trinity) : University College,

1879. Eidgeway, Prof- W.,M.A. (Cains): The Queen's College, Cork.
*Eoberts, Eev. E. S., M.A., Cains.

*Eoby, Prof. H. J., M.A. (St. John's) : Wood Hill, Pendleton,


1879. RiislibTOoke, W. G., LL.M. (St. John's) : City of London
School, London, E.C.

1882. Rutherford, W. G., M.A.' (University College, Oxon.):

Westminster School, London.
♦Sandys, J. E., M.A., St. John's.
1877. Savage, Rev. H. E., M.A. (Corpus) : Pelton Vicarage,
Chester-le-Street, Co. Durham.
*Scott, Rev. C. B., D.D. (Trinity) : 19, Dean's Yard, West-
minster, S.W.
Seeley, Prof. J. R., M.A., Caius: St. Peter's Terrace,
1879. Selw3ni, Rev. E. C, M.A., King's: The College, Liverpool.
1877. Sharkey, J. A., M.A., Christ's.

Sidgwick, Prof. H., M.A., D.L., Trinity.

1879. Sing, Rev. G. H., M.A., Corpus.

*Skeat, Rev. Prof. W. W., M.A. (Christ's): 2, Salisbury
Villas, Cambridge.
Smith, W. F., M.A., St. John's.

1873. Spratt, A. W., M.A., St. Catharine's.

Storr, P., B.A. (Trinity) : 40, Mecklenburgh Square,
London, W.C.
*Swain8on, Rev. Prof. C. A., D.D., Master of Christ's.
Taylor, Rev. C, D.D., Master of St. John's.
1876. Thompson, E. S., M.A., Christ's.

♦Thompson, Rev. W. H., D.D., Master of Trinity College.

1883. Tottenham, H. R., M.A., St. John's.

1874. Tovey, Rev. D. C, M.A., Trinity : Eton College, Windsor.

1882. Tucker, Prof. T. G., B.A. (St. John's) : Porton Bank,

Garstang, Lancashire.

1880. Vardy, Rev. A. R., M.A. (Trinity): King Edward's School,


1874.*Verrall, A. W., M.A., Trinity : Newnham Terrace, Cam-

1880. Vince, C. A., M.A. (Christ's) : The School, Repton.

1880. Wallis, Rev. P., M.A., Caius.

1879.*Welldon, Rev. J. E. C, M.A. (King's): The CoUege,
Dulwich, S.E.

1880. West, H. H., B.A., Trinity: St. Patrick's Deanery, Dublin.

1883. Westcott, P. B., B.A., Trinity.

WHkins, Prof. A. S., M.A. (St. John's) : The Owens CoUege,


1879. Williams, W. H., M.A. (Trinity): The Leys School, Cam-
♦Wordsworth, Rev. C, MA. (Peterhouse) : Glaston Rectory,

♦Wright, Rev. A., M.A., Queens'.
Wright, Prof. W., LL.D., Queens'.
♦Wright, W. Aldis, M.A., Trinity.
1881. Wyse, W., B.A., Trinity.

♦Young, Rev. E. M., M.A. (Trinity) : Sherborne, Dorset.

Members are requested to send corrections of any errors in this liit

to tlie Secbetabt.


ven by volmnes and pagti ; hut the first volumt
t qitoM hy the fage only.


A icale in tha Greek Towel sj'atem, 9.
Abu Simbel Insoriptioiia. antiaiiity

of, 293.
Ambignitj in tranalatioa, avoiiliiJice of,

Amphorae foimd at Caere, 138,
tv, xamoHiouseA insertioa of, 132.
Aorist in -9i|v, 4S.
Arabia in PontuB, II. 179.
AriatopfaaneB, puos nnd irapi vpirSoKf u

It of do., 29.
Bilingual inscription on slab fonnd at

Cflrdiufll victaea, tlie, 96.
Carneades' division, ot hma, II. 173.
Catalogoe of ehips in Euripides' Iphe-

genia at Aulis, 101.
Ohaucer Prologae vv. 562-3, 66.
CompaEite sentences, resolutioQ of , 1S3.
OoajuDctiTe, Latin, the thought -mood,

ConjunctitB mood used in two wap as

Pore Bad Subjunctive, 105.
�ituiicialie, Interrogatia, Petitio,

Suhobliqne CooBtructioD. Virtual

Oratio Obliqna, 108.
ConDeiion between legends of Greek

Tragedy and Heroic Myth, 213.

Crok�, Bichard, II. B3 sqt

in Paria, II. 83.

in Louvain, II. 85.

in Cologne, II. 86.

in Leipsio, II. 86.

great anocesa as teacher in

Bio, II. 86 aq.
literary activity at Leipaic, II.

88 sq.
Criminals, Treatment of bodies of, at

AthjiiiB, 84.
Cjelicpocta, 271.
Cyclops of Euripidea, 233.
ATitiayayot at Athens, II. 150.
Demetriua, the Scriba at York, 397 sqq.
DemoHthenes' da Falsa LegBtiono,colIfl -

tinnof, 12, 30.
Dialectic forms preserved in Arialiitte,


Early Greek
EngHB.li alphabet and spelling, history

of. II. 62 sqq.
English and Sanskrit, resemblances

English n

ire, spelling re.

ih, II. 62Bqq.

isyllablea termina

-blush, fi
Etruscan Dumerals, 89.
Emipiiiea' Helena, nourcea of, 130.

Fabric and Kltual of Chmoh at Tyre,


Index of Subjects {continued),

Forcellini's Lexicon, remarks on, 156.
Four Cardinal Virtues, the, 96.
French spelling, influence upon English

spelling, II. 63.
Future Participle in Greek and Latin

supine in -Mm, 93.

Grammatical Terms in Latin, 105.

Grapes, Latin words for, 302.

Gotnic A scale, 17.

Gothic enclitic -h, -uh, 53.

Greek deponent verbs having aorists

ending m -fl7;v, 48.
Greek Literature, early, 127.
Greek Lexicons, supplement to, 9.
Greek Lexicography, errors in, 67.
Greek Tablets found at York station,

Greek verbs apparently parathetic

compounds with &,- and 8t;<r-, 61.

Harshness and softness of letters,

Hindu idea of, 33.
Hendiadys and Zeugma, 152.
Heraclitus, alluded to by Aristotle, II.

138, 152.
Homer and tragic poets, 213 sqq.

and Quintus Smymaeus, 290 sqq.

spurious archaisms in, 276 seqq.

Hyginus, authority of, II. 107.

Icelandic, Umlaut of a to ei^ II. 157.
Idiomatic Translation, 145.
India, a Diary in, by John Marshall, 8.
" In puris naturalibus,'* 47.
Inscription on an olla discovered at

Steeple Morden, 204.
Internal evidence, nature and limits of,

Isocrates, occasion of sixth letter of, 10.

�ine, extension of meaning of Sanskrit

terms relating to, 16.
KipK-n, of Aeschylus, 231.
KOPT&Kiov, a, 183.

Landn^mab6k, sailing directions of, 314.
Larisa, magistrates of, II. 137.
Latin compound construction, some

terms of, 104.
Latin and Romance languages, biblio-
graphy of, II. 2 sqq.

Latin, II. 2.

Low I.atin, II. 2.

Catalonian, II. 7.

Franco-Provencal, II 8.

French, Old, II. 9.

New, II. 9.

Dialects, II. 10.

Frioulan, II. 6.

Gallo-Italic, II. 5.

Genoese, II. 5.

Italian, II. 3.

— dialects, II. 3.

Portuguese, II. 4.

dialects, II. 4.

Provencal, Old, II. 7.

New, II. 7.

Bomanese, II. 6.

Sardinian, II. 4.

Spanish, II. 4.

dialects, II. 4.

Wallachian, II. 11.
Latin and Eomance words connected
with Viticulture, 302sqq.Jl. 1-61.

Grapes, Eomance wori for II.
51, sqq.

Grapes, bunch of, II. 44 sqq.

Grape, a single, II. 56, 57.

Grape pulp, II. 69.

Grape skin, II. 57, 58.

Grape stone, II. 61.

Grapes, residuum of pressed, II. 58.

Must, II. 59.

Kaisins, II. 54.

Vine, vinestock, II. 23 sqq.

blossom, II. 51.

branch, II. 38 sqq.

bud, II. 43, sq.

leaf, II. 42. sqq.

^'oote, II. 31 sqq.

shoot, layer, II. 59 sqq.

tendrils, II. 50.

trellis, 11.25.

Vineyard, II. 19 sqq.
Latin epitaph at Ascalon, 167.
Latin-English Dictionary bj

and Short, criticism on, 196.
Latin Mood, 104.
Latin Subjunctive, so called potential

and jussive uses of, 94.
Legends of Greek Tragedy and Heroic

Myth, Connexion between, 213.
Lewis and Short's Latin Dictionary, 196.
Lex Thoria and Lex Agraria, Mommsen

on, II. 104.
Literal Translation, 142.

Madvig's Adversaria, criticisms of, 67.
Metaphors, rendering of, 150.
Middle English Spelling, II. 64.
Mommsen on uiritanua ager, II. 99.

on Lex Thoria, II. 104.

Mood, see Conjunctive,
MS. of Aristotle's Ethical Treatises, 44.
MS. of 15th century, 91.
Mutes and liquids, short vowels length-
ened before combination of, 134.




Index of Subjects {emiinued),
'Myrmidons ' of Aeschylus, 219.

K, transference of .from end of one word

to beginning of next, 15.
Negatives and prohibitives in Latin, 63.
Negatives in composition in Greek, 74.
Nieouhr on the a^er publieua, II. 106.

'08v<r<r€^5 &icai^oirX^{, 235.
Oedipus legend in Tragedy, 213.
Orientation, date of, 191.
*OffTo\6yot of Aeschylus, 231.

Participles, translation of, 148.
Fenelope of Aeschylus, 230.
Philoctetes legend in tragedy, 214.
Philological Society, work of a, 1.
Fhoenix of Euripides, 217.
Phonetic change, causes of, 17.
Phryges of Aeschylus, 225.

* Post Epic ' words in Homer (Paley)

271 sqq.
Predicative Dative in Latin, 261.
Prefix a- in English, 15.
Prefix un- in English, 62.
Present Indicative, translation of, 147.
President's address, 17, 30, 50, 76, 109.
Printing, discovery of, effect on English

spelling, II. 6.
Pronunciation, Latin, reform of, II.


* Proteus ' of Aeschylus, 230.
"VuxoffToaia of Aeschylus, 228.

Puns and ira^ trpinrBoKiciv in Aristo-
phanes, 28.

Quintns Smymaeus, character of his
poems, 290.

* Eead tOy' Greek words for, 248.
Keflexive verbal and noun formations

with Old Scandinavian reflexive pro-
noun, 24.

Relative pronoun translation, 146.

Romance language, bibliography of,
see Latin,

Romance soimds, pronunciation of, II.
14 sqq.

Roots AK- and magh, 51.

Root iB in tdvoiy etc., 51.

Roots SAK, etc. in English, II. 194.

Roots TOX-, ToA-, tAo, 51.

Runic Alphabet, origin of, 121.

S to R in Latin, transition from, 9.

Sanskrit and Latin, 15 words common
to, 14.

Scotch proverb sokand seill is best, 314.

Ships, Catalogue of, in Euripides Iphi-
genia at Aulis, 101.

Short vowels, lengthened before com-
binations of mutes and liquids, 134.

* Sisyphus' of Aeschylus, 231.

Socrates, his daufi6vtov inifAtTov, 23.

Sophists, defence of Mr. Grote's account
of the S., 10.

Spartan franchise, grants of, II. 1 33.

Spelling, etymological, unmeaning in
its conventional sense, II. 66.

Spelling, real etymological is phonetic,
II. 67.

Spelling reform, discussion on, II, 176.

Spelling reform in English, II. 62 sqq.

Spelling reform, not a wiping out the
history of the language, II. 66.

Spelling reform to be based on Romance
values of the letters, II. 68.

Spelling reforms, value of partial, II.

Spelling, unphonetic character of Eng-
lish, II. 65.

Spenser's Faerie Queen, pseudo-
archaisms in, 11.

Surgeons in Greek Armies, 116.

Tablets, votive, found at York station,

69, 397 seqcj.
Tabula Lusoria, 170.
Talent, the Homeric, 245.
Thorius or Borius^ II. 104.
Tiberius Gracchus the elder, 8.
Tibullus IT 13, genuineness of, 239.
Tisias, date of, 238.
** To save appearances," 46.
Translation from Greek and Latin,

notes on canons of, 138.
Tyre, church at, as described by Euse-

bius, 189 sqq.

Vase, Greek, of fifth century b.c, 80.
Viticulture, Latin and Romance terms
connected with, 302 sqq ; II. 1 sqq.

"Wasse, Joseph, literary career of, 82.
"Words found in two Indo-European

languages only, 14.
"Written history, lateness of, deduced

from Thuc. i 1-23, 11.
"Written literature, early Greek, 127,




kyopk TeX'tiOoviTaLf 301.

afv|, 57.

aiKdXKot, 25.

aXo|, 11.144.

itHpiyvfieis, II. 78.

afi<i)lyvoSf II. 79.

hfi^UXurcra, II. 80.

^vaiTor, imchallenged, 74.

hvarpe^Wy fatten up, 67.

'Ain7A,t�J>Ti7S, 13.

araftrripSs, 19.

2b^ i.iropoffT'fia'etPf 183.

BopeaS) 13.

yycoarifiaxftyf usage of, 240.

AeX^iK^ /t(�x<xpa, II. 124.

diouppotnl^uvj c. ace, II. 132.

SovXefa, II. 132.

Bpdyfiaf 311.

BpdKiaf 311.

8paK($( (gen.), 311.

9p4fifxaf 311.

Sp4ir€iyf rpxryay, 311.

9peirr€?s, rpvyrircdj 311.

ifxfiare^uv, 73.

ivoirfif 25.

iirah\dTT€iy, II. 114n., 121 sq., 129.

ivippodosy 19.

Ipp6(v in Homer, II. 160.

fifdtveTu, II. 165.

€<Jvoio, II. 115n., 121 n., 131.

^i<J6KTi (2/ca/A(�i'$^), II. V. 36, 41.

ilV€poV€^(0, 25-.

r|*s, 212.
Tora, 5juoia, 28.

KOTO with ace. in apparently contra-
dictory senses, 55.
Kard\ri}\fts, II. 171.
Kcvefifiareia, 66.
Kopdvrji II. 145.
Kdfffios, II. 133.

K(Jxw (Hesych.), 25.
KT^avost 39.

K(^/t77 and- 7^yoj, relation of, II. 141.
\afieiVf of thing acted on, II. 142.
\d\oSj inhonestat H* 139.
Aaf)i<ra?o$, II. 135.
\api(roiroi6s better than Xapffcuowoiiij
II. 135 sqq.
. X<^yoi, II. 121, 123 n.
/xaprrroDj 25.

/u&i^ ^^ovoariiareiv, 183.
/it77f)o( and /A)7f)(a, 202.
purfifiopcSj II. 151.
va^KX-qpos, Kvfiepvrirfis, ir/wpc^f, 22.
6apoSf oapiQiiv, 49.
ofieKi<TKo\vxvioVi II. 125.
3\�y, II. 130.
dfidKairoSj II. 125.
6v€ir0ou, II. 152.

-ocruvos, -oavtnj^ in Greek tragedy, 260.
TTKiveiovy 172,

Vpod€\VfXVOij 20.

pdnaTUf 310.
^t^i, 310.

^o8o8(�ktvXos 'Hc^s, 301.
^a;|, 310.

Sefpios dcTT^p, 177.
crKonovfiou, passive as well as middle, 16.
(nrovdda'fiaTai II. 147.
<Tvvaao<f>€ip, 74.
avv€Trc\lnri(f>l^€iy, II. 134.
<rxoA^, lecture, II. 141.
rh iroy, corrupted from totcU^, rpor^,
etc., 204.

Tpox�7A.^C�� 47.

SXri, silua, 136.

viroAefiretv, construction of, II. 142.

xH^s, 41.

ODfiOdfTUV, 202.

<wiMM�, 306, 308, 311.
arcesso and accerao, 45.
arcifinius, II. 95 sqq.
atriariuSf 312.
botryOy 304,
�a^^�, 172.


cardinales uirtuteSy 96.
eondicio, conditio, 184.
ecukusy 210.
^0M�, 268.

decumanus, II. 97 sq.
granum, 306, 308.



Index of Words {eontinued),

hemina sanguinis^ 180, 297*

inhdbilia, 67.

intereisiui limites, II. 99.

tw� ueetigalisj II. 108.

latrunculi, 172.

libera sehola, 694

lieentia poetiea, 178.

nominibt48 aasignare^ II. 104.

" twti for wtf,*' 63.

oeeupatoritu ager, II. 99.

j90r eenturiaSf II. 108.

roctfinari, ra�0ma/tM, raeemosus, 306.

ro/'^martMs, 305.

racemt48y 304, 307, 310.

seopioy seopiuSf 307.

��rmo in Servius meaning * word,* 49.

aeruoSf 14.

^t>M/0, 176.

uncus f 12.

Mua, 303, 307, 310.

uinaceunif 307-309.

uiritanua ager, Mommsen on, II. 99.

uiritim diuisus ager^ II. 100.



aggrace, etc., 11.

aim, 70.

akimbo, II. 188.

an in sense of < if,' 175^

anneal, 175.

atone, 35.

6a�A:, ^imAt, risk^ etc., 25.

�fo�^, <20r�, dart, 175.

^imA, <;^�/i, ,/^A, erash, etc., 26.

frisk, fresh, busk, etc., 26.

glamour, 33.

^am, 72.

gypsey, 12.

ytt<�, 208.

keight, etc., 11.

A:<?y, II. 190.
for^, ' nothing,' 27.
mandarin, 208.
marmoset, 208.
��a�Ar, 209.
fi�aj9 and �dd, 17.
patch, 209.
platehet, 209.
slowworm, II. 177, 179.
' sokand seill is best,* 314.
to/A:, II. 178.
weary, II. 178.
wench, II. 178.
wraith, II. 179.
wyvem, II. 179.


Icelandic —
*<j�7a, • tack,' II. 15^.
/y/ * whit,' 28.
keng-boginn, II. 188.
foi�a, ' bury,' II. 168.

Icelandic {continued^ —

S(Bkja, * advance,' 315.

vei^r, * catch of fish,* II. 160.
Sanskrit —

^o^Aara and other compounds of ^0, 15.




Aeschylus —

Agamemnon 16
276, 7







1166-9 172,
Choephorae 472-3
Eummides 441

829 sqq. II.
Fersae 297, 8
PrometheuB 420 II.

SepU e, Theb. 24

146, 6






SuppUees 983-4

Anthology— ix 482

Aristophanes —

Aeharniana 920-6

Aves 1647 II.
Equitea 670

Fax 114-7
Vespae 642
Aristotle —

Nieomachean Eth. i 7. 16

VIII 10. 2
Politic$, I 1. 3 II.

2. 6 II.










II. 190














Aristotle {continued)-^
Folitiea, i 2. 7


6. 1




9. 8


10. 4


n 4. 8




8. 1






10. 6


12. 7


m 2. 2


3. 2


3. 6


3. 7


4. 9




6. 9




12. 6


IV (vii) 1. 1




8. 3


11. 3


12. 2






16. 9 sqq








17. 1


17. 3


17. 6


17. 6


17. 9


V (vni) 2. 6


VI (iv) 1. 1


1. 6




7. 1


16. 8


VII (vi) 6. 7


8. 7


8. 8


viii (v)' 10.16





28 sqq.

35 sqq.

45 sqq.






















Index of Passages — Greek {continuetFj,

Demosthenes —

Plato {continued).

Pais, Leg. 413


. 176

Fhilebus 66


Euripides —

64 E


Alceitis 312


Itepublie vi 488


Helena 381


Thtaetetus. 207 E


Hippolytus 276


Fassim 333 sqq.

II. 216 sqq.

Ion 3


Sophocles —



Antigoney 413-4

II. 173 sqq.

Medea 297






Ajaxy 399-400






Homer —



Iliad \ ^2^




II 604, 605





V 36




XV 18, 19




XVIII 506-8

211, 246



Odysaey vn 87




Fassim 320sqq

.,11. 199 sqq.

Ehetra, 461-2


Lysias —

Oedipus Coloneus, 30


OiraU XXVI 17




Pindar —



Isthmians n 39, 40




VII 43




Nemeana i 8, 9
















IV 17








VII 86 sqq.




98 sqq.


Oedipus Rex. 210




328-9 123,

II. 162, 176













XI 46




Olympians 11 66 sqq.


. 183



Ill 8,9




VI 73, 4







Apol. Soci\ 26 D, e




33 b


Fhilocietes 627


Crito. 44 D


Traehiniagf 663-4


Meno, 86 E


Fragments, 319 ,


J*haedo, 62 a

. 73

Theophrastus, passim,


98 b

. 71

Thucydides— 1II8.2



. 70

III 17


104 D

. 76



106 A

. 76


II. 180

Fhilebus. 12 e


IV 18.4


21 B




26 D




26 D



II. 181

30 B


V 49


46 B


VI 11.6


61 B





Index of Passages — Gbeek {continued).

Thucydides {continued),

VI 57. 1

VII 76.4

vin 14.2


Thucydides {continued),
vm 86.3
Xenophon —

AgesilauSy i 2

I 9

de Vect. iv 14



Colossians ii. 18, 19
1 Corinthians vii. 1
ix. 1
ix. 24-27


Ephesians i. 22 — ^ii. 3 66

vi. 2 33

St. John xviii. 28 48

2 Timothy u. 15 116


35. 4, 5 312

OatulluB —
Cicero —

Academica i 39-42
Brutus 36, 136

Milo 21. 57
Be Natura Beorum

III 35. 84
Orator 48.160
Gromatici Scnptoiespassim, II. 95 sqq.
Horace —

Upodes V 87-88
Satires i 3.120-1
II 1. 86

II. 170 sqq.
II. 104


II 4. 77

Juvenal — i 153-5

VII 166-6

X 65-6

Lucan — i 44,





11, 114



6 II. 166

151 sqq. II. 167

164, 5 II. 167

167 sqq. II. 167

220 sqq. II. 167

327 II. 167

413 II. 168

452-4 II. 168

694 II. 168

Lucilius, fragments of, in Cic. de Fin,

II � 23, de Fin, i � 7, Or, ii � 26,

Plin. N. H. Praef. � 7—168

VlsLuim— Miles 526 II. 181

635 II. 181

881 II. 182

936 sqq. II. 183

Mostellaria 62 II, 183

460 II. 183

Propertius— i 1.33 187

2.25 188

Propertius {continued),

I 6.19 188

8. 7 188

16.29 266

20.52 188

n 1.47 188

2. 4 189, II. 159

III 26.15, 16 (u 28.61, 62) 383

32.1 (II 34. 1) 384

29 (II 34.29) 189

92 (II 34.92) 312

IV (III) 11. 6 189

17.27 384

19. 7,8 384

21.19-22 S86

V (iv) 1.37, 38 385

2.11, 12 385

4.14 249

6.61 189

64 386

8. 1 249

39 386

9.70 386

10.42 386

11. 5 189

17 sqq. 266

■ 37 sqq. 267

Passim 372 sqq., II. 227 sqq.

Quintilian —

Inst. Orat, xu 10.17 64

Servius—P�s�m 387 sqq.

Tibullus— IV 13 239
Virgil —

Aeneid vi 585-6 182
X 185-6 81

Georgics i 513-4 66

Passim II. 223 sqq.




uLB76'rorZj&(1880),byH. Jackson.

368 sqq.
BernayB, ArUtotelische Theorie

des Drama 371

Grote, Aristotle 368

Hatch, W. M., Moral Fhilo-

aophy of A ^ 370

Susemihl, Ariatotelis Ethiea Ni-

eomaehea 370

Wallace, E., Outlines of FhHo-

sophy of Aristotle 368

Wilson, J. Cook, Aristotelian

Studies ^ 368

MOMEJR (1880-2), by W. Leap.

321 sqq. II. 199 sqq.
Adam, L., Odyssee u, episeh,

Cyelus ..... 330

Anton, H. S., Etymologische

Erkldrung Horn, Worter II. 209

Fortsetzung II. 212

Avia, Odyssey in English verse 323
Baenitz, zumlu, Ilder II. II. 208
Bolte, J., de monwnentis ad Od.

pertinentihus II. 212

Brentano, zur Losung der TroJ.

Frage II. 203

Brocks, E., zu B. xvii 330 II. 209
Buchholz, E., die Rom, Realien :

Band II, Ablheilung I: das

Oefentliche Zeben II. 201

BvachaiditK.foTosb, Homer 11.210
Du Cane, Sir C., Odyssey I- XII

in English verse 324

Dunbar, H., //. xvi 322

Concordance to Odyssey and

FEymns ...� ..... ..... 327

Ebeling, Lexicon Momerieum ..... 330

Faust, A., Homerische Studien

II. 212
Fowle, E., Eook I of Romeros

Iliad (for schools) 323

Frey, K., Homer II. 210

Frohwein, E., Homerische Ver-

balformungen II. 209

Frolich, H., d, Militdrmediein

Honters 327

Gemoll, A., Einleiiung in d. Horn.

Qedichte • II. 207

Giles, Homer* s Iliad 324

Goebel, Zexilogtts zu Homer m. d.

Homeriden 324

Goecke, Oebrauch d, Konjunctiv

u. Optativ bei H, ..... II. 201

HOMER {continued),

Haesecke, EntstehungdesIB.der

Ilias II. 208

Hagemann, A., Eigennamen bei

-*-�- • •••�• ••••• ••••• ••••• Oi& I

Hailstone, H., II. xxi 322

Harrison, J. E., Myths of the

Odyssey II, 210

Hecht, M., Quaestiones Homer'

ieae .... II. 212

Hentze, Homer* s Hias Schulaus-

gabe v. K. F. Ameis..... II. 206
Anhang zu H.*s L �. dessel-

ben II. 206

Hercher, R., Homerische Awf-

sdtze 11. 206

Hinrichs, G., d. Hom. Chryseis-

episode II. 213

Kayser, K. L. Homerische Ab-

handiungen II. 204

'Kiene,A.f die Epen des Homer II. 204
Kobilinski, G., He A, I, T, ap,

Hom . mensura uocalium II. 211
Kochly H., Opuscula Fhilo-

logica, vol. i II. 205

Kopp, H., Aurea Catena Homeri 329

Lahmeyer, L., de apodotico S4 327

Lenz, E., de uersibus ap. Hom.

perperam iteratis II. 206

M.iAaSiS.y^Z.'P, [History of Greek

Literature) II. 328

Morgan, R., Odyssey y literally

translated 324

Niese, B.,EntwickelungderHom.

poesie II. 212

Polak, H. J., Ad Odysseam eius'

que Seholiastae curae secundae

II. 203
Pratt, J. H., & Leaf, W., The

story of Achilles 323

Ranke, F., die Holoneia II. 202
Rothe, C, de Vetere Kirchhoffii

v6(TT(p II. 213

Sandford, P., Iliad xxii 323

Sayce, A. H., On the Language

of Homer 321

Schliemann, Ilios 326

Jieise in der Troas II. 202

Schrader, H., Forphyrii Quaes'

tionum Hom. reliquiae 329

Sidgwick, A., Homer's Iliad xxi 322

xxii 322

Siegfried, R., Compositio libro-

rum Iliadis xviii ad xxii II. 208


Indbx of Bbtiews {continued).

HOMER {continued),

Sittl, �., Wiederholungeninder

Odyssee II. 211

Thiemann, C, Gebrauch u. Jin'
terichied der lartikeln &y u.
Kiv 11.206

TLATO (\%^0, in England \%^W2) by

R. D. Hicks 333 sqq; II.215sqq.
Apelt, 0., observationes criticae

in PL dialogoa 344, 354, 355, 361

ueber den Farmenidea 344

— : — zum Comment ar von PJs

Parmenides 349

Archer -Hind, R. D., Difficulties

in Platonic Psychology II. 218

Badham, Q., ad PL Fhilebum 349

Flatonica II. 220

adl. X de legibus II. 220

L via Farnlipomena II. 220

Becker, Th., zur Erkldrung v.

Flaton's Laches 355

Benn, A. W., Greek Philoso-

phers II. 220

Bruns, J,. Plato^s Gesetze 362

Bywater, I., Atakta ..... II. 220
Campbell, L., a neglected MS, of

PL 11.219

Theaetetus II. 221

Church, F. J., Euthyphron,

Apology, Crito and Phaedo

translated into Eng 367

Cobet, C. G., ad PL Protagoram 357
Drygas, A., P.'� Erziehungs-

theorie 340

Dziatzko, K., Kritisches zu P. *s

Leges 365

Fischer, C., Uber d. Person des

Logographtn in P.*s Euthy-

demus 356

FofHter, R., Sophron u. Platon — 360
Gobel, K., aier d, Plaionischen

Farmenides 346

Gow, J., Nuptial Number of

Republic II. 220

Ilasbach, Aesthetik Flatos u,

Sohopenhauers 339

Heine, T., de ratione quae Pla-

toni cum poetis Graecorum

inter oedii qui ante eumforue-

runt ••••• 338

Iluit, 0.,^* Sophisteest'ilV ceuvre

de Platon f 343

Jockion, H., Plato' t later theory

^ Ideas 11.216

Oh Plato's Rtpublle II. 216

PLATO {continued),

Kennedy, B. H., Theaetetus,

Translation and Notes II. 221
Kleist, H. v., Methodologisehe

bedeutung des Protagoras ^ 358
Liebhold, �. J., zu Platon' s

Philebus ..349

zu Flaton's Politeia ..... 360

Loschhorn, K., kr, Studien tur

platonischen u, ehrittliehen

Ethik „ ..... _340

Maguire, T., Parmenides II. 221
Milller-StriLbing, H., Protagorea 342
Miinz, B., Erkenntniss u. Sen-

sationstheorie des Protagoras 342
Noble, C, Staatslehre Platons m

geschichtlicher eniwicklung ..... 335
Purves, J., Selections from the

Dialogues II. 221

Rettig, G. F., die Zahl in P.'�

Staat >... 361

Schanz,M.,P/a/onf�o^r0(772) 334
Schmidt, H., exegetischer JSCom-

mentar zu P,'s Theatet. ._ 342
Stein, P., Aristophanis Eed,

argumentum e iv Reipublieae

libro sumptum — . 361

Susemihl, F., Abfassungszeit des

PL Phaidros ..„ ..... _ 352
Tannery, P., V education pla-

tonicienne �� �... 365

Thompson, W". H., Introductory

remarks on the Phaedrus II. 219
Usener, H., Abfassungszeit d,

PL Phaidros^ 350

Wells, G. H., Euthyphro ^ 340
Zeller, E., zur Geschichte d.pla-

tonischen u. aristotelisehen

Schriften „.. 340,359

VIRGIL (1881-2) by H. Nbttleship.

II. 223 sqq.
Albrecht, �., wiederholte Verse

u. Verstheileb. V, 11.226

Conington & Nettleship, Works

of VirgU (4th ed.), voL i II. 223
Henry, J., Aeneidea vol. Hi II. 224

Kloucek, W., zu Vergilius II. 226
Kolster, W. H., V.'s Eklogen
in strophischer Gliederung mit
Kommetitar ..... ^.. II. 222

Kvicala, J., Reitrage zur Erkla-
rung der Aeneis II. 224

Ladewig, Virgilj ed, Sehaper,
VOL a II. 224



Index of Kbyiews {continued).

VIRGIL (continued).
PapiUon, T. L., Virffil II. 226
Smith, C. L., VirgtVe instruC'
ixom for ploughing, etc, II. 223

FR0PERTIU8 (1880-2) by J. P.

FosTGATE 372sqq., II. 229, sqq.
Baehrens, E., Propertius (text) 372

Beviews of do 380 (bis)

. zu lateinisehen dichtern 11.230

Birt, T., Properz {Dae antike

JBuehwesen II. 233

BitschofEsky, E., zu Prop. II 21.

Usq.^ 11.231

Brandt, K.^ Quaestiones Proper^

tianae ..„ .... II. 231

Ellis, R., on P. �-. 380

The Neapolitanue of P. ..... 381

Propertianum ..... II. 236

Kiihlewein, G., kritische Pemer-

kungen zu P.... II. 233

Leo, F., Vindieiae Propertianae 378
Otto, A., Fabulae Propertianae,

Pars i 379

Palmer, A., Propertius (text) 376

Peiper, Quaestiones Propertianae,

Pars i 380

Polster, Quaestionum Proper-

tianarum Specimen ..... II. 230

Postgate, J. P., Propertiana 382

Select Elegies of P, II. 227

Emendations of P, II. 228

Scharf , Quaestiones Propertianae

II. 231
Schenkl, etneProperz-handschrift

II. 231
Sim^n, F. P., NoU on P, ..... 382
. Solbisky, K., de Codd. Proper-

tianis ..... II. 236

Vablen, J., Beitrdge zurBerich-

tigung der Elegien des P, II. 229
-^� ueber zwei Elegien des P,

II. 232

PEOPERTIirS (continued).
"Weidgen, J., Quaestiones Pro-
pertianae ii II. 233

SERVIXrS (1880) by H. Nettleshtp.

387 sqq.
Linke, H., de Macrobii Satur-

naliorum fontibus 393

Thomas, E., Essai sur Servius et

son commentaire 387

Wissowa, G., de Macrobii Satur-
naliorum fontibus „... 393

by H. F. Tozer II. 237-42

Clark, J. T., and others, Inves-
ligations at Assos ..... II. 237

Olympia, die Ausgrabungen zu,
Part V II. 239

Kamsay, W. M., Studies in Asia
Minor^ etc, II. 242

Sachau, E., iiber die'Lage von
Tigranokerta..., II. 241

Treu, Cavadias* excavations on
siU of Tegea II. 242


by J. ZupiTZA II. 243 sqq.

Palmer, A. S., Folk-etymology

il. 263
Skeat, W. "W., Etymological Dic-
tionary of Eng 11.243

Concise do, II. 243

Wedgwood, H., Contested ety-
mologies in Skeat'' s Dictionary

II. 263
Kluge, F., Etymologisches JVbr-
terbuch d. deutschen Sprache

II. 259
Schade, 0., altdeutsckes Worter-
buch (2nd ed.) ..... II. 269



Allen, J. B., 138.
Allen, S., 109.
Arnold, E. v., 261.

Bendyshe, T., 41, 103.
Birks, E. B., 29, 73,101.
Bonaparte, H.I.H. Prince L.-L., II.

Bum, B., 249.

Cooke, A. H., II. 173.

Cowell, E. B., 8, 14, 16, 17, 30, 33,

39, 48, 49, 51, 76, 109.
Gnllinan, Max C, 87.

Bahlmann, B., 52.
Doig, W., 182, 210.

England, E. B., 209.

Fennell, C. A. M., 9, 25, 34, 89, 109,

Fulford, H, W., II. 175.
Francis, A. L., 9.

Gardner, P., 80.
Gow, J., II. 167.

Hager, H., 84, 246 ; II. 83-94.

Haskins, C. E., 88.

Hayman, H., 127, 183, 189, 213, 270.

Hicks, R. D., II. 170sqq.

Hort, F. J. A., 22, 63.

Jackson, H., 9, 20, 22, 23, 29, 34, 44,
66, 102, 136; II. 70-7, 111 sqq.,

Jebb, R. C, 10, 21, 22, 42, 75.

Kennedy, B. H., 14, 16, 68, 69, 81,
94, 104, 123, 166, 172 ; II. 162-4,

Kenrick, J., 48.

Kompthome, J., 165.

King, C. W., 347.

l/fturonco, P. M., 111.
Uftf, W., II. 70-7.

Lewis, S. S., 29, 39, 63, 69, 161, 204,
240, 261.

MagntSsson, E., 24, 25, 35, 70, 120,
314; II. 167 sqq., 179, 188.

Mayor, J. B., 23.

Mayor, J. E. B., 9, 46, 49, 63, 67, 82,
91, 96, 109, 166, 178, 184, 196, 297.

Munro, H. A. J., 81, 168.

Nixon, J. E., 63, 94, 109, 132.

Paley, F. A., 9, 12, 16, 21, 22, 28,
39, 40, 41, 49, 61, 86, 92, 93, 101,
130, 136, 138, 169, 202, 298.

Pearson, J. B., 176.

Peile, J., II. 164.

Postgate, J. P., 187, 239, 262, 266,
302, 312; II. 118, 164, 166-8, 180,

Ridgeway, W., 209, 210, 244 ; II. 160,

179 sq., 186 sq.
Roberts, E. S., 40.
Roby, H. J., II. 95 sqq.

Sandys, J. E., 16, 182.

Savage, H. E., 134.

ShiUeto, R., 48, 59, 61, 74.

Sidgwick, H., 10, 21.

Skeat, W. W., 11, 16, 17, 38, 45, 54,

60, 62, 73, 86, 113, 176, 208; II.

160, 177 sqq.
Swainson, C. A., 183.
Sweet, H., II. 62-9.

Taylor, C, 14, 66.
Thompson, E. S., II. 169.

Verrall, A. W., 204, 212, 238, 244,
250,297,311; II. 164 sqq., 181 sqq.,

Wilkins, A. S., 8. 46.
Wood, — ., 63.
Wordsworth, C, 11, 16.
Wratislaw, A. H., 9, 13, 18, 31, 42,
65, 78, 113, 162.

INDEX. 285


Election of Members, 19, 28, 30, 39, Election of Officers, 8, 18, 30, 50, 76,

41, 42, 60, 68, 61, 70, 74, 76, 81, 103, 201, 299.
87, 96, 103, 113, 123, 132, 136, 138,

166, 162, 167, 169, 172, 183, 202, Miscellaneous, 9, 18, 300, 311; II.

208, 240, 244, 249, 262, 266, 299 ; 162, 169, 177.
II. 167, 162, 181, 187, 190.




CamliriDge 0|)ilolo9ieal i)oeietp

ifsn tje gear 1882*



Cambrtnge |0l)ilologttal ^octetp.

LENT TERM, 1882.


At a Meeting held in St. John's College on Thursday, Feb. 9, 1882,
Professor Skeat, in the absence of the Prestdent, in the Chair,

H. F. "Wilson, Esq., Trinity College,
was elected a member.

A vote of thanks was passed to Mr. Yaistsittaet for his present of
the Philological Museum and the Museum Crtticum to the Society's

It was agreed to purchase a complete copy of Kuhn's Zeitschrift
for the library.

Prof. A. S. WiLONS communicated a paper on a MS. of Cicero's
Be Oratore and Orator in St. John's College, Oxford.

**It seems to have been first collated by Thomas Cockman {Be
Oratore, Oxf. 1696): and Bp. Pearce, who knew it from Cockman,
praises it highly. The collations of the other MSS. by Lagomarsini,
Ellendt (1840), Piderit, and Ravaisson (^Codex Ahrincensis), now
enable us better to estimate its value.

The MS. is a small folio of 28 leaves (55 pages, the last blank)
written in double columns in a neat and clear hand. The ink has
kept its colour except on the first page. It has numerous
contractions, such as the Tironian abbreviations for et and cons, the
misunderstanding of which latter has led copyists to change
consules into asinos (Wattenbach, Mnleitung, p. 74).

The MS. contains

De Okatoee I. �� 1 — 128 cogitanti — sumo, 157 — 193 citatae —
ciuili. n. 60 — 69 ferut — a doctore tudant, 19 — 20 tu — arte, 39 — 50
eloquete — cohortatio, 30 — 39 mediocris — qd qde, 69 — 245 p'ma
— p'f ut (omitting 90 — 92) exprimat — quid enim, 228 colligtr. m. 1
istituenti — 17. 110 n ut iure — ad finem. Obatok 91 robustius —

Thus it belongs to the second class of codices mutili. It wants
I. 128 — 156 and m. 18—109 ; but it contains i. 124—128, which
are wanting in the older Erlangen, and n. 231 — 245, which are
added in A by a somewhat later hand. The dislocation of the four
passages towards the beginning of Bk. n., evidently corresponding
to the displacement of four leaves by a binder, is the same as in



7 and other eodi€e$ mutUi. Its leadings show eonsiderahle resem-
blance to 7. In in. 1 — 18 I haTe noted more than eighty readings
of Zf none of which are given by Pearce or Ellffndt. Eor fourteen
the reading of 7, as given by Sorof, agrees with Z. In seven there is
discrepancy (one being an error in Z, six in 7), A having in all
these cases the right reading. From an inspectiim of the readings
of A, 7^ and Z in these and other instances, we can infer a very
close connexion between A on the one hand, and Z 7 on the other.
It would seem Z and 7 were not derived directly from A, but
through the medium of a copy which feU to pieces and was
wrongly rebound. Z however represents A. more accurately than
7. Z and 7, though only holding a secondary place in the 2nd and
3rd books, where we have A, rise to the position of excellent
authorities where A fails us.

It may be added by the way that, though the readings of A are
of verv great value in determining the text, the same cannot be
said of its omissions."

Dr. Waldstein read a paper on aKpox^tp^f^f^^f Ar..Eth. N. m.
i. 17, p. nil (Bekk.).

** Aristotle is enumerating the categories of harmful human
action, which, from particular ignorance on the part of the agent,
are not to be considered criminal. These categories are illustrated
by definite instances from real life, and to the last to wws, otov
rjpefia ^ a(f>6hpay is added as an illustration Kal ^ei^ai ^ovXofuvoij

wffvep 01 aKpox'^''P*'^ofi€Voif Trard^etev uv.

As this passage stands, it fails to illustrate the category, and
cannot be construed into good sense. Our difficulties are increased
by our ignorance of the precise nature of the axpox'^tpiafioi. If, as
has been supposed, this game consisted of boxing, wrestling, or
spurring, the illustration falls flat.

A painting on a vase in the possession of M. Camille Lecuyer at
Paris, together with a relief published by Clarac {Musie de Sculptm^
Vol. II. Plate 184, No. 55), and another published by Kranse
( Oymnastik und Agontstiky etc.. Vol. 11. PL x. Fig. 29), show this
game to have been similar to one practised by boys with us, in
which the fingers are interlaced, and. the point is to bring the
adversary to his knees by forcing back his wrist, only with the
iinportttut addition that the Greeks did not begin with interlacing
th(<ir hands, but stood opposite one another and strove to seize the
inoMt favourable grip of the hands, the most decisive part of the
giuuci. In this act, the one striving to seize, the other to avoid
&10 hand of his opponent, involuntary striking must have been a
most fi'equont occurrence.

The point of the illustration, however, does not so much lie in a
mistake of two separate acts within one game, but in the slipping
from the typictd act of one game into that of another, the
4ic^uvf<i/ii^c>^6>'09 falling into the action of the pancratiast or
pugihnt. It is the involuntary transition from the lightest and
most inoffensive of games to the heaviest and most severe of games.

Gamsbidge Philological Socistt*s PBOCEEDnros. 8

That it is this step from a light to a heavy game which is the point
of the illustration, is evident from the fact that Clemens Alexan-
drinus, who (Strom, n. 14, p. 461) enumerates these categories of
Aristotle, does not hesitate to take another instance, but again one
in which a competitor in a harmless game causes death to his
antagonist, a frequent occurrence in the heavier games.

The Sei^ai fiovXofi€vo9, which, as Bemays has shown, is a lapsus
on the part of the scribe from the fact of the same having occurred
only two lines above, is to be replaced by ^�fat, which Tumebus
saw in several manuscripts."

Mr. BrrDQBWAT suggested that het^ai was for BpafaaOai, through

Dr. "Waldsteik then read the following paper :

" To the description of the Polygnotan pictures in the Lesche of
the Cnidians at Delphi Pausanias devotes seven chapters (Lib. x.
capp. 25 to 31). The twenty-ninth chapter, which deals with the
second picture representing Odysseus's descent into Hades, begins
with the mention of two figures, Perimedes and Eurylochus, the
companions of Odysseus, who are preparing the offering of the

black rams to Hades, Tu>u Be tJBtj /uloi tcareiKer^fievioi/ eialv ei/ivrepoi
TovTwv iepeia xal ol eraipoi rov *0Sva<r€to9 Tl€piju,ySij9 Kal Kvpv\oxo9
0€/>oj/Te9, ra Se iffri fiiXave^ Kptol ra tepeta. Then follows the

description of a seated old man who is twisting a rope of reeds,
which is eaten as fast as he twines it by an ass behind him. This
figure, the cicerone said, had the inscription "Oki/o^, This man
Pausanias believes, and his information is again on the authority of
the people at Delphi, to have had an unthrifty wife, and in later
literature i this name occurs as a personification of thriftlessness and

We cannot help feeling that these attributes apply solely to the
wife and not the ''Oici/os, if to anybody at all. The whole allegory,
a direct personification of human ideas, is very forced and contrary
to the spirit of Greek works of the time of Polygnotus, while the
story is one that would readily become popular with the people,
and be taken up by later writers. It is the only instance of such
an allegory known before the middle of the fourth century in
Greek art. That Pausanias himself felt doubt concerning this
tradition is evident from the way in which he takes pains to quote
this story on the authority of others (/uuera Se ainovs ap^p iffrt

Ka6y/j,evo9f ewl^paiifia he *'Okvov eivai Xer^ei rov avOpw-wov . . . . ra
ovv 69 Tov Okvov TTfv ^vvoLKa iOeXovffiu atvt^affOai rov J\o\v^vu)roVy

ic.T.X,.), and in the way in which he tries to satisfy himself and
others in referring to a custom among the lonians and the name of
a bird ''Okvo^ which have no tangible bearing upon the subject.

1 [As in Propert. v. 3. 21—

Bignior obliquo qui f unem torqueat Ocno,
aetemusque tuam pascat, aselle, famem.]

4 Cambbtdge Philological Society's Pboceedings.

The whole story and position of ^O/cj/09 here and in later traditions
cannot be satisfactorily explained, and if we bear in mind how
credulous was Pausanias and how ignorant were the ciceroni^ we
must question whether the whole story was not invented upon the
basis of an abbreviated or obliterated inscription.

Bearing this in mind we must consider whence Polygnotus took
the scenes which he represents. "We find that the first picture
was taken from the Iliu Persis, the second from the I^ekuia. The
second picture corresponds entirely to the contents of the 1 1th book
of the Odyssey. But here there is no mention of "Okvo^, We do
find the two comrades of Odysseus sacrificing the black rams, and
immediately before this as well as a few lines above and at the end
of the 10th book we do find the mention of 'Q/ceai/os.

avTol B* avre irapa poov 'ClKcavoio
Tjofiev, o(^f^ €9 'xSypov ojCJyiKOfieO* ov (f)paae JLipicq,

€1/0* iep'jia fiev Ilepifi'^drf^ KvpvXoxo^ re
ea')(ov' K,r,\,

When we consider that localities are indicated in these v6ry
pictures and throughout the whole of Greek Art by means of
human figures, that the great world-stream is often represented
as an aged man, we must be inclined to believe that the ^O/ci/o? of
the picture is really 'QA:eai/o9, his action being a simple mode of
expressing the endless flow and change of the element which he
personifies, and this will be still more evident to us when we
remember that on several reliefs this rope-twisting old man is
seated beside the Danaids whose endless drawing of water is
acknowledged to be an illustration of the same course of nature.
The story of ''O/ci/09 therefore was spread through the misreading of
the inscription *Q/ceai/o9."

Mr. Palet communicated a paper on Sophocles, O.T. 1380,

KoKXiffr avyp eh ev 76 ra?? Q^fiai^ rpacjyet^y of which the following

is a summary.

'* Oedipus is giving reasons for his self-inflicted blindness, of
which the last is that he might not look on the temples and statues
of the Gods in Thebes in which he had lived so long and honourably,
and from which he had excluded himself by his edict against the
murderer of Laius. Lines 1379 — 82 are most naturally taken, ^Of
which (statues of the Gods) I, the most unhappy king, after having been
brought up as well as any man could be, at least in such a city as
Thebes, deprived myself by my own proclamation that the impious
homicide should be repelled by all.' I have remarked in a little
manual on Greek particles that 76 per se rarely means * at least '
(701)1/). As in V. 1377, * mt/ eyes,' it simply emphasizes ; but here
it seems to =^r^ouv. Apparently there is a contrast between the*
shrewdness of Oedipus in solving the riddle of the Sphinx and the
proverbial dullness of the Thebans. But rpafpeh is a further
difficulty, as Oedipus was brought up with Polybus in Corinth.

Camsbidge Philological Society's Pboceedie^gs. 5

Are we to acquiesce in the theory that rpaxpeU = Biarpiy[ra9, or
translate it * having heen maintained (in royal dignity) as well as
any one could be in such a dull and stupid city as Thebes ' ? — a
city which he elsewhere goes out of his way to praise. But the
logic also is faulty. Why does Oedipus say * I have deprived
myself of the temples after living in such a city as Thebes as well as
a man could do ' ? Perhaps he put aurjp rpat^h * brought up to be
a true man,' cf. Oed. Col. 393. But as dvrjp eU with superlative
generally means * most for any one man ' (Trach. 460, etc.), the
expression may be a confused one for avyp rpax}>€h KoKKurr aurjp eU.
Otherwise we must have recourse to the 76 otiosum, in which case
we had better reject the verse as spurious."

Dr. Keitnedt sent a note on the same passage, in which he said
he had omitted to remark in his forthcoming edition what had
however long since struck him, viz., that when Sophocles makes
Oedipus say he has lost all pleasure in gazing on

city or citadel, or of the gods
statues and temples^ of which I the wretch, —
the one in Thebes of all most nobly reared —
deprived myself, etc.

he perhaps meant by the emphasis cV 76 raU Orj^ae^ to express his
Athenian contempt for that illiterate and unartistic character of
the Thebans which gained for them the well-known proverb,
acknowledged by one of themselves to whom it was certainly
inapplicable — Boiwreai/ vp. And the 76 might hint that, though to
have been bred in Corinth was better than to have been reared in
Thebes, yet there was something better still, to have been educated
in Athens. As to construction, cV 76 rac9 Orj^ai^ must be taken
in close connection with durjp €ts, and KoXXitrra rpaxpeU afterwards;
* the one man above all in Thebes at least who had received an
excellent education,' i,e, 'who had been better educated than any
other man in Thebes*'


At a meeting held in St. John's College, on Thnrsday, Feb. 23,
the President Mr. Muitro, in the Chair,

The Rev. C. Badham, D.D., Professor of Classics in the University
of Sidney,
was elected an honorary member.

Yotes of thanks to the Philological Society (London), the Oxford
Philological Society and the Hellenic Society were passed.

Mr. Cooke read a paper, " On the imperatival force of the Latin
subjunctive," of which the following is an abstract.

6 Cambbidge PniLOLoeiCAL Socistt's FBocKEDnres.

"Mr. Eoby, in his Syntax (�� 1596—1604). divides the tenses
of the snbjunctiyey when nsed in commands and prohibitions, as
follows :

(a) In present, and, in prohibitions, perfect tenses.

(h) In imperfect and pluperfect tenses, of adyice applicable to
circumstances no longer existing.

On the first of these two divisions we find a note, to the effect
that 'the use of the subjunctive in the second person, present
tense, is rare, except when the subject is indefinite.' This remark
relates only to commands; for, although one example only is given,
a reference is given to � 1544, which also contains one example,
from Ter. Andr. 430, explained however in that section as a hypo-
thetical, not imperatival, use of the word.

Now this use of the second sing. pres. subj. in commands is
anything but * rare ' in Plautus— e.g.

Bacch. 417 morem geras.
ib. 1061 proin tu quaeras quid ferat.
ib. 1189 accipias potesque et adcumbes.

Cure. 271 pacem et Aesculapio petas.

ib. 457 dicas quid uelis. argentiim accipias, cum illo mittas

K'ext comes a note on � 1600. *In prohibitions to a definite
person, the present subjunctive active is found occasionally in the
comic poets, once in Horace.'

So far from this being an ' occasional ' use in Plautus, it is the
rule : compare Capt. 14, 247,- 331, 349, 393, 434, 548; Cure. 213,
539, 565, 568, 713. This list might be extended to any length.

Then as to ' once in Horace.' The reference given by Koby is
Sat. n. 3. 88, ne sis patruus mihi. On what principle does Mr. Roby
admit this, and exclude such passages as these,

Od. I. 33. 1 Albi ne doleas .... neu decantes,

Od. n. 1. 37 sed ne retractes .... mecum quaere.

The ordinary explanation, which makes the ne clause * final'
after something mentally supplied like *I tell you that,' is ex-
ceedingly clumsy and unpoetical, while the last example given
above where an imperative {quaere) parallels the ne clause, seems
conclusive in favour of a construction amply supported by earlier
Latin, and therefore familiar to Horace, whose love for archaism is
well known.^

^ It is possible that we should explain in the same way Hor. Od. rv. 9. 1
ne forte credas interitura,

and Virg. Eel. 3. 28—30

ego banc nitulam (ne forte reenses,
bis uenit ad mulctram, binos alit ubere fetus)

construing ne recuses j not " that you may not refuse (I tell you that) twice she
comes . . . . " but *'do not reriise.'' Yet it must be admitted that in both
cases the word forts tends to giye the ne a ** final " sense.

Gaicbbidge Philolooical Sooett's Pbogeeddtgs. 7

Next as to diyision (h) � 1604.

Six examples are quoted, without mark of distinction. A con-
sideration of these forces one to the opinion that no arrangement
of these tense-usages will be satisfactory, which does not separate,
or contrast, command and prohibition as expressed by them.

For instance, his first example,

Ca. non ego illi argenfcum redderem ? Me. non redderes,

neque de eo quicquam neque emeres neque uenderes.

Plant. Trin. 133—4,
is very different from his fifth

frumentum ne emisses, sumpsisses id nummorum.

Cic. Yerr. 3. 84.

In the first case non redderem is a deliberative subjunctive in the
past (*I not pay' echoed by non redderes in the same tense and
mood) ; in the second, ne emiasea, sumpsisses are respectively pro-
hibitions and commands in the past.

Precisely similar instances to that given above from the
Trinummus, viz. Plant. Merc. 633, Cic. Sest. 19. 20, are put by
Mr. Eoby under quite a different heading in � 1610.

An instance of ne prohibitive with imperfect subjunctive (a use
not given by Mr. Eoby) will be found in Plant. Pseud. 437 uel tu
ne faceres tale in adulescentia.

The following classification is proposed of the tenses of the
subjunctive in this imperatival sense : e.g,

(i) ne facias paralleled by facias,

(ii) ne feceris ,, ,, [feceris].

(iii) ne faceres „ „ faceres.

(iv) ne fecisses „ „ fecisses.

Examples of (iii) and (iv) prohibitive are, from the nature of
the case, not common.

Examples of (iii) and (iv) jussive are found in such phrases as
* At tu dictis, Albane, maneres,' which may be taken as a pure use
of the mood, as a command in the past, without any ellipse of a
suppressed protasis, e.g, * had you been doing your duty, you would
. . . .' If, as is agreed, tu facias can mean * do,' there is nothing
against tu faceres meaning (literally) *have been doing.'

It remains to complete the parallel in the case of (ii). Though
little, if any, trace remains of (e.y.) feceris in the sense of *do'
(which is quite what we should expect, since the idea could bo
expressed in two other ways), yet this imperatival sense of the
perfect subjunctive is distinctly shown in the first and third
persons ; e.g,

Yirg. Aen. vi. 46, hac Troiana tonus fuerit fortuna secuta.

In expressions of a * modest ' wish :

Hor. Sat. I. 3. 64, qualem me saepe libenter obtulerim tibi,
Maecenas. Cf. Sat. i. 10. 5.

Commonly in the ' concessive ' sense of ' suppose that,' ' granted.'

Cic. pro. Mil. Milo de Clodii reditu undo praesciuit ? quaesierit

8 Cahbbidge Philological Society's Pboceedikgs.

sane ; seruum argento corruperit. Add Hor. Sat. n. 1 . 45 : also the
much-debated dixerit ah'quis : and possibly also, thougb doubtfully,
uideris as in Cic. Phil. n. 46. 118 sed de te tu uideris."

Mr. Eedgeway read notes on Aristotle Pol. i. n.

(1) I. 2. 5. Ov^ ICapivvSa^ fnAv KaXe7 ofioanrvov^y 'Kvi/u^i/iBij^ ^e

6 KpTJ9 6fioKa7rov9 ic.T.X,. The better MSS. have ofioKdwov9, the in-
ferior ofjioKawvov^y preferred by Grote and St. Hilaire. Epimenides
wrote in hexameters : hence ofioKarrov^ {Karrrf, used only of cattU)
does not suit. o/ioKarrvov^ was read, because {a) it suited the
metre, and (J) Kairvo^ was more familiar. Kairvo^ cannot = eaila.
ofioKCLTrovi evidently expresses the same idea as ofioffirrvov^f which
= ** having a common meal-bin." Read ofioKdwov^ Doric for
6fioici^7rov9 (ktjvos)^^** with a common plot of ground." The Cretan
poet used a Doric form ; and for the retention of the dialectic form
in Aristotle cf. QaXew inf, kvtto^ is the common plot of ground
that furnishes the common lood supply {ffiTrmj), Cf. n. 5. 3
f^r/TreSov and Kapvoi. The scale of social development indicated hy
Arist. seems to be (1) original oUia. (2) o?*ro9= joint family of
Hindoos or Sclavonic house-community, where the proceeds of the
undivided property (/cwttos) must be brought into a common chest
or purse (vide Sir H. Maine). (3) The oiko9 breaks up into
separate oiKtai forming the KiLfitf (=the Russian village com-,
munity); all are sprung or believe themselves sprung from a
common ancestor {o/ior^dXaicrei). Mr. Heitland's cltt oIkU^ for
aTToiKia olKia9 cannot be accepted, ^or (a) it needs eV rather than
dv6, cf. n. 2. 2. (J) Ar. does not explicitly state that the village
is an dwoiKia of the oUla but is like it, ebticc. {c) Ar. wants to
show that the KWfiri comes from the first oiKUf and is not composed
of any chance persons inhabiting contiguous oiKiai, and therefore
uses diroiKia as expressing direct descent,

(2) I. 2. 5. Read TeketvOeU and Xtt;/3t<r^ei9 for rekeivOev and

Xtoptffdev. If construed as it stands, it is nonsense.

(3) I. 6. There are three theories of slavery here.

(A) Aristotle's own. Slavery (pvaei is j'tcst.

(B) Slavery (pvaet and vofiw is just,

(C) Slavery (fyvaei and vofivo is unjust

The corresponding theories of Justice are (A) to peKrlov xa-i
aperrji/ ^et dpx^iv (the mark of which is 0�\/a between master and

slave). (B) to tou KpeiTTOua upx'^iv, (C) evvoia,

B and C overlap {iTraWd-rreiv) through confusing pla and dperrj,
B thinks fila always implies dpe-nj^ C thinks apery implies ^/a, and
it is owing to this mistake {Std roiho) that they hold their respective
theories of justice, since, if B and C cease to overlap (StaffrdtmDv
;^ii>/>is contrasted with exaWaTrc/i/), the overstatements {arepot
\6^oi of B and C will have no force. The overstatement is on

the part of C 109 ov ^e? to ^eXrlov Kar dperyv upx'^iv mai Scffiro^etv

(the negation of Aristotle's own theory); but now instead of stating

Cambhidge Philological Society's Pboceedings. 9

in a similar way B's, i,e, that preeminence in pla gives a claim to
tt/>x€�j/ Kal ^€<nr6^€iUf he goes back to � 1, where he first touches

B's error (o r^ap i/6fio9 ojbLoXorfta t/s itmu, iv tZ ra Kara woXefwv

Kparovfieva rvbv Kparovvrtvv eivai (l>a(nv)'y and then puts B's over-
statement in a slightly different form, i,e, that, since vofio^
sanctions pla, and since v6p,o9 is Sixaiou riy B therefore holds
slavery i/6/iw to be just theoretically, but he denies it practically, for
fear of being denominated a slave himself, in case of capture. B
confines the word hovKo^ to fidp/iapoi, and thus ovSev aWo ^tjtwu
^ TO (pvaei SovXoi/, he coincides in practice with Aristotle's theory.
On the other hand C differs from Aristotle in practice as well as

There is an ambiguity in the termdperj. With Ar. it is moral
and mental excellence; with B it includes physical as well as
mental and moral ; whilst C understands it only in physical sense,
and therefore rejects slavery (/)v(Tei as well as slavery v6p,u),
B making it include physical excellence is thus led to defend
slavery vofuo.

(4) I. 10. 5. 6 ^e r6K09 k.t.X, Por the idea cf. Plat. Eep. 555 e,

rod irarpo9 eK^ovov^ roKov^ K.r,\.

(5) n. 4. 8. ovru) (rvfifiati/ei Kal rrfv otKCiorrfra r'qu 7rpo9

aWyXov9 K.r.X. Instead of governing oIk, by Sia<ppouri^€iv, and
then by change of construction with waripa as subject governing
gen. vISjv, or taking oiKcior, as a loose ace. or reading Kara rrjv oIk.,
govern oIk. by Sia</)p.y and also irardpa etc., taking w^ vl&v closely
with warepa ("regard a father as having correlative sons,^^ etc.) and

cf . eiSo^ 0)9 r^euov9,

(6) li. 5. 8. Mention of horses and dogs naturally suggests

hunting. So read eV rat9 a<^pai9 for iv roi9 a^po29.

(7) n. 5. 22. eiXu)rela9 re Kal 7rei/€(rr€ea9 Kal SovX€ia9. Modem

edd. object to Kal SovX€ia9 ; Susemihl is inclined to reject it, others
emend it. It is better to keep it as it refers to other serf popula-
tions, e.g. Tvp,i/yffioi at Argos, *A(/>ap,iu)rai at Crete. Por BovXeia so
used cf. Thuc. v. 23.

(8) n. 7. 1-5. Bead AfivveaOai instead of the very unusual active


(9) n. 8. 1. In the interpolated description of Hippodamos

(the antique Oscar Wilde) ^rjv Jrepiepr^orepov rpi')(G)v re irXriOei Kal
KOffjUAV TToXvreXeif in Be eff$rjro9 evreXov9 fiev ic.t.X., there is no

construction for ea07jro9. Susem. rejects woXyreXe^, as having only
inferior MSS. authority, and reads K6firf9y which does not go well
with T/o�xa;i/. en he is wanting in some MSS. '7roXvreXov9 was
written in the margin by a scribe who did not understand evreXou9,
then inserted beside Kotrfiw, so spoiling the construction, and en Se
inserted to make connexion. Expel TroXvreXei en Be; then it
runs rpixSii^ Te irXriOet Kal Koafiw (fashion, ** cut," cf. Aesch.

Supp. 246) e<r0rjro9, K.r.X �

(10) eirl p,ev rwv rrporepwv fiaffiXewv fiereBlBoffav (the Spartans)

Tys '7roXireia9 K.r.X. Neither does this refer to aliens (Congreve)

10 Gambbidgs Philological Society's Pbocxedings.

nor to early kings, nor to fioOaxes, but rather to tlie granting of
citizenship to Helots through the stage of N'eodamodes (cf . Miiller,
Dor. II. 45, Arnold ad Thue. y. 34), a practice in vogne as late as
the Peloponnesian war.

(11) II. 9. 20. Por hrifiar^wr^etv ainovs nvaf^Ka^ovro ical Oi

fiaatXeh read avrol. Srjfiar^torfeii/ is used absolutely, cf. Tm. 11.
The kings tried to outbid the ephors for popular favour.

(12) n. 10. 7. (rvve7riyl/^<ptaai=i not "join in ratifying" (L.
and S. and edd.), butrather=**to be mere adjuncts" (cf. Fr. assister)
to the putting of the question, cf. vm. 1 orau eTri-^fpit^ijrai apxjt
"is put to the vote," not ^^ratified^^ (L. and 8.).

(13) n. 12. 7. OdXffTos. OaXeu) is a form used in the story of
how he " struck oil," 1. 11. This is another proof of the spurious-
neSs of n. 12.'


At a meeting held in St. John's College on Thnrsday, March 9,
the President, Mr. Mtjnbo, in the Chair,

the following were elected members :

M. C. Macmillan, Esq., M.A., Christ's.
G. A. Maomillan, Esq.

A vote of thanks was passed to the Public Obatoe for the present
of a copy of the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology and the
Pullications of the English Dialect Society to the Society's Library.

Mr. Mttneo read a paper on Aeschylus Agamemnon 1156 — 1159
(Kennedy = 1 1 86—1 1 89 Paley).

He argued against both Madvig's and Mr. Yerrall's emendations
of this passage ; and proposed to read as follows :

vewu t' e7rap')(09 *I\/ov t* avaatcLTrj^
ovK oiBev oTa f^XuxTtra fiiff7jrrf9 Kvvo^y
Xe^aaa KCLKretvaaa (fyaihpovov^ BoKTfu
any? XaOpaioVf rev^erai KaKrj fv^rj,

' The captain of the fleet and destroyer of Ilium knows not what
the tongue of a lustful she-hound, speaking as she spoke and
lengthening out with a gay heart the ambush of dark crime, will
achieve — ^with foul success.'

The neut. plur. accus. of the pronoun oTa is quite regular as the
object of Tcv^erai I Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides have, each
of them, more than one instance of such neuters after rvrfxavo)'

1 " Mr. R. D. Hicks has pointed out to me that Spengel proposed x�p�<'^*'*
and T€XcoD06h [Studien Arist. 1866) and that Busse in a degree thesis (1881) htf
anticipated me in &7fHus.*'— W. R.


juJarfro9f With accent thrown back, in the sense of ' lustful ' is well
attested. The MS reading of v. 3 cannot be right, as iicTelvatra
has then no object, and the whole clause in fact affords no proper
sense. hoKrjv for hiicTiVf a very uncommon word for a very common
one, is a slight palaeographical change. For ^oktiv comp. Hesychius :

SoKcu' ivcBpatf TrapaTrfpT^aeii I and again iv Soicj' iv iTrt^ovXij, The

word therefore meant * ambush,' * hostile watching for,' ' deliberate
plot,' any sort of * dark treachery,' like insidiae in Latin, guet-apens
in French. Tho' iveSpa, in this metaphorical sense, is far less
common than its synonym insidiae or guet-apenSy it is so used by
Plato and Demosthenes. Bokti is confirmed by Homer's iv irpotoKTJmv^

and his frequent use of its verb hoKevw in precisely analogous senses.
With Jtj^s XaOpalov should be compared SoXiav arrfv in v. 1457
(1501). </>aiBp6vov9 may be abundantly illustrated : KaKovov^,

Kov(f>oi/ov9f vylnj\6vov9f Ta^vi/ov9, fier^aXdi^ovs, Kpv(f>lvovs:y Kpy^ivov^,

07j\wov9, etc.

We thus get a complete sense and construction ; and the words
well depict Clytemnestra's appalling equanimity, the long pro-
tracted dissimulation of her tongue. Compare Jeremiah ix. 8 * One
speaketh peaceably to his neighbour with his mouth, but in heart
he layeth his wait.'

Mr. Yeb�All read a paper upon the meaning of pkaineiv and

** The use of pKaineiv is very different at different periods (see
L. and S. �.v.), and its use in Aeschylus (it was contended) is not
that of Attic prose, but that of Homer and the older poets generally ;
the meaning to arrest, hinder , embarrass is required by several of
the Aeschylean passages and possibly in all ; the meaning to injure
is nowhere necessary and must not therefore be assumed. pXaTrreaOai
must signify to he hindered in Jig. 120 pXa^evra XoiaOiujv hpofiwv
and Cho, 956 Aixav .... pXairrofievav. The analogy of the last
passage is in favour of a similar rendering of o pXaTrrwv Cho. 327 ;
arrest gives as good a sense as injure in Eum. 661 olai /nrj /SXaylrrj

Oeos and a better sense in Prom. 196 ein /irj pXaTnei {thou art em-
barrassed) X07W. (Should we not read Xorfov, translating if nothing
hinders thee from telling? Cf. Ag. I.e.) A comparison of Prom. 196
with ibid. 763 suggests a corresponding translation of el fij ti9
ftXd^tf there is no hindrance. The substantive has the same sense in
Theh. 201 /tiy pxdprjv TiOeiy Eum. 491 pXa^a objection or obstruction
(cf. TyrtaeuSf 8. 42, for the expression pXaTneiv Bikij^ to hinder of
justice), Eum. 938 tevhpoTnjfiwv pXa^a the cold wind (note antithesis
to </>Xorffi69) which checks the trees. In discussing Eum. 491 BiKa*
Kal pXdpa (so the MSS.), Mr. Yerrall proposed to restore the
syllable wanting to the metre between hUa and koI by reading
biKai <ica>Kai {Biica xa/ca) by a wrong sentence. In conclusion he
criticized the common rendering of OeofiXafiovvTa (sinning against
the gods) in Pers. 831. OeofiXafieiu is equivalent to deoftXafirji
eivai to he infattuited, an early example of the formation of a verb

12 Cambsidge Philological Societt's Peoceedings.

in -eto from a compound adjective in which, the verbal element is
passive {^god-distraughf) ; cf. yfryxoppaf^eivy appuxneiv, awpaxifiv
and (in later Greek) a large number of such forms."

Mr. Jackson read two notes, of which the following are abstracts:

"(1) In the apologue of the ring of Gyges, Plato Republic^ 359
D sqq., it is related that the shepherd, descending into a chasm,
discovered a hollow horse of brass having windows in its sides,
through which he looked and saw what seemed to be a corpse of
more than human stature, rovtov Be aXXo fiev ovBev, irepl Se rfj ^ei/)!
"X^pvaovv SaicTvXtov, op TrepieXofievov iK^rjvai, To complete the sen-
tence which I have quoted, some editors give exeti/ before ovUv^
others (/)€peiv after baicrvXiov, Both readings appear in some MS.
or other, but as neither can be said to be well supported, it is
reasonable to suppose that they are conjectural additions to the
text. Accordingly they are rejected both by Baiter, who supposes
the words Ihtuv exovra to be understood from the clause last bat
one preceding, and by Madvig, who substitutes for Tx>vrov he oXXo
fiev ovBev, the words ttXovtov Se ovSev. Neither expedient appears
satisfactory. Furthermore there is something grotesque in this
description of a corpse, of stature more than human, * having
nothing on but a gold ring ' (Jowett), and it is noticeable that the
nudity of the corpse is not mentioned, either in Cicero^s paraphrase,
de Officiis m. 9 � 38, or in that of Mzami, translated by Prof.
Cowell, Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society, 1861. "Would it not
seem that Davies and Yaughan show a sound instinct when they
translate * from which he took nothing but a golden ring off the
hand, and therewith made his way out,' a meaning which certainly
cannot be extracted from the text as it stands ? In order to obtam
the desired sense and to provide government for aXXo ovhev and
Xpvaouv BaicrvXcoVf it is only necessary to omit the relative o�
after SaKTvXiov, and to alter tovtov into rovrov.

(2) It is well known that when Plato established himself at
Athens in 387, he came into collision with Isocrates, who was not
only a writer of forensic speeches, but also a professor of political
philosophy: and it is now generally acknowledged that several
of Plato's dialogues contain references to his rival. But I am not
aware that any one has considered the early part af the sixth book
of the Republic from this point of view.

(a) The apologue of the ship, with its tall, burly captain, dull
of sight and hearing, ignorant of navigation, and its equally
ignorant, riotous, crew struggling for the helm, while the skilM
navigator is regarded as a stargazer and a babbler — (which apo-
logue, by the way, seems to be developed from an elxwv of the
historical Socrates, see Xen. Memorab, in. 9 � 11, and to be directly
referred to by Aristotle, Politics iv [vn]. 2, 1324 b, 24, 30)— has
for its main purpose to show that the philosopher is useless as a
politician, only because his fellow-citizens do not invite his help.
Incidentally, however, we are told that the ignorant, riotous sailors

Cambbidge Philological Society's Proceedings. 13

apply the epithets vavriKo^^ KvPepi^riKo^j iiriaTafievo^ ra Kara vavv^
to OS av ^vXXa/ifidveiv B€ivb9 rj^ 07ru}9 ap^ovaiv rj TrelOovre^ ^ ^la^ofievoi

Toj/ i/ovicXi//)�!', 488 D. Have* we not here an allusion to Isocrates,
who, himseK taking no part in political life, taught the young
Athenian to win the ear of the S^/io^, and so to secure the helm of
the state ?

{h) At 493 A sqq. Socrates describes the ^^/to? as a monster, whose
keeper studies its whims and tempers, the meaning of its various
cries, and the means by which to soothe and to rouse it, calls the
results of his observations wisdom, systematizes them into an art,
and opens a school, though in reality he knows not which of the
monster's fancies and desires are good, and which are bad. Is not

o rrjv rwv ttoWujv xal Tramohawubv ^viovrwv opf^rjv Kal ySova9

Karav€vo7fK€vai <ro^iav rjf^ovficvo^ 493 c, here figured as the keeper
of a monster, Isocrates, the poUtical philosopher as he called him-
self, the political charlatan as Plato thought him ?

{e) At 495 B sqq. we are told that when philosophy is deserted
by her natural relations, she becomes the prey of certain mannikins,
who, attracted by the dignity which she retains even in her degra-
dation, leave their miserable crafts to seek her out. Such creatures
remind Socrates of a bald-headed tinker, who, having made some
money, goes to the bath and washes himself, puts on a wedding
garment, and proposes to marry his master's daughter, now that
she is poor and desolate. Have we not here another allusion to
Isocrates, who, as we know, denying the title of philosopher to his
rival at the Academy, claimed it for himseK ?

It would have been strange, if Plato, when in the Repuhlic he
was developing his own educational system, had not made some
reference to the system of his popular rival."

On the first passage discussed by Mr. Jackson, Mr. Yeerall
remarked that, if the relative ov is omitted, the second of the
changes proposed is unnecessary, as rovrov may be regarded as a
second accusative after Troirjaavra understood with a\Xo fiev ovBev.

The Secretary then read a paper from H.I.H. Prince L. L.
BoNAPAETE on the Latin and Romance terms of vine culture.
This paper, which consisted of an extract from the Prince's Com-
parative Polyglot Dictionary, will be shortly printed in extemo by
the Society.




At a Meeting held in St. Jolin's College on Thnrsday, May 4,
the President, Mr. Munbo, in the Chair,

The accounts of the year 1881 were passed; and it was resolved
that the same be printed and circulated among the members at the
end of this term.

The Public Orator read four papers from Professor Matob, of
which the following are summaries :

(1) Seneca Upist, 121. � 4 non desistam .... uoluptates ituras
in dolorem compescere et votis obstrepere. quidni? cum maxima
malorum optauerimus et ex gratulatione natum sit quicqnid

On this Madvig (Advers. n. 522) remarks : ** Sic codices (aut
alloquimur) et Haasius, sine sensu ; perspicuum est enim, stultitiam
uotorum humanorum ex eo ostendi, quod; quae nunc lugeamus et
quibus liberari cupiamus, ex uoto nobis acciderint et cum gratu-
latione accepta sint. sed quod Fickertus substituit, qutcqttid
ohloqmmur, etiam prauius est ; nihil enim aliud est nisi : quicquid
contra (quos aut qu od ? ) dicimus. suspicor f uisse : quicquid amolimur.
nam lacrimanus nimis longe abit."

To begin varepov TTpoTcpoVf '0/i7jpiKW9. If amolimur or lacrtnumuf
had been in all MSS., I should have suspected corruption. * What-
ever we get rid of {or weep for) began with congratulation ' is but
a wooden antithesis. Pickert (in 1842) was not the first editor to
read ohloquimur, which is found in the first edition of Erasmus,
1513, and in all editions which I have seen up to Pickert's. AUo-
quimur is found in the first edition (circa 1470), and in an ed.
Yen. 1490 fol.

If any word in any Latin author ought to have been sacred from
corruption, it is this.

Victorius in his Variae lectiones vm. 23. proved that alloquor =
7rapaiLiv0eoiu,ai=i condole, comfort. He emended the passage of
Varro 1.1. vi. � 57, which has since appeared in all lexicons :

hinc adlocutum mulieres ire aiunt,

quom eunt ad aliquem locum consolandi causa.

Cambbtdge PHiLOLOGicix Societt's Peoceedinos. 15

Muretus in liis Vartae iectiones, u, 4, followed by Bentley and by
all lexicons, cites a passage from the Troades of Seneca 619, 620,
alios parentes alloqtd in Inctu dece, tibi gratulandum est, misera
qnod nato cares. Here we have the same opposition between
gratidor and alhquor, * congratulate ' and * condole,' as in our text.
Since the days of Muretus it ought to have been impossible for
any editor to read in Epistle 121 anything but dlloquimur.

Once more. Muretus warned the world against the imperiti who
corrupted Hor. Epod. xnr. 17. 18. by inserting et.

illic omne malum uino cantuque leuato,
deformis aegrimoniae et dulcibus alloquiis.

He says with perfect justice :

** Ita interpretati sunt, moneri Achillem a Chirone, ut ad Troiam
leuaret omne malum deformis aegrimoniae tribus rebus ; uino,
cantu etiucundis sermonibus. non autem id dixit Horatius, sed
uinum et cantu m uocauit dulcia deformis aegrimoniae alloquia, id

est, ffKvKea irapafivOiay

Bentley must have forgotten this lesson, when he conjectured,
but happily kept out of his text, ac dulcibus alloquiis, * wine and
song and pleasant conversation.' It is amazing that so consummate
a scholar should make aegrimoniae depend on omne malum, Bentley
however draws a true distinction between irapafjuvOiofiai {TrapafivOiovy
wapafivOia) and alloquor {alhcutio, alloquium) when he says that the
Greek words very frequently take as their object a thing (some
misfortune, sickness, etc.), while the Latin words ordinaiily take a
person as their object. I have examined all passages, cited in
lexicons and indexes, in which allocutioy alloquium, alloquor, occur,
and find as examples of alloqui rem only aegrimoniae in Horace and
quicquid here (if indeed quicquid be accusative of the object, and
not rather, as Mr. Smith suggests, a cognate accusative : quicquid
alloquimur^zquicquid est allocutionum).

Yet again : Lambimis, on the passage of the Epodes, cites, and
Klotz and Corradini place in juxtaposition to the passage of the
Troades, a second certain instance of antithesis between gratulor
and alloquor, Valerius Maximus, n. 7. � 6 nostra urbs ....
imperatorum proprio sanguine manantes secures .... ex castris
incerta pubHce speciosas, priuatim lugubres duplici uultu recepit,
gratulandi an alloquendi officio fungeretur.

One further criticism. I can only suppose that quod in Madvig's
parenthetical question quicquid contra {quos aut qitod?) dieimm, is a
misprint for quid. He confesses in the preface to Yol. n. of the
adversaria that he wrote the volume in haste; it must also be
remembered that he is nearly blind.

It may be thought that I have made too much of a small
matter. But any conjecture found in Madvig's ^orks is almost
sure to find its way into texts. Some time since I defended the
received reading in Sen. de otio 3, � 4 (sic ad iter, quod inhabile
sciet, non accedet) from Madvig's conjecture quoi inhahilem se sciet.

16 Cambeidge Philological Societt's Proceedings.

I observed that all lexicons cite inhahile iter from the digest, and
proved that inhahilia is nearly as often an epithet of things as of
persons. Yet in Koch's edition of Seneca's dialogues so-called,
Madvig's corruption stands in the text. I take this occasion to
warn our members against implicit trust in the Teubner texts.
The editions, for example, of Seneca by Haase, and Gellius by
Hertz, are, I believe, the least trustworthy in existence.

(2) Ovid Metamorphoses , n. 503, 504,

omnia trita simul, quae sanguine mixta recenti
coxerat acre cauo, uiridi uersata cicuta.

On this Madvig (Advers. n. 82) remarks : ** ineptum et ridiculuiii
est, ceteras potionis uenenatae pkrticulas uersari cicuta, nimirum
quasi trulla. rectum est mersata, cicuta copiose affusa."

If Madvig had compared the kettle of Medea (Ov. Met. th.
278 — 280) he would have seen, what uiridi should have told lum,
that cicuta is the stem of hemlock, used to stir the ingredients of
the potion.

omnia confudit summisque immiscuit ima.

ecce uetus calido uersatus stipes aeno

fit uiridis prime.

Add that miscere uenena is a technical term (Juvenal i. 70 n.).

Ritschl long since called for a critica uannus to sift the chaff of
Madvig's conjectures from the wheat. Certainly any one who
would merely digest the criticisms which they have already called
forth, would do a good service to letters.

(3) In puris naturalihus. Seven years ago (20th May, 1875,
Journal of Philology, vi. 174 — 5) I pointed out to the Society that
this phrase had its origin with the schoolmen, and remained in
use after the reformation among philosophers and theologians. I
have since met with *pure naturals,' *mere naturals,' in Andrewes
and Jeremy Taylor (several times). Sorbiere, a Prenchmanwho
wrote a somewhat shallow account of a visit to England under
Charles II., used the phrase as a mere purpureus pannu^, as he used
the name of Des Cartes to gain credit with Dr. John Wallis. The
first example of the grotesque modem use that I have met with is
in Wieland's introduction to Hor. Epist. i. 16 : * a good old comrade,
to whom we have always displayed ourselves in puris naturalihw!
i.e. evidently * without disguise,' * as we are.'

I?o branch of lexicography has been more neglected than that
which deals with proverbial sayings of this kind : it is plain that
combination alone, and that of many persons working on different
lines, can lead to any satisfactory result. Our Journal, or Notes
and Queries, would no doubt always be open to contributions.
Many years must elapse before any one can be competent to publish
a dictionary of bur Geflugelte Worte.

(4) The dwarf Atlas of Juvenal vm. and Bohert Browning.
luv. vni. 32,

nanum cuiusdam Atlanta uocamus.

Cambridge Philological Soctett's PROCEEDnrGS. 17

I assame that the following is an unintentional parallel, and
therefore the more important as an illustration of the principle.

FasBagea from the French and Italian Nbtehooks of Nathaniel
Sawthorne (Strahan, London, 1871) ii. 11 (9 June, 1858): *his
[Browning's] little boy Eobert, whom they call *'Peimuii" for
fondness. The latter cognomen is a diminutive of Apennino,
which was bestowed upon him at his first advent into the world,
because he was so very small, there being a statue in Florence of
colossal size called Apennino.'

Professor A. Palmer (Trinity College, Dublin) sent the following
emendation of Horace, 8at, i. 6. 6 :

Non quia, Maecenas, Lydorum quicquid Etruscos

incoluit fines, nemo generosior est te,

nee quod auus tibi matemus fuit atque patemus,

olim qui magnis legionibus imperitarent,

ut plerique solent, naso suspendis adunco

ignotoSf ut me libertine patre natum.

'* The last line is commonly read as above, but there is very
scanty MS. support for ut. Out of fifteen MSS. cited by Holder
only two, and those not first-rate, have ut at first hand. Seven
have auty which Holder reads. But curiously two have aut ut, one
has ut ut, one et aut, while another L (Lipsiensis of the tenth
century) has the strange reading aut me ut. Surely this points to
some corruption. Again, instead of the simple natum of the
vulgate, although there was no temptation for the scribes to
wander, four of the best MSS. have natos, two nattcs. Hence,
thanks to Holder for his recension, I have no hesitation in saying
that what Horace wrote was :

ignoto, aut, ut me, Hbertino patre natos.

The writer of the archetype was in a hurry to bring in his
accusative, and changed ignoto to ignotos, leaving the line a foot
too long, and causing all the various corrections in subsequent
MSS. I only leave out an �."

Mr. Heitlaio) sent a reply to Mr. Eidgeway's paper * on Aristotle
Fol. I. 2. 6. as follows :

(a) ** "Why does my proposal * need eV rather than aTrd ' ? Cannot
the notion of descent be conveyed by d7r6 ? To the quotation given
in my pamphlet, p. 8 note, add Thuc. n. 15. � 5 ol hr^ ^kOrjvalujv

"Iwve^, VI. 76. � 3 oaoi airo a^Gbv ^aav ^vfifia')(oi,, VH. 57. � 4 *'\u)ve9
<}vre^ KOI aiP ^ AOrjvatwv^ Odyssey X. 350 — 1 r^it^voirrai S^ apa rat fy'
€K T€ KpjJVetVV WTTO T oKaSUJV €K & lepwv TTorafiCbv .... K,r,\.

^ See Proceedings above, p. 8.

18 Cambetdge Philological Society's Peoceedings.

How does n. 2. � 2 ajQPect the matter? oUla ix ttoXciv^ seems to
me to denote order of 8eqtience, not descent — * it will cease to be
7r6\i9 and become [will have become] oiKia,^

(b) I freely grant that Aristotle does not say * that village m
ajroiKia, but eoiice.^ But I do not grant that this is fatal to my
proposal. I take av olxia^ eTvai after eoiKc to mean ' seems to be
descended from.' And I still believe this to be a reasonable
meaning, and one directly derivable from the Greek as I timidly
proposed to read it.

(<?) That I also hold that * Aristotle wants to show that the
KwfiTf comes from the first olxiaf and is not composed of any chance
persons inhabiting contiguous oUlai^ is I trust sufficiently clear
from the words of my published pamphlet. Indeed how any one
could on any other supposition propose to read air oiKia^ instead of
cLTroiKia oiKia^ I cannot for the life of me understand. As soon as
any one shows how this sense is to be gathered from the traditional
reading, I shall cease to desire a correction of the text, but not
sooner. I think I have shown that to retain aTroiKia is on the fac9
of it simply a violation of the meaning of the word. T merely seek
to lay the ontLs probandi on those who would adopt what seems to
me a far more revolutionary proceeding than my hypothesis of a

Mr. EiDGEWAT remarked in reply that an emendator incurred the .
mtis probandi (1) that the text is corrupt, (2) that his proposal
conforms to Greek usages. With respect to the first point
Mr. Heitland says ** one MS. omits oUia^ after airoiKia,^^ but he
omits to tell his readers that the aforesaid MS. (P*) is only one of
the third-rate MSS. Aristotle wanted to express the idea that one
community {KuyjuLrf) stood in the relation of offspring to the other
(olKia), The familiar terms firjTpoTroXi^ and airoiKia expressed such
a relationship to every Greek, so that Aristotle had the familiar
word aTToiKta ready to hand to make clear his meaning. At the
most it would be a very slight extension of the term to make it
include the parent oUca which was the nucleus of the Ktv^irj, But
even this is unnecessary. Ar. regards the kw^itj as being composed
of the oiKiat of the children of the original man and woman, upon
whose death, their oUca ceases to exist, in which case there is no
extension of the Uteral meaning of aTroiKia,

With regard to the second point he maintained his former state-
ment that €ii/ai airo rivo9 was not good prose Greek in the sense of
* offspring,' and that statement was confirmed by the fact that a
scholar like Mr. Heitland had only quoted in support of it the
well-known line :

ov f^ap airo hpvo'S iffffi 7raXai(f}aTOV ovB airo ireipr^^^

and had in his note been only able to add four quotations, none of
which applied to the case. Por in the fresh Homeric quotation
r^it^vovTai cLTTOf not elffi, is used, and the three quotations from
Thuc. come under a weU-known use of ajro, expressing remote


origin or dependence, like €*? aTro SwayoTjys, oi avo TWaTtDvo^y etc.
With reference to the first Homeric quotation {\) pace tanti viri it
was rather inconclusive to quote Homer in support of a construction
in Aristotle, and (2) the line cited is one of the most disputed in
Homer as regards its meaning. As however Plato quotes it in the
sense given it by Mr. Heitland, it is worth while to see what
evidence he gives on the subject of elvai awo tivo9.

Plat. Apol. 34 D Socrates says ovB* e^w aTrb Spvo9 ovS* airb 7r€rp7j9
we^VKa (not eifii)y aW^ ef dvOptvTrtov (not aw' dvOpwTrtvv) Again
�rep. 544 D ij OL€i iic Spv69 woOev rj iic irerpa'S ras TroXiTeia^ f^if^vetrOai,

Surely Plato was a fair judge of fourth century Greek Prose, and
these two quotations indicate that he will not use etvai dwo rivo9 on
any account. This is confirmed by the fact that no instances of
such a construction are found in Eonitz's Index Arist., Ast's
Lex. Plat., Schweighaeuser's Lex. Herodoteum, Pindar, Homer,
Wellauer's Lex. Aeschyleum, Beck's Ind. Euripidis, Beatson's Ind.
SophocUs (Oed. E. 415 may be an exception), Aristophanes
(araveUa), though we do find dvo used after rfir^veaOai, <f>vvai,

W€(pUK€vaij etc.

Mr. Paley communicated a paper on Aesch. A^. 1229 (Dind.)
ovK oiSev oTa t^Xtvffffa fiKTrfrij^ icvi/o9 k,t.X. In defending the vulgate
against the changes proposed, he thought it not improbable that

rev^erai was the future of revxu). Cf . Hesych. rev^ofiivri* Troirjffovoa,

The construction is oTa Xe^atra ola rev^eraif quia tcerbia dictis ae
lon^o sermons traetis quidnam sihi demum paratura sit. The tongm
is mentioned and not the person because it was the speech that was
to put the king off his guard and which led him into the snare.
<paiBpdi/ov9 seems genuine, and </)aiBpov ov9 ib not supported by
<f>aiBpo79 waiv Ar. Pac. 154 which is rather to be compared with
micare aitrthua, etc. Mr. Paley could not accept Mr. YerraU's
explanation of rvxrjv urrj^ * a chance of hurt,' and his construction
of Ti;7xa�'€�i/ rvxfv as a cognate ace. He could see no difficulty
whatever in Biktjv "krvf^ XaOpalovy * like a doer of mischief in secret,'
as we have 5/iciyi/ (paiSpa^ (reXrjvri^ in this very play. Mr. Munro's
reading hoiniv and explanation did not seem to have the genuine
ring of tragedy : but he was undoubtedly right in taking fjnajiTq as
' lewd,' a sense expressly recognized by J. Pollux.

Mr. E. 8. Thompson suggested that the MS. reading might
stand, but punctuated thus :

ovv oiBev oTa r^Xubaaa fii<ri^Ttj9 icvvo^^
Xe^aaa KVLKTeivaaa <paiSp6vov9 SiKrfv^
<1tij9 XaOpaiov rev^erai KaKrj rv^iy.

" Knows not what things the tongue of the lewd she-hound, that
with gay heart hath uttered and spun out at length her * justice,'
may achieve by an evil chance of treacherous mischief." The
speech of Clytemnestra (w. 855 — 913 Dind.) is seemingly pointed
to by the word iicTeivaaa : cf. v. 916. This speech, though doubt-

20 Oambeibge Philological Society's Peoceedings.

less a trap, is at the same time a plea or apology. In our passajge
it might be possible to translate hUrjv **plea." But instances of
hiKfi in this sense are hard to find ; for in Eum. 491 the reading is
uncertain ; and Sept. c. Theb. 684 is a line of very doubtful
genuineness. However one may suppose Cassandra to quote the
word hiKTiv from the last lines of Clytemnestra's speech, where
^iicri and BiKaiuj9 are both prominent.


At a meeting held in St. John's College on Thursday, May 25,
the President^ Mr. Muneo, in the Chair,

The following were elected Members :

C. E. Chambees, Esq., Trinity College.

"W. G. Mitchell, Esq., M.A., Trinity College.

T, G. Tuckee, Esq., B.A., St. John's CoUege.

Dr. Kennedy read the following paper :

" Various editors and translators of Thucydides have variously
interpreted the concluding words of this chapter. My own view,
which differs in some degree from any given in the volumes of
Arnold, Poppo, Goller, Kriiger, Elassen, Meyer, Bloomfield,
Sheppard and Evans, Dale, Crawley, Jowett, may perhaps be
best understood and appreciated if it winds up a free translation
of the whole preceding context. In the funeral oration of Pericles
(Thuc. n. 32-46) the 42nd chapter immediately follows the orator's
splendid picture of Athens as the glorious ornament and pattern of

A�o hrj Koi ifirjKvva ra Trepi t^9 ttoXciv^, hihaaKoXlav re Troiovfuvo^
fiTJ Trepl vaov y/iiv eivat rov ar^wva koi 0T9 rwvhe ju,rfBev virapX'^i
o/u,oiu)9f Kal TTji/ evXot^tav afia i(f} 0T9 vvv Xef^w (f)avepav (rnfieloi^
KaOitrrd^. koi eiprjrai ain7J9 ra p^r^iaa* a t^ap rrjv woKiv vfivufffa at
rwvhe Kot rwv roiwvSe aperai eKoer/u.ifffaVy xal ovk av woWots wr
^l^XKijvwv laoppowo^ uyaTrep rubvhe o \6f^o9 rtbv epr^wv (jyaveln. Sok€i
Se jbioi SrjXouv avBpo^ aperrfv wpwrri re firjvvovaa Kal reXeirratu
^e^aiouaa y vuv . rCbvhe Karaarpotfyq, koi r^ap roc9 raWu yelpoai
SiKuiov rrjv €9 rov9 TroXejbiov^ virep t^9 7rarpiBo9 avBpar^aOiav Trpori-
OeffOaC ar^aOvo f^ap xaKov aXpavieravr€9 Kotvw9 yttaWoi/ ih^Xfjaav
^ €K rwv iBiwv epXayjrav, rwvSe Se ovre irXovrw ri9 r'^v eri airoXavaiv
7rpori/iyffa9 efiaXaKterOrj, ovre 7revia9 iXTriSiy tt;s k&v en hiacfw^uiv
avrrjv TrXovrrjffeievy avafioXrjv rod Setvov iiroiijffaro' r^u he t&v
ivavrlwv rifuvpiav woOeivorepav avrwv Xa^oWes xal KivSvvtvv a/ui
rovhe KoXXiarov vofiiaavre9 efiovXriOrjffap fier avrov rov9 fiev ripM'
peiaOai r&v he iipieaOai, iXTrtSi jxev ro axf)ave9 rov Karop0wceiy

Gambbidge Fhilologica];. Society's FBOCEEOnras. 21

iiriTpiyfravre^y epf^iv Be irepi rov TJhrj opiavevov (KJiiaiv a{noi9 afeovi/res
W€7roi0evaif xal iv axnvi to afivveaOat koi iraOeii/ fiaWov yf^rfffajbuevoi
1} TO fcV^oWes aw^eaOai to fiev ala')(^pov rov Xof^ov ^jj^vfyoi', to S* ipf^ov
Ttp atofiari VTrifieivav^ koi Bi iXax^<^ov xaipou rv'^rf^ afiua ar^/u,ij t^s
B6^7J9 fiaXKov 7j rod Beov9 aTnjKKaf^rjaav,

* I have dwelt at length on the character of onr city for these
reasons : — I wished not only to prove that people without any of
the advantages resemhling ours have not an equal stake with us in
the present contest, hut also to justify clearly hy striking facts
my eulogy of the men over whom I am now speaking. Its chief
grounds are contained in what has been said already ; the glories
of our city which I extolled were conferred on her by the virtues
of these men and of others Hke them : and there are few Greeks in
whose praises word and deed would be shown so evenly balanced
as in this case. In my opinion the death of each now lying before
us amply proves the worth of a man, whether it be the first
indication or the final confirmation. For in favour of those whose
conduct in other respects was less creditable, it is but just to put
forward their bravery in war for their country's cause : they have
cancelled evil by good, and the benefit of their public services has
been greater than the harm of their private acts. iNo rich man
among them became a coward from over-esteeming the prolonged
enjoyment of his wealth : no poor man put off the hour of peril in
the natural hope that even yet he might escape poverty and be
rich. Such aims they embraced with less longing than the chastise-
ment of their enemies: and, as they deemed this moreover the
noblest of dangers, they frankly welcomed it, resolving, while they
punished the foe, to let their aims stand over ; trusting to hope for
success in a future which they could not see, but for work in a
present which they did see minded to rely upon themselves. In
that work they thought more of resistance even to the death
than of safety by retreat : the word of shame they fled from, the
brunt of action they personally bore, and in fortune's briefest
crisis, full of high-wrought determination, free from dread, they
passed away.'

My version of this chapter will, I hope, for the most part
explain and defend itself. Eut the concluding words need special

It will answer no good purpose here to tax particular scholars
with this or that error. There are three points to be decided, and
as my opinion on each of these has been long considered and held
with f uU conviction, the shortest and simplest course is to state it.

1. Does rvx^i^ depend on Bt e\a;^/<rrov KaipoVf which stands
before it, or in a/u,a aKfiij, which follows it? I reply without
hesitation, on the former *of these, as all editors but Arnold have

2. It is a necessary consequence of the last answer, that the
genitives So^rj^, Seov^, depend on ax fin , not on the verb dirrfWdf^ffaaVf
which accordingly means ' departed,* * died* or * passed away.*

22 Cambbidoe Philological Socmrr's PBOGEEDnres.

3. I hold, in contradictioii to commentators and translators
generally, that Sd^ij9 cannot be rendered fflory without making
the passage nonsensical.

Elassen's note here is the best and deserves attention. He
says : * S6^ij9 contrasted with Sdov^ must have a subjective
meaning.' I cordially agree. Eat he unhappily adds : ' not that
of indeterminate, but of glorious expectation : when their souls
were not full of fear, but in the highest anticipation of the glory to
be gained.' This exegesis, in my judgment, involves a confusion
of tiiought. Aofa has two general meanings and uses: one of
these, * opinion j^ * expectation f^ is subjective : the other, * reputatum^^
^ glory f^ is objective. These senses cannot coexist in the word:
it must mean one or the other, not an amalgam of the two, as
Klassen tries to make out. What he first says is true, that here
the subjective sense is required ; the objective sense {glory) must
not be tiirust in over and above.

I do indeed believe that the subjective sense given here by Thucy-
dides to ho^a is very large. I think he uses it to comprise the sum of
all those feelings which he ascribes to these men in their death-
struggle ; and, as flying from disgrace was one of these, desire of
glory is so far implied. But we should be wrong in saying that
this is specially denoted by the word ho^a, and that the word is
chosen for the purpose of including it. Perhaps the nearest
approach to the meaning may be * the determination to do {ihihoao
avroTi) what they deemed their duty' as soldiers and patriots.
Some may prefer * expectation.'

Again, I believe that the expression fiaXXov rj is one of those
which grammarians would place under the figure fjuelwai^ as when
ovK iXaffffixjv is used for fiel^wv, I believe that the presence of
* fear ' is not implied by its use but excluded entirely : in short
that fiaWov rj = Kal ouri, I have written above, *full of high-
wrought determination, free from dread, ^ I might write, to the
same effect, * when determination (or expectation) not dread, was at its
highest.'' If I am asked why Thucydides should bring in heo^ at
all, if there was none of it, I reply, because a death-struggle seems
to all beholders or hearers a dreadful thing : and what they think
of it they are tempted to ascribe to those engaged. * Yes,'— the
historian would say — * it is in its nature Setvov, but each of these
men, when in it, felt not the ^eo?.' See above ' ovre . . . •

aua^oX'^v rov heivov iTroirjawTo.^

Probably rhythm and alliteration had some share in determining
Thucydides to use the word ^of jy? as opposed to heov^,

I set this passage in the late examination for the Chancellor's
Medals; and, as I found most of the candidates clinging to the
notion of ^ gl&ry,* this circumstance, added to my sense of the
general mistake of commentators, has led me to publish my own
interpretation of the passage.

As Arnold's view was advocated by a member of the Society, I
am constrained to state it, with my objections.

Cambeidge Philological Society's Peoceedhtgs. 23

The concluding words of this chapter Arnold represents and
renders thus: *Kal Si iXaxtfrrov Kaipov, and in the briefest moment,
rvxTj^ afia aKfirjj when their fortune was at its height, t^9 So^ij9
fiiaXKov rj TOO heov^ aTnjWdf^ijffaVf they were taken away from
what was their glory rather than their fear ; ' then adding :
* Death found them not dreading his approach, fearful and miserable,
but in the height of their glory; for the battle was not their
terror but their glory.'

Against this view I have to urge :

(1) Bi* iXaxitrrov xaipov is a phrase which lacks support. Thuc.
would have written Si iXt^ltrrov without subst. Tv^i/s added
makes all the difference. See xaipou rvx^tv often ; and tvx^ *^�*
Kaip69 Plat. Leg. iv. 709.

(2) rvxrf^ afia uKfirj is an objectionable arrangement. It should
bo afm cLKfirj rvx^j^.' Neither can it be rendered, 'when their
fortune was* at its height : ' nor can good reason be shown for any
such expression being here brought in. But Bi iXaxitrrov xaipov
rvxrf9, * in fortune's briefest crisis ' (or * opportunity '), i.e. * a
fatal struggle, very soon decided,' gives excellent sense. See
Kriiger. If this argument be accepted as settling the government
of rvxy^f the subsequent interpretation of Arnold falls to the
ground. But let us consider it on its own merits.

(3) As to hTrrfWarfTjaavy it can mean * were freed ' ; it can mean
' were removed ' (Aiitig. 422) ; it can mean * were removed by
death,' i.e. 'passed away,' 'died.' So Eurip. Her. 995 Keivov
^ a7raX\ax0evro9f ' when he was dead.'

(4) As to Bo^a, how does it obtain the meaning ' glory ' ? The
primary sense * opinion ' is used objectively, ' the opinion of others
about some one.' See Soph. Oed. Col. 258 rl Spa ^o'fiys, ^ t/

KXijSdvo9 KaXij^ fJbcuTrjv peoverrj^ w^Xrifia f^ If^ver ai ; 14 OW let US ask,

what rational sense is there in saying, that a man who dies in
battle ' is removed from the opinion of men concerning him, not
from his fear '? or even * is removed from his glory (obj.) not from
his fear ' ? * The glory ' is purely objective, i.e. his renown in
the minds and mouths of others ; his fear belongs to his own mind,
if existing at all. Arnold's translation 'what was their glory,'
and his paraphrase, 'the battle was not their terror but their
glory,' are both alike 'blendwerk,' verbiage disguising the truth
of the Greek original by the ambiguous sense of ' glory ' in English,
where it can mean not only fame,' ' renown,' but also ' boast.'
' Awake up, my glory.' Arnold, like all other interpreters, was
unable to rid himself of the idea that S6^rf9 here means glory, and
thus he has (almost unconsciously) striven to attach to it some
subjective element, which may qualify it to stand in contrast with
Seov9. The Scholiast, whose version condemns Arnold's con-
struction, is possessed with the same idea of ^ofi/9. He writes :

cLKfid^oine^y (^i^ffiVf iv evSo^ia Kai ov%e SeiXta aTriOavov, Such,

with slight variation, is the tone of all editors, Klassen not

24 Cambbibgb FHiLOLoeiOAL Society's FBocBEDnres.

escaping the infection. It is true, that S6^a, in its objective nse,
may often be rendered 'glory' without impropriety, particularly
in the orators; yet I doubt whether in any place 'reputation'
might not express its singular, and * good opinions ' its plural use,
in the laudatory sense. I ask then, confidently, is it not impossible
to say that these men, dying in their brief struggle, ' were re-
moved from their reputation, from the good opinion entertained of
them, not from their fear ' ? They were not removed from that
* glory ' ; they gained and kept it by their fearless death, as the
orator declares in the very next chapter (43) ; Kocvy (yap ra ffiv/juna

SiSovre^ Ihla rov afyrjptvv eiraivov iXajuL^avov^ xal rov ra4pov iiriarjfioia'
toVf ovK iv vo KeivTai fiaXKoVy aW iv tf ff Bo^a avrwv wapa rw ivTVXovri
hel ical \ofyov Kal epf^ov Kaipw deifivriaro^ KaraXeiirerat, dvhpujv t^ap

iTTt^avwv TTaffa f^rj Td^o9 k.t.X, On all these grounds I contend
that ^ofgys must be rendered here by a purely subjective word,
whether it be * determination ' or * expectation.' I am indebted to
my friend Mr. Jackson for the following passage, which strongly
supports my adoption of the former rendering : Plato, Kep. 412 s

Tijpijreov . , , el (/xvXaKiKot eifft rovrov rou ^ofy^aros xai firjTC fyoiyrewo-
fievoi firi'te ftia^ofievoi eK^dXkovatv iiriKavOavofievoi So^av r^v rov

woieiv he2v a rrj woXei /HeXTitrra, To the same ejffect are the various
places in which' Law is spoken of as ttoXitiic^ ^of �, * the determina-
tion of the State.'

(6) Finally, Arnold and his advocate prefer the rhythm given to
the sentence by his explanation. If A. and B. interpret a passage
differently, each usually finds a better rhythm in his own interpre-
tation. Arnold thought his clauses 'better suited to the natural
pauses of the voice.' This I do not perceive : and while, in bis
arrangement, the combatants trip to their * removal from glory not
fear ' in trochaic rhythm without any pause —

/laXXov ^ I rov B€0V9 dTrrjXXdfyijaaVf

in mine, the orator, after saying, in sustained tone, xal Si^ iXaxifrrov
Kaipov rvxrj^i is supposed to raise his voice and utter with proud
dignity the words d/bua aKfuij rrj^ Sd^rj^ jULoXXov rj rov Seovi, then
dropping it slowly to the *sad and solemn cadence dTnfXXar^rjaav.
This rhythm seems to me the more suitable of the two to such a
place as this. But I should not have raised the question of rhythm
except in reply to what has been said on the other side."

Dr. Kennedy gave a new interpretation of Euripides Troai0�
(ed. TyrreU), 1167—1172.

* E/c. w (f}LXra9*y W9 <toi Oavaro^ rfXOe BvffrvxT^^.
el jjiev f^dp €0av€9 irpo TrdXewSj rjPri^ rvx^uju
ryajUiwv re xat t^s laoOeov rvpavviSo9,
ju,aKapi09 TjerO* ai/, ei ri rwvBe fjuaKapiov,
vvv h* avr iSwv fiev f^vovs re aij '^vx'fj reKvov,
OVK oiGu e'x^pijau} o ovoev ev oofiois e\u)if.

Cambbtdge Philological Soctett's Peoceedings. 25

After quoting Mr. TyrrelPs note Dr. Kennedy said :

** Mr. Tyrrell has, in correspondence with me, very cordially
accepted my interpretation, which, placing a comma after 7J/0V9 re,
and connecting (ttj ^vxrj with the verb olaOa, understands that
dative to mean '* with 'thy (disembodied) spirit,^ In the classical
^eKviUy as Homer and Yirgil show, the shade or disembodied spirit
remains what it was at death. And here Hecuba condoles with
her murdered grandchild Astyanax, calling his death hvarvxijh
because he did not Uve to be a warrior, a husband, and a sovereign,
and so to possess in the nether world the memories and prestige
belonging to these characters. I take avr^ to be aina, those things,
I render freely thus : —

Ah darling ! how ill-fated came thy death !

If thou hadst died before the city's walls

Its champion, after reaching man's estate

And marriage rites and godlike royalty,

Blest thou hadst been, if aught of these is blest.

But now — ^though thou didst see, didst recognise

Those things, my child — ^thy spirit knows them not :

None didst thou use, when all were housed with thee.

The peculiar antithesis of participle Ihwv fiev r^vov^ re and finite
verb exprfffw Se deserves special notice."

Mr. EoBY read a paper on points arising out of the Gromatici
Veteres of which the following is a summary :

Arcifinius, The derivations which have been given of this word
from arcere fines or a/rcere uicinos are all unsatisfactory in meaning
and impossible in form, the position of the verb and noun in such
a compound being reversed, arcifinius is ** bow-bounded." The
ancient arcus had often the shape of a double curve joined by a
straight line and was thus a symbol of an irregular line, arcifinius
ager is land with wavy natural boundaries as opposed to land
bounded by the straight lines of Roman surveyors. So Balbus
describes it (p. 98), extremitatum genera sunt duo unum quod
per rigorem obseruatur, alterum quod per flexus : rigor est quicquid
inter duo signa ueluti in modum Imeae perspicitur, per flexus
quicquid secundum locorum naturam curuatur ut in agris arcifiniis
Bolet. . .

Decumanus is the name of a balk between centuries, normally
running E. and W. It has been the subject of wild speculations.
But it must be derived from decuma and must mean * of the tenth.'
The centuria was a square plot of land divided into iugera, two
iugera forming an heredium or original allotment and there being a
hundred heredia in the century which were not separated by balks
but only by marks erected by the proprietors. Measuring along
the cardo or a side after the tenth heredium comes a balk, limeSf
which thus belonged as it were to the tenth plot. Hence limes
decumanus and then simply decumamcs.

Mr. Eoby then controverted Mommsen's view of the difference

26 Cambetdge Philological Society's Pkoceedings.

between agar uiritanus and ager coloniariua (Corp. Inscr. i. pp. 88,
89), viz. that colonial land was divided into centuries by balks and
given by lot and only to a relatively small number of persous,
which was fixed by a law authorising the distribution : whereas
ager uiritanus was divided into saltus of four centuries, it was not
given by lot and to all Roman citizens subject only to their
willingness to receive it and the amount of distributable territory.
Mommsen's seven instances of uiritim diuism ager prove nothing,
as he does not assert that uiritim cannot be applied to a colony,
and in two of them according to Livy (iv. 47, 48, v. 24) the
distribution was colonial which shows that L. did not recognize
the distinction. In Festus Paul JE^it, Z. 373 uiritanus ager
dicitur qui uiritim populo distribuitur (the only place where
uiritanus is found) populo cannot be pressed to mean the whole
people. Nor does Varro -ff. .ff. i 10 quattuor centuriae coniunctae
appellantur in agris diuisis uiritim publico saltus prove anything, for
the saltus mentioned by the surveyors was twenty-five centuries
(p. 158). The third place from Siculus Flaccus, Diuisi et adsig-
nati agri non unius sunt condicionis; nam et diuiduntur sine
adsignatione et redduntur sine diuisione. diuiduntur ergo agri
limitibus institutis per centurias assignantur uiritim nominibus,
may be translated freely * Divided and assigned lands are not all
held on the same tenure. You may have a division of lands
without their being assigned, and you may have restoration of
lands without their being divided (cf. Grom. p. 162). Division is
the separation of land into centuries by regular balks, assignment
is the appropriation of the land to individuals by name.' Assign-
ment and division are thus different things, and are not always
found together. Assignment may be made without division
(Prontinus Grom., p. 4, Siculus Placcus, p. 160, a passage which
seems to have escaped Mommsen) and division without assignment
(cf. p. 163). nominibus assignare, to register the land in the
proprietors' names, is opposed to per centurias diuidere, not as a
different mode of allotment, but as a different part of the same
process, uiritim diuidere is not necessarily division to all the
people but merely to individuals of the body or number specified.

Mr. Roby next criticized Mommsen's rendering of Cic. Brut. 36.
i36 (Corp. Inscr. i. 77), Sp. Thorius .... qui agrum publicum
uitiosa et inutili lege uectigali leuauit. Appian B. C, i. 27 gives
the history of the public land after C. Gracchus. The Gracchi had
prohibited the sale of the allotments and imposed a tax on the
holders. Three laws followed. The first removed the prohibition
of sale, the second put an end to any further allotments and allowed
the holders of lands yet undistributed to retain them by paying a
tax or rent, the revenues thence accruing to be distributed to the
people in lieu of the lands. The third law removed the rent.
Appian attributes the second law to ^irovpio^ B6pto9f probably a
misreading of Qopio^, So far most writers are agreed. The
discrepancy which thus arises between Cicero and Appian Mommsen

Cambetdge Philological Societt's Pboceedinos. 27

would remove by translating the Cicero " Sp. Thorius .... who
by imposing a rent on the public land, relieved it from the faulty
and impolitic law of the Gracchi : " an impossible translation not
justified by Cic. LaeL 20 � 72 where no ambiguity could arise. It
IS not a difficult supposition that Appian confused the authors of
the second and third laws.

Mr. Roby finally criticized some remarks of I^iebuhr's in his
Roman History, ii. 140, on the tenure of public lands. The
passage of Hyginus (Grom. p. 116) there quoted refers to leases of
the land, not of a mere grcJund rent, proximi qmque possetsorea
would be suitable tenants of the land, but not suitable as sublessees
of a ground rent, per centurias {locauerunt) probably here means
not 'by a century at a time,' but in the several centuries, as in
p. 121 and p. 125.

Mr. Jackson read a paper on Aristotle Politics i. 6. 1255 a,
7 sqq., of which the following is a summary :

To the question stated at the beginning of ch. 5 — irorepov

fieXriov Koi hiKaiov rivi SovXeveiVy rj ov, aWa iraaa SovXeia Trapa

(Pvaiv ioTiv ; — Aristotle makes answer, that, as it is advantageous
to both and to each, and therefore just and natural, that body,
appetite, beast, and female should be respectively subject to soul,
reason, man, and male, so it is advantageous to both and to each,
and therefore just and natural, that a man who is inferior in aper-n oi
soul should be subject to a man who is in that respect superior.
At the same time he recognises the obvious fact that the custom of
selling prisoners taken in war sometimes reduced to slavery men
who by right of aperri should be free. His contention is then, that,

since theoretically hel to ^cXtiov kut* apeTTJv apx^iv koi heo'n-o^eiVy

in practice some slavery is just and natural, some slavery is unjust
and unnatural.

It had been maintained however in the course of a contemporary

(i) by X, that all slavery is unjust and unnatural, because
violence is wrong ;

(ii) by Yy that all slavery is just and natural, because might is
right ;

(iii) by Z, that all slavery is just and natural, because what is
legal is just. Thus, while Aristotle declares that in practice some
slavery is just, some slavery is unjust, X holds that all slavery is
unjust, Y and Z hold, though on dijfferent grounds, that all slavery
is just. The purpose of the sentences 1255 a 12 — 21 is then to
show that the positions of X and Y are open to attack precisely in
so far as they differ from the position of Aristotle himself.

Now the Xo^oi of X and Y, (i) all slavery is unjust, (ii) all
slavery is just, iiraWaTTovaLv i i.e. slaveries which X pronounces
to be unjust are pronounced by J' to be just. What is the reason
of this difference of opinion ?

28 Cambhidoe Philological Societt's PitocEEBDrGS.

The reason is, tliat, as aperij with proper appliances is able to
exert force or violence, while force or violence implies ar^aOov of
some sort or other, X and T agree in the hasty assumption that
where there is /3/a, there there is aperli, and consequently suppose
that they differ fundamentally in their notions of ^Uaiov. That is to
say, starting from the assumption that pla is always accompanied
by dperfi, and consequently ignoring Aristotle's distinction between
pla accompanied by aperri and pia not accompanied by a/ieri}, X
condemns all relations between inferior and superior which are not
based upon evvoia, * loyalty,' * the villing obedience which an
inferior renders to a kind and considerate' superior,' and F takes as
his principle Might is right.

When however the two theories are withdrawn within their
proper limits, so that they Biearaffi x*^P^^ ^^^ ^^ longer eVoX-
XcLTTovaiy the adverse theories {arepoi \6fyoi), i.e. the theory which
X advances against Y and the theory which T advances against J,
&ave neither force nor plausibility as against the modified doctrine
maintained by Aristotle, w9 Sei rb piXnov icar^ apeTqv �/>x^**' '*'

Two words in this passage need a word of explanation: {a)
€7ra\\aTT€iv means primeirily, as Mr. Heitland points out, *to
overlap ' ; whether by superposition, e.g. t^ iiraWa^ei t&v Saimikiop

460 B 20, or by juxtaposition, e.g. o<ra iTraWaTrei rov9 ohovTM

70V9 ofe?? 501 A 18 J for secondary uses, see Iliad xin. 358, Plat.
Sophist 240 c, Aristotle 501 a 22, 1317 a 1, 464 f 28 : in this
place it describes the mutual relation of two incompatible sub-
contrary propositions : {h) for the meaning which I have given to
€^j/om, see Xen. Oeeon. 7 ^ 37 ; 9 �� 5, 12 ; 12 �� 5—8 ; 15 � 5
(in all which cases the oiKenj^ is evvov^ to his master and mistress) :
Aristot. Nie, eth. ix. 5 �� 3, 4 : Polus Pythag. ap. Stob. Jloril. T. 9

p. 106 oiKcrav TTOTi heairoTa^ evvoia^ heaTroTav Se ttotI Oepairovrai
KaBe^iouia I Herodotus v. 24 ovBeva eivai trev evpoetrrepov . . • •
KTtipartvu Trdtntov iffri ri/iitunaTov uurjp ipi\o9 svvero^ re koi tvvovi

(where Darius addresses Histiaeus).




At a Meeting held in St. John's College on Thursday, Oct. 19,
the President, Mr. Muneo, in the Chair,

The Secretary read a paper by Dr. "Rayuan of emendations on

Trachiniae 628,

TTpoffBer^fiaTf avr^v 0^ d)9 ihe^afjuqv <pi\a}9y

we should read yrpoirBer^fiaO^ , avr^v 0^ w9 iBe^afirjv 0/\{tf9, where

avrfjv is for ifiavrqv,

Philoctetesj 684—6,

09 ovT €p^a9 7 IV ovre votr^iira^f
a\\ iff09 €v iff09 avTjp

From the corresponding lines, 696 — 700,

ovB^ o9 0€p/iioTaTav aifiaha KTjKio/ievav eXKeu}^
iv0ripov 7roho9 '^Trioiffi (pv\\oi9
KarevvdireieVy ei ti9 efi'u-iaoi * *,
(f>oppdho9 €K T€ 709 eKe7vf

(Campbell's text)

where a subst. such as v6(to9 is much wanted, and Karevvdaeiev has
probably a short a, KaTevvd^to being the Sophoclean form rather
than Karewdtv, cf. l^ach, 95, Ant 833, Track. 1005 (transitive),
we should probably read os oirri pe^a9 ovre vo(T(f}laa9 Tivd a complete
senarius. In the second Hne for the unmetrical iv taoi^ we should
read dvoaloi^y i<ro9 dvoaioi9 'just as if profane,' being like itro^
dvavBuj, Hom. Od, 10. 378.

Oed. Col. 277, 8,

Kai flTJ 06OV9 7lflG3VT€9 €lTa T0V9 0€OV9

fioipai9 (yy. U. fioipa^y fioipati) voi€iff0€ fiijBa/ii&s. yr^feiffffe Be
pXeTreip /iiev avrom 7rpo9 rov evffe^rj ^portov ic.t.X.


'iUx jglLilif- H}?

lyyTfru" ant flic JL

5sF preiTBd Inr die Ime m
lasra.. Tic .laitlL. tl 905).

TI llii* &iz;f iirjWTi rf TiHmf ii?^ i "Sie Bne qiioted; (ii)
■ftAa*#�?iT-i*nT* XSi:. iz. ZiL Ix. T ':� T5if finslacT erf T�'^/>�=a
tnnn^tT k*?:nitt ^^sfria. _ -7nitr7ii5v PiiL I ft. 1^ ; ^ir^ The supposed

^r 'tjiuM^m'7-i*j%'^ !2SL niJTxicEL ^flniBff-3Dsik�r, not JmtMfgH miiVer;
'E;^ '.n izjia:�z7 v^ ffliirtii -Eigisgc Ajuu^k. \j^B��a^; (it) Dr. Thomp-
2�9�. rengk^. "^ h sEfsxzs xij^^y isss:: \ri^Mfiii^ widioiit a snbstan-
tire Y-^ocjd ijsrre si:^^<E5S^i xxj iczter ikiniDCKi^ but that of a man of
Laii�a ^ Ckrs. p. 1^^^. Tbfse <i?in4dpraticins make it very
impr^fhMe tfiat skt teskI v^^ caljai A^MsiW, hat di^hUy pro-
MU that �r>i=^ sodi tcsscI vif calkd A ^mv. If tiiis inference is
correcty the dooble-han^elkd joke is exploded.

B, (�^ On tozmng the joke of Goigias into direct narration, we
find lie gives not only the jest, hnt the inteipretatioii thereoL For
eiuai "fap r.X. depend on eptf, whilst Ar. resumes his own disconrse
with ^ari V air\ov�, (i) Xo interpretation whicli leaves out
oXfLovH can. be right. Some one perhaps not seeing that the point
lay in the double meaning of crffuov/Kfo^, and knowing of some
hardware manufacture at Larisa, and that Grorgias alluded to it,
wrote a note to the effect that there was a class of mechanics called

Gahbbidgb Philological Society's Pboceedings. 31

larisa-makers, and this got into the text. The point of the joke is
that the biffjuovp^ol and okfjLoirotol manufactured Larisaean citizens
and fLansaean) SX/jmi by the same method, just as though it were
said in reference to Sheffield that the Master-Cutler and the blade-
makers manufacture guildsmen and blades on the same principle.
The gender of oKfiov^ suitrng Aapitraiov^ lends force. This wiU
preserve the reference to the peculiar industry of Larisa, and give
due prominence to the important word o\/iovs, hitherto ignored.
If there was authority for Aapiaaiowoiov^^ it is easy to see that it
was manufactured by some one from Aapiaalov^ and woieiv to
correspond to oXfioTroiom.

m. 9y 2. eiTrep ovv Koi ^fioKparovvrai five^ k.7,\, William

renders this m democratiam versae fuerunty after which Susem.^*'

reads Kara Brfp-OKpariav eTpdirovTO. Did not William take hrifioKpa-

Tovvrai as if from Bfj/noKpaToto, and hence his version ?
m. 3, 6. wffTrep Kal Trora/iiom K.r.X, Hef . to dicta of Heraclitus.

m. 3, 7, eiTrep r^ap Koivtovia ri9 y woX-ts, etrri Se Koivtovia TroXtrwv
vo\n€ia9 ic.T.X.

The MSS. reading is to be retained. For y woXt? is the subject
of Koivwvia irok. ttoK, For the sense cf. m. 4, 1. For construction,
Kotvwvia is found commonly with either kind of gen., and at in. 9,
14 is found again with two genitives, though Susem. after Scaliger
inserts x^P^^ with one of them, evidently on account of the pre-
ceding sentences, where however both genitives are objective,
whilst in both passages quoted one gen. is suhj,, the other ohj.

m. 5, 9. aXK oTTov TO ToiovTov ewiKeKpv/ii/ievov itrriVf d'7raTij9
X^piv tGjv avvotKovvTujv itrrlv. This is explained by vm. 3, 11 — 12,

^10 oaoL rjhri ffvvoiKOV9 iBe^ai/TO ^ iiroiKov^y ic.t.X., where avvoiKelv

is used absolutely as here. From this it is plain that avvoiKoi =
joint settlers of alien race (to firj 6fi6<pv\ov)j in the original diroiKia ;
€9ro�ico� = immigrants of alien race into an already established
airoiKia. So here the meaning is that at the founding of a city the
main body of citizens of the same race are a&raid of ofPending the
smaller bodies of different race, which are their avvoiKoi, Conse-
quently dirdrri^ x�'P''^ they, do not openly state in their constitution
the doctrine that /hctoikov^ /nrj fieTex'^tv twv n/iwvy though determined
to put it into practice in due time.

in. 9, 11 — 14. In this passage scholars are troubled by finding
r^evTf mentioned with oiKiai, KtopMi and 7r6\i9, whilst in i. 1 Ar. is
silent about them. The reason is that in i. 1 he is getting at the
7r6\i9 synthetically. First the oUlay then the Kihfiriy lastly the
K&fnat disappear in the iroKi^, Here on the contrary he is proceeding
analytically. Starting from the iroKi^, he perceives as units within
it first oiKiaiy then fyeViy as evidenced by Ovalaiy etc. Next the
sutures of the 761/1/ within the iroki^ indicate the divisions formerly
existing between the separate KUbfiai before their avvotKiafko^. Thus

32 Cambbidge Philological SodEir's Pboceedikgs.

in the process of analysis the 761/7 are of the utmost importance,
whilst in that of synthesis they have no place, as its function ceases
on the combination of Kwfiai into the Tillage. The Kuyfifi is the
earlier stage of that of which the 761/05 within the city is the later

m. 12, 6. el r^ap fiaXKov ro rl fJuef^eOo^ ic.t.\. Eject /laXkoVf

which has got in from ivd^iWov, and carry on avfi^XrjTov from the
preceding sentence.

IV. 11, 3, ivffre firjhewoTe vwoXei'Treiv elpf^o/nevov^ /c.t.X. i'n-iXei'

TTciv (Koraes), elpr^opdvoi^ (Madvig), vwoXeiTreiv intransitivum
(Susem.). vBara is the subject and viroKeiTreiv is quite regular, cf.

Hhet. I. 13, 20, VTroXeiTroi ^ap av o alu)v BiapiO/novvra, and again

Ehet. in. 17, 21.

rv. 12, 2. ra Kvpiivrara rSbv ap')(€iwv avaania,

Ar.'s idea is that the citizens' messes should be held on the scene
of their employment, e.g. messes of 0v\aiC€9 in (pvXaicrypiay so here
that of magistrates, which is of course the most important. Insert
ra before twv apx^^^wv ; it would easily fall out after Kvpiwrara,

rv. 12, 6. eVet 5e to 7r\n9o9 — eh i€p€i9, eh dpxovra^, wpeirei
Kal 7WV iepetvv avaavrla irepX rrjv r&v iepwv oiKoSo/nrffiaTivv e^^iv rrjv

ra^iu. There is no need to change apxoPTa9, All citizens can be
called equally oirXiTai or apxovre^, For they are each xaTa fiepo^y
cf. IV. 9, 10. T^i/ before twv lepwv is wanting in 11^ and is not
translated by Aretinus. iepwv is used as adj., though twice in this
chapter used as noun = temples. Just as Ar. wishes the </)v\aK€9
and magistrates to have their mess at the scene of their employ-
ment, so here the priests are to have theirs in the buildings of the
temple. Omit ttjv with 11^, and read for it ra, and read oiKQ^op^rf
fiara. The disoider arose from olKohofirjfiara being changed to
agree with iepwv, ra had nothing to depend on, was omitted by
one family of MSS., and in the others changed to rrfv in the vain
effort to get a construction. Eor use of irepl with aoc. cf . next sect.

rv. 14, 11. Koi Set 70,9 TOO lieXTtovo9 atpeTtvTepa9 eivai loh
Bvvap,€voi9 TVf^x"'^^^^ ^ iraffdbv rj to 11/ Bvotv. Omit ^ before TraawVf

which is to be taken closely with TVf^x^^^^^f ^•�' ^ ^� have the
choice of all 7rpa^ei9y etc.

rv. 16, 10. eTi Be rj BiaSox'fj twi/ reKvivv T019 p,ev apxofieinj9f

K.7,X. The whole passage deals with the adjustment of the ages of
the sexes. Ar. takes as point of departure the synchronous cessa-
tion of fertility and seeks so to adjust their ages that the offspring
may have the maximum of physical and intellectual vigour. Men
must marry before 37 ; for (a) women would be too young, and
(h) the men would not be in their intellectual prime, which is 49.
The men have just turned their physical aKfirj at 35 (cf. E.het. n.
14), and are physically beginning to go down the hill (though
steadily increasing in mental power) ; but this is counterbalanced

Caicbbidge Fbxlological Soctety's Pboceedings. 33

by the fact that the women are just coining to their physical prime.
Thus when the limit of reKvoiroua is reached, 54 for men, 35 for
women, the man is at the end of his intellectual^ the woman at the
end of her physical aK/nrj, Eead then Tai9 jllcv for to?9 /tei/, just as
in the preceding sentence ray ^ev and tov9 Be are contrasted.

IV. 17, 6. y r^ap Tov irvevfiaro^ xaOe^i^ iroiei rqu la'xvv rots
vovovai, For TTovovtri read Trvevfioaiv

V. 2, 5. €(m Be KOI T&v iXevOepitov, K,r,X, Kead tlov aveKevOepwv^
or perh. aveKevOeplojv,

VT. 1, 1. KOI ri9 7019 7r\ei<rroi9 fita iraatVj ic.t.X. For Tratriv
read vanrlp ; cf. rat^ 7r\ei<rrai9 iroXetn infra.

Till. 11, 31. axf)eiBu>9 r^ap eavrwv e'x^ov(riV'-^y[rv'X7J9 r^ap ihveiaOaiy

cf. Eud. Eth. II. In each place there is no object for wvettrOai.
Ar. intends to paraphrase ivi/eTtrOai by ac/yeiBtv^ exovaiv. Head the
good Ionic word ovea6ai=to think light of, and for gen. cf. Od.
V. 379. That it is a very old mistake is plain from Plutarch and
lamblichus, who quoted it with a whole clause of varied form to
give an object for wvetaOai.


At a Meeting held in St. John's College on Thursday, .November 2,
the Presidenty Mr. MuifEO, in the Chair,

The following were elected Members :


H. C. LEVA]n)EE, Esq., M.A., Pembroke College, Oxford.
"W. Gr. RuTHEEFOED, Esq., M.A., Balliol College, Oxford.

Dr. Hagee communicated a paper on Richard Croke^ of which
the following is an abstract. **MulHnger in his history of the
University of Cambridge, p. 527, refers to Croke's going abroad
and his stays in Paris, Cologne, Louvain, Leipsic, The brief
mention there can be filled up from several sources. In Paris he
attended the lectures of Aleander. Croke was in Leipsic for some
time during 1514 (letter of Erasmus, 1514? in Erasmi epp. L.B.
p. 136, and letter of G. Spalatin, dated March 2nd, 1515). In the
autumn he visited Mutianus, who probably at this time called
Croke* s attention to the fine library at Wittenberg. From there
he went to Cologne, where he must have been lecturing for some
time previous to his matriculation (March 20th, 1515), and which
he left almost immediately afterwards.



As to Croke's visit to Louvaia we only know from his En^
gratuiatorium that it preceded his second stay in Leipsic, irherfr hft
matriculated in the SummeraemeBter of 1515, i.e. after April 23rd,
the day of St, George, when the election of the rector takes place.
It is strange that Croke does not allude to tiia former stay in
Leipeic in the Etieomiuni ; yet if the date of Spalatin's letter is
rightly given by Krafft, we are forced to this conclusion. His stay
at Lonvoin cannot have been long enough to allow of his making a
mark there, as hia name does not appear in the works on the hiatoiy
of that TTnivereitj. Croke was not the first who taught Greek at
Leipaic, but the first to teaoh it with success. Of his success there
is no lack of evidence. Camerarius used to tell in after life how
be suddenly became famous from, having been the pupil of so
renowned a teacher. The same ia clear from letters of Erasmns to
Linacre, and of Emscr to Erasmus (Erasm. epp. p. 1592), from
what Croke himself says iu hie encomium of the professors- of
philosophy, law and history, and from the hatred of the "SophistB"
(Biicking Hutt. opor., p. 276, 19 foil., cf. Carmen Rithmioale
magiatri Phil. Scliauraff, p. 200, 48 foil.). At the wish of Geoi^,
Duke of Saxony, the faculty of arts decreed Croke 10 guilders
" ut ad famam noatre Achademie et profeetum studiosorum legeret
gratis unam loctionem in grccis litteris." Soon the feculty
petitioned the Duke for a stipend of 100 guilders for Croke ; and
when no immediate action was taken, and the same sum was
offered him from Prague, a petition was sent up to Dresden signed
by fifteen Masters of Arts (March 12) repeating their request in
still more urgent terms. Whether their prayer was granted or
not, we do not know : but it is certain that Croke was very well
satisfied with the generosity of the Senate and the Duke.

Iu 1517 Croke returned to Cambridge where he proceeded to
his M.A. degree in the same year.

Croke'fi literary activity at Leipsic includes (1) an edition of
Ausonius (1515). It has a Greek motto, and Greek phrBses and
quotations appear in the prooemium. In the Eneomium Croke
quotes Greek freely. There arc ten quotations in it, five from
Jlomer, four from Hesiod Opera, and one from Plutarch, rrom
tha type, the absence of accents, spiritm and i suhgeripium, we can
clearly see that Greek printing was not far advanced. The
printer's name is Yalentin Schuman. In 1516 Croke published his
' Tabulae graeeos litems compendio discere cupientibus soae qnam
neoessariae,' Schuman being the printer. This was not the fiist
Greek book printed with moveable type in Sasony as was formeriy
supposed ; but it shows a great advance ou ihe first one, m
elaa'^a^il jrpoa tuiv fpafiftaTutv printed five years before at Witten-
boi^. It is dedicated Aeademie, Senatiti et Pbihsophonm : i�
vrht Lipaimii, eorone, by whose wish as ho states in the prefaca
(date February 26) he had undertaken the work. In its 60 pages
he treats his aubject in the following order decUaatio artkuionm,
did, nomimim (la {as, T/a), ua (a, i/), ma {on ae), na [loa) ; d*

Gambbidge Philological Society's Pboceedings. 35

impa/risyUabis ; deoUnationea nominum eontraetorum : m to vni�,
then vooffjf next numeralia de formattone comparatworum et auperla-
ttvorum de verbis (five conjugations Tcpinvf irXeKtOf hvvrto, Y^aWw,
and verbs in -/i� ; de verbis circumflexis) ; de adverbio ex quarto
Theodori, !N"(Jt the least interesting feature about these tabulae are
two poems printed with it addressed to Mutianus, In the same
year (not, as Horawitz says, in 1519), Croke published a transla-
tion of the fourth book of Theodorus Gaza which he dedicated to
the Archbishop of Mayence and Magdeburg. In the preface Croke
again quotes Greek, Homer and Theocritus ; and the arms of the
^chbishop (one eagle, two lions, four griffins) suggest to him a
Latin elegy. For this and his other publications the Senate
of the University granted Croke copyright for four years. One
other of Croke' s poems requires mentioning. He accompanied the
Reprobatio orationis excmsatoriae pica/rdorum, etc. of Hieronymus de
Ochsenfurt by a poem beginning quia hanc perfdiam tuam picarde,
Croke' s work at Leipsic bore rich fruit. Mainly in consequence
of his exertions Greek was formally recognized as part of the
TJniversity curriculum (1519). Eor he left behind him a pupil,
P. Mosellanus, well qualified to succeed him. Croke was greatest
as a teacher of grammar as Camerarius says. He was widely
known amongst the German scholars of his day as is testified by
his correspondence. Nor was the intercourse broken off when he
returned to England. He could not however induce P. Mosellanus
to come to England.

Mr. Yeeeall read papers upon the following subjects :

(1) '^EjLLTTovffa (also y'^E/u^TTovira and ^ efiirovaa).

This word, the name of a certain bogie or apparition, appears to
have signified rj /iiop</>a9 Seivas aXkaaaovaa, 8?ie who assumes various
strange forms j or more briefiy, the changing one, (See the passages
cited from Aristophanes and Demosthenes in Idddell and Scott , s.v.)
In form it is, like Me^overa, ILpiovaa, 'ApeOovtraj etc., a participle,
and points therefore to the existence of a verb e/LLireiv =2 jLLop(/)a9

aWdfftreiv. A compound of this participle iTripm-qvaa (cf. iiraX-

Xaaaeiv) taking several forms successively -^ovldi be restored in Plato

Crito 46 C ovh^ av TrXeiiv rwv vuv Trapovrivv tj twv TroWwv hvvafii's
&ff7r€p 7raiBa9 yfia^ jiop/ioXvrrrfTaif Sefffioits Kal 0aparov9 iwefiwovaa

KOI x/3i;/iaTtt;j/ d^aipdffeis — not though the powcT of numbers should even
surpass her present effort to frighten us, like children, in ever-shifting
shapes of fine, imprisonment, and death. The MSS. reading, 'eV*-
irifiirovaa, though apparently simple, is intrinsically bad; the
metaphor of the Mopjuto or bogie affords no place for the notion of
sending, and in any case it should be not i7ri7r€jLL7rov<ra but i</>i€iffa.

Professor Skeat suggested that the root of efiweiv was perhaps
FefiTT', a labialised form of wank-ishift), from which are derived
among other words the Latin vaeillor, the German wanken, and the
English wench.

36 OAMBBiDaE PHTLOLoaicAL Societt's Fboceedings.

Mr. NrxoN observed that, even if the verb efiweiv and its
participle cfiirovaa were not in use, Plato might have coined
iwe/iTrovira, figu/ring as a hogie, direct from the proper name '^E/uLwovoa

(2) Eur. Med. 1159 foU. and 947—963.

On the former passage it was pointed out that it appears to be
constructed with careful ambiguity, so as to maintain the parallel,
indicated elsewhere in the play, between the poisoned Koafto^
(bridal raiment) sent by Medea to her rival, and the Koafio^ used in
adorning the dead for burial. '

Upon the latter (947 foil.) the writer advanced the theory that
the poison of Medea, as also that of Deianira in the Trachiniae^ is
applied and concealed by means of the xp^f*^ ^^ scented oil used by the
Greeks and Romans for garments worn on festal or solemn occasions.
In connexion with this theory were propounded the corrections
Xptfiartvu for xRVf*^"^^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^ aupa for avr^a in 982. The
arguments, which are too long to be presented in an abstract, will
be published hereafter.


At a Meeting held in St. John's College on Thursday, Nov. 16,
the President, Mr. Muneo, in the Chair,

The Secretary read a paper from Prof. A. Palmer (T.C.D) on
A lost Greek proverb.

*' The proverb is the equivalent of the English * Pine words
butter no parsnips.' It is to be found in Plant. Poen. i. 1. 9, a
passage given in Geppert's text as follows :


Saepe ego res multas tibi mandaui, Milphio,
dubias egenas inopiosas consili ;
quas tu sapienter docte et cordate et cate
mihi reddidisti opiparas opera tua.
quibus pro beneficiis fateor deberi tibi
et libertatem et multas grandes gratias.


Scitumst, per tempus obuiam si est uerbum uetus.
nam tuae blanditiae mihi sunt, quod dici solet,
gerrae germanae, edepol Xrjpoi \rjpoi meri.
nunc mihi blandidicus es : heri in tergo meo
tris facile corios contriuisti bubulos.

Cambbidge Philological Sogiett's Psoceedings. 37

Here the slave MilpMo, vexed at his master's empty praise with
nothing substantial accompanying it, says he has a proverb, for
that is a regular use of iierhum in Plautus, which will express what
he thinks. But in the ordinary reading no proverb is there, but
an awkward and common-place line, where the proverb ought to
come : gerrae germanae edepol Xrjpoi Xrjpot meri, which is about as
far from the MSS. as a line can possibly be. The MSS. give for
the latter part of the verse :

haedecol lyrae lyrae,

that is to say, without the alteration of a letter : al Be xoWvpai
Xvpaif that is, ' but loaves are the real lyres ' or, * presents are
true praise.' Does edepol occur so seldom in Plautus that the
scribes of the Palatine MSS. were puzzled by it and changed it to
haedecol? If so, what idea did they attach to this remarkable
word that they unanimously substituted for it ?

In the ordinary reading Xrjpot is an old correction for lyrae, and
meri is an addition tacked on by Weise, who also tries to make out
a proverb in the first line of Milphio's speech by reading

scitum est, per tempus si obuiam is, uerbum uetus,

making out that per tempus si ohuiam is is the old proverb. But
(1) there is not much of a proverb about that phrase in any
application ; (2) it has no application here ; (3) quod dtcisolet shows
that the proverb is yet to come."

Mr. Palet sent a paper "On Mr. Munro's Emendations of
Euripides " {Journal of Philology, No. 20, pp. 233 — 252).

In fr. 59, we should retain rfj rvxa- The poet is speaking of
persons whom fortune or fate* has actually made slaves.

In fr. 149, read w for Sv, "No man is fortunate who is not favoured
by heaven in most of his endeavours." There is plenty of authority
for ffvvOeXeiv, " to have a common will."

No alteration is required either in Medea v. 966, K€iv7f9 6 Saijutov,
K€ii/a vvv av^ei Oeo^, * hers is the luck now ; that is the side which
the god is making great." Cf. for the neut. pi. Fers, 397.

Er. 162. Hence we should retain 7 TJprj<n9, comparing for the
sentiment Aesch. Sicppl. 975. The poet says, amorous young men
are not easily kept safe at home, for ** Love laughs at locksmiths."

In the last verse, which is a common metaphor from a bird or a

bee alighting, read if 5' civ (or if B^ av) irpoal^rj Kvirpi^, yBiarrj
Xa^eiv. TTpoaTJrai is a gloss on irpoffi^y.

In 167, we should punctuate thus,

y rfap BoKtfffi^f waTpcLfft fiaiBa^ elxivai
ra voXXctf ravrrf r^ir^verai TeKVwv wept.

In 230, KaXKioTov ix ^aias (springing out of the earth) vBwp
cannot be altered with the least probability.

38 Cambbidoe FHiLOLoaicAL SooiEirr's Peoceedings.

In 250, I read oTrtP€9 ZoKOvtn fi^v, (f>povovai 5' oifhev 'x^pvifiA'nov

inreprepov. The gloss (ppoveiv to ^oKovai caused it to be coirapted

to (f>povov<n.

In fr. 264, ra? ri^a? ra? rCbv pportav seems an obvious and
certain correction.

In fr. 324, v. 5, I propose apporri^ for rjpriT/i^, and v€(pvice ^
for 9r60i;ic' 0^6. Cf. Baech. 968.

In 414, it seems clear from Hipp. 645, XPI^ ^ ^* yvvaiica
wpoffTToXov fiev ov vepaVf that here too we must read wpoffiroXov
wepav (for iav). In the third line, from v. 1005 of the same play,
we should read

TO. 5' altrx^pa fiiaet kov icar' 6(f>0aX/M�m ep^e*.

In '457, for ovairo, proposed by Mr. Munro, idiom requires ovaio.
In 514, ru)v Kevujv ho^aafioTwv seems a case of abstract for

concrete, "those vain pretensions" for ** those vain pretenders,"

viz. to true nobility.
In fr. 554, we should not alter (jiavetaa, perhaps a metaphor

from sighting land in a storm, as in Agam, 872. The addition of

fnaXKov to a comparative is easily defined.

In fr. 582, v. 7, read ^pa^avra t' ecTretv rov \ap6vra t' elSevai,

In 608, Tvpapvh may be a nominativm pendens. In v. 3, xpewi/
appears to be an accusative absolute, like heop and ho^av. *' "When
one has to rob (ruin) one's friends, or put them to death, there is
the greatest fear always before us lest they should do something,"
viz. in anticipation or in revenge. Compare Oeov^ tov9 ir^r^evei^
TTopOeiv, Theh, 578, where the person is used in place of the
possession airuoOetv seems rather weak ; it should at least be
airwaai, and the construction oT^ irKetara (/)6po9 TrdpetTTiy '* those
who are most dangerous " is doubtful.

In 620, V. 3, for etrj ffo(/>o9 read e^coi (ro<f)d9, exeat sapiens, Bibfta
rfaia9 Kkeitnov may mean a cave or closed cell in the earth.

In fr. 652, read Kal Xor^oi. " Hopes and promises (or professions)
often deceive mortals." Cf. Antig, 389, for ylrevhetv.

In fr. 664, ttovo^ fiovooOel^ dvev tvxtj^ means toil without the
necessity of being a workman.

In fr. 739, t/ooVw is genuine. The poor aids his inherited
nobility by his disposition, t/ooVw.

Er. 773 should be read xax ry9 rvxrf^f from the mere fact of being
rich, heivov Be toi9 TrXovTovtri touto <y* epxpvTov, " Because Plutus,
who is blind, is their friend, have they also blind minds by the
very luck that has befallen them ? " That is, " Shall we say that
they become fools from the mere fact of being rich ? "

In fr. 794, read xav <roi Bia</>0€ipa9 Soku), In 1.3, for the gloss
fiaOriarj read eTrian^ffei In the last verse read, trv 5' aino9 amhv
€pj(/)avi^e fioi \er^u)v.

In fr. 801, read ei ri9 for iariv in v. 1.

In fr. 830, I think wKrjv ofiu)9 should be retained, nisi quod
nihilo mintis, etc.


In fr. 892, fiij rov atnov seems to me clearly right, "the same
person should not always be in misery." Compare Troad. 1206,

ovheli avT09 evrvxet wore.

In fr. 1039, v. 4, I think for e^a)9ev we must read i^uy fiAv,
*^ Wealth is indeed a thing that is exempt from troubles and the
cares of business, but it does not bring the credit which results
from bravery."

In fr. 1046, v. 2, read /oltj ire<lyuK^ evhoi^ fiAveiv, " A woman who
is not of herself disposed to stay at home is watched to no purpose ;
to do so only makes bad worse."

In fr. 1052 aih/iaro^ seems clearly right.

Mr. F. T. Aenold communicated a note on Eur. LT. 1419.
The MSS. read :

ri (jyopov rov AvXiBt
afiV7ifi6v�xnov Oe^ TrpohoutP oKiffKeTaif

in which the phrase vpoBouvat (f}6vov Oea is very strained. We
should read

y </>6vov rov V AvXiBi
afivTifioveuro^ Oeav Trpobova* aXitTKeraif

"who, unmindful of the sacrifice at Aulis (i.e. her rescue by
Artemis), is now caught betraying the goddess." Badham has
already given

^ </)6i/ov rov V AUXiSi
afivrifiovevrov Oeav wpo^oua oKiffKcrau

<p6vov=i(f)6vov €V€Ka, * forgotten so far as the sficrifice is concerned' ;
which however does not give such good sense, provided it is
possible to establish the active meaning of djLLvrj/novevro^^idfivTifitvv,
The only passage quoted in the Lexicon for this is Diog. L. 1, 86,

aXKorpluov Be KaKwv dfivrf/iiovevrov eivai, which WOuld prOVe nothing

if the words were Diogenes' own. But they seem to be a quota-
tion from Bias of Priene (so Orelli Carm. Sentent.), which fact
seems to make the alteration to dfii/7ffi6vevro9 worth considering.


At a General Meeting held in St. John's CoUege on Thursday^
Hovember 30, the President, Mr. Muxbo, in the Chair,

The Secretary communicated an emendation from Prof. A.
Palmeb, T.C.D.., of Mart. vn. 46 as foUows :


" Tlie lines are

Commendare tuum dum uis mihi carmine miinus

Maeonioqne cupis doctius ore loqui,
excrucias multis pariter me teque diebus

et tua de nostro, Prisce, Thalia tacet.
diuitibus poteris Musas elegosque sonantes

mittere : pauperibus munera pexa dato.

I have printed the last line according to the reading of the
Palatine (P), one of the best of the MSS. of Martial. Others haye
plma or plana. Mr. Stephenson repeats Prisce with Beyerland.

I conceive however that pexa very nearly represents the truth.
Martial says, * You may send high-flown poems to the rich : to the
poor send plain presents without poetry.' This latter idea Martial
I think expressed thus :

pauperibus munera wefa dato.

we^cLy 'prosaic,' 'plain,' * unromantic,' is just the word required?
and pexa is the nearest Latin word it could be corrupted into."

The Secretary read a paper from Mr. W. Leaf on the etymology
of three Homeric words.

afiipirfvyeis, Ebeling Lex. says ^^ a/jxpirfvyei^ (fyvAoi/, vett.
X^A-o's) ' utrumque validis artubus instructus ' Goebel, * utraque
manu agilis ' Doed." But both these derivations disregard the �,
and the second, from rfvi69, overlooks the fact that adjectives in
-€i9 always come from substantives (see Goebel de EpithetU
Somerieis in -€�s desinentihus, Vienna, 1858, esp. p. 24). It is
much better to take it from *7iJi/ "crook, curve." Cf. 7vj/s
curved piece of wood in a plough (afterwards ** plough-gate,"
iuger), r^vaXop hollow of hand {if^-r^vcCK-l^eiv), curved breastplate,
7ai;Xo9 jug, <^ad\ost merchant vessel (Curt. Gr. Et. no. 127). Perh.
the Xifivrj Tv-f^'alrj II. 2. 865, lake of the hollow (ace. to Strabo
called afterwards YLoXorj, ? KolXrf), Hence f^v-i-ov of bending parts
of body, moveable extremities, 7v-�-os crooked and maimed. Hence
a/A0t7viye�y might =** with a crook on both sides," bandy-legged;
cf . KvWo7roBia)p of the same god.

afi(t>i^vo9 is used eight or nine times as epithet of a spear and
is generally explained to mean ^''utrimque manihua instructtiSf" i.e.
with a point at each end. But djux/)i means " on both sides," not
" at each end." As before, the loss of the c is without analogy.
And there is still the serious objection that Homer would scarcely
have called the metal points at the butt and the ** business " ends
of the spear <^vta or hands. Hoffmann and Doederlein refer the
word to the point only and explain it '* curved on both sides " asof
a flat point more or less oval with cutting edges. But this is a

Cambbidge Philological Society's Fboceedings. 41

property of the point hardly obvious enough to give its name to
the whole spear. A more obvious one is the elasticity of the long

shaft. Compare II. 13. 504 ai')(jLrj Bi* Alvelao KpaBaivo/ULevij KaTo,

rfata9 ujxf^To, Hence afi<pirfvo9 seems to mean */ bending both ways,"
** flexible."

aficfueXiaaa, All the received explanations of this word (1)
" curved at both ends," i.e. with rising from a poop : (2) " with
curved ribs : " (3) " curved " in plan, i.e. of a ywa��-oval shape, do
violence to the meaning of the root /eX (wo/-w-o, etc.), which
always means "wheeling," ''revolving," or "twisting" and does
not pass into that of simple deviation from a straight line. So of
the foot in circling dances (Eur. Or, 171) ; in Homer of chariots
wheeling round, warriors rallying from a flight. " Twisted both
ways " does not express in the least the gradual curve of a ship's
form. The old interpretation " rowed on both sides " is not to be
defended by Soph. Aj. 358 SXiov ekiaawv TrXdrav, of the oar-blade
which approximately describes an oval. And of course the word
cannot come from root eyo, row. The Schol. on II. 2. 165 explains

it as d/jj(/)oT€pw0€v . <rrp€^o/u.€va9 xal ipeaao^va^ wllich suggests the

simplest and most suitable explanation, viz. " wheeling round loth
waySf"^^ i.e. easily steered, handy. Although the word is generally,
i.e. 14 passages out of 20, used of ships drawn up to land, this has
little weight in view of the very conventional use of epithets in

The President criticised in detail Mr. Paley's observations on
Euripides read at the last meeting.

Addendum f p. 12 (2). — Since this note "On references to
Isocrates in the sixth book of Plato's Repuhlic " was communicated
to the Society, the writer has discovered that Teichmiiller calls
attention to the subject in his Liter arische Fehden im vierten
Jahrhundert vor Chr. pp. 103-105, 1881.

Mratum, p. 20. — ^For Mitchell read Michell.




SOCIETY. 1882. No. L— III.





in puria naturalihua

utrttanus ager


cLfUJ^iiKiaaa . .

^Xd^rff fiXaTniv ,

EfiTTovffaf efiTreiv .

'^Oici/os misreading for ^QKcapo^

Cicero, Orator and de Oratore, MS. of

Croke, Richard ....

Greek Proverb, a lost .

Juvenal* s Dwarf Atlas and Robert Browning

Latin Subjunctive, imperative force of

JSTiebuhr on Roman public lands

Plato and Isocrates

Vine Culture, Latin and Romance terms of

CiCEBO, Brut 36. 136
Horace, Sat, i. 6. 6
Ovid, Met, n. 503
Maetial, vn. 46 .
Seneca, J^. 121. �4

Aeschylus, Ag, 1156-9

1229 .
Abistotle, Eth,N, in. 1. 17
Pol. I. n. passim
I. 2. 6 .



















Cambbidge Philoiogical Society's Peocebdings. 43


Aeistotle, Pol, I. 6 27

ni.-vni. passim ..... 30

ExTBiviDES, Iph. Taur. 1349 39

Med. 947-63 36

966 37

1169 �^ 36

Tro, 1167-72 24

Fragments passim 37, 41

Sophocles, 0, C, 211, 8 29

0. T, 1380 4

Philoct. 684-6 29

Track. 628 29

� Fragm. 343 30

Plato, Rep. 359 d sq 12

Thucydides, II. 42 20


Aenold, p. T 89

BoNAPAETE, H.I.H. Prince L. L 13

Cooke, A. B[. ........ 5

Hager, H 33

HAYMAJf, H. 29

Heitland, W. E 17

Jackson, H 12, 27, 41

Kennedy, B. H 5, 21, 24

Leaf, W 40

Mayoh, J. E. B 14

MuNEo, H. A. J. M 10, 41

JSTlxon, J. E. 36

Paley, p. a 4, 19, 37

Palmer, A. 17, 36, 39

KlDQEWAY, W 3, 8, 18, 30

BoBY, H. J. 25

Skeat, W. W 35

Thompson, E. S 19

Yeerall, a. W 11, 13, 35

"Waldstein^, C 2, 4



Accounts 14

Elections 1, 10, 20, 33

Honorary Member ....... 5

Yotes of thanks 1, 5, 10

Miscellaneous 1






There can be no donbt that in classical philology we are in a state of great
activity. All nations are interested in enlarging the science of antique life and in
contributing to the discovery of early art remains which can give new conceptions
for the aesthetic tastes of the present generation. All research however becomes
more difficult as the field for labour increases ; therefore, a review intended to give
a survey of these investigations would be fully entitled to provide for a general want.
This is the purpose of the " Berliner Philologische Wgchenschript,"
which will give :

Reviews and Notices of important and interesting new Publications.—
Extracts from the scientific Periodicals and. a complete Survey of
those smaller Philological Treatises given in the Dissertations op
German, Dutch, Northern, and Italian Universities and in the
Theses of French Universities, and in the Programmes of the
Classical Schools of Germany, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland,
Holland, Italy and Russia. — Reports of Scientific Societies. —
Notices of the Progress of Discovery. — Original Communications
AND THE Correspondence of Travellers and Expeditions. — Dis-
cussion of the Pedagogical Questions of the day.

The ** Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift ** will have weekly from
thirty-two to forty columns largest 8vo. Price (including postage) :

48. 60. QUARTERLY.

All Booksellerfi and Newsdealers will be able to supply the ''Bkblinkr Philolooibchk
WocHKNscHRiFT," on these conditions.
Specimen Numbers are sent free of charges on application to Publishers.

*^^* The Meetings of the Cambridge Philological Society are regularly

reported in the "Wochenschrift.


The American Journal of Philology, published under the auspices of the
Johns Hopkins University, and edited by B. L. Gildersleeve, Professor of Greek,
is now in its fourth volume. The Journal is open to original communications in
all departments of Philolo^, classical, comparative, oriental and modem. A
large portion of the space is given to condensed reports of current philological
work, and arrangements have been made to present regularly summaries of the
chief articles in the principal Philological Journals of Europe. The Journal
appears in the ordintu^ review form, four numbers (about 600 pages) constituting
a volume.

Price to Subscribers Three Dollars a year.

Macmillan & Co., London and New York.

B. L. Gildersleeve, Baltimore, Md. (P. 0. Drawer 2.)


Stiehometry I., J. R. Harris ; Studies in Pindaric Syntax III., the Editor ;
Words for Colour in the Eig- Veda, E. "W. Hopkins ; Sarbours of Ancient
Athens, T. "W. Ludlow ; JDpiny Alexander of Uffizi Gallery and QigantO'
maehia of Fergamum, Alf. Emerson.
Notes. Eeviews and Book Notices. Reports. Correspondence.




CambrilJBe ^{jtlologtcal ^mtt$.


POn 1881-85.



TKiTBSEB ft CO., 57 *sd 59, LUDGATE HILL.

(J/? rijfHl� rvitrtivl.)



Search more related documents:Full text of "Transactions .."

Set Home | Add to Favorites

All Rights Reserved Powered by Free Document Search and Download

Copyright © 2011
This site does not host pdf,doc,ppt,xls,rtf,txt files all document are the property of their respective owners. complaint#downhi.com