If all the passages of Thucydides in which transposition of words has been plausibly suggested were added up, the total would be by no means insignificant. But careful consideration has convinced me that transposition is required in a far larger number of cases than anyone, so far as I know, has yet thought, and that the transposition is not seldom of a rather surprising kind. Very often it is not a question merely of making a few words which adjoin one another exchange places. A word, two or three words, a clause, a whole sentence has to be moved, sometimes to the line preceding or following, sometimes three or four lines away, occasionally six, eight, or even ten. This is, I am convinced, the true solution of many notorious difficulties in the text of Thucydides. One or two cases of this had struck me years ago. I noted them and thought little of it. But more recently I observed, or thought I observed, quite a number of such cases in Books 4 and 5, and minute study of the other books seems to show that the same thing is true of them also.

Suetonius says that Augustus was born on the ninth day before the Kalends of October (a. d. VIIII. Kal. Oct.), in the year when Cicero and Antonius were consuls (691 [63 B.C.]), a little before sunrise,1 and also that he was born under Capricorn.2 Mr. H. W. Garrod, in his recent edition of Manilius,3 maintains that the date which Suetonius gives belonged to the pre- Julian calendar, and corresponded with December 20 of the Julian. Remarking that, ‘ according to our present reckonings,’ the sun enters Capricorn on December 22, he adds that ‘the astronomers of Cicero's time placed the beginnings of the sign some 7 degrees in advance of our reckonings. If, therefore,’ he concludes, ‘ Augustus was born on Sept. 22 paulo ante solis exortum, Capricorn was his natal sign.’

‘Der Text der Tragodien des Seneca ist in zwei Rezensionen iiberliefert.Die bessere (E) ist vertreten durch die Haupths. Laur. 37, 13 (Etruscus) s. xi/xii.… Zu der schlechteren, stark verfalschten Rezension (A) gehoren die iibrigen Hss., von denen keine iiber die Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts zuriickgeht.’

All sorts of views have been held as to some editors even thinking that in a corrupt form it contains a reference to the or peers of Sparta. It really belongs to the first words of the passage and should be placed before or after . Both parties alike, Sparta in particular, were inclined towards an agreement. does not necessarily imply exactly equal degrees. Cf. for instance Arist. Poet. 4. 1448 b 13

The MS. 410 of the Bibliotheque publique of Valenciennes consists of 70 leaves of vellum, written in Caroline minuscules in the 11th century. The titles Ivvenalis liber primvs incipit and Explicit Ivvenalis. Incipit Persivs are in small rustic capitals. The MS. contains Juvenal and Persius in that order. The last leaf but one has been cut out, that containing Pers. vi. 8 dant–vi. 71 exits. Juvenal, Sat. xvi, follows at the end of Sat. xiv, fol. 56v: then Sat. xv follows on Sat. xvi, fol. 57v, after which comes Persius, fol. 60v, beginning with the Choliambi, which precede Sat. i. The MS. has usually 32, occasionally 34, lines on a page. There are interlinear glosses, but no scholia, and no titles to the Satires, with three exceptions: Pers. iv. ‘In hac satira reprehendit illos qui honores cupiebant’ Juv. v. ‘Ad trebium loquitur’ xi. ‘De uictus comparatione.’

(i.) Even after the masterly studies of Leo Sternbach following on the paper by Hilberg1 there are still some small points to be noted on the historical poems of George of Pisidia. In what follows I have, of course, presupposed a knowledge of Sternbach's work which has happily rendered superfluous the new text which he was to have edited for Methuen's Series of Byzantine Texts.

The following paper contains a few suggestions which have occurred to me from time to time. As it was written under appreciable difficulties—Want of access to a library being the chief—it is possible that at whiles I may have simply repeated the criticisms of others. In that case, I can only express my regret for the involuntary depredation.

I. ON Aristotle's supposed inconsistency in his treatment of Epic as a form of Mimesis. In his note on the Poetic c. i, 1447, a, 15, Mr. Ingram Bywater writes: ‘ In his use of , in the Poetics Aristotle has fallen into a grave inconsistency, as he distinctly makes it in one place (3,1448, a, 21) include narrative, and in another (24, 1460, a, 9) exclude it.’ Yet I venture to think that a careful examination of the two passages will show that Aristotle is perfectly consistent, and that Mr. Bywater like his predecessors has completely misunderstood the second passage.

In the Phillipps Library at Cheltenham there is a MS. of the Epitome which Professor Thewrewk was unable to use for his edition. No one who knows the difficulties which attend the study of MSS. in this Library will blame him for the omission. The Phillippsianus has the form usual in codices of the Epitome (the form probably of Paulus’ autograph original), a quarto volume with two columns to the page, and with each article occupying a separate paragraph and beginning with a fairly large initial letter. It was written by Ellinger (Abbot of the Monastery of St. Quirinus at Tegernsee, between 1019 and 1056), during his previous stay at Altaich, as is shown by the subscription in capital letters which stands at the end of the whole volume, (fol. 103v): Abbas indignus ego Ellinger peccator istam glosam scripsi dum essem in Altahensi monasterio Deo sanctoque Quirino. Rogo vos omnes in ea legentes ut oretis pro me.

Herakleides, fr. 3I (Muller F.H.G. ii. p. 222, with his note):

ACP et margo p; om.reliqui.

Elymnion, according to Stephanos, was The name occurs in Aristophanes {Peace, 1126) in a context which points to the neighbourhood of Oreos. There is no evidence to connect it immediately with Chalkis. Mela (II. 2. 30) mentions an Echinia near Akanthos: ' inter Strymona et Athon Turris Calarnaea et portus Capru, urbs Acanthos et Echinia.' Confusion of A and X is easy. Thus, even if the first sentence has no ol, the passage gives no safe evidence that these settlers came to Kleonai from Chalkis, or from Euboea. Such a derivation would be hard to reconcile with Thucydides' account of the towns on Akte. If oί is right, cadit quaestio.

It is now generally recognized that Plato's whole theory of the Ideal State is based upon the principle that human society is ‘natural’ As against the antisocial doctrines of certain sophists, this proposition means, in the first place, a denial of the view that society originated in a primitive contract. But Plato does not merely reject this false opinion; he also sets up an alternative doctrine that the state is natural, in the sense that a human society constructed on ideal lines1 would be one that should reflect the structure of man's soul, and give full play to the legitimate functions of every part of his nature. Accordingly, it is vital to his purpose in the Republic to show that the division of the Ideal State into three classes—Guardians, Auxiliaries, Producers—corresponds to the division of the soul into three ‘parts’ ‘kinds’ or ‘forms’ —the Reflective, Spirited, and Appetitive.

The text of Fronto is in a very corrupt state, and the startling discrepancies which exist between different collations, as well as the unintelligibility of many of the readings deciphered, seem to justify a good deal of conjectural emendation. I append some attempts to complete or restore the sense in some passages of the Greek letters which seem hitherto to have been left in an unsatisfactory state. Not having had access to the MS, I have relied on the collations of Naber and others for a statement of what is to be found in the palimpsest.

The following quotations will show what is thought about the origin and extension of the name Chalkidike and the work of Euboean Chalkis in those parts:—

‘The barren islands of Sciathus and Peparethus were the bridge from Euboea to the coast of Macedonia, which, between the rivers Axius and Strymon, runs out into a huge three-pronged promontory. Here Chalcis planted so many towns that the whole promontory was named Chalcidice.’ ‘The whole peninsula was called Chalkidike, and the Greeks in it were comprised under the name of the Thracian Chalkidians.’

Some passages of Herodotus and Thucydides led me to suspect that Chalkis took but a minor part, if any, in the colonization of this region; that the area of the Chalkidians of Thrace was comparatively small; that the name was confined to this area; and that these Chalkidians were not colonists from the cities of southern Greece, but, like their neighbours the Bottiaioi, a tribe. Further enquiry, though it has strengthened these suspicions, has not established them beyond doubt; but it seems to me worth while to set out the evidence, in the hope that others may throw light on a question of some importance for the history of Greece. At least I may expect that in future ‘Chalkidike’ and ‘Chalkidians’ will be used with care.

The narrow limits of the apparatus criticus in the new Clarendon Press edition have excluded these suggestions, which may find a place here:

I xxix, 4 Quaedam (nomina) etiam facta sunt ex nominum deriuatione, ut a prudentia ‘prudens ’; quaedam etiam ex uocibus, ut a garrulitate ‘garrulus.’ Although garrulus is the traditional reading, the derivation elsewhere (X 114) of garrulus from graculus, ‘a jackdaw,’ suggests that we may read here ut a garrulitate ‘graulus.’ For the jackdaw's name in Late Latin developed from gragulus to graulus (Fr. grolle).

That three of them were popularly regarded as correlated with the three ages of human life; (2) that the structure of early Greek societies, as of other primitive societies, was based on the distinction of three main age-grades, of which the three virtues are characteristic; (3) that Plato's own Ideal State has the same age basis underlying the other features peculiar to it, and is indeed transparently modelled on the Spartan constitution; (4) that it is therefore probable that Plato started with the three divisions of his State and their several virtues, and then, proceeding on the assumption that the ‘natural’ State must reflect on a large scale the constitution of the individual ‘nature,’ arranged the structure of the soul to correspond with his polity.

After reading carefully the essay which, in his recently-published Varia Socratica, Part I., Prof. A. E. Taylor has written on the use of the words and in the Greek literature of the Socratic and Platonic periods, I find myself on the one hand in agreement with him as to the importance of such linguistic investigations for the understanding of Plato, and on the other in frequent disagreement with him as to the meaning of the words in the passages he cites, and the inferences he draws from them. Thinking that Prof. Taylor's analysis of the use of the terms in Hippocrates is very far from final, I offer in this paper a further contribution to their interpretation, confining myself as far as possible to the question, What do and mean in the Hippocratean writings?

The review of Prof. Bywater′s new edition of the Poetics (Classical Review, December, 1910) once more raised the question of the interpretation of dfuipria in Aristotle′s definition of the tragic hero (Poetics, Ch. xiii.)

VIII 18 6 (G. Baehrens, Lips. MCMXI p. 245 17) ‘Nee idcirco minoribus gaudiis feruntur dempti periculi [meri] quod experiundi necessitate caruerunt.’

Cum de certa emendatione nondum constet haereatque etiam nouus editor utrum ‘periculi maris’ praeferat an deleat [meri] et clausulae causa ‘pericli’ restituat, aliam uiam ingredi licebit, scilicet ut syllabam intercidisse suspicemur qua reuocata optima efficitur clausula: ‘dempti periculi merifo’ = dempti periculi causa, cf. Sittl, Lokale Verschiedenheiten p. 135, Archiv f. lat. Lexicogr. I 174, 574, VIII 590, X 539, 562.

That the hiatus in 33 is inadmissible in an Augustan poet has long been recognised by the critical. Of the three other examples, Prop. II xv. 1 ‘o me felicem! o nox mihi Candida et o tu,’ ib. xxxii. 45 ‘haec eadem ante illam (add iam) inpune et Lesbia fecit,’ and Manil. I 795 ‘emeritus caelum et Clausi magna propago,’ only the first can claim any excuse, on the ground of the speaker's excitement and the pause after felicem, but, metre apart, even there ‘nox, o’ seems a better order. But the corruption has had perforce to be retained in our texts through lack of a reasonable correction. The line is perfectly sound Latin as it stands and, though not poetry, is sense.

The use of the temporal augment in narrative we have found to be purely scansional. Scansional, too, is the use of the syllabic, though this has a grammatical restriction which is of some interest; indeed, next to the maintenance of type öρovδΕ, it is the most vital fact for the whole question. The unaugmented aorist is not felt as an inflection which has been docked of its first syllable; quite the reverse, the augmented tense is treated as a compound. For example, é normally stands second in its clause; and so, if the syllabic augment was still consciously regarded as what it really is—viz. an adverb in composition—we should expect to see a great unwillingness to place Be after a tense thus augmented. Our expectation is fully borne out by the text; in the whole narrative of the Iliad there are only sixteen sure examples of é standing after the syllabically augmented aorist.