536. But here we have to face the great difficulty of Loofs' identification. If we believe Leontius of Byzantium and the Leontius of the "collatio cum Severianis " to be the same, we can hardly deny that the identification goes further and takes in the leader of the Origenist movement among the monks of S. Saba. In fact it is known

from the life of Saba, one of the most accurate of monastic histories, that S. Saba went to Constantinople on an embassy for the alleviation of taxation in Palestine, taking with him a Byzantine Leontius, and while there held a dispute with the Monophysites (which Loofs thinks may be the very "collatio cum Severianis"). Leontius was left behind in Byzantium and did not return till S. Saba had died, when he began to make so much trouble with his Origenist views that the whole of the East was thrown into a state of ferment.

Now at first sight it seems unlikely that Leontius Fidei Defensor and Leontius Origenistes can be the same; but Loofs makes out a capital case for the identification, especially in incidental points, such as that when Ephraim of Antioch condemned the Origenist views, Leontius the Origenist went to Constantinople to obtain the support of the court

for the party to which he belonged; which is thoroughly likely if he had been in earlier life a resident, and in later life a visitor, in the city. And he uses his conclusion to explain the apparent neglect of Leontius by later writers (for even John of Damascus, who is known to have been acquainted with his writings and to have made use of them, does not give his name), and the fact that several of his most important works were re-written not long after his death by orthodox theologians. If this should turn out to be true, one can only regard it as a horrible punishment for a very innocent heresy, but not altogether undeserved, if, as Loofs suggests, he held his views for a long time under the disguise of the doctrine of accommodation.

It would not be easy to find a more important book than the present for the student of Monophysite views and movements: the most subtle of all heresies, as Newman calls it, is apt to be the most uninteresting; but Dr. Loofs does much to show the real lines that divided parties in the Church at a very critical period; and what he sees himself, his singularly straightforward and transparent style enables any one else to see with him. J. RENDEL HARRIS.

Aeschylus, Prometheus Vinctus, with notes by M. G. GLAZEBROOK, M. A. Rivingtons. 2s. 6d. THIS is an edition which has many strong points to recommend it to the schoolmaster. In the first place there is a lively introduction which will help boys to a clearer idea of the meaning and of the grandeur and beauty of the Prometheus Vinctus than they could easily get elsewhere. In this part the teacher too will doubtless find some enlightenment, though he may not think that the editor solves all difficulties in the great problem of the real standpoint of the characters. For instance Prometheus raises men to a civilized state; Zeus wanted to destroy them. A man at all events could hardly agree that Zeus is 'triumphantly' justified (Introd. p. xiv.). The grammatical notes, both in the introduction and in the commentary are sound, lucid, and concise; and the ideal of translation set before the learner is a high one. Judicious hints are given, where the constructions are such that any schoolboy who is not a genius would be likely to go wrong. Good examples of this kind of aid may be found in the notes on vv. 27, 81, 249, 319, 481, 523, 561, 600 (both notes), 693 (1), 722 (2), 763, 767 (2), 797, 934, 929 (3), 993, and 1009. The stage directions' and headings to the scenes in the text and commentary are useful, though it may be doubted whether more is not lost than is gained by partly abandoning the Greek division of the tragedy and lumping the stasima with the 'acts.' The notes on the choric metres are helpful and sound as far as they go, which is perhaps far enough. The last syllable but two in vv. 133 and 153 is marked

long instead of short in the first scheme on p. xxxiii. There are one or two points on which it may be worth while to express a difference of opinion. Surely Wecklein and Mr. Glazebrook are wrong at v. 220 (in this edition)-τὰ λῷστα βουλεύων πιθεῖν . . . οὐκ ηδυνήθην—in making πιθεῖν govern τὰ λῷστα and depend on Bouλeuw- Though my purpose was to persuade.' Where can be found in tragedy, or in Attic Greek an instance of Bovλeuw (in the sense of 'plan,' 'resolve') with an infinitive depending on it? The translation of 501f. κάκρινα πρῶτος κ.τ.λ.

And I was the first to judge from dreams what must really come to pass"-is original but, like the doctrine that ou is an enclitic, which is propounded in a note to v. 42, is it not itself not rap but ovap? Mr. Glazebrook's reason for abandoning the usual translation is that if & meant which dreams it would have been dσa not &.' The word 'optative' in the note on v. 161, is a slip. Eveúvŋ on v. 340 should be εὔθυνα. It is hardly right to call elveka exclusively Epic (v. 361, cf. Wecklein, Curae Epigraphicae p. 37). It is a question whether the L. and S. explanation of nyai lov at 835 is not preferable to that given by Wecklein and the editor. Derivations are fitfully introduced. Is it not better to leave these to the dictionaries? Also it is difficult to see the use of the tiny apparatus criticus (consisting of the more important variants given in the text from that of the Codex Mediceus) which follows the preface; since little is said of the history and nothing of the reasons for the several emendations, it is difficult to see what good the list can do to either younger or older students.-E. B. ENGLAND.

Herodotus. The Ionic Revolt, by E. D. STONE, M.A. Drake. Eton. 2s.

MR. STONE has selected a good and interesting passage from Herodotus in the Ionic Revolt, with the stories of Aristagoras and Histiaios, characteristically told. The introduction is short and clear; and, what is by no means an unimportant point for the beginners for whom such a selection is made, the scale of the notes is wisely limited to a few brief comments. Probably Mr. Stone is also right in not attempting (in so short a passage) to give any account of the Ionic forms. The boy who reads this book will have to learn them, no doubt but he can get them from grammars, and any satisfactory survey of them would overweight the book. The allusions are generally explained with adequate fullness; and though some of the references and quotations might be omitted without loss, (as for instance the reference to Oedipus Rex on chap. 107, and the rather irrelevant quotation from Aristophanes on vi. chap. i.) there are not many of them altogether, and they are mostly to the point.

=

The notes on grammar perhaps leave something to be desired. Thus (p. 38, chap. 33) it is misleading to compare the que of itaque with the re of ÈTEί TE. рóσxnuа (p. 37, ch. 28) in the sense of 'glory' does surely not come from poéxew to be superior' but from πpoéxεoba 'to hold out before one's self.' Mr. Stone tells us that ὡς ἂν oι ὅπως ἂν with the optative is only found in Homer or Herodotus. It is also found in Aeschylus (Ag. 365): but this is a trifling inaccuracy: it is a much more important point that for the beginner it should be clearly stated what is the peculiarity of the usage. It is not instructive or accurate to say that 'kal expresses something unexpected or unlikely' (p. 41, ch. 98), nor that 'kaí limits '(p. 42, ch. 101). apxhy we are told is omnino, but we are not told that this is only true in negative sentences. The note on the difficult question of un où with a participle (p. 47, ch. 9) it is perhaps dangerous to criticise, as opinions differ so much but it is certainly misleading to say that 'un ou ought to imply a supposition, the où being inserted as usual when a negative sentence precedes.' A boy would infer from this that if he had to translate 'you cannot run if you have no feet' he ought to put οὐ δυνήσει τρέχειν μὴ οὐ πόδας ἔχων: which is not true, and which Mr. Stone probably does not mean. Lastly it surely is wrong to translate ὅρα μὴ σεωυτὸν ἐν αἰτίῃ σχῇς beware lest you find yourself blamed. Mr. Stone has misgivings, for he adds but ev airía xe usually means to blame.' Why not then translate it simply 'beware lest hereafter you have to blame yourself?'

:

Mr Stone's little edition would be improved by revision of a few points like the above and at the same time he might correct some accents in the notes, such as χρύσου, δεόν, τη Ασίη, έλασσονι, πλήγη, and the singularly worded statement (p, 41) that Poseidon tells Heracles he is heir to Jupiter.'

A. S.

Herodotus. Buch VIII. Für den Schulgebrauch erklärt von DR. J. SITZLER, Professor am Gymnasium in Tauberbischofscheim. Gotha. Friedrich Andreas Perthes. 1887. (8vo. Pp. iv. 108. 1 Mk. 30 Pf.)

A CONTINUATION of the editor's work on Book VII., in the Preface of which the principles on which the edition is based have been described. The edition is designed for use in school. As the notes are in German, few English schoolboys, or even undergraduates, are in a position to use the book. An estimate of it may, however, be of service to those engaged in teaching in our schools and universities.

In the Preface the schoolmaster is advised to omit in class four passages in the book: cc. 43-48, the list of ships; 72, 73, the population of the Peloponnose; 104-106, the story of Hermotimos; 137-139, the fortunes (Schicksale) of Amyntas (sic). Chapter 139 contains the pedigree of Alexander, and might be omitted, if it were worth while to omit four lines. Chapters 137, 138 contain a thoroughly good story about Perdikkas, which it would be a great pity to omit. The Introduction contains four divisions: I. Herodotus' Life; II. Herodotus' Journeys; III. Herodotus' Work; IV. A short sketch of the Dialect of Herodotus. This last division is of some practical use, and frequent and convenient reference is made to it in the notes.

:

The text is unusually well printed for a German edition. You will not be irritated on every page by defects of the type or printer's work. How the text is arrived at is not stated. Some emendations are admitted which are not usually printed in the texts, as 'Iwvwv in c. 91, or even noticed in the previous editors, as the words Tv K.T.A. in 82. These insertions are always properly indicated. Every chapter is printed separately, and not, as is usual, in paragraphs according to the continuity of the passage: the lines of each chapter are numbered. This arrangement is evidently based on the principle that shows itself in the notes, which are copious of their kind. The notes appear to be written on the principle of leaving no linguistic or grammatical point of any difficulty unnoticed or unexplained. No other editor has approached Dr. Sitzler in the number of minute directions in this department. Dialectical variations, peculiarities of tense, mood, case, or construction are duly indicated words or phrases are translated, or the student's attention called to their difficulty. Space is gained for this microscopic critique by the sacrifice of almost everything bearing upon the comprehension of the narrative, except the words or phrases in which it is clothed. Points in the geography form almost the only noticeable exception. This is a perfectly legitimate and serviceable object or principle for an editor to take as his guide: the only question is how in the present case it has been carried out. On the whole it must be said with considerable success: one might even wish that the principle had been so rigorously applied as to have left nothing of any difficulty without explanation. It is not, however, always possible to explain words fully without taking into account the material meaning and general points of view: this the editor recognises, but not always happily. Thus chapter 22, 5, for Hellas' I would suggest 'Athen,' and in line 12 for die Griechen,' 'die Athener' (und Eretrier). Nor can I always accept Dr. Sitzler's exegesis, even on his own special ground. Thus c. 11, 3, ἔργου πολέμου ought rather to be μάχης. In 25, 1, to the genitive wayyeiλaμévov he supplies TOÙ KHрUKоs, missing the force of the middle. (Cp. bk. vii. c. 1.) Nor in 2, 6 need σrparnyds be supplied to ὁ Λάκων, any more than βασιλέα to τὸν Πέρσην in 3, 9. These supplements and hypothetical subaudita kill the idiom of the language. Surely aríorous in 22, 16, is entitled on Dr. Sitzler's principle to a note. As is perhaps well in a school book, the notes are expressed in rather dogmatic form. There are few references to any illustrations, or analogies: such references as are given are mostly to other chapters in the book. There is no index. I can hardly imagine English teachers, with a passion now happily growing for the 'Realien,' relying on such an edition as this alone but any student or teacher will find it very serviceable if used in addition to other wellknown editions. R. W. M.

Libri xv. Recensuit G. KAIBEL. Vol. ii. Libri vi-x. Teubner. 1887. 4 Mk. 80. ALTHOUGH Kaibel proposes expressly to edit Athenaeus, and not the fragments quoted by Athenaeus for their own sake, his edition is indispensable to all students of the comic fragments, as he has collated anew the Marcian MS. (A). His critical notes contain many good suggestions, not only of his own but of Wilamowitz. For example on p. 56 (= 249b) for σιλοδούνους οι Α. he proposes σολιδούρους, comparing soldurii in Caesar B. G. iii, 20. Again in a corrupt quotation from Hipparchos' Egyptian Iliad

χέννια τίλλοντες καὶ κυλλήστεις ἀλέοντες.

On p. 409 (418b) it seems to me that a corruption of the text is unnecessarily assumed. The passage is: Πολύβιος δ ̓ ὁ Μεγαλοπολίτης ἐν τῇ εἰκοστῇ τῶν ἱστοριῶν φησὶν ὡς Βοιωτοὶ μεγίστην δόξαν λαβόντες κατὰ τὰ Λευκτρικὰ κατὰ μικρὸν ἀνέπεσον ταῖς ψυχαῖς καὶ ὁρμήσαντες ἐπ ̓ εὐωχίας καὶ μέθας διέθεντο καὶ κοινωνεῖα Tois pinois. The meaning seems clear enough: àvéπεσον ταῖς ψυχαῖς = animis (or studiis) refrixerunt, that is, they degenerated, and διέθεντο κοινωνεία they got up clubs.'

=

In a passage from the Пpóyovo of Antiphanes, Kaibel as well as other editors has missed what appears to me a very obvious emendation (p. 34 = 238c)

... ἀλλὰ τοῖς φίλοις

τοιοῦτός εἰμι δή τις 4 τύπτεσθαι μύδρος
τύπτειν κεραυνός, ἐκτυφλοῦν τιν' ἀστραπή, κ.τ.λ.

Read ἅπτεσθαι for τύπτεσθαι, placing a comma after TIS, and all runs smoothly-'I am hot iron to touch,' that is, to be touched, like kaλds ideîv. On p. 125 (= 282d) Kaibel notes 'extrema corrupta' to a line of Epicharmos about the sturgeon,

τόν τε πολυτίματον ἔλοπ ̓ ὁ δ ̓ αὐτὸς χαλκὸς ὤνιος.

But is it not possible that there may have been a word χάλξ = a bronze coin, of which xaλkós here is the genitive of price?

Perhaps Kaibel's best emendation is on p. 84 (= 263a) where in the clause καὶ τἄλλα τἀκόλουθα ἔπειτα ἀλέσας ἐξένισεν αὐτούς he reads ἐπιτελέσας for ἔπειτα ἀλέσας.

JOHN B. BURY.

Die Attische Beredsamkeit; Von Gorgias bis zu Lysias. F. BLASS. 2nd Edition, 1887. Leipzig: Teubner. 14 Mk.

IN 1865 Friedrich Blass, who had then lately completed his course as a student at Bonn, published at the early age of two and twenty an interesting sketch of the history of Greek eloquence during the period of its decline, between the death of Demosthenes and the age of Augustus. Only three years afterwards appeared the first volume of his great work on Attic Eloquence, giving a connected and comprehensive account of its development from the time of Gorgias to that of Lysias. The volume on Isocrates and

Isaeus followed in 1874, that on Demosthenes in 1877, and that on his contemporaries in 1880. This admirable series of volumes is well known to scholars as giving a complete account of the history of the subject. Before their appearance the field was occupied by Westermann's work on the History of Oratory in Greece and Rome, containing in a compact form a great store of references and authorities on the subject, but supplying materials and hints for a connected history rather than the history itself. From such a work, valuable as it still may be for purposes of reference, it is a relief to turn to the far more readable volumes of Professor Blass, which have deservedly won the widest recognition and have given a fresh impulse to the study of the subject, both in Germany and elsewhere. It is to be remembered that they are by no means confined to the literary criticism of the Attic Orators alone, but, in accordance with their title, cover the whole field of Attic Oratory. Thus in the first volume, which has lately reached a second edition, we have as many as fourteen pages on Thrasymachus and nearly forty on Thucydides. In the new edition the author refers to all the dissertations that have appeared during the last twenty years so far as they deserve mention in connexion with his own work, the best among these being Professor Jebb's Essay on the Speeches of Thucydides, which was first published in Hellenica, and has since been translated into German, and F. Berbig's pamphlet on the genus dicendi tenue of Lysias. The discussion of the date of the birth of Lysias has been slightly altered and expanded, with the general result that whereas in the former edition 440 B.C. was provisionally adopted, instead of the date of Dionysius (459), we now have it placed in '446 B.C. or later. To Lysias are devoted more than 300 pages, or nearly half the volume; and, as in the former edition, this is the most interesting and valuable part of the work. All the speeches that have come down to us under the name of that orator are passed in review, with a sufficient account of their purport and with elaborate criticisms on their style. In dealing with the style of Lysias the author naturally quotes Cicero's description of the tenuis orator, and refers to Cicero's remarks on the tria genera dicendi, the tenue, the medium, and the grave. But in connexion with the last he uses, on p. 3912-3811, the word granditer, which is not really found in Cicero, but is confined to verse and post-Augustan prose; it would therefore be best to alter it into graviter. On p. 2482243', in quoting Juvenal vii 203, he prints Thrasymachi instead of Tharsymachi, which the editors generally prefer for metrical reasons in the line beginning Sicut Tharsymachi probat exitus. But as a whole the new edition has been most carefully revised. By judicious retrenchment of some superfluous portions it has been shortened to the total extent of sixteen pages. Meanwhile, room has been found for many minor additions, and the work in its new form is thoroughly worthy of the author's high reputation. J. E. SANDYS.

Aufsätze zur persischen Geschichte, von Tн. NÖLDEKE. 8vo. Leipzig, Weigel. 1887. (German version of the articles PAHLAVI, PERSEPOLIS and part of PERSIA in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. 9th. ed. vol. xviii. 1885). 4 Mk.

THESE articles, which now appear in German, and in separate form, by the courtesy of Messrs. A and C. Black, the proprietors of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, have undergone a final revision by the author, but do not present any feature to distinguish them

substantially from the earlier English publication. In this respect they differ from the posthumous Geschichte Irans...von Alexander...bis zum Untergang der Arsaciden of the late Prof. Gutschmid, which is much less condensed than the close-packed section of the Encyclopaedia article PERSIA to which it corresponds. Nöldeke's share in this article embraces the Median, Achaemenian, and Sasanian empires, periods of history which are full of interest to the classical student, but gain much by being treated from the point of view of an oriental scholar. For the Sasănian period the oriental sources are of the first importance, and among these must be included not only the inscriptions and coins but above all the Syriac and Arabic records. As editor of the corresponding part of Tabari's great chronicle, which he has accompanied by a translation and by notes of very great learning and historical value (Geschichte der Perser und Araber...aus Tabari, 8vo. Leyden, 1879), Prof. Nöldeke has had the chief share in making these new lights available for the historian, and his supreme authority on the Sasanian period is undisputed. The result of his researches is now presented in a clear and continuous narrative.

For the Achaemenians the eastern sources are less copious; but Prof. Nöldeke has used the latest photographic copies of the Old Persian Inscriptions (cf. his Bemerkungen on these in the Persepolis of Andreas and Stolze, 2 vols. fol. Berlin, 1882), and his knowledge of eastern antiquity throws much valuable light on a record which classical scholars generally approach from too western a standpoint. The essay on Persepolis is an important critical study resting on the most recent explorations. The short papers on Pahlavi or Pehlevi and on the names Persia and Iran supply in a convenient form information of a trustworthy kind on subjects that no classical scholar can afford to ignore.

W. ROBERTSON SMITH.

Didascalia CCCXVIII Patrum Pseudepigrapha, E Graecis Codicibus Recensuit PETRUS BATTIFOL, Coptico Contulit HENRICUS HYVERNAT. Parisiis. Leroux. 1887. 3 frcs.

M. BATTIFOL has used for his edition of the Didascalia three Greek MSS., which have been hitherto unknown, and which he describes as (P.) Parisinus gr. 1087, (M.) Marcianus 498, both of the fourteenth century, and (R.) Regius = Parisinus gr. 1053, of the tenth. M. Hyvernat has added the readings found in the Turin Coptic MS. (tenth century), which differ from those of the Greek MSS.; and he has given them, in a Greek translation, in an appendix. It was not the intention of the editors to make use of all the material available for a new edition: 'sat erit hic Didascaliam graecam recensuisse,' they state (p. 19). They have omitted to consult the earlier editions of this book, as well as the Coptic Codex Borgianus at Naples. But in spite of the limits which they have imposed upon their enterprise, the editors have furnished a text which is in the main far correcter than that hitherto received. The Didascalia opens with the Nicene Creed (omitting, however, the words ἐνανθρωπήσαντα after σαρκωθέντα sc. υἱόν 1. 8, and ἢ κτιστὸν before τρεπτὸν 1. 13); there follows the interpretation of the symbols bearing on Christology and the doctrine of the Trinity; the second part of the book contains rules and precepts intended to regulate the life of bishops and clerics and monks, and all the other Christians' (Chaps. I.-VIII. pp. 10-18). M. Battifol's statement respecting the origin of the Didascalia is open to criticism on two points. He says that this book is a Greek translation from the Coptic, and that the Coptic itself is a version

NO. XIII. VOL. II.

of the Athanasian tract Syntagma doctrinae ad monachos (Migne XXVIII. 835). But the first-the dogmatic-part of the Didascalia is closely allied to Athanasii interpretatio in symbolum (Migne XXVI. 1232). And as to the second part, Eichhorn, to whom we are indebted for this last remark, maintains (Theol. Literatur Zeit., 1887, N. 24, p. 570), on the authority of Revillout, that the present Syntagma cannot have been the original, whence the Coptic version was made, but that the Syntagma formed part of the acts of the Alexandrine Council 362, and was afterwards revised and made into a separate treatise, which has been handed down to us. The Didascalia has the value of a document which bears on the theology of the fourth century; its main importance, however, lies in the fact that it throws light on the early history of monastic life and institutions. It contains, as has been recently pointed out, numerous quotations from the Teaching of the Apostles. A comparison of texts has shown us the main parallels to be-Didascal. I., 1. 12-14 comp. Didache I. 2. Dl. I., 1. 14–16 comp. Dd. II. 2. Dl. I., 1. 17, 18 comp. Dd. VI. 1. Some of the terms in Dl. I. 1. 24-27 are evidently taken from Dd. II. 4, III. 5, 6. The commandment rà σáßßara μὴ φυλάττειν καθάπερ Ἰουδαῖοι, Dl. II. 1. 3, and the other injunction μὴ παράβαινε τὴν νηστείαν κυρίου, τουτέστι τετράδα καὶ παρασκευήν, II. 1. 13, refer most

probably to Dd. VIII. 1. The order given to all Christians to 'fear above all the words of the Lord,' Dl. IV. 1, seems but a repetition of Dd. III. 8; and that given to monks to learn a handicraft or to work on the fields, Dl. VI. 4, lest they eat the bread of idleness, and to give the firstfruits to the priests, Dl. VI. 9, seems taken from Dd. XII. 3, 4, and XIII. 3. (Comp. Apostol. Constit. VII. 29). An inquiry into the manner, however, in which the injunctions given to primitive Christian congregations in the Didache have been enlarged into rules and regulations for monastic settlers in the Didascalia would require a separate monograph.

CHARLES MERK.

Critica Biblica. Le Recensioni dei LXX. e la versione detta Italia. Nota del M. E. ABATE A. CERIANI, letta al R. Istituto Lombardo nell' adunanza del 18 febbrajo 1886 (Estratto dai Rendiconti del R. Istituto Lombardo, Serie II., vol. xix., fasc. iv.) pp. 7.

ST. JEROME in his preface to the book of Chronicles writes thus: Alexandria et Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat auctorem, Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat. Mediae inter has provinciae Palaestinos (or Palaestinae) codices legunt, quos ab Origene elaboratos Eusebius et Pamphilus vulgaverunt.' Until lately we did not possess the means of distinguishing these three recensions amongst the existing MSS. The Abbé Ceriani believes that he is in a position to do so now. The idea flashed upon him when he saw the facsimile of Cod. VIII. (Holmes) published in Dublin in 1880 (Par Palimpsestorum Dublinensium) a MS. manifestly written in Egypt. I will merely give his conclusions drawn from comparisons with the Coptic versions, the Commentary of S. Cyril Alex., etc. The MS. which seems to have generally preserved the Hesychian recension is Holmes 106. In the Prophets the MSS. which generally agree with 106, are XII. 26, 33, 86, 97, 198, 306 and some others. The Palestinian text is represented by the Chigian codex (88 Holmes and Parsons) codices IV. V., and the Hexaplar Syriac version. Some other codd. exhibit this recension more or less, either in text or margin. In several books of the Syro-hexaplar version the

G

subscriptions state that the version was made from copies, the subscription of which indicated that they were derived from MSS. of Origen's text, corrected by Eusebius and Pamphilus. Cod. 88 has similar subscriptions. The character of the text compared with Origen's own statement of his method confirms this.

Lucian's recension was recognised by Field and Lagarde independently, and Abbé Ceriani claims priority for himself as regards the text of some of the books. This is the text of Theodoret and Chrysostom. The only uncial containing it is a MS. of fragments of Isaiah published by Tischendorf Monumenta Sacra, Tom. i. p. 187-198. The cursives are 19, 82, 93, 108. Besides the agreement of these Codd. with Theodoret and Chrysostom, they have, with 82, 245, the peculiarity of commencing 3 Kings (= 1 Kings E. V.) at ch. ii. 12, as did the Codices of Diodorus and Theodoret, and as there is reason to believe that Lucian's Codices did also. Further, the text followed by Ulphilas in the extant fragments of Ezra and Nehemiah was that of 19, 93, 108, and he must have followed the text used at Constantinople. In Isaiah, beside 93 are 90, 144, 147, 233, 308; in Genesis, beside 19 and 108, 418. Vercellone had already pointed out the agreement with 19, 82, 93, 108 of the Latin margin of the Gothic Codex Legionensis. With this recension agree the Latin of S. Ambrose and that of the (so-called) Speculum of S. Augustine. According to Dr. Ceriani this is precisely the Itala referred to in the famous passage of S. Augustine, Itala becoming used in that region which was then officially called Italia, viz. the northern part which afterwards formed the ecclesiastical province of Milan. The correctness of Itala as against the suggested Italica has been vindicated by Mommsen. (Corssen approves Bentley's conjecture usitata.)

Т. К. Аввотт.

THIS volume nearly completes Thilo's well-known edition of Servius. A concluding part will contain the Verona Scholia and the commentary of Philargyrius, edited by Hagen.

The preface to the volume before us contains an account of the Regensburg, Limoges (now Leyden) and Vatican manuscripts. The Limoges commentary, which contains the fuller versions generally known as Daniel's Servius, only extends, as we now have it, to Georg. i. 278. Its deficiencies are partly supplied by the Vatican commentary on the Georgics, which also has a number of additional notes introduced by the words et aliter. Ursinus added these et aliter notes on the Georgics to the notes of Junius Philargyrius on the Eclogues, which Politian had copied from the Laurentian MS. He then included all under the name of Philargyrius. They are now printed by Thilo in the text of his Servius. Thilo thinks that Politian copied the notes on the Eclogues bearing the name of Philargyrius from the Laurentian, and some of those on the Georgics from the Vaticanus and that Ursinus, deceived by this, attributed to Philargyrius all the notes copied by Politian.

;

The quality of the additional notes in the Vaticanus varies very much, a fact which leads Thilo to attribute them to different authors.

In the notice of the earlier volumes of this edition published in my Lectures and Essays I observed that Thilo had not exhausted the points of contact between

Servius and Nonius, and taken too little notice of the coincidences between Servius and Verrius Flaccus (Festus and Paulus). The following instances, taken from the commentary on the Eclogues only, will show that the same observations apply to the present volume. The point is important, as bearing on the antiquity of the Servian tradition. E. i. 69 Caespite,' id est terra cum propria herba evulsa. Paulus p. 45 Müller, Caespes est terra in modum lateris caesa cum herba. E. ii. 46 Calathis' Graecum est: nam Latine quasillum dicitur: Cicero in Philippicis &c. Paulus p. 47 Calathos' Graeci, nos dicimus quasillos. Verrius then is the ultimate authority for the note of Servius, and for the fuller one on the same subject in Isidore xix. 29, 3. E. iii. 77 Dicitur hoc sacrificium 'ambarvale,' quod arva ambiat victima. Macrobius S. iii. 5, 7, ambarvalis hostia est, ut ait Pompeius Festus, quae rei divinae causa circum arva ducitur ab iis qui pro frugibus faciunt. Festus's note is abridged by Paulus p. 5, and joined with one on amburbialis hostia which is also in Servius.

E. v. 5, (L) Succedere' idem significat quod et 'subire,' id est penitus intrare. Nonius p. 403 M. glosses both succedere and subire by ingredi, quoting, as Servius does, nostris succede penatibus hospes.

E. v. 37, Infelix' infecundum. Nonius p. 301 'felix' fecundus: Paulus p. 92, felices arbores Cato dixit quae fructum ferunt, infelices quae non ferunt.

E. vi. 7, 'Condere' componere: Paulus p. 57. E. vi. 32, 'Liquidi' puri. Nonius p. 334 liquidum est purum.

E. vii. 24, Sacra pinu,' matri deorum consecrata. Nonius p. 397 sacrum' sacratum.

Ib. 33. The note on sinum lactis closely resembles that of Nonius p. 547.

It would be easy to add more instances: but the reader may be weary, and a few remarks are required on the text, towards emending which something still remains to be done. I hazard the following conjectures

E. ii. 8, Frigora,' i.e. aprica loca. For aprica read opaca.1

E. vi. 26, Haec autem omnia de Sileno ac Theopompo in eo libro qui Thaumasia appellatur conscriptu sunt. Ipse autem (Vergilius) ad commendationem addidit. Read multa addidit, multa having dropped out between m and a.

G. iii. 122, Arionis (equi) ex Cerere, cuius odorinium Adrastus habuit. Read dominium.

Ib. 148, Dividit enim furia armenta, cum ab co (oestro) stimulantur. Read dira agit for dividit. G. iv. 448, Deum praecepta,' propter matrem hoc Read propter matrcm hoc monentem. H. NETTLESHIP.

nomen.

DR. LOLLING's Hellenische Landeskunde und Topographie, which forms part of the third volume of Dr. Iwan Müller's Handbuch der klassischen Alterthumswissenschaft, contains a complete and very accurate account, as far as the surface of the country and the dwelling-places of its inhabitants are concerned, of the geography of Greece Proper, and of the other lands which were inhabited by Greeks in antiquity. The information which it comprises has been gleaned from many quarters, carefully sifted, and compressed within the narrowest possible limits. The heights of the mountains, and the extent of the area of the districts, are carefully given, and the modern names, wherever these exist, are appended to the ancient names of sites of cities and features of the

1 This emendation has been accepted by Thilo, to whom I communicated it some three months ago, before this notice was written.