465. γυμνὸν φανέντα τῶν ἀριστείων ἄτερ, ὧν αὐτὸς ἔσχε, στέφανον εὐκλείας μέγαν I cannot assent to any explanation of a double genitive, that I have seen, in the second of these lines. It appears to me that ὧν is simply the direct object of ἔσχε, attracted to its antecedent τῶν ἀριστείων, while στέφανον εὐκλείας μέγαν is in apposition with a, the proper object of ἔσχεν, implied in the attracted ὧν. Compare 967, 968; ὧν γὰρ ἠράσθη τυχεῖν, ἐκτήσαθ ̓ αὑτῷ, θάνατον ὅνπερ ἤθελεν. where θάνατον ὅνπερ ἤθελεν is a mere exegetical apposition to ὧν ἠράσθη τυχεῖν. 556, 557. ὅταν δ ̓ ἵκῃ πρὸς τοῦτο, δεῖ σ ̓ ὅπως πατρὸς I think the hypothesis of an aposiopesis from agitation after δεῖ σ', and then a change of construction, is preferable to any method of forcing de o' into syntactical union with oπs δείξεις. 730. κολεῶν ἐρυστὰ διεπεραιώθη ξίφη. The proper meaning of διαπεραιόω is to cause to pass across'. Why can it not mean here: 'swords, drawn from sheaths, were crossed'? It would then be vividly descriptive of the attitude of persons proceeding in a quarrel as far as possible without actually striking a blow. Or perhaps, as επεραιώθη is the intransitive aor. of περαιόω, διεπεραιώθη would be better translated simply “crossed. Journal of Philology. VoL. VI. 12 803. οἱ 'γω, φίλοι, πρόστητ ̓ ἀναγκαίας τύχης. If we analyse the word πpóσTηTе, we arrive at once at the meaning 'stand in front of'. Adding the idea of motion with a view to standing in front of, we obtain the meaning 'get in front of', i. e. 'be beforehand with'. Thus, although I am not aware of any similar use of the word, we arrive at exactly the meaning required by the context: 'Alas, friends, be beforehand with fate!' 1083. ταύτην νόμιζε τὴν πόλιν χρόνῳ ποτε, With regard to e ovpíwv, it is surely as legitimate to refer to such passages as Esch. Eumen. 147: ἐξ ἀρκύων πέπτωκεν οἴχεται δ ̓ ὁ θήρ, as to ovpías λev and similar expressions, which usually abound in the notes of commentators. And the former reference brings out an easy and vivid sense, which is not very apparent in the latter. "Consider that that state some day in course of time, if it were to run out of the sphere of favourable winds (ei Spáμo), will fall into the abyss." 1112. οὐ γάρ τι τῆς σῆς οὔνεκ ̓ ἐστρατεύσατο I understand ὥσπερ οἱ πόνου πολλοῦ πλέῳ to be a hit at the meddlesome and fussy character of the Atridæ. "For Ajax did not go on the expedition at all on account of your wife, like those who are full of much ado," meaning by that, Menelaus himself, who was meddling with the burial of Ajax, a matter with which he had properly no concern. 1396, 1397, compared with Heb. vi. 6. τὰ δ ̓ ἄλλα καὶ ξύμπρασσε κεἴ τινα στρατοῦ In this passage I think Twα σтρаToû must be taken as the subject and not the object of roμiew, which again I think is used intransitively in the sense exequias ire'. "And if you wish any member of the army to attend the funeral, I shall feel no annoyance." That is to say, although Teucer objects to Ulysses attending Ajax's funeral himself, yet he is perfectly willing to allow him to send a representative to do so. If I were to supply an object to κομίζειν, it would be τὸν νεκρόν, for which compare Eurip. Andromache 74. This is one of those curious uses of a transitive verb in an intransitive sense, which illustrate the employment of ȧvakaivitev in the sense of renewing [a covenant] in Heb. vi. 6, where I translate, “For it is impossible that those who have been once illuminated......and have fallen away should renew [their covenant] again in the direction of repentance, by [re]crucifying for themselves the Son of God, and putting him to open shame." A. H. WRATISLAW, ON PLATO, THEÆTETUS 207 E. CURTIUS grounds his opinion that the Greek aspirates were up to the period of classical literature, if not much later, genuine aspirates or double sounds-that is, not spirants, on the following five considerations: 1. The moveability of the aspirate as shown, e. g. in reduplication-syllables and in the Ionic kov, &c. as compared with Attic χιτών. 2. The representation by foreigners of the aspirates by the corresponding tenues, as in the case of the Scythian in Aristophanes, Thesmophorazusae-πέρε for φέρε. 3. Latin transcription-e. g. tesaurus, Corintus, where t stands for Greek 0. 4. The mention by Dionysius of Halicarnassus of the πрoσθήκη τοῦ πνεύματος. 5. The fact that modern Greek in some dialects gives the tenuis for the older aspirate-e. g. ἔκω for ἔχω, τέλω for θέλω. Now any additional evidence on this point coming actually from the Classical period of Greek literature would be especially important and it seems to me that the passage in question goes a long way towards supplying this deficiency. The question is there asked whether a man could be said to have real scientific knowledge of (éπíστaσbai) the first syllable of the names cairηtos and Ocódwpos, if in the one case he were (by accident) to spell it right +e, and in the other wrong T + e. The example seems to derive its whole point from the ease with which such a mistake might be made by an unlettered person; while the improbability of the mistake is increased and the Onτa and Taû more widely separated and less likely to be confounded, if we assume that the @ had a pronunciation somewhat like modern Greek 0 or our own hard th in thin. E. S. ROBERTS. ON THE SO-CALLED ARABICUS MONS. THE Ancient Atlas of Dr Smith and Mr Grove, just completed, contains a sheet of 'Geographical Systems of the Ancients'. They are drawn by Dr Karl Müller. In the Herodotean system there is a mountain range marked as 'Arabicus Mons', starting from above Heliopolis in Egypt, running parallel with the Arabicus Sinus, and ending in a 'Thurifera Regio' West of the opening into the Southern Sea, among or South of the Ethiopians in Africa as we should now call it. And its length is set down as "60 dierum iter." In accordance with this, so far as it goes, Smith's Dictionary of Ancient Geography has a title 'Arabiae or Arabicus Mons', which is said to be "the name given by Herodotus to the range of mountains which form the Eastern border of the Nile valley, and separated it from the part of Arabia West of the Arabian Gulf." The invention and denomination of this mountain range has arisen from what I conceive to be a misunderstanding of Herodotus, Book II. 8. ̓Απὸ δὲ Ἡλίου πόλιος, ἄνω ιόντι στεινή ἐστι Αἴγυπτος. Τῇ μὲν γὰρ τῆς ̓Αραβίης οὖρος παρατέταται, φέρον ἀπ ̓ ἄρκτου πρὸς μεσαμβρίης τε καὶ νότου, αἰεὶ ἄνω τεῖνον ἐς τὴν Ερυθρὴν καλευμένην θάλασσαν· ἐν τῷ αἱ λιθοτομίαι ἔνεισι αἱ ἐς τὰς πυραμίδας κατατμηθεῖσαι τὰς ἐν Μέμφι. Ταύτῃ μὲν λῆγον ἀνακάμπτει ἐς τὰ εἴρηται τὸ οὖρος· τῇ δὲ αὐτὸ ἑωυτοῦ ἐστι μακρότατον, ὡς ἐγὼ ἐπυνθανόμην, δύο μηνῶν αὐτὸ εἶναι τῆς ὁδοῦ, ἀπ ̓ ἠοὺς πρὸς ἑσπέρην, τὰ δὲ πρὸς τὴν ἠῶ λιβανωτοφόρα αὐτοῦ τὰ τέρματα είναι. Herodotus goes on to say that this mountain and a corresponding one, on the Libyan side of the valley, make Egypt |