Report

ON February 5th a paper was read by Mr. WARDE FOWLER in support and amplification of the view put forward in Heinze's Virgil's Episehe Technik (Berlin, 1903) that Virgil meant the character of Aeneas to grow during the action of the poem. Aeneas is always pius, but his pietas is only realised at its highest point in the last six books, and only as the result of the descent into Hades, and especially of the ' Heldenschau ' in the Sixth Book, which is thus the pivot on which the whole story turns, and the crisis of the hero's life. In the first five books he shows manifest signs of weakness, e.g. in i. 92 foil., and even of violentia in ii. 314 foil., 594 foil., of forgetfulness of his divine mission in Bk. IV., where there is an undoubted reference to the narrow escape of the Empire from destruction at the hands of Antony and Cleopatra. In the Fifth Book the character improves, becoming more typically Roman; but even up to the latter part of Bk. VI. Aeneas is continually looking backwards instead of forwards— not yet fully realising that nothing that he has yet achieved is the real work of his life. In the last six books he never looks back or hesitates; and though the characterisation is not strong, and the real interest lies elsewhere, the poet meant his hero in these books to reach the heroic type of the Aeneas of the Iliad, in combination with the Roman qualities of pietas and humanitas.

ON February 5th a paper was read by Mr. WARDE FOWLER in support and amplification of the view put forward in Heinze's Virgil's Episehe Technik (Berlin, 1903) that Virgil meant the character of Aeneas to grow during the action of the poem. Aeneas is always pius, but his pietas is only realised at its highest point in the last six books, and only as the result of the descent into Hades, and especially of the ' Heldenschau ' in the Sixth Book, which is thus the pivot on which the whole story turns, and the crisis of the hero's life. In the first five books he shows manifest signs of weakness, e.g. in i. 92 foil., and even of violentia in ii. 314 foil., 594 foil., of forgetfulness of his divine mission in Bk. IV., where there is an undoubted reference to the narrow escape of the Empire from destruction at the hands of Antony and Cleopatra. In the Fifth Book the character improves, becoming more typically Roman; but even up to the latter part of Bk. VI. Aeneas is continually looking backwards instead of forwardsnot yet fully realising that nothing that he has yet achieved is the real work of his life. In the last six books he never looks back or hesitates; and though the characterisation is not strong, and the real interest lies elsewhere, the poet meant his hero in these books to reach the heroic type of the Aeneas of the Iliad, in combination with the Roman qualities of pietas and humanitas.
On February ,12th a paper was read by Professor COOK WILSON on the Problem of the Greek Modes. Through the accident of being asked by Professor Bywater to consider a passage in Aristotle's Politics (1276. a. 35) for another purpose, the writer had come across a piece of evidence which seemed inconsistent with any current theory of the Greek Modes. By some strange mischance this passage, as well as another-important but much less explicit-from Theon of Smyrna (Hiller, p. 48, 1. 12), seemed^to have been quite overlooked in the controversy, antl it contained information of a kind supposed entirely wanting in the classical period about the internal constitution of a Mode.
It was contended that the passages usually quoted from Plato, Aristotle, Athenaeus, and Plutarch, while confirming Monro's view that a difference in pitch was essential to the difference between the Modes, proved that the Modes must also have differed in the arrangement of their intervals, i.e. as scales. The quotation in Athenaens from Heraclides Ponticus was of special importance, and the exact drift of it seemed to be generally misunderstood. The result obtained from these passages was confirmed by the new evidence from Aristotle, which seemed to necessitate that the Modes differed as scales, and inter atia could not be different species of the octave of the same compass. They must differ both in pitch and in interval, and thus somehow unite the characteristics of both keys and scales. Octaves taken at different positions in the same Perfect System would differ in this way; but such octaves as Westphal's would not do, because in an order of pitch contrary to the tradition about the Modes. That order had been supposed by Westphal to apply only to pure keys and not to the Modes at all; for it probably seemed that, if two systems were said to differ in pitch by a tone, &c, they must differ by this interval throughout and thus be different keys of the same scale, and hence the distinction would be inapplicable to octaves at different parts of the same Perfect System. It was suggested that this difficulty might be got over by supposing that the interval of pitch between two such octaves was measured by the interval between two notes in them occupying relatively the same given position in order in each of them ; and similarly for a system of octaves.
It was shown that, if this was so, the traditional order of pitch given for the Modes, 11£ 11J, would be best accounted for by supposing that the fifth note from the bottom of the modal octave, the true paramese in the central and standard octave and the thetic in the rest, was the note measured from. This would lead to a system of modal octaves in the traditional relations of pitch, such that the Dorian coincided not with the e-e octave, which has the intervals of the later so-called Dorian species of octave, but with the f-f octave. This not only agreed with the statement in Plutarch that the tetrachord hypaton was excluded from the Dorian Mode, and with his record of the interval of the Mixolydian-the only notice of the kind in a reliable author -but was further confirmed by the fact that it gave a simple solution of a standing puzzle-the story in Plutarch of the treatment of the Mixolydian Mode by a certain Lamprocles. Further, the system of Modes, when^takenin connexion with an hypothesis based on Ptolemy about the manner in which the later modal names for the species of octave and for the keys arose, would also give a simple solution of another puzzle, which has occasioned much speculation, the ancient notation for the Hypolydian key; for this would be a necessary consequence of the position assigned to the Dorian Mode. The general relation of these Modes to one another seemed again to make fully clear the meaning of the criticism attributed to Heraclides Ponticus in Athenaens.
The passage from Aristoxenus i. 37 was discussed. The transposition in it, proposed by "Westphal, was defended by a curious circumstance in the text itself, which seemed to have been overlooked ; on the other hand it was shown that Westphal was wrong in supposing that this text, in another part, contained a contradiction.
On February 19th a paper was read by Dr. FARNELL on the Attic Thargelia, discussing (a) the vegetationritual, (6) the piacular ceremonies. The former part of the festival fell on the seventh day of Thargelion, that is, about the 20th of May, and was evidently an early harvest-thanksgiving or a consecration of first-fruits immediately preceding the harvest; it falls into line with other European peasant-ritual which has been minutely examined by Mannhardt, and which does not in itself imply any highly organised system of personal deities; it was certainly pre-Apolline at Athens, being taken over by the higher religion as much agrarian primitive religion has been taken over by Christianity. The chief interest and much perplexity attach to the second part of the festival, the piacular ceremonies, which took place on the preceding day ; the question concerning the actual immolation of the pharmakos, of great importance for the history of Attic civilisation, was discussed in the light of the positive and negative evidence, and was shown to depend partly on the determination of the date of Socrates' death, which again requires a careful consideration of the Delian festival-calendar, and of the relation of various Delian festivals to the Attic Thargelia. The conclusion to be drawn from the varied evidence is that at least from the fifth century onwards there was no actual sacrifice of the human scape-goat at Athens, though human sacrifice was not unknown in the legend nor even in the ritual of Apollo. A further question was iaised as to the exact significance of the religious figure known as the pharmakos ; it was pointed out that the piacular conception of the scape-goat does not explain all the facts about him, and that we must also regard him in the light of a divine incarnation ; the story for instance that he was put to death because he had stolen certain sacred vessels from Apollo's temple could naturally arise if the pharmakos was carried in procession bearing libation-cups in the character of a god; but if the pharmakos embodied a deity, it must have been an old vegetation-deity other than Apollo.
On February 25th Professor ROBINSON ELLIS read a paper on the following passages:-Caesar B.C. iii. 69: Omniaque erant tumultus timoris fngae plena adeo ut cum Caesar signa fugientium manu prenderet et consistere juberet; alii dimissis equis eundem cursum tconfugerent, alii ex metu etiam signa dimitterent, neque quisquam omnino consisteret. . ConfugererU seems to be an error for eonfunderent. A scene is described in which foot-soldiers and cavalry are in turbid retreat. Some of the horse-soldiers dismount and thus become indistinguishable from the rest of the retreating army.
In reconstituting 670 Langen is followed. Prop. iii. 13. 32: Aut uariam plumae +viricoloris avem. So K F ; this points to mtricoloris rather than versicoloris ; some bird whose feathers were green or tinged with green.
Sen. Apocol. viii.: Quare, inquis, quaeroenim, sororemsuam? 'Stulte, stude : Athenis dimidium licet, Alexandriae totum.' ' Quia Romae, inquis, mures molas lingunt.' The American editor, Mr. Peazley Ball, explains molas as 'meal.' Is this meaning possible in the plural? The usual sense of the pluril is 'millstones.' Seneca says incestuous connexions between brother and sister were not uncommon at Athens, recognised at Alexandria, only furtively permitted in Rome. Thi3 is thus expressed: ' You mean, because at Rome (i.e. if we look to our own country) the mice only lick the mill-stones where any flour has been left, not venturing on anything more open, e.g. whore the flour lies freely on the floor, or has been collected in a bag or bin.' A gives Art/iav o{io» 8e iroAAa <pep(ii> flapv (altered from ffapvv, according to Bergk *). The other MSS. point with equal clearness to ArnuSva£, ipipeiv, and some inflexion of Hapvs in which either s or v is retained. Bergk conj. <rir 8e H-OAAA <p4peis fiapi, which necessitates an unpleasing hiatus, but seems very likely to be right in <rb Se. Harrison gives o-ol iro.Wck ipeptiv Papi, objectionable as a repetition of col. If ah hi is right, as seems more than probable, and <peptiv, as both A and the other MSS. agree, 0apis, so far from being an awkward attempt to emend, will be necessary. And surely this personal seflse ' resentful' is particularly idiomatic, whereas /3op<5 would be commonplace, a fault of which Theognis is not often guilty. Professor Ellis also suggested that the explanation of the abnormal Regis opus, sterilisve diu palus aptague remis (Hor. A. P. 65) is to be found in some peculiarity of pronunciation in which the syllables were slurred. A trace of something of the kind seems to be found in the reading of the Fronto palimpsest p. 228 Naber PLAUDIBUS for PALUDIBUS, and in the Oxford MS. of Catullus (Canon. Lat. 30) pVmdesque for paludesque (cxv. 5). And so plaudicolam for paludicolam in the ninth century MS. at St. Gallen of an epigram in the Anthologia Latina 395. 6 Riese.
At the same meetiug Mr. POWELL read a paper on two passages of Virgil's Georgics.
i. 410 Presso gutture. The meaning of ' hushed, pressed, soft," which all the editors give, seems inappropriate, both to the context and to the ornithological fact. A clear note of joy is described; and the evidence of observers shows that 'indrawn throat' does not express the action of a rook in cawing, although the neck may be strained forward. Pressus has a special meaning of'distinct,' 'clear,' in the technical language of rhetoric. In Cicero de Offieiis i. 133, presse loquentium means ' with a clear distinct enunciation.' In Cic. de Orat. iii. 43, oris pressu means ' distinct articulation,' and so in iii. 45. In Cic. de Nat. Dear. ii. 149 sonos vocis distinetos el pressos are made by the tongue. Presso then combines, in VirgiVs usual way, the physical meaning of effort, of pressing forward, not drawing back, the neck, and this literary use ; and the phrase may be translated 'with clear, deep note.' Virgil's exact knowledge of rooks may be illustrated by Georg. i. 382, eorvorum exercitus, which refers not merely to their numbers, but to their military precision and discipline.
iv. 141 Illi tiliae atque uberrima pinus. The meaning of uberrima has been missed by the editors, who generally take it as meaning 'fruitful,' which makes good sense at first sight, as the Stone Pine (pinus pinea), the pine of Italy and the Tyrol, was much prized for its nuts in Pliny's time (N.H. xvi. 44), which are still eaten and called Pinocchi.
But the lines 139 to 141 refer to gardens from the point of view of bee-keepers; Columella, ix. 4, and Palladius, i. 37, give both the tilia and the pinus among the list of trees which a bee-keeper should plant; the trees in this list are all either of the class of early-flowering trees, or resiniferous. There is no need to accept the reading tinus, which Philargyrius apud Servium ad loc. says was left by Virgil in his own handwriting as a variant, although tinus is an early-flowering shrub. Uberrima means 'rich in pollen.' Conifers are rich in pollen, and an observer writing in the Spectator of March 10, 1894, speaks of the pines attracting the early bees, and of the pines being crowded by working bees in the warm early spring of 1893 for the rich supplies of pollen. A beekeeper will plant early-flowering trees which will be in flower before the spring flowers, and give food for the comparatively barren months of March and April ; hence the appropriateness of saepes florem depasta salicti in Eel. i. 54, willows being early to flower. Again, conifers are resinous, and are said to provide the propolis, (which is probably the meaning otfueus in Georg. iv. 39 and of gluten in 160), just as in 183 the tilia is called pinguis from the gluten on the leaves ; and many of the other trees given in Columella's list are resinous. Uberrima may then be translated ' honey-laden.' Tiliae (lime-trees) are mentioned, because bees are notoriously fond of them as supplying honey and propolis; pines are men' tioned, because, besides these two advantages, they are early in flower. Virgil always writes carefully about bees and trees ; Suetonius' memoir ( § 1) says that Virgil's father 'silvis coemendis atque apibns curandis auxisse reculam fertur.' On March 4th a paper was read by Mr. Ross on some passages in Aristotle's Metaphysics. A 1071. a. 33-tj. 2 ; 1. 33, ij may be defended as introducing (1) an explanation of wSi or (2) a limitation of TO4T<£. In 1. 34 &>til is right, pointing forward to in avaipurai ivaipovfitvav which explains it. firi ri> trpurov 4vre\fX f W (the primwm movens, opposed to the vpanov iv TTJ ava\v<rti, cf. JEth. iii. 1112. b. 23) sc. airtor Travrav, is a third reason for saying the causes of all things are the same, the fiist being given in 11. 33-34, the second in 11. refers to nv6s, rb 8' OHK itrri to nvl. L. 5, the MSS. all read xa 1 iv4pytia, and it is not quite clear that Alexander omits it. p Kiveirat must refer to what follows. Read Sxrr el y <pop& (subject) 5\ vptir-n Kal ivepyeii. (predicate) ionv, $ Kivurat rairri y' 4v5fX*Ttu &\\us J?x«y, KOT& T6TOV. If the spatial motion of a thing is the primary spatial motion (the circular, and therefore the primary motion in general, for spatial motion is the primary motion), and is an ivipyeia (not a mere yeve<ns, i.e. n.lvt\ais icar' ovtrlav), the thing is contingent in that respect in which it is moved, i.e. in place, even if not in substance (i.e'. even if it is eternal, as the primwm mobile is).
1074. a. 12-14. The theories as to the number of the spheres have just been stated as follows :- 'Not adding to the moon and to the sun the movements we have mentioned' would naturally mean deducting the four Calippus added, and the two sun-spheres which Aristotle added to counteract the two sun-spheres added by Calippus. This would reduce the total to forty-nine, not to forty-seven as • is here stated. If Aristotle meant to deduct four counteracting spheres from the sun, he was giving up the principle of counteracting spheres, for two of Eudoxns' sun-spheres would remain uncounteracted and disturb the movement of the moon. Alexander makes three suggestions:-(1) that Aristotle forgets there are only two moon-spheres to be subtracted, (2) that he forgets there are only four sun-spheres to be subtracted, (3) that twin is the true reading. Simpl. on de Coelo 503. 10-504. 3 adds nothing valuable. Schw. and Bon. accept Krische's view that the movements to be deducted are the eight reverse movements of Mercury and the sun which prevent their forward movements from affecting the sun and the moon respectively. K. thinks these might be omitted because of the great distance of the sun and moon from the planets and from each other. But (1) the last point is wrong, for the spheres touch one another. Meteor. 340. b. 10, 341. a. 2 ; de Coelo 287. a. 5, (2) the reverse spheres of Mercury and the sun were not added to the sun and the moon, though for their good, (3) K. ignores de Coelo 291. b. 35

4\6TTOVS yap ijAios xal <re\{\yn KIVOVVTHI KiWjffeis f) TUV itXavaiiivav Harpav (via. On K.'s view only
reverse movements have to be deducted; the sun and the moon would still have five movements each, which is not fewer than the number of movements of any of the planets ; for five is the largest number assigned to any of the planets in the theory either of Eudoxus or of Calippus. If the total number of movements (backward and forward) assigned to the sun and the moon is, as A tells us, to be reduced from fourteen to six, and if the sun and the moon are each to have less than five, either one must have four and the other two, or each, must have three.
No known theory agrees with the former alternative, while that of Eudoxus agrees exactly with the latter. Aristotle, then, goes back to the Eudoxean theory, subtracting-just as his words suggest-all the additions made by Calippus and himself in respect of the sun and the moon. This coincides with Alexander's second interpretation. His third interpretation is tempting; but lirra goes back to the time of Sosigenes (50 B. c.) and ivvia still leaves the main difficulty-why Aristotle should give up the additions made by himself and Calippus. We have no light on this : but, in view of the obvious differences between the sun and moon and the planets, it is not surprising that Aristotle should have abandoned, with regard to the former, a theory which he accepted with regard to the latter. If our view is correct, Aristotle might have said in de Coelo that the sun and the moon have fewer motions than any of the planets; but his point is that the movements do not become regularly > more complex as one passes from the primum mobile inwards to the earth.
On March 11th a paper was read by Mr. Louis DYER on ' Early Relations between Arcadia and Olympia.' The Peloponnesian war ultimately revolutionised these relations, but not until the foundation of Megalopolis, the forcible occupation of Olympia, and the celebration of the games by Arcadians in 364 B.O., known as the An-olympiad. Eecent labours on Olympian inscriptions, on the Oxyrhynchus list of victors from Ol. 75-83 (Kobert), and on cc. i.-xviii of Pans. vi. (W. Hyde), enabled the writer to draw a sharp line at the Anolympiad, before which Arcadians and Eleans indiscriminately, and as one community, achieved the highest standard in athletics. Pausanias catalogued. 188-odd victor3. Of these 168 were approximately dated; and only one Arcadian among them came after S64 B.C., and he won in 360 B.C. He was of Lepreum, which must count as Arcadian. No inscription records an Arcadian victor after the Anolympiad, though Arcadian local games flourished until at least 200 B.c. From 168 dated victors, subtract 65 who come after the Anolympiad, and 103 remain, 52 for all other parts of the Greek world, while 51 are left who came from Arcadia and Elis. Of these 30 are Arcadians and 21 Eleans. This doubtless resulted 1 partly from the superior numbers of the Arcadians, but chiefly from their superior athletics, which in turn depended on their highly developed local games and their easier access to the Nemean and Pythiangames, as well as on the exclusion of Eleans from the Isthmia. Xenias in Cyrus's 10,000 showed the Arcadian devotion to games, and Lycomedes's boast as to Arcadian bodily vigour had a sound basis in fact. Local Arcadian games, unsupplied until the foundation of Megalopolis with Stadia and Hippodromes, were plainly little more than a training ground for the metropolitan contests at Olympia. The Eleans so greatly excelled in savoir faire, that, under great provocation, the Spartans continued them as overseers of the games, judging the rival claimants as incompetent x<"P' T< " (Xen. Bell. III. ii. 31). Arcadians won no chariot-races, and excelled chiefly in boxing and wrestling, not in the pentathlon. Their boy victors weTe proportionately more numerous than the Eleans', perhaps because grown up Arcadians went forth as mercenaries.
In the matter of the sculptors chosen to make statues of Arcadian and Elean victors, indications of a common taste are not lacking. Barring scattered choices, we find nine Eleans and seven Arcadians falling upon four sculptors, all from Sicyon, obviously nearer to Arcadia than to Elis. Close scrutiny of dates indicates that (Arcadians took the initiative in choosing sculptors, and were followed by Eleans. Arcadians introduced Sicyonian sculptors, patronised by them and Eleans just when the Sicyonian treasury was built at Olympia. Arcadians at an earlier time introduced Pythagoras of Rhegium and Nicodamus of Maenalus to the notice and patronage of all Greece. After their withdrawal from Olympia there was a collapse of good taste. This is suggested by shoals of monuments of degenerate taste that met Pausanias' eye at the end of his first, and throughout his second, round among victors' statues. These, with, few exceptions, were set up after the Anolympiad, and their grouping suggests a survival in the mind of the Eleans of thenotion that Elis and Arcadia were still the ' homecounties ' of the games, and perhaps an expectation of future Arcadian victors. Before the Anolympiad, at all events, the grouping of victors' statues is a record of long comradeship between Arcadians and Eleans. It was Arcadia and Elis against the world. Arcadians and Eleans were grouped together, and always in the best places. The three groups east of the front of the Great Temple of Zeus contained 3f> Arcado-Eleans, a group presumably near the Great Ashen-Altar contained 3, and the group south of the Heraeum 6. Further evidence that for social and religious purposes the Eleans and Arcadians often figure as one people, is found in Xenophon's and Plutarch's casual allusion to individual Eleans as Arcadian (Anab. VI. iv. 10, De Fraterno Amore p. 479 B), in Thucydides's (I. 10) subdivision of the Peloponnesus, alluded to by Pausanias at the beginning of Book V, as well as in Pindar's Sixth Olympian Ode. This is further emphasised by the known facts about Elean and Arcadian coinage, and by Pausanias's unsuccessful, though repeated attempts to indicate the boundary between Elis and Arcadia. The boundary between Heraea and Pisatis he knows as a cantonal boundary, but nevertheless puts the whole district of Pholoe into Arcadia, and places Mt. Lapithas there also, in spite of giving the river Diagon as the limit of southern Pisatis eastward. Only by reading *pv£alas,-not known as a topographical designation,-for Utaaias in a puzzling passage, can Bliimner and Hitzig disguise the fact, recognised in the index to Teubner's text, that Pausanias regards Pholoe as an Arcadian mountain, although it is in Elis, just as he looks upon Mt. Laplthas as Arcadian, although west of the river Diagon. The testimony of legends here is overwhelming, and to this may be added, for the earliest times, that of deep-level Olympian excavations. These must have come from an area including at least the whole region watered by the Alpheus and all its tributaries. He shews that the head has been twice restored in plaster, first by Ferrari and then by Simart. The lower part of the forehead, the whole of the nose and mouth, and the front part of the chin are modern. So much a trained eye can easily discern from a careful examination of the plaster casts of the head, though certain French archaeologists are most unwilling to allow that the profile is a modern creation. But Dr. Sauer made a further discovery, by the help of old casts preserved at Giessen and Dresden. Every one who has studied it must have observed how impossibly deep the head is from front to back. This turns out to be the fault of Simart, who finding the back of the head damaged and part of the top indented, added plaster at the back and top to a depth of 1 to 2 centimetres, say three-quarters of an inch. The restoration of the face was perhaps legitimate, but the distortion of the whole form of the head was unjustifiable.
Taking his discovery as a starting point, Prof. Sauer has certainly used it for all it is worth, perhaps for somewhat more, though one must always forgive the ardour of the man who unearths a new fact. He seeks in an exhaustive investigation to prove that the slight recessing of part of the top of the head proves exactly how it must have stood in relation to the cornice of the pediment; and further that it must be assigned, not to the Western Pediment, but to the central portion of the Eastern, which has disappeared ages ago, all but three or four fragments. Prof. Sauer tries to support with fresh arguments the restoration of the East Pediment which he proposed in 1891, but which has not met with the general acceptance of which, not unnaturally, its originator had thought it worthy. He also makes a contribution to the West Pediment in the form of a newly identified foot, which he'attributes to the male figure seated on the lap of mother or nurse.
The facts as to the Laborde head with which Prof. Sauer sets out seem clear and certain. For these at least we owe him gratitude. His tendency to get out of facts more conclusions than they will warrant appeared in his work on the Theseium. In dealing with the Parthenon Pediments he is on safer ground : and his method, even if carried to excess, is far preferable to the arguments from one's subjective notions of fitnesses and probabilities which have played so great a part in some reconstructions and interpretations of the sculptures of the Parthenon.