period, we shall expect to find Vergil drawing upon both for the cultural background of his epic.

A comparison of the native Italian army with the invading Trojans and their allies shows that Vergil has assigned to the former all the arms which he has given to Aeneas' men, but that among the Latin forces there are, in addition, many instances of more primitive and unusual equipment.

The materials used for the arms are mainly gold, bronze, and iron. So lavish a use of gold is not borne out by the simple contents of Latian tombs but is abundantly confirmed by many splendid Etruscan tombs. The great prominence of iron weapons in the Aeneid is in marked contrast with the rare use of iron in the Homeric poems but it agrees admirably with the contents of primitive warrior tombs in Italy.

A comparison of specific weapons in the Aeneid with those from prehistoric burials in Italy yields many interesting parallels. On the significance of these resemblances we may not dogmatize until Vergil's picture of the heroic age has been scrutinized from many points of view. Upon such a study the writer of this paper is now engaged.

7. Septima Aestas, Aeneid I, 755; V, 626, by Professor Franklin H. Potter, University of Iowa.

The alleged inconsistency of these two passages, noticed by commentators from the earliest times, has had an important place in the theories of the composition of the Aeneid. The "inconsistency" depends on an unwarranted assumption that Aeneas spent a year at Carthage. A year intervenes between the death of Anchises and the beginning of the fifth book; but the close of the third book does not warrant the assumption that this full year was spent at Carthage and does not preclude the view that Aeneas remained in Sicily during the winter following his father's death.

Two passages in the fourth book commonly cited to show that Aeneas spent the winter in Carthage, one being the exaggerated rumor of Fama that Aeneas purposed to spend the winter with Dido, the other being the stock argument which Dido used to exaggerate the danger of sailing, are insufficient to justify the traditional view and are contradicted by passages which show that Aeneas' sojourn in Africa was in the summer.

The view that Anchises died near the close of the sixth summer, that Aeneas remained in Sicily during the following winter, was driven to Carthage when he finally set sail in the following (seventh)

summer, remained in Carthage about three months, and returned to Sicily the same summer in time to celebrate the anniversary of his father's death involves no violence to the evident meaning of any passage of Vergil and eliminates the necessity of seeing any inconsistency in the septima aestas of 1, 755 and v, 626.

8. An Attempt to reconstruct the First Edition of Plato's Republic, by Professor L. A. Post, Haverford College.

To prove the existence of an early edition of Plato's Republic we have, besides internal evidence, a statement of Aulus Gellius, statements in the seventh Platonic epistle, the evidence of Aristophanes' Ecclesiazousae and of Theopompus' Stratiotides, and the probable references in the Busiris of Isocrates and the Timaeus of Plato. The question arises whether these items of evidence are mutually inconsistent or whether a hypothetical first edition of the Republic can be reconstructed which will bring the scattered evidence to a focus with cumulative effect. It is found that all conditions are satisfied if we assume that about the year 392 B. C. Plato published a work about as long as the Gorgias, containing book I of the Republic and the substance of numerous brief passages in books II-VI. In view of the numerous facts explained by this hypothetical first edition it is probable that there was such an edition. While this result is not certain, it is much simpler and consequently more probable than any possible alternative hypothesis. The unity and the significance of the Republic as we have it are in no way impaired by supposing that parts of it had appeared in another form.

9. Ritual Survivals in Greek Tragedy, by Alfred C. Schlesinger, Williams College.

Gilbert Murray traces the influence of the ancestral ritual on classic Greek tragedy through six elements, which are present throughout tragedy,-Agon, Pathos, Messenger, Threnos, Anagnorisis, and Theophany. The Agon, or contest, is a necessary element of drama, the Pathos, or catastrophe, with its accompaniment, the Threnos, or lamentation, a necessary element of "tragedy," as defined today; it is not always markedly present in Greek tragedy. The prominence of the Messenger is due largely to the conditions of production; to an outdoor scene, which eliminated ambushes laid in the house, ladies' suicides, and scenes necessarily indoors; to the immobility of the chorus; and to limited machinery. It is unnecessary to invoke esthetic or religious considerations to account

for these off-stage scenes. The Anagnorisis was considered by Aristotle a type of complication, and hence we should not expect it in the earlier plays. We find it rarely in Aeschylus, and less in Euripides' earlier plays than in his later ones; Sophocles, the great master of plot, uses it most frequently. The Theophany is also a late development, provided we distinguish it correctly from the appearance of a god as an actor throughout the play. This latter naive use of gods was largely discontinued after Aeschylus; the Theophany properly so called was a specialty of Euripides, like its companion piece, the prologue-god. He used it largely to further his interest in prophecy and to round off the story. This led him to introduce references throughout a play, wherever possible. When a non-divine character could supply the information, no god was introduced. It therefore appears that such elements of Murray's "ritual tragedy" as are not common to all drama of a similar nature are employed by the Greek dramatists in accordance with artistic principles rather than religious tradition; hence we conclude that the influence of ritual on developed Greek drama was manifested, if at all, in other ways than those set forth by Murray.

10. Possible Literary Affinities of Two Satires of Lucilius, by Professor L. R. Shero, St. Stephen's College.

99.66

I

Cichorius has argued that the adjective rusticus used in Charisius' description of a passage in book v of Lucilius (deridens. rusticam cenam enumeratis multis herbis) must have been employed in the sense of "crude,' unmannerly"; for in view of the satirist's unremitting advocacy of simple living it cannot be supposed that "country fare" was anywhere the object of his ridicule. But the immediate addition of the words "enumeratis multis herbis" suggests that rusticus should be given its primary meaning, and furthermore that the point of the satire lay somehow in the enumeration of vegetarian dishes. Such a point would be provided for the satire, and the difficulty with regard to ridiculing country fare be met by assuming that Lucilius (whose wide acquaintance with Greek writings is well attested) was burlesquing pieces like Matron's 'ATTIKOV SEÛTVov (Ath. iv, 134-137), in which the most conspicuous feature is the enumeration of a great variety of elaborate viands. In the Lucilian account we may suppose that there was the same lavish profusion, but a profusion of common herbs instead of luxurious dainties. The extant fragments of the satire are consistent with such an assumption.

II

That a satire in the Lucilius, book XIII, closely resembled the lecture of Ofellus on plain living in Horace II, 2 is indicated by the following facts:

(1) It was an instruction, like the Horatian piece, as is shown by the verb forms in fragments 438 f. and 440 f.

(2) The speaker inveighs against fastidiousness and luxury (440-443); simple fare is recommended (444). Cf. esp. Hor. 23-37 and 44-46.

(3) Fragment 445 is most naturally interpreted as a warning that the revolt against luxury must not extend to offenses against good taste. Cf. Hor. 53-69.

Certain fragments not assigned to particular books fit well into such a satire.

11. A Simonidean Distich at Florence, by Professor Emeritus Ernest G. Sihler, New York University.

I copied it there, in October, 1924. Its metrical character (iambic trimeter) had not been recognized by Gori, 1731. Osann (Sylloge, 1834) readily perceived it and Welcker charged the initial 'o to the "quadrantarius." Kaibel published it in his Epigrammata, 1878, as No. 1137. Bergk, fr. 66 did not see that line 1 was essential. I present the distich here without the initial article:

παυσίλυπος οἶκος οὗτός ἐστιν ἀσφαλῶς·

ἐστὶν δὲ καὶ σιγᾶν ἀκίνδυνον γέρας.

For ἀσφαλῶς Osann miscopied ἀστομῶς. (The light in the corner of the cortile of the Medicean palace is indeed poor.) That word of Osann's blunder ultimately found lodgment in the Didot Stephanus, S.V. ǎσтоμоs. Young Kaibel's friend Wilamowitz in 1874, 52 years ago, latinized the distich thus:

Ingredere limen; cura non potest sequi;
Tutum est fidele praemium silentii,

-conceiving it, perhaps, as adorning the entrance of a Roman villa, like the Pausilypon (Posilipo) of Vedius Pollio near Neapolis. But I am sure we are dealing with versus ferales. I suggest this version:

A home is this where sorrows are no more;

'Tis a distinction, too, of danger void,

To speak no more.

Line 1, too, in that sententious and simple dignity of noble truth is Simonidean to the core. May I not, for the sentiment involved, append some lines of Longfellow's Silent Land as translated by him from the original of Salis-Seewis:

For all the broken-hearted

The mildest herald by our fate allotted,

Beckons, and with inverted torch doth stand

To lead us with a gentle hand

To the land of the great Departed,

Into the silent land!

12. Note on the Date of Livy's Birth and on the Termination of his History, by Professor Gertrude Hirst, Barnard College.

1. The commonly accepted date for Livy's birth, depending on St. Jerome, is 59 B.C. He says "Messala Corvinus orator nascitur et Titus Livius Patavinus scriptor historicus." Messala's date conflicts with Jerome's other, statements about his death and with various circumstances of his life; the dates usually accepted now are 64 B.C.-8 A.D. Schulz first pointed out a plausible explanation for the mistake-that Jerome had confused the consuls for 64 B. C. (Caesar and Figulus) with those for 59 (Caesar and Bibulus). No biographer of Livy however appears to have noticed that Livy's date must presumably also be changed to 64. Then, if Jerome's statement that Livy died at Patavium in 17 A.D. be accepted, his age was 81 and not 75.

2. Some have thought that Livy could not have intended to end with Drusus's death, 9 B.C. But is this so certain? The oldest MS. of the Periochae states that book cxxI was written after Augustus' death; if so, 22 books were written by Livy in the last three years of his life. This tremendous output suggests that the aged historian had a goal in view. Now Drusus was credited with democratic tendencies, and Livy, besides giving the eulogies pronounced by Augustus and Tiberius at the funeral ceremonies, himself would have summed up his character, and would doubtless have indicated whatever republican tendencies Drusus had. The Periochae of the last five books, after Agrippa's death, 12 B.C., all refer to Drusus' conquests: and his death must have seemed a national disaster. Livy may well have thought that with Drusus were buried also the last hopes of the revival of the republic. So in his declining years he may really have designed to end his history with Drusus' death.