Readers of the poems of Dracontius as edited and expounded by F. Vollmer may well receive the impression that the poet was incapable of the Latin tongue and was given to turns and expressions intelligible only to himself and such painstaking students as his editor. The language of the true Drac., though often stiff and artificial, does not, however, call for superhuman powers of interpretation, and the bewilderment of his readers is occasioned largely by the faulty tradition of the text (...) and the conservatism of an editor who either refuses to recognize the corruptions which confront him, or is content with superficial corrections sufficient to restore some semblance of grammar whether or not accompanied by sense. To the text of Drac. Vollm. certainly made a valuable contribution, but his unshakable faith in the integrity of scribes led to a frequent acceptance of the false as the true; that the transmission of the text may have been left to the heedless or the ignorant is not a possibility which appears to have occurred to him. There can be no doubt that the manuscripts on which the text depends are full of corruptions, and many of these have received either inadequate attention or none at all; where convincing remedies have been proposed by previous scholars, Vollm. has shown all too often a blind indifference. The poems of Drac. deserve, indeed, more sympathetic treatment, for they are by no means without merit. The Christian works at least, written during his imprisonment, contain flashes of real poetry and are characterized by a warmth of feeling inspired by the poet's personal miseries and genuine belief in the goodness of God; that they were read and imitated in the most diverse lands of the Christian world is not surprising. The following notes represent for the most part an attempt to improve on Vollm.'s text of the De laudibus dei and the Satisfactio in certain passages where the manuscript reading appears to me to have been either improperly retained or imperfectly emended. I have already dealt with a number of other unsatisfactory passages in C.Q., vol. xxxiii, pp. 157–62, and vol. xl, pp. 92–100. The text quoted is in each case that of Vollm.'s P.L.M. edition. (shrink)

Among the Christian Latin poets Paulinus, Bishop of Nola in the early fifth century and for Gronovius the ‘swan’ of that city, occupies a prominent place and his work throws important light on contemporary tendencies in language and literature as well as on religious customs. In editing both his epistles and poems W. von Hartel performed a valuable service. Yet, great as was the improvement upon the Migne edition, numerous questions of text and interpretation have remained to be dealt with (...) and these have received comparatively small attention. The passages discussed below are a sample of those that call for elucidation or amendment. The text quoted at the head of each note is that of Hartel. At or near the beginning of the first note on a new poem, where a point of reading is considered, the manuscripts available are specified. (shrink)

O. A. W. Dilke disapproves of the reading uergens advocated by me in C.Q., NS. iv [1954], 188 f., retains uertens of the better manuscripts translating ‘and Fortune did not take long to change the balance of so many weights’, and, citing for the use of diu Sen. Contr. 2. 3. 10 ‘si non impetro ut uiuam, hoc certe impetrem ne diu moriar’, asks ‘How is this not a parallel?’ Others too have not hesitated to ascribe a similar use to (...) diu. The difficulty is that to which I briefly referred in C.Q,., I.e. The adverb diu is appropriate only with verbs representing a continuous or protracted action: e.g. morior may represent such an action, and it does so in Sen., I.e.—the speaker prays for exemption from a protracted death and diu retains its characteristic sense. (shrink)

All is set for the Greeks' departure from Troy. As I understand the scene, the rowers have their oars strapped to their hands and are eager to start. A warning flare now shines out from the regia ratis and the actual signal to start is given by a trumpet-blast, either rhetorically viewed as addressed to the thousand ships from the flagship or sounded on each at sight of the flare. The flagship then moves off and is followed by the fleet. (...) Cf. the related passage, Tro. 1044–6 ‘cum tuba iussi dare uela nautae | et simul uentis properante remo | prenderint altum’.428 laetum was conjectured by Leo in view of the difficulty of reconciling lentum, which would normally mean ‘listless’ or ‘sluggish’, and properanti in 426 ; note too 437 ff. ‘properat iuuentus omnis adductos simul | lentare remos…’ and the expression properante remo in Tro. 1045. The simple correction laetum would appear both to remove the difficulty and to be entirely appropriate. Yet, though accepted by Peiper-Richter and Herrmann, laetum has come in for resistance: it is rejected by Moricca, Viansino, Giardina, and Tarrant. In defence of lentum Viansino compares Medea 623 portibus lentis, in which I find no relevance; F. Giancotti interprets that the men in their impatience to be off appear lenti to themselves; Tarrant renders ‘slow to respond’, explaining ‘the rowing of the men is uncoordinated after ten years' lack of practice’, but in 428 the rowing has not yet started, and note the harmony indicated in 437–9. lentum is alien to Seneca's spirited picture and seems to me indefensible; laetum, on the other hand, is both attractive in itself and supported by significant evidence, which I have not seen adduced. (shrink)

The expression transuersa tuentibus hircis has been liable to misunderstanding. Conington, Sidgwick, and Page offer no comment; Perret is puzzled; Coleman explains ‘either literally “peeping out of the corner of their eyes” or figuratively “looking askance”; cf. Greek This was too much even for the lusty goats …’; others, e.g. Holtorf, detect humour in the words. A more realistic view was taken by some earlier editors, who saw in the sidelong looks of the goats a sign of envy and desire.

In CQ 34, 457, on Lucan 4.664 indulsit castris, I wrote ‘Housman…explains “…inuitantibus ad desidiam”: read rather ad temeritatem’. Mr S. J. Heyworth has kindly pointed out to me that Housman in his corrected impression does in fact write temeritatem. I was myself using the first impression, where H. has desidiam. It had not occurred to me that H. would so drastically alter an interpretation in a ‘Second impression ’.

For horribilesque we need something better than Haupt's horribile aequor ; and Mr. E. L. B. Meurig Davies comes near the truth, I think, with his proposal horribilem niue. A noun in the ablative indicating cold to define horribilem is just what we require. That noun does not seem to me, however, likely to be niue. Read rather horribilem gelu; cf. Luc. 2. 570 ‘ Rheni gelidis … fugit ab undis’, Claud. Rapt. 3. 321 ‘non Rheni glacies, non me Rhipaea (...) tenebunt’, Paneg. 7. 6 ‘duratus gelu Rhenus’. (shrink)

So a frenzied matron cries out to Phoebus as she rushes through an appalled Rome. In CQ 34 , 454f. I pointed out that the words primos in ortus could not here bear their normal sense ‘to the far east’ , which in view of the next line would be geographically absurd, and, distraught as the lady was, even so highly improbable. I did, however, then think R. J. Getty right in taking the expression primos ortus as simply = ‘the (...) east’, and adding ‘the epithet primos appears to be otiose’. But I now feel very doubtful about the epithet being viewed as otiose in order that the words may denote Egypt; quite different are the passages noted in OLD primus 6 ‘belonging to the rising sun, eastern’, as Stat. Silv. 1.4.73 ‘occidiias primasque domos’ in the cited Sen. Oed. 116 ‘miles… ausus Eois equitare campis / figere et mundo tua signa primo’ the literal meaning is no doubt ‘on the world's first edge’ , but its development into ‘eastern’ is readily seen. Egypt, however, as viewed by Rome, is but the bare beginning of the east, and that is what primos must indicate above : see OLD primus 10 b ‘the nearest part of, the entrance, threshold, or sim., of, noting e.g. Ov. Fast. 1.717 ‘horreat Aeneadas et primus et ultimus orbis’, Cic. Fam. 3.6.2. ‘te in prima prouincia uelle esse, ut quam primum decederes’. In a characteristic departure from their stock meaning Lucan's words primos in ortus must then mean ‘to the threshold of the east’, i.e. the delta of the Nile, as explained in the next line : contrast 7.360 primo gentes oriente = ‘the nations of the far east’ . For Egypt viewed as the beginning of the east, cf. Mela 1.9 ‘Asiae prima pars Aegyptus’, Plin. Nat. 5.47 ‘[Africae] adhaeret Asia, quam patere a Canopico ostio [Nili] ad Ponti ostium Timosthenes…tradidit’, Mart. Cap. 6.675 ‘Aegyptus… Asiae caput, 3 quae una ab ostio Canopi ad ostium Ponti habet… milia passuum’; cf. the close association of Egypt with the east in Virg. Aen. 8.687 ‘Aegyptum uiresque Orientis’. For the varied use of the word primus should be noted too Luc. 9.413f. ‘nee… plus litora Nili / quam Scythicus Tanais primis a Gadibus absunt’, ‘from Gades in the far west’ , ‘Gades the first place in the west’ , i.e. the threshold of the Mediterranean. (shrink)

A list of the principal works referred to is given in my previous article, ‘Notes on Some Passages in Seneca's Tragedies and the Octavia’, CQ 39 , 186–96.

Claudius Marius Victor , a rhetor of Marseilles , composed in the first half of the fifth century a metrical paraphrase of Genesis from the creation of the world up to the destruction of Sodom. The work, which amounts to something over 2,000 lines and is supposedly unfinished, is entitled Alethia, seasoned with occasional discussion of philosophic or other matter, and written with the expressed hope of improving the minds of the young. The text depends on a single ninth-century Paris (...) manuscript , which contains errors that are numerous but in general rudimentary and susceptible of convincing emendation. The first serious edition—for the edition of J. de Gagny , though it offered many useful emendations, was too full of licentious alterations, excisions, and additions, to rank as such—was that of G. Morel . The next editor, G. Fabricius , in spite of his awareness of Morel's edition, did little more than reproduce the depraved text of Gagny. (shrink)

Mr. Alan Ker in C.Q., N.S. vii , 151–8, proposes to alter the text of Claudian in numerous places where the tradition appears to me to be blameless, in some cases substituting for readings which seem characteristic and admirable others which seem less so. Claudian is an elegant poet, whose mastery of language many regard as comparable with that of the Silver Age poets, and Mr. Ker's dismissal of him as ‘a simple writer, with a small and unambitious vocabulary’ does (...) less than justice to his powers. I would suggest, in particular, the following points for consideration. (shrink)

Orientius, Bishop of Auch in the early fifth century, possessed a talent for elegiac verse of no despicable order, and this he exercised in a didactic poem of 518 distichs, as the Commonitorium. This poem, consisting of two books, describes and exhorts the reader to follow the Christian mode of life, and is characterized by its unassuming simplicity, some effective description, a number of well-turned lines, and a sincere belief in the truths he was preaching. The language is in general (...) clear and direct, though tinged here and there with turns of a decidedly late flavour. (shrink)

The text of each passage commented on is that of Housman except where otherwise stated. The following editions of Lucan or other works concerned with him are indicated by the scholar's name only: Text: A. E. Housman . Text with commentary: F. Oudendorp ; P. Burman ; C. H. Weise ; C. E. Haskins ; R. J. Getty, Book 1.

The text quoted above each note is that of the edition of Seneca's tragedies by Otto Zwierlein , OCT 1986; numerous passages are discussed in his Kritischer Kommentar zu den Tragüdien Senecas , Stuttgart, 1986; various textual suggestions were made in a correspondence with Zw. by B. Axelson . Other works on Seneca's tragedies, referred to by the scholar's name only, are: Text and translation: F. J. Miller, Loeb, 1917; L. Herrmann, Budé, 1924–6. Text with commentary: R. J. Tarrant, Agamemnon (...) , and Thyestes ; J. G. Fitch, Hercules Furens . Text with commentary and translation: Elaine Fantham, Troades ; A. J.Boyle, Phaedra. (shrink)

All is set for the Greeks' departure from Troy. As I understand the scene, the rowers have their oars strapped to their hands and are eager to start. A warning flare now shines out from the regia ratis and the actual signal to start is given by a trumpet-blast, either rhetorically viewed as addressed to the thousand ships from the flagship or sounded on each at sight of the flare. The flagship then moves off and is followed by the fleet. (...) Cf. the related passage, Tro. 1044–6 ‘cum tuba iussi dare uela nautae | et simul uentis properante remo | prenderint altum’.428 laetum was conjectured by Leo in view of the difficulty of reconciling lentum, which would normally mean ‘listless’ or ‘sluggish’, and properanti in 426 ; note too 437 ff. ‘properat iuuentus omnis adductos simul | lentare remos…’ and the expression properante remo in Tro. 1045. The simple correction laetum would appear both to remove the difficulty and to be entirely appropriate. Yet, though accepted by Peiper-Richter and Herrmann, laetum has come in for resistance: it is rejected by Moricca, Viansino, Giardina, and Tarrant. In defence of lentum Viansino compares Medea 623 portibus lentis, in which I find no relevance; F. Giancotti interprets that the men in their impatience to be off appear lenti to themselves; Tarrant renders ‘slow to respond’, explaining ‘the rowing of the men is uncoordinated after ten years' lack of practice’, but in 428 the rowing has not yet started, and note the harmony indicated in 437–9. lentum is alien to Seneca's spirited picture and seems to me indefensible; laetum, on the other hand, is both attractive in itself and supported by significant evidence, which I have not seen adduced. (shrink)

Mr. Alan Ker in Class. Quart., vol. xliv, 1950, pp. 12–24, discusses a number of Martial passages which appear to him to be in need of elucidation or textual amendment. That some of these passages require elucidation seems indeed clear, but few require any treatment of the kind prescribed by Mr. Ker. In so many cases does he seem to me needlessly to alter the epigrammatist's carefully chosen words and ascribe to him others which he would never have used that (...) it seems but proper to call attention to some instances. The following notes are intended to show that Martial was a more able writer and the transmitters of his work more competent than Mr. Ker's paper would suggest; the conclusions accord with Heraeus' observation ‘coniecturis omnino non multum loci est in Martiale, minimum, ubi αβγ conspirant’. (shrink)

The expression transuersa tuentibus hircis has been liable to misunderstanding. Conington, Sidgwick, and Page offer no comment; Perret is puzzled; Coleman explains ‘either literally “peeping out of the corner of their eyes” or figuratively “looking askance”; cf. Greek This was too much even for the lusty goats …’; others, e.g. Holtorf, detect humour in the words. A more realistic view was taken by some earlier editors, who saw in the sidelong looks of the goats a sign of envy and desire.

Among the Christian Latin poets Paulinus, Bishop of Nola in the early fifth century and for Gronovius the ‘swan’ of that city, occupies a prominent place and his work throws important light on contemporary tendencies in language and literature as well as on religious customs. In editing both his epistles and poems W. von Hartel performed a valuable service. Yet, great as was the improvement upon the Migne edition , numerous questions of text and interpretation have remained to be dealt (...) with and these have received comparatively small attention. The passages discussed below are a sample of those that call for elucidation or amendment. The text quoted at the head of each note is that of Hartel. At or near the beginning of the first note on a new poem, where a point of reading is considered, the manuscripts available are specified. (shrink)

This early work by William Henry Hudson was originally published in 1894 and we are now republishing it. 'An Introduction to the Philosophy of Herbert Spencer' is a book that examines Spencer's ethics, sociology, and synthetic philosophy. Herbert Spencer was born on 27th April 1820, in Derby, England. In 1851 he published 'Social Statics' to great acclaim and his quietly influential 'Principles of Psychology' in 1955. These were followed by numerous works of sociology, psychology, and philosophy, which led him (...) to become a prominent intellectual of his day. He also wrote 'The Developmental Hypothesis' (1852) which described the theory of evolution seven years before Charles Darwin's 'Origin of Species'. He even popularised the term "Evolution" and coined the phrase "Survival of the fittest," but his works did not contain the comprehensive theoretical system that Darwin's did, which is why his theory was not taken seriously at the time. Spencer's most famous idea was that of "Social Darwinism." He saw the process of organic evolution as being analogous to that of society, an idea influenced many intellectuals of the day. (shrink)