صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

tation, Corn, and Tree spirits, as well as those of rocks, mountains, and rivers, and what are collectively termed Totemistic beliefs", fertility-rites, initiation rites, mana, "the worship of Demeter and almost1 all other Greek deities" are "not primary phenomena but merely secondary and dependent on the primary belief in the immortality and durability of the soul" (63, 337, and passim). It would follow that "tragedy and serious drama" (being everywhere associated with some form of religion) not only in Greece but "wherever they are found under the sun have their roots in the world-wide belief in the continued existence of the soul after the death of the body" (385). It would hardly lie within the scope of the interests to which THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY is devoted to follow the ramifications of these theories. Every one understands that ancestor worship has played a prominent role in the development of religion; but the view that it is the parent of all, or practically all, other forms few will be disposed to accept.

Space may properly be used, however, to express an opinion upon the fundamental problem which lies underneath our author's two volumes, namely, the origin of tragedy in Greece, even though this matter figures only incidentally in the book under review. Prior to Arion and Epigenes there was nothing which the most fanciful could recognize as akin to modern tragedy. After the work of Thespis and Aeschylus no one can fail to note its presence. To trace, so far as we may, the gradual unfolding of the new genre from a state of non-existence to a period of vigorous growth seems to me a concrete problem and distinctly worth while. Now the songs and dances from which tragedy and the satyr-play developed were associated, at the period when they became truly dramatic, with the worship of Dionysus, and at that same period Dionysus was as truly a 'god' (as distinct from a 'hero') as any that the Greeks ever knew. To abandon these plain facts and others like them in favor of vague theorizing on religious origins will never bring us satisfactory results.

This is equivalent to saying that from a practical standpoint a study of the origin of religion is not indispensable for a discussion of the origin of Greek tragedy. To Mr. Ridgeway such a statement will appear heretical, but let us see how much better he fares. What was the point in his conceding that satyric drama was Dionysiac in origin, if it was to be argued that Dionysus himself had been a hero? In that case, the ultimate origins of tragedy and satyric drama must, after all, have been identical, and the differences in their origins must have consisted only of the minor divergences in the final stage of their development. In practice, how does this result differ from the more usual procedure, which ignores the ultimate sources and concentrates attention upon the final stage of develop

"Why "almost" is inserted here does not appear. Many Greek divinities are mentioned on Mr. Ridgeway's pages, but none is recognized as "totally independent" of the cult of the dead.

ment? So far as I can see, it would differ only to the extent that the underlying religion of both genres would now be understood to be ancestor worship. But this distinction loses all practical meaning in view of Mr. Ridgeway's present contention that ancestor worship is prior to and the ultimate source of other forms of religion. What can be predicated of everything loses all value for purposes of differentiation. In other words, in spite of any resemblance which may have obtained between the ultimate forms of Dionysiac worship and the true veneration of heroes, c'he time when tragedy actually came into being the existing differences between them were of much greater significance than any alleged identity of origin in the far-distant past could have been. If it were possible for Professor Ridgeway to substantiate his first position, that tragedy arose directly from the worship of the hero Adrastus at Sicyon or the like, there would be some meaning in his work. But his doctrine of ultimate derivation loscs itself in primeval darkness.

As was to be expected, Mr. Ridgeway has changed his opinions upon not a few points. Thus, in his Origin of Tragedy (61), in his eagerness to prove that dramatic impersonation antedated Thespis, he declared:

But it is very likely that long before this time sacred dramas with impersonations of the gods were regularly performed in temple precincts, as for instance the Mystery Plays at Eleusis, as part of the regular ritual of the deity.

In the present volume, however, the exigencies of his argument force him into a saner position (24):

"The evidence of the writer", says Miss Harrison, "is indefeasible as regards the rites themselves". But whilst it is "indefeasible" for the rites as practised in his day, it by no means follows that it is of any value for the rites of Eleusis as practised in the sixth century before Christ, as assumed by Miss Harrison, Sir James Frazer, and the rest. It might as well be postulated that the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, which was only formulated in the latter half of the nineteenth century, was one of the doctrines of the early church. To put it briefly, the whole theory of the sacred marriage between the Sky-god and the Earth-goddess at Eleusis depends entirely upon writers who all lived after the Christian era and who described with accuracy the performances at Eleusis in their own time.

The Appendix on the Origin of Greek Comedy is, in the main, directed against the same group of investigators as was the body of the book. Mr. Ridgeway protests against the assumption that the phallic rites from which Aristotle declared comedy to have sprung were part of a "religious" ritual and against the further assumption of certain scholars that "all obscenity is religious". Be it observed, however, that Mr. Ridgeway himself felt no scruples in recognizing "a distinct survival of Dionysiac rites" in the obscenities of the modern North Greece carnivals (Origin of Tragedy, 15 ff.). The whole constructive side of the argument here is vitiated by the same ignorance of the inscriptional results obtained by Professor Capps and Dr.

[blocks in formation]

Ingram Bywater. The Memoir of an Oxford Scholar, 1840-1914. By William Walrond Jackson. Oxford: at the Clarendon Press (1917). Pp. xit 212. $3.

Judged by comparison with the length of the now usual biography, autobiography, or letters, this Memoir will indeed seem brief. The author points out that materials for a life of Bywater are scant as compared with those for a life of Jowett. Unlike our own Benjamin Franklin, Professor Bywater was accustomed to destroy his letters and papers, and besides he left no diary.

It is a pleasant picture that we get of Bywater's father, a man of very moderate means, who spared no expense for his son's education. It was from his father that Bywater got his first instruction in Greek, Latin, and French. His serious study of Greek began when he entered Kings College School. From early years the boy evidently had a bookish turn; when, at the age of eighteen, he went up to Queen's College, Oxford, where he had obtained a scholarship, he carried with him about two hundred books. Here he came under the instruction of Lewis Campbell, and, to quote his own words, of "the distinguished man now known as Lord Bryce"; at the same time he had private tuition from Robinson Ellis, later Professor of Latin. He was intimate with Walter Pater, but could never accede to Pater's extravagant doctrine that aesthetic enjoyment was the chief end of man. Bywater took a first class in 1862; in the following year he was elected, along with his future biographer, to a fellowship at Exeter College. Soon afterwards he became very intimate with Mark Pattison, who more than anyone else influenced his future career. Pattison, a man of broad interests and of fine scholarship, soon led Bywater to choose the life of a scholar. Bywater at once set about making himself master of the scholar's technique and he made a thorough study of German methods. A remarkable instance, however, of his independence of judgment was shown at the time of the war of 1870. Oxford was largely pro-German, but Bywater, taking issue with his friend Pattison, warmly espoused the French cause.

Having once made his decision he never faltered in his devotion to the austere and heroic side of scholarship. He was averse to the popularization of knowledge and accordingly was strongly inclined to distrust men like Conington and Jowett. His wide knowledge of books, largely due, no doubt, to the stimulating intercourse with Pattison, led to his being appointed Sub-Librarian of the Bodleian, in 1879. His chances

were very good for becoming at an early date Bodley's librarian. However, fearing encroachment upon his time for study, he resigned the position, but was at once made a Delegate of the Clarendon Press, a place which he filled until his death. His bent in scholarship was made clear by the publication in 1877 of his now well-known Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae. In the following year he issued privately a collection of Greek aphorisms, under the title Gnomologium Baroccianum. In 1886 appeared his edition of Priscianus Lydus, which he had been asked to prepare for the Supplementum Aristotelicum of the Berlin Academy. In 1890 appeared his text of Aristotle's Ethics. Finally comes his edition of the Poetics, which at once forces comparison with Butcher's famous work, which boldly bears the title Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art. "You must not expect from me", insists Bywater, "anything about fine art, for I don't think that Aristotle said anything about it". His Aristotelian studies were intimately connected with the Aristotelian Society, of which an entertaining account is given by his biographer.

Bywater had been appointed Reader in Greek in 1883. At the death of Jowett he was appointed, on the nomination of Gladstone, Regius Professor of Greek in 1893. This position he resigned in 1908. He was strongly opposed to compulsory Greek and his reasons are given at length in this Memoir. American scholars will read with pleasure of his friendly intercourse with Whitney, Goodwin, and Professor Gildersleeve.

The book is beautifully printed on excellent paper and contains, as frontispiece, a striking likeness of Bywater. But with all its excellences the price, three dollars, is outrageously high. THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI.


The Argonautica of Gaius Valerius Flaccus Setinus Balbus, Book I, Translated into English Prose, with Introduction and Notes. By H. G. Blomfield. Oxford: B. H. Blackwell (1916). Pp. 147. 3 sh. 6 d., net.

The author of this book is described on its title-page as Late Scholar of Exeter College, Oxford, and has after his name the initials M.A., I.C.S. The book begins with some 36 alleged verses, in English, labelled Candido Lectori, giving the story of the Argo. The lines, which are wholly gratuitous, abound in slang and shocking evidences of bad taste. In the Preface (7-12) the author tells us that this is the first translation into prose, in any language, of Valerius Flaccus. Indeed, only the first book has been translated into verse. The latter rendering, by Thomas Noble, published in 1808, Mr. Blomfield praises very highly (II-12). Mr. Blomfield tells us also, in the Preface, that he hopes, in time, to bring out a complete edition of Valerius Flaccus, with introduction, revised text, commentary, and appendices, maps, plans, illustrations, bibliography, and index. The present volume

contains notes, beneath the translation; the notes deal mainly with the mythological allusions in the text. The author tells us, finally, that his aim has been to render faithfully the sense of the original, and at the same time to produce a fairly readable version (9).

The Introduction (13-17) gives a short account of Valerius Flaccus. The author argues that the Setinus Balbus is no part of Valerius's name; why, then, are these words so conspicuously given on the title-page of the book? Mr. Blomfield regards as exploded the view that the poet of the Argonautica is the Flaccus to whom Martial addressed several epigrams. On pages 15-17 he writes most enthusiastically of Valerius Flaccus, as a real poet, who had something to say:

at his best he is perhaps not greatly inferior even to Vergil himself. Here, we feel, is a poet indeed and not a poetaster, and one who has not only a genuine insight and imagination, but also a very considerable gift of expression, and one, moreover, who is not always straining after effect. the poet contrives to invest the loves of Jason and Medea with a human interest which is almost modern in tone and setting, and is all the more refreshing because it is conspicuously absent in both Apollonius and Vergil. Indeed Valerius treats the love-interest with a freshness and charm which are all his own. And in certain descriptive passages, which are fairly numerous, he reaches a beauty of word-painting to which we have to turn to Vergil himself to find a parallel; and Noble does not scruple to put Valerius even above the Mantuan.

This eulogy of Valerius had been juster had it been a bit more restrained. Mr. Dimsdale, in his History of Latin Literature, 446-453 (see THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 10.118-119), praises Valerius for his powers of description, and for his portrayal of Medea's love, but he is less the partisan and more the sound scholar than Mr. Blomfield. In concluding this part of his book, the author quotes, for the second time (see, for the first, page 7), Quintilian 10.1.90 Multum in Valerio Flacco nuper amisimus.

The prose-rendering reads well. How difficult it is to achieve this result in the case of the poets of the Silver Age every one who has read those poets knows. Frequently there are in the Notes quotations from Noble's verse-rendering of this book; often, also, Mr. Blomfield gives alternative renderings of his own, in verse. The notes are really voluminous, taking up 118 of the 145 pages devoted to translation and notes together! On these notes there is another series of notes, printed in still smaller type, explaining matters contained in the main commentary. There is in these notes too much of an effort to be smart and up-to-date in language. Thus, on page 34, Persius is described as the "Grahame-White of classical mythology"; on page 43, the wine-bowl that Theseus flung in the face of the centaur is described as “ancient equivalent of the modern whisky decanter". A very good feature of the book is to be seen in the numerous

references to books and articles that deal, directly or indirectly, with Valerius. The commentary, spite of its discursiveness, and its lapses from good taste, is welcome, especially since it is the only commentary in English on the poem.

Of the merits and demerits of the translation itself a fair notion can be got from the following extracts (see, in the Latin, verses 22-63, 788-817 [Aeson's curse of Pelias]):


Pelias had governed Thessaly from his earliest youth with a rod of iron, and was now well-stricken in years, and had long been feared by his subjects. His were all the streams that flowed into the Ionian Sea; wealthy he was, and his servants ploughed the slopes of Othrys and Haemus and the fertile plains below Olympus. But his mind had no rest through fear of his brother's son, and the boding oracles of the gods; for the prophets prophesied that he would destroy the king, and victims on the altars gave the same dread warnings. Above all the mighty renown of the warrior himself weighs on his mind, and his valour, a thing no tyrant loves. Wherefore he strives to anticipate his fears by killing the young man, even the son of Aeson, and seeks means and an opportunity to slay him. But he can find no wars, no monsters to be throughout the land of Greece: ere this Alcides ́had covered his temples with the gaping jaws of the lion of Cleone; long since had the men of Arcady been ridded of the Water-snake of Lerna; long since had the horns of both bulls been broken. So he bethinks him of the angry sea, and remembers the perils of the vasty deep. With peaceful look, no frown upon his brow, he approaches the youth, and by his serious air adds weight to words that come from feigned lips: 'Grant me this service, more noble than the deeds of olden time, and give thyself up to it, heart and soul. Thou hast heard how Phrixus, sprung from the blood of our kinsman Crethus, escaped the altar whereon his father was about to sacrifice him. But alas! cruel Aeetes, who dwells in Scythia by frozen Phasis, shaming his mighty sire the Sun-god, slaughtered him whilst the hospitable wine-bowl circulated, amid the inviolable rites of the banquet, while the guests looked on in horror-unmindful of me and of the gods. Nor is it only rumour that tells the news. I myself, what time late sleep binds my tired limbs, have seen the youth in his own person groaning bitterly; his mangled shade dispels my slumbers with its incessant complaints, and Helle, now a deity of the mighty deep, gives me no rest. Had I the strength I once possessed, e'en now shouldst thou behold the punishment of Colchis, and see the head and arms of its king brought back in triumph. Alas! long since, with advancing years, has the keen edge of my youthful ardour been blunted; nor is mine own son yet ripe for empire or war or exploits o'er the seas. But thou, glorious youth, in whom already there is a strong ambition and a manly spirit, go and restore to the walls of a Grecian temple the fleece of the ram sent down by Nephele, and deem thyself worthy of such a perilous task'. In this strain he encourages the young man, and then holds his peace, as one who commands rather than exhorts; saying naught of the Black Rocks that clash on the Scythian main, naught of the grim Dragon that guards the fleece; whom, as it darted forth its forky tongues, the king's daughter was wont to entice from its secret abode by spells and offered food, and to give it honey already livid with the poison of the day before.

C. K.


I have read with much satisfaction the advice of C. K. (THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 10.81-82, 89-90, 97– 98) to read Latin aloud, which I can support from my own experience.

I urge all with the greatest emphasis to follow C. K.'s advice. Nearly all the time spent in translating into English is thrown away; because, if the reader has a proper command of English, and if he understands what he reads, he can translate nearly all of it without difficulty when put to it. The really difficult bits, which tax the translator, are few. Do not suppose this is a counsel of perfection. Our staple work in this School is reading aloud, nothing else: every book is read aloud from beginning to end, and the result is that large masses are retained in the memory without further effort. We only make sure that it is understood, and difficulties are explained in Latin (or Greek) until they are understood. And, though it may seem strange, when we do want to translate, we can do it very easily. We compete with all other Schools, where all the time is spent in translation, we compete, I say, in the very difficult scholarship examinations, and hold our own easily; although these consist chiefly of translation-I could indeed say more with truth, but I content myself with that. And the enjoyment is multiplied a hundredfold; real, genuine, unforced enjoyment, which can only come when the matter is understood at once, such enjoyment as we have rarely felt with Horace and Vergil, because our enjoyment came after long hours of wrestling and drudgery spent on these very texts. The boy trained in reading gets his drudgery done upon very different material; he comes fresh to Vergil and Horace, and makes their acquaintance in the most favorable circumstances. And there is no mistake possible when a boy does enjoy something; he lets you know it. PERSE SCHOOL HOUSE, Cambridge, England.



Praesens maioribus deus,
iam posterisque spes,

nos ventis, undis perditos
in portum tuto ages.

Potenti regno sub tuo
metu omni liberi,

tibi solum confidimus,
re nulla territi.

Ante ipsam terram conditam, ante ardua montium, e sempiterno tempore aeternum te deum!

*Part of a letter sent by Dr. Rouse last spring. The rest of the letter, which enters into highly controversial matters, may, perhaps, be presented at a later time, when there is space for controversy, and I have leisure to discuss Dr. Rouse's views in detail.-C. K.

'These Latin stanzas a version of Isaac Watts's familiar hymn, O God, our help in ages past. Our hope for years to come, are offered as an addition to the material available for singing.

[blocks in formation]


Mention should have been made before this of important additions to the University of Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series. In 1915 Professor Louis Charles Karpinski, of the Department of Mathematics of the University of Michigan, brought out an edition of Robert of Chester's Latin Translation of the Algebra of Al-Khowarismi; this contained the Latin text, an English translation of that text, an Introduction, and Critical Notes. The original work is one of importance in the history of mathematics, as may be seen from an examination of reviews of Professor Karpinski's edition, the one, by Professor David Eugene Smith, the distinguished mathematician, of Teachers College, published in Science 43.389-391 (March 17, 1916), the other, by Professor Milton W. Humphreys, distinguished at once as Greek scholar and as mathematician, in The American Journal of Philology 37.354-357.

In 1916 Dr. John Garrett Winter, of the University of Michigan, produced an English version, accompanied by an Introduction and Explanatory notes, of The Prodromus of Nicolaus Steno's Dissertation Concerning a Solid Body Enclosed by Process of Nature within a Solid Body. This has been reviewed by Professor Humphreys, in The American Journal of Philology, 38.201–203.

These two books form parts of Volume XI of the University of Michigan Studies.

In 1917 Professor Henry A Sanders, of the University of Michgan, produced further fruits of his study of the Freer Biblical Manuscripts in a volume entitled The Old Testament Manuscripts in the Freer Collection, Part II, The Washington Manuscript of the Psalms. This forms part of Volume VIII of the University of Michigan Studies. For Professor Sanders's earlier studies of these manuscripts, as well as for the importance of the manuscripts themselves, see a review in THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 6.213-214, by Professor B. W. Bacon, of Yale University.

The decipherment of the manuscript of the Psalms was a work of enormous difficulty, requiring endless patience and skill. In the Introduction to the present volume Professor Sanders discusses I. The Manuscript (107-109); II. Palaeography (110-124); III. The Text Problem (125-132). C. K.

[blocks in formation]


Game of the Latin Noun, new; may be played by all grades including beginners. Price, 50 cents.

Verb Games, a series of five games, each 29c.; 1 and 2, on principal parts; 3 and 4, on verb forms; No. 5, on verb terminations. Game of Latin Authors. Price, $1.04.

These games always please and profit; are highly recommended by teachers and pupils. Any or all sent postpaid on receipt of price. Stamps accepted.

THE LATIN GAME CO., Appleton, Wis.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Back Volumes (I-X)


The Classical Weekly

may be had from


$1.50 per Volume



« السابقةمتابعة »