Evripides Rhes. 161 sqq. Dolon, having undertaken to visit the Greek lines as a spy, addresses Hector:

οủκûν πονεεîν μèν χρή, πο;νοûντα

μιαθòν φéρεαθαι. παντì γàρ προακε;íμενον

κéρρς πρòς ἔργῳ τ⋯ν χáριν τíκτει διπγ⋯ν.

The critical problems of the Third Decade of Livy have long been familiar to students. In Books XXI.–XXV. we have only the mutilated Codex Puteanus (P) of the fifth century and later manuscripts derived from it, directly or indirectly, at one or more points in its history. R, C, and most probably M, are copies of P, after it was corrected by P2 and probably P3. Here the problem in the parts in which P is preserved is to correct its numerous corruptions by conjecture as far as possible; and, where it is now defective, by comparing the later MSS. to arrive at their inter-relation and at P's original text, and then subject this text to the same process of criticism. Also a study of the corrections in the earlier of these MSS. may reveal the previous existence of other traditions and of other MSS. now lost—such corrections, e.g., as are made by P4, R2, and M2.

It is a point of some interest to the historian of the social and intellectual development of Athens to determine, if possible, the exact dates between which the philosopher Anaxagoras made that city his home. As everyone knows, the tradition of the third and later centuries was not uniform. The dates from which the Alexandrian chronologists had to arrive at their results may be conveniently summed up under three headings, (a) date of Anaxagoras' arrival at Athens, (b) date of his prosecution and escape to Lampsacus, (c) length of his residence at Athens, (a) The received account (Diogenes Laertius ii. 7), was that Anaxagoras was twenty years old at the date of the invasion of Xerxes and lived to be seventy-two. This was apparently why Apollodorus (ib.) placed his birth in Olympiad 70 and his death in Ol. 88. I, thus giving the years 500–428 B.C. of our reckoning, (ib.) The further statement of Apollodorus that Anaxagoras ἤρξατο ϕιλοσοϕεῖν ⋯π⋯ Καλλίον has given rise to discussion; but when we remember that Demetrius of Phalerum had made what ‘Diogenes’ regards as an equivalent statement in his register of archons, and had said that Anaxagoras was twenty years old at the time, I think there can be no doubt of the meaning. Demetrius had clearly mentioned something about Anaxagoras which was looked on as giving the date at which he ‘began to philosophize,’ and had given his age at the time. The natural interpretation is that Demetrius mentioned the year of Anaxagoras’ arrival at Athens, and that this was taken as the time at which he ρξαtο φιλοσοφεlσ And it is further reasonable to suppose that this date was the source of the further statement of Demetrius, that Anaxagoras was born in or about 500 B.C. We may, I think, infer that Demetrius recorded the arrival of Anaxagoras in Athens under the year 480, giving his approximate age at that time.

The present essay, reposing on phenomena of derivation and semantics, will attempt to establish a more objective basis for the syntax of the impersonals. As a matter of syntax, the subject is of vital interest for the living Germanic tongues, and with these the essay begins. It will continue with a discussion of the phenomena of the Latin impersonals, and seek, by the help of living English usage, to establish upon a correct psychological basis the definition and derivation of the least elusive impersonals of emotion in Sanskrit and Latin.

A Manuscript belonging to the Municipal Library at Tours (No. 843, formerly 416, fols. 75a-101a) of the beginning of the thirteenth century contains a portion of a Commentary on Donatus, compiled in the middle of the ninth century by Sedulius of Liège. This copy was left unfinished by the scribe, and the Commentary comprises only about two-thirds of the Ars Minor. A brief note on the manuscript was contributed by Charles Thurot to the Comptes rendus de l' Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres in 1870.

Miss Gertrude Hirst's article on Aeneid VII.in the April number, 1916, of the C.Q. depends for its cogency upon dates in Propertius. Not wishing that her careful work should be vitiated by premisses which may shortly be proved false, I venture to set out the bare results of my own researches in this field of dates, results which have stood the test of several years of further examination.

In Professor W. B. Anderson's interesting paper on this subject (C.Q. Vol. X. No. 4) there seems a certain hesitation about the treatment of Lucan's famous

et quantum mihi restat ad Culicem ? (Sueton. Vita Lucani).

The following passages may be cited as fixing the sense of this rather rare idiom:

1…crebro querens incolumi filio adiutorem imperii alium uocari. Et quantum superesse ut collega dicatur ? (Tac.Ann. IV. 7),

i.e. from adiutor to collega is ‘a mere step.’