Thatmox means, or can mean, ‘soon,’ is an assertion which is made often and positively, in works of all sorts, from the ordinary dictionaries, such as Facciolati-Forcellini and Lewis and Short, and valuable writings on lexicography such as Merguet's lexicon to Cicero and Krebs-Schmalz' Antibarbarus, down to the latest little school book at which I have looked. As I had never been able to find a passage in which it clearly and unambiguously had that meaning, in any classical author, I have thought it worth while to examine all the instances in a few good writers, with a view to finding out how they really do use it.

A summary view of the main evidence at our disposal may be soon obtained. Three traditions appear at the outset. The first depends on a MS. once at Mainz, and now no longer extant, but of which part, at any rate, still existed in the sixteenth century; the second on an eleventh century MS. at Bamberg; and the third on a number of later MSS. in Rome, Florence, Paris, the British Museum, Oxford, Holkham, and other places. The fact that (at any rate for preliminary investigation) these three traditions must be regarded as separate may be seen first from the parts of the decade which they each omit.

The meaning of ὑποτύπτω to plunge or dip into a liquid, is so different from that of τύπτω, as to suggest that the word does not really contain τύπτω but arises from ὑπο-δύπτω (δύπτω = dive, plunge), in the same way as ποταπός from ποδαπός (Schweizer, Gramm. der Pergamenischen Inschriften, p. 107, note 1), κωλακρἐται from κωλαγρέται, Πεταγείτνιος from Πεδαγείτνιος (Solmsen, Beitr. zur gr. Wortforschung, p. 234), δεκάταρχος from δεκάδαρχος (cf. Thackeray, Gramm. of Old Testament in Greek, p. 103), in all of which a voiced stop situated between two unvoiced stops becomes unvoiced.

Charisivs, in his chapter on Adverbs, cites for Hispane (p. 260 of the new edition by Barwick; p. 200 of the old edition by Keil) a line of Ennius' Annals (the number of the book is not stated; see Barwick's note):

Hispane, non Romane memoretis loqui me.

Professor Norden (Ennius und Vergil, p. 114), the apostle of Combinations-forschung, combines this fact with another fact mentioned by Livy (XXI. 19, 6), the celebre per Hispaniam responsum of a Spanish town to a Roman embassy. But why does he ignore a third fact which must be brought into any combination that can be convincing—the quotation of this line of Ennius by Festus in a paragraph (of the R-chapter) which apparently deals with Graeco-Roman affinities (362, 10) ?

In his article in a recent issue of the Classical Quarterly Mr. G. M. A.Grube attempts to vindicate the authenticity of the Hippias Maior, concentrating his attention upon an article by me as ‘embodying most of the objections of earlier scholars’ against the genuineness of the dialogue. I believe that I am still ‘the latest exponent,’ in any detail, of this view; but I may claim at least some good company in the heresy, and to the names already cited by Mr. Grube or myself may be added in particular that of Wilamowitz, who also believes the Hippias Maior to have been written in the Academy within Plato's lifetime. I was not aware when writing my previous article of this noteworthy support in a work just then appearing.

MissSteuart, in her recent edition of the Annals of Ennius, prints the notorious line, ‘O Tite, tute, Tati, tibi tanta tyranne tulisti,’ among the fragmenta spuria, and shows that the attribution of it to Ennius is late and uncertain. That it is old is shown by the fact that it is quoted in the Ad Herennium. Miss Steuart classes it among the ‘freak’ lines by which Hardie (without good reason) thought Lucilius (1100 Mx.) illustrated his hundred kinds of Solecism (Res Metrica, p. 4, note).

It is sometimes assumed too rigorously that what distinguishes the language of Terence from that of Plautus is its modernity; that antiquated forms and expressions, common enough in the older dramatist (died 184), were all but completely absent in the younger (died 159). On this assumption a faulty Terence line is due simply to mistranscription, and the method of emendation is the same as would be employed on any MS. incorrectly copied in Carolingian times from an archetype now lost.

The difficult and apparently inconsistent regulations by which certain marriages are forbidden in the Republic have not, it would seem, been consistently explained hitherto. It is the purpose of this article to prove that—if we read Plato's text without prejudice—marriages between brothers and sisters are nowhere prohibited, but expressly allowed; and that there are in the ideal city certain family groups, though I do not contend that any very great importance is to be attached to these.

If the Bucolics as a whole ‘ look on us with dark enigmatical eyes,’ for long no more impenetrable darkness and no more compelling enigma could be found than that of the fourth poem in the collection. But Skutsch, the authors of Virgil's Messianic Eclogue, and more recently Mr. Royds in his Virgil and Isaiah, have done much to solve its many mysteries. Their efforts, however, were mainly directed towards the problems of fact contained in the Eclogue, and so far little attention seems to have been given to an equally interesting point, that of its metrical arrangement. It is plain that we must consult the Sibyll for help: if it is not plain, that is not Virgil's fault. I hope to be able to show here that Virgil himself has left in this poem certain unmistakeable signs for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, besides his own rather casual reference to the Cumaeum carmen, and incidentally to dispose anew of the theory which reads in that expression an allusion not to the Sibyl but to Hesiod.