In this 'Urilias,' this Aeolic lay, Achilles and Patroklos, the áíras and the elovýλas, dominate the scene, hold hands, as it were, across the stage. The Ilias has become an Achilleis and not a pure Achilleïs; it is largely a Patrokleia. And what more Aeolic than this? One remembers the echoes in one of Theokritos' Aeolic odes—the famous αλλάλοισι πελώμεθ' ̓Αχιλλέιοι φίλοι; one remembers how prominent Patroklos is made in two of Pindar's Lokrian odes, O 9, 76 and 10, 21, and only there. But according to the Urilias,' Patroklos was no Opuntian but a Myrmidon. And ROBERT maintains that it was the poet of the "EKTopos ȧvaiperis that first made him an Opuntian, & 326, and that the author of the ela é Пarpókλ, noticing the discrepancy, tried to salve it over by the story that Patroklos had fled to Phthia on account of blood-guiltiness incurred in his boyhood. The scholiasts make themselves very busy with this point and tell a long story about the fortunes of Menoitios and the Aktoridai but they get nothing but contemptuous silence for their pains. To be sure, nothing seems to have been more common than the contracting of heroic marriages outside of the native canton, as Menoitios is said to have done, and there is no more familiar motif in heroic legend than exile on account of manslaughter. It is the 'Gone to Texas' of my boyhood. It is the 'Gone to Canada' of later years. But ROBERT Considers this a lame device and insists on the horsy side of Patroklos in the 'Urilias' where he is as addressed as ПarpÓKλEIS

еυ with the same affectionate tone, by the way, as Eumaios is addressed in the Odyssey, Evμale σvßâтa. No king is Patroklos; he has no chariot of his own, and, while his rank is higher than that of Eumaios, he is a vassal and Achilles his overlord; and according to ROBERT he was originally nothing but the charioteer of Achilles. But this is only one little point among hundreds and, being one, it may serve to show how much room there is for comment in this notable contribution to the study of Homer, a comment which I must leave to those who are better qualified to deal with Homeric questions.

In the Annuaire de l'École pratique des Hautes Études for 1902, M. GAIDOz, the well-known Keltic scholar, has published an interesting little essay suggested by the mention of the apple as a declaration of love in Old Irish literature. Next come Greeks and Romans and after them the Christian use of the apple in the Vierge à la pomme, in whose person Eve, the mother of us all, and cette archidiablesse de Vénus, as Heinrich Heine calls her, are blended after a fashion not unfamiliar to the student of such matters. This apple, it need not be said, is not strictly the apple of commerce. It may be the quince, it may be the pomegranate; and in Tahiti it appears as the 'nono', a round fruit, which the Kanaka girls throw at the lovers whom they design to favour. As for the symbolism of the apple, M. GAIDOZ scouts it. The

throwing of the apple is only a grata protervitas, as an old commentator calls it. A flower would answer every purpose but the apple or any other spherical fruit carries better. Snow-balls, I would add, sometimes serve the same teasing purpose: and M. GAIDOZ actually mentions the use of rotten eggs at English elections as a familiar and popular practice which indicates the reverse of love; and the instance of Mrs. Nickleby's demonstrative neighbour will recur at once to the minds of those who are not ashamed to remember Dickens. The first apple thrown, says M. GAIDOZ, was merely to attract attention. The symbolism was an afterthought. One is curious to know what M. GAIDOZ will do with the various representatives of the vegetable kingdom, the symbolism of which in Greek is hardly to be denied. One asks in the words of the flower song: ποῦ μοι τὰ ῥόδα; ποῦ μοι τὰ ἴα; ποῦ μοι τὰ καλὰ σέλινα; one abandons reluctantly the longcherished explanation of the 'parsley bed', which is the English rival of the German stork; and I am afraid that some amoureux de tetons, to use La Fontaine's phrase, will not resign the symbolism, which Aristophanes did not invent and which is quite as evident as any of the popular wall-pictures, the exaggerations of which Montaigne so feelingly deplores.

The Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames, by the late CHARLES WAREING BARDSLEY, author of the well-known work on English Surnames, and younger brother of the Bishop of Carlisle, who has furnished an interesting and pathetic biographical preface (N. Y., Henry Frowde), is a storehouse of material on a subject which comes near to everyone, and the special American instances which have been incorporated in the work will be welcome to a period of genealogical fads. As in the thesaurus. of English words there are hosts of survivals in America that are little known in the mother-country, so in the list of English surnames there are many whose representatives have increased and multiplied on this side, while the stock has become barren beyond the water. In any event the distribution of surnames is always an interesting problem for the historian, as their etymology is tempting and elusive.

M. W. H.: Welche dem Menschen gefährlichen Spinnen kannten die Alten? Such is the title of an interesting address delivered by Dr. R. KOBERT before the section on the History of Medicine, Sept. 1901, reprinted from Janus, VI, II. As to whether spiders in temperate latitudes are ever poisonous, the author is very emphatic, asserting that he knows some of them are. A book of his on venomous spiders (in press when the address was delivered, but now published) is not at hand. The address summarizes the book and attempts to determine which of

the present venomous spiders were known to the ancient Greeks and Romans. It will be sufficient here to note only these. Pliny mentions a spider that drove out the entire population of a country, and his description shows plainly that the spider belonged to the solifugae or "giant ants." KOBERT, however, says that these are not venomous, though they may bite. Pliny's story would therefore seem to be fabulous. Aristotle mentions a spider which appears to have been a tarantula (not, of course, the venomous mygalid called "tarantula " in Texas); but even the bite of this spider, according to K., is comparatively harmless. "Tarantism" grew out of a passage of Strabo by people confounding the lathrodectes, which Strabo evidently meant, with the much more conspicuous tarantula. The very remarkable effects of the bite of some spiders of the lathrodectes genus, renders it easy to recognize ancient allusions to it. It probably includes the padayyor of Xenophon (and Plato, not mentioned by K.), two species of it are spoken of by Aristotle as being venomous, and one by Nicander (who calls it póg and accurately describes the effects that are produced to-day by the bite of the Italian and Russian lathrodectes), and by Pedanius Dioscorides. Celsus speaks of a Gallic poison, which K. thinks may have been made from spiders. The facts reproduced by Aelian from earlier writers confirm the existence of venomous spiders. This address is not intended for philologians, and, with rare exceptions, we are not told exactly where the passages referred to occur; still the author seems to have been the first to explain correctly the description of the p in Nicand. Onpuaká 715 as referring to the black color with red spots characteristic of the Italian species, the "malmignatto" (lathrodectes tredecimguttatus), which name he says is derived from "marmoratus", "marmoriert d. h. gefleckt.”

W. P. M. By some odd obliquity of vision the editor of the Parnassus' Virgil (p. xi) transposes the subjects of the Second and Third Georgics. The same editor has the same mistake in the Introduction to his Virgil in Macmillan's 'Classical Series': "the first deals with husbandry proper, the second with the rearing of stock, the third with the cultivation of trees," etc. This sentence stands in all three parts; Aen. i-vi (1894); Bucolics and Georgics (1897), and Aen. vii-xii (1900). Moreover, the commentary on Geor. iv. 559-60 makes pecorum' the subject of Bk. ii, and 'arboribus' the subject of Bk. iii. If these things can happen even to an editor who is very jealous for Virgil, one may perhaps be the less surprised to read in Carter's Elegiac Poets (p. 198) that the subject of the Third Georgic is "arboriculture."

RECENT PUBLICATIONS.

Thanks are due to Messrs. Lemcke & Buechner, 812 Broadway, New York, for material furnished.

AMERICAN.

Aristophanes. The Knights; ed. by Rob. Alex. Neil. New York, Macmillan, 1902. 14+229 pp. 8vo, cl., net $2.50.

Caesar. Commentaries on the Gallic War; with introd., notes, and vocabulary by Albert Harkness and C. H. Forbes. New York, Amer. Book Co., 1902. 3-593 pp. I il. 12mo, hf. leath., $1.25.

Keller (A. G.)

Homeric Society. New York, Longmans, Green & Co., 1902. 12mo, 8+332 pp. cl., $3.

Macdonell, Arthur Anthony. A Sanskrit grammar for beginners. New York, Longmans, Green & Co., 1901. 20+ 240 pp. cl., $3.

Morris, (E. P.) On principles and methods in Latin syntax. New York, Scribner, 1901. c. 11+232 pp. 8vo, net $2.

Ogilvie, (Rob.) Hora Latina; studies in synonyms and syntax; ed. by Alex. Souter; with a memoir by Jos. Ogilvie. New York, Longmans, Green & Co., 1901. 23+339 pp. 8vo, cl., $5.

ENGLISH.

Anecdota Oxoniensia: Classical Series, No. 9. Collations from the Codex Clunacensis s. Holkhamicus by W. Peterson. London, 1902. 4to. 7s. 6d. Aeschylus. Choephori. Critical Notes, Commentary, Translation, Recension of the Scholia, by T. G. Tucker. London, 1901. 8vo, 422 pp. 12s. 6d. Brodrick (M.), and A. A. Morton. Concise Dictionary of Egyptian Archaeo

logy. London, 1902. 8vo, 206 pp. 3s. 6d.

Crow (F. E.) Arabic Manual. London, 1901. 8vo. 7s. 6d.

King (L. W.) Assyrian Language. Easy Lessons in the Cuneiform Inscriptions. London, 1901. 8vo, 232 pp. 3s. 6d.

Thesaurus Palæohibernicus: Collection of Old Irish Glosses, Scholia, Prose and Verse. Edited by Whitley Stokes and J. Strachan. Vol. I. London, 1901. 8vo, 756 pp. £1 10s.

Wright (W.) Catalogue of Syriac MSS preserved in Library of University of Cambridge. 2 vols. London, 1901. 8vo, 1320 pp. £3.

FRENCH.

Gsell (S.) Les Monuments antiques de l'Algérie. Tome I. Paris, 1901. 8vo. Illustr. 20 fr.

Ptolemaei, Claudii, geographia. E codicibus recognovit, prolegomenis, annotatione, indicibus, tabulis instruxit Carol. Müllerus. Vol. I, pars II. Lex. 8vo, ii u. S. 571-1023. Paris, 1901, Firmin-Didot & Co. 15 fr.

GERMAN.

Adami (Frider.) De poetis scaenicis graecis hymnorum sacrorum imitatoribus. [Aus: "Jahrbb. f. class. Philologie."] gr. 8. S. 213-262. Leipzig, 1900, B. G. Teubner. m. 2.

Aeschylus. Perser. Hrsg. u. erklärt v. Hugo Jurenka. Textheft u. Einleitg. u. Kommentar. x, 39 u. 63 S. m. Bildnis. gr. 8. Leipzig, 1902, B. G.Teubner.

m. 1.40.

Arx Athenarum a Pausania descripta, in usum scholarum edd. Otto Jahn et Adolf. Michaelis. Ed. III. gr. 4. viii, 140 u. xli S. Bonn, 1901, A. Marcus. u. E. Weber. m. 10.

Bartal (Ant.) Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis regni Hungariae. xxviii, 723 S. gr. 4. Leipzig, 1901, B. G. Teubner. m. 50.

Bibliothek indogermanischer Grammatiken. 1. Bd. gr. 8. Leipzig, Breit kopf & Härtel. 1. Sievers, Ed. Grundzüge der Phonetik. 5. Aufl., xvi, 328 S. 1901.

m. 5.

m. 8.

Blass (Frdr.) Die Rhythmen der attischen Kunstprosa. IsokratesDemosthenes-Platon. gr. 8. xi, 199 S. Leipzig, 1901, B. G. Teubner. Blaydes (Frider. H. M.) Adversaria in Herodotum. gr. 8. vii, 160 S. Halle, 1901, Buchh. des Waisenhauses in Komm. m. 3.80.

Christoffersson (Herm.) Studia de fabulis Babrianis. gr. 8. iv, 178 S. Lund, 1901, H. Möller.

m. 3.50.

Corpus inscriptionum latinarum, consilio et auctoritate academiae litterarum regiae borussicae editum. Vol. XI, partis 2, fasc. I. Fol. Berlin, G. Reimer. XI. Inscriptiones Aemiliae, Etruriae, Umbriae, latinae. Ed. Eugen. Bormann. Partis 2, fasc. I. Inscriptiones Umbriae. S. 53-92 u. 595-1224 m. Abbildgn., 1901. m. 75.

—Vol. XIII, partis 3, fasc. I. Fol. Berlin, G. Reimer. XIII, 3. Inscriptiones trium Galliarum et Germaniarum latinae. Collegerunt Otto Hirschfeld et Carol. Zangemeister. Ed. Ose. Bohn. Partis 3, fasc. I. 429 S., 1901. m. 40.

Cuntz (Otto). Polybius u. sein Werk. Mit 1 Kärtchen. v, 88 S. gr.8. Leipzig, 1902, B. G. Teubner. m. 2.80.

Demetrii Phalerei qui dicitur de elocutione libellus. Praefatus, recensuit adnotavitque Ludov. Radermacher. gr. 8. xvi, 132 S. Leipzig, 1901, B. G. Teubner. m. 5.

Dissertationes philologicae Halenses. Vol. XIV. Pars IV. gr. 8. Halle, M. Niemeyer. IV. Ritter (Rud.) De Varrone Vergilii in narrandis urbium populorumque Italiae originibus auctore. iii, 131 S. 1901. m. 2.

dasselbe. Vol. XV. Pars I. gr. 8. Ebd. I. Lippelt, (Ernest) Quae fuerint Justini Martyris ȧñoμvnμovevμara quaque ratione cum forma evangeliorum syro-latina cohaeserint. iv, 102 S. 1901. m. 3.

Euripidis fabulae. Edd. R. Prinz et N. Wecklein. Vol. I, pars III. gr. 8. Leipzig, B. G. Tuebner. I, 3. Hecuba, ed. Rud. Prinz. Ed. altera, quam curavit N. Wecklein. vii, 67 S. 1902. m. 2.40, Vol. III, pars 5. Troades, ed. N. Wecklein. gr. 8. v, 72 S. Leipzig, 1901, B. G. Teubner. m. 2.80. Festschrift, Strassburger, zur XLVI. Versammlg. deutscher Philologen u. Schulmänner. Lex. 8. iii, 332 S. m. 8. Abbildgn. u. 1 Taf. Strassburg, 1901, K. G. Trübner. m. 10.