and Religion," and both give delightful pictures of Minoan life. Flaws may be detected, as e.g., the inconsistency of accepting Mrs. Hawes's theory that the shrine at Gournia was a town shrine when the author holds with Mr. Mackenzie, and rightly I think, that Minoan shrines were private and secluded. But in spite of such ready acceptance of doubtful theories the author accomplishes well his purpose of "offering to the general reader a plain account" of the Cretan discoveries.

MT. HOLYOKE COLLEGE

EDITH H. HALL

Aus dem griechischen Schulwesen Eudemos von Miletus und Verwandtes. Von ERICH ZIEBARTH. Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1909.

The basis of this extremely interesting and instructive study is a Milesian public document of the end of the third or the beginning of the second century B.C., which Ziebarth was permitted by those in charge of the excavations to publish in advance. Eudemos, a citizen of Miletus, had offered to the city in behalf of himself and his two brothers 10 talents for the education of "free boys," and the document in question is a decree of the people accepting the gift and providing for the expenditure of the income. The fund was to be deposited in the state bank and the income of 6,000 drachmas (interest 10 per cent) was to be expended by the educational authorities in paying the salaries of 8 teachers of whom 4 were to be instructors in athletics, and in providing an annual sacrifice. Thus the fund supplemented the sums that the city no doubt spent on the education of the ephebi and enabled them to institute a system of elementary instruction. One of the three gymnasia uncovered in the course of the excavations has with considerable probability been identified as the building used for the purpose. Appropriate provision was made for honoring the donor by allowing him and his descendants to participate in the religious rites, and a monthly holiday served to keep his memory alive among the boys who profited by his bounty. The teachers were to be selected by the assembly annually. Salaries-30 drachmas for athletic instructors and 40 for the others—were to be paid monthly.

Instructors who wished to accompany their pupils to the games at which they competed were required to obtain permission from the educational authorities and to provide substitutes. The decree which supplements the existing education law (Taidovouκòs vóμos) is in all probability the work of a special committee of the senate as Ziebarth argues, though the evidence adduced is not entirely conclusive. One is reminded of the frequent use of commissions at Athens for various purposes (cf. Foucart Bullet. de Corresp. Hellen. [1880] 225 ff.).

In order to fill out from other sources the picture of the school system of Miletus the author adds three excellent chapters entitled, "Staat und

Schule," "Schulstiftungen und Stiftungsschule," "Aus griechischen Schulen." In these chapters, particularly in the second, where the school law of Teos is given, full use is made of the most recently discovered epigraphical material, of which the author has complete command. On the whole the book offers welcome additions to our knowledge of ancient Greek education. One could wish that the commentary had included some of the matter reserved for the general chapters on education, for a number of questions arise in the mind of the reader that could most effectively be answered in the commentary. ROBERT J. BONNER

Ithaque, la Grande. By A. E. H. GOEKOOP. Athens: Beck & Barth, 1908. Pp. 38.

To M. Goekoop, as to many others in these days, the Homeric poems are textbooks of geography and history; and following Homer literally, as Dörpfeld did when he found the beehive tombs of Triphylia and identified old Nestor's Pylos at Kakovatos, he finds that Ithaca is Cephallenia. There were, according to his view, two Cephallenias-the great (the Mycenaean Ithaca) and the small (the classical Ithaca). The palace of Odysseus he places at the foot of Mt. St. George. Furthermore, Odysseus' Ithaca was not the whole Cephallenia but only the southern province of the island; the rest of Cephallenia was taken up by the provinces of Dulichium and Same. The other points mentioned in the Odyssey M. Goekoop attempts to identify along the southern shore of Cephallenia. His principal argument for this thesis is that in ▲ 329 ff. Odysseus' men are called Cephallenians; but he fails to note that the Cephallenians under Odysseus came from the mainland opposite Ithaca!

The author of this pamphlet is the same Goekoop who so generously put his wealth at the disposal of Dörpfeld for the first campaigns in his magnificent work on the island of Leucas-Ithaca. That he of all men should be one of the few unconvinced and so far from conviction that he should attempt to carry the controversy away over to the utterly impossible Cephallenia! WALTER MILLER

TULANE UNIVERSITY

Μαρκέλλου Σιδήτου περὶ Σφυγμῶν. Βy Σκεγος Γ. Ζερβος. Athens: Sakellarios, 1907. Pp. 61.

Dr. Zervos, of the medical faculty of the National University, is performing the welcome task of publishing in a series of monographs the unedited fragments of ancient Greek physicians. This, the third in the series, deals with Marcellus of Side. Marcellus was a contemporary of Galen and wrote a work on medicine in forty-two books in hexameter verse. Only a few pages are preserved to us in two codices, discovered recently in prose

version in Vienna. These, containing Marcellus' discussion of pulse-beats, normal and abnormal, are given to us now in twenty-one carefully edited pages of this pamphlet.

Not the least interesting feature of Marcellus' work is found in his quotations from the medical works of older authorities-Chrysippus, Erasistratus, Herophilus, Asclepiades, Hippocrates, etc.

An index of words, almost full enough to be a concordance, completes this issue of Dr. Zervos' series. Another, in which he will take up the detailed explanation of the text and of all the technical words and phrases in it, is promised.

TULANE UNIVERSITY

WALTER MILLER

Dead Language and Dead Languages. By J. P. POSTGATE. London: John Murray, 1910. Pp. 32. 18.30 cents.

The inaugural lecture for the academic year of 1909-10 at the University of Liverpool was given by Professor Postgate under the above lugubrious caption. But the address itself is full of life and vigor. It is a new and novel presentation of the claims of classical education for its timehonored place in the training of modern men. In these days our ears are continually dinned with opprobrious remarks about the "dead languages." Long ago Clarence King, at that time director of the United States Geological Survey, declared that "only dolts can refer to Greek as a dead language." And he was right. So Professor Postgate in his address takes up the case of Latin and proves that Latin is just as much alive as English, or French, or German. There is a world of difference, he shows, between a dead language and a language of people that are dead. Even so, "if a great and world-wide Church uses Latin every day in its ritual and in the converse of its colleges and religious houses, and if newspapers are published in Latin in more than one civilized community, then to call Latin dead is perhaps a little premature."

WALTER MILLER

TULANE UNIVERSITY

Die Kultur der Gegenwart. Herausgegeben von PAUL HINNEBERG. Allgemeine Geschichte der Philosophie. Des Gesamtwerkes Teil I, Abteilung V. Berlin und Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1909. M. 12.

The method of collaboration employed in the Cambridge English Literature, in Lord Acton's Cambridge Modern History, and in Petit de Julleville's History of French Literature is here applied to the general history of philosophy. From the artistic point of view, there is some loss of unity. But it is the

only method that will satisfy the scientific conscience of an age of specialization. A Zeller or a Windelband may write almost equally well on Greek and on modern German philosophy, but no single scholar could do this and at the same time produce the admirable summary of mediaeval philosophy which Baeumker contributes to this volume, or write of prehistoric thought with the competence of Wundt, of Hindoo philosophy with that of Oldenberg, of the philosophy of Islam with that of Goldziher, of Chinese philosophy with that of Grube, of Japanese philosophy with that of Tetsujiro Inouye. The publishers' prospectus promises an "allgemein verständliche Sprache," and accordingly technical terms and quotations from the original texts are eschewed. But in the endeavor to say as much as possible in brief compass, the writers employ a generalized, abstract style which presupposes in the German reading public which they address a singularly high culture. This is especially noticeable in Windelband's sketch of modern philosophy. His comment is full of interest and suggestion to those who already know the story. But its rapid comparisons and combinations of historical movements and tendencies in "-mus" from "humanismus," "Paracelsismus," and "Augustinismus," to "criticismus," "positivismus," and "pragmatismus" will baffle the uninitiated.

Further criticism must be confined to the section which falls within the scope of this journal, von Arnim's history of the philosophy of classical antiquity. It is no paradox to say that its chief merit is due to the fact that the writer is not primarily a philosopher, but a philologist and student of literature. He does not attempt to probe to the bottom of metaphysical problems, and rarely loses himself in the cul de sac of epistemology. But he gives on the whole the most lucid and intelligible description of the general movement of philosophic ideas from Thales to Plotinus with which I am acquainted. His conception of the pre-Socratics, I am pleased to note, is that emphasized by my pupil, Dr. Clara Millerd, in her dissertation, On the Interpretation of Empedocles. He says (p. 119) "Indem man eine Geschichte erzählt, wie aus dem Urstoff die Welt entstand, gibt man nicht nur eine genetische Erklärung des gegenwärtigen Weltzustandes, sondern glaubt auch etwas auszusagen über das wahrhaft Seiende." He rightly affirms the practical identity of Anaxagoras' "Urgemenge" with the "Urstoff" of Anaximander. The omission of all reference to the Xóyos in connection with Heraclitus seems strange. He does not find two distinct cycles of creation in Empedocles, but blends them in one, to which he refers all four descriptions of the development of organic life. There seem to be some traces here of the confusion of Zeller first clearly explained in Dr. Millerd's dissertation (p. 50). Unless we are to take Empedocles' words vaguely and symbolically of a general evolution from chaos, we must admit (1) that there are two world creations, (2) that the cycle in which we live is that in which strife is on the increase, (3) and that Zeller's interpretation confounds the two in hopeless ambiguity.

The account of the sophists is excellent, as we should expect from the author of the first chapter of the Leben und Werke des Dio von Prusa. At the most I should query whether too much of the Theaetetus is not attributed to Protagoras, and too much of Xenophon to Socrates. The homo mensura is said to mean the individual man—rightly, so far as we may suppose Protagoras to have raised the question at all.

The treatment of Plato is admirable in lucidity, directness, and warmth of appreciation. The ethical, religious, and social aspects of Plato's thought are properly emphasized. A specialist may take exception to some things said of the metaphysics. But as it is in any case impossible to make this intelligible to the general public even of philologists such criticism would be captious. There is real insight in the statement (p. 151) "Die Tatsache, dass ein Ding viele Eigenschaften hat, stellte sich für den Griechen aus sprachlichen Gründen in der Form dar, dass Ein Ding vieles ist." He is right in denying that the Ideas are thoughts of God, that matter is μǹ ov, and that Plato changed his terminology in regard to μéleέis. But he misses the psychological or epistemological necessity for affirming ideas of everything, and he errs in tracing a development of the idea of immortality from the Symposium to the Phaedrus and the Phaedrus to the Phaedo; in affirming that the avrò (@ov of the Timaeus is God; and, as was to be expected, in his interpretation of the Idea of Good. With many other critics, he fails to see that the Idea of Good may be the highest idea for the ethics and sociology of the Republic and the teleological nature philosophy of the Timaeus, without being the most comprehensive idea in logical extension for the purposes of the dialectical and ontological dialogues.

The only exceptions that I have to take to the clear and helpful summary of Aristotelianism are (1) the distinction between ȧpxaí=axioms and ȧpxaí concepts is not sufficiently brought out; (2) the fundamental ambiguity of ovoía in Aristotle, of which Gomperz makes so much, is ignored or evaded; (3) the statement (p. 183) that a plant has no sensation because "es fehlt ihr an einem seelischen Zentralorgan," repeats, I think, an old error of Zeller's to which I have elsewhere called attention. The μeσórns does not mean a central organ of the soul, but as Themistius, says, (p. 144.5) τὸ σῶμα ἐν μεσότητι κεκραμένον τῶν ἁπτῶν ἐναντιώσεων.

The Epicurean рóλnis, von Arnim says, cannot be an innate idea. He explains it, if I may borrow the terminology of Romanes, as an infallible "recept" from sense experience. He does not attempt to reconcile this view with the fact that there is a póλnyes or natural anticipation that the gods are eternal. Nothing is said of the beginnings of the development of an empirical logic of induction in the later Epicureans. There is a good account of Stoicism, and an admirable chapter on Plotinus, with which the sketch closes. The last two centuries of neo-Platonism are judiciously omitted. Little worth while could be said of them in the space available.

PAUL SHOREY