and Italian, and those in English which did not need to be quoted at length to bring out the comparison have been omitted or abridged. Cf. Od. i. 3. 21-34 passim; i. 2. 38; i. 12. 1. Alternative constructions and interpretations are also omitted; cf. Od. i. 31. 17; ii. 2. 1-4; ii. 13. 19; iii. 3. 12, etc. It may be noted here that in several cases the preferred construction of the first edition has been rejected (Od. i. 32. 2-3; ii. 8. 3; Epod. 16. 15); in others the alternative rendering has superseded the one preferred by Professor Shorey formerly; cf. Od. i. 6. 1-2; i. 12. 21; ii. 10. 6; iii. 7. 41-42; iii. 21. 4; Carm. saec. 65. A further improvement is an index of first lines. On the whole errors in the revision are rare, but I have noted a few which have survived from the previous edition or appeared now for the first time. Text and notes in some instances do not agree: viz., ii. 13. 23, discretas and discriptas; i. 5. 13, intemptata and intentata; i. 37. 23, ensem and ensen; ii. 8. 20, iminati is a misprint. In Carm. saec. 65, the notes reject the previous reading arces and adopt aras, but the text still reads arces. The mispunctuation in i. 1. 30 still remains in the revision. Epod. ix. 11 might be more clearly written, and Miss Case's article in the Classical Journal (December, 1908), p. 65, should be added to the references on Horace's religion in Od. iii. 23. Furthermore, would it not have been more helpful to the student to replace very technical terms like "brachylogy" (Od. i. 8. 9), "cacophonous" (iii. 3. 67), “trajection" (iii. 4. 11), and "anadiplosis," with brief explanatory phrases?

But these are minor points. The revisers are to be congratulated on making the work so helpful to an understanding of Horace without impairing its literary flavor, which is, as before, its special charm.

HAROLD L. AXTELL

Abhandlungen zur römischen Religion.

Von ALFRED VON DOMAS

ZEWSKI. Leipzig: Teubner, 1909. Pp. viii+240. M. 6. Scholars have reason to be grateful to the late Albrecht Dieterich for persuading Domaszewski to gather into a volume his most important articles on Roman religion. Hitherto these have been accessible only to such as were near the largest libraries, for they originally appeared in widely scattered publications. Now we have in a handy volume twenty-four papers, no one of which can be neglected, even if each and every one cannot secure our acquiescence in equal degree. In all essentials the original form of the articles has been preserved. Obviously a reviewer cannot even name all the titles here included, but must confine himself to noting the most important. Yet, first of all, the modest form in which the articles appear certainly deserves mention. In many cases a few pages contain what another writer would have expanded into a paper many times the length; indeed it must be confessed that in certain instances expansion would

probably have been an advantage, for at times excessive compression and a neglect of literary form, such as is so exasperating in Domaszewski's important Religion des römischen Heeres, tend to conceal the writer's aim and to obscure the significance of his work.

Domaszewski's great knowledge of all that relates to the Roman army makes us naturally turn first to those articles which deal with the religion of the troops, such as No. I, Die Tierbilder der Signa, in which the author shows that the animals represented on the signa under the empire were chiefly drawn from the zodiacal signs, the creature indicating in each case the nativity of the imperial house or of the Emperor under whom the legion was formed, or of the legion itself. This result is of value not only in determining the date of the organization of the legions but it also explains a number of minor matters, as for example such dedications as CIL. II, 2553, ob natales signorum, and 6183, ob natalem aquilae. The other two articles of this class are briefer: the first, No. II, Lustratio Exercitus, is an interpretation of CIL. V, 808, and III, 8112, both of the third century; the other, No. VIII, Das Tribunal der Signa, elucidates CIL. VI, 3559.

Next we may note the short papers which deal with special divinities. No. III, Neptunus auf lateinischen Inschriften, shows that while the concept of Neptune as lord of the sea was foreign to Roman thought originally and only had its place as the result of Greek influence, the divinity frequently appears as god of springs and once (Eph. Epig. III, 99) even as protector of a bridge. No. IV, Tempestates, presents the evidence for the cult of these Latin powers of the deep, so far as they were not banished by Greek influence. An inscribed relief in honor of Fortuna and Bonus Eventus, found near Isca in Britain, CIL. VII, 97, furnishes the theme for No. XII, Bonus Eventus. Although this divinity appears elsewhere as the god of profit in money transactions or of good luck, in the monument from Isca he seems to show his original Italic nature as the god of success in agriculture. The old Roman character of this concept appears in the dress of the god, which is that of the Roman priest, the toga and the limus, a representation not found elsewhere on the monuments of this god. In No. XV, Virgo Caelestis, Domaszewski employs CIL. VII, 759, the famous apotheosis of Julia Domna as Virgo Caelestis, to elucidate Virg. Aen. iv. 58, where he would identify legifera Ceres with the Carthaginian goddess. This is no doubt correct, but why he should say that Servius' identification of Ceres with AnμýTMnp Beoμopópos "ist nur ein Scholiastenwitz" is beyond comprehension. The very inscription which he is using calls Caelestis iusti inventrix, which is exactly equivalent to coμopópos (cf. HSCP. XI, 58 ff.). The longest paper of this class is No. VII, Silvanus auf lateinischen Inschriften, in which is shown how this ancient god of wood and field became the patron of wooddealers, hunters, herdsmen, and shepherds. The deforestation of Italy may be the reason why only a single dedication to the god by caplatores has been found in the entire peninsula, while the number of similar dedications

in Illyricum and Dalmatia testifies to the active wood trade in those provinces. In like fashion the dedications to Silvanus as protector of cattle show that the grazing lands lay chiefly in the central Apennines and on the southern slopes of the Alps. These inscriptions were set up chiefly by slaves and freedmen whose guardian the god naturally became. Furthermore the article proves how the distribution of the dedications in the provinces reflects the native religions.

Two numbers deal directly with religious phenomena of the Germanic provinces. The first of these, No. XIII, Die Schutzgötter von Mainz, discusses the four pairs of gods represented on a monument of the third century, found within the limits of the Roman Mogontiaceum. The gods are identified as Silvanus and Diana, the Celtic Sucellus and Nantosvelta; genius castrorum and Fortuna; Apollo and Salus, the Celtic Grannus and Sirona; and Mercury and Victoria. The other paper, No. XIV, Die Juppitersäule in Mainz, deals with a monument of the time of Nero, which, with its complex of divinities, shows how Greco-Roman civilization had penetrated into Gallic lands.

Only three articles treat subjects belonging specifically to the Republic. No. X, die Eigenschaftsgötter der altrömischen Religion, discusses such pairs as Lua Saturni, Salacia Neptuni, etc. With the conclusions of No. XVII, Dei Certi und Dei Incerti, it is difficult to agree, for Domaszewski would regard as dei certi those divinities whose sphere of action was indicated and delimited by the effects they produced on human affairs, as for example the gods Vervactor, Reparator, Imporcitor, etc. The more probable explanation has a less philosophic basis: Varro designated as dei certi those gods about whom the theologians could say something definite; the dei incerti included all others, both those who had never been definitely conceived as individual divinities and those who had more or less died out of Roman religious consciousness. This was long since pointed out by Wissowa (see his Gesam. Abhandlungen, 306 ff.). In the third paper of this class, No. XVIII, Die Festcyclen des römischen Kalenders, the writer follows up an earlier observation of his own on the cyclic arrangement of the Roman festivals and endeavors to prove that in each month there was a tendency to group the sacred days around one central festival. For example, in August the Vulcanalia of August 23, which celebrated the ripening power of the sun's flaming heat, formed the center of the group Portunalia, August 17, Vinalia, August 19, Consualia, August 21, Opiconsiva, August 25, and the Volturnalia, August 26. Domaszewski holds that all these stand in a natural relation to the central festival, and would establish similar cycles in the other months. The contention contains much truth, beyond all question, but the present reviewer is unable to see everywhere the same close connection which the author seeks to establish.

Three other important papers deserve more attention than the mere mention which can here be given them. In No. V, Die politische Bedeutung

des Traiansbogen in Benevent, Domaszewski analyzes the reliefs on the arch and points out how the whole work was intended to celebrate Trajan, princeps optimus, as the benefactor of the provinces. No. IX, Die Familie des Augustus auf der Ara Pacis, as the title indicates, is an interpretation of the sculptured groups on the famous Augustan monument, against the conclusions of which it should be said that the procession is no longer commonly thought to be that of 13 B.C. Der Festgesang des Horaz auf die Begründung des Principates, No. XI, is a discussion of Hor. C. 3. 1-6, in relation to Augustus' own words in the Monumentum Ancyranum which demands the careful attention of students of Horace.

Of the eight remaining papers only No. XXII, Die politische Bedeutung der Religion von Emesa, can be noticed here. In it Domaszewski attributes the source of the extraordinary influence exerted by the women of the imperial house for the half-century following the marriage of Septimius Severus with Julia Domna to the commanding position which the religion of Emesa had previously won in Syria. With this monotheistic cult of the sun and with oriental theosophy in general the first of the Severi had become acquainted probably at the time when he was in command of the legio IV Scythica in Syria during the latter years of Marcus Aurelius' reign. How completely he had come under this religious influence is shown by the readiness with which he accepted the guidance of the stars in selecting his second wife. Julia Domna, Julia Soaemias, Julia Maesa, and Julia Mamaea were all connected with the priestly line of Emesa, whose superior position prompted their high ambitions.

Much more might be said, but this notice has already passed its normal bounds. The individual papers all deserve careful study, for in spite of their compression and lack of style, they are both stimulating and illuminating, even where the reader must dissent from their conclusions.

CLIFFORD H. MOORE

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Opferbräuche der Griechen. Von PAUL STENGEL. Leipzig: Teubner, 1910.

Students of Greek religion well know their constant debt to Paul Stengel. For more than thirty years he has modestly and continuously been adding to our precise knowledge of Greek ritual by a series of special studies in which he has examined the evidence in point in objective fashion and has drawn his conclusions uninfluenced by prejudice or by theories previously conceived. In response to many requests he has now issued twenty-eight of the most important of his studies in a handy volume. Eleven of these papers deal with the technical terms of ritual, such as, for example, those entitled, I, “Homerisches, ἱερήιον, πρωτόγονος, τελήεσσα ἑκατόμβη, ἀποσπένδειν, θυήεις-θύελλα-θυόεις”; ΙΙΙ, “Θύειν und Θύεσθαι”; VI, “Χέρνιψ”; ΧΙΧ,

66

“ Νεκύσια”; ΧΧΙ, “Ἱερώσυνα und Θεομορία”; of the fourteen which have to do with the manner and meaning of ritual acts the most important are V, "Opferblut und Opfergerste"; XV, "Zum griechischen Opferritual"; and XXVII, "Buphonien"; the remaining three discuss the nature and worship of special divinities under the titles, XVI, "Chthonischer und Totenkult"; XVII, "Der Kult der Winde"; and XVIII, "Aídŋs kλutótwλos.”

Happily Stengel has not followed the usual custom of being content to publish his papers in the form in which they originally appeared, valuable as such publication would have been; he has instead taken the trouble to revise the whole series of articles, rewriting the older when necessary; so he has brought all up to date and given the collection a contemporaneous character for which scholars will be duly grateful. The table of contents gives under each number references to the original place of publication.

No doubt some of Stengel's results will appear scanty or questionable, especially to members of the anthropological or the "comparative" school, for of analogous ritual acts and religious practices among other peoples than the Greeks he has nothing to say. Probably such analogies could often be used to advantage for illustration or explanation of the matters Stengel discusses, but the dangers of the "comparative" method are so great that we cannot fail to feel a certain satisfaction that the author has chosen to confine himself to a consideration of the data which the Greeks themselves have left us and to be content with the results which can be obtained therefrom. This is sound philological method and vastly to be preferred to that 'comparative" course which has so often led to strange conclusions. CLIFFORD HERSCHEL MOORE

Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen: Ihre Grundgedanken und Wirkungen. Von R. REITZENSTEIN. Leipzig: Teubner, 1910. Pp. 212. M. 4.

One of the most striking phenomena in the course of classical studies during the last twenty years has been the increasing appreciation of the fact that antiquity must be studied in all its manifestations, and that consequently the New Testament and the writings of the church Fathers belong to the classical philologist as much as to the theologian. The several writers of the New Testament, Paul above all the rest, were the children of their time no less than Seneca, Epictetus, and Plutarch; their words and ideas must be interpreted with due regard to their Hellenistic as well as their Jewish environment. How much our knowledge of the language of the New Testament has gained from the study of the profane writings of the time, especially of the papyri, is well known; it is not too much to expect that many of the religious ideas of early Christianity may be illuminated by a study of the contemporary non-Christian religious literature. This