A pretty exhaustive exploitation of this poem yields the following result: cunquise, quise et rovee (117), donee (118), quise et assemblee (139), raliie (?) (147), menee (161), assembleiz (167), entreocis (180), entrocis (219), vencue (242), mateiz (266), rendue (302), prise (305), assise (306), attainte (351), coneüe (411), perdue (522), laisseiz (600), laissiez (606), rassembleie (611), fineie (833), deviseie (834), oïe (1001), vencuz (1058), baisie et blandie (1121), prise (1200), chargies (1275), raloïe (1393), covreie (1415), raloïe (1532), deviseie (1533), commencie (1596), meneie (1600), deviseies (1631), ordeneies (1632), sevreie (1764), conquise (1871), popleie (1887), eschaciez (2015), mise (2025), popleie (2038), troveie (2045), apeleie (2046), doneie (2080), deviseies (2135), ordeneies (2136), feruz (2168), clameie (2182), morz et detrenchiez (2186), ameneies (2197), precies (2198), prise (2286), ameie (2291), torneie (2292), commandeie (2299), meneie (2311), receleie (2312), hauteie (2313), engendreie (2314), nomeie (2316), demostree (2335), amee (2337), getee (2338), deguerpie (2339), faite (2340), recinte (2348), assembleie (2362), aŭneie (2367), engendreie (2401), deguerpie (2487), faiz (2514), destruiz (2530), passeie (2538), deviseie (2539), popleie (2542), nummeie (2543), ameies, (2602), honoreies (2603), tramises (2605), rameneie (2665), apeleie (2672), araisu. neie (2822), apeleie (2823), fineie (2842), entendues (2856), ordeneie (2861), celeie (2864) mostreie (2865), cuntredite (2891), troveie (2913), blasmeie (2914), fineie (2915), doeies (2927), mostreie (2958), demandeie (2959), ahireteies (2975), oïe (2978), respitie (2979), entendue (2985), quise (3007), furnie (3008), chargie (3009), meneie (3013), livreie (3014), jureiz (3124), soferte (3218), demandeie (3301), faite (3425) assembleie (3455), aduneiz (3457), livreiz (3458), meneie (3465), resaisie (3507), desheriteiz (3509), mandeiz (3510), renduz (3511), toluz (3512), coronefe (3521), assegureie (3522), mandee (3587), aunee (3588), menee (3589), commencie (3602), assemblee (3603), mise (3608), perdue (3615), devisee (3621), aquitee (3622), partie (3651), mandiez (3661), arse et gastee (3664), defendue (3668), vencue (3669), saisie (3706), exquise (3720), donee, (3755), tenue (3759), laissie (3764), nomeie (3883), sacreie (3884), prise (3896), mise (3902), veüe (3939), troveie (3881), perdue (4030), faite (4038), troveiz (4053), porteiz (4054), serviz (4087), nurriz (4088), cummencie (4157), assize (4166).

(a) of these 117, 118, 139, 147, 161, 167, 242, 302, 306, 411, 522, 600, 606, 1058, 1121, 1275, 1393, 1415, 1532, 1533, 1596, 1600, 1631, 1632, 1764, 1871, 2015, 2038, 2045, 2046, 2080, 2135, 2182, 2186, 2197, 2198, 2291, 2299, 2314, 2316, 2335, 2337, 2338, 2339, 2340, 2348, 2362, 2367, 2401, 2487, 2514, 2538, 2539, 2542-43, 2602-3, 2605, 2665, 2672, 2823, 2856, 2861, 2865, 2890-1, 2914-15, 2925-26-27, 2958, 2975-78-79-85, 3007-8-9, 3013-14, 3218, 3301-2, 3455-7-8, 3465, 3511-12, 3588-9, 3602-3-8, 3616, 3622, 3651, 3661, 3664, 3076, 3720, 3755, 3760-4, 3883-4, 3939, 4030-38, 4053-54, 4087-88, 4166, have in every case the direct object before both auxiliary (avoir) and participle.* This object is sometimes pronominal, sometimes substantival.

(b) 97, 685, 831, 1055, 1231, 1292, 1365, 1571, 2035, 2195, 2923, 3015, 3165, 3714, have (1) participle, (2) auxiliary, (3) object, in the order here named.

(c) 219, 1051, 1626, 2016, 2268, 3825, 3981, have (1) participle, (2) object, (3) auxiliary, in the order here named.

(d) 241, 305, 351, 611, 833-4, 1001, 2025, 2103, 2286, 2292, 2311-12-18, 2822, 2864, 3124, 3415, 8507-9, 3521-2, 3587, 3621, 3667-8, 3896, 3902, 4157, have (1) auxiliary, (2) object, (3) participle.

(e) 153, 191, 1531, 1887, 2060, 2334, 2515, 2559, 2583, 3012, 3245, 3523, 3596, 3631, 3759, 3797, 3886, 3991, have (1) auxiliary, (2) participle, (3) object.

Observation: In 1. 4038 pp. with faire agrees with a fem. pronoun: Si l'a faite vive enfoïr.

2. Does the past participle, in tenses compounded with AVOIR, fail to agree with the direct object?

Ll. 1884, 2210, 2247, 2427, 2663, 3404, (respectively, fait, mis, receü, pris remis, menei,) show the cases of non-agreeing participles, which govern their object without change of form.

(a) Of these 2210, 2247, 2427, 3404, have the object after the participle and auxiliary, in the order: auxiliary, participle, object.

(b) 2663 has the participle before the auxiliary and object. (c) 1884 has (1) object, (2) auxiliary, (3) participle.

*Occasionally, as in 1275 and 522, the order is: direct object, participle, auxiliary.

Observation: In 2499 the participle fails, as in modern French, to agree with a preceding specification of time:

Quant li vint an furent passei

Que rois Mempricies out regnei.

Sum. The past participle agrees with the direct object in 157 instances; fails to agree or governs without agreeing in 6 instances. In 115 of the instances of agreement the order is (1) object, (2) auxiliary, (3) participle, (or, in a few instances, (1) object, (2) participle, (3) auxiliary) as in modern French. Great freedom of position prevails, as the data show, partly due to poetic considerations, partly due to the fluctuating uncertainties of French word-order at that time.

On an Etymology of Isidore. (A Philological Conundrum.) By J. RENDEL HARRIS.

In an appendix to the treatise of Isidore, De Ortu et Obitu Patrum (ed. Arevalus. t. vii. p. 395), we find as follows: "Lucas qui interpretatur elevans sive consurgens, evangelista tertius." I have been much puzzled to determine the philological process employed by Isidore (Pseudo. Isidore), or the earlier writer whom he quotes.

It seems that the following is the solution of the difficulty:

(a). The derivation is from the Hebrew language, to which all the names in the appendix to De Ortu et Obitu Patrum are referred. For example, Philippus interpretatur os lampadis ; Thomas interpretatur abyssus = Dinņ.

=

Moreover, it is to the Hebrew language that Patristic philologians most frequently refer. The treatise De Nominibus Hebraicis, (Migne, Patr. Latina, tom. 23), bound up with the works of St Jerome, but probably of a considerably earlier date, finds a Hebrew origin for almost every name in the New Testament, including Gaius, Demetrius, and Diotrephes. On the other hand there are some bright instances of Greek philology, as when Euthalius teaches that Saul was so called ὅτι ἐσάλευε τήν ἐκκλησίαν, and Paul was the name given him öτ TÉπаvrai, because he left off his wicked ways.

But with regard to the passage in question, a Hebrew derivation is the more probable.

(3). This supposition is confirmed by a reference to Cod. Coislin. ccxxiv, from which Tischendorf gives extracts in his Anecdota Sacra et Profana. The MS. contains Ερμηνεία ἑβραϊκῶν ὀνομάτων τῶν ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐμφερομένων κατὰ στοιχεῖον ἠρμηνευμένη. And we find as follows:

quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit

TERTIO EVANGELII LIBRUM SECANDO LUCAM.
lucas iste medicus post acensum XPI
cum eo paulus quasi ut iuris studiosum
secundum adsumsisset numeni suo

ex opinione concriset. dnm tamen nec ipse
dvidit in carne et ide pro asequi potuit

ita et ad nativitate iohannis incipet dicere. The words printed in capitals are rubricated in the original document: and the text is edited as follows by Westcott. (On the Canon of N. T., p. 523).

quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit. Tertium Evangelii librum secundum Lucam. Lucas iste medicus post ascensum Christi cum eum Paulus

quasi ut juris studiosum secundum adsumsisset nomine suo ex opinione conscripsit. Dominum tamen nec ipse vidit in carne, et idem prout assequi potuit, ita et a nativitate Johannis incepit dicere.

In the third line of the fragment I propose to read Lucas iste medicus Antiochensis. To justify this emendation observe (which is not apparent from Westcott's text) that Christi stands outside of the line and has been added by the rubricator. In the next place the missing letter s in ascensum has been added by a later hand, according to Ceriani (s superscriptum manu dubia).

I believe post acensum to be a correction for ante acensum and this latter to be a corruption of antiocensis.

The following quotations will show how common is the tradition which makes St. Luke a native of Antioch, or which is for our purpose almost an equivalent statement, a Syrian.

1. Eusebius. Eccl. Hist. iii. 4. Λουκᾶς δὲ τὸ μὲν γένος ὢν τῶν ἀπ' ̓Αντιοχείας, τὴν δὲ ἐπιστήμην ἰατρὸς τὰ πλεῖστα συγγεγονὸς τῷ παύλῳ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς δὲ οὐ παρέργως τῶν ἀποστόλων ὁμιληκὼς ἧς ἀπὸ τούτων προσεκτήσατο ψυχῶν θεραπευτικῆς ἐν δυσὶν ἡμῖν ὑποδείγματα θεοπνεύστοις καταλέλοιπε βιβλίοις.

2. Euthalius, in his edition of the Acts (Migne, Patr. Graec. tom. 85, col. 633) furnishes the following statement:

πρῶτον περὶ ὧν Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς συνέταξε, προοιμιασάμενος. ̓Αντιοχεὺς γὰρ οὗτος ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος, ἰατρός τε τὴν ἐπιστήμην πρὸς παύλου μαθητευθείς, δύο βίβλους συνεγράψατο.

And we find this statement again, almost word for word in Cramer's Catena, as the Introduction to the Acts;

̓Αντιοχεὺς ὑπάρχων τὸ γένος ὁ Λουκᾶς ἰατρὸς τὴν ἐπιστήμην, ὁ ὑπὸ παύλου μαθητευθεὶς, δύο βίβλους συνεγράψατο κτέ.

It is evident that the passage in the Catena is either taken from Euthalius, or from some one of the fathers whose work Euthalius incorporated with his own.

3. Jerome, De viris illustribus, c. 7.

Lucas medicus Antiochensis, ut ejus scripta indicant, Græci sermonis non ignarus fuit, sectator apostoli Pauli et omnis peregrinationis ejus comes,

etc.

4. The Codex Amiatinus of the Vulgate provides us with the following prologues:

a. Tertius Lucas medicus, natione Syrus Antiochensis, cujus laus in evangelio, qui et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli in Achaiæ Bœotiæque partibus volumen condidit, quædam altius repetens et, ut ipse in prohemio confitetur, audita magis quam visa describens.

b. Lucas Syrus natione, Anthiocensis, arte medicus, discipulus Apostolorum, postea Paulum secutus * usque ad confessionem ejus, serviens domino sine crimine nam neque uxorem umquam habens neque filios, lxxiiii annorum obiit in Bythinia plenus spiritu sancto. Qui cum jam descripta essent evangelia, per Matthæum quidem in Judea, per Marcum autem in Italia, sancto instigante spiritu in Achaiæ partibus hoc scripsit evangelium, significans etiam ipse in principio ante alia esse descripta: cui extra ea quæ ordo evangelicæ dispositionis exposcit ea maxime necessitas fuit laboris ut primum græcis fidelibus omni perfectione venturi in carne dei manifestata ne judaicis fabulis intenti in solo legis desiderio tenerentur neve hereticis fabulis et stultis sollicitationibus seducti excederent a veritate elaboraret: dehinc ut, in principio evangelii Johannis nativitate præsumta, cui evangelium scriberet et in quo electus scriberet indicaret, contestans in se completa esse quæ essent ab aliis inchoata, etc. 5. The collections of Isidore add some important statements to the preceding, and as is so often the case with that writer, the extracts bear marks of high antiquity.

Isidor. Hisp. (ed. Arevali) vii, 395. Lucas, qui interpretatur elevans sive consurgens, evangelista tertius, natione Syrus, Antiochensis, cujus laus in evangelio canitur, arte scriba et medicus, apostolorum discipulus, postea Paulum usque ad confessionem ejus secutus, serviens Domino sine crimine. Nam neque uxorem umquam habens, neque filios, medicus corporum et animarum. Duos etenim libros de spirituali medicina animarum scripsit, id est evangelium in Achaia partibus tempore Pauli, quod evangelium Paulus Apostolus (ait) esse suum ait enim secundum evangelium meum, alium vero librum qui Actus Apostolorum dicitur quem sancto Theophilo episcopo Antiocheno conscripsit, lxx et iiii annorum obiit in Bethania, plenus Spiritu Sancto, qui postea Constantinopolim xx Con

* The MS. is clearly wrong in placing the comma after secutus, and equally incorrect in putting a full stop after crimine.

stantino imperatoris anno cum reliquiis beati apostoli Andreæ translatus est cujus depositio xv. kal novemb. celebratur.

6. Idem. v. 187. Lucas Antiochenus evangelista et apostolicæ conscriptor historiæ, natione Syrus, arte medicus, græco eloquio eruditus quem plerique tradunt proselytum fuisse, et hebræas literas ignorans. Hic tamen fuit Pauli discipulus et individuus comes peregrinationis ejus. Quique ab ineunte pueritia castissimus fuit et evangelicæ prædicationis opus exercuit Obiit septuagesimo quarto vitæ suæ anno. Sepultus in Bithynia; cuius quidem ossa, regnante Constantino Constantinopolim fuerunt translata.

Here, then, are at least seven fragments of traditional evidence, bearing striking analogies to the Muratorian Canon, and favoring strongly the suggested emendation. And the only counter evidence that I know of is the statement in the subscriptions to the Gospel of Luke, in Codd. KS, to the following effect: ἐξεδόθη μετὰ χρόνους ιέ τῆς τοῦ χῦ ἀναλήψεως.

Assuming the accuracy of the emendation, we shall see further that these traditions become much more intelligible when placed side by side; and in order to make the comparison more carefully and completely, we can add several other passages belonging to the traditional history of St. Luke, and it is easy and interesting to examine the accretion and development of the tradition.

[Abstract of a communication to the University Scientific Association, November 7, 1883.]

There is great interest attached to speculations as to the probable ancestry of the Decapods, owing to the value which the conclusions have in enabling us to interpret paleontological facts. There have been quite a number of theories advanced as to the original stem from which the Decapods have been derived, two of which claim especial attention. One is the theory of Müller, who finds such a stem form in the zoea. Another, suggested by Claus, or in a different form by Brooks, considers the protozoea as the ancestral stem. It is of great importance in understanding the Crustacea to decide between these two views, inasmuch as by the first view Crustacea are supposed to have descended from a form without a thorax, while according to the second, the thorax was present in the original Decapod stem. Some work done at Hampton during the last summer upon the larval cuticle of crabs, indicates conclusively that the latter view is the correct one, or that at least Fritz Müller's view is incorrect. The larval skin, particularly the telson, of a large number of crab zoeas was studied with the following results: The larval skin is not in different crabs alike, nor is it in any case exactly similar to the inclosed zoea. There is always an indication, more or less complete, of some previously existing stage. There has been shown in the various forms studied a gradation from the larval skin, with little difference from the zoea inclosed, to a larval skin which is utterly unlike the zoea, but which possesses a forked tail with 14 long feathered spines. This gradation is complete, and a study of the different embryonic telsons shows that all have been derived from the form shown by Panopeus, which has a forked tail with 14 spines. Now such a larval skin is to be considered simply as the cast off skin of some stage immediately preceding the zoea. It has been shown by Paul Meyer that the study of the larval skin of Macroura leads to a similar result, that a forked tail with 14 spines is also seen in the early history of this group. If, therefore, a form can be found which shows these peculiarities, we have reason for accepting it as the stem form of the higher Crustacea. Now a study of the different protozoea forms which occur in the ontogeny of various Macroura shows that we have in this form a stage which fulfils the conditions. It has the forked tail with 14 spines, and has large swimming antennae, another peculiar characteristic of the crab larval cuticle. If the various larval skins of crabs and Macroura be compared with each other, it will be seen that they are all to be considered as modifications of a tail much like that present in the larval skin of Panopeus; and if this tail be compared with the protozoea tail of Peneus, the likeness will be seen to be very striking. We have, therefore, in the comparative study of the larval cuticle of crabs, good reason for accepting as the stem form of the Decapods a form which had resemblance to a protozoea.

I. Dr. von Holst's Lectures on the Relation of History to Politics, etc.

Two public courses of lectures by distinguished writers on history have been given here since the opening of this session. The first course was a careful and at times an eloquent review of the Relation of History to Politics, with illustrations drawn from modern European history. The lecturer was DR. H. VON HOLST, Professor in the University of Freiburg, who had previously lectured here in the winter of 1879, and is well known as the author of the Constitutional History of the United States.

THE RELATION OF HISTORY TO POLITICS.

It is impossible to understand European politics without understanding European history. If you would study the present character of European states and the tendencies of the nineteenth century, you must begin at least as far back as the French Revolution. The lecturer considered in a philosophical way the ancien régime, the causes and results of the Revolution. He showed that while feudal institutions were levelled to a democratic plain, the monarchical principle survived in the most absolute form. Liberty, equality, fraternity, were but idle dreams. France has always looked for political guidance to men rather than to measures or principles. The French people are not republican in the same sense as are the people of the United States or of Switzerland. These countries have not only republican institutions but republican traditions, habits, and modes of thought. Dynastic monarchy is dead in France although monarchical feeling survives. Devotion to the Bourbons was extinct long before the natural death of the Count de Chambord. The Orleans princes have never won the hearts of the French people. The Germans of to-day are under great obligations to the French Revolution and to Napoleon 1. If old Germany had not been thoroughly shaken up, the country would now be a geographical name and a political corpse. But modern Germany has paid back her debt with interest, and the day will come when France will acknowledge it. The French have profited by the lesson of 1870 in their thorough reorganization, civic and military, and also in their educational system. Excessive centralization at Paris was one of the chief obstacles to French liberty. But the Paris Commune taught France to depend upon herself as a united country instead of upon one city. The death of Gambetta has been a great blessing to France, for, just because of his great qualities, the French people continued to believe in one man rather than in public measures. The present generation of French statesmen must learn to keep themselves in the saddle by deeds rather than by prestige. The existing relations between France and Germany were freely discussed and the international position of Germany as regards Russia, Austria, and other powers was suggestively defined. The policy of Germany but with readiness for immediate and overpowering war. is peace, American competition in economic ways will however finally compel the disarmament of Europe. The internal condition of Germany received some attention from the lecturer. The German Empire is daily growing into a more organic unit, and, whatever political and social dissensions there may be within German borders, the German people have no confidence in foreign war as a safety-valve for the nation.

Before leaving Baltimore, Dr. von Holst met the students of History and Political Science by themselves and urged upon them the study of Slavery as an historic, economic, and social Institution. A fuller report of this address will probably be printed in the University Studies of Historical and Political Science.

Few people considered the late civil war as an irrepressible conflict. It was not so considered by the man who coined the phrase. Neither Seward nor Lincoln, neither North nor South understood the irrepressible nature of the conflict into which the nation was drifting. This view is impossible even in our time, because the history of slavery has not yet been written. There has been no attempt to write it. There are, indeed, works which indicate by their titles some bearing upon the subject of slavery, but a scientific treatise upon the same there is not. Accounts of

the slavery question there are in abundance, but slavery as an historic Institution is yet to be studied. Until the thing itself is known, it is impossible to treat it understandingly in the history of political controversy. Students from the South, trained to a knowledge of scientific methods, should take up the history of slavery - the peculiar institution. Study the slaveholders as such; study their position, occupations, modes of life, their intercourse with the outside world. Investigate the history of landed property or land tenure in the Southern States. Inquire into their commercial relations; what articles were imported and what things were not imported. Study the history of the southern press and of southern literature. Such inquiries would show to some extent the character of southern civilization. No individual can complete this great task. It will be a work for the coming century. But individuals can contribute a stone to the up-building of this historical structure and by and by it will be finished. Whoever takes up such work with interest, diligence, and strict conscientiousness may expect results which will entitle him to the praise: "He has deserved well of his country."

II. Mr. Bryce's Lectures on the History of the Sources of Roman Law.

The second public course of lectures in history was given by JAMES BRYCE, Esq., M. P., Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Oxford, author of a work on the Holy Roman Empire. In a course of six lectures he called attention to the importance of the study of Roman Law, and indicated the mode in which the subject should be taken up and the results to which it might lead.

ROMAN LAW.

The lectures began with some observations on the nature and value of the historical method as applied to legal studies, and upon the place which a study of Legal History ought to hold in the general history of the institutions of a state and the life of a people.

The term "Sources of Law" was then explained as including the persons or bodies from whom the law of a State proceeds, and the methods and channels by and through which it is expressed and promulgated. A sketch was then given of the conditions under which law existed in early Rome, during the regal period and in the first two centuries of the republic. The nature of Customary Law was discussed, and the importance of the priests as the depositaries of sacred customs and ceremonial usages in primitive societies was indicated. The Laws of the Twelve Tables were then touched upon, and remarks made on their great value as forming a centre for the subsequent systematic development of Roman Law and a basis for its teaching. Some account was given of the way in which statutes were passed by the comitia of the people, and the consequences which legislation by such assemblies produced were examined. After this the position of the legal profession at Rome was treated of, and the way in which the prudentes became, as teachers and writers, sources of law, was illustrated from similar phenomena in England and America. Special reference was made to the action of Augustus and his successors in giving certain jurists the privilege of issuing authoritative responsa, and to the growth and influence of the Sabinian and Proculian schools. Next the position and powers of the Roman magistrates, and especially of the Prætor as an executive and judicial officer, were discussed, and it was shown that, by his control over procedure and through his edicts, he became a source of law of the first importance. The meaning of jus gentium was explained, its growth traced, and the philosophical conception of naturalis ratio was dwelt upon. Some words were said in conclusion upon the legislation of the Senate and the Emperors, and the character of Justinian's codification, or rather consolidation, of the two great masses of statute law and jurist law was briefly touched

upon.

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA.

Mr. Bryce also met the members of the Seminary of Historical and Political Science on November 23, and made some remarks in criticism of De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America."

After dwelling upon the rare and admirable qualities of De Tocqueville's work, almost without a parallel in modern political literature for keen analysis, exquisitely lucid statement, and judicial fairness, Mr. Bryce indicated several points in which De Tocqueville's observations might seem open to criticism, as affected by certain possibly misleading influences. Among these some critics might enumerate an inadequate appreciation of the English element in the institutions and political habits of the American people, a similarly scarcely adequate appreciation of the effects of colonial life, a somewhat too constantly present disposition to try American phenomena by comparison with those of France, and conceive those which are unlike France to be distinctively American, together with a view of political methods and institutions slightly too theoretical, and needing to be corrected by the experience of practical politicians.

The question was then proposed whether certain points in De Tocqueville's description of the phenomena he saw in 1833 were correct then, although not true now, or whether he had erred in his observation of the then actual condition of the United States. Among these points were the following: The arbitrary powers of American magistrates, the tyranny of the majority in America, the absence of free thought and free speech, the eager interest of every citizen in political affairs, the tendency of State authority to encroach on federal authority and the predominance of

State patriotism over national patriotism, the number and variability of small political parties. These topics were briefly discussed, and the suggestion made that an edition of De Tocqueville's great work carefully annotated so as to show which of his reflections and forecasts had stood the test of time and comparing the past with the present condition of the United States might possess considerable historical and political value.

III. Dr. Billings's Lectures on Municipal Hygiene. Dr. J. S. BILLINGS, Surgeon U. S. A., who has been for several years the medical adviser of the Trustees of the Johns Hopkins Hospital, in respect to the construction of their buildings, has completed a course of twelve lectures upon the Municipal Hygiene, which was listened to by many physicians, by the health officers and other municipal authorities of Baltimore, and by such members of the university as are interested in sanitary science. The lecturer discussed the general principles which apply to the health control of cities and the illustrations were largely derived from the experience of Baltimore. The daily newspapers furnished excellent reports of most of his lectures, so that their influence was extended far beyond the company who heard them.

AMERICAN JOUrnal of PHILOLOGY. Edited by Professor Gildersleeve. Vol. IV, 3. Whole No. 15.

Article I.-The New Revision of King James' Revision of the New Testament. III. Examination of the Revision of S. Matthew (continued). By CHARLES SHORT.

In this number Professor Short continues his exhibit of the various renderings of S. Matthew from ch. vii to ch. xii inclusive (see A. J. P., II. 149-180, III. 139-169).

The character of the article precludes a synopsis. Among the matters that come up for discussion may be noted the use of the article in couplings, e. g. the east and (the) west, both in English and in Greek, the suppression of the verb in the second clause, as in the hervest is great, and the woorkmen few (Sir John Cheke), the repetition of the preposition, the use of that, how, how that.

Article II.-On the English Dative-Nominative of the Personal Pronoun. By F. B. GUмMERE.

The later change of ye to you must be connected with the earlier like tendency in the singular. After the dative had driven out the accusative forms of the personal pronoun it turned toward the nominative. In fact it had long performed nominative functions, as is shown by the construction with self, as is shown by the definite article the, which is undoubtedly a dative, se being the nominative proper. In the XVth century we find, To-morrow shall you wedded be (Guy of Warwick). But it is sporadic and the new form gained ground at first very slowly. In the Paston Letters there is no gain in the later period (1485-1509) over the earlier (14241461). In nearly a century there is not the slightest indication of such a change as might have been anticipated. But in the Kentish A zenbite of Inwyt written (1340) a century before the Paston Letters, there is a use of the dative-nominative in the second person of the singular personal pronoun that would justify the prophecy of a speedy substitution of thee for thou. But just then the plural was substituted for the singular. Ye became the more polite form of address in the XVth and XVIth centuries. The singular was isolated, a hedge was set about it. It was reserved for solemn purposes, and was thus removed from the influence of linguistic change. It became one of those forms that men use consciously with effort; just as we use ye with effort. Most men use any case of the singular personal pronoun, second person, only on special occasions and with this conscious effort. Most men, but not all. Thee is familiar to the Society of Friends though few use thou in familiar speech.

The change went on with thou and thee, and the dialectic dative-nominative of the Azenbite of Inwyt was used for thou with no more right and no less right than you for ye. The explanation from euphony is idle. If euphony is to blame why did not euphony retain ye? The ou in thou was not a diphthong at the time of change. The reason is hard to discover. Schleicher attributes the usurpation to a certain shyness. Me seems' is preferred to I see.' At any rate the tendency was helped by the analogy of the impersonal verbs in dative construction, which also had its effect on the form of verb. The modern Quaker thee does not take a verb to correspond. The Quaker says thee shall, thee multiplies.

·

The conclusion is that the household thee of modern Quakers is no more "ungrammatical" (Dr. Abbott) than the household you of anybody else. Only in solemn language does the former use thee or the latter ye. If it be urged that some dialects have retained the thou, we have simply to remember that the same is true of ye and does not interfere with the fact that thee is now a legitimate nominative.

Article III.-Participial Periphrases in Attic Prose. By W. J. ALEX

ANDER.

This is substantially Dr. Alexander's thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. An abstract will be found in Circular No. 22 with an extended note on the subject by Professor Gildersleeve.

Article IV.-Stichometry, II. By J. RENDEL HARRIS.

In this paper Mr. Harris extends his previous results to Bible texts, and discussed at length the Euthalian stichometry (see Circular No. 25). The majority of the data agree closely with the hexameter hypothesis as is shown by a comparison between a measured selected text of the Epistles and the traditional verse numberings. Although there is greater irregularity in the Gospels than in the Epistles, it must be admitted that in both cases (but especially in the Epistles), they offer a new critical instrument to the student of the New Testament by means of which to restore the text to the same compass as it occupied in early copies. True the extension of the enquiry to the Gospels is much complicated by the variety of texts, the Textus Receptus, for example, showing an excess of at least 50 hexameters in the Gospel of Matthew over the text of Westcott and Hort, but it is so much the more interesting for we begin at once to ask such questions as relate to the authenticity of the last twelve verses of Mark, the pericope de adultera and other important passages. As all the texts of the Gospels are in defect according to the best preserved stichometry, we must assume a shorter measuring line for the Gospels with the result that a modern text was found to be only five verses in excess in Matthew, if it was in excess at all, that it was within a single verse of the traditional number in Mark, and not more than five verses in excess in John. The last twelve verses of the Gospel of Mark must be admitted to make up the reckoning, and for the same reason we are obliged to reject John VII. 53, to VIII. 11. In Luke the longer of two available results requires the rejection of most of these passages which Westcott and Hort designate as Western non-interpolations. This would leave the measured texts some nine verses in excess of the traditional numbers. In no case does the Textus Receptus afford us a reasonable concordance with the traditional figures. The later MSS. thus appear as witnesses against themselves.

There are three elaborate Reviews, one by Professor J. M. GARNETT of Sweet's AngloSaron Reader and Anglo-Saxon Primer and Morris' Specimens of Early English, one by Professor FRANCIS BROWN of Schrader's Keilinschriften und das alle Testament with Haupt's Appendix and one by Professor J. F. MCCURDY, of the new edition of Gesenius' Lerikon. Professor BLOOMFIELD has given a Notice of Bühler's Leitfaden fur den Elementarcursus des Sanskrit, and Professor G. S. MORRIS, of Wallace's APIZTOTEAHE NEPI YXH2 The Reports embrace Rheinisches Museum, (J. H. Wheeler), Anglia, (J. M. Garnett), Hermes, (E. G. Sihler.).

In the Correspondence, DR. J. R. S. STERRETT communicates a corrected copy of inscriptions from Sebasté in Asia Minor. The usual select bibliographical list completes the number.