Housman put the case against fallacia with characteristic trenchancy in an early paper (Journ. Phil, xvi, p. 25). ‘I conceive’, he wrote, ‘that so far as Latinity is concerned the words deductae fallacia lunae may bear any one of three meanings. First they may mean “false pretence of bringing down the moon”: a sense peremptorily forbidden by the context. Mr. Lucian Mueller points out that Propertius cannot look for help to those whom he holds and asserts to be impostors, and that argument is clinched by the tune ego crediderim of 23: Propertius now doubts whether the power of magic be real or no, but turn Cynthia's heart and he will believe. Secondly deductae fallacia lunae may legitimately mean “deceiving men by bringing down the moon” on the analogy of Ov. Met. 13. 164deceperat omnes, in quibus Aiacem, sumptae fallacia uestis. But plainly this sense is no better than nonsense: if magicians bring down the moon as men believe them to do, then men are not deceived. Equally absurd is the third possible sense of the words, deceiving the moon and bringing her down. I know that Pan deus Arcadiae captain te, Luna, fefellitin nemora alta means, but in what sense do magicians faltere lunam? What conceivable deceit do they employ? Manufacture a cerea effigies of Endymion I suppose and lay it on the mountain tops.’