^{page 190 note 1} Cp. Buchenau, G., De Scriptore Libri Πϵρὶ Ὕψους, p. 66Google Scholar, and Jannarakis, A., Εἰς τὸ ΠϵρὶὝψουςλϵγόμϵνονβιβλίον Κριτικαὶ Σημϵιώσϵις, p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 1} During a recent visit to the Bibliothèque Nationale I have had an opportunity of examining P. 2036 and P. 985. In P. 2036 the follows the Problems of Aristotle which occupy the greater part of the manuscript. The Problems are prefaced by an index or table of contents (forming fol. 1, r. and v.). At the end of the index are added the words:

At the beginning of the text of the treatise the heading is:

This title is distinguished from the other by the absence of the , but it is also distinguished (and this appears to have escaped even Vahlen's careful scrutiny) from it by the fact that a considerable space separates the first word from the second and the second from the third, while the third and the fourth are run together. It would almost seem as if (notwithstanding the absence of the ) the reader were still offered his choice between Dionysius and Longinus. The same absence and presence of the , and the same separation and non-separation, are to be observed in P. 985, on f. 222 v. (beginning of the treatise) and f. 79 v. (index) respectively.

^{page 192 note 1} How precarious any arguments connected with John of Sicily are may be inferred from the fact that Émile Egger, who urged them in the first edition of his Histoire de la Critique chez les Grecs (pp. 531–533), silently abandons them in his second edition and in the Journal des Savants (Mai 1884). Further details, if desired, may be found in Vaucher, , Études Critiques sur le Traité du Sublime, pp. 57Google Scholar, 58, 62, 63, and in Canna, , Della Sublimità: libro attribuito a Cassio Longino, pp. 39, 40.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 1} For some account of the life and literary activities of Caecilius, reference may be made to an article by the present writer on ‘Caecilius of Calacte: a contribution to the history of Greek Literary Criticism’ in the American Journal of Philology, October 1897.

^{page 194 note 1} ix. 9:

^{page 194 note 2} Suidas.—A fuller discussion of the passage translated above will be found in an article by the writer in the Classical Review, December 1897.

^{page 194 note 3} Schol. A Homeri IL.[IX. 540: SUIDAS:

^{page 195 note 1} xiii. 3: xxi

^{page 195 note 2} iii. 5:

^{page 195 note 3} Quintilian, , Inst. Or., iii. 1, 17Google Scholar: Theodorus Gadareus, qui se dici maluit Rhodium, quem studiose audisse, cum in eam insulam secessisset, dicitur Tiberius Caesar. Suetonius, , Tib., 57Google Scholar: saeva ac lenta natura ne in puero quidem latuit: quam Theodorus Gadareus rhetoricae praeceptor et perspexisse primus sagaciter et assimilasse aptissime visus est, subinde in obiurgando appellans eum

^{page 195 note 4} xii. 4:

^{page 195 note 5} Plutarch, , Demosth. 3Google Scholar:

^{page 196 note 1} xliv. 5: (‘but actually attenuate them’) is a recent conjecture of Schmid, W., Rheinisches Museum, lii. (1897), p. 446Google Scholar. MSS.

^{page 196 note 2} It may be remembered that the presence of a nain (to use the French form) on the so-called Bayeux tapestry is interpreted as an indication of the date of its production, but only because the addition of the dwarf's name Turold may be taken to imply contemporary knowledge of the events portrayed. ‘Souvent, dans une discussion de ce genre, ce sont les moindres détails qui fournissent les meilleures inductions,’ as M. ľAbbé J. Laffetay remarks.—Much recondite information with regard to the Pygmies both in ancient and in modern times will be found in B. A. Windle's edition of Edward Tyson's ‘Philological Essay concerning the Pygmies of the Ancients,’ one of the volumes included in Nutt's Bibliothèque de Carabas.

^{page 197 note 1} Cp. Vaucher, op. cit., p. 50: la différence sensible que ľon remarque entre le style, simple et égal des fragments de Longin, et le style animé, véhément, figuré du Traité περὶ ὕψονς, dont le sujet, quoi qu'il en dise, ne prêtait pas plus à ľéloquence que ceux des Fragments. Cp. also ib. 68–72, 383–442 Ruhnken, it is true, took another view, but he is not supported in it by his modern successor Cobet.

^{page note 3} A signal instance of such variation in our own day is that afforded by the style of Thomas Carlyle. Let it be supposed that nearly two millenniums had passed since he wrote, and with what confidence we can imagine the position assumed and maintained that Carlyle the Edinburgh reviewer and Carlyle the philosopher of Chelsea could not possibly be identical. Treacherous always, such comparisons are doubly treacherous when advanced concerning men of marked individuality who have been driven, more and more, into themselves by the circumstances of the times in which they live.

^{page 197 note 3} It is convenient, as a rule, to adhere to ‘sublimity’ or ‘the sublime’ as the accepted rendering of ὕψος. But the English expressions are apt to mislead, by reason of the existence of Burke's treatise particularly. It is perhaps regrettable that the earliest English titles of the De Sublimitate (‘Of the Height of Eloquence,’ John Hall's Translation, 1662; ‘Of the Loftiness or Elegancy of Speech,’ John Pulteney's Translation, 1680) have not held their ground in some slightly modified form.

^{page 198 note 1} Cp. Vaucher pp. 73 seqq., and Canna pp. 23–26, for Longinus; for Caecilius, cp. American Journal of Philology (as cited above), and the dissertations by Martens and Coblentz named in the note at the end of this article.

^{page 198 note 2} Vaucher 45 45 n., 85, 201; Canna, 21, 22.

^{page 198 note 3} Coblentz 54, 58, 59.

^{page 198 note 4} The more we investigate, the more certain we are as to the existence, and the less certain as to the particular origin, of a vast floating mass of literary criticism contained in the rhetorical writings of the first century.

^{page 199 note 1} For these analogies reference may be made to E. Bertrand, De Pictura et Sculptura apud Veteres Rhetores, and to the appendix to Brzoska's dissertation De Canone Decem Oratorum Attcorum Quaestiones.

^{page 200 note 1} For various references to the degeneracy and its causes, see Seneca, , Ep. 114Google Scholar; Pliny, , Hist. Nat. xiv. 1Google Scholar; Plin., iun. Ep. viii. 14Google Scholar; Tac. Dial. de Orat. xxix, xxxvi, xxxvii.; Vell. Paterc., Hist. Rom. I. 17Google Scholar; Petronius, Satyr. lxxxviii.; Quintil., Inst. Orat. ii. 10Google Scholar, 3 etc. Quintilian further wrote a separate treatise, now lost, on the decay in prose composition, De Causis Corruptae Eloquentiae: cp. Reuter, A., De Quintiliani libro qui fuit De Causis Corruptae Eloquentiae, Vratislaviae, 1887.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 2} Mnemosyne, N.S., vii. 421.

^{page 200 note 3} Compare also cc. xxxvi., xxxvii., ibid.

^{page 202 note 1} Christ, W., Gesch. d. gr. Litt. (second edition, 1890), p. 630.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 2} For Plutarch reference may be made to Vaucher 93–119; Canna 15, 16; Winkler 19; Brigh. 37. For Dionys. of Halic., see Vaucher 44, 45, 50, 54, 90; Canna 11. Ael. Dionys. of Halic., Vaucher 91; Egger, Longini quae, supersunt, lvi. Dionys. Att. of Perg. Vaucher 46, 90; Canna 12–14; Pess. 292; Blass, , Griech. Bereds., 158Google Scholar. Dionys. of Miletus, Vaucher 91; Pess. 292. [Full titles of the hooks here indicated by the authors' names will, where not already given, be found in the bibliographical note at the end of this article.]

^{page 203 note 1} In continuation of a parallelism already mentioned, it may be noted that the Fabius Iustus to whom the Dialogus is addressed was probably Pliny the Younger's friend, Consul Suffectus in 102 A.D. The person addressed is, therefore, in the one case as well as in the other, a factor in the determination of the date.—Again, a question arises in both cases as to the precise signification of iuvenis or νεανίας. Tacitus (or whoever the author was) speaks of himself as ‘iuvenis admodum’ at the time of the Dialogue. In the De Sublimitate, on the other hand, it is Terentianus that is addressed in the words ὦ νεανία.

^{page 204 note 1} The exact reading of P. is There is, as I can testify from personal inspection of the MS., no doubt about the presence of the dot. ‘ puncto notatum ut suspectum,’ as the editors say.—The Codex Eliensis, preserved in the Cambridge University Library, gives with in the margin.

^{page 204 note 2} Φλορεντιανέ is found in other MSS.

^{page 206 note 1} It is doubtful whether sufficient attention has been paid to the line, ‘dulcia Septimius qui scripsit opuscula nuper’ (v. 1891). The points to be remembered are (1) that Terentianus was, as appears in his Preface, an old man when he wrote the line, and (2) that Septimius Serenus is reckoned, by so high an authority as W. S. Teuffel, among the poets of Hadrian's time.

^{page 207 note 1} It need hardly be pointed out that sublimia, and grandia, are the obvious Latin equivalents of such expressions in the Treatise as

^{page 209 note 1} The following passages seem to contain references to other writings of his: viii. 1, (if this is a reference to a separate work) or ix. 2, xxiii. 3, xxxix. 1 xliv. 12