c 
 
 C49UJ 
 ser.2 
 no. 15 
 
 University of Cincinnati 
 
 Bulletin No* 15. 
 
 Publications of the University of Cincinnati^ 
 SKRiKs II. Edited by HOWARD AYERS. voi.. li. 
 
 The Use of KEKAWIAAl and the 
 
 Meaning of Euripides, 
 
 Hippotytus t-2. 
 
 J. EL HARRY 
 
 The University Bulletins are Issued Monthly 
 
 Entered at the Postoffice at Cincinnati, Ohio, as second- class matter 
 
 UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 CINCINNATI, O. 
 
UNIVERoiTY OF 
 
 ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 
 AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN 
 
 BOOKSTACKS 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2012 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 http://archive.org/details/useofkeklemaimea215harr 
 
University of Cincinnati 
 
 Bulletin No. J5* 
 
 Publications of the University of Cincinnati. 
 SeriBS II. Vol. II. 
 
 The Use o/KEKAHMAI, and the 
 
 Meaning of Euripides, 
 
 Hippolytus t-2. 
 
 %'f 
 J. E HARRY 
 
 The University Bulletins are Issued Monthly 
 
 Entered at the Postofficc at Cmcinnati, Ohio, as second-class matter 
 
 UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 CINCINNATI, O. 
 

 THE USB OP KEKAHMAI, AND THE MEANING OP 
 EURIPIDES, HIPPOLYTUS 1-2. 
 
 A paper read before the American Philologfical Association 
 
 at Union College, Schenectady, N. Y., 
 
 July 9, 1902. 
 
 We Americans have been charged recently with expend- 
 ing a superfluity of energ}^ on syntactical studies. Possibly 
 the charge is well founded; but certainl)'^ an)^ real contribu- 
 tion to our knowledge of the facts of the Greek language 
 should be welcomed, not condemned. We want to get at the 
 secrets of the masters of expression at almost any cost. To 
 the tyro who seeks to establish and interpret the text of a 
 Greek play probably nothing causes greater surprise than the 
 diversity of opinion among scholars as to the meaning of 
 certain passages. Editors differ not only from one another, 
 but also from themselves; and the ScvVcpat c^povrtSes are not 
 always o-oc^wrfpai. Hermann contended for years against 
 Welcker's theory of a Promethean trilogy, only to desert to 
 the enem3^ at the last moment in a way that shows his heart 
 ^^*^ ' may have been in the other camp for some time : ' 'Communis 
 opinio est de cuius veritate non videtur dubitandum esse, 
 
 trilogiam fuisse." 
 
 Perceptions contradict, 
 Convictions come, anon depart, 
 And but themselves as false convict. 
 ;;> Assumptions, hasty, crude and vain, 
 
 ^ Full oft to use will science deig-n. 
 
 As Lessings says, it matters not whose the false assumption 
 is, if onl}^ b)^ its aid we arrive at the truth. 
 
 ^ 
 
There are four current interpretations of the first two 
 verses of the Hii)i>olytus. The primary aim of this paper is 
 to show that three are false and the fourth but partly true. 
 Two of these views, 'HpoSoTtKcos Ac'ywv, I deem scarcely worthy 
 of mention, " j"-"^ oaov arjixrjvaL /3ov\6fji€vo<s fJiovov: (l) that ttoWt] . . . 
 KovK avtuw/xos is equivalent to ttoXvwvu/xos kovk avu)vvixo<; and (2) — V ^' 
 iTept) avc7n(TTrifxov€aTepr] fxiv icrxL t^s AcXcy/xevT^s, Xoyo) 8' etTrctv OavjxaaKOTeprj 
 
 — that K€K\y)fxaL means invocata sum. The reg^ular word for 
 invoke^ preserved even in Modern Greek is IttikoXCiv. Cp. Bike- 
 las, AovKi}? Aapa?, H lTnKoXovpxx.i Tr)v (rv/JLTrpa^tv Tov^ linKaXiaB-qv Trjv 
 (iorjBeuxv tov ©eou, Hdt. 3.65 0^ov<; Toivq ^acnXr}Lov<; tTriKaAcW, 8.64 
 
 TcXa/xoiva cTreKaXeWro. That the simple verb may be used for 
 the compound is patent : rov'i Oeovs KaXovfieOa (Aesch. C/io, 201). 
 But the third theor}^ since it is held by some of our best 
 scholars, seems to demand more serious attention, and, like 
 the opinion of Herodotus with reference to the cause of the 
 overflow of the Nile, can be shown to be incorrect onl)^ b)^ 
 an exploration of the sources, not by g-uessing-, but by secur- 
 ing trustworthy data. The supporters of this view conceive 
 that there is a twist in the sentence, that Kuripides did not 
 proceed, as usual, straight to the goal, but, like the mules of 
 
 Achilles, ttoXXo. 8' avavra Karavra irdpavTa re 8o;(/u,ia t yXOov — in 
 
 short, that we have not here, in the very opening of a master- 
 piece, the well-known roUinda vohibisgue sententia of Kuripi- 
 des, but a disjointed Browningesque utterance, peculiar in 
 punctuation, peculiar in elucidation.* I shall waive the 
 
 consideration that ^vrjOe^ tovto ye ^aveir) av Koi ovk EupiTrtSov 
 
 (**past dispute the verse slips oily-bathed in unctuous 
 music"), since there are weightier reasons for believing that 
 no such volcanic disturbance of the smooth surface of the 
 
 *Cp. Ar. Rhet. 3. 5. 6 oAto? Sc Set tvamyi/oio-roi' cmxt to yey pa fxfiivov 
 Kul €v<f>pacrTOV^ ovSe a fxrj fmStov BiacrTLtat u)OTrep to. 'llpuKXiiTov' to. yap 
 'HpaKXtLTOv SiaaTL^at tpyov Bui to dByXov tlvuL TTOTepio TrpocrKarai, tu> 
 v(TT€pov rj TO) irpoTtpov The ICuripidean order of words reproduces the 
 natural se^iuence of ideas. 
 
Kuripidean current, as Weil and Earle* suppose, exists, and 
 if my contentions are correct, we can say with Herodotus 
 
 again : y Se rpLrrj Twv oSwv TToWov eTrtetKecrraryy iovaa^ fxaXio-Ta eif/evaTai. 
 
 In the first place, the poet's object is not to inform his 
 audience how renowned the ^ea is, but who she is (since this 
 is the first question that the observer naturally asks himself), 
 just as in vase paintings of the archaic type the goddess is 
 labelled A^POAITH for the information of the beholder. So 
 the beginning of Hercules Furens : T15 rov Ato? crvWtKTpov ovk 
 olSev ^poTOiv I 'Apetov *Afx<f>LTpvo)v^ ov 'AAKatos ttote j €ri')^B 6 Ilepo-ew?^ 
 irarepa tovS^ 'HpaKAeovs ; which von Wilamowitz well translates : 
 "Wer kennt ihn nicht, der seines weibes liebe mit Zeus ge- 
 teilt, Amphitryon von Argos, Alkaios des Persiden Sohn, den 
 Vater des Herakles? ich bins." So the opening of the 
 
 Hecuha : Hkw vtKpZiv Kev^/xwva Kat CJKOTOV TrvAas AtTrcov . . . IIoAv- 
 So}po<;, 'EKa^r/9 Trat? yeyws, and of Trocides : 'Hk(u AtTroJV Atyatov a.\p.v- 
 
 pov (SdOo<; I TTovTov IIo(7€t8coi/. Similarly Hermes in lofi tells who 
 he is by naming first his mother and grandfather, then him- 
 self and his office, and finally his errand, as in many Euripi- 
 dean prologues. Compare Andromache (a4>LK6fxr}v , . . 'AvSpo- 
 fJ-f^Xv) and Bacchce ("Hkw Atos TraTs . . . Atovvo-o9)t. In Helena^ 
 after an explanatory introduction of twenty-one verses, the 
 speaker tells who she was {'EAeV?; iKki^drjv, Cp. Ar. Thesm. 
 862), using the same verb as Kypris in Hipfolytus. In Iphi- 
 genia in Tauris the whole line of Pelops is traced : IleAoj/^ 
 
 . . . Oivo/xaov ya/txet Koprjv, ii ^s 'Arpeiis cySAacTTev 'ATpew? Sk Trat? | 
 MevcAao? 'Aya/x,e/x,v(ov re- rov 8' €^w eyw. So in OresteS 5-23 : Zev9 
 . . . TavraAo? . . . UeAoi/^ . . . 'Arpevs . . . 'Aya/xe/xvwv . . . cS 
 TrapOivoL fx€v rpeis iffivfxev ck /xtas Xpv(T6$€fXL<; 'I</)ty€Veux t 'HAcKTpa r' cyw. 
 
 *The chief supporters of the theory. Mahaffy and Bury merely 
 echo the French scholar. Von Wilamowitz g-ives the sense (In himmel 
 und auf erden kennt man mich und meiner gottheit wirken Aphrodites), 
 but does not commit himself by his translation to either Weil's or 
 E^arle's explanation. 
 
 tCp. Ar. Rhet. 3. 14. 6. Kat oX rpayLKol SrjkovaL Trepl to Spa/xa, kulv fxrj 
 evdvq w(nrep EiupiTrt St;?, aAA' iv ro) TrpoAoyw ye ttov. 
 
In each instance the purpose of the speaker is to acquaint 
 the audience with his identity. But the most instructive of 
 all for our passage is the prologue of the PhcenlsscE : Ka8/xo? 
 
 ... OS HoXvhuipov ii€<f>vcre^ rov Sk AafSSaKOv cjjvvac Xeyovatv^ ck Sc tov- 
 Se Aatov. | eyw Sk Trais fxkv KXi^^OfJuit MevoiKecos, | Kpecov t' aStX(fib<; 
 fJi7)Tpb<s €/< fxias i<t>v I KaXovcrt 8' 'loKacrrTyv /xe, tovto yap naTrjp | Wero 
 (5-13). The positive statement is made that 'loKao-rry is her 
 name, not <^v(ret, but Oeaei (Trarrjp eOero) , We are in an atmos- 
 phere of Oeaeis. She is 7'epuied to be the daughter of Menoi- 
 ceus (<l>vvai XeyovcTLv). Hence we are not suprised to find KaXova-L 
 
 'loKao-TT/v /x€, instead of KiKX-qjxai 'loKOLO-Tr}, 
 
 In the second place, if ttoXXt] KeKXrjfxaL be understood as 
 equivalent to /u-eya €;)(a) TO ovoju,a (Karle), or ttoXv p-ol kX€o<: Igtlv 
 (Weil), ovhk 7r/3os €vtx Xoyov cfyatvcTat ip^/^e/SXYJaOai to /u-eV, and, as Aris- 
 totle says {^JRhet. 3. 5. 2.) o p^kv koI 6 iyoi /xeV dTrairet rbv Si koI rov 6 
 8e. Not to Speak of the pointlessness of the utterance in the 
 bare form: "I am renowned and not without renown", the 
 assertion does not balance properl}^ with Seti^w Sc p,v6o)v roivS' 
 dX-qOeiav raxa (9), uor, indeed, with the rest of the prologue, 
 which is but an explanation and amplification of this state- 
 ment. It is the pozue?' of the goddess that is to be mani- 
 fested in the following story (cp. 21, 23, 33, 39, 44, 48f., 
 56f.), and for this very reason ttoXXt] is made prominent by 
 its position, is put first because it is the ke3^note to the whole 
 play. The chord which sounds the note of ttoXXtj is struck 
 at every step, and at the end, when Aphrodite has manifested 
 her terrible power, the chorus hastens to recognize and exalt 
 it in an ode, the beginning of which bears a striking resem- 
 blance to what the goddess says of herself in the first two 
 
 verses : o-v rav Oewv OLKap-TTTOv <f>piva kol (SpoTwv aycts, KvTrpt. Hence 
 
 the appropriateness, in the ver}" beginning, of ttoXXyj, Aphro- 
 dite's power is so great that it /i//s the universe. As the 
 
 nurse Sa3'S (447ff. ), (}>OLTa 8' ai/' aWep\ Io-tl 8' iv OaXacraiio | KXvSuiVL 
 KvTT/jts, TTavTa 8' CK ravTri<i €</)v | ^8 idTlv r/ cnreLpovcra Kal 8Sova^ ipov I 
 ov 7rdi/TCS iaplv oi Kara )(d6v'' tKyovot, Cp. Soph. 7/'. 497 /^<V" ''"'■ 
 (fdivo<; d KuTT/jis iK<^iptTaL vlkus ucl, 
 
 6 
 
Now this power which Aphrodite proposes to display is 
 precisely what a scholiast says ttoXXtj means, for he explains 
 by Svvarrj^ which is, ag-ain, preciselj'' its force in the same play 
 and used of the same deity (443) : KvV/ot? yap ov ^op-qros^ r/v 
 TToWr] pvfj. Indeed, there seems to be only a semi-personifica- 
 tion of the g-oddess in the poet's mind, as he writes the first 
 word of the tragedy. The idea of flow is so often associated 
 with KvV/ats (almost always when used with -n-oWrj. Cp. Hor. 
 Od. 1. 19. 9. m 7ne tota rue^is Venus) ^ as in 401 and 443, that 
 probabl}^ the word for the "influence" of the deity which 
 Euripides had in mind had not lost its original meaning so 
 completely as the corresponding- English word. The image 
 of a mighty river flowing" deep and full {ttoX-) may have been 
 at the basis of the expression. Compare Bacchcp 281 orav 
 
 TrXrjcrOwa-LV ajxiriXov porj<; with 300 orav yap 6 ^eos eh to o-oJ|U,' eXOr) 
 
 TToXvs. At all events, the frequency of the phrase KvTrpts ttoAAtj 
 does not seem to justify the complete dissociation of the two 
 words here, particularly when the combination TroXXy — KUXrjpxii 
 creates a sentence that is universall)^ recog^nized as harsh. 
 When Euripides sneers at Aeschylus (Ar. Ran. 1046) for not 
 having- Aphrodite in his plays, for being- a homo invcntistus^ 
 
 the latter retorts aAX' ItcX aoi tol koI tois o-oto-ii/ ttoXXt] ttoXXov VtKa- 
 
 OrJTo, Moreover, the phrase cv (^poToZa-i^ coming, as it does, 
 immediately after ttoAAtJ, makes the meaning I have assigned 
 to the word natural and easy, ovpavov t co-w is an after- 
 thought (and so it is in heaven). Cp. Eur. H. F. 849 o.\n]p o8' 
 ovK a(Tr)fxo^ ovt ctti )(6ovl | ovt iv OeofLatv. Differentl}'^ from the 
 man)^ persons and things in the Jliad which bear different 
 names eV ^poToicn koI iv ovpavio, KuV/ots is KvTT/ois in both places. 
 Furthermore, the position of eV ^poroto-t with reference to 
 dv(x)vvfxo<s and ttoAXtj lends color to the theory that doth adjectives 
 must be taken with Kvtt/ois. Cp. also Baecha 273 ovk av SwatfjLYjv 
 
 fX€ye6o<; i^enreLV o(ro<i \ KaO' 'EAAaS' co-rai. It was the pOWer of the 
 
 reified Kypris which Phaedra was unable to cope with suc- 
 cessfully (401): ovK ii-qvvTov KV7rpL<s KpaTTja-ai, The chorus prays 
 
 7 
 
that Kypris may never come a.ppvdfio<: {ui undue measure)^ 
 which is practically the same as ttoXXtj. "Love's keen 
 arrows" are viripT^pov^ that is, K-p^lrrov than all others (530ff.). 
 The walls of Thebes and the Dircean fount could tell of the 
 power of Kypris (557): a Kwpts otovepTrei. Hippolytus himself 
 finally recognizes her might (725) : KvV/Dtv, rjirep i^oXXvai /xe. 
 The last song- the chorus sings has for its burden the omnipo- 
 tence of Aphrodite, who subdues the wild beasts of the forest, 
 the creatures that live in the sea, everything that breathes 
 in the light of the sun, yea, even men (127ff.): o-u/xTravrcov Se 
 
 /SaatXrjLSa rifxav, KwTrpt, ToivSe fxova Kparvvws. Sophocles in no leSS 
 
 extravagant terms tells of her overpowering might {Fr. 
 890): Ty]v 'A^poStXT^v ov;^ opa<i 6(rr} ^eos, | ^v ovB^ av cittois ovSe //.er/aryo-et- 
 
 as av I ocrrj TricjiVKe Ka.<f>' ocrov Ste/oT^erat ^pyV ^^ Set^o) to cr6ivo<i 
 
 Trjs Oeov (cp. verse 9 of the Hippolylu-s), and again in his 
 Ph(^d7'a : '<cit rov^ (Kros) diretpyetv ovS" 6 Tray KpaTrj'i aOevei Zevs dXX* 
 
 v7r€LK€L, while the nurse in Euripides' play, when she hears the 
 secret of Phcedra's love, exclaims (355ff.): Kwpts ovk dp' ^v 
 Oto'i, aXA.' et TL fjidlov dXXo ytyi/erat Oeov, Cp. Baccjl, 777 Atovvo-os 
 ^o-o-cov ov^tvo<i 6eu)v €(f)v. The SCholiast gives also p^^yio-Tr], Oavpxi- 
 
 crrrj as equivalents of TroXXrj in the first verse of the Ilippolylus. 
 But the objection may be raised that ttoXXtj cannot mean 
 fxeydXrj. It is not a far cry from -n-oXXr) yrj to ttoXXt] Kpavyrj (Xen. 
 Aji. 3. 4. 45), nor from the latter to -n-oXXr] Oed. The two 
 words are neighbors and encroach on each other's domain. 
 Sometimes the meanings seem to merge. Sophocles 
 says /xcyas xpoVo? (Ai, 714) as well as ttoAvs xp^vo<s. Herodo- 
 tus writes ttXovtov fxeyav (2. 121) and XPW^"^^^ fxeydXwv (5. 6). 
 cp. Aesch. Pers. 163. Naucl^ wishes to change Adyos /Acyas, 
 the manuscript reading of Prometheus 732, to Adyos ttoXvs. 
 The scholiast remarks on this passage : ycrT^o-co-^at 8c rots 
 dvdpioTTOLS ix^ydXr] (f>-^p.r} Tr}<; ct^s Tropetas. Compare Soph. /!/. 173 
 0) fxeydXrj <f>'i]fXY), 226 o /w,eyas p-vOos, Allt. 855 (7roXv= violcii(ly). In 
 
 l^erscT- 250 we read ttoAvs -nXovrov Ai/xr/i/, where some would 
 change (unnecessarily) to conform to the same phriisc in 
 
 8 
 
Euripides {Orestes 1077), who doubtless borrowed it from 
 Aeschylus. The repetition with oA^os just below is after the 
 poet's manner (748, 780, Cp. .4^. 641.). In Persae 751 we 
 read ttoXv? -kXovtov ttwo?, in SuppL 294 ^art? ttoAXt;, in Eton. 646 
 ttoAAt) ix-qx^-vrj^ in Eur. Stij):pl. 474 ttoAvs kAvSwv, Plato, Phaedr. 
 253 D a-KoXio^ TToAv?. But long" before Euripides was ttoAvs used 
 in this sense, e. g. H, 157 ttoAAo? yap rts tKaro. In B3^zantine 
 Greek ttoAvs was used reg"ularly for /Atya?. An even more 
 interesting" fact is that this use survives in Greece to-day, as 
 Bikelas, Aovk^s Aapa?, y avTos ■^tov 6 dp)(iypafXfMiTev<; tyjs €7rtKpaT€ta?, 
 
 6 /xcyas KOL TToAv? ©eoScopo? Ncypr;?. From Homer to the present 
 day TToAv's in the senses of /^eyas has lived on as one of the ele- 
 ments of the undying" lang'uag'e. The scholiast says that 
 TToWrj here is equivalent to Swan;, and Plato's definition of 
 
 this adjective is : Awaro? Si y ia-rlv €Ka<TTO<s apa, o? av ttolyJ rore o av 
 
 (iovX-qrat^ orav ^ovXrjTat, The idea is not that Aphrodite e^x^ 
 
 fxiya TO ovofJLa iv jSpoTOLcn, but eSvvaro fxiya iv rfj rroXu kol iv rots aAAots 
 
 "EWya-Lv (Plato, Meno 94D). It is the Sophoclean "how-much- 
 ness" of the g-oddess (/^r. 890) that Euripides has in mind. 
 Kypris COllld^ and she ivoicld: KvVpt? rjOeK' uxrre yiyveaOat TaSe 
 (1327), — opa? Trjv OeC)v l(rxvv oar) (Soph. Ai. 118), apX^^ '^^^ ^^^^ 
 
 oTTcus OeXcL {Tr. 442). That ttoAvs can be used in this sense is 
 attested by a passag-e in a play written only a few years 
 
 after the Hlppolylus : ovto) 8' ta-xve re koI /u,eyas ^v Tore kul ttoAv's, 
 war'' €Tt KOL vvv I d-TTo ttJs p(i>fir)<i 7-75 tot' iKCLvrjs kt€, (Ar. ^z^. 488f.). 
 Cp. £^g. 760 7rpo9 Tai)^' OTTOJ? €^€t TToAvs Kat Aa/X7rp6s cs Tov dvSpa, 
 
 Thoug"h the adjective is probably not in the predicate in the 
 passage under discussion (see below), the verses just quoted 
 from Aristophanes show that it can be so employed even in 
 the singular (meaning SwaTo's, mighty\ gewaltig)^ notwith- 
 standing" the expressed opinion of some of our best scholars 
 to the contrar3^ In Hdt. I. 120 we find the superlative in 
 the sing"ular used as a predicate {ravrr) ttAcTo-tos ttJ yvw/xr; €tp,t'). 
 
But a philolog-ian must be a veritable Cebes, Kaprcpi^raros 
 TT/oos TO aTTto-Tetv ToTs Ao'yois, and if it be urged that the deit)''s 
 power can be arg-ued from her renown, more convincing argu- 
 ment remain, — Sel yap koI t6v Ke/3r]Ta TTtidtLV, 
 
 If TToXkyj had come in the second verse and x.^X-qfiai KvTrpis 
 been placed in the first, nobody would ever have thought of 
 taking the phrase in any other sense than ich heisse, je m' 
 nomme, Kyfris, Earle sa)^s (PAPA, 1901, p. XXIX) that 
 the harsh order of the words has led many to misunderstand 
 them, and adds "the verses are of course to be understood as 
 
 equivalent to ttoXA.-^ pkv kv /SpoTolaLV ovpavov t' €cro) KiKXyjfxaL Sea 
 KvTrpts (ttoXA^ K€KXr]ixaL = fxeya e^oi to ovo/xa) kovk ctvwi^^os <ct/xt>. 
 
 But K€KXr}fjiaL with ttoAAt; and KtKAiy/xat with KvTrpts are two diifer- 
 ent verbs. We might sa}^ ttoXv /xol kAcos Io-tlv, but not KvTrpts 
 fxoL kAcos i(TTiv. If, however, Oea KvVpts be considered apposi- 
 tive (instead of predicative) a Greek would expect some indi- 
 cation of the fact, such as the insertion of cyw, particularly 
 as both the meaning and the position of KeKXrjfxai would, in that 
 case, be unusual, to say nothing of the adjectival form of 
 TToXXrj, Moreover, Earle does violence to the order b)" sepa- 
 rating Kwpts from KeKX-qfxac by Oed^ and he makes the change 
 with the express purpose of bringing K€KXr}fxaL into closer 
 relation with TroXXy. The sequence KUXy]}xat Ki^Trpt? is the inten- 
 tional and intended order of Euripides. 
 
 The so-called perfect Ke/<Ar;/xat is not used of the transi- 
 tory, but of the fixed, the permanent, whereas the tendency 
 is to employ the present to designate the fleeting, that 
 which is for the time being, the name Oia-u^ not <^vo-£t. 
 "Alles vergaengliche ist nur ein Gleichnis" (the present), 
 whereas "das Ewig-weibliche" is expressed by the perfect 
 (KeKXrjfmi)^ the kyprisity of Kupris, the cupidity of Cupid. 
 The character of the person inheres in the name. As the 
 chorus in the Aj^amejunoii sa3's (681ff. ) : Tts ttot' oiv6p.at,€.v wS' 
 
 €9 TO TTfiv €Tr}TvpM<; . . . Toiv BopLya/xfipov dfJL<}>LV£iKrj 0^ *EAei/av; iirel 
 
 10 
 
7rpe7r6vTw<; | cXeVavs, cAeTroXts kt€, Cp. Soph. Al. 430 atat ♦ tis av ttot' 
 we^' wS' i7r(x)vvfxov | rovfxov ^vvoicrav ovofjui toTs e/xois KaKoi?.* 
 
 It is sig-nificant that the perfect active KCKXrjKa barely 
 emerges in Greek literature (twice in Aristophanes, Plato 
 and Demosthenes). The explanation is thait K€K\r}fxaL was je 
 m' appelle, whereas j' appelle was xaXw and /' ai appe/le ^xaXca-a^ 
 just as iKT-qadfxrjv is both aorist and perfect. In the Refithlic 
 580 K we have an example of Platonic TroiKiXia (KCKXi^Kafxev for 
 eKaXia-afxev) . In all but one of the examples in Demosthenes 
 the verb is the regular perfect oi KaXeXv (advocare). The per- 
 fect passive in this sense is extremely rare {KCKXrja-OaL c? Sat- 
 Ttt). In all of these passages the ordinarj^ meaning of 
 K€KXr}fmt is ignored and K€KXr}Ka is used as the perfect of xaXw 
 (instead of the normal cKaXecra), in apLo-rov, inl SetTTvov KaXelv be- 
 ing common phrases. So the pluperfect iKeKXi^fxrjv (Lucian, 
 Somniiim 9). Cp. Ar. Av. 1602, Ran. 395, Athenaeus 10, 
 457 B. 
 
 But KeKXrjfxaL occurs over a hundred times, and regularly 
 in the sense of ic/i /leisse, je me 7ioinme^ io ml chiamo. 
 K donna mi chiamd beata e bella. 
 Dante, Inferno^ 2.53. 
 
 The tense alone is fatal to the Weil-Karle theory. Not 
 the perfect, but the present would, under normal conditions, 
 
 *In the heroic ag-e names were born of a custom : hence th-e imper- 
 fect wvo/xa^ev in the passage just quoted. Hector's son was Skaman- 
 drios or Astyanax. Cp. Aristotle, Rhet. 1. 11. 3 €o-Tt 8' y] pkv (/>uW rov 
 act, TO Se c^os tov iroXXaKLq, Plato, CraL 383 A ovd/xaros opdorrjTa elvai 
 CKOLaTw tCjv oVtcov (jivaeL TrecfiVKvlav Kal ov tovto clvat ovojxa o av rtvcs 
 ^vvOefxevoL KaXeiv KaXoyat, tyjs avTU)v <f>(ji)vrj<; fxopiov iTncfiOtyyofxevoL, dXXa 
 opOoTYjTOL TLva Twv 6vofxdT0)v '7re(f>VK€uat Koi "EiXXrjCTL KOi (3ap(3dpoL<i Tr}v avrrjv 
 diracnv. In other words ovopxx. StSacTKaAtKov T6 Icttlv opyavov (388B). 
 To the Greek there was such a thing as a Kvpcov kol oUeLOv ovofxa 
 (Ar. Rhet. 3. 6). Cp. Cicero, Oi^. 3. 37. 149 quae propria sunt, et certa 
 quasi vocabulum rerum, paene una nata cum rebus ipsis. From these 
 are distinguished words quae transferuntur et quasi alieno in loco col- 
 locantur : aut iis quae novamus et facimus ipsi, Pro Caecina 18.51 res 
 ut omnes suis certis ac propriis vocabulis nominentur, Plato, Crat. 391 E 
 St/Aov ya.p 8r] otl ol ye Oeol avra KaXovanv Trpo? opOoTTjra direp cctti cfyvaec 
 ovo/JuaTa, 
 
 11 
 
be required, as for example, in the opening verses of the 
 Persae. An exact parallel to ttoAX^ K€K\rjfxac cannot be found. 
 The common adjective is not used as often in the predicate 
 with KaXdaOai as are other forms, and when it is employed, 
 the meaning- is different from that which Weil and Karle 
 wish to assign to ttoXXt) KeKXrjfmi. Cp. Plato, C?'al. 194 D 
 
 crocfiol . . . KaXovvTat^ Ar. Rhet. 2. 24. 2 fJ'OVoq yap KaAetrat KOivos 
 'F,pixrj<;^ Phocylides, (ri/w/xat) a<f>p<ji)v kikX-tjctkct at ev TroXtrai?.^ 
 
 HOMER. 
 
 The first example of KCKXrjadaL appears in the second book 
 
 of the Iliad : M^' ^^^ TrjXefxdxoto Trarrjp KCKXrjfXivo^ ctrjv (260). The 
 remainder are ^ 61 or^ TrapaKOiTL<; KiKX-qixat, A 758 KoXoivrj K^KX-qrat, 
 
 S 365 (=B 61). The perfect does not appear in the Od5^ssey. 
 The present, on the other hand, is very common, and is reg- 
 ularly used of the temporar}^ or local, of that which is so 
 named at certain times, in certain places, by certain per- 
 sons, or under certain conditions : A 293 rj ydp kcv SetXo's re Kat 
 
 ovrtSavos KaXeoL/xrjv, 403 ov Bpiapecov KaXeovat Ocot^ c 306 kotvXtjv 8e p,LV 
 KaXiov(Ttv, t, 402 '''OV' p 'E/<Twp KaXUcTKC ^KafxdvSpLOV, L 461 ws P'T) Trarpo- 
 <f>6vo<; KaXeoLp-rfV^ i 210 a.^£i xe cr<f)i <f)iXr} tc Kat aiSoLrj KaXeotfxrjv, 279 ol 
 Ttr^i/€S KaXiovTM, 291 X*^^*^^^ klkXt^o-kovotl OeoL, V ^4 ov 'Btdvdov KaXeovat 
 OeoL^ $ 29 ov T€ Kvv 'O/0t(ovos iTTLKXrja-LV KaAtovcriv, 506 Aarvdva^^ ov 
 Tpoies kiTLKX-qa-iv KaXiovcrtv^ 8 355 ^dpov Si k KLKX-qaKOvartv^ c 275 oL/xa^av 
 iiriKXrjcnv KaXeovcriv^ v 104, 348 ai vrjcdSe^ KaXiovrai^ rj 313, ^ 147 f^i-v 
 TjBdov KoXiu)^ o 403 vrj(r6<s tis 'Zvpir] KiKXrjaKeTaL^ 433, P 423? t 79 d<f>V€LOt 
 KoXiovTai^ I 366 OvTiv 8c /AC KLKXiqcrKOvcrLV^ K 305 P-itiXv 8e /utv KaXiov(n 
 OeoL^ /A 61 nXayKras . . . Oeol fxdKapes KaXiovaLV^ a 6 ^pov 8e veot 
 kikXtjo-kov airavTes (not his real name, for 'ApvaTos 8' ofo/a' ta-KC TO 
 yap dero TroTvia p-YjT-qp \ Ik ycvcr^s). 
 
 *Of the numerous Greek expressions for nomcn est, jwminari, diet, 
 KtKXrjaBat is one of the commonest : Hesiod, Thcog. 144 ovo\x i-movvixov^ 
 Ar. /*ajc 520 rrpoaiLiru) a cttos, A v. 814 ovofia KaAaJ/xcj/^ 923 tovi/o/x' ^Be/jLrjv, 
 Plato, CraL 156 B €;(ovo-iv oi/o/xaTtt, Herodotus 2.52 ovopux KCKTcaTut, 4.45 
 ovo jjja iXafie, 
 
 12 
 
The first appearance of KaXeiv in Greek literature is in A 
 54 KaXco-aro Xaov. So a dozen times in Homer in the middle, 
 the compound TrpoKaXelv not so often and o-vyKaXetv only two or 
 three times. The active of xaXeiv in the sense of advocai'e is 
 found fifty times, the middle very seldom. 
 
 HESIOD. 
 
 The form KCKXria-BaL appears in Hesiod but once ( Theog. 
 410 <^iXy]v KeKXrjaOai (Lkoltlv) the present passive three times ( 0. 
 
 D. 141 TOt /xci/ vTTOxOovLOL fxaKapcs dvrjTol KaXe'ovrat), the active twice, 
 
 klkXtjo-kclv twice, and KaXieaKev once (T/ieog. 207). Cp. O. D. 
 
 80 ovofji-qve Se TrjvSe yvvaiKa | lilavB<x)pr)V. 
 
 THE LYRIC POETS. 
 
 The first example of KeKXrjaOaL is in Archilochus, and this 
 in the future : iTrUovpos KCKXyaofxaL (24)."^ The second instance 
 is in an epig-ram of Acarnania (roSe aafxa KeKXrja-eTat) , Two 
 similar examples are quoted as from Theognis. The only 
 examples of the perfect are in Hybrias (Tovtw Seo-Troras /xvotia? 
 
 KeKA.>;/Aat) and Pindar, 0.7.76 (KeKXrjvraL Se a(fiLV eSpai). The 
 
 active is found inErinnaS. 6, Philoxenus 1.66, Simonides 12. 
 31, Pindar jP. 9.71, Thren. 4. There are three examples of 
 the passive present in Simonides and one in the Anacreonteia. 
 In the sense of advocai'e Alcaeus and Sappho each have one, 
 Pindar four. 
 
 THE DRAMATIC POETS. 
 
 In Aeschylus KeKXrjfmi occurs eight times : SepL 929 tckvo- 
 
 yovoL KiKX-qvTai^ Euin. 417 'Apat KCKXrjfxeOa^ J^ers. 242 SovXoc KeKXrjvraL^ 
 Cho. 321 ya-p^TVi K€KXr]VTaL^ Ag. 161 ^i roK avrw cf)tXov K€KXr)fX€vw^ 
 
 Cho. 1037 <^ey7os K€KXr)fievov^ Eu7n. 658 kckAt^/xcVov tUvov. The 
 future appears three times, twice in the Prometheus : 734 
 
 Boo-TTOpos 3' i7r(i)wixo<s K€KXyjcr€TaL^ 840 TrwTtos /xv;j(09 . . . KCKA-r/o-erat, 
 
 once in the Septem. (698) KaK6<s ov KeKXrjaeL, KaXetv occurs 
 
 *The future perfect, being a perfect thrown into the future, becomes 
 a future when the perfect is used as a present. 
 
 13 
 
twenty-two times in the sense of advocare, six times in the 
 sense of nominare. 
 
 Sophocles has five examples of KeKXrjarOat ; El. 366 Trarpos 
 
 TrdvTiov dpiarov TralBa KeKXrja-Oat^ 1087 cro^a. t apiara re Trais KeKXrjaOai,^ 
 Tr. 736 d-Xkov KeKXrjo-daL fx-qripa^ Phil. 85 KUX-qa-o^ 119 ao<f>6^ r dv 
 
 avTos KdyaOo^ kckXtj' dpn. The f nture of K€KXr)fmL occurs twice : 
 
 O. T. 522 i<-o-x^o<i Se Trpos crov kol (fttXoiv KCKXr^cro/xat, A/. 1338 ovk ifxov 
 
 KeKXrja-eTai. In Electra 971 appears the future middle KaAet, the 
 only instance of its use in a passive sense. Aristophanes 
 employs the form, but regularly as a middle, contrary to the 
 rule with other verbs. The present and future middle and 
 passive of koXCiv are identical in Attic; hence the future of 
 KCKXTjcrOai had to do service for the future also of KaXtLo-dai, 
 The regular future passive of Ko-Xd is KeKXrja-ofjxiL (rarely KXrjO-ijao- 
 /^O ; consequentl}^ the so-called future perfect is often found 
 where the principles I have enounced for the present and per- 
 fect would not seem to warrant the use of this form. It is 
 merel}^ a make-shift, K^KXya-ofxai for KaAov/xat (which would be 
 ambiguous). On the other hand, where the present is used 
 the meaning is regularly "called for the nonce": E/. 1194 
 fj-T^rrfp KaAetrai, fxrjTpl 8' ovSkv l^icrdi (a mother in name merel}^? 
 
 O. T. S O 7rd(TL KX€iv6<S OlStTTOVS KttXoV/XCVOS, Q, C. 57 X^^^^'* '^ttXciTttt 
 
 T^(r8e xP-Xkottov's b^6<i^ 107 /-icytcrTTys IlaXXaSos KaXov/xevat Traaaiv ^Adrjvai 
 TifiKordTTf] TToAis, 1303 d(TOLTrf.p 'ATTia? I TrpuiTOi KaXovvrai koX TeTLfxrjVTai 
 
 Sopt, where the present denotes the local, transient name, 
 and the perfect expresses fixed repute. Cp. T/ii/c. 2.45 t«t£- 
 fxrjvTai (^fermanent honor^^ Phil. 94 TrpoSoryj^ KaXeiaOat. Of course 
 the permanent may be regarded as for the time being, the 
 transitory as the abiding. So in O. C. 69 we find ®r]<r£vs KaXel- 
 Tai Tov TTplv Aiyc'ws tokos, which would seem to be as much the 
 hero's fixed name as Kypris is Aphrodite's, but Oedipus is 
 told by the stranger what the people call the king so that he 
 too may name him correctly; not the fcrson, but the name is 
 emphasized, whereas in the IJippolytus it is the person on 
 
 14 
 
which the stress is laid. Cp. Time. 5. 9. 9 AaKeSat/xovtW |v/x- 
 /xaxots K^KXrjcrOai (allies in reality, not in name only). The 
 present optative occurs once : ywaiKwv rjo-aove^ KaXotixeO' av (Aiit. 
 680). The middle, which is rare in Attic, except as a law 
 term (to cite before court) is found in O. C. 1385 (apas as o-ot 
 
 KaAov/xat), 
 
 In Euripides KCKXrjaOai is very common (22 examples) and 
 always means "to be cleped". Now just as KCKXr]fx€vo<i can 
 never mean kXclvos, or kAc'o? cx^'^^ so K€KXr}fiaL cannot signif}- ttoXv 
 fxoi kAcos ccrrtV, either with -n-oXXrj or without it; (far different 
 
 is eyoo S' iv TracTL OeotaLV /xyrt re KAeo/xat kol KepSeaiv v 298) and even if 
 
 we wrench KUX-q^xai from Kwpts (which to the Greek, and par- 
 ticularly to Kuripides, would have been an impossibilitjO 
 iroXXyj K€KXr)ixaL would uaturall}^ mean "I am ttoXXt] )xleped", 
 something very different from -rroXv, TroAAa, 7roAAa/<ts 3^cleped".'^' 
 The examples in Euripides are : //ec. 480 KeKXrjfxaL SovAa, 
 552 ^ovXrj KCKX^adai^ Fr. 22 ^^<\>h KUX-qixaL^ HcL 1463, Ion. 311 
 
 Ao^tbv K€KXrjfxcBa^ H. F. 501, EL 366 KiKXrjvraL ttoVi? e/txo's, //cc. 625 
 
 Ti/XtOS K€KXr]fl€VOS, Alldl'Om. 75 O K€KXrjtX€VO^ TTttTT/p, RJlCS . 298, //. /^ 
 
 31, 291, 6^^;^;!)/. 626, /. T. 570, .4/c. 637 KtKX-qiiiv-q fxyTrjp, Ion 9 
 
 TToAts . . . IlaAAaSos KCKXrjfXivrj^ Fv. 2 ^^*<-Xr\(jBo.i ^ovXerac iraryp^ 8 Sct- 
 
 Aov K€KXrj(rOaL {^branded a coward), 150 KeKXrjTUL Bavtiv ( "the thing 
 mortals call death", BjTon, Manfred 2.2), 8 ^/aos ya/x^/oos 
 KiKXrjaaL^ Fr. inccrt. KCKXrjadaL KaKov. The future passive kXtjOtjo-c- 
 Tttt occurs once (7r6>. 13), KCKATJo-o^at ten times: 7/(?^. 1271, A/c. 
 
 331, €/x^ yw>; /jtov>; KeKXrjcrr)^ /. yl. 954, //<?/. 1035 ovirore K€KXrjcrr) 
 8vo-o-ej8r;s, 1683 Oeos KeKXyjaY}, Ion. 580, 594, El. 1275 CTTwi/v/xos 0-ov 
 TToAis KeKAr/crerat, /<;-. 12, Z'?'. inCCrt. cre/xvos naAat/xwi/ vavrt'Aot? kckXt}- 
 
 <X€TaL, 
 
 In Aristophanes there are onlj- three examples of KiKXrjfxai^ 
 and these are all in the future : Vesp. 151 oo-ns -rrarpo^s vvv Ka-rrvi- 
 
 *Cp. Thucydides 3.82.7 Se^tot KUXrjvTai {have a reputation for cLever- 
 ness). That the adjective mig-ht be used for the adverb is, of course, 
 not denied. 
 
 15 
 
ov KCKXi^a-ofiai, Av. 184 KeKXiyo-erat ttoXis (Cp. 182, where the pre- 
 sent is used, KaActrac vvv 7r6\o<i\ 761 arrayas ovros Trap i^jixtv ttoikiA-O? 
 
 K€KXrj(T€TaL, Of the present there are twent3^-five examples : 
 
 Vesp. 1137 ot fxkv KaXova Ilepo-tS', ot Se KavvaKrjV, Av, 485 KaXetrat 
 
 Uepo-tKos opvis 720 TTTapfjiov T opviOa KaXetre. There are fort}— five 
 examples of KaXeLv=adroca7'e, and sixteen compounds. 
 
 THE HISTORIANS. 
 
 There is no better author for the study of the behavior 
 of KaXeiv than Herodotus. The participle meaning- ' 'called", 
 "so-called", is regularly present: 1.1 rrjs 'Epvdprj^ KaXeofxevr)^ 
 6aXda(Tr}<i ^ 1.2 tov Etj^civov KaXeofxevov, 1.7*, 1.56; 1.57 Toto-t vvv ©eacra- 
 XtrJTLV KaXeofX€vriv, 1.82; 144, 149 Ktj/x>;, 17 ^pLKMvU KaXeofxevrj^ 166, 202 
 rj 'ArXavrls KaXeofxivr]^ 204; 2.8 ^9 t>)s 'Epvdpyv KaXeofxevrjv OdXaacrav, 
 7.231 o Tpe(Ta<; 'A/oto-ToSry/x-os KaAeo/xevos, 8.35 tov KaAeo/xevov tovtov Mtii/, 
 8.44 T>)v vvi/ KaXeofx^rjv 'EXXdSa, 9.57, 85, 109. So with the present 
 indicative: 1.93, 105, 110, 131 KaXeovcn Se 'AcravpLot Trjv 'A<t)pohLT7)v 
 MvXcTTa, ^ApafSiOt 8c 'AAtXar, 139 TO Acopiees /x€i/ (rai/ KaXeoucrt, "Icoves 8c 
 orty/i«x, 131, 158, 164, 167 ^^t? vw 'YcAr; KaAetrat. 
 
 The perfect form KeKXrjfxai occurs ten times: 1.32 oA^to? 
 
 KeKXrja-BaL, 143 "loves KCKXyjaOai^ 2.18 Kavw^iKov arofxa KCKAryrac, 45 
 KCKAiJo-^at rr/v ^Aatrjv . . . KCKA^cr^at 'Ao-taSa^ 85 BooTTropos KCKXyrat^ 58 
 <l>otvtKr7ta KCKXyjadaL^ 68 KeKXrjaBai AiyiaAca?, 105 2ap8ovtKov KCKAy/rat, 
 
 7.59 Aopio-Kos KeKXrjTai, In every instance, except one, a proper 
 name is the predicate (as Kypris in Hifi>olyUts 2), and this 
 one does not mean "to be happil}^ called", but "to be called 
 happy". cTTtKaActv is used mostly in the sense of invocarc, but 
 occasionally in the sense of cTroi/o/xa^civ. 
 
 In Thucydides KCKAr/p-at occurs four times: 2.37 SrffxoKpaTLa 
 
 KCKAr/Tttt, 3.82.7 8e^ioi KeKXrjVTat^ 4 (,4. 3 ovofia tv KCKXrjfxevov^ SikcAkotu? 
 
 (the only example of the perfect participle in Thucydides, 
 whereas KaAou/xcvos occurs 44 times). In the sense of advocarc 
 KttActi/ appears twice; the present indicative active occurs 
 twice ; the passive eleven times ; the aorist passive five times. 
 
 16 
 
In Xenophon K€K\r)fxat is found four times, all in the Oeco- 
 uomiciis and all in the same phrase (KaAos Kaya66<s K€K\7]^mc). 
 There are twenty-one -examples of the participle, all present. 
 There is a score of present passives, a dozen actives, and 
 about fifty examples of KaAetv = advocare. i-n-LKaXeiv is used for 
 i-TTovofxa^eLv {Hicro 1.31; Hell, 3.1.18). The aorist passive is 
 rare. 
 
 PLATO. 
 
 Plato furnishes almost as good material as Herodotus for 
 the study of the use of KoKtiv and KeKXrjaOaL, The perfect is 
 found twent)^-one times, mostl}^ with predicate substantives: 
 Phaedriis 258 K StKaiwv di/SpaTroSwSet? K€K\r)VTaL^ PJiacdo 79 D ^9^' 
 vy](TL% K€KXr}TaL^ I^eg\^\ 744 D o ^Laa-raa-LV r} crraa-iv opOorepov av etrj kc- 
 KXrjadai^ TimcieilS 43 C at 8i^ koX €7ruTa ravra iKXrjOr](rav re kol vvv trt 
 ai(TO-^acL<; K€KXr}VTaL^ 66 C KCKXrjTai yXvKv^ LcicllCS 178 A o-p^rr^ KiKXrj- 
 rai, CratylllS 410 B a^ KCKXrjTai^ 417 A K€KXrjaOaL^ 419 D T€piJ/L<; kL 
 KXrjTat^ 420 B €/ooro? TO ye iraXaLov eKaXdro . . . vvv 8' c/aws /<€KAr;rat, 
 
 426 C KLVYjatS K€KXr)TaL^ Rep. 371 K K€KX7)VTai fJLLaOoJTOL^ 552 D OdOl 
 
 KeKXrjvTaL KaKovpyoL^ Sopkistes 219 K rpioBovTia rt? K€KXr]TaL^ 263 K 
 K€KXr)Tai Aoyos, TiiuaCtlS 42 A K^.KX-^aoiro dvqp. 
 
 The perfect participle occurs six times : Rep. 499 B 
 
 dxpy](rTOL<i 81 vvv KCKX-qp.ivoL'i, Crat . 156 B ^o/?ot KeKXr)pi€vaL 408 B, 409 
 
 C, 419 C. Two are found also in the scholia to the Phacdrus 
 (238 B and 248 C). The active, mostly present ijiominare) 
 occurs nearly tw^o hundred times, the passive about one- 
 fourth as often. 
 
 Some writers prefer one synonym, others another : Trpoo-- 
 ayopevai/, oi/o/xa^etv, KaAeiv. Plato has all, and, except in a few 
 dialogues {Sop/i/s/cs, Politicus)^ where there is a run on the 
 Trpoo-ayopevetv bank, thc}^ are not unevenl3^ distributed. 6vo//a. 
 4"v occurs less than a hundred times, cTroi/o^o^etv less than fifty. 
 Neither the simple nor the compound forms of ovo\x6X,^iv and 
 KaAetv occur frequenth^ in the perfect active. The passive, on 
 the other hand, is not rare. liriKaXdaBai is sometimes used for 
 i7rovofxdC€a6aL, As we should expect from his fondness for ^otKt- 
 
 17 
 
A.ta, Plato has a great variety of ways of expressing to name; 
 Trpoo-ayopeveiv (a hundred times), ^iruiwfxiav tx^tv, TO ovofm kinKda-Oai 
 ovofMi kKXrjBrj^ iTTCKXrjv exovra^ liriKXrjV /caXov/Acros, iTrUXrjv XcxOrjvai^ 
 
 iTTLKaXovfxevoq, The participle ("so-called") occurs sixteen 
 times, and always in the present. 
 
 THE ORATORS. 
 
 The perfect of KaXeXv does not appear in the orators, ex- 
 cept in the participle passive (Lysias -F/'. 66 em to a-vvSeL-n-vov 
 k€kX7}ix€vov) and in the indicative a.ctive=advocavtt (Demosthe- 
 nes 27.25 and 39.10 -rroTcpov o-e KUX-qK^v). The present parti- 
 ciple passive is frequent. The verb is used by the orators 
 nearly three hundred times. 
 
 An examination of these examples shows that TroXXr) kL 
 KXrjimi cannot mean -rroXv /xot kXIos co-tiv. An examination of the 
 trimeters demonstrates, I think, the same fact in another 
 wa}'. A pause made in the wrong place in a sentence ma}' 
 completely change the meaning. Aristotle says {^Rhet. 3.9. 
 4): Set Se Tr]v TTcptoSov kox ttJ StavoLo. TeTeXeiwcrOaL^ koI fxr} BtaKOTTTiaOaL 
 axTirep to. ^So^okAcovs ia/Jifieia^ ' KaXvSwv /xev ^8e yaux ncA.07r£ta? ^^^^^s.' 
 
 If a pause is made at x^^^^^? the thought is conveyed that 
 Cal3^don is in the Peloponnesus; but if the next verse be read 
 as a continuation of the first, the sense is clear (cvdvTtTrop^/xois 
 TTcSr exova evSatfxova) , Kuripides is exonerated and Aristotle is 
 convicted of two misstatements (the verses are the opening 
 lines of the Mcleager of Euripides). But Aristotle is not the 
 only Greak reader that has been caught in the fallacy of 
 division. Editions of the Hippolytus alone for the last cen- 
 tury will furnish abundant examples {e. g. 114f., 407 etc.).* 
 Euripides did not intend that the verses we are discussing 
 
 should be read ttoXXyj pxv iv f^poTolcn kovk avwvv/xo5 Otd — K€KXY)iJLaL 
 ' KvTrpis — ovpavov t ccro), nor Oea KeKXyj/xat KvTrpi^- — ovpavov t €(T0)^ 
 
 *So the English "deviT' who made the poet say "where the earth 
 sods my beloved hide", by tie^-lecting- to insert a hyphen between the 
 first two substantives. 
 
 18 
 
for this would have been too limping" even for Hipponax. 
 Euripides endeavored to keep his trimeters as intact as pos- 
 sible (each verse separate and distinct), and by so doing he 
 succeeded in attaining- wonderful rapidity and ease, that 
 well-known smoothness of speech and uniform melody of 
 verse. He not only avoided a pause before the last iambus 
 (far more than his editors), but he also objected to the con- 
 tinuance of the sentence to the middle of the first metron in 
 the next verse, which was not offensive to Aeschylus and 
 Sophocles (particularly the latter, who effaced the dividing 
 line between the individual verses, carrying his principle 
 even to the point of elision). But when one gets an idea 
 that a certain passage has a certain meaning, it is very dif- 
 ficult to get rid of that idea. Ludwig Schmidt, in his edi- 
 tion of the Prometheus, says on verse 119: "Der modus von 
 opare ist nach V. 141 u. 304 zu beurtheilen". The same con- 
 sideration has doubtless influenced the long line of editors 
 who take the same view.'^ Schoemann translates ri xaXG. 
 
 * Humphrey's note on Sophocles' Antigone 806 (that opare is imper.) 
 fell under my eye just too late to notice in my paper in the last number 
 of the Transactions of the American Philological Association. The 
 very fact that a note is necessary shows the doubt that lurks in the 
 reader's mind whether it is imperative (which it may be under the cir- 
 cumstances) or the indicative (=6pav TrdpeaTLv in 1293). At all events, 
 opare as imperative of actual perception is practically never used; the 
 one or two supposed examples are by no means certain. If the verb in 
 O. T. 15 were plural, doubtless many grammarians would consider it 
 imperative. I take this opportunity to explain another statement in 
 the same paper, that a-KOTrecTe is rare, (TKixpai unusual, o-kottci and o-K€i//a- 
 o'C'e being the regular forms. This assertion is made in the paragrai)h 
 on the orators, I do not, of course, include that pink of perfection, 
 Isocrates, who is so faultily faultless and icily regular that he uses 
 (TK&paL to correspond with orKiij/aaOe, In Aeschines a-Kiil/aaOc occurs ten 
 times, CTKOTreLTe not at all. Lysias employs o-kottu once, (TKixl/aaOe four- 
 teen times, (TKCipaL and o-KOTreire never. In Demosthenes a-K^ij/aaOe occurs 
 fifty-nine times, (tkoitcltc only eight, (TKOTret six and crK€i/^at not at all. 
 
 The indicative in lyuke 2.29 vvv aTroAvets tov SovXov (tov is generally 
 quoted as an imperative, due, perhaps, to Genesis 41.30: "And Israel 
 said unto Joseph, now let me die, since I have seen thy face". So the 
 L<atin version : dimitte servum ttium, instead of dimittis. 
 
 19 
 
fiavLUiv; (Aesch. Prom. 1057) b}^ "wie zaelimt er die Wutli?". 
 Another scholar renders "wie vergaess' er die Wuth?". 
 Mahaff}^ and Bur}^ and Weil explain o-i>i/ ^coto-t <\>oit5. {Hip- 
 ■polytus 167) by "she walks in the number of the gods". 
 Pale5^ translates "thanks to the gods". Van Herwerden sur- 
 mises that Euripides wrote cv ^eoto-t, instead of <tvv ^eoto-t, 
 showing: that his conception of the meaning- is equally erro- 
 neous. Some believe that Hippolytus 246 refers to change 
 of color (cp. Ion 1369 f.). Scores of examples like these 
 might be cited to show how well the language of the tragic 
 poets is understood by eminent scholars. 
 
 Sanskrit is an analyzable language in word structure, 
 Greek in sentence structure. But the Greek sentence some- 
 times betrays extra-linguistic phenomena. The Hellenic 
 liveliness overleaps rules that were framed for normal condi- 
 tions. "Natural man manipulates language sensitively^ and 
 fruitfulh' without the interference that comes from critical 
 understanding of the processes of word-making."" A little 
 tot says "me no get for you" and "me how know do that". 
 There is no analysis ; the sounds are all there ; the trans- 
 position (for-get) mattered little to the unanalytic mind. 
 Compare Plato, Protag. 324 A "^90% rovri^ t6v vovv ex^^- The 
 Greeks, like children, manipulated language naturally. The}" 
 could say olaO o Bpaa-ov with the same unhesitancy as the 
 American girl would sa}" "I tell 3^ou, girls, what lets do". 
 Such a livel}" language can produce not only the familiar 
 TO. rffxirep avrtov^ but also i7/xcT£pa K€pBr] rcov aocfjwv (Ar. Ahll). 1202^. 
 In the hands of a self-willed writer, like Aesch^dus, it pays 
 little heed to regimen. The manipulator seizes a prjpxx afia^i- 
 (uov and throws it into its place at the head of the sentence re- 
 gardless of case. Analysis will not show how Pindar built 
 his odes ; analysis will not always show how^ Euripides coi;- 
 
 * Bloom field, The Syvibolic (,'ods. Studies in Honor of 13. L. Gilder- 
 sleeve, p. 143. 
 
 20 
 
structed his trimeters. The conception g-ained from a felici- 
 tous translation into one's "g-eliebtes Deutsch", or "g"eliebtes 
 Knglisch" is not necessarily the Greek conception. Ahapp)- 
 paraphrase in Greek itself is not always an infallible g-uide. 
 Neither Weil's nor Karle's Greek equivalent of Hippolyhis 
 1-2 connote the Greek idea. Much nearer the truth is Monk, 
 who renders "I am powerful" (K£KX7)fxaL=dfxt ) . But he does 
 not gfive the whole truth, o iracn kAcivos OlSiTrovs KaXovfxcvo^ does 
 not mean exactl}^ "I, Oedipus renowned of all" (Jebb), nor 
 "I, who am of all called renowned Oedipus". In both the 
 Jifippolylus and the Oedipus the words are knit together with 
 a closeness of which the English has no conception. In the 
 passage under discussion KUX-qixat dovetails into ttoAX-^ . . . Kv- 
 Trpts. Call it a temporary compound, if you will, or conceive 
 the adjectives ttoXXt] . . . kovk dvwvv/xo? as trailing: after K^KXrjfxaL 
 KvV/ots, the effect is practically the same. It isonh^ an exten- 
 sion of a phenomenon familiar in smaller complexes, like 
 [XLKpov I'xojv xtTtJjva, where ^x^^ is mortised into the adjective- 
 substantive phrase. We undertranslate or overtranslate. 
 Greek is too flexible to be bound by rules, mirrors too well 
 the living voice to assume cast-iron Latin rigidity. As Weil 
 himself says {Journal dcs Savants^ May 1901) : "la langue 
 grecque, produit naturel d' un peuple admirablement doue, n' 
 a pas connu pendant des siecles le joug etroit des grammair- 
 iens de profession ; instrument d' une merveilleuse souplesse, 
 elle s' accommoda au caractere des genres litteraires, au 
 genie des poetes, des orateurs, des ecrivains qui savaient en 
 jouer, capable de rendre les plus fines nuances du sentiment 
 et de la pensee. Mobile et variee a 1' infini, tout en restant 
 la meme, cette langue fait, par son apparente indiscipline, le 
 desespoir des grammairiens rigides et les delices des esprits 
 qui savent la gouter". As Professor Gildersleeve sa3^s : 
 ''The rules will not work; the facts will not fit into the 
 scheme ; analysis will not yield sjmthesis". Many scholars 
 think that ri% is in the predicate in Hippolytus 369. It is a part 
 
 21 
 
of the complex subject. The few examples of rU in the predi- 
 cate without wv that do occur (as Sophocles, O. T. 151) are 
 entirely different in nature. To the Greek the juxtaposition 
 of Ti5 with o-e is sufficient to justify his conceiving- the words 
 as subject and object respectively. The love of balance, of 
 contrast, must never be left out of account in the considera- 
 tion of a Greek lang-uage-problem. Onl}^ a casual plance at 
 the tragic poets is necessary to convince one that the Greeks 
 refused to separate subject and object, if one of the promessi 
 5?:>6>5?' happened to be Tts (oo-rt?) and the other /^e, o-e, avrov. 
 There can be a ohe rk xp^vos as well as a oSe /xuk/dos xp^^^^- The 
 words coalesce temporarily, as KaXoKaya66<; has permanently. 
 Compare the Aristophanic ro ri^ to ttoiov^ the Sophoclean and 
 Aeschylean tl 8' ovrtva. As in hypallag-e, the words are put 
 tog-ether compactl)^ so as to form a unit. The individual 
 word is subordinated to the g-roup. The power of the stream 
 of thoug-ht unifies and welds the individual elements into 
 one harmonious whole. A lang-uage that can form such 
 phrases as ^ Travra av ToXfxwv (Ar. Ntlh. 375), ^ KaWiirvpyov cro<f>Lav 
 KXuvoTOLTrfV liracTKOiv (1024) ^ KOLVov 0)<f>iXrjfJLa 6vY)T0i(nv <\>avu<; (Aesch. 
 Prom. 613), TrX-qSov^ /xkv av (Td<f>"L(TO' cKari {Pers. 337), Tov TrapaKpov- 
 (ra<rdaL kol <f>evaKLaaL Xeyerat Trap' -^fioyv eivcKa (Dem. 20.88) will ex- 
 perience no difficulty in making- a rhetorical complex like 
 
 TToXXr) KOVK dv(OVV/iOS dea K€KXrjfMXL KvTT/OtS. 
 
 If our philologfians and comparative grammarians could 
 be induced to forego their Promethean proclivities occasion- 
 ally and would resolve to adopt the discredited Epime- 
 thean methods, they would learn more about the Indo- 
 European famil}" ot lang-uages than any bare record of 
 morphological changes in quarto volumes can possibh^ im- 
 part. Language is not simply an algebraic symbol or com- 
 bination of symbols, to convey ideas ; it is not a mere 
 mechanism, nor yet a work of nature, but, as Brunetidre 
 says, it is also a work of art. A knowledge of the individual 
 is not gained by a study of his physical growth. As (xoethe 
 
 22 
 
says, you cannot argfue from any characteristics which a boy 
 may have exactly what kind of a man he will prove; but if you 
 take the other point of view and look backward from man- 
 hood toward youth, you can readih^ see how the man grew 
 out of such a lad. So with nations. Looking- backward has 
 its advantages in language study as well as in economics. 
 The genius of a people, as mirrored in their speech can thus 
 be discerned, and the language-transformations better under- 
 stood. With the Roman each word is an entity, is gravely 
 weighed, meant (cp. Serv. Aen. 6.724 Romanos graves, Gallos 
 natura feroces atque acrioresingenio); with the Gaul (speak- 
 ing generally, and without reference to the ps5xhological 
 fact that we talk in phrases) no word is an entity, weighed, 
 or meant, outside of its belongings. In Latin the word is 
 the unit, is a sturdy independent Roman soldier; in French 
 the only unity is the group, the society — the words flock 
 together and solidify. The Italian retains some of the 
 Roman characteristics. He puts his strength in the individ- 
 ual word, even bolsters it up, if there is danger of a vowel or 
 consonantal break-down, by doubling or lengthening. In 
 noil volete venire con me the words, whether in the group or 
 out of it, are the same. Not so the French. Wrenched from 
 their place, torn from their environment, they change their 
 ctSr; as the chameleon his colors. Hence the confusion in the 
 mind of the learner, taught, it may be, two diametrically 
 opposed theories with regard to French accent, or a rule, 
 beautiful in theory, which he discovers he can never put into 
 practice. The Gaul had from time immemorial fighting 
 ability and esprit. Gallia duas res industriosissime per- 
 sequitur: rem militarem et argute logui (Cato. ap. Charis.) 
 The French language is a living proof of the latter part of 
 this statement. The Frenchman wants to communicate and 
 to be communicated unto. Hence he has, in the lapse of cen- 
 turies, created and perfected an instrument admirably 
 adapted for that purpose. He wants to convey his concept as 
 
 23 
 
a concept, in concentrated form, withont taking- the time and 
 the trouble of reducing- it to analysis — he gives the thought 
 in a thoug-ht-word, and indicates the end of the word-group 
 b}^ voice-stress. In his lang-uage the Frenchman reveals the 
 characteristics Caesar observed : enthusiastic, impulsive, 
 quick-witted, versatile, inquisitive (cp. B. G. 2.1.3; 3.9.6; 
 4.5.2; 7.20). The Spaniard, ag-ain, betra3^s his cavalier pro- 
 clivities b}^ his speech. His abruptness and impetuousity 
 are reflected in his diphthongs. In fuerte we can see the 
 rapier thrust; \n forte, tre^nolaj'e the Italian predilection for 
 dwelling- on the melodious sounds, to talk for the sound of 
 it; in fort the desire for quick communication— no Spanish 
 superfluous expenditure of energy. As Galdos says ( Cadiz 
 14): "" Esfana es el fais de naturaleza desnuda, de las^asiones 
 exaltadas, de los seiitiniientos energicos . . . de Jos -privilegios 
 que traen las hichas de la gtierra contintia del nunca descan- 
 sary Georg-e Sand ^Le Marquis de Villemer ch. 18) speaks 
 of ^^ Cette pose trop belle et tin pen thdatrcile qui caracterise la 
 race espagnole.'' Now the Greek had the rapidity and energ-y 
 of the Spanish, but exercised a sober self-control ; had the 
 power of the French to merg-e sing-le words into a thought- 
 complex, but possessed greater elasticit5^ The S5"nthetic 
 lang-uag-e here -shows its superiority over the analytic. The 
 words do not lose their individualit}^ to the same degree. 
 There is, to be sure, a complete destruction of the word in 
 the case of elision (whereas Latin word-tenacit}^ made for 
 word-survival, real elision being unknown) ; nevertheless, 
 the single words in a Greek sentence retain their original ac- 
 cent. The first two verses of the Hippolytus have the French 
 compactness, but the words cling together in the group 
 without spasmodic effort. 
 
 While ToA.v /xoi kA.€os co-rt is possible Greek, I have not been 
 able to find a parallel. The comparative {-rrXttov^ occurs in 
 Hesiod, Thcog. 531. The common phrases are : ^kko^ ccrdXov, 
 
 24 
 
^eya kXcos, kAgos a(j>6LT0v^ aci^vqarov ^ evpv^ aafitarov, aevaov, ^aOv^ 
 
 ovpavw arrjpL^ov. TroXvKXetTov^ Pind. O. 6.71 (120) IS ver}' diifer- 
 ent from ttoXv kckXtjix^vov , Kven Aristophanes, Lys. 853ff. {ov 
 
 yap oiKXekq rovvofxa | to aov Trap' rjfXLv i(TTiv ovB dv<jovv/xov ) , prOVCS noth- 
 ing", except, perhaps, how little the derivation of the word 
 avMvvixo<s was felt. We can say rowo/xa ia-rtv avo)Vvixov^ but not 
 K€KXr)fxaL dvu>vvfio<: (in this sense at least), nor K€KXr)fxaL a.KXei^'i. Cp. 
 Plato, Theagcs 123 C for a different meaning-. The usual sig- 
 nification of dvoW/xo? is inglorious^ as in Plato, Leggl2\ B kAci- 
 iw Koi pH] dvojj/u/xoi/. Cp. Hdt. 7.129. In Plato's Theacietus 126 B 
 we have di/ww/xos and KUXr^pxiL in the same sentence, as here, but 
 the context shows that avuivvp^o^ is used for the sake of va- 
 riety, merely as a neg-ative of K€KXr)pievo<: (at /xev ala-Orjaw; to. tol. 
 
 dSe rjplv €)^ovaLV ovopuara . . . Kal i-rnOvp.i.aL kol <fi6j3oL KeKXyjpLfvaL kol 
 dXXai aTTcp'xvTOL p,kv at dvwvv/aot, TrapiTrXtjOel^ Sk at a)vo/xa(r/xeVat). Indeed, 
 
 the whole trouble seems to have arisen from the accidental 
 circumstance that di/wi/v/xos bears a certain synonyniical rela- 
 tion to KUX-qp.tu, In this sentence dj/wi/v/xo? has no more to do 
 with k^kXtjiml than TroXXrj, The thought is simpl}^ : ''I am a 
 g-oddess, powerful and far-famed ; m}^ name is K)'pris".'^ 
 
 A rather remarkable testimony to the fact that Greeks 
 of the earl 5^ centuries of our era (if, indeed, the lines were 
 written then) considered ttoXXtj separate and apart from k^kX^. 
 /Aat, is a verse in the play on the passion of Christ, quoted al- 
 most verbatim from the Hipf>olytiis : 
 
 ttoXXyj p.kv iv jSpoToliTLV KOVK avci)vvp.o<; 
 dyvrj KCKX-qcr^L r^crSe yrj%. 
 
 *Hovr easil}- "rroXvi and /Acyas could be interchang-ed is shown by 
 such examples as Soph, adesp. 157 TroAAr; <j>ap€Tpa^ Hdt. 6.24 V ^^ <^<^t 
 TfoXXrj . . . o/3V(r<T€rai, [Dem.] 59.99 o yap 'Ao-oottos 7rora/xo9 /w,eyas ippvrj 
 Kal Stal^rjvaL ov paSiov rjv. Cp. also the Herodotean /xcydAa xPVt^ara, 
 
 25 
 
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 3 0112 111534027