The statement in the second-and-third edition of Sommer's excellent Handbuch der lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre (1914), p. 462, that the oldest scansion is diūtius, to say nothing of the unqualified assertion in our current grammars and dictionaries that the u in it and in diutissime is long or the regrettable silence of the principal editors of Plautus upon the subject, is of itself sufficient warrant for a brief discussion. The relevant facts are these:

1. Though diu is common enough in verse of all kinds, the comparative is not attested for any but writers in iambics, while the superlative appears to be confined to prose.

The bilingual Philoxenus Glossary drew some of its materials from Festus de Signif. Verb. and occasionally mentions his name. Its Festus glosses have been collected in a Jena dissertation by Dammann. The Abolita Glossary (if we may so term the collection enclosed within square brackets in Corp. Gloss. Lat. IV. pp. 4–198) seems to have begun (in its original arrangement) with Festus excerpts. Before we can glean from these two glossaries every available scrap of evidence about Festus, we must try to complete and correct them. For of the Philoxenus Glossary (Philox.) we have practically only one MS., and that of the ninth century. It must have omitted many items and perverted the words of many others. The Abolita Glossary (Abol.) was associated (but not mixed up) with another, the Abstrusa Glossary (Abstr.), in Spain, and this composite collection (Abstr.-Abol.) passed into Italy. The MSS. are, we may say, only two, and of each a certain number of leaves are missing. The older and better MS. (Vat.), an uncial codex of the eighth century, was written apparently in Central Italy; the other (Cass.) was written two centuries later at Monte Cassino. They show us Abol. not in its original form, but rearranged in a not too strict alphabetical order (between AB- and ABC-). The St. Gall Glossary was compiled from (1) Philox., (2) the composite Abstr.-Abol., and supplies some of those Festus glosses of Philox. and Abol. which are omitted in our MSS. It seems to have been a Bobbio compilation (but see below). Our best MS. was written in rude uncials at St. Gall in the eighth century.

In proportion to their numbers the Semitic peoples have exercised a greater influence on the course of human history as a whole than any other of the large races of mankind. As far as our records carry us, it appears that the early spirit of exploration and adventure, as distinct from racial migration, had its origin with them. Even in Homeric times, the Phoenician trader or pirate was a familiar feature of the Mediterranean world. Greece, commonly regarded by us as the home of true culture, admitted that she owed to Phoenicia her first introduction to the art of writing. Semitic establishments were spread over the whole of the ancient world, and the only state that ever seriously contested with Rome the sovereignty of the world was Carthage. Though not famed more for military prowess than other races, the Semitic branch of mankind in the seventh century of our era swept over northern Africa and western Asia, overflowing at two points into Europe itself.

On p. 118 I said(à propos of W.D. 742) that the injunction of Pythagoras παρà θνσíαν μ⋯ ⋯ννχíζον, quoted by Goettling with a false reference, might be illuminating in its context but that I suspected it of being a figment. My suspicions were unfounded. The reference, as Mr. A. B. Cook has kindly pointed out to me, is Iambl. Protrept. 364 K.; but Iamblichus's explanation—that ‘nails’ stands for one's remoter kinsfolk, οíον ⋯νεψιáδαι ⋯ πατραδ⋯λφων γαμβρονοτιδεîς ⋯ τοιοντοí τινες, with whom one should renew relations on festal days—does not seem very helpful.

I. The etymologies susceptible to simple phonetic formulation and semantically obvious have, for the most part, been discovered long ago. But I cannot say semantically obvious without recording my conviction that semantic science is still in swaddling clothes. Readers of the Classical Quarterly will, I trust, find the following derivations interesting, as well as clear and semantically obvious.

In the Note on p. 155 and in Note 2 on p. 156, for ‘Journal of Philology’ read ‘Classical Philology.’

The Notes by Professor Jean Wageningen on pp. 131, 140 should be deleted. They appear in the Classical Quarterly for July, 1912.