In assessing the value of any historical work it is necessary for the investigator to undertake the often frustrating and tedious task of Quellenforschung. In the case of the De Caesaribus the first substantial attempts began in Germany in 1873 and 1874 with the appearance of two important studies by A. Enmann and A. Cohn. Enmann sought to explain the mass of verbal similarities, numerous errors and shared idiosyncrasies to be found in Victor's De Caesaribus, Eutropius' Breviarium 7–10, and parts (...) of the Historia Augusta by postulating a common source which has subsequently come to be known as the Kaisergeschichte. He was so convinced by his findings that he stated , ‘Victor und Eutrop es beide als Haupt – wenn nicht als einzige Quelle benutzt haben’. Working quite independently Cohn's examination of the first eleven chapters led him to conclude that from the beginning of Augustus' sole reign to the death of Domitian Victor, Eutropius and the Epitomator followed a common source which he entitled Suetonius auctus, an account excerpted from Suetonius with some new material added. Enmann, however, had already described the Kaisergeschichte's early chapters in this way and the two were readily identified. One major problem remained. The traditional date of the completion of the HA was still believed to be 305/6; consequently if the K.G. had been used by its authors then the K.G. must have been written by that year. Nevertheless notable similarities between Victor and Eutropius continued apparently till 357 and Enmann therefore suggested a continuation of the K.G. until that date. (shrink)

After Mr. Stuart and Mr. Hardie I ought to be shy of speaking upon the Tragedies of Seneca. But Mr. Stuart and Mr. Hardie have stirred the dust that lay upon notes which I have had by me for some four years: and their papers encourage the hope that there is among English scholars some revival of interest in Seneca. I am afraid that I myself read Seneca for pleasure, with admiration for the justness of his moral sentiments and with (...) affection for his style. Yet I can hardly be blind to the opportunities which his text offers to those who practice the art of critical divination. (shrink)

A study of the place of human sexuality in religious systems indicates a possible universal stress on sexual attraction. This could be explained by using the theories of Richard Dawkins and other sociobiologists: the philandering male and the coy female express the best strategies for the survival of the “selfish gene.” Closer analysis of four religious systems throws doubt on these theories. In some systems the strategies are contradicted while in others there is stress on cooperative restraint rather than on (...) survival through selfish propagation. The principal objection to the sociobiological approach is its assumption of conflict between the sexes. (shrink)

The words 'true value' assume an existential relationship with the thing being measured. There is assumed to exist some aspect of the thing being measured that is independent of its relationship to the person who is interested in the result of the measurement. Yet measurement is a response to the need of an observer to know something about the real world. There is therefore an epistemological aspect to measurement. Some aspect of measurement has to do with the observer as a (...) knower of the result of the measurement. The paper considers electrical measurement. It proposes that these relationships correspond to two distinct kinds of measurement: one has the characteristic that there does exist such a thing as a true value, though it cannot be known: in the other kind, no such thing as true value even exists. The notion of true value is very useful, and for the kind of measurement where such a thing does not exist, the paper defines an alternative that has the advantage that it can actually be known under some circumstances in calibration. (shrink)

Die in diesem Buche entwickelte Staatslehre ist aus den Er gebnissen meiner Schrift: "die Lehre der Rechtssouveränität" (1906) hervorgegangen. Während jene Schrift insbesondere die Lehre von der Staatssouveränität kritisierte, bezweckt die jetzt vorliegende hauptsächlich, die positiven Grundlagen der ge genüberstehenden Lehre von der Rechtssouveränität auseinan derzusetzen und damit die moderne Staatsidee zum Ausdruck zu bringen. Auch diese Schrift wurde in der niederländischen Sprache, meiner Muttersprache, abgefasst, ist aber in eine den Auslän dern zugänglichere Sprache übersetzt worden, wofür ich auch diesmal (...) die deutsche Sprache wählte, weil die Ergebnisse spe ziell denjenigen der deutschen Staatswissenschaft gegenüber Stellung nehmen. Der Uebersetzung liegt das unter dem gleichen Titel in nie derländischer Sprache erschienene Werk, welches im Jahre 1915 veröffentlicht wurde, aber bereits vor dem Kriege druck in fertig war, zu grunde. Nachher veröffentlichte ich, gleichfalls niederländischer Sprache, eine Schrift: "Het Rechtsgezag" (1917), welche, anlässlich der hierzulande erschienenen Kriti ken, eine Verteidigung und Erläuterung der modernen Staats idee enthielt. Diese Schrift ist in der hier vorliegenden mitver arbeitet worden, demzufolge diese deutsche Ausgabe eine Zu sammenfassung der beiden obenerwähnten niederländischen Schriften bietet. H.K. LEIDEN, Mai 1919. INHALTSVERZEICHNIS. Seite EINLEITUNG. DIE MODERNE STAATS IDEE ERSTES KAPITEL STAATSAUTORITÄT UND RECHTSAUTORITÄT. 3 I. Der Gegensatz zwischen der alten und der neuen Staatsidee "... 3 11. Das Aufkommen der modernen Staatsidee. 6 111. Die Bedeutung der modernen Staatsidee 9 ZWEITES KAPITEL. (shrink)

Re-examines the relationship between the fragments on Theophrastus' theory of perception and his critique in the On the Senses.

Most of the commentaries on Greek authors which circulated in the towns of Egypt during the late Ptolemaic and early Imperial periods ignored the critical and colometrical problems which had engaged the attention of the great Alexandrian grammarians. A few, however, based themselves on texts equipped with signs, included the signs in their lemmata and offered explanations. Such commentaries must be the source of the scattered references to signs in the older marginal scholia in Byzantine manuscripts of Homer, Hesiod, Pindar (...) and the Attic dramatists. The only Byzantine manuscript to transmit a pagan text still equipped with a large number and a variety of signs, namely cod. Venice, Bibl. Marc. gr. 454, is also the only one to transmit scholia with lemmata retaining prefixed signs. Just as texts and scholium-lemmata lost their signs in the course of transmission, so too did references to signs within scholia either disappear or become garbled. At best, a statement about the reasons for affixing a sign would turn into one about the content or style of the verse in question. The few mentions made of the great Alexandrians give no cause for thinking that we ever have a verbatim quotation of an πόμνημα written by one of them in order to explain his own signs. Time and again it is demonstrable that an explanation of a sign's presence against a particular verse goes back to some writer like Aristonicus. What survives of the ancient discussion of Latin literature is exiguous in comparison with the Greek material. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in (...) the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)