FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55  
56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   >>   >|  
the Oxus in 1877, and containing coins from Darius down to Antiochus the Great, and Euthydemus, King of Baktria. This would seem to indicate that it had been buried there in 208 B.C., when Baktria was invaded by Antiochus and Euthydemus defeated. The coins, figures, and ornaments, many of them, were manifestly Persian, and doubtless had been brought into that country and kept by the victorious generals of Alexander. Some of the works of art unearthed by Dr. Schliemann at Mykenae are either Persian or Assyrian in character, and are like those found on the Oxus. Professor Forchhammer very plausibly supposes that they were spoils from the Persian camp which had been awarded to Mykenae as her share after the overthrow of Mardonius.--A. W.] [Footnote 4: See "Selected Essays," vol. i., p. 500, "The Migration of Fables."] [Footnote 5: Cratylus, 411 A. "Still, as I have put on the lion's skin, I must not be faint-hearted." Possibly, however, this may refer to Hercules, and not to the fable of the donkey in the lion's or the tiger's skin. In the Hitopade_s_a, a donkey, being nearly starved, is sent by his master into a corn-field to feed. In order to shield him he puts a tiger's skin on him. All goes well till a watchman approaches, hiding himself under his gray coat, and trying to shoot the tiger. The donkey thinks it is a gray female donkey, begins to bray, and is killed. On a similar fable in AEsop, see Benfey, "Pantschatantra," vol. i., p. 463; M. M., "Selected Essays," vol. i., p. 513.] [Footnote 6: See "Fragmenta Comic" (Didot), p. 302; Benfey, l. c. vol. i., p. 374.] [Footnote 7: "Lectures on the Science of Language," vol. i., p. 231. The names employed in the Hebrew text of the Bible are said to be Tamil.--A. W.] [Footnote 8: 1 Kings 3:25.] [Footnote 9: The Bible story is dramatic; the other is not. The "shudder" is a tribute to the dramatic power of the Bible narrative. The child was in no danger of being cut in twain. In the Buddhist version the child _is_ injured. Why does not Prof. Mueller shudder when the child is hurt and cries? The Solomonic child is not hurt and does not cry. Is not the Bible story the more humane, the more dignified, the more dramatic? And no canon of criticism requires us to believe that a poor version of a story is the more primitive.--AM. PUBS.] [Footnote 10: See some excellent remarks on this subject in Rhys Davids, "Buddhist Birth-Stories," vol. i., pp. xiii. and xliv. Th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55  
56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 
donkey
 

dramatic

 

Persian

 

Mykenae

 

version

 
Buddhist
 

Baktria

 

shudder

 
Antiochus

Essays

 
Euthydemus
 

Benfey

 

Selected

 
Language
 
employed
 
Lectures
 

Science

 

Hebrew

 
killed

similar

 

begins

 

female

 

thinks

 

Fragmenta

 

Pantschatantra

 

criticism

 
requires
 

humane

 

dignified


primitive
 
remarks
 
subject
 

Davids

 

excellent

 
Stories
 
Solomonic
 

tribute

 

Mueller

 

injured


narrative

 
danger
 

master

 

Assyrian

 

character

 

unearthed

 

Schliemann

 
Professor
 

awarded

 
spoils