30. Prabodha Chandrodaya Brockhaus. 31. History of Indian Literature The same. 32. Aristophanes’ Vespae Hermann. 33. Plauti Rudens The same. 34. Greek Syntax The same. 35. Juvenal Becker. 36. Metaphysics and Logic Weisse. 37. Philosophy of History The same. 38. Greek and Latin Seminary Hermann & Klotze. 39. Latin Society Haupt. 40. Philosophical Society Weisse. 41. Philosophical Society Drobisch. Summer term, 1843. 42. Greek and Latin Seminary Hermann & Klotze. 43. Philosophical Society Drobisch. 44. Philosophical Society Weisse. 45. Soma-deva Brockhaus. 46. Hitopadesa The same. 47. History of Greeks and Romans Wachsmuth. 48. History of Civilization The same. 49. History after the Fifteenth Century Flathe. 50. History of Ancient Philosophy Niedner. Winter term, 1843-4. 51. Rig-veda Brockhaus. 52. Elementa Persica Fleischer. 53. Greek and Latin Seminary Hermann & Klotze. Here my _Collegien-Buch_ breaks off, the fact being that I was preparing to go to Berlin to hear the lectures of Bopp and Schelling. It will be clear from the above list that I certainly attempted too much. I ought either to have devoted all my time to classical studies exclusively, or carried on my philosophical studies more systematically. I confess that, delighted as I was with Gottfried Hermann and Haupt as my guides and teachers in classics, I found little that could rouse my enthusiasm for Greek and Latin literature, and I always required a dose of that to make me work hard. Everything seemed to me to have been done, and there was no virgin soil left to the plough, no ruins on which to try one’s own spade. Hermann and Haupt gave me work to do, but it was all in the critical line—the genealogical relation of various MSS., or, again, the peculiarities of certain poets, long before I had fully grasped their general character. What Latin vowels could or could not form elision in Horace, Propertius, or Ovid, was a subject that cost me much labour, and yet left very small results as far as I was personally concerned. One clever conjecture, or one indication to show that one MS. was dependent on the other, was rewarded with a Doctissime or Excellentissime, but a paper on Aeschylus and his view of a divine government of the world received but a nodding approval.