[17\2: The reasons for the special favour shown to Rhadamanthys are as unknown to us as they evidently were to the Greeks of later times. What is generally said of the "justice" of Rhad. rests upon private opinion only and does not supply the place of the precise legend that should have justified his translation. That he once had a complete legend of his own may be guessed from the allusion to him in ~ê~ 323, though that passage still leaves us quite in the dark. At any rate, it certainly does not follow from that reference that while dwelling in Elysion he was a neighbour of the Phaeacians as Welcker thinks: nor further that he had always been a dweller in Elysion, as Preller supposes, instead of being transported there. Nothing in the former passage justifies us in regarding him as then dwelling in Elysion; while the other reference to him must be supposed to mean that Rhad. just as much as Menelaos, was translated to Elys. (and so e.g. Paus. understood the poet 8, 53, 5: ~pro/teron de\ e/ti Rhada/manthun entau=tha hê/kein~; doubtful: Aesch. _fr._ 99, 12-13). In fact, we have lost the legends which gave the details of his translation: his figure had become isolated and had not entered into the greater circle of epic figures--and as a consequence his mythical context soon disappeared too.] [18\2: Hasisatra's _Translation_: see the translation of the Babylonian account in Paul Haupt's _Der Keilins. Sintfluthber._ (Leip. 1881), p. 17, 18. The expressions used by the Greek-writing reporters are exactly like those common in Greek accounts of translation: ~gene/sthai aphanê= {83} (to\n Xi/southron) meta\ tô=n theô=n oikê/sonta~, Beros. ap. Sync., p. 55, 6, 11 Di.; ~theoi/ min ex anthrô/pôn aphani/zousi~, Abydenus ap. Syncell., p. 70, 13. Of Enoch we read, Gen. 5^24: ~ouch heuri/sketo ho/ti mete/thêken auto\n ho theo/s (metete/thê~, Ecclus., 44^16; Hebr. 11^5); ~anelê/phthê apo\ tê=s gê=s~, Ecclus. 49^14; ~anechô/rêse pro\s to\ thei=on~, Jos., _AJ._ i, 3, 4 (of Moses: ~aphani/zetai~, Jos., _AJ._ iv, 8, 48). On the translation of Enoch and Elijah, see also Schwally, _D. Leben. nach d. Tode n. d. Vorst. d. a. Israel_ (1892), p. 140. Translation of the living into Sheol often in the O.T., see Schwally, p. 62. Even Enoch has not escaped the fate of being regarded by comparative mythologists as the sun. Enoch may be given up to them, if the Orientalists have no objection; but it seems a pity that the theory, in accordance with the favourite argument from analogy, should be applied to Greek Translation-myths too, so that we should see the whole series of such figures, from Menelaos to Apollonios of Tyana, transformed by magic into mythological suns (or dawns, water-meadows, thunder-clouds, etc.).] [19\2: ~malthako\s aichmêtê/s~, ~R~ 588.] [20\2: ~X~ 321-2.]