But while M. Boeckh takes so much pains to vindicate Plato from one contradiction, he unconsciously involves Plato in another contradiction, for which, in my judgment, there is no foundation whatever. M. Boeckh affirms that the function of the earth (in the Platonic Timæus) is to put forth a great force of passive resistance--"to oppose constantly, against the diurnal movement of the heavens, an equal force in an opposite direction." Is it not plain, upon this supposition, that the kosmos would come to a standstill, and that its rotation would cease altogether? As the earth is packed close or fastened round the cosmical axis, so, if the axis endeavours to revolve with a given force, and the earth resists with equal force, the effect will be that the two forces will destroy one another, and that neither the earth nor the axis will move at all. There would be the same nullifying antagonism as if,--reverting to the analogous case of the spindle and the verticilli (already alluded to) in the tenth book of the Republic,--as if, while Ananké turned the spindle with a given force in one direction, Klotho (instead of lending assistance) were to apply her hand to the outermost verticillus with equal force of resistance in the opposite direction (see Reipubl. x. p. 617 D). It is plain that the spindle would never turn at all. Here, then, is a grave contradiction attaching to the view of Boeckh and Martin as to the function of the earth. They have not, in my judgment, sufficiently investigated the manner in which Plato represents to himself the cosmical axis: nor have they fully appreciated what is affirmed or implied in the debated word [Greek: ei(lo/menon--ei(lou/menon--i)llo/menon]. That word has been explained partly by Ruhnken in his notes on Timæi Lexicon, but still more by Buttmann in his Lexilogus, so accurately and copiously as to leave nothing further wanting. I accept fully the explanation given by Buttmann, and have followed it throughout this article. After going over many other examples, Buttmann comes to consider this passage of the Platonic Timæus; and he explains the word [Greek: ei(lome/nên] or [Greek: i)llo/menên] as meaning--"_sich drängen oder gedrängt werden_ um die Axe: d. h. von allen Seiten her an die Axe. Auch lasse man sich das Praesens nicht irren: die Kräfte, welche den Weltbau machen und zusammen halten, sind als fortdauernd thätig gedacht. Die Erde drängt sich (ununterbrochen) an den Pol, _macht, bildet eine Kugel um ihn_. Welcher Gebrauch völlig entspricht dem wonach dasselbe Verbum ein _einwickeln_, _einhüllen_, bedeutet. Auch hier mengt sich in der Vorstellung einiges hinzu, was auf ein _biegen_ _winden_, und mitunter auf ein _drehen_ führt: was aber _überall nur ein durch die Sache selbst hinzutretender Begriff ist_," p. 151. And again, p. 154, he gives the result--that the word has only "die Bedeutung _drängen_, _befestigen_, nebst den davon ausgehenden--die von _drehen_, _winden_, aber ihm _gänzlich