pros tauta, rhipthesthô men aithaloussa phlox, leykoptherps de niphadi kai bronthêmasin chthonhiois kykhatô phanta kahi tarasshetô gnhampsei gar ouden tôndhe m'---- eiselthetô se mhêpot, hôs egô, Dios gnhômên phobêtheis, thêlhynoys genhêsomai, kai liparhêsô ton mhega stygohymenon gynaikomhimois hyptihysmasin cherhôn, lyshai me dhesmôn tônde toy pantos oheô. Also v. 1047, et seq. The memorable ode of Goethe, entitled _Prometheus_, embodies a similar vein of sentiment in the finest poetry.] [Footnote 8: Euripid Hippol., 10-- (Aph) oh gar me thaeseos pais, 'Amazonos tokos monos politon taesde gaes Troizaenias legei kakistaen daimonon pephukenai Phoibou d' adelphaen Artemin,-- tima, megiotaen daimonon aegoumenos-- (Hipp.) taen saen dhe Khyprin pholl' hegô Chairein lhego-- (112.) See also v. 1328--1402.] [Footnote 9: Herodot. t. 32. O Kroise, epistumenon me to theion pan eohn phthonerohn te kai taraxodes, epeirotas ahnthropaeion pragmhaton pheri; also iii. 40] [Footnote 10: See Eurip. Hipp., 6-96-149. The language of the attendant, after his affectionate remonstrance to Hippolytus had been disregarded, supplicating Aphroditê to pardon the recalcitrancy of that virtuous but obstinate youth, is characteristic and touching (114-120.)] [Footnote 11: See especially his chapter ii. on the Sensations of Sight, pp. 222, 241--247, in the second edition of this work.] [Footnote 12: Descartes says, in his 'Principia Philosophiæ,' i 51--'Et quidem substantia quæ nullâ planè re indigeat, unica tantum potest intelligi--nempe Deus. Alias vero omnes, non nisi ope concursûs Dei existere posse perspicimus. Atque ideo nomen substantiæ non convenit Deo et illis _univocè_, ut dici solet in scholis, hoc est, nulla ejus nominis significatio potest distinctè intelligi, quæ Deo et creaturis sit communis.'] [Footnote 13: At the same time, we cannot go along with Mr Mill in the following affirmation (p. 201):-- 'This natural probability is converted into certainty when we take into consideration that universal law of our experience which is termed the Law of Causation, and which makes us _unable to conceive the beginning of anything without_ an antecedent condition, _or cause.'_ Such 'inability to conceive' appears to us not in correspondence with facts. First, it cannot be properly either affirmed or denied, until agreement is obtained what the word _cause_ means. If three persons, A, B, and C, agree in affirming it--A adopting the meaning of Aristotle, B that of Sir William Hamilton, and C that of Mr Mill--the agreement is purely verbal; or rather, all three concur in having a mental exigency pressing for satisfaction, but differ as to the hypothesis which satisfies it.