DE PRINCIPIIS ATdUE OEIGINIBUS, 



SECCNDUM FABULAS 



CUPIDINIS ET C(ELI: 



ETC. 



QtLE de Cupidine sive Amore ab antiquis memorata 

 sunt, in eandem personam convenire non possunt ; quin- 

 etiam ab ipsis ponuntur Cupidines duo, et longo sane 

 intervallo discrepantes ; cum unus ex iis deorum anti- 

 quissimus, alter natu minimus fuisse diceretur. Atque 

 de antique illo nobis in praesentia sermo est. Narrant 

 itaque Amorem ilium omnium deorum fuisse antiquis- 

 simum, atque adeo omnium rerui% excepto Chao, quod 

 ei coaevum perhibetur. Atque Amor iste prorsus sine 

 parente introducitur. Ipse autem cum Chao 1 mistus, 

 et deos et res universas progenuit. A nonnullis tamen 

 ovo prognatus 2 incubante Nocte traditus est. Ejus 



1 Gslo in the original. For the grounds of the correction, see Preface, 

 p. 274. J. S. 



2 Kellgren, De Ovo mundano (Helsingfors, 1849), has collected the pas 

 sages on the egg cosmogony in the Institutes of Menu, the Putanas, and 

 certain Commentaries. He remarks that, so far as he is aware, no trace of 

 the mythus occurs in the Vedas. It follows that he did not perceive any 

 reference to it in the 129th hymn of the 10th book of the Rig Veda, with 

 which he was certainly acquainted, as he has quoted a portion of Cole- 

 brook s translation of it. In this translation it is difficult to recognise even 



VOL. v. 19 



