On Certain Abuses in Language [pp. 248-272]

ON CERTAIN ABUSES IN LANGUAGE.
the original meaning, the fact that the thought of augury has
utterly passed away from "inaugurate" and "inauguration," is
in some sort a gain. The new use of the words is not likely
to lead any one to false notions about the Roman augury, nor
is it likely to lead to any more practical evil consequences as to
affairs of our own day. It is a silly and affected way of talking;
but it is nothing worse. In some of the other cases there is something worse. Many of them are likely to lead to misconceptions
as to things past; some of them are likely to lead to practical
mistakes as to things present.
Let us begin with a phrase which is sure to be used whenever there is a Congress or a Conference-I am not sure that I
know the difference between the two-of the great powers of
Europe. Such an assembly is sure to be spoken of somewhere
or other as "the European Areiopagos." I do not know that
any direct practical evil comes of this; I do not suppose that
the resolutions of such a Congress or Conference are likely
to be less wise or just because it is called an Areiopagos.
But those who so speak of it must have very false ideas of
the ancient Areiopagos, and those who form their notions of
the ancient Areiopagos from the "European Areiopagos" now
will certainly go very far wrong in their ideas of old Athenian
polity. The Areiopagos was simply the highest criminal court,
the highest religious court, at Athens. It was not an international body at all; it was a court of justice in a single commonwealth. But I suspect that this phrase of the "European
Areiopagos" arises from a twofold error. The court of Areiopagos is confounded with the Amphiktyonic Council, and the
functions of the Amphiktyonic Council are altogether misconceived. The Amphiktyonic Council was not an international
Congress; as its functions were primarily religious, it had really
more likeness to a General Council of the Church, and, in that
character, it sometimes preached a crusade. But it had likeness
enough to an international Congress to be mistaken for one, and
it often has been mistaken for one. To call a diplomatic Con.
gress "the Amphiktyons of Europe" would imply a very false
notion of the Greek Amphiktyons; still there would be likeness
enough between the two things to account for the mistake. But
when the diplomatic Congress is called an Areiopagos, there is
17
257