^{page 205 note 1} I would read Adornans.

^{page 206 note 1} But an alternative explanation is possible; see below.

^{page 205 note 1} It ought to be noted here that by an oversight in Dr. Sanday's lists, the ad Demetrianum is incorrectly omitted for O₄ O₅, and both the ad Delnetrianum and de bono patientiae for S : and also that though the de zelo et livore is not now extant in S, yet since the end of no. 9(debono patientiae) and commencement of no. 11 (arl Fortunatum) are both also wanting, it is not impossible that the lost gatherings may hare contained no. 10 as well.

^{page 208 note 1} Possibly pro m. i.

^{page 208 note 2} Possibly clxxxiiii.

^{page 208 note 3} This and the next line are added by a second hand at the foot of the page.

^{page 209 note 1} Perhaps π for , i.e. numero.

^{page 209 note 2} Mommsen gives for No. 25 ad efesius, altered by the first hand to ad efphesius; for No. 26 ad efhesius. He is probably right as to the scribe's having made an alteration : but I think the scribe's first idea must have been efesius or effesius, and his second ephesius, in both cases.