^{page 103 note 1} Prof. Thurneysen objects that the carrying on of the final word of a clause to the beginning of the next line, praicime Peraeponas | Afded, (in regnum (?) Proserpinae | Abiit), is not in the Saturnian style. But we have exactly the same thing in one of the Scipio epitaphs (C.I.L. i. 33: Quare lubens te in greraiu, Scipio, recipit | Terra).

In the Pelignian inscription I indicate by dots under the letters that the first letters of vv. 1, 2, 3, 5, and the last of v. 2, are not quite certain, and by crosses that the first of v. 4 and the last of v. 1 are completely illegible. The letters v and u are not distinguished on the stone.

^{page 104 note 1} Irregularly long lines on metrical epitaphs, are often caused by the insertion of ‘tags,’ like those bracketed in this Latin ‘Iambic’ epitaph (C.I.L. i. 1027): Hospés, resiste, et hóc ad grumum [ad laeuam] aspice, Ubei cóntinentur óssa hominis boni [misericordis, amantis, pauperis.]

Rogo té, viator, mónumento huic nil [male feceris], where the metre has been woefully deformed by the substitution of ad laeuam aspice for the respice of the model, and male feceris for laeseris. Justice is done to the good qualities of the deceased, at the expense of the verse, in line 2. An example of the same thing in Saturnian verse is perhaps v. 2 of the Falisco-Latin inscription (Zv. I.I.I. 72 a), in the first hemistich: Opiparum ad ueitam quolundam ‖ festosque dies.

But in the Pelignian epitaph the parallel rhythm of the two half-lines of vv. 4—5 saves the credit of the versifier. With ĕcǔc and they have only one syllable too many, if firata (fĭrăta or f(i)rata?) be the equivalent of two syllables.

^{page 106 note 1} The Prepositions in early Latin were probably, as in the Italic dialects, more often appended than in classical Latin, or placed between the noun and a qualifying word, e.g. praieim-e Perseponas. I would so explain the beginning of the Dvenos Inscription: Ioueis (?-es) at deiuos, Jovios ad deos, the di Jovii in contrast to the di Mānes (on the Dvenos Inscr. stem Māno- lit. ‘good,’ Varro L.L. 6, 4). Cf. Eph. Epigr. VIII. 460 (Capua) Venerus Joviae; Not. Scav. 1880, p. 479 (Rome) Herculi Jovio. The Dvenos Inscription prescribes that the sacrificial vessel, on which it is written, shall be used in the worship only of Mānus (cf. Summānus and in Carm. Sal. ap. Paul. Fest. 87, 29, Th. Cerus Mānus), or of Ops Tūtĕriae(cf. the name Tutisulanus, Not. Scav. 1890, p. 47; and for the form of the title, Gell. 13, 22, 2.)

Prof. Brugmann now explains the Latin Gerundiveby this appended ^*-do, which he makes dō or dĕ, e. g. Lat. en-do, en-du, dō-ni-cum, Av. vaesman-da, Gk. ⋯μ⋯τερ⋯ν-δε, ⋯μ⋯τερον-δ⋯. Laudandus is ^*laudam-do- ‘one to praise’ (Grundr. II. p. 1425). I would rather make dus- a Verbal Adjective ‘giving praise.’ Cf. ruborem do, venum-do.