^{page 13 note 1} Confusion between et and ut is as common in the manuscripts of Horace (e.g. Odes i. 31. 10; Sat. i. 4. 69, i. 6. 31; Ep. i. 6. 31, i. 10.42; A.P. 355), as in those of other authors.

Mr. R. G. M. Nisbet kindly read a draft of this note, but is not to be taken as agreeing with its conclusions.

^{page 13 note 2} Reviewed by the writer below, p. 55.

^{page 13 note 3} Cf. Neue–Wagener, , Formenlehre d. lat. Spr. i ³. 578.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 1} 406 ac sic offectus oculique uenena maligni | uicit tutela pax impetrata deorum. At 316 I not know why Baehrens's ac has been preferred to Sannazarius' et; palaeographical do considerations can hardly decide.

^{page 14 note 2} Cf. Housman, , C.R. xiii (1899), 176.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 1} omni Heinsius, Bentley: uitreoque uel uitroque … amne codd.

^{page 15 note 2} There may be a reminiscence of Lucret. vi. 1189, but it cannot be pressed, salsa sitis seems an eminently natural expression.

^{page 16 note 1} I do not know why modern editors are so sure that this name was spelt Melitensia.

^{page 16 note 2} Of the extensive collection of examples at Kühner–Stegmann, , Lat. Gr. i. 22–26, none is like this one.Google Scholar