Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T17:36:52.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three textual notes on Lucretius

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Martin F. Smith
Martin F. Smith
Affiliation:
University College of North Wales, Bangor
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , December 1966 , pp. 264 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 264 note 1 Traina says that Merrill's conjecture is adopted by Cinquini.

page 265 note 1 Cf. ⋯γγαλην⋯ζων (Ep. ad Hdt. 37); γαλην⋯ζειν (Usener 429. 1).

page 265 note 2 Cf. Usener 413. 21–25.

page 265 note 3 Cf. ibid. 544. 9–10.

page 265 note 4 Cf., e.g., Virg. Aen. iii. 69; Ov. Met. xi. 432.

page 265 note 5 The text is Bailey's (1947): the manuscripts read fuerint for furerent.

page 266 note 1 I am indebted to Mr. David A. West of the University of Edinburgh for comment-ing at an early stage on my proposals for v. 1203 and iii. 962.