- On Lucretius. 43
lost in enim; then on the principle illustrated above we get ext, ecst, ois. So iv. 101, for the imperfect verse : Ex imagini- bus missis consistere eorum, I confidently read Extima imagi- nibus, &c. ; Lucretius delights in eorum at the end of a verse, and extima eorum is much the same as extima circumcse- sura, twice used by Lucretius, n. 926, quod fugimus ante has, I believe, no meaning ; I read quod diximus ; the d has been lost in quod, and iximus easily passes into igsimus, fugimus. in. 198, for the corrupt spicarumque I propose asperrima quce- que ; the a was lost in the m of conlectum, and sperrimaquceque easily became sperrimaque, spicarumque : thus n. 428, Bernays is, I think, wrong in reading unde, instead of quceque with Lach- mann, which is only the que that has wrongly attached itself to the unca of the preceding verse, in. 962, for agedum magnis read agedum numanis concede; so rv. 1191, humanis conce- dere rebus. I have noticed several cases of the omission or insertion of a g. n. 1165, manuum is rightly read for magnum; on the other hand, iv. 429, MSS. have cogni for coni; this suggests to me what is perhaps the simplest correction of the corrupt et igni, v. 1106, viz. et uti, (igni iniuti). iv. 104, I would read: Sunt igitur tenues formce rerum similesque Effigiae, &c. comp. 42 : Dico igitur rerum effigias tenuisque figuras, &c, also 52 and 158 ; the formce rerum was first contracted into forma- rum, and similes then changed into dissimiles for the sake of the metre, iv. 284, I cannot understand Lachmann's iterum; I would read in idem for in eum; the id has been absorbed in the in; thus 1037, where id in nobis is to be read with the older editors, not e nobis, the in has been lost in the id. i. 971 MSS. have invalidis for id validis, and v. 1129 side for sine. Thus iv. 1168, Bernays rightly reads tumida for iamina; this I had long ago conjectured myself, appending to the conjecture Ovid's imitation in the A. Am. n. 661 : Die habilem quaecunque brevis, quae turgida, plenam. When in our passage the id was lost em would naturally be changed to eum. iv. 327, I read : Quinque etiam sex re ut fieri, vi. 1121 MSS. have ve for ut. v. 485, I hardly understand Lachmann's reading. I would sug- gest: Et radii solis cogebant undique terrain Verberibus cre- bris extrema ad limina in artum ; the one ina has swallowed up the other, and partem was made out of Hum in order to complete the verse, vi. 541, surely summersosca is summersos cceca. The
