18 M PETRONIUS ARBITER 
quasi priori videtur contrarium ` ‘non idcirco causas Isocrates non defendit, quin id 
utile esse et honestum existimarit. " Gellius extends his article further; but both 
from the beginning, — * quam grammatici coniunctionem appellant," — and from the 
concluding clause, — * Quod quia longioris dissertationis est, poterit, cui otium est, 
repperire hoc in P. Nigidii commentariis, quos grammaticos inscripsit," — it is evident 
that the material of this article is not original with Gellius, but drawn from the work 
of Nigidius; and Petronius, having evidently a practical object in view and aiming at 
great conciseness, was satisfied with even a smaller portion of the definition of Ni- 
gidius, containing the three principal meanings and applications of quin. This article, 
again, is a strong reason for supposing that Petronius did not borrow from Gellius. 
The difference in the reading, Socrates and Isocrates, is to be noticed. Petronius 
appears to have the better reading, Nigidius undoubtedly referring to the reasons which 
influenced Socrates in not employing legal aid at his trial.* : | 
42. Soror. There is no important difference between the two manuscripts. As to 
the matter, cf. A. Gell. N. A. 13, 10: * Praeterea in libris, quos ad praetoris edictum 
scribsit (Labeo Antistius), multa posuit partim lepide atque argute reperta. Sicuti hoc 
est, quod in quarto ad edictum libro scriptum legimus: * Soror, inquit, appellata est, 
quod quasi seorsum nascitur separaturque ab ea domo, in qua nata est, et in aliam 
familiam transgreditur' Fratris autem vocabulum P. Nigidius, homo inpense doctus, 
non minus arguto subtilique érvu@ interpretatur: * Frater, inquit, est dictus quasi fere 
alter.” The difference between the definition of soror of Labeo and Petronius is such 
that it is probable that Petronius borrowed from — rather than Labeo in the 
article soror as wellas frater. 
43. Frater. There is no difference between the two manuscripts. The circumstance 
that the article frater follows the article soror in Petronius, as in Gellius, might 
be viewed as a reason for supposing Petronius to be a borrower from Gellius; but 
the juxtaposition of these two words, on account of the intimate connection of mean- 
ing (bearing in mind, too, that even those writers, grammarians or lexicographers, 
who adopt, in general, an alphabetical arrangement, do not in every particular strictly 
adhere to it, e. g. Festus and Nonius), may have existed in the works of Labeo and 
N Lgs. from which Petronius and Gellius drew. Cf. Fest: “Frater a Graeco | 
* The anecdote alluded to in this e is, with some slight modification, related by Diogenes Lenger - 
2, 40: 6 8 ad diddcogos Avaiov ypáavros dmoXoy(av aird Brayvods £y, Kadds pev 6 dyos, à. Avola, où pay dppórroy : 
epot» Schaf yàp hy Tò mhéov Bixavixos Y épndiNónodos ` eiróvros de rod Avotov, Dës, el kaAós éorw ô Aóyos, ok dy co 
áppórroi; Ze, Oé yàp kai indria kadá kal úrodiuara etr dv ¿uol dvápuocra; The change of Socrates into Isocrates 
by a careless copyist was an easy and natural one. 
