366 VARRO ON FARMING 



the rain water would fall into an '* impluvium," which 

 might be used as a pond — the *Macus sub dio " of 

 Chapter XI — while, if running water were at hand (for 

 * ' aqua saliens " opposed to ' ' putei " or ' ' fontes, " cf. Pliny, 

 Ep., ii, 17, 25), it was to be directed into a pond in the 

 yard, probably into the portico where it would form a 

 semi-piscinay having the sty lobates on two sides (2i piscina 

 had usually masonry on all four sides). I suggest there- 

 fore: " Cohortes in fundo magno duae aptiores: una ut 

 interius (having inside it) compluvium habeat, aut lacumj 

 ubi aqua saliat quae (Schneider) intra stylobatas cum 

 venit (Merula, approved by Keil) sit semipiscina." One 

 may regard the omission of '*aut" as a case of haplo- 

 graphy, of which we have many examples in these books. 

 *' Qui " improperly written for " quae " occurs very many 

 times (cf. II, i, 27, etc.). 



I, 15, I. " Praeterea sine saeptis fines praedii sationis 

 notis arborum tutiores fiunt." Schneider, followed by 

 Keil, cuts the knot by deleting '* notis " and writing ** sa- 

 tione " for "sationis." If the text may not stand — and 

 I do not feel sure that it may not — ** farm boundaries if 

 unfenced are made safer by the indications given by the 

 sowing of trees," though the double genitive is terribly 

 harsh, perhaps might be read: '* Praeterea sine saeptis 

 fines praedii, satione si noti (or notati), tutiores fiunt. 

 For the form of the expression ** si noti " cf. I, 13, i : ** Si 

 fessi opere "; II, 4, 20, " si in acervo positum "; III, 5, 2, 

 '* si enim late ibi diffusa aqua . . . bibitur inutilius." 



I, 10, 2. *' Is modus acnua latine appellatur." The 

 use of the word " latine " here and in II, 1,5, "in Samo- 

 thrace Caprarum quas latine rotas appellant," is perhaps 

 due to the ignorance of the scribe. Pontedera (Cur. 

 Sec.) points out that Varro's usual formula in such cases 



