EXCURSUS III 371 



For**Plautium"for *'Plautum" cf. II, 8, 2, "hinnius" 

 for *' hinnus." As for the rest I imagine that the scribe 

 for **quo miro" read **quam irQ," and remembering 

 Hirrus already mentioned wrote *'Hirrum" or *'Hir- 

 rium'* (of "h" interpolated there are numerous ex- 

 amples in this book, *' hostia " for *' ostia," etc.), " nun- 

 tiato" he read as **nuntiatu (nuntiatum) " — and **sub- 

 dio " as ** scribtQ (scriptum)." The ** in " (** Romam in 

 Senatum") is perhaps a case of dittography, "in" and 

 **m" being frequently indistinguishable in Pre-Caro- 

 lingian minusculae. 



II, 7, I. ** E quis feminas Q. Modius Equiculus 

 etiam patri militari iuxta ac mares habere solebat." The 

 words '* etiam patre militari" seem quite irrelevant. 

 Ursinus conjectured "etiam in re militari" — which 

 makes excellent sense. Keil first adopted this correc- 

 tion, but rejected it afterwards, probably because of the 

 difficulty of accounting for the corruption. "Etiam a 

 parte" ("etia a parte" — the second "a" disappearing 

 through haplography) is plausible. Pliny in a chapter 

 (viii, 42 end) which owes much to Varro, mentions the 

 fact that the Scythians preferred to use mares rather 

 than horses for military purposes, " Scythae per bella 

 feminis {t\e. equabus) uti malunt, quoniam urinam cursu 

 non impedito reddant." Varro frequently uses "pars" 

 in the sense of "section," "department," and "a" 

 meaning "in respect of," cf. I, 7, 5, **a qua parte vel 

 maxime bonus aut non bonus appellatur," and II, 2, 2, 

 " quae ita ad aetate," " in respect of age." 



II, 7, 15. " Neque idem qui vectorios facere vult ad 

 ephippium aut ad raedam quod ad rem militarem." I 

 would insert "aut" after "vult," cf. the n6te to the 

 passage in the Commentary. 



