142 BARON WALKENAER ON THE 



These passages, which are the only ones where the name 

 convolvulus occurs, do not give us any information respecting 

 the insect it was applied to, except that it was very injurious 

 to the vine. We shall have to examine whether this insect is 

 the same as the involvulus of Plautus, or whether the two 

 words were employed to designate two different insects. 



16. Volvox. 



We shall have no occasion to inquire if the insect, called 

 volvox by Pliny is the same as that to which he gives the 

 name of convolvulus, for he distinguishes them himself. 



This writer, after having pointed out a remedy against the 

 convolvulus, informs us that the volvox, which eats the young 

 grapes, is a different insect, and recommends, in order to 

 prevent its attacks, that care should be taken to wipe the 

 pruning-knife with the skin of a beaver, and to rub the vines 

 in those places where they have been cut with bear's blood : 

 " Alii volvocem appellant animal prserodens pubescentes uvas : 

 quod ne accidat, falces, cum sint exacutaB fibrina pelle detergent, 

 atque ita putant sanguine ursino liniri volunt post putationem 

 easdem." 



17. Volucra. — Eruca. 



We cannot separate these two words in this discussion, 

 because they are mentioned together in the same passage of 

 Columella, and perhaps volvox ought not to have been sepa- 

 rately considered, for I should not conceal the circumstance, 

 that many editors read volucra instead of volvocem, in the 

 passage of Pliny I have just quoted; but volvocem is the 

 reading of all the ancient manuscripts, and volucra has only 

 been introduced into his text because they have found a 

 passage in Columella which, although somewhat different, 

 seems to be derived from the same source; and as in Colu- 

 mella it is not possible to substitute the word volvox for 

 volucra, because that word is a second time employed in the 

 plural, in a verse which cannot be altered without injuring 

 the metre, these editors of Pliny have determined to transfer 

 into his text the reading of Columella. Gesner, the com- 

 mentator on Columella, reasonably finds fault with them 

 for making this change, and recommends that the readings 



