QUINTI CICERONIS COMMENTARIOLUM PETITIONIS 



XI, § 43. 



BY GEORGE L. HENDRICKSON. 



Proclest qnidem veliementer nusqiiam discedere, sed tnmen hie fructus est assidui- 

 tatis, non solum esse Roinae atque in foro sed assidue petere, saepe eosdem appellare, 

 non committere ut quisqiiam possit dicere, quod eius consequi possis, si abste non sit 

 rogatum et valde ac diligenter rosiatum. 



This is the reading of Buecheler, and also of Baiter, except 

 that the latter writes quoad eius for quod eius. I wish to call 

 attention, however, to the words sed tamen, which so far as I 

 can see have no meaning at all in this connection; for in the 

 sentence hie fructus est assiduitaiis there is certainly no idea 

 adversative to the .statement, prodest quidem vehemenfer nus- 

 quam discedere. To admit of the adversative particles sed 

 tamen in this sentence the preceding one must have contained 

 some such idea as this: discedas fortasse interdum, sed tamen 

 hie fructus est assiduitatis. It seems to ms evident, therefore, 

 that sed tamen cannot be correct. The connection after prodest 

 quidem vehementer nusquam discedere demands, if anything, a 

 reason for the statement, and I would therefore emend to sed 

 quoniam or siquidem, neither of which, I think, would be paleo- 

 graphically improbable. 



