HoRAT. Serm. I. 10 (1-8). 33 



These mss. agree very closely, and establish the text as 

 follows: 



Lucili, quain sis mendosus, teste Catone 



defensore tuo pervincam, qui male factos 



emendare parat versus, hoc lenius ille 



quo melior vir est, longe subtilior illo 



qui multum puer et loris et funibus udis 



exoratus, ut esset opem qui ferre poetis 



antiquis posset contra fastidia nostra, 



grammaticorum equitum doctissimus. ut redeam illuc, 



" How full of faults you are, Lucilius, I shall clearly 

 prove from the testimony of Cato, your champion, who is 

 preparing to revise your ill made verses. He will deal 

 more gently with them inasmuch as he is a better man, of 

 far finer tastes, than the scholar who in his boyhood felt 

 the vigorous ^jersuasion of moistened thong and rope, in 

 order that there might be one who could lend a helping 

 hand to the poets of old against the carping criticism of 

 our day, the cleverest of aristocratic grammarians. To re- 

 turn to that point," 



NOTES ox THE TEXT. 



Vs. 1. 'qvLod sis' {codd.2:>le7'iqueap. Lamb.). Some of 

 the abbreviated forms of 'quam' and 'quod' in minuscular 

 writing are very much alike.' Unless very carefully written 

 these words might be readily confused, and so 'quod' may 

 have appeared here. When once it had appeared in a ms. 

 it might easily be retained because of its use in late Latin 

 to introduce substantival clauses after 'verba dicendi et 

 sentiendi.* 



Vs. 2. 'convincam' (ed.Lcmdini ex mss.) for 'pervin- 

 cam,' which as the more difficult reading should be re- 

 tained. One ms. {Kirchneri cod. L in Dresd. III.) gives 

 'devincam.' Peerlkamp suggested 'proj)e vincam.' 



Vs. 4. 'quo melior vir est.' This is the reading of the 

 most important mss. The false quantity in 'vir' has 



' Chassant, Dicticmnaire des abreviations, latines et fravcaises, Paris, 1876, p. 77. 

 ^Draegor, Hist. Synta.f der lutein, Sprache, Vol. II., p. 229, 



