510 CRITICAL NOTES. 



cation of treaties, peace, war and armistices," ratorum being referred 

 equally to each of the preceding nouns, and being of the neuter 

 gender according to the general rule. The decision of these matters 

 was peculiarly the province of the '^Fetialesf (See Dictionary of 

 Antiquities: "Fetiales.") With regard to the v. 1. non sunto, some 

 editors omit non altogether, as it is not to be found in all MSS. ; 

 others with Lambinus read duo sunto ; perhaps the most ingenious 

 emendation is that proposed by Vahien "noiitii sunto" i. e., nuntii 

 sunto. However that given by Lambinus is said to be supported by 

 the authority of some MSS., and Davies quotes Livy Bk. IX. 5, to 

 prove that the "Fetiales," whose names were mentioned in connection 

 with the treaty, were two in number. 



Ibid: II. X, 26. "Nam a patrihus acceptos deos ita placet coli, si 

 kuic legi 2^(j'''^uerint ipsi. Patrum delubra esse in urhibus censeo :" In 

 explaining this passage, editors have usually had recourse to one or 

 other of two methods : the former that ruthless kind of criticism 

 which attributes every difficulty to the malice of some designing 

 interpolator, and accordingly uses the critical pruning knife with 

 unhesitating, hand. Madvig (Advei's. Critica, vol. I, p. 64) says that 

 "Bahius et alii Batavi et Germani' are much too prone to resoi-t to 

 this "refuge of despairing ciitics," and it is only fair to say that in 

 the present instance, the learned Dutchman has not departed from 

 his wont : " Patrum," says he, '^contra omnium lihrorum auctoritatem 

 abjiciendum erit." We may remark, en passant, that the " Prince of 

 modern critics," as the Copenhagen professor has not undeservedly 

 been styled, has himself been convicted of repeated offences against 

 his own canons, in the emendations which he has proposed in this 

 particular work of Cicero's. When, however, we take into account 

 the fact that at the time when Madvig published the greater number 

 of his - emendations of the De Legibus of .Cicero, he was scarcely 

 twenty years old (see Introduction to Adversaria, vol. I.), we lose 

 every other feeling in that of wonder at the extraordinary genius of 

 this remarkable man. Those who adopt the second method maintain - 

 that Patrum is here used for Deoruvi, and produce parallel passages 

 to prove that, in prayers and addresses to the Gods, they were 

 frequently called P aires; but, as has been very justly observed, this 

 is a very different thing from speaking of them generally as Patres. 

 A more plausible explanation is that of Scheffer, who thinks that 

 Patrum delubra is the same as " constructa a patribus delubra," which 



