Purser—On a London MS. of Cicero’s Letters. 389 
see when we consider that the archetype was most likely written in 
uncials. The reading of H is the lectio difficilior, and we hear, more- 
over, that M has fugatia with -ia written over an erasure. Victorius 
says Petrarch’s ms. had fugato. Thus ms. authority scems to be 
strongly in favour of fucata having been the archetype; and it is on 
that ground principally that I should adopt it The sense at first 
sight seems to require a word signifying “short-lived ”’ or ‘ fleeting.” 
But then we shall have the same idea repeated three times over; and 
‘““those external things which have a mere semblance of glory, a mass 
of splendid pomp and pageantry,’”’ may well be thought of as ‘“ short- 
lived, painted unrealities, and sure to fall and fail.” 
x. 12.5. complexus es tene M; complexus tenes Orelli; com- 
plexus es et tenes H, rightly. 
x. 14. 2. tecum et rep. esse facturum H, making for Orelli’s 
reading, tecum et cum rep. esse facturum. 
x. 15.4. qui sequatur Italiam a uastatione defendat M; Italiam- 
queaH. The asyndeton of M is certainly harsh, and I should like to 
adopt the reading of H; or if that is thought to be too like an emenda- 
tion on the part of H, to read sequatur ut Italiam. 
x. 16.1. institit M; instituit H. Either would stand; but the 
reading of M is preferable as expressing greater urgency. 
x. 17. 3. H gives us noassistance on this difficult passage reading 
Studium mihi suum L. Gellius de tribus fratribus Eganiano probauit. 
x. 18.2. Et cum collega consentiente, exercitu concordi ac bene 
de rep. sentiente, sicut milites faciunt, &e. So H. The words from 
exercitu to sentiente are omitted in M. They fell out ex homoeoteleuto. 
Surely the copyist would never have been able to compose such an 
addition, even though he were, as Orelli says, ‘‘nescio quo furore 
instinctus.”? That we should have consentiente, bene sentiente and bene 
sentiens in such close proximity, is not a cause of wonder in a letter 
from Plancus. Those who are not masters of language are very prone 
to harp on the same word, both in writing and speaking. 
x. 18. 3. constantiaeque meae quae me ad hance experientiam 
excitauit H; me is omitted by M. It is absolutely required, however, 
as excitare is a transitive verb. 
x. 20.2. Sed accepi litteras a collega tuo . . . in quibus erat te 
adscripsisse, &c. SoM. In H we find a%se seripsisse (sic). ‘This is 
the reading of all edd. 
x. 21.4. Accessit eo ut milites . . . conclamarunt M. The edd. 
alter to conclamarint. H reads,eo q (=qui) milites . . . conclamarunt. 
The reading is probably accessit eo utgue . . . conclamarint. Plancus 
was fond of archaisms; see Graey. on § 5 of this letter. On Lucr. 1. 
758, sqq., hue accedit item . . . utqui Debeat ad nihilum iam rerum 
summa reuerti, Munro (after Mr. Howard) in defending wtgue of the 
Mss., says that he unhesitatingly proposes in a letter of Balbus (ap. 
