396 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 
Hittorp.: dum serui essemush. This latter is merely a conjecture. 
The reading of the editors, serwremus, seems right. We want a 
word in the imperfect subjunctive, as the sentence is in Orat. Obliqua. 
The re got repeated as se in the archetype. The copyist of Y wrote 
heremus for eremus, which in contracted writing is almost the same as 
haberemus (héremus). It is to be noticed that both in H and Hittorp. 
haberemus was first written, and subsequently altered to heremus. 
xi. 14. 3. Et quidem multo partius scripsi [quam re uera furere 
iuveni. Quod uero aliquid de his scripsi] mirari noli H. The words 
in brackets are not found in M; but they make good sense, and can 
easily have fallen out ex homoeoteleuto. ‘They do not appear to be in 
Hittorp. Here is Gebhard’s note as given by Graevius :—<‘ Deleui 
uocem interiectitiam classe post possit, ex Palatino primo, Gruteriano, 
Hittorpiano ac Stevech, Vatic [quibus consentiunt Amstelodam. Men- 
tel. Graevii sec. ] ex lisdem et editione principe edidi et quidem multo 
pareius scripst: mirart noli, eiectis illis quae nusquam comparent quam 
reuera furere inuent quod uero aliquid de his seripst { quibus assentiuntur 
quoque Amstelodam. Mentelian. et Graevii secundus ]. 
xm. 14. 3. putati (sic) M; putari H, Hittorp; pati, edd., rightly. 
The error, probably in the archetype and corrected there, yet did not 
fail to be propagated in the other family. 
xu. 14. 4. suffragére H: a kind of erroneous alteration very 
common in mss. The subjunctive is better attested, and the sentence 
runs more smoothly with it than with the imperative. 
xu. 15.5. persecuti fuimus H; persecuti sumus M. The former 
is due to a simple confusion of f with {. There would be no point m 
reading fudmus, for it would mean (if anything) ‘‘ we stopped our 
pursuit at Sida”; lit. ‘‘we were in a state of having pursued them 
up to Sida.” 
xu. 15. 6. studium e¢ diligentiam H, Dresd. m.; e¢ is omitted 
by M. 
xu. 15. 7. Itaque ¢ circiter amissis M; Itaque 6 ¢ circiter 
amissis H. This latter is a heavy loss; but how else did the 6 arise if 
it was not in the mss. 
xm. 18. 1. Quod mihi uideor ex tuis litteris intellegere te nihil 
commisurum esse temere nec ante quam s¢isses quidquam certi consti- 
tuturum M; sevres H, Hittorp. In Oratio recta the fut. perf. indic. 
would have been used, which in Orat. Obliqua is transformed into the 
perf. subj. after a primary tense. We ought to read, accordingly, 
scleris, or better still sevris, to which the reading of H leads. There 
is an exactly similar difficulty in Tac. Dial. 33, where the mss. read 
scirent, but, the text requiring the perfect subjunctive, Schurzfleisch 
and Andresen read scverint, and Heinrich seirint. 
xu. 19. 1. Eademrem M; eandem rem H, h; Kam rem (Lambinus: 
edd.). Perhaps eamque rem will account for the corruption to some 
