392 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



fj.ovcrav sed tectiorem ex Q. Muci P. F. edicto Asiatico ; and suppose that 

 Muci got out of place, and P. F. was Trritten in an extended form. 

 Accordingly Tve might read Q. Ilv.ci P. F. 



X. 4. 3. — De Sicinio. 



The other names mentioned in this passage are those of officers in 

 Cicero's suite, and of Sicinius we do not hear elsewhere in Cicero's 

 epistles. Malaspina reads de Licinio, referring to the ordinary reading 

 in 3. 2. Possibly we should read Mescinio. Mescinius was Cicero's 

 quaestor. 



V. 4. 4. — Dum acta et rumores, vel etiam si qua certa hahes de 

 Caesare, exspecto. 



The attractive emendation of ITadvig {Bumtaxattoi Bum actaet) has 

 met with a large measui-e of approval, and is adopted by ^iiller. It 

 may be right ; though it is not plain why Cicero should ask explicitly 

 ■only for rumours here,, when he asks for non modo res omnes sed etiam 

 rumores in 5. 1. It would be simpler perhaps to read I>iu acta et 

 rumores. 



V. 7. — Proficiscebar Brundisium a. d. xiin Kal. lunias. 



The date is confessedly in error. Cicero arrived in Tarentum 

 XV Kal. lun. (i.e. on Alay 18). and intended to wait in that town for 

 the arrival of Pomptinus. On the 19th he wrote Att. v. 6, in which 

 he states that Pompey had asked him to spend every day {cotidie) of 

 his sojourn in Tarentum in his company. He appears to have spent 

 three days {triduum) with Pompey, and then left for Brundisium, 

 where he arrived xi Kal (Fam. iii. 3. 1). The journey from Taren- 

 tum to Brundisium, though some 45 miles at least, was probably 

 performed by Cicero in one day, as it was in 58 b.c. (cf. Att. iii. 6, 

 and 7. 1). So the arrangement of Cicero's time would seem to have 

 been — 



Arrival at Tarentum ]!tlay 18, xv Kal. 



Three days there with Pompey, May 19, 20, 21, xiv-xn Kal. 

 Departure for Brundisium, May 22 (early), xi Kal. 

 Arrival at Brundisium, May 22 (late), xr Kal. 



TTe must accordingly read xi for xmi. This may have been a 

 mere mistake, as e.g. in Earn. xiv. 5 fin. the MSS. have xv. where 

 Sternkopf^ has conclusively proved that we must read xvn : cf. also 



1 Quaest. Chrou. (1884), p. 35. 



