There are two undoubted instances of this use of Neaera in Prudentius which are cited by Mr. Ullman in support of his contention that in Horace another proper name may be similarly employed. I imagine however that to an unprejudiced sense of Latin usage these instances will themselves seem to be strange and in need of explanation.

Mr. Garrod has earned the gratitude of all students of Manilius by his detection of the ratio of the series in iii. 599–615, and he is fully justified in his contention that tricenas in 612 is ‘one of the few emendations which can be proved mathematically.’ I owe him a special acknowledgment, inasmuch as his discovery enables me to add one more to the list and affords me an opportunity of establishing what was correct and correcting what was erroneous in (...) my discussion of the whole passage in Silua Maniliana, pp. 30 sqq. Let me do the last first. My suggestion of uix for bis in 616 of course disappears; bis sex is required by the series: and in 595–6 the number meant is 75, not 76. (shrink)

Since the time of Burman it has been amongst the aims of Phaedrian scholarship to endeavour to make good the imperfections of the direct tradition by recourse to the indirect. That losses have been sustained, one piece of evidence is enough to show. In the sixth line of his Preface to Book I. Phaedrus says that trees speak in his fables; but no trees speak in any fable now left to us, either in the five books as handed down in (...) PR or in the Perottine Appendix. (shrink)

Dissatisfied with current views upon the exordium of Tibullus II. i. , I proposed in Selections from Tibullus to make the occasion of the poem the Sementiuae Feriae instead of the Ambarualia. This proposal, criticised, amongst others, by Mr. Warde Fowler in an interesting article in the Classical Review , I have now abandoned . But the difficulties which led me to break away from previous exegesis still remain, and to them I address myself in the present article.