The grammarian Caesellius Vindex, writing under Trajan, criticized Furius Antias for his newly coined verbs lutescere, noctescere, opulescere and vīrescere. Their meanings in classical Latin are classified by Nicolaie as follows: becoming, the intensification of a quality, the acquisition of a quality. Their number increases in post-classical Latin, in which we also find them used causatively as transitive verbs, e.g. innotescere ‘make known’; Gellius' causative use of inolesco is mentioned below. Incohative verbs descend to Romance languages, where forms in -o (...) and in -sco both contribute to some conjugations, e.g. Fr. finir, finissant; It. finire, finisco, and to English. (shrink)

The grammarian Caesellius Vindex, writing under Trajan, criticized Furius Antias for his newly coined verbs lutescere, noctescere, opulescere and vīrescere. Their meanings in classical Latin are classified by Nicolaie as follows: becoming, the intensification of a quality, the acquisition of a quality. Their number increases in post-classical Latin, in which we also find them used causatively as transitive verbs, e.g. innotescere ‘make known’; Gellius' causative use of inolesco is mentioned below. Incohative verbs descend to Romance languages, where forms in -o (...) and in -sco both contribute to some conjugations, e.g. Fr. finir, finissant; It. finire, finisco, and to English. (shrink)

The most reliable manuscript of Statius' Achilleid is the Puteaneus , and its authority, against the group QKC, is frequently upheld only by the Codex Etonensis . The readings of this manuscript , which contains, apart from the Achilleid, Maximian, Ovid's Remedium Atnoris and other poems, were collated by C. Schenkl, Wiener Studien, iv , 96 ff., and were used by H. W. Garrod for the O.C.T. of Statius: Klotz in the Teubner 2nd edition merely notes the readings of Schenkl (...) and of the Oxford text. Unfortunately these are neither complete nor always accurate; and the latter should be corrected as follows: 1. In three passages the Oxford text differs from the reading of PEKQ without noting the fact: Ach. i. 145 Non superant is not, as implied, the MS. reading, but Havet's conjecture: PEKQ have nam superant. 306 PEKQ have impulsam , not impulsum. 680 PEKQ ibi, not ubi. (shrink)

The idea of structural analysis of the Aeneid has been attacked recently by some who believe that too complicated mathematics are involved in line totals involving a golden mean. The object of the present article is to investigate whether simpler numerical effects are discernible in the poem, and whether these effects were deliberately inserted by Virgil. The significant numbers to be examined in this connexion are 3, 7, 12, and 30. The first three of these are among the ritualistic numbers (...) whose use in the Aeneid was discussed by C. P. Clark, while 30 is among other things part of the series 3, 30, 300 which we encounter in Aen. I. 261–96. (shrink)