Page:The Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, Volume 1, 1854.djvu/386

 376 Journal of Philo logy. (tstra): Nam neque quo possit genus ullum material' Eflugere ex omni quicquam est extra, neque in omne Unde, fyc. Compare v, 361 Sicut summarum summa est aiterna, neque extra Qui locus (.st quo dissiliant, and I, 963 Nunc extra summam quoniam nil esse fatendum, non habet extremum. For the corrupt ineohihescit in in, 444 neither Lachmann's nor Bernays' corrections are to me satisfactory. I propose to read Aere qui credas posse hanc cohiberier ullo, Cor pore qui nostro varus mag is in quo iiabitet sit ; " how can you believe that the soul, which the body cannot hold, can be contained by any air, which would be much more rare and porous a habitation for it than our body is." The elision of the long monosyllable and the cadence of the end of the second verse appear to me peculiarly Lucretian. In quo hahitd sit might easily become first inquohabetsit, and then incohibescit. Tn iv, 804 Nisi quce ex se ipse paravit should probably be Nisi quai ex hisce ipse paravit. The way in which Lachmann dis- locates and explains v, 969 appears to me most improbable and quite intolerable. Nearly all previous editors from Avantius downwards rightly place 975 after 967. But how is the imper- fect verse 969 Saetigerisque pares subus silvestria membra to be completed ? I believe in this way : Saetigerisque pares subu' sic silvestria membra. Sic is ovtoos, temere, sic tenure. ' Like to bristly swine, quite carelessly, just as it might happen, they threw their savage limbs all naked on the ground/ It is an equally common error to repeat wrongly the same letters. In I, 1033 we find the imperfect verse Fota novet fetus summaque gens animantum. * Prorsus egregie Marullus summissa- que/ says Lachmann. To me summissa seems inadmissible; flowers, trees, &c. are sent up from the earth ; but certainly Lucretius did not mean to say that the earth gave forth men or beasts in his day, whatever it might have done at their first creation : that was quite contrary to his philosophy : see v, 826 Sed quia jinem aliquam pariendi debet habere, Destitit, ut mulier spatio defessa vetusto. I believe that the 8 of summa has come from the s of fetus, and that we should read unorsaque gens animantum Floreat. In n, 1033 Lachmann should not have altered essent; it is the sint of 1034 which is in fault. I would read Omnia quos nunc si primum mortalibus essent, Ex improviso si nunc objecta repente. Si has been wrongly repeated and nunc written in a contracted form. The variation of nunc si, si nunc