Valerius Maximus: Memorable Deeds and Sayings

PREFACE.

it is unlike the handwriting of the former scribe. — 6, 8. 4 (p. 308, 15) it is written by the first hand original: "m. 1" i.e., manu prima corpore instead of torpore, not orpore. — 6, 9. 6 (p. 313, 5) it seems that A¹ did not have belli fluctus waves of war, but belli luctus sorrow of war. — 7, 1. 1 (p. 320, 17) possint they may be able in A¹, not possent they might be able. — 7, 2. init. (p. 322, 17) what is inserted after animi of the mind is owed not to the first hand, as it seemed to Halm, but to the second; by ejecting this spurious word, I have corrected the sentence. — 7, 2. ext. 1 (p. 326, 14) he reports that A exhibits expeteremus we might seek and scolds me (pref. p. X) because I did not accept the best reading, even one to be accepted by conjecture. Perhaps correctly; but he did not see that in expeterem original: "expeterem" with superscript 9 the abbreviation original: "compendium" of 9 letters i.e., the letters 'us' was added by the second hand, as is evident from the somewhat blacker ink. — 7, 2. ext. 11 (p. 331, 6) in A it had been written by the first hand dem and by the second hand the letter i was added before d. Halm incorrectly affirms that the second hand provides item. — 7, 3. ext. 3 (p. 341, 11) the reading altioriu* original: "altioriu*" which he cites from A¹ is not the true primary script. Cf. what has been noted concerning this place in the critical apparatus, which supplied me with a sufficiently certain way of correcting: for in place of that which Halm published, scarcely to be tolerated, if the thought of the mind had been sent down deeper, I think it should be written if a deeper thought of the mind had been initiated. — 7, 3. ext. 9 (p. 344, 8) in A¹ there was not, as Halm reports, ercules usi simplicitate using the simplicity of Hercules, but erculeusi simpl., from which it is concluded that hercule, not hercules, should have been written. — 8, 1. damn. 2 (p. 372, 28) it is handed down as actione by action, not actiones actions; for the s was added by the second hand. — to 8, 2. 3 (p. 377, 15) Halm noted that which is in erasure and accepted it, but it is clear that the first hand wrote cum with/when and that this was changed into quod which/that by the second hand without any erasure. Now, since L as well as all the copied manuscripts original: "dett." i.e., deteriores that I have seen handed down cum in this place, I believe it should not be spurned. — 8, 7. init. (p. 384, 3) Halm could have been taught in several other places that the stroke original: "uirgulam illam^" I mentioned added after confirmat confirms signifies the end of a question. — ibid. ext. 3 (p. 388, 18), where I noted from A dū* original: "dū*" in erasure, certainly that which Halm took from codex D, ubi where, was not erased, but undoubtedly, with all other manuscripts, dum while was to be retained. Having done this,