This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

Since very many bore the inventions of previous editors too patiently, few understood whence the memory of the ancient writing should be sought or had gained a clear view of the nature of Varronian speech.’
To these things which Keil set forth, I have added whatever I either thought myself or others advised to be worth knowing about individual passages. 9, 5. Nicesius Maronites is suspected by E. Weiss in his learned dissertation ‘de Colum. et Varr.’ p. 11, with probability, to be a dittography for Hegesias Maronites v. 3. — 10, 21. ibique Italia, it should be stated rather as eam fuisse with Keil and Schoell. — 10, 30 sqq. Leo, in 'Stren. Helbig' p. 172, thinks it appears from the kind of speech, or the testimonies of Festus and Suetonius regarding these same words, that Varro brings forward nothing from the very words of Pacuvius except those flammeo vapore: against whom Mras, in 'Jahresbericht' a. 1909 p. 65, rightly cautioned that the opinion of Varro is brought forward, not the words. — P. 11, 2. diffindo eum, Leo l. s. s.: there is no need for this; cf. Mras l. s. s. — 11, 8. Mras l. s. s. wishes Venafro to be an adjective. — 11, 26. adque adgnatos = et ad adgnatos was also accepted by Zahlfeldt ‘Berl. phil. W.’ a. 1885 p. 676, even though Columella (or Cornelius Celsus) I 3, 1 presents atque ad agnatos, who in the same passage placed deesset instead of the unusual decolat, more in keeping with his own manner of speaking. Regarding adque cf. Thes. l. lat. — 13, 17. Those who would prefer to write evehunt, I do not know if they should also place convehunt beforehand. — 15, 7. aut alia [metalla] metalla Zahlfeldt l. s. s. with Reitzenstein. — 19, 1 sq. terrae, [et] altera Keil; I returned to the Aldine edition; for the examples by which Keil attempts to demonstrate that altera can pertain to 'the other aspect of the first part' seemed to be of a different kind. — 19, 5. tertia pars de rebus dividitur is also in Keil’s commentary, perhaps rightly. — 22, 25. cuius Schoell coll. de l. l. adn. to 125, 8 and pref. p. XXIII: unless more has fallen out, as seemed to me. — 25, 12. Schoell prefers in exili with Schneider. — 26, 20. quam postulavit modus agri Colum. I 4, 6: in whom you might desire agri, but not so in Varro (cf. 26, 19). — 27, 6. I did not wish to discard advertendum, relying on examples such as de l. l. 183, 22 and others. — 27, 8. alescunt with