De Abusu linguae Graecae

that error. For in it is written that symbolon token or symbolen contribution, and likewise in Latin symbolum and symbolam, is a collection, synagogion gathering, or a collective banquet. But in these few words, whoever is the author of that book lies in many ways. For first, it is false that in Greek symbolon, and it is likewise false that in Latin symbolum, has the same usage as symbolen and symbolam. Then, even if this were granted to him, who will he persuade, or from where will he prove, that symbolen or symbolam is accepted for the collective banquet itself? Certainly, trusting this Lexicon, we will be able to call to apo symbolon deipnon the dinner from contributions a symbolen. But to continue speaking about the noun symbolon, when I was printing my Thesaurus, I examined all the passages that my memory suggested to me or that I had stored in its support, yet I found no example of that meaning, not even in a dream. But in that illustrious Lexicon, it is confirmed by the passage of Terence: "He gave the symbolum, he dined," although ancient codices testify that he wrote symbolam there, as I have said. But another passage of the same poet is also added in the Eunuchus:

"Yesterday several young men met in the Piraeus,
In order that we might dine today from symbolis contributions."

But how, I ask, can this passage provide proof, when symbolis can come from symbola no less than from symbolum?