Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T08:25:36.198Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Correspondence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

L. H. Allen
L. H. Allen
Affiliation:
Sydney Teachers' College
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Correspondence
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 26 , Issue 6 , September 1912 , pp. 206
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1912

References

1 Haupt preferred ‘orbis o piissimei’. Recently M. Saenger in a Russian periodical, while himself proposing ‘inclutissimei,’ cites from Th. Korsch ‘urbis o piissimei.’ Some such modification of Lachmann's conjecture may seem desirable.

1 The words ‘Mamurram,’ ‘vorax’ (bis), ‘comesset,’ ‘elluatus’ all prepare us for the hit in Lamum:—‘devorare’ drives the point home. Cf. also Ovid's ‘Laestrygonis impia tinxit ora cruore suo’ (Metam. XIV. 237). On these ‘Neptuni filii’ see Aul. Gellius, xv. 21.