380. Or _de laude Pisonis_. See Baehrens, _Poet. Lat. Min._ iii. 1. For the question of authorship see p. 159.

381. It was long believed that there were eleven, but the last four eclogues of the collection are shown by their style to be of later date, and there can be little doubt that the MSS. which attribute them to Nemesia.n.u.s of Carthage are right. We know of a Nemesia.n.u.s who lived about 290 A.D. and wrote a _Cynegetica_, a portion of which survives.

Comparison with these four eclogues shows a marked resemblance of style.

382. Verg. _Ecl._ vii. 1:

forte sub arguta consederat ilice Daphnis, compulerantque greges Corydon et Thyrsis in unum, Thyrsis oves, Corydon distentas lacte capellas, ambo florentes aetatibus, Arcades ambo, et cantare pares et respondere parati.

Calp. ii. 1:

intactam Crocalen puer Astacus et puer Idas, Idas lanigeri dominus gregis, Astacus horti, dilexere diu, formosus uterque nec impar voce sonans.

The conclusion is borrowed from Vergil, _Ecl._ iii. 108:

non nostrum inter vos tantas componere lites.

et vitula tu dignus et hic et quisquis amores aut metuet dulces aut experietur amaros.

claudite iam rivos, pueri; sat prata biberunt.

Calp. ii. 95-100:

'iam resonant frondes, iam cantibus obstrepit arbos: i procul, o Doryla, rivumque reclude ca.n.a.li et sine iam dudum sitientes irriget hortos'

vix ea finierant, senior c.u.m talia Thyrsis, 'este pares ...'

383. Cp. also v. 50 sqq.

384. See Baehrens, _Poet. Lat. Min._ vol. iii. p. 60. The first poem is unfinished, the award of Midas being missing.

385. Bucheler, _Rhein. Mus._ xxvi. p. 235.

386. So Bucheler, loc. cit. _respexit_ is a mere conjecture: _corrumpit_, the MS. reading, is meaningless, and no satisfactory alternative has been suggested. The lines may merely refer to Apollo, but _et me_ suggests strongly that Ladas retorts, 'I, too, have Caesar's favour.' Cp. _L._ 37, where _hic vester Apollo est!_ clearly refers to Nero.

387. In a MS. at Lorsch, now lost; but used by Sechard for his edition of Ovid, Basle, 1527.

388. In Parisinus 7647 (Florileg.). Sec Baehrens, _P. L. M._ i. p. 222.

389. Tac. _Ann._ xv. 48 'facundiam tuendis civibus exercebat, largitionem adversum amicos et ignotis quoque comi sermone et congressu.'

390. Schol. Vall, _ad Iuv._ v. 109 'in latrunculorum lusu tam perfectus et callidus, ut ad c.u.m ludentem concurreretur.'

391. Cp. ll. 190 sqq.

392. Cp. ll. 190 sqq.

393. Baehrens, _Fragm. Poet. Rom._ p. 281.

394. Priscian, _Gr. Lat._ i. 478.

395. Persius derides a certain Labeo (i. 4) and a writer named Attius (i. 50) for his translation of _Iliad_. On this last pa.s.sage the scholiast says, 'Attius Labeo poeta indoctus fuit illorum temporum, qui Iliadem Homeri foedissime composuit.' The names are found combined in an inscription from Corinth, Joh. Schmidt, _Mitt. des deutsch. archaol.

Inst. in Athen_, vi (1882), p. 354.

396. Schol. _ad Pers._ i. 4 (p. 248, Jahn).

397. Schol. _ad Pers._ i. 4, ex cod. Io. Tillii Brionensis episc., cited by El. Vinetus.

398. Sen. _ad Polyb. de Cons._ viii. 2, and xi. 5.

399. Vualtherus Spirensis Vs. 93. X cent. (ed. Harster, Munich, 1878, p.

22). Eberhard Bethunensis, _Labyr. Tract._ iii. 45.

400. This apparent confusion between Homer and Pindar is first found in Benzo, episc. Albensis (_Monum. Germ._ xi. 599) circa 1087. In Hugo Trimbergensis (thirteenth century) Pindar is the translator: 'Homero, quem Pindarus philosophus fertur transtulisse.' Cp. L. Muller, _Philol._ xv, p. 475. So, too, in Cod. Vat. Reg. 1708 (thirteenth and fourteenth centuries); in Vat. Pal. 1611 (end of fourteenth century), he is styled Pandarus. See Baehrens, _P. L. M._ iii. 4.

401. Seyffert, in Munk, _Geschichte der Rom. Litt._ ii, p. 242.

Bucheler, _Rhein. Mus._ 35 (1880), p. 391.

402. Baehrens (_P. L. M._ iii) reads (7) _ut primum tulerant_ for _ex quo pertulerant_. The corruption is unlikely, especially since the corresponding line in the _Iliad_ (i. 6) begins [Greek: ex ou]. In line 1065, for _quam cernis paucis ... remis_, he reads _remis quam cernis ... paucis_, a distinct improvement. Some of those who retain MSS. in (7) attempt to explain _Italice_ as a vocative or adverb. But _ex nihilo nihil fit_. For a summary of these unprofitable and generally absurd speculations, cp. Schanz, _Gesch. Rom. Lit._ -- 394.

403. Vindobon. 3509 (fifteenth or sixteenth centuries).

404. Mart. vii. 63.

405. Vagellius, Sen. _N.Q._ vi. 2. 9. Antistius Sosia.n.u.s, Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 28. C. Monta.n.u.s, ib. xvi. 28. 29. Lucilius junior, see p. 144.

406. Tac. _Ann._ iv. 46; _C.I.L._ ii. 2093.

407. Dion. lix. 22; Tac. _Ann._ vi. 30.

408. Dion. loc. cit.; Suet. _Claud._ 9.

409. Plin _Ep._ v. 3. 5; Mart. i. praef.

410. Ap. Sid. _Ep._ ii. 10. 6.

411. v. 16; vi. 190, 331; vii. 71, 244, 245, 275, 354; xi. 409.

412. Baehrens, _Poet. Rom. Fragm._ p. 361.

413. Quint, x. 1.96 'at lyricorum Horatius fere solus legi dignus:... si quem adicere velis, is erit Caesius Ba.s.sus, quem nuper vidimus; sed eum longe praecedunt ingenia viventium'.

414. e.g. perhaps Martial, Sulpicia, and some of Pliny's poet friends, see pp. 170 sqq.

415. See p. 80.

416. See Teuffel and Schwabe, _Hist. Rom. Lit._ -- 304; Schanz, _Gesch.

Rom. Lit._ 384 a.

417. Schol. _Pers._ vi. 1.

418. Ithyphallic.u.m, Archebulium, Philicium, Paeonic.u.m, Proceleusmatic.u.m, Molossic.u.m. Baehrens, _Poet. Rom. Fragm._ p. 364.