BOOK I CH. XXVIII § 77. 179

R. P. 1 4 quam contrectationes et amores soluti et liberi! so contrecto fre- quently.
eam esse causam—putaremus. Madyv. thinks that this clause was added by a reader who misunderstood the construction mirum si (?) and it has accordingly been bracketed by later editors. The objections as stated by Sch. Opusc. 111 317 foll. are (1) that it is superfluous in sense; we had already been told that man’s self-admiration was one of the grounds of anthropomorphism ; (2) that in reading the sentence, we naturally take sz as depending on mzrum, and it causes an awkward surprise when we find that it is intended for the protasis of the sentence; (3) that the sequence of tenses is violated by putaremus after esse. Kl. (Adn. Crit. 111 7) defends the Mss reading, and I am inclined to think he is right. The clause may be superfluous in reference to what precedes, but if we look to the follow- ing sentence, we shall see that it is needed in order to explain the intro- duction of si ratio esset. Cicero is seeking to prove that the reason why man attributes his own form to the gods whom he worships, is because he, in common with other animals, loves his own form best; and he pro-. ceeds to argue that this common incident of animal nature would, if acted upon by reason, lead the other animals each to glorify (plurimum tribu- turas) his own nature in like manner, cf. the passage from Xenophanes quoted below. If there is any corruption in the text, one might suggest the loss of a sentence referring to the 8rd reason for anthropomorphism (domicilium mentis). At present this is passed over without notice, and