BOOK I CH. XXxI § 84. 189

the 2nd person was merely indefinite ‘to confess one’s ignorance’: cf. for a similar change from the Ist to the 3rd, § 122 utilitatum suarum.
an—sapientia: ‘Or (am I mistaken in supposing you to be dissatisfied with your position?) do you really believe God to be a man like you or me? That is impossible. Then am I to call the sun or moon God? But you Epicureans have yourselves shown that the divine attributes of happiness and wisdom are incompatible with such deities’. :
trunco: ‘a senseless block’, contrasted with man’s powers of feeling and motion, as in Lael. 48, where see Seyffert, and Juv. vir 53 trunco Her- mae with Mayor's n.
haec vestra: this may refer to such passages as the criticism on Zeno § 36 rebus tnanimis et mutis.
§ 85. visu: cf. § 12 n. and Ruhnken on Patere. 1 94. On the omis- sion of the verb, see § 68 n.
tali aliquo: if the reading is right, this must refer to the heavenly bodies just mentioned, but I prefer Heind.’s alio aliquo.
quod—ita: see above on zstud—ita.
hoc loco: see § 13 n. and § 76. It is equivalent here to the in hujus modi sermone of § 61.
omnia sigilla: ‘even the least images’, not merely statuettes, but emblems on rings or other ornaments.
Epicurum—deos sustulisse: this is asserted by Posidonius below § 123, cf. Plut. M. p. 1102 B, 1112 p.
reliquisse : ¢ol/ere is regularly opposed to relinguere in the Academica, as dvaipetv to drodeimew in Sext. Emp., Philodemus and elsewhere. verbis —re: cf. § 16.
itaque: the particle properly refers to the sentence beginning zn hac ita exposita, to which this should have been subordinated. For exx. of similar looseness of construction, which makes two separate and inde- pendent sentences out of the protasis and apodosis of a compound sen- tence, and yet leaves the original introductory particle in the protasis, see etenim § 91, nam § 93, and Madv. Fin. 1 18, where censet enim properly refers to ctaque attulit in the next sentence.
kuplas dd€as ‘articles of belief’ see § 45 quod beatumn. In Fin. 11 20