BOOK I CH. Xxxv § 98. 205

more easily lost after moribus, but because it makes a better antithesis to simillimis dispares.
suscipimus: cf. suscipienda § 94.
quo serpat: ‘what it leads to’, so m1 51 dla quae tu a caelo ducebas, quam longe serpant ; Niigels. Stil. § 129.
quodsi—obsistis: ‘if you are proof against all these inferences (lit. hold your ground in all these cases), why should you be shaken by the figure only ? i.e. why allow that inference to weigh with you ?
his adjunctis—videbas: ‘you never saw human reason except in connexion with these qualities’.
sortiri, quid loquare : ‘to toss-up what you should say’; cf. Fat. 46 num (atomt) sortiuntur inter se quae declinet, quae non? and Xen. Cyrop. 1 6 46 9 dvOparivn copia ovdév padXAov oid TO Apicrov aipetoOat #) et KAnpov- Pevos, OTL Aaxol, TOUTS Tis TpaTTOL.
§ 99. nisi forte—obstare: ‘unless indeed you have never noticed that whatever is superfluous is mischievous’ (in that case you may have considered, though to little purpose). For the ironical nist forte cf. § 117.
uno digito plus: ‘a single finger too much’, Abl. of Measure. Cf 11 92 sol multts partibus major quam terra, Liv. 117 wno plus Etruscorum cecidit, Roby § 1204. We may understand guam satis est, as often, for the second member of comparison.
quia nec—desiderant: ‘because the five leave no need for (lit. do not miss) another, either in respect of beauty or utility ’.
capite—cruribus: repeating § 92.
si, ut immortalis sit: ‘if he has these limbs (v. subaud. from redundat as from guaeres § 90) in order to make him immortal’; cf. for omission of verb after st, Draeg. § 11913 b, and my n. on § 22.
illa: as usual, of what follows (cerebrum &c.), which are afterwards referred to as haec.
domicilia vitae: ‘the vitals’, so dom. mentis § 75, dom. animi Gell. Xvil 15; cf. Arist. Part. An. 11111 7 xapSia Kat 6 éyképados Kipia pddiora ths Cons.
oris habitus: ‘the general set of the face’, Fin. ut 56 hab. oris et vultus.
vitae firmitatem : ‘vitality’, so we find firm. joined with corporis, capitis, valetudinis.
Ch. xxxvi § 100. et eos vituperabas. The reference is to § 53. For the ‘ et’ endignantis cf. et nune § 91 n.
terras, maria : see § 22 n.
horum insignia: ‘their decorations’, so Lucr.-v 700 calls the sun radiatum insigne diet.
suspicati essent. The Ppf. is used because the action is conceived as anterior to that denoted by the governing verb vituperabas.
206 BOOK I CH. XxxvI § 100.
aberrant a conjectura : ‘miss their aim’. This is the reading of all the mss, but Sch. following Walker omits the preposition, and translates ‘go wrong in their guessing’. In his Opuse. 111 321 and 367 he stoutly maintains (against Wopkens, Heind. and Klotz Adn. Crit. 11 12) that the other reading makes nonsense; and he would therefore correct 12 Phil. 23 nunc, quaeso, attendite num aberret a conjectura suspitio periculi mei, and Att. XIV 22 vereor ne nihil a conjectura aberrem, where Wesenberg keeps the preposition. I have mysclf very little faith in these a@ priori reasonings as to the impossibility of a word acquiring any particular use. It seems to me more improbable that the scribes should in several passages have inserted the preposition, without any inducement that I can see, than that conjectura should come to mean ‘hitting the mark’, as in fact Quintilian says 111 6 30 conjectura dicta est a conjectu, id est, directione quadam rationis ad veritatem, just as conse- quor has come to mean ‘I attain’, as the corresponding cuvinus means ‘1 put things together rightly’, as conjector itself means an ‘interpreter’ or ‘seer’, KI. quotes Plin. Zp. Iv 28 ab imitatione aberrare.
quid sequantur : ‘what leads them to their conclusions’, cf. 12 n. Here again we sce the Stoic.
quod opus tandem. So we find tandem separated from the Interroga- tive in Leg. 19 quod tibi tandem tempus, where see Dumesnil.
et barbati quidem : ‘yes and of a bearded Jupiter’, cf. § 78n. This is a repetition from § 83.
§ 101. quanto melius. For the ellipse of facit see Roby § 1441. It is especially common with words like bene, as in § 121 quanto Stoici melius, Orat. 111 221 quo melius nostri senes; also with Acc., as in Hor. Sat. 12 90 hoc ili recte.
qui tribuant: ‘in assigning’ =ofruves.
qui irridentur Aegyptii : cf. §§ 43, 82, m1 47. Plut. Jf 379 p says that the Egyptians have made religion ridiculous by their worship of animals, and that, in consequence of this, men have fallen either into an irrational superstition or into atheism.
beluam: cf. § 77 n.
ob aliquam utilitatem : Herod. (11 75) asserts this of the ibis; Diog. L. (procem. 11) of animals generally, ra evxpnota taév (dwr Oeods edd€acayr ; Diodorus 1 86 foll. gives various explanations of the worship of animals, e.g. that their images had been originally used as standards in war, but he appears to consider utility the main cause; Plut. l.c. laughs at the story of the transformation of the gods in fear of Typhon, and says the real causes are TO xper@des Kat TO TupBodikov, dv 1a Oarépov, ToAAA & auchoiv perécynke ; as an example of symbolism he notes especially the scarabaeus, and argues that the living symbol, though the resemblance may sometimes be fanciful and far-fetched, is no worse than the mystical emblems of the Greek religion or of the Pythagoreans. So Celsus ap. Orig. 11 19 ‘the Christians deride the Egyptians, but their worship embodies a deep meaning (alviyyara), eray edv didiwy, Kai ox, ds Soxodaw oi moAXol, Cowv epnuepiov Timds eivac