…vel quod res omnes timide gelideque ministrat, dilator, † spe longus, iners avidusque futuri, diffcilis, querulus… I agree with Brink, and other editors referred to by him ad loe, that spe longus in Horace's description of the typical old man's character cannot be made to give sense. For earlier attempts at emendation, see Brink's note . Most of those who have tried to emend the passage concentrate on longus, and are reluctant to relinquish spe: this is largely due to the (...) parallel with Aristotle's account of the character of old men in Rhetoric 2. 13. 1389b 13ff., in which they are said to be, among other things it seems to me that this parallel should not be pressed too far. There is much in Aristotle that is not in Horace, and nothing to suggest close and detailed dependence. The parallel can only be relevant if spe longus can be turned into a reasonable Latin equivalent for Otherwise there is no good reason to suppose that spe is any less likely to be corrupt than longus. (shrink)

This volume presents new texts of Cicero's dialogues on political philosophy, De Re Publica and De Legibus, together with corrected versions of the editor's previously published editions of Cato Maior de Senectute and Laelius de Amicitia. The texts are based on a full reconsideration of the manuscript evidence and are presented in a clear and readable form.

J P Powell; On Learning to be Original, Witty, Flexible, Resourceful etc, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 2, Issue 1, 30 May 2006, Pages 43–49, https.

The beginning of the seventy-sixth poem of Catullus appears to cause some modern readers considerable dismay. One may instance the reactions of R. O. A. M. Lyne: ‘Our first reaction to the beginning of this poem may be one of incredulity’ ; ‘The effect of such language is to imply an outrageous and implausible self-righteousness’ ; of K. Quinn: ‘a self-righteousness that makes us feel a little uncomfortable’ ; or of G. Williams: ‘this is sheer melodrama, a deft and surprising (...) reversal of “count your blessings”’; and, further down, on ‘si vitam puriter egi’: ‘This could be simply priggish or outrageous or both, but he does not mean it as a general statement’. (shrink)

I begin by listing those manuscripts older than 1100 that have hitherto been known to editors.

During the months before and after he saw Julius Caesar assassinated on the Ides of March, 44 BC, Cicero wrote two philosophical dialogues about religion and theology: On the Nature of the Gods and On Divination. This book brings to life his portraits of Stoic and Epicurean theology, as well as the scepticism of the new Academy, his own school. We meet the Epicurean gods who live a life of pleasure and care nothing for us, the determinism and beauty of (...) the Stoic universe, itself our benevolent creator, and the reply to both that traditional religion is better served by a lack of dogma. Cicero hoped that these reflections would renew the traditional religion at Rome, with its prayers and sacrifices, temples and statues, myths and poets, and all forms of divination. This volume is the first to fully investigate Cicero's dialogues as the work of a careful philosophical author. (shrink)

Suetonius quotes a number of extracts from Augustus' letters, with the intention of showing that Augustus did not dislike Tiberius as much as some had held, and that he had a high opinion of Tiberius' military qualities. The first of these contains a somewhat vexed textual problem. It reads as follows : Vale, iucundissime Tiberi, et feliciter rem gere, μο κα τας †μουιcαcαιcτ στρατηγν. iucundissime et ita sim felix, vir fortissime et dux νομιμτατε, vale.

It is recognized that Romans of the late Republic did not normally address or refer to one another by praenomen alone. Most instances in which the praenomen is used alone are easily explicable ; either the persons concerned are members of the same family, with names otherwise identical, or the praenomen itself is particularly distinctive and aristocratic.