Professor Postgate (C.Q. XI. 169) speaks of ‘the regrettable silence of the principal editors of Plautus upon the subject.’ As a minor editor, I beg to defend my colleagues by pointing out that the scansions dĭŭtíus and dyūtius are subject of a note in Dziatzko's and Hauler's editions of the Phormio of Terence (on line 182) and in the Plautus Report in Bursian of 1879 (p. 70). Also that a reference to the index of my larger edition of the Captiui (Methuen, 1900) will show that the word is discussed in my section on Prosody (p. 27): ‘The same doubt exists regarding the scansion of diutius (e.g. Trin. 685), the by-form (equivalent to a dactyl dῖutius or to a proceleusmatic dĭŭtĭŭs) of the fuller form dĭūtĭŭs (Rud. 93).’