^{page 159 note 1} Or, Scandentis.

^{page 160 note 1} Lines 19 and 20 of II. xxx. seem themselves to have been introduced from somewhere else, as in their context they make no sense. Is it possible that ‘non tamen immerito,’ which has been altered to ‘num tu, dare, paras,’ in other MSS. to account for the infinitives, is itself a corruption of ‘non Tanain metuo’ If this were possible, it would account for their addition here, presumably at the bottom of a page, as a quotation illustrating ‘tu licet usque ad Tanain fugias, usque sequetur Amor,’ where D, F, and L have ‘tantam’ for ‘Tanain.’ We should then have to change ‘nunc’ to ‘non’ The corruption might have been facilitated by the recollection of II. vi. 35. ‘Sed non immeiito : ’