^{page 289 note 1} Perhaps for sed ditis et auri.

^{page 290 note 1} Perhaps ac structo.

^{page 290 note 2} possint seems to be right, not possunt.

^{page 290 note 3} Conceivably for excetenens or exquitenens, ‘snake holder’ (excetra).

^{page 290 note 4} Perhaps for tragici.

^{page 291 note 1} The letter after see is doubtful; possibly it is n altered to v. Can the right reading be scaeuasque togatos = Roman Scaevas, such as Lucan has immortalized in Book vi. of the Pharsalia?

^{page 291 note 2} Possibly for Indutusque (accus. plural).

^{page 291 note 3} Perhaps for Haec = hae.

^{page 291 note 4} i.e. Pernoctemque.

^{page 291 note 5} Probably for Aer et poto.