^{page 178 note 1} Kauer seems to have realized his mistake, for subsequently he distinguished between Jov. and Jov¹. Jov¹, however, does not appear in his edition. (Cf. Mountford, J. F., The Scholia Bembina, London, 1934, p. 118, n. 3.)Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 2} The article was prepared at the request of the late Giorgio Pasquali who intended to include it in a revised edition of his Storia della tradizione e critica del testo. He was unable, however, to revise his work and his second edition is merely a reprint of the first with some general chapters added at the end.

^{page 178 note 3} I quote two of the most important: Amatucci, A., G.I.F. lv (1951), 277–279Google Scholar and Pratesi, A., Doxa iv (1951), 277–279Google Scholar. Perhaps Skutsch will be interested to know that Pratesi in his edition of Terence (Roma 1952) accepts completely the results of my research. He writes in his introduction: ‘il testo della presente edizione si fonda in prevalenza sulla collazione dei manoscritti eseguita dall’ Umpfenbach e dal Kauer. Non così per il Bembino, di cui una revisione totale era imposta dai risultati della recente indagine di Sesto Prete.’

^{page 178 note 4} In Il codice Bembino (p. 13, n. 2) I noted (without realizing that Sabbadini had already done so) that it was possible that the sign indicates the price of the manuscript. In my edition of Terence I quote Sabbadini (Le scoperte dei codici latini e greci ne' secoli xiv e xv, Firenze, 1904, i. 146, n. 33): ‘nella sigla L 14 et … che segue, io vedrei significato il prezzo di acquisto: Libris 14, con la cifra dei soldi cancellata.’ Skutsch suggests this interpretation and adds ‘if I am not mistaken’ as if he were proposing something new, instead of reproducing a solution rejected in my footnote.

^{page 178 note 5} Hobson, G. D., ‘Et amicorum’, The Library, iv (1949), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 179 note 1} Since it has escaped Skutsch's attention I note here that in a miniature in C (f. 54^v) I discovered, written in a very thin 14th-century script, the words ‘vivo burgongne’ which the late Prof. C. R. Morey considered very important for the history of the manuscript.

^{page 179 note 2} I have taken these facts from the Bipontine edition of Terence (Publii Terenti Afri comoediae sex … studiis Societatis Bipontensis, Biponti, 1, xi–xxvii); cf. Jones, L. W. and Morey, C. R., The Miniatures of the Manuscripts of Terence prior to the 13th Century, Princeton, 1930–1931, ii. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 3} It was not easy to find it in the Vatican Library, since the editors, obviously working at second hand, refer to it as H 79. The correct signature is H 19.