Abstract

The necessity of emending immundas… dapes in 78 to immundos… pedes has long been recognized, but I argue here that the text is unsatisfactory in three further respects: the difficulties of style, sense, and punctuation in 73–75; diuitiis in 76, wrongly retained by most editors and, when emended, wrongly emended to deliciis; and raros in 77, of which no satisfactory explanation has been offered