^{page 380 note 1} Cf. Enk's, edition (Zutphaniae, 1918), ii. 17 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 380 note 2} The older editors took iubent as having some subject like utnatores understood. This is quite in Grattius' manner (uetant 58; iussere 90).

^{page 380 note 3} Enk candidly admitted ‘non tamen nego earn (interpretationem) satis duram esse’; Verdière adopts the same explanation in his edition (Wetteren, n.d.) and finds it ‘extrêmement simple’.

^{page 380 note 4} This rare use as a substantive may be imitated from Lucretius (4. 186 and 2. 313; cf. also Livy 8. 3. 6; Silius i. 682). Iubeo with a non-personal subject may be paralleled (e.g.) by facies aetasque iubebat, Ov.Met. 7. 716.

^{page 380 note 5} J. W., and Duff, A. M. (Minor Latin Poets, London 1934, p. 153),Google Scholar if I am not mistaken, are wrong in ascribing to C. Barthius the view that limbus (sing.) mean the ‘head-line’ or from which the net was suspended, while limbi (plur.) means the ‘yarns’ spun to make the headline; and they have misled Capponi on this point. This was the view suggested by Vlitius in his diffuse note ad loc. Barthius thought the head-line or limbus (sing.) was attached to the rectangular cordage of the net (limbi, plur.), through which the headline passed at the margin of the net. One may be prepared to admit that, if limbus meant a ‘yarn’, the plural limbi could well mean the rope spun from several yarns (cf. the variation of meaning for aedes in singular and plural). But the reverse seems quite unnatural. Limbus means ‘a margin’, and, as the head-line was affixed to the edge of a net, it seems a suitable word for the meaning ‘headline’. There is no evidence, however, that the word was used in this meaning, and Isidore (Orig. 19. 5. 1) tells us that plagae was the word used for ‘head-lines’.

^{page 381 note 1} I admit there is no authority for this meaning, but it does seem to be required by the logic of the passage under discussion.

^{page 381 note 2} Isidore (Orig. 19. 4. 4) defines tormentum as a great nautical ‘cable’—hence it seems most unsuitable to describe the incredibly fine lines used for hunting nets (cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 19. 11).Google Scholar Verdière (ad Gratt. 26 [40]) copies Enk's wrong reference to Isidore and tries to refute Isidore's definition without reading it. Capponi can hardly be right in thinking tormento means torquendo: torquendo was the natural way to express ‘by twisting’ and it suits the metre.

^{page 381 note 3} All the relevant passages will be found in Cyn. 2. 4–5.Google Scholar

^{page 381 note 4} Grattius is fond of distributive numerals: bina (?) 470; quinos 147; senos 29; uicenos 31.

^{page 381 note 5} I assume that Grattius is describing nets for hunting the hare, and that accordingly he is treating of the types of net that ‘Xenophon’ mentions in the second chapter of the Cynegeticus. This seems to follow from the rough equality in the greatest lengths of long-nets which they prescribe (40 doublepaces = 200 feet approx. [Gratt. 31] and 30 fathoms = 180 feet approx. [Xen, . Cyn. 2. 5]).Google Scholar

^{page 381 note 6} s and n confused in A: se for ni (311).

^{page 381 note 7} r and n confused in A: uiro for uino (415). For confusion of r, s, and n in the (at least) partly parallel transmission of the Halieutica ascribed to Ovid, see p. 5 of my edition (London, 1962).