UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES The Cynegetica of Nemesianus A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DON" MS MARTIN 2 2 8 5 " 11 1017 The Cynegetica of Nemesianus A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By DONNIS MARTIN • I 114 l)| Jl * • 1911 To Prof. C. E. Bennett, of Cornell University, for his kindly interest and many helpful suggestions the author wishes to express sincere thanks. FA 7 INTRODUCTION History of the Manuscripts Only three manuscripts of the Cynegetica of Neme- sianus are in existence. Of these the best is Parisinus 7561, designated as A by Baehrens and Postgate. This MS. belongs to the tenth century. Parisinus 4839, designated as B by Baehrens, is also a manuscript of the tenth century but is so poor that its readings are of little value. The third MS. which we have is Vindobonensis 3261, designated as C by Baehrens, as imperatore, et Rutilii Namatiani elegos." 2 Hence it is evident that Sannazarius brought the Halieutica and the Cynegetica of Grattius and Nemesianus to Italy and from the assertions of Logus they were in the same MS. Wt in the case of the Halieutica and Grattius, Schenkl the Aldine text does not follow the old Vindob. 277 alone.' Against this it a inmany l See Haupt, p. 23. 2 Sre Ilaupi, p. :\. 'op. cit. p. 5 instances with the first copy made by Sannazarius, Vindob. 277, fol. 74-83; in many instances with the second copy, Cod. Vindob. 3261. From this fact Schenkl concludes that Aesiander did not have the old MS. itself but a third copy of it made by Sannazarius, in which the deciphering of the MS. had progressed still farther. Hence it is evident that the words of Logus in regard to the old codex of Sannazarius are not to be trusted. Schenkl adds still another argument against the assumption that Codex Vindob. 277 ever contained the Cynegetica of Nemesianus. This MS. contains at present some verses of the Eucheriae, th e Halieutica, a short epigram (Anth. 391), and the Cynegetica of Grattius. These are arranged in two quaternions, numbered 17 and 18, so that it is evident that part of the MS. has been lost. The Thuaneus contains these same works but preceded by several other selections. By a computation of the pages and lines which have been lost at the beginning of Vindob. 277, and by a compari- son with the contents of the Thuaneus, Schenkl proves that the Paris MS. minus the satires of Juvenal (fol. 2-22) is a copy made from the Vindobonensis when it was complete. 1 Hence it is evident that the quaternions preceding 17 and 18 of Cod. Vindob. 277 did not contain the Cynegetica of Nemesianus; nor could it have followed the Grattius since the worn parchment of the last sheet shows that it has formed for centuries the close of the mutilated codex. But just as Aesiander did not copy the Halieutica and Grattius from the old MS. but from a copy made by Sannazarius, so it was only from a copy that he received the Cynegetica of 'op. cit. 399-400. Nemesianus. This copy which Sannazarius brought from France was probably the same as Cod. Vindob. 3261 and from the similarity of its readings must go back to Parisinus 7561. 1 The Archetype From the fact that certain verses in our MSS. are obviously out of place, Haupt has formed a most plausible theory as to the form of the ancient MS. from which our copies are derived and as to the method by which these transpositions arose. 2 Verse 12 as it stands in the MSS. after verse 24 is clearly out of place. Haupt then supposes that the poem began on the reverse side of a leaf and that the first page contained 23 verses. At the bottom of this page there was written in the margin the verse which should have been placed after verse 1 1 and which had been omitted by the scribe. The opposite page, on the second leaf, contained the same number of verses, so that the total of the two pages was 47 verses. Then the third page, or reverse side of the second leaf, began with verse 48. If this page and the two following contained 25 verses each, the third leaf or fifth page ended with verse 122. This verse is followed in our MSS. by seven verses, 123-9, which are out of place and which in the archetype must have followed verse 230. If we omit these verses here, the fourth leaf or sixth page began with verse 130. From verse 130 to verse 230 there are 101 verses which would have filled four pages with 26 verses on one page, 25 verses on the other three pages. Then in our ancient MS. the tenth page or sixth leaf began with those seven 'See Schcnkl, op. cit. p. 401. 2 S< •<• Haupt, Opusc. 1. 4°4~5- 7 verses, 123-9, followed by verse 231. From this it is evident that the transposition of these verses to their place after verse 122, as in our MSS., must have arisen through the fact that the scribe in copying the old MS. first skipped two leaves of it, the fourth and fifth, and thus inserted the verses in the wrong place. If we count these verses as they were in the archetype, at the beginning of the sixth leaf or tenth page, we have 102 verses left, from verse 224 to verse 325. These remain- ing verses would fill the sixth and seventh leaves with 26 verses on two pages, 25 verses on the other two. Thus verse 325 formed the last verse of the seventh leaf or thirteenth page. If Nemesianus left the poem in an unfinished state, as some have conjectured, we should scarcely expect to find the last leaf of the MS. filled out completely. From this fact Haupt concludes that the other leaves of the MS. were lost and in this way only 325 verses of the Cynegetica have survived. History of the Editions The first edition, as we have already noticed, was the Aldine edition of George Logus in 1534. Upon this were based all the following editions until Haupt issued his edition in 1838 with the collation of Cod. Vindob. 3261. But since the Aldine edition was based either upon this MS. or upon a similar copy by Sannazarius, we find the text of the early editions in a good state, except where it is changed by bold and useless conjec- tures. The Aldine edition was reprinted hastily and with numerous mistakes by H. Steyner at Augsburg in 1534. A second reprint was made by Seb. Gryphius at Lyons in 1537. This edition represented the Aldine more exactly than that of Steyner. The edition of 8 P. Pithoeus in his Epigrammata et poematia uetera, Paris, 1590, marked an advance over previous texts since for the Halieutica and first 159 verses of the Grattius he had made a collation of Parisinus 8071. In 16 13 C. Barth published his Venatici et Bncolici poetae latini. This edition is of interest because in forming his hasty and arbitrary text Barth made use of what he called his editio germamca. Jde describes it thus, "uetustissima editio litteris germanicis siue Longobardicis mauis, excusa, Lipsiae ut arbitror." 1 Again he declares that it is over a century old.' 2 But other than this he gives no definite information about it and even the editors of his own day accused him of inventing this old edition in order to lend authority to his own absurd conjectures. Much superior to the edition of Barth was that of Ulitius, Jani Ulitii uenatio Non-antiqua, ex officina Elzeuir, 1645. It was supplied with copious notes. A similar edition with commentary was published by Thomas Johnson at London in 1699. The notes of Barth, Ulitius, and Johnson were published together in the Poetae latini rei uenaticae scriptores et bucolici antiqiii, Lugd. Batau. et. Hag. Com., 1728. The next edition of the Cynegetica was in the Poetae latini minores of P. Burmann, published at Leyden in 1731, but marked no advance over previous editions. (For an account of these early editions see Stern's edition, p. g IT.) With the edition of J. C. Wernsdorf, Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 1, Altenburg, 1780, we enter upon a new era in the textual history of the Cynegel ica. The c< >n- atism of the text and the scholarly notes make this edition still of worth today. This texl was reprinted 'Calp. Eel. 4. 34- 2 Calp. Eel. 4. 40. 9 by N. E. Lemaire, Paris, 1824, with a few additional notes by the editor. In 1832 another valuable edition of the Cynegetica appeared, Faliscus et Nemesianus by R. Stern. This edition is supplied with a critical apparatus of the old editions. The notes take up the problems of interpretation in a thorough fashion, pre- senting the views of previous editors. Although advance has since been made in establishing a text through the collation of the MSS., this edition of Stern's is still of great worth. The first edition of the Cynegetica to be issued with the collation of a MS. was that of M. Haupt, published at Leipzig in 1838. The collation of Codex Vindob. 3261 put the text on a firmer basis although it was not altered to a large extent. Some years later the two MSS. of the tenth century, Parisinus 7561 and 4839, were discovered by Conrad Bursian at Paris. 1 Both of these MSS. were collated by Baehrens for his text of the Cynegetica in the Poetae Latini Minor es, vol. 3, published in 1881. The most recent text which has appeared is that of J. P. Postgate in the Corpus Poeta- rum Latinorum, Fasc. 5, London 1905. For this text Postgate made use of Parisinus 7561 and of Vindob. 3261, disregarding Parisinus 4839, since its readings are so far inferior to the other two MSS. His text is naturally marked by a greater conservatism than that of Baehrens. The Author The name of the poet is given as a subscription in MS. A: finit m. aurelii nemesiani K artaginiensis cynegeticon. C has at the beginning of the poem, M. Aurelii Nemesiani Carihaginensis cynegeticon. 'See Haupt, Opusc. 1. 403. 10 Hincmar of Rheims, who declares that he studied the Cynegeticon as a school-boy, gives the poet's name simply as Carthaginensis Aurelius: "ut uenatores ferae lustra sequentes agere auditu et lectione puer scolarius in libro qui inscribitur Kynegeticon Cartha- ginensis Aurelii didici." 1 But from other sources we learn that the poet was also called Olympius. The Aldine edition designates him as Marcus Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus. Flavius Vopiscus in the life of Numerian (Script. Hist. August. 30.11) refers to him as Olympius Nemesianus. Lactantius, on Stat. Th. 5. 389 and 2. 58, quotes a certain Olympius. Although we have no works of Nemesianus preserved which contain these passages, it is probable that Lactantius is referring to Nemesianus as Olympius. Hence we may conclude that the poet's complete name was Marcus Aurelius Olympius Nemesianus. Since the poet was evidently a native of Africa Werns- dorf suggested that the cognomen Nemesianus was derived from Nemeseum, a town of Marmarica. Later he preferred to think the name derived from the Nemesii, as Claudianus from the Claudii, Tiberianus from the Tiberii. 2 That there was a family of Nemesii seems probable since the name Nemesius was borne by several martyrs of the second and third century A. D. 3 Whatever the origin of the name Nemesianus may have been, it seems to have been peculiar to Africa. We find it twice in ecclesiastical history, each time borne by an African. Augustine praises a boy by the name of Nemesianus as one of the African martyrs. 4 Anotl •For the complete passage, see Baehrens, P. L. M. 3. 174. n. 'addenda p. 294. 'See the Onomasticon by Vincentius De-Vit. 4 S< rm. 286. 1 1 Nemesianus, Bishop of Thubunas, was present at a counci] which Cyprianus held at Carthage in 256 A.D. concerning baptism. 1 To him and his fellow workers Cyprianus addresses several letters (62, 70, 76). The Nemesiani may well have been an African family of rank and distinction. From the fact that Cams and his sons, to whom the poem is dedicated (v. 63 ff.), each bore the name of Marcus Aurelius, Ulitius suggested that Nemesianus, whose nomen gentile was also Aurelius, was connected by some bond of relationship with the Caesars. But the evidence is too slight to support such a supposition. In regard to the life of the poet we have little knowl- edge beyond the fact that he was a native of Carthage. This fact, as we have seen, is attested by the MSS. and by the words of the Bishop Hincmar. Moreover we find in the poem itself evidence that Nemesianus lived in Africa. From the passage (vv. 76-85) in which he expresses his desire to behold the victorious emperors, Carinus and Numerian, it is evident that he is not at Rome. In verses 251-2, he refers to the Spaniards as the people lying beyond the lofty peak of Calpe. From this it is clear that the poet was in Africa or he could not have said trans ardua Calpes culmina. That Nemesianus during his life time was known for his poetical ability is shown by the fact that he con- tended in a poetical contest with Numerian, son of Cams, who was himself famous as a poet and orator. Thus Vopiscus says of Numerian: "uersu autem talis fuisse praedicatur, ut omnes poetas sui temporis uicerit. Nam et cum Olympio Nemesiano contendit, qui iXteuTtxd JtuviJYeTHcd: et vauTtftd: scripsit inque omni- •See Cypr. Sententiae Episcoporum. 12 bus colonis inlustratus emicuit." Of the works of Nemesianus to which Vopiscus refers, we have only 325 verses of the Cynegetica. Whether he also wrote Halieutica and Nautica is a matter of doubt since we have only the statement of Vopiscus as evidence. Baehrens would change the reading nautica to pontica with reference to the Incerti Ponticon Praefatio, P. L. M. 3. 32, which he thinks may be the work of Nemesianus. Bernhardy proposed ixeutica as a reading instead of nautica. 1 Nemesianus would then have written, as Oppian before him, Cynegetica, Halieutica, and Ixeutica. This conjecture of Bernhardy's rests upon the fact that some verses de aucupio have come down to us under the name of Nemesianus. Gybertus Longolius in his dialogue on birds (coloniae excudebat Jo. Gymnicus a. 1544) writes: "Nemesiani poetae authoritas, qui de aucupio Latinis uersibus conscripsit, me in hanc sententiam perduxit (tetracem esse urogal- lum) . descripserat autem furtim in bibliotheca porcorum Saluatoris Bononiensis uersus aliquot Hieronymus Boragineus Lubecensis, magnae spei adolescens, cum quo Bononiae et Ferrariae aliquandiu communi uita uixi: ex eis ego quosdam cum opus erit historia, tibi recitabo." Longolius then quotes 18 verses from Nemesianus on the tetrax and later gives 10 verses con- cerning the scolopax. These verses follow the Cyi tica in Baehrens' P. L. M. 3. p. 203 and Postgate's C. P. L. Fasc. 5. p. 572. Longolius' statement as to the manner in which he obtained tin S lias arou ed distrust and editors have varied in their opinions as to the authorship. Max Ilmi, Rhein. Mas. 52. 45;, pre- sents the following arguments in favor <»f Nemesianus 'Grundrisz d. Rom. Lit. 3 500. 13 as author: there is nothing in the verses de aucupio which might not be attributed to a poet of the third century; an archaism as contemplauerit (v. 3) may be compared with ollis (Cyn. 264) and mage (Cyn. 317); the elision of a long vowel, as in verses 5,6,14,27, is not strange since instances of the same occur in the Cyne- getica and Eclogues; there are reminiscences of Vergil and other poets such as are found in the other works of Nemesianus; finally there are resemblances to the Cynegetica and the Eclogues. Of the passages which Ihm cites the only two which display much similarity are v. 21, praeda est facilis and Cyn. 184, faciles ut sumere praedas. Yet as far as can be judged from these few verses de aucupio, it is quite probable that they are the work of Nemesianus. Date of Composition of the Cynegetica We do not know when Nemesianus was born nor when he died but from internal evidence we are able to date the composition of the Cynegetica. From the dedication of the poem (w. 60-85) to the sons of Cams, Numerian and Carinus, it is evident that Carus was not alive at the time or the poet would have sung of his achievements instead of those of his sons. The Emperor Carus died in the midst of his Persian cam- paign, Dec. 25, 283 A.D. 1 Numerian, who had accom- panied his father, led the army in retreat and by slow marches returned from the banks of the Tigris to those of the Thracian Bosphorus. Here the army discovered that Numerian had been made away with by Arrius Aper. A general assembly was held at Chalcedon and 'See w. 63-85. n. 14 Diocletian was proclaimed Emperor, Sept. 17, 284 A.D. 1 It was then in the course of these eight months, from the death of Cams to the death of Numerian, that Nemesianus composed his Cynegetica. It is evident that he knows of the victories of Carus in Persia 2 and of his death. 3 But Carinus and Numerian must have both been alive when he wrote these verses for he pic- tures their return to Rome in triumph after their many victories. Wernsdorf thought that the space of time intervening between the death of Carus and that of Numerian was too short for the composition of such a work as the Cynegetica. 4 From the statement of Vopiscus that Nemesianus had written Cynegetica, Halieutica, and Nautica, Wernsdorf considered it impossible that Nemesianus left the poem in an unfinished state after learning of the death of Numerian. For the Halieutica and Nautica, he argues, are the minor parts of hunting and the poet would not have taken up those themes until the Cynegetica was finished. Moreover the words of Vopiscus indicate that it was the poet's fame, derived from these works, which led Numerian to vie with him in a poetical contest. Hence Wernsdorf concludes that the Cynegetica must have been written during the life- time of Carus ; that after his death Nemesianus added this part of the exordium in praise of Carinus and Numerian and that the poem was then published before the death of Numerian was reported. Stern supports the conclusions of Wernsdorf by observing that these dedicatory verses break the continuity of thought in the introduction and that their style is distinctly different ■See Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire 1. .U8-49. *See 71 f. n. 'Sec 64. n. 'See Excursus 1. 15 from the rest of the poem. 1 But he fails to prove either assertion. It is absurd to think that Nemesianus would have introduced these verses into the poem after he had already become famous as its author, as Werndorf suggests. There is no reason to assume that Nemesia- nus was already known as the author of the Cynegetica when he matched his skill against that of Numerian. Vopiscus wrote after the death of Nemesianus 2 and naturally named the most important works of his life. There is then no reason to believe that the rest of the poem was composed earlier than the dedicatory verses. It is evident that the poem as it stands is in an unfinished state. In verse 237 the poet promises to relate later in detail the characteristics of certain dogs. But the poem breaks off after a description of the hunting nets without touching upon this subject. Moreover we may note that the length of the exordium, 102 verses, is entirely out of proportion to the rest of the poem. But we may feel sure that Nemesianus did not leave the poem incomplete or Vopiscus would not have mentioned it among his literary achievements. As to how long the poem was originally we can only conjecture. In the 325 verses which we have, the poet treats of the dogs, horses, nets and hunting equipment. He seems on the point of taking up the chase proper when the poem closes. From this we may infer that the entire poem did not embrace over 700 or 800 verses and it is quite possible that a poem of this length could have been written and published within eight months. 1 See pp. 31-3. 2 Note the tense in the words "inque omnibus colonis inlustratus emicuit." 16 The Eclogues of Nemesianus In addition to the Cynegetica four Eclogues, found in the MSS. which contain the seven Eclogues of Cal- purnius, are considered the work of Nemesianus. The earliest editions assigned all of these Eclogues to Calpurnius until Angelus Ugoletus, in an edition printed at Parma about the year 1500, assigned the last four to Nemesianus. This edition claimed to be based upon an old MS. of Thadaeus Ugoletus, brought from Germany, which gave as the heading to the first seven Eclogues: Titi Calpurnii Siculi Bucolicv.m carmen ad Nemesianum K arthaginensem incipit; and to the last four Eclogues: Aurelii Nemesiani Poetae cartagincnsis Aegloga prima incipit. The Codex Gaddianus, of the fifteenth century, has also the heading: Atireliar.i Nemesiani Carthag. eel. IIII. Finally the Neapolitan MS., which is one of the best, has no inscription but the subscription: Aureliani Nemesiani Cartag. bucol. explicit. The testimony of these MSS. gave rise to the theory that the last four Eclogues were the work of Nemesianus. The dedication of the Eclogues of Cal- purnius to Nemesianus as in the edition of Ugoletus and in some of the MSS. probably arose through a confusion of the subscription to the Eclogues of Calpurnius with the title to those of Nemesianus. The question as to the authorship of the last four Eclogues seems to have been definitely decided by the treatise of M. Haupt, De carminibus Bucolicis < 'alpurnii et Nemesiani, 1S54 (Opusc. 1. 358). By his invesl tions Haupt has shown a number of ess ntial differences between ihe first seven Ecl< md the lasl four. Calpurnius shortens final only in agreemenl with classical usage, as puio 6. 83, nescio 1. 21. Bui in the 17 Eclogues assigned to Nemesianus there are several bold uses of this metrical license as exspecto (2. 26), ambo (2. 17), coniungo (3. 14), mulcendo (1. 53). In the Eclogues of Calpurnius there are but eight elisions; in those of Nemesianus there are thirty-nine. Cal- purnius does not elide a long vowel and even short ones are usually elided only in the first foot. On the other hand, in the last four Eclogues half of the elisions occur in feet other than the first and there are a few instances of the elision of a long vowel (1. 21 ; 2. 14, 32). In the Eclogues of Calpurnius the caesura occurs frequently after the second syllable of a dactyl in the fourth foot, while in the Eclogues of Nemesianus this caesura is found only six times. These metrical dissimilarities make it evident that the eleven Eclogues are not the work of the same author. Furthermore the last four Eclogues contain obvious imitations of the Eclogues of Calpurnius. This imitation is not such as would indi- cate an identity of authorship but verses and even couplets are taken entire from the first seven Eclogues. (Cf. Calp. 3. 56 ff., Nemes. 2. 37 ff. ; Calp. 3.61, Nemes. 2. 78; Calp. 2. 88, Nemes. 2. 74; Calp. 2. i, Nemes. 2. 1.) A poet would scarcely repeat himself in such a fashion as this, while, from the extent to which Neme- sianus in his Cynegetica imitated the third Georgic of Vergil, it would not be strange if in his pastoral poetry he borrowed to such an extent from another. From the agreement of the Cynegetica with the four Eclogues in question, in the very points in which these Eclogues differ from those of Calpurnius, it seems still more probable that they are the work of Nemesianus. Final o is shortened in cano(i), devotio(S^), exerceto (187) . The caesura after the fourth trochee occurs more fre- 18 quently than in the Eclogues but only 13 times in the 325 verses. There are 39 elisions in the Eclogues, 51 in the Cynegetica. Schenkl has shown (Praef. p. 31) that in the character of the elisions also there is agree- ment between the Cynegetica and the Eclogues. Of the elisions in the Eclogues those of que amount to 56 per cent, in the Cynegetica 45 per cent. In the Eclogues 92.5 per cent of the elided syllables are short, in the Cynegetica 94 per cent. The elisions of a short e number 82 per cent in the Eclogues, 79 per cent in the Cynegetica. 44 per cent of the elisions in the Eclogues are in the first foot, 41 per cent in the Cynegetica. Apart from the metrical similarities, there is other evidence which supports the conclusion that Nemesianus is the author of these four Eclogues. In the third Eclogue (23) where Pan is singing the praises of Bacchus these words occur: "hunc pater omnipotens uenturi prouidus aeui — pertulit, et iusto produxit tempore partus." In the Cynegetica similar verses are found (19) : "ut pater omnipotens maternos reddere menses — dignatus iusti complerit tempora partus." Both pas- sages are an imitation of Statius, Th. 7. 166: "cui tu dignatus limina uitae — praereptumque uterum et maternos reddere menses. ' ' Other imitations of Statius occur in these Eclogues and in the Cynegetica while none occur in the Eclogues of Calpurnius. 1 The unusual expression lactis fluores which occurs in the Cynegetica (220) is found also in the third Eclogue (67). There are other expressions also which by their simi- larity of phrasing betoken the work of the same author: Eel. 3. 60. non acquis uiribus Cyn. 182. non uiribus aequis 'Haupt considers Wernsdorf wrong in comp arin g 4. 87 with Stat. Silv. 5. 1. 11. '9 Eel. i. 12. hilares .... amores Cyn. i. hilaresque labores Eel. 4. 6. totis discurrere siluis Cyn. 49. totisque citi discurrimus aruis quin ei and quin etiam, which occur so frequently in the Cynegetica as to be displeasing, are found in the Eclo- gues of Nemesianus (3. 27, 63 ; 2.74) but not in those of Calpurnius. Other Writers of Cynegetica Nemesianus was preceded by four writers of Cynege- tica, three of whom were Greek and one, Roman. The earliest treatise on hunting is the one ascribed to Xenophon, but between this and the poem of Nemesia- nus there is very little resemblance. Because Xeno- phon, in his Cynegeticus, failed to treat of the grey- hound, Arrian of Nicomedia, who lived at the beginning of the second century A.D., wrote a treatise devoted entirely to coursing with the greyhound. 1 This work was intended, as Arrian tells us, as a supplement to the Cynegeticus of Xenophon. Although Nemesianus is the only other of the cynegetical writers who has a knowledge of coursing, strangely enough he has not imitated Arrian, the first writer of a courser's manual. A much larger debt he owes to Oppian, author of a poem on hunting in four books, who lived in the time of Caracalla. In expression and in subject matter, the poem of Nemesianus resembles especially the first book of Oppian's Cynegetica. Nemesian's predecessor in the writing of Latin Cynegetica was Grattius, under whose name 541 verses 'See note on verse 182 fl. 20 of a poem on hunting have been preserved. That this work was known during the classical period is attested by Ovid's reference to Grattius, Pont. 4. 16. 34. G. Curcio places the date of its publication between 19 B. C. and 17 A. D. 1 The question as to how much Nemesianus owes to Grattius, as his only Latin prede- cessor, is an interesting one and has been thorouglily investigated by Curcio, Rivistadi. Fit. 27. p. 447. This subject had been previously considered by M. Fiegl 2 who noted several passages in the Cynegetica of Nemesianus as imitations of Grattius. Curcio rightly judges that these passages fail to prove such imitation. There is practically no similarity of diction and the similarity of thought is only such as we would expect to find in two poems treating of the same subject. Curcio notes the fact that the arrangement of the material in the Cynegetica of Nemesianus is exactly the reverse of that of Grattius; that in the many breeds of dogs and horses which Grattius names and in his careful charac- terization of them he displays a much larger special knowledge than Nemesianus. Furthermore, if we compare the technical terms which each poet has used, in regard to the nets, the breeding and the care of the dogs, medicinal aids for the rabies, etc., it will be seen that there is not the slightest similarity between the language of the two poets. In each instance Grattius is more full in his instructions, in the use of technical terms but less polished and poetical than Nemesianus. A close study of the two poems shows such wide diver- 'Rivista di. Fil. 26. p. 57. ■Dea Gratius Fal. Cynegetica, seine V' t und Nachfolgcr, Gorz 1890. Unfortunately I have not been able to obtain this work. 2 1 gences in style and treatment that we may well doubt whether Nemesianus even knew of the Cynegetica of Grattius. He may be sincere when he declares that he enters upon a new field and treads the untouched moss (w. 8-1 1). The Third Georgic of Vergil Nemesianus is much more indebted to Vergil than to any of the writers of Cynegetica. For that part of the Cynegetica which has come down to us, he evidently chose as his model the third Georgic of Vergil. How closely he followed this model may be seen from a com- parison of the two poems. Each poet expresses his scorn of dealing with the trite themes of mythology (G. 3-8; Cyn. 15-47). Each exults that he is to sing of a new and rustic theme and predicts the glory which he will win in essaying this new path (G. 8-12, 291-3; Cyn. 1-15). Each promises that in the future he will gird himself to sing of a loftier theme, Vergil the vic- tories of Caesar, Nemesianus those of Numerian and Carinus (G. 46-8; Cyn. 63 ft). The subject matter of the third Georgic is similar to that of the Cynegetica since it deals with the care of the cattle and flocks with a few words on the care of the dogs. Hence Nemesianus found ample material for imitation. He follows Vergil in the description of the good points of a horse (G. 79-88; Cyn. 243-50); in the comparison of the fleet- ness of the horse with the north wind (G. 196-201; Cyn. 272-8). In the few words which Vergil devotes to the care of the dogs and the pleasures of hunting, the resemblance to the more extensive treatment of the Cynegetica is apparent (G. 404-13; Cyn. 103-237). 22 Other than these general points of similarity we find constantly, throughout the Cynegetica, words and phrases borrowed from the third Georgic. Many of these parallel passages are cited in the notes on the Cynegetica and make it apparent to what a large extent this poem is a copy of Vergilian thought and diction. 23 M. AURELII OLYMPII NEMESIANI CYNEGETICA Venandi cano mille uias hilaresque labores discursusque citos, securi proelia ruris, pandimus. Aonio iam nunc mihi pectus ab oestro aestuat: ingentes Helicon iubet ire per agros, Castaliusque mihi noua pocula fontis alumno 5 ingerit et late campos metatus apertos imponitque iugum uati retinetque corymbis implicitum ducitque per auia, qua sola numquam trita rotis. iuuat aurato procedere curru et parere deo. uirides en ire per herbas 10 imperat : intacto premimus uestigia musco ; et, quamuis cursus ostendat tramite noto obuia Calliope faciles, insistere prato complacitum, rudibus qua luceat orbita sulcis. nam quis non Nioben numeroso funere maestam 15 iam cecinit? quis non Semelen ignemque iugalem letalemque simul nouit de paelicis astu? quis magno recreata tacet cunabula Baccho, ut pater omnipotens maternos reddere menses dignatus iusti complerit tempora partus? 20 sunt qui sacrilego rorantes sanguine thyrsos (nota nimis) dixisse uelint, qui uincula Dirces Pisaeique tori legem Danaique cruentum imperium sponsasque truces sub foedere primo 24 dulcia funereis mut antes gaudia taedis. 25 Biblidos indictum nulli scelus; impia Myrrhae conubia et saeuo uiolatum crimine patrem nouimus, utque Arabum fugiens cum carperet arua. init in arboreas frondes animamque uirentem. sunt qui squamosi referant fera sibila Cadmi 30 stellatumque oculis custodem uirginis Ius Herculeosque uelint semper numerare labores miratumque rudes se tollere Terea pinnas post epulas, Philomela, tuas; sunt ardua mundi qui male temptantem curru Phaethonta loquantur 35 extinctasque canant emisso fulmine flammas fumantemque Padum, Cycnum plumamque senilem et flentes semper germani funere siluas. Tantalidum casus et sparsas sanguine mensas condentemque caput uisis Titana Mycenis 40 horrendasque uices generis dixere priores. Colchidos iratae sacris imbuta uenenis munera non canimus pulchraeque incendia Glauces, non crinem Nisi, non saeuae pocula Circes, nee nocturna pie curantem busta sororem : 45 haec iam magnorum praecepit copia uatum, omnis et antiqui uulgata est fabula saecli. nos saltus uiridesque plagas camposque patentes scrutamur totisque citi discurrimus amis et uarias cupimus f acili cane sumere praedas ; 50 nos timidos lepores, imbelles figere dammas audacesque lupos, uulpem captare dolosam gaudemus; nos flumineas errare per umbras 25 malumus et placidis ichneumona quaerere ripis inter harumlineas segetes felemque minacem 55 arboris in trunco longis praefigere telis implicitumque sinu spinosi corporis erem ferre domuni; talique placet dare lintea curae, dum non magna ratis, uicinis sueta moueri litoribus tutosque sinus percurrere remis, 60 nunc primum dat uela Notis portusque fideles linquit et Hadriacas audet temptare procellas. mox uestros meliore lyra memorare triumphos accingar, diui fortissima pignora Cari, atque canam nostrum geminis sub finibus orbis 65 litus et edomitas fraterno numine gentes, quae Rhenum Tigrimque bibunt Ararisque remotum principium Nilique uident in origine fontem; nee taceam primum quae nuper bella sub Arcto felici, Carine, manu confeceris, ipso 70 paene prior genitore deo, utque intima f rater Persidos et ueteres Babylonos ceperit arces, ultus Romulei uiolata cacumina regni; imbellemque fugam referam clausasque pharetras Parthorum laxosque arcus et spicula muta. 75 haec uobis nostrae libabunt carmina Musae, cum primum uultus sacros, bona numina terrae, contigerit uidisse mihi. iam gaudia uota temporis impatiens sensus spretorque morarum praesumit uideorque mihi iam cernere fratrum 80 augustos habitus, Romam clarumque senatum et fidos ad bella duces et milite multo 26 agmina, quis fortes animat deuotio mentes. aurea purpureo longe radiantia uelo signa micant sinuatque truces leuis aura dracones. 85 tu modo, quae saltus placidos siluasque pererras, Latonae, Phoebe, magnum decus, heia age suetos sume habitus arcumque manu pictamque pharetram suspende ex umeris, sint aurea tela, sagittae; Candida puniceis aptentur crura coturnis, 90 sit chlamys aurato multum subtemine lusa conrugesque sinus gemmatis balteus artet nexibus, implicitos cohibe diademate crines. tecum Naiades faciles uiridique iuuenta pubentes Dryades Nymphaeque, unde amnibus umor, 95 adsint et docilis decantet Oreadas Echo, due age, diua, tuum frondosa per auia uatem : te sequimur, tu pande domos et lustra ferarum. hue igitur mecum, quisquis percussus amore uenandi damnas lites avidosque tumultus 100 ciuilesque fugis strepitus bellique fragores nee praedas auido sectaris gurgite ponti. Principio tibi cura canum non segnis ab anno incipiat primo, cum Ianus, temporis auctor, pandit inocciduum bissenis mensibus aeuum. 105 elige tunc cursu facilcm facilemque recursu, seu Lacedaemonio natam seu rure Molosso, non humili de gente canem. sit cruribus altis, sit rigidis, multamque trahat sub pectore lato costarum sub fine decenter prona carinam, no 27 quae sensim rursus sicca se colligat aluo, renibus ampla satis ualidis diductaque coxas, cuique nimis molles fluitent in cursibus aures. huic parilem summitte marem, sic omnia magnum, dum superant uires, dum laeto flore iuuentas 115 corporis et uenis primaeuis sanguis abundat. namque graues morbi subeunt segnisque senectus inualidamque dabunt non firmo robore prolem. sed diuersa magis feturae conuenit aetas: tu bis uicenis plenum iam mensibus acrem 1 20 in uenerem permitte marem; sit femina, binos quae tulerit soles, haec optima cura iugandi. mox cum se bina formarit lampade Phoebe ex quo passa marem genitalia uiscera turgent, fecundos aperit partus matura grauedo 125 continuo largaque uides strepere omnia prole, sed, quamuis auidus, primos contemnere partus malueris; mox non omnes nutrire minores. nam tibi si placitum populosos pascere fetus, iam macie tenues sucique uidebis inanes 130 pugnantesque diu, quisnam prior ubera lambat, distrahere inualidam lassato uiscere matrem. sin uero haec cura est, melior ne forte necetur abdaturue domo, catulosque probare uoluntas, quis nondum gressus stabiles neque lumina passa 135 Luciferum uidere iubar, quae prodidit usus percipe et intrepidus spectatis annue dictis. pondere nam catuli poteris perpendere uires corporibusque leues grauibus praenoscere cursu. 28 quin et flammato ducatur linea longe 140 circuitu signetque habilem uapor igneus orbem, irapune ut medio possis consistere circo : hue omnes catuli, hue indiscreta feratur turba: dabit mater partus examen, honestos iudicio natos seruans trepidosque periclo. 145 nam postquam conclusa uidet sua germina flammis, continuo saltu transcendens feruida zonae uincla, rapit rictu primum portatque cubili, mox alium, mox deinde alium. sic conscia mater segregat egregiam subolem uirtutis amore. 150 hos igitur genetrice simul iam uere sereno molli pasce sero (passim nam lactis abundans tempus adest, albent plenis et ouilia mulctris), interdumque cibo Cererem cum lacte ministra, fortibus ut sucis teneras complere medullas 155 possint et ualidas iam tunc promittere uires. sed postquam Phoebus candentem feruidus axem contigerit tardasque uias Cancrique morantis sidus init, tunc consuetam minuisse saginam profuerit tenuesque magis retinere cibatus, 160 ne grauis articulos deprauet pondere moles, nam turn membrorum nexus nodosque relaxant infirmosque pedes et crura natantia ponunt, tunc etiam niueis armantur dentibus ora. sed neque conclusos teneas neque uincula collo 165 impatiens circumdederis noceasque futuris cursibus imprudens. catulis nam saepe remotis aut uexare trabes, laceras aut mandere ualuas 29 mens crit, ct teneros torquent conatibus artus obtunduntue nouos adroso robore dentes 170 aut teneros duris impingunt postibus ungues; mox iam cum ualidis insistere cruribus aetas passa, quater binos uoluens ab origine menses, inlaesis catulos spectaueris undique membris; tunc rursus miscere sero Cerealia dona . 175 conueniet fortemque dari de frugibus escam, libera tunc primum consuescant colla ligari Concordes et ferre gradus clausique teneri. iam cum bis denos Phoebe reparauerit ortus, incipe non longo catulos producere cursu, 180 sed paruae uallis spatio saeptoue nouali. his leporem praemitte manu, non uiribus aequis nee cursus uirtute parem, sed tarda trahentem membra, queant iam nunc faciles ut sumere praedas. nee semel indulge catulis moderamine cursus, 185 sed donee ualidos etiam praeuertere suescant, exerceto diu, uenandi munera cogens discere et emeritae laudem uirtutis amare. nee non consuetae norint hortamina uocis, seu cursus reuocent, iubeant seu tendere cursus. 190 quin etiam docti uictam contingere praedam exanimare uelint tantum, non carpere sumptam. sic tibi ueloces catulos reparare memento semper et in paruos iterum protendere curas. nam tristes morbi, scabies et sordida uenis 195 saepe uenit multamque canes discrimine nullo dant stragem : tu sollicitos impende labores 30 et sortire gregem suffecta prole quotannis. quin acidos Bacchi latices Tritonide oliva admiscere decet catulosque canesque maritas 200 unguere profuerit tepidoque ostendere soli, auribus et tineas candenti pellere cultro. est etiam canibus rabies, letale periclum. quod seu caelesti corrupt o sidere manat, cum segnes radios tristi iaculatur ab aethra 205 Phoebus et attonito pallens caput exserit orbe seu magis, ignicomi candentia terga leonis cum quatit, hoc canibus blandis inuiscerat aestus, exhalat seu terra sinu, seu noxius aer causa mali, seu cum gelidus non sufficit umor 210 torrida per uenas concrescunt semina flammae: quicquid id est, imas agitat sub corde medullas inque feros rictus nigro spumante ueneno prosilit, insanos cogens infigere morsus. disce igitur potus medicos curamque salubrem. 215 tunc uirosa tibi sumes multumque domabis castorea, attritu silicis lentescere cogens; ex ebore hue trito puluis sectoue feratur, admiscensque diu f acies concrescere utrumque : mox lactis liquidos sensim superadde fluores, 220 ut non cunctantes haustus infundere cornu inserto possis Furiasque repellere tristes atque iterum blandas canibus componere mentes. sed non Spartanos tantum tantumue Molossos pascendum catulos: diuisa Britannia mittit 225 ueloces nostrique orbis uenatibus aptos. 31 nee tibi Pannonicae stirpis temnatur origo, nee quorum proles de sanguine manat Hibero. quin etiam siccae Libyes in finibus acres gignuntur catuli, quorum non spreueris usum. 230 quin et Tuscorum non est extrema uoluptas saepe canum. sit forma illis licet obsita uillo dissimilesque habeant catulis uelocibus artus, haud tamen iniucunda dabunt tibi munera praedae, namque et odorato noscunt uestigia prato 235 at que etiam leporum secreta cubilia monstrant. horum animos moresque simul naresque sagaces mox referam; nunc omnis adhuc narranda supellex uenandi cultusque mihi dicendus equorum. cornipedes igitur lectos det Graecia nobis 240 Cappadocumque notas referat generosa propago *armata et palmas nuper grex omnis auorum. illis ampla satis leui sunt aequora dorso immodicumque latus paruaeque ingentibus alui, ardua frons auresque agiles capitisque decori 245 altus honos oculique uago splendore micantes, plurima se ualidos ceruix resupinat in armos, fumant umentes calida de nare uapores, nee pes officium standi tenet, ungula terram crebra ferit uirtusque artus animosa fatigat. 250 quin etiam gens ampla iacet trans ardua Calpes culmina, cornipedum late fecunda proborum. namque ualent longos pratis intendere cursus, nee minor est illis Graio quam in corpore forma, nee non terribiles spirabile flumen anheli 255 32 prouoluunt flatus et lumina uiuida torquent hinnitusque cient tremuli frenisque repugnant, nee segnes mulcent aures, nee crure quiescunt. sit tibi praeterea sonipes, Maurusia tellus quern mittit (modo sit gentili sanguine firmus) 260 quemque coloratus Mazax desert a per arua pauit et assiduos docuit tolerare labores. nee pigeat, quod turpe caput, deformis et aluus est ollis quodque infrenes, quod liber uterque, quodque iubis pronos ceruix deuerberet armos. 265 nam flecti facilis lasciuaque colla secutus paret in obsequium lentae moderamine uirgae: uerbera sunt praecepta fugae, sunt uerbera freni. quin et promissi spatiosa per aequora campi cursibus adquirunt commoto sanguine uires 270 paulatimque auidos comites post terga relinquunt. haud secus effusis Nerei per caerula uentis, cum se Threicius Boreas superextulit antro stridentique sono uastas exterruit undas, omnia turbato cesserunt flamina ponto; 275 ipse super fluctus spumanti murmure feruens conspicuum pelago caput eminet, omnis euntem Nereidum mirata suo stupet aequore turba. horum tarda uenit longi fiducia cursus, his etiam emerito uigor est iuuenalis in aeuo. 280 nam quaecumque suis uirtus bene floruit annis, non prius est animo quam corpore passa ruinam. pasce igitur sub uere nouo farraginc molli cornipedes uenamque feri ueteresque labores 33 erfluere aspecta nigri cum labe cruoris. 285 mox lactae redeunt in pectora fortia uires et nitidos artus distento robore formant; mox sanguis uenis melior calet, ire uiarum longa uolunt latumque fuga consumere campum. inde ubi pubentes calamos durauerit aestas 290 lactentesque urens herbas siccauerit omnem messibus umorem culmosque armarit aristis, hordea turn paleasque leues praebere memento: puluere quin etiam puras secernere fruges cura sit at que toros manibus percurrere equorum, 295 gaudeat ut plausu sonipes laetumque relaxet corpus et altores rapiat per uiscera sucos. id curent famuli comitumque animosa iuuentus. nee non et casses idem uenatibus aptos atque plagas longoque meantia retia tractu 300 addiscant raris semper contexere nodis et seruare modum maculis linoque tenaci. linea quin etiam, magnos circumdare saltus quae possit uolucresque metu concludere praedas, digerat innexas non una ex alite pinnas. 305 namque ursos magnosque sues ceruosque fugaces et uulpes acresque lupos ceu fulgura caeli terrificant Unique uetant transcendere saeptum. has igitur uario semper fucare ueneno curabis niueisque alios miscere colores 310 alternosque metus subtemine tendere longo. dat tibi pinnarum terrentia milia uultur, dat Libye, magnarum auium fecunda creatrix, 34 dantque grues cycnique senes et candidus anser, dant quae fluminibus crassisque paludibus errant 315 pellitosque pedes stagnanti gurgite tingunt. hinc mage puniceas natiuo munere sumes: namque illic sine fine greges florentibus alis inuenies auium suauique rubescere luto et sparsos passim tergo uernare colores. 320 his ita dispositis hiemis sub tempus aquosae incipe ueloces catulos immittere pratis, incipe cornipedes latos agitare per agros. uenemur dum mane nouum, dum mollia prata nocturnis calcata feris uestigia seruant. 325 35 NOTES i f. The poet begins in a lofty epic style recalling the arma uirumque cano of Vergil. The hunting poem of Grattius begins in a similar fashion: "dona cano diuom, laetas uenantibus artis auspicio, Diana, tuo." hilaresque labores discursusque citos: the first que con- nects the two verbs, the second the two substantives; cf. v. 200. For such use of que — que see H. Christensen, que — que bei den romischen Hexametrikern, Archivf. lat. Lexikogr. 1908, p. 188. 2. securi proelia ruris: the hunting of the wild beasts was regarded as a sort of warfare. Grattius especially applies a large number of military terms to the chase. See H. Schenkl, Jahrb. f. Philol. Suppl. Bd., 1897, 437-8. 3. pandimus: change from the singular to the rhetorical plural is not uncommon (see Kuhner-Stegmann, Ausf. lat. Gramm. 2 1 , p. 88). Aonio .... ab oestro: with the inspiration of the muses, oestrus is often used by the poets of poetic frenzy and inspiration. Cf. Stat. Th. 1. 32: "tempus erit cum Pierio tua fortior oestro — facta canam." 4. Helicon : the name of the mountain is used for the Muses. This passage is an evident imitation of Verg. G. 3. 291 ff.: "sed me Parnasi deserta per ardua dulcis raptat amor; iuuat ire iugis qua nulla priorum Castaliam molli deuertitur orbita cliuo." 5. alumno: this is the reading of all the manuscripts. Ulitius proposed as an emendation alumnus; Pithoeus suggested Castaliique. As the verse stands Castalius must be used abso- lutely of Apollo. Cf. Ennod. Carm. 2. 109. 2: "numquam frugiferis per saecula longa thyrambis in me fluxerunt commoda Castalii." The use of alumno as nursling of the Muses may be compared with Auson. p. 229 (399). 3: "Paule, Camenarum celeberrime Castaliarum alumne quondam, nunc pater." 36 NOUA pocula: fresh draughts of inspiration; cf. Ov. Am I. 15.35: "mihi flauus Apollo — pocula Castalia plena ministret aqua." 6. metatus: this is the reading of A, metatur of B 2 , C, and the Aldine edition. The reading metatur probably arose through a failure to understand the following polysyndeton, imponitque . . . retinetque . . . ducitque. This, however, was com- mon in the dactylic verse where que was especially convenient in forming dactyls; cf. Ov. Met. 14. 61: "ac primo .... refugitque abigitque timetque" (see H. Christensen, op. cit. p. 186 ff.). 7. IUGUM: used figuratively of being bound to the service of another, corymbis: clusters of ivy berries. The ivy was used for the crowning of Bacchus and also of poets, since Bacchus through his relation to the drama was closely associated with the Muses. Cf. Prop. 2. 30. 39: "turn capiti sacros patiar pendere corymbos." Nemes. Eel. 3. 18: "te cano qui grauidis hederata fronte corymbis — uitea serta plicas." 8 f. DUCITQUE PER AUIA, QUA SOLA NUMQUAM — TRITA ROUS: cf. Lucr. 1. 926: "auia Pieridum peragro loca nullius ante — trita solo." Oppian likewise declares his Cynegetica to be a new and untrodden field, Cyn. 1. 20. 9. aurato procedere curru: the poet thus pictures as a triumphal procession his progress under the inspiration of the Muses. So Pindar speaks of being borne in the chariot of the Muses; cf. Pyth. 10. 101; 01. 9. 120. Similarly Claud. 21. 23: "ipsaque Pierios lassant procliuia currus — laudibus innumeris." 10 f. en: frequently used of the appearance of a divinity; cf. Ov. Met. 15. 677: "et Deus en; deus en! animis linguisque fauete." Hor. S. 1. 1. 15: "si quis deus 'en ego' dicat— iam faciam quod uoltis." ire . . . imperat: impero occurs occasionally in the poets with the passive infinitive, more rarely with the active (see Drager, Historische Syntax, 2, 409-10). 11. intacto . . . musco: cf. Prop. 3. 3- 25: "dixerat et plectro sedem mihi monstrat eburno qua noua muscoso semita facta solo est." Hor. Ep. 1. 19. 21: "libera per uacuom posui vestigia princeps non alicna meo prcssi pede." 37 I2ff. Verse 12 is found in the MSS. after verse 24. Pithoeus' transposition of it to this place has met with general approval. But the passage still presents difficulties. The Aldine and other early editions read se ostendat instead of the oslendat of the MSS., fades instead of faciles and retain the complacito of the MSS. in v. 14. obuia Calliope is then interpreted as a vocative: "quamuis nota aliqua uia, et trita materia offerat se tu tamen obuia et auxilians Calliope, fac me insistere prato complacito, ut in hoc etiam semita facta appareat," (Wernsdorf ) . Baehrens follows the conjecture of Pithoeus by reading facilest for faciles and also non placito for complacito. The happiest solution of the difficul- ties of the passage is offered by Schenkl's conjecture of complaci- tum for complacito: although Calliope in person shows me an easy course in the beaten path, it has pleased me to set foot in a meadow where glistens a road with freshly-made furrows, complacitus as the perfect participle of complaceo with active force is well attested (see Neue-Wagener, Formenlehre, 3. p. 117). 14. qua luceat: a descriptive adverbial clause, rudibus . . . . sulcis: rough in the sense of newly-made or untried; cf. rudes . . . pinnas, v. 33. The same epithet is applied to the Argo as the first ship launched on the sea; cf. Lucan 3. 193; Prop. 3. 22. 13. 15-47. The poet tells us why he has chosen a new field. All mythological subjects are trite and worn. But in passing he takes occasion to heap up a number of brief, recondite mythologi- cal references in a style which is similar to that of Propertius. 16 f. ignemque iugalem letalemque: the marital fire which destroyed her. Cf. Ov. Met. 3.308: "corpus mortale tumultus — non tulit aetherios, donisque iugalibus arsit." 17. de paelicis astu: the use of de was much extended in the African Latinity and acquired instrumental force (see Sittl, Lokale Verschiedenheiten der lateinischen Sprache, p. 126). Cf. Nemes. Eel. 3. 64: "et de uitibus hastas integit." Eel. 2. 11: "quod non tarn tenui filo de uoce sonaret." paelex evidently refers to Juno because of her jealousy. Disguised as Semele's nurse she had aroused her suspicion of Zeus and caused her to make the fatal request to behold Zeus in his majesty. The same term is applied to Juno in the Laudes Herculis which Wernsdorf attributes to Nemesianus (v. 47). 38 1 8. When Semele perished by the thunderbolt of Zeus, Bacchus was prematurely born. Zeus saved the child by cutting open his own thigh and concealing the infant there until the full time for his birth had come. Cf. Ov. Met. 3. 317: "tutaque bis geniti sunt incunabula Bacchi." 19 f. Cf. Nemes. Eel. 3. 23: "hunc pater omnipotens, uenturi prouidus aeui pertulit et justo produxit tempore partus." Stat. Th. 7. 166: "cui tu dignatus limina vitae praerep turn que uterum et maternos reddere menses." 21. The reference is to the death of Pentheus. The thyrsi were used by the Bacchantes in killing Pentheus. Manitius (Rhein. Mus. 44. 543) notes that this verse is an imitation of Val. Flac. 5. 76: "abluit eoo rorantes sanguine thyrsos." 22. dixisse: the perfect infinitive where we expect the pres- ent, as frequently with nolo. It is perhaps aoristic in force (see Bennett, Syntax of Early Latin, 1, p. 427). 23. Pisaeique tori legem: the law by which the suitors of Hippodamia were compelled to contend in a chariot race with her father, Oenomaus, King of Pisa, and by which those who were defeated suffered death. Pelops by bribing Myrtilus, the charioteer of Oenomaus, won the race and the hand of Hippo- damia (cf. Hygin. Fab. 84). Statius uses the same term as Nemesianus in regard to the conditions for winning Hippodamia, Silv. 1. 2. 41 : "hanc propter tanti Pisaea lege trementem currere et Oenomai fremitus audire sequentis." 24. SUB foedere PR I MO: at the beginning of their marriage c ompact. For sub with temporal force cf. sub uere nouo v. 283. 26. The guilty love of Biblis for her brother, Caunus, forced him to flee from his home. Biblis hung herself and from her tears arose the fountain Biblis (cf. Ov. Met. 9. 454 ff.). 26 f. impia Myrrhae conubia: Myrrha by means of trickery was guilty of an incestuous union with her father, Cinyras. In anger he attempted to kill her but she fled into Arabia where she was changed into a myrrh tree (cf. Ov. Met. 10. 298 ff.). 29. IUIT IN ARBOKEAS FRONDES: cf. Ov. Met. IO. 493: "sanguis it in sucos, in magnos bracchia ramos in paruos digiti; duratur corticc pc-llis." 39 Prop. 3. 19. 15: "crimen et ilia fuit, patria succensa senecta arboris in frondes condita Myrrha nouae." IUIT: the indicative in indirect questions is not rare in poets of the post-classical age (seeKuhncr-Stegmann, Ausf. lat. Gramm. 2 2 , p. 494). animamque uirentem: a leafy spirit, i.e. she became a tree nymph; cf. v. 94, "uiridique iuuenta pubentes Dryades." 30. Cadmus, founder of Thebes, slew the dragon of Ares and, in punishment for this, he and his wife Harmonia were later changed into dragons. Cf. Ov. Met. 4. 577: "durataeque cuti squamas increscere sentit," 588: "quotiensque aliquos parat edere questus — sibilat." 31. STELLATUMQUE OCULIS CUSTODEM: cf. Ov. Met. I. 664: "talia maerentes stellatus submouet Argus." Stat. Th. 6. 255: "inocciduis stellatum uisibus Argum." Aeschylus applies to Argus the epithets p.vptojTr6s (Prom. 569) and iravb-wrrit (Supp. 3a.s — i)\tKTpov \if3d8as j3\«pdp7 195-224. The poet begins a general discussion of the diseases of dogs but devotes most of his attention to rabies and the method of curing it. Grattius also treats of the different maladies with which dogs are afflicted but there is little similarity between the two poems. Nemesianus imitates Vergil directly in his introduc- tion of the subject while Grattius begins in a quite different fashion, 344: "haec tua militia est. quin et Mauortia bello uolnera et errantis per tot diuertia morbos causasque adfectusque canum tua cura tuerist." 195. scabies .... sordida: cf. Verg. G. 3. 441, turpis . . . scabies, uenis: cf. cubili v. 148. 196 f. MULTAMQUE CANES .... DANT STRAGEM: must be taken with passive significance. In order to remove the awk- wardness of the expression, Burmann proposed to alter it thus: multamque cani discrimine nullo dat stragem. But dant stragem may be compared with Verg. A. 2. 310, deditampla ruinam . . . dotnus. 198. sortire gregem: select the pack, suffecta prole: by supplying new stock; cf. Verg. G. 3. 65: "atque aliam ex alia generando suffice prolem." 199. acidos Bacchi latices: cf. Verg. G. 3. 509: "profuit inserto latices infundere cornu — Lenaeos." Tritonide oliua: oliuo is the reading of the MSS., oliua of the Vulgate. Postgate rejects both, suggesting as a possible emendation leui, or olenti, the conjecture of Schenkl. TpirwvU, as TpiToytvua, was an epithet of doubtful origin applied to Athena. There was a lake Tritonis in Libya from which, according to an old legend, the goddess was born (Herod. 4. 180). There was also a spring in Arcadia of that name, connected by legend with the birth of Athena (Paus. 8. 26. 6). This feminine patronymic appears frequently in Latin as a noun, e. g. Stat. Silv. 2. 7. 28; Verg. A. 2. 226. But it also is used as an adjective — of or belonging to Athena; cf. Ov. Her. 6. 47 : "quid mihi cum Minyis, quid cum Tritonide pinu?" Hence the reading of the Vulgate, Tritonide oliua, the olive of Athena, is probably correct. 201. tepidoque ostendere soli: Serenus Sammonicus, after prescribing remedies for the mange, adds (6. 80): "conue- nit hinc tepido lita tradere corpora soli." Grattius gives similar advice, 421 ff. 68 202. tineas: probably the same as the ricini, for removing which Varro (R. R. 2. 9. 14) and Columella (7. 13. 1) prescribe ointments, candenti .... cultro: i. e. heated for cauterizing. 203. caelesti corrupto sidere: sidus was explained by Barth as the air, by Wernsdorf as the sky, by Stern as the sun. Ulitius thought that sidus referred to a constellation; that this constellation was designated as Cancer by the description of the sun in verses 205-6 (he compares segues radios with w. 157-8) and as Leo by verses 207-8. But verses 205-6 evidently refer to an eclipse of the sun and can scarcely be a description of the sun when entering Cancer, caelesti corrupto sidere must be a general term, with an explanatory instance added in the following cum clause: whether this emanates from a tainted heavenly body, when Phoebus hurls sluggish rays from the gloomy sky, etc. The eclipse of the sun is, then, an illustration of such a tainted condition of the sky. Pestilence and disease were frequently attributed to poison- ous atmospheric conditions. Cf. Verg. G. 3. 478: "hie quondam morbo caeli miseranda coorta est — tempestas." A. 3. 138: "corrupto caeli tractu." Claudian uses the same phrase as Nemesianus, 15. 40: "crebras corrupto sidere mortes." 206. ATTONITO PALLENS CAPUT EXSERIT ORBE: pictures the sun's countenance as it passes from beneath the eclipse. Barth thought that orbi should be read and that attonito orbi referred to the earth amazed at the prodigy. But attonito orbe is used of the orb of the sun astonished at suffering the eclipse: puts forth a pallid face from his astonished orb. Such an expression — as if the sun were distinct from its orb — is not unusual ; cf . Verg. G. 1 . 442, medioque refugerit orbe; Avien. Arat. 1568, medioque recedens orbe. 207 f. magis: see note on verse 160. leonis: the sun entered Leo at the hottest season of the year. At the same time the dog star Sirius rose and this was considered especially respon- sible for the rabies of dogs; cf. Pliny N, H. 2. 47. 47. 123: "arden- tissimo autem aestatis tempore exoritur caniculae sidus sole primam partem leonis ingrediente;" 2. .}<>. 40. 107: qnidem toto eo spatio maxime in rabiem agi non est (labium. " terga .... quatit: cf. Sen. Oed. 40: "sed i^"' aestiferi canis — Titan, leonis terga Xerneaei pretDi 6g 2o8. hoc: so indefinite as to cause difficulty of interpreta- tion. Ulitius suggested the correction hos which would make Phoebus the subject of inuiscerat. hoc is best interpreted as the object of the verb. It then refers to letale periclum which, in the form of a neuter pronoun, is the subject of the preceding main verb manat and object understood with the following verb exhalat. inuiscerat: lit. to put into the vitals; post-classical, canibus blandis: an imitation of Verg. G. 3. 496: "hinc canibus blandis rabies uenit." 211. concrescunt: thicken, semina flammae: cf. Verg. A. 6. 6, semina flammae. 214. prosilit: "uermiculum respicit de quo Grat. v. 387," Wernsdorf. But Nemesianus has made no mention of a worm as the cause of hydrophobia, although Grattius and Pliny both (N. H. 29. 4. 32. 100) treat of it. The subject of prosilit is the same as that of agitat. The poet has not been able to name definitely the cause of the disease or what it is, so he calls it merely a deadly evil and refers to it throughout by a neuter pro- noun: and with the dark poison foaming it leaps into the ferocious jaws. Sterns' translation of this passage is admirable: "Was es auch sei, es wiihlt tief under dem Herzen das Mark auf, Und in den grimmigen Rachen, bedeckt mit schwarzlichem Giftschaum Sturtzt es hervor, und es zwingt zu des Zahn's wuthflammenden Angriff." 216 f. uirosa .... castorea: cf. Verg. G. 1. 58 : "uirosaque Pontus castorea." Castoreum is a reddish brown substance with strong odor secreted by the beaver. Pliny treats at length of its medicinal qualities (N. H. 32. 3. 13. 26). domabis: fig. to crush or powder. After drying, the castoreum forms a hard substance. 218. Powdered ivory was supposed to have medicinal value, (cf. Pliny N. H. 28. 8. 24. 88; Dioscor. 2. 61). 220. lactis .... fluores: an unusual expression which occurs also in Nemes. Eel. 3. 68: "nox iubet, uberibus suadens siccare fluorem — lactis." 221 f. non cunctantes haustus: i. e. without sticking to the throat as the powder of castoreum and ivory unmixed with milk would do. infundere cornu inserto: cf. Verg. G. 3. 509: inserto .... infundere cornu. 70 223- BLANDAS .... COMPONERE MENTES: bldtldas is used proleptically. 224-238. The poet touches briefly upon the various breeds of dogs and their characteristics but promises to enlarge upon the subject later. 224. See note on verse 122. 225. pascendum catulos: the impersonal gerundive with object in the accusative is used in early and in late Latin. Although rare in the classical period, it occurs frequently in Varro who holds to the old-fashioned usages (see Kuhner-Stegmann, Ausf. lat. Gramm. 2 1 p. 734). 226. ueloces: Grattius describes the British dogs as of poor appearance but remarkable courage (175 ff.). Oppian praises their powers of scent and their courage (1. 468 ff.). 227. Pannonicae .... stirpis origo: the lineage of the Pannonian breed. The combination of a substantive with synonymous genitive was one of the pleonasms of the tumor Africus (see Sittl, Lokale Verschiedenheiten der lat. Sprache, p. 92). The Pannonian dogs stand at the head of Oppian's list of the well known breeds (1. 371). 228. de sanguine .... Hibero: it is doubtful whether these Iberian dogs were from the Iberia of Asia or of Europe. The Iberians of Asia were neighbors of the Albanians and Strabo tells us that the people of this region were extremely fond of hunting (11. 4. 5). Oppian mentions the Iberian dogs (1. 371) but throws no light on the question of their geographical habitat. 229 f. That Nemesianus alone is acquainted with the Libyan dogs is perhaps another indication that he was a native of Africa. These Libyan dogs are not to be identified with the Egyptian dogs which Oppian mentions, since he describes them as watch dogs (1. 374). 231 ff. These Etruscan dogs are evidently similar to the Umbrian described by Grattius thus, 171: "at fugit aduersos idem quos repperit hostis Umber: quanta fides, utinam, et sollertia naris tanta ford uirtus et tantum uellet in armis." .Vmesian's careful description of the ability of these do^s to follow a scent and the fact that he says tiny ate unlike the 71 catulis uelocibtlS is another argument in favor of considering that the catuli ueloces are greyhounds. 233. DISSIMILESQUE .... CATULIS UELOCIBUS ARTUS: compenaiary comparison. 234. haud: In the period of late Latin haud rarely appears. By many writers of the third century A. D. — e. g. Cypr., Corn- mod., Min. Fel. — it was completely neglected (see Planer, Dehaud et haudquaquam negationum, p. 18). praedae: praeda, the read- ing of the MSS. and of the Aldine edition is impossible; praedae, the correction of Barth and Ulitius, is an epexegetic genitive (cf. Drager, Syntax, 1. p. 466). 235. odorato .... prato: Wernsdorf explains: "quod odorem ferarum uestigiis inhaerentem seruat. Gratius v. 223 uocat 'signa uapore ferino intemerata.' " Ulitius, interpreting in the same fashion, compares Verg. A. 4. 132, odora canum uis. But odorato does not necessarily refer to the scent of the wild beast. It may be interpreted simply as fragrant. Xenophon speaks of the difficulty of following a scent in the spring because of the perfume of the flowers and growing things (Cyn. 5. 5). Hence the poet is emphasizing the skill of the Etruscan dogs when he says that they follow the trail even in the fragrant meadow. 237. naresque sagaces: keen scent, the distinctive quality of dogs of this type. So the Umbr ian is described by Silius Italicus, 3. 295: "aut exigit Umber — nare sagax e calle feras." 238-298. The horses and hunting equipment have not yet been touched upon. The poet turns first to a discussion of the horses. 240. cornipedes: cornipes appearing at first only as an epithet of the horse (Verg. A. 7. 779; 6. 591), later came to be used as a substantive. Silius and Statius use it most frequently thus (see Rittweger, Die poetischen Ausdrucke fur Pferd, Archiv f. lat. Lexikogr. 7. p. 326). Graecia: the horses of Greece, especially those of Argolis, Elis, Thessaly, and Epirus, were highly valued in antiquity (see O. Keller, Die Antike Tierwelt, 1. pp. 227-9). Grattius discusses in more detail the various breeds of horses, 497 ff . 241. Cappadocumque: the Cappadocian horses were espec- ially famous. Vegetius, Mulom. 3. 6. 4, says: "curribus Cappa- docum gloriosa nobilitas, Hispanorum par uel proxima in circo 72 creditur palma." Oppian describes them as swift, spirited, and especially suitable for hunting (Cyn. I. 198 ff.). not as: dis- tinguishing characteristics; so Grattius, 497: "restat equos finirenotis." referat: reproduce; cf. Verg. G. 3. 128: "inuali- dique patrum referant ieiunia nati." 242. This verse, which is obviously corrupt in the MSS., seems to defy any satisfactory emendation. Some of the early editors (Ulit. and Burm.) merely changed to palmis: fortified with the recent victories of their sires. Gronovius suggested the following correction: armenti et palmas numeret grex omnis auorum. But armenti, which must limit propago, seems redun- dant. Wernsdorf decided that armata was the Greek word ap/xara, used by the poet for cur r us in the sense of chariot victory. He would then read the verse with the numeret of Gronovius: Harmataque et palmas numeret grex omnis auorum. Since no similar use of Stp^ara is found in Latin, this interpretation is not satisfactory. Stern proposed the following reading: armata ut palmis superat grex omnis auorum, and interpreted thus: "Cap- padocum notas et insignia monstret generosa propago, sicut olim auorum grex palmis fuit insignita et inter relicuos eminet." Postgate's suggestion, superet, seems to be the logical word to replace nuper since we then have a verb parallel to referat and governing palmas. The latter part of the verse is then satisfac- tory in meaning: let every herd surpass the palms of their sires, palma, referring to victory in the races, is frequently used to indi- cate the merits of a horse; cf. Grattius, 531 : "quos signat Achaia palma;" Verg. G. 1. 59: "Eliadum palmas Epiros equarum." But although the correction of nuper to superet seems fairly cer- tain, armata remains as the major difficulty. If one more might be added to the numerous proposed corrections, none of which seems entirely satisfactory, I would suggest praetniaque et palm, is superet grex omnis auorum; an imitation indeed of Verg. G. 3. 49: "seu quis Olympicae miratus praemia palmae— ] equos." In view of the numerous passages in which N eme s iaPU S I lowed closely the third Georgic, such an imitation would not be strange here. 243ft. Thi ription of a thoroughbred ho iafly similar to that of Vergil, G. 3. 70 ff., and to thai of < ►ppian, Cyn. 1 17- ff. 2 IV ami-i. \ .... \i :\: broad. U n 244- immodicumque latus: cf. Verg. G. 3. 54: "turn longo nullus lateri modus." 245 f. ardua frons: cf. Verg. G. 3. 79: "illi ardua ccruix — argutumque caput." auresque agiles: Vergil expresses the same thought by micat auribus, G. 3. 84. capitisque decori altus honos: the high-held grace of a splendid head, capitisque decori is Baehrens' correction of the reading of A, capitisque decoris; capitique decoro, the reading of C and of the Aldine edition, breaks the logical structure of the sentence. 246. OCULIQUE UAGO SPLENDORE MICANTES: cf. Opp. Cyn. I. 183: 6fj.fxa ropby, irvpixuTrbv, iirt(TKViitoit (Die Int. Sprache aufafrikan. Inschriften, 8. p. 181) as frequent in African Latinity. Bui net non et occurs in the 79 classical period and is used especially by Vergil (e. g. G. 2. 53; A. I. 707, 748) whom Ncmesianus is probably imitating in its use. 299 ff. Xenophon, Cyn. 6. 5-10, describes three varieties of hunting nets. The 51ktvov, which was used to enclose large tracts of country, corresponded to the Latin rete. Nemesianus indicates this distinction by his words longoque meantia relia tractu. The ApKvs, or tunnel net, was made with a bag into which the wild beast was driven. The cassis was evidently similar. Seneca describes the efforts of a wild beast to escape from its entangling meshes, Agam. 892: "ut altis hispidus siluis aper cum casse uinctus temptat egressus tamen artatque motu uincla et in cassum furit." Grattius describes the construction of the cassis, 28 ff. The iv65iov, or road net, was comparatively small and was placed across roads or paths to prevent the quarry from escaping. Since Nemesianus names three specific kinds of nets, the plaga was probably the same as the ivbSiov, although we have no definite information as to its form and it is frequently used as a general term for hunting nets; cf. Hor. C. 1. 1. 28; Ep. 2. 32. (On the subject of hunting nets, see Yates, Textrinum Antiquorum, p. 412 ff. ; Blumner, Romische Prival-Altertiimer, p. 517 ff.) 300. longoque meantia retia tractu: the nets were extended in a curved line of considerable length and into this space the animals were driven. For a similar phrase cf. Grattius, 219, nee uasa tenentia longe. 302. SERUARE MODUM MACULIS LINOQUE TENACI: to keep the meshes and threads the correct size. The threads were composed of several strands, the number of which depended on the kind of net. Concerning the size of the meshes and threads for various nets, see Xenophon, Cyn. 2. 4-5; to. 2. Pliny tells us of nets made from the flax of Cumae in which the threads were composed of 150 strands (N. H. 19. 1. 2. n). 303 ff. When the nets were set up they were flanked by cords, lineae, to which, as well as to the nets, feathers of bright color were attached. These frightened the game and drove it on into the nets. This arrangement was called the formido; cf. Sen. Dial. 4. 11. 5: "nee mirum est, cum maximos ferarum greges linea pennis distincta contineat, et in insidias agat, ab ipso effectu dicta formido." Verg. A. 12. 750: 80 "ceruom aut puniceae saeptum formidine pennae uenator cursu canis et latratibus instat." Grattius gives a description of the formido, 75 ff . ; Oppian, Cyn. 4- 384 ff. 304. UOLUCRESQUE METU COXCLUDERE PRAEDAS: cf. Sen. Phaedr. 46: "picta rubenti linea pinna — uano cludat terrore feras." 305. The linea should have feathers from different kinds of birds arranged upon it (digerat) and fastened to it (innexas). 306. The formido was designed especially to catch the stag but Grattius (85-8) as well as Nemesianus asserts that it was used for other wild beasts. 307 f. The feathers by their brilliancy frighten them as the lightning flashes of the sky. 308. unique ... . saeptum: the general term for the whole enclosure, embracing both net and formido, was indago; cf. Verg. A. 4. 121: "dum trepidant alae saltusque indagine cingunt." lini: linum, properly the thread of the net, was used frequently by metonymy for the net; cf. Ov. Met. 7. 807, Una .... nodosa. 309. uario . . . ueneno: with dyes of various color. Grattius also advises dying the feathers, 85: "ast ubi lentae — interdum Libyco fucanlur sandyce pennae." 310. curabis: the reading of the MSS., cura tibi, is faulty since the full expression should be cura tibi sit or at least cura sit. curabis is the correction of Haupt (see Opusc. 1. p. 403). 311. tendere: tempore is the reading of the MSS., tendere, the correction of Ulitius. alternosque metus: has reference to the white and colored feathers placed alternately. Grattius advises mingling the feathers of the vulture with those of the swan and adds, 80: "meliusque alterna ualet res." SI B 11 mine . LOMGO: figure taken from weaving. The cord to which the feathers were attached represents the woof or thread woven across the warp. 312. The feathers of the vulture were considered especially effective for the formido because of their 1 1 i. Grattius, 79: "at uolture dirus ab atro — turbat odor |. 437: "sic dum pauidos formidine ceruos — claudat d metw I aera penna< ." 81 313- magnarum auium: perhaps ostriches, since these mighty birds were found especially in the plains and deserts of Africa. (See 0. Keller, Die Antike Tierwelt, 2. p. 171.) 314. cycnique senes: cf. plumamque senilem, v. 37. 315 f. The wading birds, such as storks, herons, and flamin- goes, would be especially valuable for their plumage. 316. pellitosque pedes: webbed feet, as most of the waders have. Pliny uses the term palmipedes in reference to the aquatic birds (N. H. 10. 11. 13. 29). 317. HINC: Wernsdorf interpreted hinc as from the water fowls and the following illic as in the rivers and marshes. Such an interpretation is forced, hinc and illic must refer to Libya although the logical connection is broken by the interposition of verses 314-16. Birds of brilliant plumage, such as flamingoes, are most common in Africa, mage: an archaism, as ollis, v. 264. puniceas: sc. pennas. The red feathers were especially desirable for the formido; cf. Verg. G. 3. 372: "puniceaeue agitant pauidos formidine pinnae." natiuo munere: in natural state, as opposed to the dyed feathers. 319. rubescere luto: lulum was properly a reddish yellow since Pliny declares it was used for the flame-colored bridal veil (N. H. 21. 8. 22. 46). 320. uernare: to be gay in color as the meadows in the spring time. 321. hiemis sub tempus aquosae: Xenophon, Arrian, and Oppian agree in recommending spring and autumn as the best seasons for hunting. Other writers, however, agree with Neme- sianus in considering winter the proper season; cf. Hor. C. 1. 1. 25; Ep. 2.29; Verg. G. 1 . 307 ff . hiemis .... aquosae: cf. Verg. Eel. 10. 66: hiemis .... aquosae 324. uenemur dum mane nouum: cf. Verg. G. 3. 325: "carpamus dum mane nouom, dum gramina canent." 324-5. Cf. Sen. Phaedr. 40: "Nunc dimissi nare sagaci captent auras lustraque presso quaerant rostro dum lux dubia est, dum signa pedum roscida tellus impressa tenet." 82 BIBLIOGRAPHY Baehrens, E. — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 3, Leipzig 1881. Bruce and Havercamp — Poetae lat. rei venaticae scriptores et Bucolici antiqui, Leiden 1728. Curcio, G. — II Cynegeticon di M. A. Olimpio Nemesiano, Rivista di Fil. 27. p. 447. Haupt, M. — Ovidii Halieutica Gratii et Nemesiani Cynegetica, Leipzig 1838. De Carminibus Bucolicis Calpurnii et Nemesiani, Opusc. 1 , Leipzig 1875. Lemaire, N. E. — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 1, Paris 1824. Panckoucke, C. L. F. — Poetae Minores, Bibliotheque Latine- Francaise, vol. 1, Paris 1842. Pinder, N. — Less Known Latin Poets, Oxford 1869. Postgate, J. P. — Corpus Poetarum Latinorum, Fasc. 5, London 1905- Schenkl, H. — Zu Grattius und anderen lateinischen Dichtern, Jahrb. f. class. Philol. Suppl. Bd. 24, p. 387. Stern, R. — Faliscus et Nemesianus, Halle 1832. Wernsdorf, J. C. — Poetae Latini Minores, vol. 1, Altenburg 1780. 83 228 6- n UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. AT LOS ANGELES THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 0EC * 3 195* JAN 2 4 RECt, SEP 31 RECEIVED U.AIA LOAN DESK SEP 4 1934 A.M. p.|f, 7!3 '9 H0'n[12ll|2|3|4|5|it a i JUN -7 1971 N 1 5 1971 Form L-9 2om-l,'42<&olfi> rp I 191% AUG24S72 FACCUY/ BB?D LD-URt FE 193 MAfi' 2 9 1986 REC'D LD-0RC Qf. OCT 06 1986 • JUN 171986 SBCD LDUMJ 9UN 1 7 1986 u: LOS ANGELES LIBRARY *> 3 1158 00846 5915 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FAC LITY AA 000 424 634