words which usually have an opposite meaning.  Now I contend that Cicero’s words minoris aestimanda bear quite as strong a negative meaning as the phrase of Sextus, [Greek:  ta me hikanen axian echonta].  I therefore conclude that Cicero has striven, so far as the Latin language allowed, to express the Stoic doctrine that, of the [Greek:  adiaphora], some have [Greek:  axia] while others have [Greek:  apaxia].  He may fairly claim to have applied to his words the rule “re intellecta in verborum usu faciles esse debemus” (D.F. III. 52).  There is quite as good ground for accusing Sextus and Stobaeus of misunderstanding the Stoics as there is for accusing Cicero.  There are difficulties connected with the terms [Greek:  hikane axia] and [Greek:  hikane apaxia] which are not satisfactorily treated in the ordinary sources of information; I regret that my space forbids me to attempt the elucidation of them.  The student will find valuable aid in the notes of Madv. on the passages of the D.F. quoted in this note. Non tam rebus quam vocabulis:  Cic. frequently repeats this assertion of Antiochus, who, having stolen the clothes of the Stoics, proceeded to prove that they had never properly belonged to the Stoics at all. Inter recte factum atque peccatum:  Stob. speaks II. 6, 6 of [Greek:  ta metaxy aretes kai kakias]. (This does not contradict his words a little earlier, II. 6, 5, [Greek:  aretes de kai kakias ouden metaxy], which have regard to divisions of men, not of actions.  Diog.  Laert., however, VII. 127, distinctly contradicts Cic. and Stob., see R. and P. 393.) Recte factum = [Greek:  katorthoma], peccatum = [Greek:  hamartema], officium = [Greek:  kathekon] (cf.  R. and P. 388—­394, Zeller 238—­248, 268—­272). Servata praetermissaque:  MSS. have et before servata, which all edd. since Lamb. eject.  Where et and que correspond in Cic., the que is always an afterthought, added in oblivion of the et.  With two nouns, adjectives, adverbs, or participles, this oblivion is barely possible, but when the conjunctions go with separate clauses it is possible.  Cf. 43 and M.D.F. V. 64.

Sec.38. Sed quasdam virtutes:  see 20.  This passage requires careful construing:  after quasdam virtutes not the whole phrase in ratione esse dicerent must be repeated but dicerent merely, since only the virtutes natura perfectae, the [Greek:  dianoetikai aretai] of Arist., could be said to belong to the reason, while the virtutes more perfectae are Aristotle’s [Greek:  ethikai aretai].  Trans. “but spoke of certain excellences as perfected by the reason, or (as the case might be) by habit.” Ea genera virtutum:  both Plato and Arist. roughly divided the nature of man into two parts, the intellectual and the emotional, the former being made to govern, the latter to obey (cf. T.D. II. 47, and Arist. [Greek:  to