Sec.40. Iunctos:  how can anything be a compound of one thing?  The notion that iunctos could mean aptos (R. and P. 366) is untenable.  I entirely agree with Madv. (first Excursus to his D.F.) that we have here an anacoluthon.  Cic. meant to say iunctos e quadam impulsione et ex assensu animorum, but having to explain [Greek:  phantasia] was obliged to break off and resume at sed ad haec.  The explanation of a Greek term causes a very similar anacoluthon in De Off. I. 153.  Schuppe, De Anacoluthis Ciceronianis p. 9, agrees with Madv.  For the expression cf. D.F. II. 44 e duplici genere voluptatis coniunctus Ernesti em. cunctos, Dav. punctos, ingeniose ille quidem says Halm, pessime I should say. [Greek:  Phantasian]:  a full and clear account of Stoic theories of sensation is given by Zeller, ch.  V., R. and P. 365 sq. Nos appellemus licet:  the same turn of expression occurs D.F. III. 21, IV. 74. Hoc verbum quidem hoc quidem probably ought to be read, see 18. Adsensionem = [Greek:  synkatathesin]. In nobis positam:  the usual expression for freedom of the will, cf.  II. 37, De Fato, 42, 43 (a very important passage).  The actual sensation is involuntary ([Greek:  akousion] Sext.  Emp. Adv.  Math. VIII. 397). Tironum causa I note that the Stoics sometimes speak of the assent of the mind as involuntary, while the [Greek:  kataleptike phantasia] compels assent (see II. 38).  This is, however, only true of the healthy reason, the unhealthy may refuse assent.

Sec.41. Visis non omnibus:  while Epicurus defended the truth of all sensations, Zeno abandoned the weak positions to the sceptic and retired to the inner citadel of the [Greek:  kataleptike phantasia]. Declarationem:  [Greek:  enargeian], a term alike Stoic, Epicurean, and Academic, see n. on II. 17. Earum rerum:  only this class of sensations gives correct information of the things lying behind. Ipsum per se:  i.e. its whole truth lies in its own [Greek:  enargeia], which requires no corroboration from without. Comprehendibile:  this form has better MSS. authority than the vulg comprehensibile.  Goerenz’s note on these words is worth reading as a philological curiosity Nos vero, inquit:  Halm with Manut. writes inquam.  Why change?  Atticus answers as in 14, 25, 33. [Greek:  Katalepton]:  strictly the thing which emits the visum is said to be [Greek:  katalepton], but, as we shall see in the Lucullus, the sensation and the thing from which it proceeds are often confused. Comprehensionem:  this word properly denotes the process of perception in the abstract, not the individual perception.  The Greeks, however, themselves use [Greek:  katalepsis] for [Greek:  kataleptike phantasia] very often. Quae manu prehenderentur:  see II. 145.