[Footnote 16:  See Dr. Lowe’s remarks, pp. 3-6 above.]

  [Footnote 17:  See above, p. 21, and below, p. 53.]

[Sidenote:  The text closely related to that of Aldus]

But we must now subject our fragment to internal tests.  If Aldus used the entire manuscript of which this is a part, his text must show a general conformity to that of the fragment.  An examination of the appended collation will establish this fact beyond a doubt.  The references are to Keil’s critical edition of 1870, but the readings are verified from Merrill’s apparatus.  I will designate the fragment as _{Pi}_, using P for Aldus’s Parisinus and a for his edition.

  {Transcriber’s Note: 
  In the following paragraph, letters originally printed in roman
  (non-italic) type are capitalized for clarity.}

We may begin by excluding two probable misprints in Aldus, 64, 1 contuRbernium and 65, 17 subEuertas.  Then there are various spellings in which Aldus adheres to the fashion of his day, as seXcenties, miLLies, miLLia, teNtarunt, cauSSas, auToritas, quaNquam, sYderum, hYeme, cOEna, oCium, hospiCii, negoCiis, solaTium, adUlescet, eXoluit, THuscos; there are other spellings which modern editors might not disdain, i.e., aerarII and iLLustri, and some that they have accepted, namely aPPonitur, eXistat, iMpleturus, iMplorantes, oBtulissem, balInei, Caret (not Karet), Caritas (not Karitas).[18]

[Footnote 18:  The spellings Karet and Karitas, whether Pliny’s or not, are a sign of antiquity.  In the first century A.D., as we see from Velius Longus (p. 53, 12 K) and Quintilian (I, 7, 10), certain old-timers clung to the use of k for c when the vowel a followed.  By the fourth century, theorists of the opposite tendency proposed the abandonment of k and q as superfluous letters, since their functions were performed by c.  Donatus (p. 368, 7 K) and Diomedes, too, according to Keil (p. 423, 11), still believed in the rule of ka for ca, but these rigid critics had passed away in the time of Servius, who, in his commentary on Donatus (p. 422, 35 K), remarks k vero et q aliter nos utimur, aliter usi sunt maiores nostri.  Namque illi, quotienscumque a sequebatur, k praeponebant in omni parte orationis, ut Kaput et similia; nos vero non usurpamus k litteram nisi in Kalendarum nomine scribendo. See also Cledonius (p. 28, 5K); W. Brambach, Latein.  Orthog. 1868, pp. 210 ff.; W.M.  Lindsay, The Latin Language, 1894, pp. 6 f.  There would thus be no temptation for a scribe at the end of the fifth century or the beginning of the sixth to adopt ka for ca as a habit.  The writer of our fragment was copying faithfully