y Halm) wishes therefore to read
_est enim_, but the MSS. both of the _Lucullus_ and of Nonius agree in the
other form, which Madv. allows to stand in _D.F._ I. 43, and many other
places (see his note). Cf. fragm. 22 of the _Acad. Post_. _E robore_: so
Nonius, but the MSS. of Cic. give here _ebore_. _Dolatus_: an evident
imitation of Hom. _Od._ T 163 [Greek: ou gar apo drios essi palaiphatou
oud' apo petres]. _Neque tamen habere_: i.e. _se putat_. For the sudden
change from _oratio recta_ to _obliqua_ cf. 40 with n. _Percipiendi notam_:
= [Greek: charaktera tes synktatheseos] in Sext. _P.H._ I. 191. For the use
of the gerund cf. n. on 26, with Madv. _Gram._ 418, Munro on Lucr. I. 313;
for _propriam_ 34. _Exsistere_. cf. 36. _Qui neget_: see 79. _Caput_: a
legal term. _Conclusio loquitur_: cf. _historiae loquantur_ (5),
_consuetudo loquitur_ (_D.F._ II. 48), _hominis institutio si loqueretur_
(_ib._ IV. 41), _vites si loqui possint_ (_ib._ V. 39), _patria loquitur_
(_In Cat._ I. 18, 27); the last use Cic. condemns himself in _Orat._ 85.
_Inquit_: "quotha," indefinitely, as in 109, 115; cf. also _dicit_ in 79.

Sec.102. _Reprehensio est ... satis esse vobis_: Bait. follows Madv. in
placing a comma after _est_, and a full stop at _probabilia_. _Tamen_ ought
in that case to follow _dicimus_, and it is noteworthy that in his
communication to Halm (printed on p. 854 of Bait., and Hahn's ed. of the
philosophical works, 1861) Madv. omits the word _tamen_ altogether, nor
does Bait. in adopting the suggestion notice the omission. _Ista diceret_:
"stated the opinions you asked for." _Poetam_: this both Halm and Bait.
treat as a gloss.

Sec.103. For this section cf. Lucullus' speech, passim, and Sext. _P.H._ I.
227 sq. _Academia ... quibus_: a number of exx. of this change from sing.
to plural are given by Madv. on _D.F._ V. 16. _Nullum_: on the favourite
Ciceronian use of _nullus_ for _non_ see 47, 141, and Madv. _Gram._ 455,
obs. 5. _Illud sit disputatum_: for the construction cf. 98; _autem_ is
omitted with the same constr. in _D.F._ V. 79, 80. _Nusquam alibi_: cf. 50.

Sec.104. _Exposuisset adiungit_: Madv. on _D.F._ III. 67 notices a certain
looseness in the use of tenses, which Cic. displays in narrating the
opinions of philosophers, but no ex. so strong as this is produced. _Ut aut
approbet quid aut improbet_: this Halm rejects. I have noticed among recent
editors of Cic. a strong tendency to reject explanatory clauses intro