The article argues for an emendation in Plin. HN 9.126. Modern editors are accustomed to print the text cum testa uiuas, adopting J. Hardouin’s conjecture for cum terra uitis, the reading transmitted in most manuscripts. Nevertheless, the overlooked manuscript reading contritis conchis allows us to deduce a palaeographically neater solution contritis if conchis is considered a gloss which entered the text.

This article deals with a well-known crux in Juvenal (6.195). Previous conjectures are discussed before a new emendation is proposed.

This note discusses two places in Statius’ Thebaid (6.22 and 6.224), in which the transmitted text may be improved, and proposes new emendations.

This note presents a new supplement for Euripides, Heracles 767.

Proba’s Cento Vergilianus contains a corruption at line 42, sometimes printed as two half-lines separated by a lacuna (42a–b). Previous attempts to emend the passage based upon the four classical elements have met with limited success. This article argues for a novel reconstruction of the passage based upon the six days of the biblical creation, summarized in reverse. Two possible variants of the reconstruction are presented and evaluated on textual, metrical, compositional and contextual grounds.

This article supports Livineius’ deletion of τϵ καὶ ϕλέγϵι in Soph. Aj. 714 πάνθ’ ὁ μέγας χρόνος μαραίνϵι by means of a comparative examination of tragic quotations in Stobaeus’ Anthology, where Aj. 714 is quoted without τϵ καὶ ϕλέγϵι (1.8.24).

The article discusses a passage in chapter 49 of the Hippocratic treatise On Regimen. It defends the transmitted text against a conjecture proposed by R. Joly, the author of the Corpus Medicorum Graecorum edition.

This note argues for the restoration of the MS reading ἀέξϵι in Orph. fr. 779d v. 5 Bernabé (= 287 Kern), which transmits verses from the poem Πϵρὶ ἐπϵμβάσϵων (On Planetary Entrances) attributed to Orpheus.

This article explores the relationship of a minor variant in Hebrews 2.9 – Jesus dead ‘apart from God’ (χωρὶς θɛοῦ) – with the minor variant of Mark 15.34 and more broadly with Psalm 22.2, as suggested by Harnack, Michel, Zuntz, Elliott, Ehrman and Rodgers. First, it highlights new elements in the file of the evidence of Heb 2.9 and compares it with the case of Mark 15.34. Secondly, it demonstrates that paying attention to the minor variants of Heb 2.9 and Mark 15.34 allows one to grasp better the diversity of Jewish and early Christian readings of Ps 22.2 or Ps 21.2 LXX: these readings provide a plausible context to explain the emergence of these two minor variants.

The article makes a case for a thorough reappraisal of the text of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica by discussing a number of textual problems in Book 8. It proposes some twenty new conjectures, as well as reviving six old ones that seem to have been undeservedly forgotten.

Notes on the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Life of Alexander.

This article argues for an emendation to Ovid, Amores 3.9, Ovid's lament for Tibullus. The transmitted text of line 59 would seem to present a contradiction: Ovid speculates about aliquid nisi nomen et umbra surviving death, and then proceeds in the next few lines to identify that aliquid as, precisely, Tibullus’ umbra. Ovid's original text was most likely aliquid nisi nomen et ossa, referring to a burial site and funerary inscription; with this text, Ovid reproduces details from Tibullus 1.3, a poem which he reworks throughout his elegy.

Rhet. Her. 1.2 quoad eius fieri poterit contains the surprising reading quoad eius. Earlier scholarship has debated the authenticity of this reading and its relationship to quod eius. A survey of the sources shows that quod eius appears in a number of inscriptions as well as in the transmitted text of nine passages within surviving Latin literature. So that phrase must be authentic; it appears to have arisen as a limiting formula in the language of the law. In two other passages, quoad eius appears in inferior manuscripts that lack authority, while the reading transmitted by authoritative textual sources is quod eius. Rhet. Her. 1.2 is the only passage in which quoad eius is the transmitted reading. This phrase is also linguistically problematic. Hence it is very likely to be corrupt. It probably arose as a conflation of quod eius with quoad, both of which are attested in similar contexts. On balance, it seems more likely that the original reading in this passage was quoad.

This paper raises objections to the constitution of these lines in the OCT. The lines are gnomic but they generalize based on an actual sequence of events just described and should contain an allusion to the offence that will cause the Greeks to perish, the outrage against Athena's temple. This, it is argued, stood in a lacuna best marked after 95. The article has three theses: (1) sacking ‘cities, temples, and tombs’ is implausible because the latter two are parts of the first; (2) plundering tombs refers to nothing in the play, nor was this thought of as an offence against the gods; (3) 96–7 do not refer to the offence that causes the fool's death but are a description of his success, the destruction of the hated enemy population. That success stands in ironic contrast with his subsequent death.

At Aur. Vict. Caes. 10.5, the reading lautus should be retained; -que is a dittography and should be deleted. At 13.3, satis should be emended into sagatis. This article also provides a brief analysis of Victor's references to clothing and attempts to explain why he comments on the Dacian costume at 13.3, the only ethnographic reference to clothing in the entire work.

This paper discusses an earlier emendation to fr. 54 GRF Funaioli from Varro's De bibliothecis and argues that, while the text et citro refers to cedar oil, it should not be emended to et cedro. A comparison with a passage from Pliny the Elder (HN 13.86) is used to support the view presented in the article.