Textual notes on Favorinus’ De exilio (Pap. Vat. Gr. 11 verso). In ch. 19,1, I suggest <α> μοι παρεσ̣τ̣ι̣ν εικοτως εμαυτου τιθεμαι και καλω instead of <ε>μοι γαρ εσ̣τ̣ι̣ν κτλ. (Tepedino Guerra), which would be repetitive and redundant. In ch. 20,4, I propose ατιμωσιν instead of α τιμωσιν; the ink trace in the spacing between the lines 14 and 15 seems to be a gamma; so the editors suppose that the copyist tried to correct αυριον δ’ in αυριόν γ’. More probably this trace is an apostrophe and not a gamma. Thus the only attested reading is αὔριον δ’. In ch. 22,1, I would read συμπαν or συναπαν instead of ειναι παν, which is syntactically untenable. In ch. 22,3, I propose οι [δε] τουναντιον instead of ου [δε] τουναντιον, which would imply a too complex structure.
Notes on Epicurus’ fr. 62 US. συνουσίη ωνησε μὲν ουδέποτε, αγαπητον δ’ ει μη εβλαψε and CIC. Tusc. V,94 genus hoc voluptatum optabile esse, si non obsit, prodesse numquam. The usual translation of CIC. Tusc. V,94, “This kind of pleasure is desirable, unless it does one harm”, is wrong. The right one is: “It would be desirable if this kind of pleasures did one no harm”. So, despite current opinion, Cicero’s translation of the Epicurean sentence αγαπητον δ’ ει μη εβλαψε is perfectly sound.