 |
 |
 |
Compare Works, 10.409, where the second word is read, no doubt correctly, as ‘seva’, a form of the classical ‘saeva’. See also footnote 3 there. That footnote appears to be at odds with the version of the inscription at Notebook M2 p.90. It is suggested at Works, 10.409 that the Twelfth Capital reads ‘su(m), while the Thirty-Third reads ‘est’; that does not reflect Ruskin’s comments, and it does not reflect the present state of the inscription, so it is difficult to know what evidence is being used in Works.
|
|
|
[Version 0.05: May 2008]