bold = Main text
   Liber, Caput     grey = Comment text

 1     Int,      II|   Those who demand a dogmatic statement of belief are mere busybodies81.
 2     Int,      IV|      the olden times223." The statement of Catulus, often referred
 3     Int,      IV|   need only imply such a bare statement on the part of the latter
 4     Int,      IV|     had been attempted in his statement of the day before. Cicero'
 5     Not,       1|      appeals to Philo for the statement that the New Academy is
 6     Not,       1|    Madv. A comparison of this statement of the ethical finis with
 7     Not,       1|  εννοια, which is Stoic. This statement might have been made both
 8     Not,       1|    importance, cf. the strong statement of Varro in Aug. XIX. 1
 9     Not,       1|      Strato: see II. 121. The statement in the text is not quite
10     Not,       1|     quaecunque. Cf. Goerenz's statement "negari omnino nequit hac
11     Not,       1|      Omnis paene veteres: the statement is audaciously inexact,
12     Not,       2|      have labefacta. Orelli's statement (note to his separate text
13     Not,       2|  words on the ground that the statement about Marius implies that
14     Not,       2|       said." Tollendus est: a statement which is criticised in 74.
15     Not,       2|     in his "Annals." The same statement is quoted in De Or. II.
16     Not,       2|  eagerly pressed the doubtful statement of the latter that the wise
17     Not,       2|       Non videam: this strong statement is ridiculed in 80. De remo
18     Not,       2|      if visis be supplied the statement corresponds tolerably with
19     Not,       2|  second premiss the following statement, that the wise man sometimes
20     Not,       2|     ειδεναι, a very different statement from the nihil sciri posse
21     Not,       2| moment when he makes the true statement. The root of the sophism