Of Claudiana may be mentioned Vogt, _De Claudiani carminum quae Stilichonem praedicant fide historica_ (1863); Ney, _Vindictae Claudianeae_ (1865); T. Hodgkin’s _Claudian, the last of the Roman Poets_ (1875); E. Arens’ _Quaestiones Claudianae_ (1894); two studies by A. Parravicini, (1) _Studio di retorica sulle opere di Claudio Claudiano_ (1905), and (2) _I Panegirici di Claudiano_ (1909); J. H. E. Crees’ _Claudian as an Historical Authority_ (Cambridge Historical Essays, No. 17, 1908); Professor Postgate’s article on the editions of Birt and Koch in the _Class. Rev._ (vol. ix. pp. 162 _et sqq._), and the same scholar’s Emendations in the _Class. Quarterly_ of 1910 (pp. 257 _et sqq._). Reference may also be made to Professor Bury’s appendix to vol. iii. of his edition of Gibbon (1897, under “Claudian”) and to Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. xxx. _The Encomiums of Claudius Claudianus_. Vollmer’s article in Pauly-Wissowa’s Lexicon is a mine of information, but for completeness Birt’s introduction (over 200 pp. long) stands alone. The curious may find an interesting light thrown on Claudian and his circle by Sudermann’s play, _Die Lobgesänge des Claudian_ (Berlin, 1914). * * * * * All Claudian’s genuine works are translated in the present volumes with the exception of the two-line fragment “De Lanario” (Birt, c.m.c. lii [lxxxviii.]). The appendix “vel spuria vel suspecta continens” has been rejected both by Birt and Koch, and I have in this followed their example. The eight Greek poems attributed to Claudian are at least of doubtful authenticity, though Birt certainly makes out a good case for the “Gigantomachia” (a fragment of 77 lines). The remainder consists of short epigrams, two on the well-worn theme of the water enclosed in the crystal and two Christian ones. These last are almost certainly not the work of Claudius Claudianus but of Claudianus Mamertus, presbyter of Vienne _circ._ 474 A.D. We know from Sidonius (_Ep._ iv. 3. 8) that this Claudian was a writer of sacred poetry both in Greek and Latin--indeed the famous “Pange lingua” is attributed to him. * * * * * A word should perhaps be said as to the numbering of the poems. It is much to be regretted that Birt did not cut adrift from Gesner’s system, or at least that he only did so in the “Carmina minora.” The resultant discrepancy in his (and Koch’s) edition between the order of the poems and their numbering is undoubtedly a nuisance, but I have not felt justified, in so slight a work as the present one, in departing from the now traditional arrangement. I wish, in conclusion, to express my thanks to my colleagues, Mr. R. L. A. Du Pontet and Mr. E. H. Blakeney: to the first for valuable suggestions on several obscure points, and to the second for help in reading the proofs. MAURICE PLATNAUER. WINCHESTER, _September 1921_. [1] _Cf._ vii. 99 _et sqq._