=8. FESTO= _Burman_ IVSSO _BCMFHIL_ IVSTO _T, sicut coni Merkel_. _Iusso_ has been explained since Merula as meaning that Ovid hopes the letter will arrive on the day it is told to; but the word seems rather strange, and lacks the point it has in the passages cited by Ehwald (_KB_ 64), _AA_ II 223-24 'iussus adesse foro, _iussa_ maturius _hora_ / fac semper uenias, nec nisi serus abi' and Prop IV vi 63-64 (of Cleopatra) 'illa petit Nilum cumba male nixa fugaci, / hoc unum, _iusso_ non moritura _die_' (she would commit suicide at a time of her own choosing), or at _Aen_ X 444 (cited by Owen in 1894) 'socii cesserunt _aequore iusso_', where _iusso_ stands by hypallage for _iussi_. The meaning of _iusto_ is inappropriate for the present passage, as will be seen from Suet _Tib_ 4 2 'retentis ultra _iustum tempus_ ['the time allowed'] insignibus'. Burman's conjecture _festo_ was not placed in the text even by its author, but it seems a reasonable solution to the difficulty. For it Burman cited 56 'hic quoque te _festum_ consule _tempus_ agam'; see as well _Fast_ I 79-80 'uestibus intactis Tarpeias itur in arces, / et populus _festo_ concolor ipse suo est'. The corruption of so straightforward an epithet may seem unlikely, but compare Prop IV xi 65-66 'uidimus et fratrem sellam geminasse curulem; / consule quo, _festo_ [_Koppiers_: facto _codd_] _tempore_, rapta soror'. =9. ATQVI= _unus e duobus Hafniensibus Heinsii_. The ATQVE of _BCMFHILT_ is possibly right. For the adversative sense here required, _OLD_ _atque_ 9 cites Plautus _Aul_ 287-88 '_atque ego_ istuc, Anthrax, aliouorsum dixeram, / non istuc quod tu insimulas', _Mer_ 742, and Ter _Heaut_ 189 (apparently a misprint for 187 'atque etiam nunc tempus est') from comedy, but from the classical period only Cic _Att_ VI i 2 'ac putaram paulo secus' and _Fam_ XIV iv 5 '_atque ego_, qui te confirmo, ipse me non possum', and instances of _ac tamen_ at _Fam_ VII xxiii 1, Caesar _BC_ III 87 4, and Tac _Ann_ III 72. In view of the doubtful status of adversative _atque_ at the time of Ovid and the ease of corruption of _atqui_ to _atque_ I have followed Heinsius in reading _atqui_. Heinsius similarly restored _atqui_ from his _codex Richelianus_ for the other manuscripts' _atque_ at _Tr_ II 121-24 'corruit haec ... sub uno ... crimine lapsa domus. / _atqui_ ea sic lapsa est ut surgere, si modo laesi / ematuruerit Caesaris ira, queat'; and _atque_ is found for the correct _atqui_ in some manuscripts at Hor _Sat_ I ix 52-53 '"magnum narras, uix credibile!" "atqui / sic habet"' and _EP_ I ii 33-34 '_atqui_ / si noles sanus, curres hydropicus', and in most manuscripts at _Ep_ I vii 1-5 'Quinque dies tibi pollicitus me rure futurum / Sextilem totum mendax desideror. _atqui_, / si me uiuere uis sanum recteque ualentem, / quam mihi das aegro, dabis aegrotare timenti, / Maecenas, ueniam'. =10. SINCERO.= 'Unbroken'.