82 Mai, iv. p. 299.—The Catenæ, inasmuch as their compilers are observed to have been very curious in such questions, are evidently full of _disjecta membra_ of the work. These are recognisable for the most part by their form; but sometimes they actually retain the name of their author. Accordingly, Catenæ have furnished Mai with a considerable body of additional materials; which (as far as a MS. Catena of Nicetas on S. Luke, [Cod. A. _seu_ Vat. 1611,] enabled him,) he has edited with considerable industry; throwing them into a kind of Supplement. (Vol. iv. pp. 268-282, and pp. 283-298.) It is only surprising that with the stores at his command, Mai has not contrived to enlighten us a little more on this curious subject. It would not be difficult to indicate sundry passages which he has overlooked. Neither indeed can it be denied that the learned Cardinal has executed his task in a somewhat slovenly manner. He does not seem to have noticed that what he quotes at pp. 357-8—262—283—295, is to be found in the _Catena_ of _Corderius_ at pp. 448-9—449—450—457.—He quotes (p. 300) from an unedited Homily of John Xiphilinus, (_Cod. Vat._ p. 160,) what he might have found in Possinus; and in Cramer too, (p. 446.) He was evidently unacquainted with Cramer’s work, though it had been published 3 (if not 7) years before his own,—else, at p. 299, instead of quoting Simon, he would have quoted Cramer’s _Catenæ_, i. 266.—It was in his power to solve his own shrewd doubt, (at p. 299,—concerning the text of a passage in Possinus, p. 343,) seeing that the Catena which Possinus published was transcribed by Corderius from a MS. in the Vatican. (Possini _Præfat._ p. ii.) In the Vatican, too, he might have found the fragment he quotes (p. 300) from p. 364 of the _Catena_ of Possinus. In countless places he might, by such references, have improved his often manifestly faulty text. 83 Mai quotes the following from Latinus Latinius (_Opp._ ii. 116.) to Andreas Masius. Sirletus (Cardinalis) “scire te vult in Siciliâ inventos esse ... libros tres Eusebii Cæsariensis _de Evangeliorum Diaphoniâ_, qui ut ipse sperat brevi in lucem prodibunt.” The letter is dated 1563. I suspect that when the original of this work is recovered, it will be found that Eusebius digested his “Questions” _under heads_: e.g. περὶ το τάφου, καὶ τῆς δοκούσης διαφωνίας (p. 264): περὶ τῆς δοκούσης περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως διαφωνίας. (p. 299.)