^{page 1 note 1} Teuffel, RSmische Litteratur6 (1910), II. p. 234,

^{page 3 note 1} Other mistakes of c will be found below on and to these must be added, as I hope to show the later the reading which c shares with against the consensthe most remarkable on p. 6. show later, the readings which c shares with against the consensus of E p. I have collected p. 6

^{page 4 note 1} On these forms, see Housman, Journal of Philology, vol. xxxi., pp. 236 sqq.

^{page 6 note 1} The m is not unlike id phrigium p.Ag. 732 fugitiuum p (for furtimim; futiuum ? A)

^{page 6 note 2} I.e Od misread as Qd.

^{page 6 note 3} I.e. nil‘for ul’. Cf. Tro. 68

^{page 6 note 4} Cf. H. F. 1080 torua E p (?)tot tua c.

^{page 7 note 1} It is perhaps also worth noting that there is Troad. 1023 nemo non comparatus p Exc. B, striking agreement between p and the text of B. some excerpts from the tragedies contained in the thirteenth century MS. 479i in the Royal Library, Brussels (Exc. B):

^{page 8 note 1} H. F. 592 decus E p d′s c; but d′s may have been the reading of A, and decus a conjecture of p

^{page 9 note 1} These lists do not include the following readings of c p, which disagree with the account of A given or implied by the Teubner edition of 1902, but which my MSS. show to be predominant or universal in: H. F. 8 tepenti, 109 furit362 agent (for gerant), 664 imiicti, 680 lethes, 769 puppim, 797 ferox, 826 caput, 1005 dextram, 1038 dabis, 1118 sera, 1123 seuo, 1181 mihi (for Lyci), 1191 ne [me p], (for tuae), 1319 hanc ego manum.

^{page 11 note 1} I am not sure of H. 0. 19T3, 1937, as I commentary on these points, and my English failed to examine the Italian MSS. of the authority is missing here.

^{page 13 note 1} Cf. description of Vat., During, Hermes, vol. 42, pp. 119–120.

^{page 14 note 1} At H.F. 536 the lemma of the commentary agrees with the error of c p multis (for mutis), though Treveth apparently interprets mutis, ‘quod dum gelatur non facit collisionem tumultuosam cum litoribus’.

^{page 14 note 2} This list shows how the text of Soc. etc. is partly dependent on, partly independent of, the reading of T.

^{page 18 note 1} If my information concerning Phoen. 115, Med. 168, Ag. 216, H.O. 1002 is correct, these partial steps towards the corruption of c are especially instructive.