^{page 181 note 1} Eroticorum Fragmtnta Papyracea (Teubner, 1922), pp. 25–27Google ScholarPubMed.

^{page 181 note 2} Wilcken published as full an account of this Theban MS. as he could, together with such columns of the text as he had transcribed in Egypt, in Archiv fur Papyrusforsch. I. (1900), pp. 227 sqqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 181 note 3} Loc. cit., p. 255.

^{page 181 note 4} , Wilcken, loc. cit., p. 231 and p. 255Google Scholar.

^{page 181 note 5} Ibid., p. 262.

^{page 181 note 6} Le Origini del romcmzo greco, pp. 90–94.

^{page 181 note 7} Op. cit., p. 91.

^{page 181 note 8} πάѵтες δέ ήϰθοѵτο λοУιζόμενοɩ τò περί т⋯ς ⋯εɩλ⋯ς αṽτ⋯ν ⋯παίδευτον where αṽτ⋯ν seems to refer to the suitors and πάντες to the citizens, who felt that they were being unfairly deprived of their chance to win Chione's hand: Уε αṽτ⋯ν τɩς έτόλμα' μετ έκείνους т⋯νκόρην (2. 9–22).

^{page 181 note 9} , Wilcken, loc. cit., p. 256Google Scholar (III. 23) and p. 262.

^{page 181 note 10} , Lavagnini, op. cit., pp. 92–94Google Scholar.

^{page 182 note 1} Oṽτοɩ μ⋯νἦρ⋯ <ς> [ψ] περ[ί αѷ] τ⋯ν βουλεϋεσθ is the transitional phrase (2. 1–3).

^{page 182 note 2} 2. 22.

^{page 182 note 3} 3. 7–10.

^{page 182 note 4} According to Lavagnini nobody speaks except Chione and her mother, so that the masculines refer to two women and a number of hypothetical and unimportant men. If one of the speakers was a man the case would be different.

^{page 182 note 5} 2. 22–24.

^{page 182 note 6} , Wilcken, loc. cit., p. 256Google Scholar.

^{page 182 note 7} , Lavagnini, op. cit., p. 91Google Scholar. He is actually attacking Garin's theory. , Garin (Stud. Hal. class. 17 [1909], p. 424, note 2)Google Scholar suggests that Chione's father is the speaker in the first fragment. Whether he or one of his councillors is actually speaking, Garin, I think, was right in assuming that the king is at any rate present.

^{page 182 note 8} 1. 5–9.

^{page 182 note 9} I agree with Wilcken that columns 1 and 2 stood side by side on the same page.

^{page 182 note 10} 2. 1–7.

^{page 183 note 1} Ninus fragments A IV. 20 to V. 36; cf. Heliod. X. 18–21, 20 and 33.

^{page 183 note 2} 3. 2–13.

^{page 183 note 3} IIροσδόκɩμό 238–229 (3. 1–2).

^{page 183 note 4} Eɩ μή δυνάμεθα ζ⋯ν μετ' άλήλων… [αποθνήσκεɩν τ⋯] τελενταίον ήμ [ίν]απολείπεταɩ(3. 17–23). The introductio n of the word αποθνήσκεɩν in some form is due to , Wilamowitz (Hermes XLIV. [1909], pp. 464–466)Google Scholarand Lavagnini.

^{page 183 note 5} E.g. Charito 3. 7. 6; Xen. of Eph. I. 11. 5, 2. 1. 6, etc.; Heliod., p. 7. 29–30 (Bekker).

^{page 183 note 6} 3. 23–26.

^{page 183 note 7} 03C0;ρότερον $$n$$ is my proposal; for other suggestions see critical notes in Erot. Fragm. Pap., p. 26. There is room for nine letters.

^{page 183 note 8} Cf. , Wilcken, loc. cit., pp. 231–232,Google Scholar, Gardthausen, Griechische Palaographie I. (1911), p. 158Google ScholarThompson, Maunde, Introd. to Gr. and hat. Pal., p. 54Google Scholar.

^{page 184 note 1} Loc. cit., pp. 238–229.

^{page 184 note 2} One of the tendencies of Greek Romance seems to have been to develop out of romantic history (Alexander Romance and Ninus Romance) into romantic fiction (Charito, Heliodorus, Achilles Tatius); cf. Ludvikovskỳ, Řeekỳ Román Dobrodruinỳ, pp. 34 ff.

^{page 184 note 3} Cf. , Wilcken, loc. cit., p. 263Google Scholar.

^{page 184 note 4} Cf. , Calderini, Le avventure di Chens, e Calliroe, p. 226Google Scholar; and for arguments based on internal evidence, cf. , Somid, Pauly-Wissowa III. 2168–9Google Scholar.

^{page 184 note 5} Cf. , Grenfell and , Hunt, Oxyrh. Pap. X., p. 135Google Scholar.