^{page 24 note 1} βραδὺτερον cannot imply that the Eristic will ‘include unnecessary species through making use of a roundabout unscientific method in place of dichotomy’ (Bury). He ignores species alto gether.

^{page 25 note 1} The words really mean ‘more and less in quantity’: but ‘more and less’ must be reserved in English for μλλν τε κα ἧττον in C 10, which refer to degree.

^{page 25 note 2} μειγνὺς in E 3 = immiscens (not in unum commiscens), and τατα means the πρατος γννα. αὐτν in E 4 means τν πρας χντων (=τς το πρατος γννης).

^{page 25 note 3} Literally ‘the having a right share in these’. τοὺτων, like τατα above and ταὐτ τατα below, does not mean the two kinds, but the various instances or manifestations of the Limit.

^{page 25 note 4} I retain γγιγνμενα (bracketed by Burnet) in A 3, and remove the colon after τατα.

^{page 25 note 5} Gesammelte Philolog. Schr. II pp.62–71.

^{page 25 note 6} Jackson's views were however made known before Vahlen's article appeared in a paper read to the Cambridge Philological Society in 1877: the paper in J. of Ph. merely repeats them, as far as our passage is concerned: it is therefore not unnatural that no reference is made to Vahlen.

^{page 25 note 7} The Philtbus of Plato, 1897.

^{page 25 note 8} Platon II p. 355.

^{page 25 note 9} C.Q. XV p. 2.

^{page 25 note 10} Die Platonischen Schriften p. 572.

^{page 26 note 1} He translted τοὐτων μφ. … γενσιται ‘When diese beiden, Unbegrenzter und Grenzartiges, zusammengeführt werden, wird auch jene, die Familie des πρας sichtbar werden’, but adds the comment: ‘Denn so ist es in der Tat: wenn Unbegrenztes einer bestimmten Art durch Beimischung des Grenzhaften Mass und Grenze erhält, so tritt gleicherweise die besondere Art des πρας zutage…’ But this comment appears (I)illicitly to import into συναγομνων the meaning συμμισγομνων (otherwise where is any ‘Beinmischung’ indicated?) and (2) to involve some distinction between τ περτοειδς and τ πραςἔχον which is unexplained and to me obscure.

^{page 26 note 2} For similiar uses of μειγνὺναι, κεραννὺναι or συγκεαννὺναι see 62B, 62E, and especially 63E λλ' ἢς … ταὺτας μεγνυ.

^{page 26 note 3} Loc. cit. p. 270. He translates ‘if we addthese (i.e. the πρατος γννα)’.

^{page 28 note 1} Platonica p. 217.

^{page 28 note 2} Appendix B to his edition.

^{page 28 note 3} C.Q. XV p.3.

^{page 28 note 4} Autour de Platon pp. 389 ff.

^{page 28 note 5} Commentary on the Timaeus p. 186, note 2.

^{page 29 note 1} I suspect that it is often a non-existent, rather than an actual, substantive that is implied. A case in point is Plato Theaet, 172E, where Soc. says that the issues at stake (οἱγνες) for the advocate are οὐδποτε τν ἄλλως λλ' ε τν περ αὐτο. Here not only the noun, but also the verb, is wanting.

^{page 29 note 2} I have translated ᾑρσθαι ‘has been secured’, though this word does not adequately express the combination of the two notions, choosing and capturing, which αἰρεῖν-αἰρεῖσθαι contains, and both of which I believe to have been present to Plato's mind here. I think that the notion of capturing is the more prominent, particularly in view of the parallel of Rep. 432B to which Burnet refers; nevertheless this fivefold classification is a κρσις (66C10, 67A14), a choice as well as a capture; we have caught our valuable possessions, but we have also chosen them in order of merit. It should not be assumed that, when English has different words to discriminate between two or more senses of a Greek word, there is always a clear discrimination, or pinning down to one sense, in the mind of a Greek writer.