^{page 129 note 1} Pindaros p. 260.

^{page 129 note 2} Schol. Pyth. XI 23 a.

^{page 129 note 3} Cf. Farnell, L. R., The Works of Pindar I p. 146Google Scholar.

^{page 130 note 1} P.S.I. X (1934). No. 1174Google Scholar. The fragment was first published with a full discussion by Coppola, G., Introduzionc a Pindaro pp. 231–242Google Scholar.

^{page 130 note 2} Fr. 2 Diehl.

^{page 130 note 3} VIII 778–9.

^{page 130 note 4} Theb. II 134–140.

^{page 131 note 1} Cf. Schroeder, O., Pindars Pythitn p. 103Google Scholar.

^{page 131 note 2} Cf. Wilamowitz, , Pindaros pp. 186–7Google Scholar.

^{page 132 note 1} Frs. 13–14 Diehl.

^{page 133 note 1} Cf. Wilamowitz, , Pindaros pp. 477–480Google Scholar.

^{page 134 note 1} Aischylos: Orestie II p. 251.

^{page 134 note 2} Fr. 12 Diehl

^{page 134 note 3} Pindaros p. 263.

^{page 135 note 1} The problem is discussed with great care and fairness by Farnell, , The Works of Pindar pp. 221–5Google Scholar. It is of course possible that the Thrasydaeus of 454 is different from the Thrasydaeus of 454.

^{page 136 note 1} The whole situation is discussed by Wade-Gery, H. T. in J.H.S. LII (1932) pp. 211–213Google Scholar.

^{page 137 note 1} For ⋯λικ⋯ο meaning ‘time of life’ as here compare Pyth. IV 157, γηραι⋯ν μ⋯ρος ⋯λικ⋯ας.Also Aesch. Pers. 914, Plat. Gorg. 484c.

^{page 141 note 1} Trs. W. Headlam.