No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 February 2009
1 At p. 130, n. 104 he describes the contents as Prolegomena ad Homerulum.
2 B. argues strongly, pp. 47–50, against alteration of the paradosis of v. 7 (pro (per)- tulerant ex quo). Kilpatrick's, R. S. recent suggestion of optulerant ex quo, which produces the acrostich ITALICOS (Latomus 51 [1992], 857–859)Google Scholar, creates more difficulties than it solves.
3 nee compar erat at v. 897 is a medieval conjecture deserving of no approval, whatever be thought of the prosody.