^{page 310 note 1} ⋯ντα⋯θα διατρ⋯βειν in Arist 1371^b 31, λαμπρ⋯ς τ⋯στ⋯ν in Plat. Gorg. 484 E.

^{page 311 note 1} So did Prof. Hardie (though with quite a different interpretation) in Acad, Oct. 31, 1891, including, perhaps rightly, αὕτη.

^{page 311 note 2} For this Liddell and Scott give ‘σιοκ⋯μος, Lacon. for θεο-κ⋯μος, with hair like the gods.’ But in Liddell and Scott, as I have said, nothing is surprising.

^{page 311 note 3} I should much like to know who Mr. F. D. is.

^{page 312 note 1} See Thesaur. s.v. ⋯δ⋯ω, and add Hesych. IV p. 318 Schmidt, and p. 332 ⋯σθησεν: ⋯θησεν. ἔπρασεν, probably for ὣδησεν: ὣπρσεν (aorist of πιπρ⋯σκω).

^{page 314 note 1} Perhaps κρινοκορώκα, but κριν⋯κα would be enough; cf. Strabo 321 on κρ⋯νακος.

^{page 316 note 1} C.R. xv. 402 and xvi. 28. A form I did not then know is κοινεών, restored by Scaliger in Eur. H.F. 149 (so Heath) and 339 Scaliger). There should be no hesitation now in accepting this: cf. Aesch. fr. 99. 6 , Kaibel Ep. p. 521 .