No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
page 120 note 3 But ἰδεῖν λοξ⋯ν takes an accusative in Solon fr. 34; compare Eratosthen. Schol. A.P. v. 240.
page 121 note 1 See Housman, , Class. Quart. 1910, p. 117Google Scholar.
page 121 note 2 I trust that the editor of L and S will correct the quantities of various compounds of δ⋯ω. See Lobeck, , Parall., p. 418Google Scholar. The ε of εἴρυμα is easy to see in the facsimile (Von Arnim).
page 121 note 3 I have counted in this book alone at least eight other words omitted in L and S; why?