^{page 253 note 1} A complete list, though entertaining, would drive the text into the roof of the page. See Wecklein, N., Aeschyli Agamemnon (1885), Appendix, p. 19Google Scholar; Housman, A. E., J. Phil, xvi (1888), 254 ff.Google Scholar; Dawe, R. D., Repertory of Conjectures on Aeschylus, 1965Google Scholar. The fullest discussion is in E. Fraenkel's edition of the Agamemnon (1950), ad loc. I am grateful to Dr. W. G. Arnott and Professor P. T. Stevens for helpful criticism of an early draft of this note.

^{page 253 note 2} ‘Gentler Medicines in the Agamemnon’, C.Q. xiv (1964), 7–8.Google Scholar

^{page 254 note 1} I assume with Fraenkel and Page that in view of the strophe a syllable must have dropped out after συνορμ⋯νοις (Fraenkel reads ⋯π⋯νθεια, Page συνορμ⋯νοισι), and that Ἑλλ⋯δος will become Ἔλλᾱνος. to respond to σιγᾱς.

^{page 254 note 2} This conjecture was adopted by N. Wecklein (Teubner, 1888), A. Sidgwick (1898), Headlam, W. (J. Phil, xxiii (1895), 305–306)Google Scholar, P. Groeneboom (1944), and P. Ubaldi (1954).

^{page 255 note 1} Cf. Lindholm, Elmo, Stilistische Studien, 102–103 (Lund, 1931)Google Scholar, and Fraenkel, vol. iii, 574.