¹ ‘ Facile est et haec et alia omnia utcumque interpretari, siquod voles fingere licebit et Graecitatis rationem et usurn contemnere, sed, ut lenissime dicam, quid prodest locum difficiliorem sic interpretari, ut statim appareat meliorem interpretationem aut emendationem esse quaerendam? Quis non saepe vidit interpretationes mirificas, quorum auctoribus praeter sanam mentem et Graeci sermonis interiorem intelligeutiam nihil prorsus defuit? Ne dicam de Aeschyli locis, in quibus illo modo interpretandis multi iudicio, suo vim afferunt, proferam unum Aristophanis locum …’ Cobet Novae Lectiones p. VII (1858)

² V.L. p. 475.

³ MrMurray, ilbert, I am glad to see, does not reject the principle in his Euirpides, Andr. 289Google Scholar, Hipp. 733.

⁴ There is sometimes an intermediate stage when the particle appears in both places, as 0. T. 976 … Phoen. 726 v.l. Lycophr. 1412 γ Dio Chrys. I I. p. 384 Reiske .

⁵ άσιῆς here might suggest that in Alexis B's exclamation is an answer to bat with ἀσιή should we have had τις?

⁶ He need not alter the sentence more than is necessary for explanation, and since the stress is not on χρόνον but on is the proper order, as in Eur. Alc. 367 δ‘;νιτν’ ‘ as long as it is present,’ Plat. Theaet. 172 ‘ for so long as it remains approved.’ Dio Ghrys. II 249

⁷ So Prof. Jebb rightly reads: the MS. now has with a stop before and after it, as though τμαν were meant; but this may be left out of the argument.

⁸ Bacchyl. i. (15), ix. 38, x. 5, 40, Pind. 0. xii. 19, P. i. 2, 4, 6, iii. 6, iv. 7, N. i. 7, 18, v. 1, x. 6, 18, xi. 5, 12, I. i. 6, v. 6, vi. 25, fr. 133. 5 (ed. Bergk).

⁹ See Bergk Pindar p. 161. in Bacchyl. ix. 10 might be defended on this ground; but it would be easy to read κεκίνηκεν. In Pind. P. v. 42 is so hard to alter that I think it must be genuine, like in Bacehyl. xvi. 90. Epic lengthened vowels when it chose before consonants that could be held, like λ μ ν ρ sigma;.

¹⁰ Some may think it an argument in its favour that occurs in the same place of the corresponding line 65.

¹¹ Who must, from their office, be the Ω ρ α ι.

¹² Perhaps this should change places with μόλοιτέ for the sake of ‘responsion’ to διἰἀέρος in 1479.

¹³ But they have been misunderstood; the meaning is ‘who, after making the furthest enquiry in the world, can profess to ham discovered what is God…, when he sees … ’ τíςφησì (Musgrave restored τíς for τí) is common in this use; Trag. fr. adesp. 351, Euphron (Ath. 843 b) III p. 321 Kock, Vesp. 1497, Soph. Aj. 1413, Rhes. 149–154, I.T. 1047 (‘who volunteers?’) as Musgrave had corrected it already. P. V. 519 A.P. vii. 79 , Dio Chrys. II. 282 R. .

¹⁴ A common division of the enhoplion metre, e.g. Pind. P. xii. 1, 2 and 4, Eur. Med. 684, Soph. Trach. 121.

¹⁵ As νóμος δδε in Soph. Ant. 613.

¹⁶ The metre is an extension of Glyconic, as in the newly-published piece of Sappho , Bacchyl. xvii., Soph. O.G. 668, Eur. Hipp. 528. For Hephaestus and the-Nereids compare Nonn. D. 48. 399 seqq. Euripides probably had in his mind that passage of Hesiod (Jr. 85 Goettling) about the μάχαιρα made for Feleus by Hephaestus, in which occurs the line : Mr. A. B. Cook I expect would admit this among his verbal reminiscences.

¹⁷ ὀλέθριος is the prose word nsed in explanation; as in Phoen. 1530 : schol. . Therefore Aj. 403 may well have, been .

¹⁸ The variants are the usual corruptions of the Doric form, as in Pindar and Bacchvlides.

¹⁹ In Aesoh. Ag. 1461 read for . In Ag. 55 εíτις' Aπóλλων would be easier to support than the MS. ἥ τις.

²⁰ v.l. these are confounded in Cho. 990.

²¹ ἥμιν or ἥμὶν is required by metre in El. 495 (where I see now that in L ἥμῖν has been, made from ἦμιν), and ὗμιν or ὑμὶν in Trach. 640.

²² In Ewmen. 1008 the choice lies between χώρᾀ (Palsy) and χωρὶς (Linwood).

²³ And 228? phrýgui pulvínar poterat pingere, soliar deiugebat.