No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
page 364 note 1 Vitruvius Archit. v. 4 translating Aristoxenus proves this incidentally.
page 365 note 1 Omitting with Keil the senseless accretion ‘quod ea propior utramque est quam ilia superior, et inferior inter se.’
page 365 note 2 De aceentu ling. Lot. (Acta Societatis Philologae Lipsiensis, tom, vi.) p. 81, where is proposed for the missing fifth accent. Considerations of sense and palaeographical probability require the perfect participle; and may be read. But is better. Schöll's discrimination of the three varieties of the circumflex is quite correct so far as it goes; but he does not seem to have realised the great importance of the grammarian's whole account.