¹ Cf. Montfaucon, , Diarium Italicum (Paris 1702) 354, 365–6, 394–5Google Scholar.

² Cf. Vitelli, , S.I.F.C. ii (1894) 540Google Scholar; the librarian kindly confirms that it is still there (2.9.74). It first came to the notice of another scholar not mentioned by P., Osann, who realised that it was copied from F for the printing of the first edition; Osann also inspected F and collated 1.2–3 and the whole of book 5 (cf. Passow ix).

³ My authority for the readings of F is a microfilm kindly supplied by the Laurenziana. As I cannot read quite everything on it, my list may be incomplete.

⁴ So far as I am aware, the first scholar to upset Diller's attribution of it to the sixteenth century was Professor B. P. Reardon, who inspected it before P. did and told me before P.'s edition appeared that it was transcribed from a copy of the editio princeps corrected with the help of Miscellaneae Observationes and ď;Orville's edition of Chariton. I can add that according to Bibliotheca Heberiana xi (1836) no. 1626 it was written by Brunck (1729–1803); cf. Catalogue ďune partie des livres de la Bibliothèque de Rich. Franç. Phil. Brunck (Strasbourg 1801), where no. 1559 is an interleaved and annotated copy of the editio princeps, no. 1560 the five books of the novel ‘emendati manuque elegantissima descripti’, and no. 1562 a copy of ďOrville's Chariton.