No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
page 140 note 1 The tourth line (‘ Qua…figuram’), which Dr. Magnus ascribes to ε is not in the manuscript. (Dr. Gilson; the Keeper of the MSS., has very kindly verified the point, and endorses my report.)
page 140 note 2 Or, according to others, Tellus and Ladon: see Munro and Aetna, line 6, and the works there cited.
page 140 note 3 Lines 577 to 578 might be thought to imply that the father had not intervened, Earth being apparently the agent.
page 140 note 4 But cf. 13. 180 (q.v), Et ldquo;fer opem, Galatea mihi, mihi ferte, parents.”
page 141 note 1 Since this was writtem, I notice that Merkel in teh Preface to his second edition also cites these two passages from Aeschylus. He keeps the half-line which others reject; but his text of the whole is not altogether satisfactory.
page 141 note 1 If in some ‘forbear’ of theirs line 544 began with fessa (see 5. 618), not victa, the omission might easily have occurred.
page 141 note 2 To the two examples in Ellis (Anecdot. Oxon. Class. Ser. I. 5, anni 1885) at 2 823 and 3, 172, add another, viz 2 755, which is not ‘omitted’ but placed before 754 :—a total of three only in some two thousand lines and more.
page 141 note 3 = the symbol for ldquo;equals.”
page 141 note 4 vel ‘dehiscas!’