Abstract

As the apparent variant is in the text, Ludvvich alters the scholion into, which has not been found in any MS. so far. The only noticeable point prima facie about is that it is an. Therefore I would read. Ludwich's index to his A.H.T. gives cases of the omission of ov or OVK in the scholia. We need not restrict There is too much tendency to restrict usage in matters of language. At one time it was believed that μ⋯ποτε was the property of Didymus! ‘passage’ does not occur in the scholia we possess, τόπος however does. Compare the note on H 96⋯ν ἄλλῳ ὑβριτα⋯. We must supply in sense χωρ⋯ῳ, for the reference is to Callim. Del. 69, where this is the meaning of ⋯πειλητ⋯ρες.