^{page 11 note 3} It can also, of course, with similar force come last, e.g. Ai. 852, Phil. 1280; but hardly after ‘not even’!

^{page 12 note 1} Published later in C.Q. n.s. IV, pp. 91–3Google Scholar, and it is from this that I now quote.

^{page 12 note 2} As it does in five passages, Aesch., Suppl. 544–6Google Scholar, P.V. 790, Soph. fr. 548 (=two passages, one in Aesch., see Pearson), Moschus, 2, 8–9. For Gibraltar Mr Lloyd-Jones cites Diodorus, 4, 18, but that context precludes all ambiguity.

^{page 12 note 3} Except Paley: see above.

^{page 13 note 1} ναίει, intransitive in 99, has to be supplied transitively with ποντ. αὐλ., but intransitively again with δισσ. ἀπ. κλ.; and ‘inhabit sea’ is a construction without parallel except, naturally, for marine deities (Eur., Hel. 1584Google Scholar).

^{page 13 note 2} As indeed also does κατασκοπήν.

^{page 14 note 1} That this was the proper verb may be seen from 1116; also from Apsines as cited by Murray (after end of his app. crit.). I take this opportunity to point out that Weil's ἀλλ’ εἰ μαθήσει συμβαλεῑν β. μάχην finds no true parallel in any extant example of μανθάνειν with infin. That construction means only learn to (not also how to, as L.S.J.), and is used in a peculiarly restricted sense, of some salutary spiritual experience. To the exx. in L.S.J. add Aesch., Pers. 100–3Google Scholar, Eur., Hipp. 731Google Scholar, Hclid. 272, I.A. 927, Rh. 473, fr. 282, 3; and similarly with the articular infin. the sense is psychological, Aesch., Eum. 86, 301Google Scholar, Soph., Ai. 555Google Scholar.

^{page 14 note 2} There is nowhere any question of an armed attack by P. alone; obviously he calls for ὅπλα simply in order to lead his army.

^{page 14 note 3} There is an independent reason for thinking that stichomythia may not have extended beyond 836; cf. Dodds's note on that line.