^{page 114 note 1} It is omitted by A. (Par. inter reg.2712), ertainly awkward. Blaydes, following Meineke, (Vindic, p. 100)Google Scholar, preferred to read τᾦ ναυκλρῳ πρζῃ

^{page 114 note 2} Fr. 166. Cf. 165 (K.).

^{page 114 note 3} Müller-Strübing, , Ar. und die Htstorische Kritik(1873), p. 326sqq.Google Scholar, suggests that Marpsias = Ktesias. Cf. also Ach. 702.

^{page 114 note 4} Op. cit. p. 29 sqq.

^{page 114 note 5} Themistius, , Quomodo philos.etc. (Dind.,398)Google Scholar, ΄ϒπέρβολος ό λυχνοποις καί Δ ι ο κ λ ς ό λ ω π ο δ ύ τ η ς καί Μελητίδς ό νόητος is of interest, but need not be more than a hasty infer ence from Av. 712 and 1490 sqq. Cf. Strübing, Müller, op. cit., p. 33Google Scholar.

^{page 114 note 6} Bull. d. Acad. roy. d. Belg. 1903, pp. 647.

^{page 114 note 7} N.B. also Euelpides' adventure, 496 sqq.; which is brought into connexion with Andoc de Myst.37 sq., by , W. L. Lorimer, C.R. XXIX.(1915). P. IIIGoogle Scholar.

^{page 114 note 8} Ad Ach. 1166.

^{page 114 note 9} Cf.Aristophon, fr. 4 (K), which also gives nicknames drawn from mythology.

¹⁰ As in Plat. Phaed. 87B. θοιμτιον ō μπεíχετο αὐτòσ ὐπηνμενοσ, In Plat. Hipp. mi.368c. ὑποσματα ἂ εῖχεσ ἓπησθα αὐτóσ σκντοτομσαι και τò ìμτιον ὑπναι καì τòν χτωνíσκον the point is the garments are his own manufacture, not that manufactured garments for himself to wear. So too, in Plat. Charm., 161E τοὖ I'óμον τοὖ κελεὖοντοσ τó αντοὖ íμτον ὑπαíνειν ὑπαíνειν καí πλὐνειν— ‘ ‘each man must be his own manufacturer But I don't think this point can be pressed.’

^{page 114 page 11} Cited by Leeuwen, Vanad Aves 1490Google Scholar: rather inconsistently with the view he takes his note on Ach.1166.

^{page 114 page 12} There are some rather avuncular injunctions elsewhere in the Birds, e.g. to the πατραλοíασ 1360–69, and the σνκπŐντησ the 1433–35, 1446–49. But Orestes is not elsewhere treated seriously; and πóσνσισ is usually material for a joke. Cf. Eccl.667–71, or Ran.1075.

^{page 114 note 13} Farreus (Ven. 1542), Grynaeus (Frankfurt, 1544), Rapheleng(Leyden, 1600), Scaliger (Ley den, 1624).

^{page 114 note 14} Op. cit. Notes supplémentaires sur les Oiseaux d'Ar., p. 671.

^{page 114 note 15} The Birds and Frogs translated(1927),. 120.

^{page 114 note 16} πηλòν … ōρλασον Pearson ad Soph, frag. 482 (cf. fragg. 510, 787) writes: ‘The passage in Ar.(Av.839) shows that the phrase. (π. óπρλζειν) was particularly applicable to preparation of mortar or concrete for building operations.’ Surely this is more natural than to suppose that 839 refers to the mixing of material for making bricks.

^{page 114 note 17} E.g. Daremberg, and Saglio, , s.v. Figlinum, p. 1119Google Scholar.

^{page 114 note 18} Cf. Robertson, D. S., A Handbook of Greek and Roman Architecture, pp. 4and 235Google Scholar.

^{page 114 note 19} F. Wieseler, I find, had the same thought. Cf. Nov. sched. crit. in Ar. Av.attached to Index scholarum … in Acad. Georg. Augusta habitarum Oct. 1882-Mar. 1883, p. 17: ‘mentionem murorum aedificationis … ab Aristophane omnino non esse factum, tam est mirum, ut Meinekius, Din-dorfius, Kockius suo iure in Vs. 1050 inter κατóπιν et σπερ excidisse nonnulla uerba statu-erint.’ He suggests έπλινθύϕυν=‘lateres texu erunt’ for έπλινθοϕƄρουν, comparing πλινθυϕής Aesch. P.V. 450, and adding ‘accedit, quod etiam uerbum περιεζωσμέναι magis ad opifices quam ad baiulos aptum est.’ In ντται he thinks there may have been a play on νσαι, cf. πνράν ξύλα, βμον νσαι. (Similarly the storks are given their task because their name suggested the (tau;εῖχοσ IIελαρλικóν). In defence of (πλινθὐπουν one might add Plat. Critias 116B (Τά οίκοδομήματα) μειγνύντες τούς λίθονς ποικίλα ϋ ϕ α ι ν ο ν.

^{page 114 note 20} In I.G. 2²463, 54–58 (307/6 B.C.) πλινθοβολήοει [ἔ]ξ στοίΧομς which must mean ‘lay six courses of brick on top.’ The sense ‘to repair with brickwork’ (‘repiquage’ Daremberg, and Saglio, s.v. structura, p. 1151)Google Scholaris sometimes possible; but not, I think, the sense πλινθουλκεῖν ‘to make bricks’ which H. Van Herwerden suggests (Lex. Grace. Supplet. s.v.βάλλειν, q.v.for further reff.). L. and S. translate πλ βάλλειν and άναβάλλειν as ‘to lay bricks’; so too έπιπλινθοβολεῖν supr.

^{page 114 note 21} Very likely the word accounts for this interpretation. It occurs in Plat. Phileb.56c, with the scholium τεκτονικόν έστιν ὂργανον & προσάγοντες εύθύνονσι τ στρεβλ ξύλα; and also in Ditt. Syll. 540,118. (Cf. Van Leeuwen's note on 1149.)

^{page 114 note note 22} ‘The Scholia on the Aves of Aristophanes’ (1914): from which all the scholia quoted in this article are reported.

^{page 114 note 23} Hesych. gives παῖν=παῖδα; and pronounced παἲν the form occurs in Ap. Rhod. and the Anthology (Rutherford).

^{page 114 note 24} Op. cit., p. 18.

^{page 114 note 25} With the help of a reference to Piccolomini, , Rendic. Acad. Line, 1893, V. 2, 101sqqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 115 note 26} The part of this inscription here quoted was first published in 1883 (C. I. Att. II. 2, p. 516, 516, 834B).

^{page 115 note 27} ‘Qui muro perfecto quae adhuc restant in superficie lapidum aspera et inaequalia laevigat. Cf. V. 177 τοῖς άποξέσασιν παραστάόαςʼ (Dittenberger). On Van Leeuwen's explanation of ύπαγωγεύς, see below, p. 111.

^{page 115 note 28} Leeuwen, Van, Enchiridion Dict. Epicae, p. 256Google Scholar, groups ύπαγωγεύς (if it means an implement) wit h such words as πνιγεύς, ṕυτήρ, μετρητής The suffixes, denoting the activities of persons, were extended ‘by a kind of animism’ to things of similar function. Cf. the substantival use of the masc. partic. τένων,άμείβοντες. On έπαγωγεύς=ʼ ‘calx quo murus inducitur’ he writes: ‘Est inter artis uocabula, quae in -εύς desinunt, referendum; sed notabile hoc habet, quod non τό έπάγον significat, sed τό έτέρῳ τινι έπαγόμενον … similes sunt στροϕεύς amphora quae utrimque portatur, στροϕεύς cardo in quo uersatur ianua, Cf. etiam έπίστατον id in quo stat (collocatur) olla, et eadem ratione formatum esse germanicum überziehir (vestem “qua quis induitur”) observat amicus collega Hartman.’ English can add ‘drawers,’ and American ’pull-over.’

^{page 115 note 29} For this confusion Piccolomini, , Rendic.Acad. Linc.19 02. 1893Google Scholar(cited by Van Leeuwen), compares Plut.548 ύπεκρούσω, where Pollux hasέπεκρούσω

^{page 115 note 30} Cf. Plaut. Most. I. 2. 17 sqq., esp., esp, 34, 35 sqq., for an expansion of the metaphor int0 a simile of 28 lines. I cannot find a parallel to this use of ξύνεστι, but it does not seem impossible.

^{page 115 note 31} I choose the word ‘layer’ because, like ύπαγωγεύς, it applies equally well to the mortar as laid and to the man who lays it.

^{page 115 note 32} Robertson, D. S., op. cit., p. 233Google Scholar. On various kinds of lime-mortar cf. Vitr. II. 5.

^{page 115 note 33} As reported by White, J. W.and Cary, E., ’Collations of the MSS. of Ar. Aves, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. XXIX(1918)Google Scholar.

^{page 115 note 34} Adv., p. 121, as reported by Blaydes in 1882. Cary also took ύπαγ. to be ‘a kind of cement or mortar“ in loose apposition to πηλόν. W. C. Green, if ύπαγ. can = ‘mortar’, suggests punctuating after κατόπιν, ‘as bricklayers’ boys carry the mortar’; but this throws too much emphasis on έν τοῖς στόμασιν and retards the movement of the passage as a whole.

^{page 115 note 35} Cf. Kühner-Gerth, Gram. á. gr. Sprache, § 406. 5.

^{page 115 note 36} Cf. Kühner-Gerth, op. cit., § 464. 1.