^{page 187 note 2} See Page's, D. L. preface to Aeschylus, Agamemnon, ed. Denniston, J. D. and Page, D. L., 1957;Google Scholar and my article ‘Zeus in Aeschylus’ in J.H.S. lxxvi (1956), 55 f.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 1} Fraenkel, Eduard, Aeschylus, Agamemnon (1950), iii. 625.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 1}

^{page 189 note 2} Rh. Mus. ciii (1960), 76 f.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 1} Daube, B., Zu den Rechtsproblemen in Aischylos' Agamemnon (Zürich, 1939), pp. 147 f.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 2}

^{page 191 note 1} I follow Page in accepting Bamberger's emendation of . At P.V. 944 (cited by Fraenkel as a parallel supporting the manuscript reading), I would render by ‘you whose excess of bitterness shall taste bitter in your own mouth’, supposing the adverb to involve the sense of the word illustrated by Fraenkel, , op. cit. ii. 301, n. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 2} ‘Morals and Politics in the Oresteia’, in Proc. Cambr. Phil. Soc. 186, N.S. vi (1960), 19 f.; on this point see pp. 27–28.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 1} is Valckenaer's emendation of the manuscript reading . It is usually supported by quoting Il. 6. 202 ; but a better parallel is furnished by Quintus Smyrnaeus, 3. 456 . To hold on to the manuscript reading and suppose that can be construed with as though it were a verb of knowing (as Murray, Fraenkel, and Page all do) seems to me impossible.

^{page 193 note 1} Proc. Brit. Acad. xxviii. 22.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 2} Aeschylus, Agamemnon, ii. 441.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 3} Der Agamemnon des Aeschylus (Zürich and Stuttgart, 1957), p. 23.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 4} Aeschylus, Agamemnon, ii. 371 f.;Google Scholar cf. Proc. Brit. Acad., loc. cit., 22–23.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 1} See Denniston, and Page, , op. cit., p. 120.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 1} In (Festschrift für W. H. Schuchhardt) (Baden-Baden, 1960), pp. 69 f.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 1} T.A.P.A. lxviii (1937), 197 f.;Google Scholar see also my review of Fritz, K. von, Antike und Moderne Tragoedie (Berlin, 1962), which is shortly to appear in Gnomon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 197 note 2} I hope soon to supplement this article by a discussion of this ode.

^{page 198 note 1} My translation assumes that in 1. 1470 one may restore responsion and at the same time remove the very real difficulty of by accepting Rauchenstein's conjecture .

^{page 199 note 1} Agam. 1485–6; Sophocles, , Trach. 1278.Google Scholar