755. The orig. reading is xaì Nevoiμov "Apyos, i.e., Argos deserves to be stoned. Cf. Ag. 1118, Oûμa λevoiμov=sacrificium exsecrandum.Pfl. reads keλevσμov "Apyos, understanding ov, accusative absolute, "jubente." But Elm. writes ayos for "Apyos, observing that the words have also been interchanged in Eur. Suppl. 737.

769. The original reading is ΠΟΤΑΝΕΙΤΕΜΟΥ ΦΑΝΟΥΝΤΑΙ. This, as Elm. observes, cannot be what Euripides wrote, (1) because TOTE occurs twice in the clause (2) because av with the future indicative is a solecism in Tragic Greek. To emend this with certainty is impossible, since we do not know the sentiment that Eur. wished to express; nor whether, for instance, eol or Zeus was intended to be the subject of the remark.-For the numerous attempts to emend, see Pflugk. Equal in plausibility to that given in the text, is πpʊráVELS ¿uol, Musgrave.

774. The orig. is dopúσovra, "hasta pugnaturum," which would be fut. part. of dopúσow. Cf. Pfl., who quotes Eustathius, but reads dopioσovтa, present.

777. The orig. is dλX' èπel σoì TOλÚOUTOS alel, for which Elm. and Pfl. substitute ¿XX' ènì σol. For ènì col cf. Soph. El. 360, èp oiơɩ vûv xλiôâs, "on the ground of"; and Odyssey XXIV. 91, ẻπì σοὶ κατέθηκεν ἄεθλα, “in honour of.” B. takes ἐπὶ and κραίνεται together.

778. For noe, the old reading was keúde. Both are supported by MSS., and the latter would mean "neque latet neque celebratione carent."

780. For véwv the orig. reading was vaŵv, which might stand at the beginning of a line, quantity notwithstanding. See Elm.

781. The orig. was dé y' èπ' 8x0w, for which many editors read γᾶς ὄχθῳ with PA.

785. Elm. considered rude "frigidum," and wrote Touσde.-“XéYew TE Tŷde Jacobsius conjecturâ pereleganti." Pfl.

788. Elm., who cannot put up with διήλασεν, would read διήνυσεν οι διήγαγεν.

793. οὖν and ἔτι are emended from the orig. οὐκ and ὅδε, since Iolaus, having left the stage, cannot be spoken of as öde.-B. gives εἰσιν ὅδε, “huc redibit,” on the ground that εἰσιν and ἐστὶν are so often interchanged; cf. 386. But öde can scarcely bear that meaning. 799. The orig. onuaível is retained by Pfl. and P., but Elm. suggested the future as more appropriate, and on the ground that copying

clerks frequently wrote present for future; especially in “verbis liquidatis” Cobet, e. g. κτείνω, φθείρω, κ.τ.λ.

801. Elm. wrote éкTEívovтas, "productos," intransitively, in the sense of ἐκτείνοντα σεαυτόν.

805. After Heath, Elm. and Matth. print eláσauer without stop, and indicate lacuna, which Elm. would fill by καὶ τὰς Μυκηνὰς αὖθις εἰρήνην ayew; of which line, he says, the κal ràs M. in the next line is a reminiscence. But P. rightly thinks the lacuna unnecessary: and that with xal Tàs M. should be supplied the uèv which is requisite for the thought, though the metre has no room for it.

822. For ẞpoTelwv Paley thinks Borelwv is possible: since (1) BOT and ẞpor. are interchanged in Æsch. Suppl. 665, (2) λaμŵr in the plural would scarcely be used of Macaria only. The suggestion is plausible, especially as (1) the sacrifices in question seem to have been made by the μávres in both armies; and (2) a human sacrifice would have demanded some explanation or apology from the narrator, though for obvious reasons the name of Macaria would still have been suppressed.

824. Elm. and Pfl. have note on the spelling of πλevpaîs, which Elm. would write λeupoîs.

828. θέλειν is accepted for the orig. θελών. If θελών, the μὴ may still stand.

833. Accepted for the orig. wóσov Tivà Tivayμòv, "shaking." Besides the faultiness of the metre, Twayμdv is not found, except once in Greg. Naz. It was objected to the reading of the text, that the two nouns mean much the same thing. But Elm. compares Æsch. Persae, 426, οιμωγὴ δ ̓ ὁμοῦ κωκύμασιν κατεῖχε πελαγίαν ἄλα.

834. μév vvv is accepted for the orig. μèv vv, which P. retains, (probably accidentally).

837. μáx was altered by Elm. to μáxn, on the ground that Eur. intended to write the familiar phrase, which occurs in Thuc. IV. 43 and elsewhere, kal v ǹ μáxn kapтépa. But, surely, as Pfl. suggests, slight variation is more probable and poetical than a direct reproduction.

838. The reading in the text is generally accepted for the orig. TOU κελεύσματος.

845. P. would suggest éσßñσal.

848. λέγοι μὲν ἄλλος was the orig.

854. vnd was orig. for èπl, which was suggested by Elm.

856. Elm. wrote waîdá 0' for y', after Reiske.

884. The orig. was кратоûvтα, which might possibly, with Hermann, be explained by the idea of seeing Eurystheus in the mind's eye, in both conditions. But it is impossible that active can be put for passive. Among other suggestions are, πιτνοῦντα, κλαίοντα, πρὸ τοῦ μèv ov, åkpatoûvra. The last is the text of Musgrave and Bothe.— P. would suggest кpaтoûσa rŷn on. Elm. rightly thinks that some such word as ẞéπovra, in the sense of fŵvra, would be most appropriate : and of many suggestions writes that they are "Sardi venales, alius alio nequior."

888. For mot Porson conj. duoû. (Advers. p. 274.) The orig. was μου.

890. éλevoeρwσew, Porson and Elm.

893. δαι for δαιτί was orig. Pf. after Hermann writes ἔνι τε δαῖτες (for ἔνεστι).

894. is Elm. emend. for ', since the dé in 895 corresponds to μèv in 892. But the other editors, including P., retain dè. And the double dè is common enough.

895. apa, as printed, "sacrifices sense to metre," P. But it must be taken as a strong apa.

899. Elm. would prefer the o as in Or. 175, vπνоdóтeιрα. But all agree in w, metri gratiâ.

903.

"In three MSS. σe is not found." B.-un ye, Hermann. 912. peúyw, "rejicio," is the emend. of Elm. for the orig. pevyel, "aspernatur." Reading peúye, Matth. and P. take the clause s Tov...KaTeßa as the subject of it. But others take Heracles as the subject.

919. P. for rd would read dè, with great plausibility.

924. The text is accepted for orig. axe d' üßpes, which is against the metre. Elm. wrote oxer d'üßpis. But can eσxev be used absolutely in the sense of cessavit? Cf. Thuc. I. 112, woλéμov čσxov oi 'Aonvalol. See Elm.

925. Pfl. retains the orig. Baiws. Matth. reads πpòs díкas ẞialws. 932. Accepted for the orig. πολυπόνων σὺν ἀσπίσιν.

933. For Tŷs Túxns B., from

Jacobs sugg. #bλ. Pfl.

MSS., reads τῆς δίκης. For πόλυ,

935. Since Túxas was the orig. reading for the now accepted τύχην, Elm. would suggest τύχης.

937. The orig. čoraσav is retained by Matth. and B., who refer, for the active use, to Hom. 77. M. 56; Od. г. 182, O. 435.

950. üdpas тε Oîpás 7' is suggested by P., to supply the connecting Tε, and since the Nemean lion is elsewhere called Onp.

959. Elm. after Reiske with Matth. alters xpǹ to xpĥv. Xpĥv gives the general statement of a permanent law; while xph applies only to the particular case. Cf. 968, 969, and Med. 573.—Xpŵʊ and xeǹ were often interchanged by transcribers, and may have been in the present passage.

961. Altered by Elm. to our σTI 8σlov, to be like Iph. T. 1037. The change is not great, but not necessary.

971. This line is more usually punctuated diкny; The sense of OUKOûv is at any rate affirmative.

981. Musgrave, with whom Hermann agrees, conj. kdovyyvwo

τον. ΡΑ.

987. Accepted for the orig. on. But Elm., on the ground that H and or are often interchanged, wrote où dâтa, "no indeed," quoting many similar passages.

995. diwoas is accepted for the orig. dúoas, which Elm. retains, quoting from Strabo IV. p. 183 a line of the Prometheus Avóμevos, Báλλwv dywσels...oтpaтóv. In Homer, dniów is to kill: after him, to ravage, as in Q. C. 1319, d. äσтν TUρl.

1006. Emended from the orig. duoyevĥ.

IOII. For κατθανεῖν, the orig. κατθανών is by P., P. and most others retained. But Elm. would here, as in 228, write the infinitive.

1014. The text is accepted for the orig. πpòs äy' eîñas, though Elm. edited πрoσεîπas. Probably the πpòs was added in the margin by some reader who wished to explain that ay' was to be taken in the sense "quod attinet ad." Euripides never begins a line with a tribrach, unless it is one word, as ἱκεται, "Ακαμας, Ιόλαος: excepting only with prepositions, as Or. 898, èπì tôde, Herc. F. 940, Alc. 375. Elm.

1029. μeišov' is the orig. reading, and so P. But Elm. and most editors read μeîjov, neuter: a change which is not necessary.

1038. ᾐδούμην is accepted for the orig. ήρόμην. But Heath would read ᾑρούμην.

1039. kpeloow is accepted by all after Matth. for the orig. μeizw: which nevertheless might stand.

1050. Elm. suggested Tupl and Heath vow.

1053. The orig. Taûra is usually retained. But P. edits Taurà.

EXPLANATORY NOTES.

Abbreviations. Tr. =

translate. Qu. = quotes. N. = see Critical Notes. Elm. Elmsley. Pfl. = Pflugk. P. = Paley, B.- Bothe. Matth. L. and Sc. Liddell and Scott's Lexicon, Sixth Edi

= Matthiæ.

tion, 1869.

Observe that occasionally the more advanced part of a note is enclosed in brackets, thus [

1.

A Critical Note is only referred to when the variation in question is of exceptional importance.

2. Translate either τοῖς πέλας πέφυκε ἀνὴρ, “ is a man born for the advantage of his neighbours." Cf. Iphig. A. 1386 mâoɩ yàp μ’“EXλnoi KOLVOV ĚTEKES, oửxi ooì μóvŋ. Lucan. Phars. 2. 383, non sibi sed toto genitum se credere mundo. Or, with Pf., πέφυκε ἀνὴρ δίκαιος τοῖς

Texas, "just to his neighbours."

3. ἀνεμένον. Cf. the adverbs ανέδην and ἀνειμένως. Tr. lucro deditum, Elm. lucro effusum, B. The idea is, "so much freed from restraint that you give yourself up to one thing only:" it is almost a metaphor from driving with loosened rein. Notice avecμévov eis.

4. πόλει, ο state.—καὶ σ. βαρὺς = “et in vitae commercio gravis ;" referring to private business as distinct from πόλει. For ἀλλάσσειν, cf. v. 12. Zuvaλλáσσew=“to bring into dealings;" hence, to have dealings with. For construction, Pfl. qu. Eur. Frag. Incert. CXLV., προσομιλεῖν ἥδιστος.

5. &pioTos="fructuosissimus," B.-For où Móyw, cf. Prom. 336, ἔργῳ κοὐ λόγῳ τεκμαίρομαι, Hdt. V. 24, τοῦτο δὲ οὐ λόγοισι ἀλλ ̓ ἔργοισι οἶδα μαθών.