^{page 77 note 1} Verrall therefore naturally adds :‘Perhaps we should readέμοί(Keck) in v. 33.’

^{page 77 note 2} There was an elaborate mimetic dance in the Amphiaraus of Sophocles (Athenaeus X. 454 F.).

^{page 78 note 1} See Verrall's second edition, Appendix H.

^{page 78 note 2} Though it would serve no particular purpose to give an account of all the explanations which have been offered, I ought to add that of course several commentators have noted that there is no contest; and that Kennedy (I find) gives something like the view taken above, in his note ’This… means that the beacon of Ida, which looks down on the captured city, is on that account the winner. The victory is there.‘

^{page 79 note 1} In Soph. Ant. 674, for σύνμάχηδοροs Jebb accepts the conjecture of Reiske and Bothe, σνμμάχον δοροs ‘which has been generally received.’

^{page 79 note 2} After writing the first draft of these notes I chanced to look up tάλάνtούχοs in L. and (7th ed.) and found a hint of the rendering I suggest: ‘δορbs belongs to μάχηnot to τάλ’

^{page 79 note 3} In Uccello's picture,The Battle of Sant'Egidio, familiar to all who visit the National Gallery, the lances are extraordinarily conspicuous. The right half of the canvas, showing a lance ‘in rest,’ provides an excellent illustration of what Aeschylus means by τάλάντούχοs δοροs.

^{page 80 note 1} So Verrall, who omits the next line, μενημ will be merely ‘resembling.’βρινοιθσλπενιν τοιs ηλιον. If this is retained, ήξ.

^{page 81 note 1} The title is, then, prophetic, and refers to the hatred between the Queen and her children, especially Orestes, in the Choephoroe.

^{page 82 note 2} Though in Eur. Cyclops 396, tψ θεονtνγνι Aιδον μσγειρψ, and in Aristias fr. 3 (Nauck), Aιδονtρσπενs (both quoted by Headlam), Aιδον does mean simply ‘accursed,’ this does not affect the argument. In both cases it is probable that the language is modelled carelessly upon the passage in the Agamemnon.

^{page 82 note 3} Cp. the connecting genitives discussed abo (vv. 437 sq.)