^{page 114 note 1} For the form ṬαƲʋπṬρʋƳος (the word is not elsewhere found) compare кʋαƲοπṬρʋƳος in Cercidas (0x. Pap. 1082, p. 33, line 6). Wilamowitz, I now find, has discovered the Scholion.

^{page 114 note 2} I note a like malice of fortune in connexion with a statement in Sappho u. Simonides, p. 81. Wilamowitz there lays it down that ς for εις is an impossible form in an Aeolic poet. Among some recent Egyptian rubbish I can find for him, if he has not found it already, a certain example of ς (where εις would not scan) in a very good Aeolic poet indeed.

^{page 114 note 3} If Wilamowitz had written έσσεῖταɩ his line would have been one to which a metrical parallel could have been found in the Curetes Hymn.

^{page 114 note 4} I observe, in passing, that in Mr. Edmonds' Lyra Graeca it still appears, without comment, among the fragments of Alcaeus.

^{page 114 note 5} And perhaps the author of the Hymn of Curetes.

^{page 115 note 1} Alcman I. should, I believe, be written: Ṃоῖσ' ᾰƳε, Ṃоῖσα λỊƳεῖα, πολʋµµελές, αἰεƲαοιδέ µέλος ƲεοϰµòƲ ᾰρϰε παρσεƲοιν είδεƲ.

^{page 120 note 1} Cf. Alcaeus 50, κπος Ƴᾴρ κεøλαƲ κατίσϰ ει τÒƲ ϬƲ θµα θʋμƲ αἰτΙμεƲος and Pindar, Frag. 104d, Schroeder.

^{page 122 note 1} Mr. Edmonds (Lyra Graeca) still gives Xenocritus without comment.