1. 3. After enumerating famous pupils of Chiron, the writer goes on: Oavfux^erm S« (ir/Sels on oi iroAAoi avriov apecrtcovres flecus 5/iOK lreXevTr]o~av TOVTO p.iv yap fi v, but forms one expression with it, the antecedent yd/xav being taken into the relative clause as e.g. in Thuc. 8. 87. 5 Karatpupa, 8k fidkurra rjv c?ire wp6v ovir^s -njs firp-pos KvpuK ovros eyKpaTrfi yiyovev iroXXZv XprjfMTiov. 'AraXavnjs, explaining ydfimv, might be a gloss, but is probably genuine. Of course TQ>V rare

more »

... with ot Spurroi. 8. 1TU)(€ irapa Otutv ail t,u>v (aeifcms Dindorf) n/uurOai. We should certainly look for TOV with Ti/uurOai, but cf. Plato Phil. 50 D ol/xot o-ov Tev£ecr6ai fieOetvai fie. L. and S. also cite Pind. P. 3. 186, but that is an oversight. § 6 here is of course different. 1. 10. jrarpos 8' iv yripa eiriXavOavofievov T^s 6tov ov\ avTOv atrtats i8vo~TV)(T]o~f. The construction is probably mrrpos (aiTMus), ovx avrov, and there should be a comma after deov. 1. 11. inrb fikv rrjs 'AprefuSos ert/taTO KOI Iv XoyoK Ijv. Not ' was talked about' but ' used to talk with her.' So Herod. 3. 148 6 8e'...™ KXeofieye'i T^ 'Ava£av8pi8e<0 ev Aoyourt ia>v K.T.X. It is an unusual phrase. 2. 9. eoTca 8e KOX ev OTO) ecrovTai ai apKvs KOU TO. SiKTva iv iicaTepOK KWOS^OS /ido^«os KOU TO Speirava, iva K.T.X. 'Ey eKwrepois is unintelligible, and the