We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
I Want to comment on five passages where I have provoked disagreement by a previous discussion. In the first three, my discussion was in Philologus cx (1966), 152–4, and my critic is Bruno Gentili in Quaderni Urbinati iv (1967), 177–81. I was not the first to make an emendation in any of the three places, so that in defending the transmitted text Gentili is actually not only criticizing me but others such as Hermann, Naeke, O. Müller, Schoemann, Hunt, Murray, and Page.
page 307 note 1 The following five notes were originally accepted for publication by the editors of Classical Review as long ago as 1972. Thai Journal has now ceased to print articles, and the Classical Quarterly is here publishing, with a delay for which the editors apologize, part of the accumulated backlog.
page 308 note 1 Wilamowitz, Gr. Lesebuch, Erläuterungen, 104, Sappho u. Sim., 141 n.; Schroeder, O., Grundriss d. gr. Versgeschichte, 99; Dale, C.Q. xlv (1951), 119Google Scholar f.; Snell, Gr. Metrik, 41; Korzeniewski, D., Gr. Metrik, 142.,Google Scholar
