ANNOTATIONS ON THE SUPPLIANTS.

In the Suppliants I have used the scripts of the Medicean (M), Guelferbytan (G), Parisian (P), and Escorial (E) codices. The Medicean codex, as is known from many indications, was transcribed from a book written in square letters, a fact which must not be forgotten by those wishing to use it correctly. The Guelferbytan, which I have collated myself, was transcribed from the Medicean. The Parisian, marked by the letter L by Wellauer, which both Anthony Askew and Gottfried Faehsi collated, had as its source that ancient book from which the Medicean was transcribed. Regarding these books, as well as the ancient editions, there is a diligent discussion by Wilhelm Marckscheffel in the Philological Museum of Welcker and Ritschel, vol. V. I received the collation of the Escorial codex from Friedrich Dietz, who seems to have missed a few things. It is without a doubt transcribed from the Parisian. In the Aldine edition, Franciscus Asulanus transcribed the four tragedies that are commonly the last ones from the Guelferbytan codex, and this is confirmed not only by the perpetual agreement with that codex, but especially by the vast number of scripts in which Asulanus, through lack of skill in reading the codex, strayed from his example, such as when the abbreviation for the participles menos original: "μενος" was written, which seemed to him to be mios original: "μιος". Adrianus Turnebus had only the Aldine to follow. He correctly corrected some of its other faults, but changed many others according to his own judgment with incredible rashness and ignorance. Franciscus Robortellus expressed, if not the Medicean codex itself, then certainly one very similar to it. The brief index of scriptural changes—whether by himself or by Michael Sophianus—that he added in the preface could have been increased in a few places. Certainly, some things—though rarely—he must have placed there from his own hand. In the Victorian edition, the faults of the Aldine are for the most part corrected from Robortellus' edition. Wilhelm Canterus, who was the first to distinguish the antistrophic parts as much as he could, followed the Victorian edition almost entirely. Canterus' text was repeated in the Stanleian edition, and this was subsequently held to be the standard text. Critics have disturbed it more and more, each according to his own knowledge, wit, or whim. I have decided that those attempts of theirs which are false, vain, inept, or insane should be left to oblivion. Similarly, where the script of the codices is established,