^{page 58 note 1} The numeration is that of my forthcoming edition of the Fragments of Sophocles.

^{page 60 note 1} Aesch. Pers. 340; Cho. 994; Soph. O.C. 22; O.T. 857; El. 387, 605, 787; Phil. 774; Eur. Hel. 1182, 1254; Or. 94; Phoen. 865.

^{page 63 note 1} Since writing the above I find that my general conclusion is somewhat similar to MrWhitelaw's, (Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc. III. pp. 3 sqq.)Google Scholar, although we differ in points of detail.

^{page 65 note 1} But one cannot feel too sure. Even so acute a critic as MrWhitelaw, (C.R. VIII. 146)Google Scholar treats Ai. 659 as if it were a clause of general assumption (‘wherever I find a suitable place, I will bury my sword’) like O.T. 672 οûτος τ', ἓνθ', àν ῇ, στνγ⋯σεΤαι.

^{page 66 note 1} All these examples are taken from Kühner-Gerth, II. p. 425.

^{page 66 note 2} See the passages quoted in my note on Soph. fr. 369 (e.g. Epict. I. 29. 41 ⋯σταχρóνος έν ᾧ οι τραγοῳδοì οί⋯σονται κτέ), and add Pind. Pyth. 12. 30 sqq.

^{page 67 note 1} On this point see the remarks of Professor Sonnenschein in C.R. VII. 10. It follows from what has been said above that I withdraw entirely from the suggestion made in C.R. VII. 343 sq. I was unable at that time to accept Professor Sonnenschein's explanation, because I did not realize the possibility of the combination ⋯κρνψα (or even κρúπτω) έμαντν ⋯νθ ᜌ μ⋯ τις εìσιδῃ.