On EuBir. Iph. Taur. Vss. H51 if. 51 



Hence Kirehoff, (followed by England), would read annn',^ 

 y.a/.W'i -/jd^ufT'.-^. But wliy the anrni^^'^ (L')Tiii referring to the 

 <h)tTTux^h^ has its proper force, hut 'vtmh^ is more than super- 

 fluous with riii/Ttv znro/jTTipo'.^-. 



I feel certain, therefore, that we are nearer tlie truth in 

 reading: 



lit dlJfTT'J^et<; ydfl ZdltTtV t')7UytfT7ij>(li^ 



iiT<v> xaxco^ ~f>d^oj/T'.v ou (fpir^onnv^ to. 



The anziii may have been added by some scribe who mis- 

 took the subject of -pd^ioav^ and wished to make the reference 

 clearer. When once an-oi had crowded out >'>-<i--'> the snbj. 

 would naturally be changed to the participle. 



