The Pseudo-Gregorian Drama Christus Paliens. ^ 369 
uaQvy e$, seems extremely probable, in which case the 
Euripidean MSS. have preserved the reading better than 
the Xp. II., although both have been corrupted by the in 
corporation of the gloss, 7tapQsvoi, into the text. 
The remainder of the cases are from the portion of the play preserved 
only in codex P. 
4. 778. P. reads kcpd-itzszai. But the Xp. II. 2227 v<pditrerai. (But 
codex V. of the Xp. II. shows the same corruption 
kcpaTtrerai.') 
5. 1031. dv om. codex. But the Xp. II. 2100 and 2542 retains dv, though 
the order of the words is changed. Kirchhoff is followed in 
the insertion of dv by Nauck and Bruhn. Other editors 
have suggested other methods of restoring either the 
dochmiacs or a trimeter. At the best the reading of the 
Xp. n. cannot be regarded as very much superior to that 
of the Palatinus. 
6 . 1041. P. rivsi. But Xp. H. 653 zivi. 
7. 1049. P. kmtodwv. Xp. 17. 677 ek rtoScidv. 
8 . 1096. P. upazafdoXov^. Xp. 17. 667 xpazcaftoXovs. 
9 . 1151. P. oiuat y'. Xp. II. 1146 and Orion, Anth. 4, 55 oiyai 8\ 
[Here again K. ignores the additional testimony of the 
Xp. 77] Beiske changed to zavzd , which Paley follows. 
10. 1161. P. k^ETtpdqazo. Xp. 17. 1050 pd’c.sz e. Scaliger had sug¬ 
gested the change, to whom K. and W. ascribe the reading. 
11. 1344. P. XiddojusQa. Codex V. of Xp. II. 2557 XiddojusdQa , the re¬ 
maining codices agree with the Palatinus. Musurus 
changed to XiddojusdQa , to whom the emendation is as¬ 
cribed by K. and W. with no reference to the Xp. n. 
12. 182. This verse seems rightly rejected here, as Dobree has done, 
not only because it is a paraphase of 860 but because the 
Xp. 77, which quotes the whole passage from 178 to 187 in 
verses 1148-1157, entirely ignores the existence of this 
verse. Evidently it was not to be found in his MS. of the 
Bacchae, else he had made use of it for his theme. 
13. 1213. P. 7 T /1 ekzgov. Xp. 77 1263 npuzdi, from which Barnes drew 
the emendation itpuz^v. The passage will be treated 
again. 
14. 1345. P. ejieQeW which Musurus corrected to kud$EQ\ The mis¬ 
take is not to be found in Xp. II. 2560, where the form given 
is EjudOojusv. 
B. Verses in which the reading presented by the Xp. II. seems at least 
as good as that of our MSS. of the Bacchae. 
1. 1048. P. 7 tiupov, which Musurus emended to itoippov. The Xp. II. 
676 reads xXorjpov. The passage is ably treated by 
Doering (Phil. XXV. (1867)). itoippo 5 is found twice in 
24-A. & L. 
