342 Journal of Philology. that the thunderbolt is intended, so that we ought to read aorpcnnjs. The repetition of the word is at least as unobjection- able as that of dorepos after dcrrfpoiirov. Theodectes, Thyestes. fr. 1 (8). aXX*, eo raXav Gue'crra, Kaprepei baKvatv opyrjs xakivov, TrapaneXeuopai 8e trot* redrjypevov o~vv pvpiois aWois xP V0S anavr dpavpoi ximo X ( *P a Xa/i/3ai>ft. The last two lines are edited by Wagner from an alteration of Meineke's, the MSS. having r^ypivov Z {civ MS. Vat.) aAAoir pvpiois p6vos to. iravr k.t.X. It can scarcely be doubted that xp vo * ra Ttavr dpavpol is right as it stands, in which case the rest of the correction falls to the ground. iv aWois is probably corrupt, as <tvv pvplois oXXots would be exceedingly tame. If we retain pvplois, we must suppose iv aWois to represent some substantive in the dative : but pvpios would be an obvious conjecture. The passage seems as if it might originally have run in some form like this : irapa.Ktevop.ai 8i aoi, Tcdrjypevcp iztp coSe* pvpios XP V0S to. ttovt dpavpoi ^urro x f ^P a Xa/xjSom. Chscremoii' (?) inc. fr. (Wagner, p. 147). ovk car amarov ovftev iv 6vt)t& /3to> ovd* av yevoiTO- troWa TroiKiXXfi XP V0S napdbof-a Ka 6avpaara ko.1 {oivroav rpoTroi. In v. 1 6vr)T<av /3t'&) would be an improvement. In v. 3 Wagner says we should manifestly correct <dv or rdv (uvtuv rpoirois. Read 7rai6irra>v Tponois. Chaeremon. inc. fr. 14 (29). ytvoiro p.oi rets x^P iTas dnodovvat Trarpi. Perhaps yivoiff opolas, which would avoid the article. Inc. trag. inc. fr. 143. avdp' rjhiKT)<ras avbp % dvcKTtov t68( ; If the text be sound, we should point avbp ^Urja-as, avbp % - dveK- Ttov r<58f ; but Sp* dvcKTtov rode is a correction lying on the surface. Inc. trag. inc. fr. 269. inrjv 8' ap y (ki7tt) to trav, (ppovbos ptv (crrai Kvpdrwv anas Bvdos, yrj 8' ibpdvatv tpqpos, ov8i yap r ert TTT(pu>ra tpvXa fikaarrjo-ti nvpovpivrj.
