No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Extract
In the April No., 1935, p. 66,1 asserted that Bechtel's proposal to read Kυλαιθίδος at Theocr. 5. 15 was prompted by Hdas 6. 55, which is now read otherwise. This is a mistake; it comes from 6. 50, where the papyrus is quite legible.
- Type
- Corrigendum
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1935