Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T20:58:40.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aristophanes, Knights 1070 and 1076

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Colin Austin
Colin Austin
Affiliation:
Trinity Hall, Cambridge.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 1967 , pp. 8
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Assuming that Solazzi was not right to tear the whole text to shreds on the ground that it was heavily glossed.

2 Pace Muirhead in his Gaius, who seems to have been alone in maintaining that it could.

3 Böcking in his fifth edition of Gaius, 1876, read [Etiam lege Aelia Sentia] at the beginning of § 85. Huschke, , in Studien des röm. Rechts, i, 1830, at pp. 179 ff.Google Scholar, held likewise, giving good reasons and mentioning yet earlier scholars who had believed the same; but by the time of his second edition of Gaius, 1873, he had changed his mind, and now read [E lege Latina], with explanations which I do not find clear. Castello, C. in Studi Solazzi, pp. 242 ff.Google Scholar, proposed the lex Minicia, which seems less suitable. David and Nelson in their commentary do not refer to the old view that the lex was Aelia Sentia.