DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52134#0332
328
Fragmenta dubia (fr. 83)
ticularly in seemingly requiring that an anonymous commentator on Aristotle
and the scholia to Ovid had access to a text of Anaxandrides. Similarly difficult
is the fact that the hypothesis requires that one of the three attestations be a
paraphrase while that the other two represent two ancient variants of the line
(one of them also requiring emendation, admittedly easy, in order to work).
Fragmenta dubia (fr. 83)
ticularly in seemingly requiring that an anonymous commentator on Aristotle
and the scholia to Ovid had access to a text of Anaxandrides. Similarly difficult
is the fact that the hypothesis requires that one of the three attestations be a
paraphrase while that the other two represent two ancient variants of the line
(one of them also requiring emendation, admittedly easy, in order to work).