^{page 195 note 1} Philostrati Minoris Imagines et Callistrati Descriptiones, rec. C. Schenkl et Ae. Reisch, Lipsiae, 1902, p. x.

^{page 195 note 2} Griechische Litteraturgeschichte, ii. 2 (1924), 784.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 3} Literatur grecka, iii. 1 (1951), 561.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 4} Flavii Philostrati quae supersunt, ed. Kayser, C. L., Turici, 1844Google Scholar, praef. ad Imagines, D. vi. n. 11.

^{page 195 note 5} Lindstam, S., ‘Senbyzantinska epimerismsamlingar och ordböcker’, Eranos, xix (1919–1920), 57–92; id.Google Scholar, ‘Die Philostratos-Kommentare und die Moschopulos-Sylloga’, Göteborgs Högskolas Arsskrift, 1925, 3, pp. 179–84Google Scholar.

^{page 195 note 6} Cf. S. G. Mercati, ‘Intorno all’autore del carme ,’, Rivista degli Studi Orientali, x (1924), 210–48.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 1} Paper; 8¼″x10″; s. xvi; fol. 272. I.‘Tzetzes’ Antehomerica etc. (fols. 1–5^v); II. Eusebius' Onomasticon (fols. 6–36^v); III. Scholia of ‘Tzetzes’ on the Halieutica of Oppian (fols. 37–156^v); IV. Paraphrase by ‘Tzetzes’ of the Cynegetica of Oppian (fols. 157–214^V); V. Scholia of ‘Tzetzes’ on the Imagines of Philostratus (fols. 215–65); VI. Gregorius Corinthius on Hermogenes (a fragment) (fols. 266–72). Items I, II, and III–VI are separate manuscripts, only brought together by an eighteenth-century binder. Items III–VI are in the same hand, but items III, IV, and V each have a separate series of quire signatures. There are no signatures in the last part.

^{page 196 note 2} Paper; 29·7 X 21·7 cm.; s. xvi; fol. I, 52, III. Scholia of ‘Tzetzes’ on the Imagines of Philostratus.

^{page 196 note 3} Cf. Warner, G. F. and Gilson, J. P., Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Old Royal and King's Collections, ii (1921), 192.Google Scholar The cataloguers' identification of the hand can be confirmed by a comparison with other London manuscripts known to have been written by Darmarios, e.g. Royal MSS. 16 C XVIII, Add. 21095.

^{page 196 note 4} Ch. Graux, , ‘Essai sur les origines du fonds grec de l'Escurial’, Bibliothéque de l'École des Hautes Études, xlvi (1880), 287–97.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 5} Schmidt, S. L., ‘;Andreas Darmarios. Ein Beitrag zur Handschriftenkunde des 16. Jahrhunderts’, Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, 3 (1886), 129–36.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 1} Cf. Schmidt, , op. cit., p. 136Google Scholar: ‘Ebenso bestätigt sich auch der Verdacht, daβ Dar-marius vielfach seinen Abschriften falsche Titel gegeben hat’; Granx, , op. cit., p. 287Google Scholar, quoting opinions of Valverde, Muratori, and ‘David Colvil, Scotus’, librarian at the Escorial in the early seventeenth century.

^{page 197 note 2} Cf. Wendel, , ‘Tzetzes’, R.E. 2te Reihe 7. 1982. 42 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 1} Cf. Wendel, , op. cit. 1982. 42 ff.Google Scholarand 2005. 32 ff.

^{page 197 note 2} The passage at the end of the Life of Oppian in the London manuscript beginning and noted as unpublished in the Catalogue of Royal Manuscripts, vol. ii, p. 191Google Scholar, is actually printed by Bussemaker on p. 260.

^{page 197 note 3} Cf. Wendel, , op. cit. 1982. 32 ff.Google Scholar; Keydell, R., ‘Oppianos’, R.E. 18. 703. 26 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 4} Edited by Tüselmann, O., Abh. Gott. Ges., N.F. iv. 1, 1900Google Scholar. Mystoxides and Schinas, , Venice, published only book I, which was reprinted by Bussemaker in his edition of the scholia on Oppian, pp. 370–5. Book 4 was first edited Tüselmann in ‘Zur handschriftlichen Überlieferung von Oppians Kynegetika’, Progr. Künigl. Klosterschule Ilfeld, 1890. On Euterknios cf. Cohn, , R.E. 6. 1492. 33–63.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 5} Epigrammatum graecorum annotationibus Ioannis Brodaei Turonensis, nee non Vincentii Obsopoei, et graecis in pleraque epigrammata scholiis illustratorum libri VI, Francofurti, 1600.

^{page 198 note 1} Darmarios observes in his colophon to this manuscript that the text is . Omont in his Inventaire des mss. grecs el latins donnés à Saint-Marc de Venise par le Cardinal Bessarion en 1468, Paris, 1894Google Scholar, records two manuscripts containing collections of epigrams: No. 373 ‘Item magna moralia Aristotelis et eiusdem moralia ad Eudemum, epigrammata diversa diversorum, in versu, pulchra, et in latino eloquio sanctus Thomas de ente et essentia, partim in pergameno et partim in papyro.’ This manuscript is not traceable in Zanetti and Bongiovanni's catalogue, and has probably been split up into its component parts. No. 456, ‘Item liber epigrammatum in pergameno’, is to be identified with cod. Ven. Marc. 481, Maximus Planudes' autograph of the Planudean Anthology, dated at Constantinople in September 1301. It does not contain scholia. It is therefore impossible at present to identify the exemplar from which Darmarios copied the London manuscript. And since he had already made two copies of the same scholia in Madrid three years earlier, it is possible that the reference to the library of Bessarion is mere mystification. On the unreliability of Darmarios' colophons cf. Graux, , op. cit., pp. 293–4Google Scholar.2 Cf. Omont, op. cit., No. 460.

^{page 199 note 1} On Lianoro cf. Frati, L., ‘Lianoro de’ Lianori, ellenista bolognese’, Studi e Memorie per la Storia dell’ Università di Bologna, x (1930), 163–77Google Scholar. Frati in his list of Lianoro's manuscripts (pp. 172–5) does not mention diose in Spain.

^{page 199 note 2} Cf. Graux, , op. cit., p. 51.Google Scholar