^{page no 28 note 1} P. Oxy. 2455 (including the satyr-plays, Skeiron, Syleus, and Sisyphos, but little can be made of them). To these is to be added a fragmentary hypothesis of the late Auge, Koenen, L., Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik iv (1969), 7 Google Scholar.

^{page no 28 note 2} Papathomopoulos, M., Recherches de Papyrologie iii (1964), 40 Google Scholar.

^{page no 28 note 3} P. Oxy. 2460; Handley, E. W. and Rea, J., BICS, Supplt. 5, The Telephus of Euripides, London, 1957 Google Scholar. Note that enough fragments of Sophocles, Assembly of Achaeans are left to show that it may have dealt with the same story.

^{page no 28 note 4} P. Oxy. 2458. On the date see Musso, O., SIFC xxxvi (1964), 80 ffGoogle Scholar. Note above, p. 19, for the possibility that we have some of the Theseus. P. Oxy. 2461 gives some of another early play, the Cretans.

^{page no 28 note 5} Austin, C., Recherches de Papyrologie iv (1967), 11 Google Scholar; cf.Calder, W. M., GRBS x (1969), 147 Google Scholar. Similarly excavations at Brauron have shown that the precinct of Artemis was being reorganized about the time of the Iphigenia in Tauris. Eumolpos is the son of the Attic Deiope and Mousaios on a contemporary Attic pelike, Richter, G. M. A., AJA xliii (1939), 2 Google Scholar.

^{page no 29 note 1} P. Oxy. 2685. The Florence papyrus, Page, Greek Literary Papyri, no. 32.

^{page no 29 note 2} Snell, B., Scenes from Greek Drama, 70 Google Scholar; Borthwick, E. K., CQ xvii (1967), 41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; xviii (1968), 198.

^{page no 29 note 3} Bond, G. W., Euripides: Hypsipyle (Oxford, 1963)Google Scholar. P. Oxy. 2742 gives a parody of the first line from Strattis, Phoenissae, which slightly supports the association of the two Euripidean plays.

^{page no 30 note 1} P. Oxy. 2459. Cf. now Barlow, S. A., Imagery of Euripides, 10 Google Scholar.

^{page no 30 note 2} On Euripides in general add to Lesky’s History of Greek Literature and Tragische Dichtung der Hellenen his article in Anzeiger der Altertumswissenschaft xxi (1968), 1 ff. The papyrus fragments later than those in Page, Greek Literary Papyri, are mostly reprinted by Austin, C., Nova Fragmenta Euripidea in papyris reperto (Berlin, 1968)Google Scholar. The reprint of Nauck, A., Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (Berlin, 1964)Google Scholar has a supplement with new fragments of Euripides from quotations by other authors. Mette, H. J., Lustrum xii (1967), 1 Google Scholar and xiii (1968), 289, 569 lists all the fragments, papyrus, and quotations. My The Tragedies of Euripides (London, 1967) discusses all the tragedies, lost and preserved, in chronological groups (and lists illustrations). The Oxford editions of Euripides have been continued by a second edition of the Bacchae (E. R. Dodds), Helen (A. M. Dale), Andromache (P. T. Stevens), and Iphigenia in Aulis (W. Ritchie). W. S. Barrett’s edition of the Hippolytos (Oxford, 1964) is on a larger scale and has a new text. Diggle, J. has edited the Phaethon (Cambridge, 1970)Google Scholar.

^{page no 30 note 3} Cf. above, p. 6 n. 1.

^{page no 31 note 1} Cf. above, p. 20.

^{page no 31 note 2} The details of reconstruction can be discussed but do not affect the general impression which is what is needed for understanding the Trojan Women. Cf. most recently Conacher, D. J., Euripidean Drama (Toronto, 1967), 127 fGoogle Scholar.

^{page no 31 note 3} Goossens, R., Euripide et Athènes (Brussels, 1962)Google Scholar, finds political allusions everywhere. Zuntz, G., Political Plays of Euripides (Manchester, 1955)Google Scholar is sound; so also D. J. Conacher, op. cit. 93 ff.

^{page no 31 note 4} Greifenhagen, A., ‘Frühlukanischer Kolonettenkrater mit Darstellung der Herakliden’, 123 Winckelmannsprogramm, Berlin, 1969 Google Scholar. His date, 430-20, seems to me too early but it was certainly painted in the fifth century.

^{page no 32 note 1} D. J. Conacher, op. cit. 173. Nor do I believe that conventional unity can be produced by a silent appearance of Andromache at the end ( Erbse, H., Hermes xciv (1966), 276 Google Scholar.

^{page no 32 note 2} Cf. above, p. 21. On the Medea see now the interesting study of Reckford, K. J., TAPA xcix (1968), 329 Google Scholar.

^{page no 33 note 1} Conacher, D. J., op. cit. 41 Google Scholar; W. S. Barrett, Euripides: Hippolytos, 173, and 363 on illegitimacy. On 1. 612, cf.Avery, H. C., TAPA xcix (1968), 19 Google Scholar; on 732 ff., Parry, H., TAPA xcvii (1966), 299 Google Scholar. On character-drawing in Greek drama and its limitations, see A. M. Dale, Collected Papers, 139 ff., 272 ff.

^{page no 34 note 1} Adkins, A. W. H., CQ xvi (1966), 200 Google Scholar, 203.

^{page no 34 note 2} Conacher, D. J., op. cit. 163 Google Scholar. Acceptance of his excellent account does not necessitate also acceptance of the priority of the Sophoclean Electra.

^{page no 35 note 1} Spira, A., Untersuchungen zum Deus ex Machina (Kallmünz, 1960)Google Scholar.

^{page no 36 note 2} Conacher, D. J., op. cit. 217 Google Scholar.

^{page no 37 note 1} Cf. D. J. Conacher, op. cit. 88 ff.

^{page no 37 note 2} Kamerbeek, J. C., Mnemosyne xix (1966), 1 ffGoogle Scholar. (in English).

^{page no 38 note 1} Cf. above, p. 27. I do not mean to imply that Hera is anything other than the traditional goddess of mythology.

^{page no 38 note 2} Winnington-Ingram, R. P., Euripides and Dionysus (Cambridge, 1948)Google Scholar. Cf. also de Romilly, J., REG lxxvi (1963), 361 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Devereux, G., JHS xc (1970), 35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page no 38 note 3} Aristophanes, Lysistrata 1, with Wilamowitz’ note. Cf. my Greek Chorus, 81 ff.

^{page no 38 note 4} de Romilly, J., RP xxxix (1965), 28 Google Scholar.

^{page no 39 note 1} Euripidean Drama (Toronto, 1967).