Clement of Alexandria I: Protrepticus and Paedagogus

at least two leaves must have fallen out, on which stood the two hymns that are now preserved only in the copies of the Paris manuscript.

3. Between f. 187 and 188, the four quaternions $λ'$ to $λγ'$ are missing. These 32 leaves contained the end of the Exhortation, the entire Tatian, and the beginning of Eusebius's Preparation for the Gospel.

4. Between f. 227 and 228, quaternion $λ\vartheta'$ is missing. The eight leaves contained a section from Preparation for the Gospel II ($τ oλμησα\varsigma$ having dared II 3, 12 to $\dotαπ o\varphiηναμ\acuteενων$ of those having declared II 6, 20).

5. Quaternion $ξ'$, the last quire of the manuscript, has only seven leaves; one leaf was lost after f. 403, not between f. 401 and 402, as Gebhardt conjectured. The parchment leaves are always placed such that, wherever one opens the book, one has the same side of the parchment before one on both leaves. If a leaf had fallen out after f. 401, then f. $401^v$ and $402^r$ could not now have the same parchment side.

Furthermore, it is to be noted that quaternion $νη'$ is joined; it is located between the first and second leaf of quaternion $ξ'$, between f. 389 and 398.

The current numbering is incorrect in several places: two leaves each bear the numbers 106, 244, 360; the numbers 126, 184, 315, and 370 to 379 are omitted. Accordingly, the manuscript now has only 393 leaves, not 403. If one counts quaternion $\varkappaε'$ as four leaves, the manuscript originally had $59 \cdot 8 + 4 = 476$ leaves. As explained above, $40 + 2 + 32 + 8 + 1 = 83$ leaves are missing; thus we arrive again at the number 393.

In addition to these two numberings, there is also a double numbering with Latin letters, in which errors also occur.

On f. $401^v$ is the signature: $εγρ\acuteα\varphiη\ χειρ\graveι\ Bα\acuteανου\varsigma\ ν oταρ\acuteιου\ 'Aρ\acuteεθα\ \dotαρχιεπισ\varkappa\acute oπου\ Kαισαρε\acuteια\varsigma\ Kαππαδο\varkappa\acuteια\varsigma\ \text{ἔ}τει\ \varkappa\acute oσμου\ ,\varsigmaυ\varkappaβ'$ i.e., 914 in the Byzantine calendar. Following this, $NN\ OO\text{K}\ Π EPΓ AM\ NN\ H\text{--}\ OO\varsigma$ i.e., the writing cost 20, the parchment 6 gold coins. Both remarks, as well as the subscription above it: $E\text{ὐ}σεβ\acuteι oυ\ τ o\tildeυ\ Παμ\varphi\acuteιλου\ πρ\grave o\varsigma\ τ\graveα\ \text{ὑ}π\grave o\ Φιλ oστρ\acuteατου\ ε\text{ἰ}\varsigma\ 'Aπ oλλ\acuteωνι oν$ Of Eusebius of Pamphilus regarding those things by Philostratus concerning Apollonius, were written by Arethas, not by Baanes. His handwriting is precisely known from the marginal notes that are found in all the manuscripts he owned. Cf. Maaß (op. cit.) and, in addition to the literature cited in my Studies on the Scholia, pp. 46 ff, also A. Sonny, Ad Dion. Chrysost. analecta 1896, pp. 83–130; H. Rabe, The Tradition of the Lucian Scholia, News of the Royal Society of Sciences at Göttingen, Philological-Historical Class, 1902, pp. 718–736.