meaning, 'having made certain persons acquainted with him,' 'having caused them to recognise him.' But Vahlen (Herm. Bemerk. 1898) has, if I am not mistaken, established beyond question this rare and idiomatic use of the verb by a reference to Diodorus Siculus iv. 59. 6, and by the corresponding use of γνωρίζω in Plut. Vit. Thes. ch. xii.
xix. 3. 1456b 8. For ἡδέα of the MSS. I now read ἡ διάνοια. (Previously I had accepted Tyrwhitt's correction ἤδη ἃ δεῖ.) This conjecture was first made by Spengel, and strong arguments in its favour have recently been urged by V. Wróbel in a pamphlet in which this passage is discussed (Leopoli, 1900).
xxv. 6. 1458b 12. For μέτρον I now read μέτριον with Spengel. (So also Bywater.) Is it possible that in xxvi. 6. 1462b 7 we should similarly read τῷι τοῦ μετρίου (μέτρου codd.) μήκει, 'a fair standard of length'?
In xiv. 8-9. 1454 a 2-4 a much vexed question is, I am disposed to think, cleared up by a simple alteration proposed by Neidhardt, who in a 2 reads κράτιστον for δεύτερον, and in a 4 δεύτερον for κράτιστον. This change, however, I have not introduced into the text.
The Arabic version once more throws interesting light on a disputed reading. In xvii. 2 ἐκστατικοί instead of ἐξεταστικοί is a conjecture supported by one manuscript. In confirmation of this reading, which has always seemed to me correct, I extract
the following note by Professor Margoliouth (Class.