[187] “Our passage is thus to be understood, [Greek:  he halisketai prodousa to mnemoneuein theai phonon].”  ED. CAMB.

[188] So Hermann rightly explains the sense.  I agree with the Cambridge editor, that if Euripides had intended to use [Greek:  hosias] substantively, he would hardly have joined it with [Greek:  theas], thereby causing an ambiguity.

[189] There is another construction, taking [Greek:  klim. theas] together.  On the whole introduction of Minerva, see the clever note of the Cambridge editor, p. 158, 159.

[190] There is evidently a lacuna, as the transition to Orestes is worse than abrupt.  The mythological allusions in the following lines are well explained in the notes of Barnes and Seidler.

[191] On these last verses see the end of the Orestes, with Dindorf’s note.