Abstract The tenth prefatory letter of Pollux’ Onomasticon transmits two otherwise unattested pieces of information concerning the existence of an anonymous commentary on Xenophon and of a treatise by Eratosthenes of Cyrene entitled Σκευογραφικός. The corrupt state of the text in the manuscript tradition, which the standard edition by E. Bethe has not improved, has so far hindered the full understanding of this passage. This article (a) argues that two corrections should be introduced in 10.2–3 Bethe; (b) suggests that the anonymous commentary on Xenophon quoted by Pollux concerned not only the Περὶ ἱππικῆς, as traditionally assumed, but also the Ἱππαρχικός; and (c) re-examines the evidence supporting the hypothesis that Eratosthenes’ Σκευογραφικός was not part of the better-known Περὶ τῆς ἀρχαίας κωμῳδίας, but an independent work.

中文翻译：

---

关于 Pollux X 1.1-5 Bethe 文本的两个注释

摘要 Pollux 'Onomasticon 的第十封序言信传达了两篇未经证实的信息，内容涉及关于色诺芬的匿名评论和昔兰尼的埃拉托色尼 (Eratosthenes) 题为 Σκευογραφικός 的论文的存在。手稿传统中文本的损坏状态，E. Bethe 的标准版没有改进，迄今为止阻碍了对这段文字的充分理解。这篇文章(a)认为应该在10.2-3 Bethe中引入两个更正；(b) 表明 Pollux 引用的关于色诺芬的匿名评论不仅涉及传统假设的 Περὶ ἱππικῆς，还涉及 Ἱππαρχικός；(c) 重新检查支持埃拉托色尼的 Σκευογραφικός 不是著名的 Περὶ τῆς ἀρχαίας κωμῳδίας 的一部分，而是一部独立作品的假设的证据。