bold = Main text
   Book, Paragraph                               grey = Comment text

 1   1, 5(12)  |         525. B. See the note of Valesius on this place. It is, however,
 2   2, 12(10) |        katade/smoij;" which, as Valesius shews, ib. notes, p. 255,
 3   2, 12(13) |       our text. See the note of Valesius to the above place, cap.
 4   2, 12(15) |   Bacchus. See also the note of Valesius ad cap. xiii. Orat. de laudd.
 5   2, 12(16) |     1Obdon. But see the note of Valesius on this place, ib. p. 255,
 6   2, 12(17) |         conjecture (pai~dej) of Valesius here. In these cases, the
 7   2, 12(18) |        Mo&yion, and the note of Valesius. ~
 8   2, 12(19) |          Constant. 0Amfia&rewn. Valesius. note ib. 0Amfia&rew. The
 9   2, 13(20) | Constant, is defective here, as Valesius has properly remarked, and
10   3, 16(19) |   however, are, [Greek]. Whence Valesius argues, (notes to Laudd.
11   4, 12(33) |          xviii. And the note of Valesius, p. 47. See also Jones on
12   4, 30(114)|  Prophets, &c. See the notes of Valesius, Ed. 1695, p. 69. seq. ~
13   4, 35(140)|     Alexandria. See the note of Valesius to the Eccl. Hist. Lib.
14   4, 35(143)|         xviii. and the notes of Valesius. See also Theodoret. Haeret.
15   5, 44(87) |         fraud. See the notes of Valesius to the Eccl. Hist. l. c.