{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04582210242587601, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016172506738544475, 'mean_word_length': 4.307142857142857, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
BOD in Euripides' Alcestis and Andromache

What relationship exists in Alcestis and Andromache between O (Laur. 31.10, saec. xii ex.) and D (Laur. 31.15, saec. xiv) and B (Par. gr. 2713, saec. xi) is a question which, for want of full and accurate collations, has long stood unresolved. The reports of these manuscripts offered by Kirchhoff are inaccurate and incomplete. In Alcestis Prinz–Wecklein quote only occasional readings of OD and disdain to give a full collation even of B. In Andromache Wecklein ignores O and reports only occasional readings of D. In Alcestis Murray rarely reports OD, in Andromache he reports O (collated for him by Wilamowitz) from time to time, D rarely. In the Budé edition, Meridier ignores OD in both plays.