The aim of the present study is to focus exclusively on the Basilica scholia of John Xiphilinos: to collect and record a list of his scholia and to analyse and evaluate specific lengthy scholia of his in detail. Scholia attributed to Xiphilinos have the heading “of the nomophylax”. We also encounter scholia under the heading “of Ioannes”, and it remains doubtful whether they can also be attributed to Xiphilinos. Based on the evidence some of the scholia with the heading “of Ioannes” are certainly attributed to the antecessor Ioannes Kobidas. Xiphilinos takes into account older legal material including antecessorian writings (Stephanus, Cyril, Theophilus and kata podas translations), as well as works of Athanasius of Emesa and Theodorus of Hermoupolis. Xiphilinos’ references to the rheton raise the question whether he had actually consulted manuscripts of the Digest. Arguments are brought in favour of this hypothesis.

中文翻译：

---

关于 nomophylax：约翰·西菲利诺斯（John Xiphilinos）在大教堂上的 scholia

本研究的目的是专门关注约翰·西菲利诺斯的圣殿：收集和记录他的圣殿列表，并详细分析和评估他的具体冗长的圣殿。归因于 Xiphilinos 的 Scholia 有“nomophylax”的标题。我们还在“Ioannes”的标题下遇到了 scholia，它们是否也可以归因于 Xiphilinos 仍然值得怀疑。根据证据，一些标题为“Ioannes”的 scholia 肯定归功于前身 Ioannes Kobidas。Xiphilinos 考虑了较早的法律材料，包括先前的著作（Stephanus、Cyril、Theophilus 和 kata podas 的翻译），以及 Emesa 的 Athanasius 和 Hermoupolis 的 Theodorus 的作品。Xiphilinos 对 rheton 的提及提出了一个问题，即他是否真的查阅过《文摘》的手稿。提出了支持这一假设的论据。