hi, i was wondering if someone could explain to me a bit about the history of the scholia d… do the comments come from alexandrian scholars or later commentators? is it reliable? stuff like that, thanks 
(btw it’s linked here on Will’s page:)
The histories of the scholia are as complex as the histories of the texts they comment on. Most of them are omnibus editions, collections of many different commentators, only sometimes correctly attributed, if at all.
If you have Scolia A, B and C, I gather D isn’t terribly interesting or new. Since the New Scholiasts haven’t yet gotten up to speed, and put up the Erbse edition, that D I link to is my only access to any of the commentaries.
As for reliability, D is as reliable as any of the others. Which is to say, sometimes good, sometimes pretty bad, often not terribly interesting (I don’t need Homeric forms identified to me, for example).
And this uses up all my knowledge of the Homeric Scholia.
thanks for that will i just opened it… once you get into it’s quite easy to read… it’s interesting to see what kinds of things an ancient greek in the classical/hellenistic age needed explained to them (if the scholia are actually that old).