[1] = Synagoge sigma179 and Photius sigma463 Theodoridis. All three are close copies of the entry in Apollonius Sophistes, Homeric Lexicon 126, except that Apollonius uses the participle pepilhme/nas ['pounded'] rather than the e)peilhmme/nas ['reached'] of the later lexica. Apollonius' choice of participles may have been in part an attempt to etymologize the word (pil- > spil-); cf. Etymologicum Gudianum 508.60-509.3. Apion [alpha 3215] = fr. 125 Nauck; Heliodorus = fr. 28. Apion's interpretation, not clearly attested in literature, may reflect an impulse to connect the word to the homoeophonous sphlai=on ('cave'), vel sim. The present headword is nominative plural, and given the source it is probably a generic lexical reference that refers equally to all three instances of the word in Homer (Odyssey 3.298, 5.401, 5.405), although one of these, 5.405 (cf. scholia ad loc.), actually is in the nominative plural (the others are dative plural). See also Hesychius sigma1512; scholion to Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica 4.788; Etymologicum Magnum 724.2.
[2] See LSJ s.v. dia+i/ssw and Diogenes Laertius 2.9.
[3] A close approximation of Theophylact Simocatta, Histories 7.3.2; on the fortress city of Asemus (Asamus, Barrington Atlas map 22 grid B5), subject to repeated barbarian attacks in C6 CE; cf. de Boor (249) and Whitby (182). This secondary headword spila/zwn -- present active participle, nominative singular masculine, of hypothetical *spila/zw -- is presumably extracted from a literary source, but not from the quotation which follows here, which instead contains a finite form (imperfect indicative active, third person plural) of the verb compounded with the prefix kata-. Forms of this compound verb kataspila/zw are well-attested, but the simple verb is attested only here and at PG 31.1717 (ps.-Basil, Consolation for a sick person, also a participle spila/zousai), where the context corroborates the connection of the word with LSJ s.v. spila/s C ['storm'], a homograph of the present primary headword (LSJ s.v. spila/s A). The collocation of the two lemmata may imply that the lexicographer saw an etymological connection between them; and such a connection may in fact exist (cf. Chantraine DELG s.v. spila/s and spi/los 1 and 2).