“ The words με

So in this · · μολεῖν.

827. Κοὐδεὶς ἐπίσταται, κ. τ. λ. SCHOL.: οὐδεὶς οἶδέ με τόπος συμμαθεῖν, οἷον μεμαθηκότα τὸ γεγονὸς οὐδείς με οἶδεν τόπος, ἀλλὰ μάτην περιῆλθον. ἢ συμμαθεῖν ἀντὶ τοῦ διδάξαι, εἰς μάθησιν ἀγαγεῖν τοῦ ζητουμένου. Συμ μαθεῖν hic transitivum est, et valet διδάξαι.” BRUNCK. συμμαθεῖν signify so that I may learn, and are an instance of a construction which occurs in almost every page of the Tragic poets. tragedy, v. 636, ἐξίσταται.... φλέγειν. V.762, καὶ σπεύσαθ' (Compare Ar. Eqq. 925, ἐγὼ γὰρ εἰς τοὺς πλουσίους σπεύσω σ ̓ ὅπως ἂν ἐγγραφῆς. Ibid. 1069, νῦν δ ̓ ἐνήλλαξεν θεὸς τὴν τοῦδ ̓ ὕβριν πρὸς μῆλα καὶ ποίμνας πεσεῖν.” ELMSLEY. The first interpretation proposed by the Scholiast is properly rejected by all the commentators; the second is approved by Brunck and Abresch, Dilucc. p. 237. Jacobs explains the sense of the passage to be the following: Neque ullus locus eorum, quos lustravi, scit me aliquid in eo didicisse; in other words, Nowhere have I learnt any thing in reference to the object of my search; or, All the places I have visited know that I have acquired no information there. Wunder confesses that he is unable to suggest any satisfactory explanation of these words. Hermann approves, in great part, the explanation of Elmsley, but adds, that, in constructions of this kind, the notion of agency or effecting is to be connected with the principal verb, and that the expression before us is therefore tantamount to οὐδεὶς τόπος ἐπιστάμενος ποιεῖ με συμμαθεῖν. Consult notes to vv. 635, 762, supra. We agree with Elmsley that ἐπίστα. ταί με συμμαθεῖν is for ἐπίσταται ὥστε με συμμαθεῖν. Nothing can be more common than the ellipse of this particle. Hdt. 1. 13, συνέβησαν . . τόνδε βασιλεύειν, for which, on the other hand, we read in c. 82, συνέβησαν ....ὥστε τριηκοσίους ἑκατέρων μαχέσασθαι. ἐλάχιστον ἦλθε τὸ ̓Αθηναίων κράτος ἀφελέσθαι, where the notion of purpose or effect might have been more clearly defined by ὥστε, as at Ib. 5. 14, or by ὅπως or ὥs with the optative. Plat. Gorg. 478. Ε, οὐκοῦν οὗτος τυγχά νει ὢν, ὃς ἂν τὰ μέγιστα ἀδικῶν καὶ χρώμενος μεγίστη ἀδικίᾳ διαπράξηται, ὥστε μήτε νουθετεῖσθαι μήτε κολάζεσθαι μήτε δίκην διδόναι, but almost immediately after, ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις μεγίστοις νοσήμασι συνισχόμενος διαπράξαιτο μὴ διδόναι δίκην. From these examples it is clearly manifest that the naked infinitive is frequently added to single verbs or phrases to denote the purpose to which an action is directed, or the consequence which ensues upon it. Compare Hdt. 9. 39, Πέρσας δὲ ὀρέοντες ὡρμημένους διώκειν τοὺς Ἕλληνας οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν βαρβαρικῶν τελέων ἄρχοντες, with Xen. Anab. 1. 8. 25, εἰς τὸ διώκειν ὁρμήσαντες. Hence, then, οὐδεὶς ἐπίσταταί με συμμαθεῖν τόπος is equivalent in signification to οὐδεὶς τόπος ἐπίσταται

....

Thuk. 8. 76, ἡ Σάμος παρ'

εἰς τό με συμμαθεῖν, or ὥστε με συμμαθεῖν. See Jelf's Gr. Gr. 664, Obs.

828. 'Ido. The Scholiast and all the manuscripts read idoù idoú, and in the following verse the Triclinian editions insert yg before av. It may, therefore, be suspected that both are due to some interpolator, who wished to construct the trimeter: ἰδοὺ ιδού· δοῦπον γὰρ αὖ κλύω τινά. Wunder observes that the word do is frequently employed by the Greek dramatists in order to direct attention to some sudden cry or noise. See his notes to Philokt. 187, and Ed. Kol. 1466.

829. δοῦπον. SCHOL.: ἐλπίζοντες τῷ Αἴαντι περιπεσεῖν.

66

830. novórov opiziav. The MS. Ien. reads Tapinolav, probably a corruption of zagovoíav, and originally derived from Elektr. 1104, xoivóTOUY Tagovaiav. Elmsley, in Add. ad Eur. Herakl. 693, inserts a comma after μvys, upon the supposition of a change of construction from the genitive to the accusative. Lobeck asserts, in opposition to this view, that the accusative depends a notione verbi içãμs, quæ imperativum idoú sponte consequitur." That this explanation is inconsistent with the signification assigned to do in the preceding note, and with the fact that the speaker, although using that imperative, really sees nothing, but merely hears a noise, to which he directs the attention of the other members of the Hemichorus, will be evident to all. We regard the accusative as dependent upon xλuus, which must be mentally supplied from zλów in the preceding verse. On the double genitive, see note to v. 53, supra.

831. Ti ouv dá; This collocation is frequently met with after assertions whose truth is conceded by the questioner. Render, Well, what then? or, Suppose it granted, what follows? On the hiatus, see Buttmann's Ausf. Griech. Sprachl. 29, Anm. 1; Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 42. Porson to Eur. Orest. 692, and in Advers. 282, Dawes, Misc. Critt. 482, Blomfield to Æsch. Theb. 193, and Monk to Eur. Hippol. 875, deny that this hiatus is admissible in Tragedy, whilst the opposite opinion defended by Brunck to Philokt. 733; Hermann to Ibid. 100, 905, 1078, and in Elem. D. Metr. p. 50; Seidler, de Vers. Dochm. pp. 79, 342 sqq. In comic trimeters examples of this kind are by no means rare, but in the Tragic senarius (although we read "o, Ed. Tyr. 959) they must be viewed with great suspicion.

835. ̓Αλλ' οὐδ ̓ ἐμοὶ δὴ, κ. τ. λ. The MSS. La. Lb. T. A. Dresd. a. Aug. B. read λa' oùdè μèv dń, which is approved by Elmsley, Wunder, and Dindorf. Compare Trach. 484, 627, 1128; Elektr. 913; Ed. Tyr. 523; Hom. Il. 8. 238; Plat. Protag. p. 315. C; Id. Phædr. p. 231. D;

Xen. Kyr. 1. 6. 9; Hartung, Griech. Partik. II. 401; Heindorf to Plat. Phæd. 53. We have preferred the common reading, as more suited to the two foregoing verses. Το the words οὐδ ̓ ἐμοί, a negative particle must be mentally supplied. Cf. Eur. Troad. 664, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ πῶλος, ἥτις ἂν διαζυγῇ τῆς συντραφείσης, ῥᾳδίως ἕλκει ζυγόν, and the numerous examples collected by the commentators to Trachin. 126. In place of βολῶν,

the MS. La. reads βολῆς, with ων suprascriptum. The MSS. Dresd. a. b. Δ. and Aldus read μολῶν, for which Triclinius substituted μολών, and interpreted ἐλθών. The common reading is preserved in Bachmann's Anecd. Gr. T. II. 357, and is defended by Eur. Orest. 1263, τρίβον . . . . τὴν πρὸς ἡλίου βολάς ; Joseph. Antt. XV. 11. 782, κατὰ ἡλίου βολάς, orientem versus.

836. Κέλευθον. “ In Elektr. 1273, ἰὼ χρόνῳ μακρῷ φιλτάταν ὁδὸν ἐπαξιώσας ὧδέ μοι φανῆναι, which is a pregnant expression for ἰέναι ὁδὸν ὥστε φανῆναι ; somewhat of the same kind is κέλευθον φανείς in the present passage.” Passow. Φανῆναι, in the sense of apparere, may frequently be rendered, when applied to the motions of the heavenly bodies or to men, by venire or venisse. Cf. v. 697, supra, ἢ ἐφάνην ἐγὼ βραδύς; (d. Tyr. 737, σχεδόν τι πρόσθεν ἢ σὺ τῆσδ ̓ ἔχων χθονὸς ἀρχὴν ἐφαίνου, advenisti et potitus es. Antig. 101 sq., ἀκτὶς ἀελίου, τὸ κάλλιστον ἑπταπύλῳ φανὲν Θήβα . φάος, ἐφάνθης ποτε, at length thou hast appeared, or come Fragm. Inc. LVI. 7, ὅταν περ αὐτῆς εὐγενεστάτη φανῇ (σελήνης ὄψις). In this sense, the accusative may be referred to such constructions as have been explained in note to v. 42, supra. See Bernhardy's Synt. p. 115; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 548. d, 558. 1; and compare v. 939, infra. δηλοῖ φανείς. On the attraction of the participle as the complement of the predicate, see note to v. 445, supra.

....

837. Τίς ἂν δῆτά μοι. SCHOL. : ὅλος ὁ χορὸς εἰς ἓν συνελθὼν ταῦτά φησιν. The manuscripts and old editions exhibit τίς ἂν δή μοι The reading in the text is the emendation of Hermann, and is adopted by Erfurdt, Lobeck, Wunder, and Elmsley. It is surprising that so simple and easy a correction did not occur to Brunck, who has sought to restore the metre by erasing δή. μοι. At my request, prithee. So Elektr. 442, αὐτῇ, at her hands, at her request. Eur. Heh. 535, δέξαι χοάς μοι τάσδε. Infra, ν. 989, Μενέλαος, ᾧ δὴ τόνδε πλοῦν ἐστείλαμεν, for whose sake. See Jelf's

Gr. Gr. 598.

838. τίς ἂν φιλοπόνων ἁλιαδᾶν. SCHOL. : τίς τῶν ἁλιέων ἀεὶ ἀγρυπνεῖν εἰθισμένων διὰ τὴν ἄγραν, ἢ τίς θεὰ Ὀλυμπιὰς ἢ ποταμῶν ἴδρις, τουτέστι Ναΐς, ἀπαγγείλαι, εἴ που λεύσσει τὸν ὠμόθυμον. The MSS. Bar. a. b.

Mosq. b. Dresd. b. A. read λadav. On the Doric form of the case-ending in the words 'Aλadav and brav, see note to v. 670, supra; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 81.3; Greg. Cor. de Dial. Dor. 32, p. 226, ràs yevinàs ràs eis wy 24γούσας διὰ τοῦ αν προφέρουσι, καὶ Σοφοκλῆς ἐν Αἴαντι ἁλιαδᾶν. SCHOL. : ἁλιάδαι οἱ παῖδες τῶν ἁλιέων ἤγουν οἱ ἁλιεῖς ὡς ̓Ασκληπιάδαι οἱ ἰατροί, which would be an apt illustration, if physicians had been called 'Aoxinπιοί. The formation and signification of this and similar patronymics (xogavions, Antig. 940; broì oigavidas, Eur. Phon. 837) have been ably illustrated in the learned observations of Lobeck to this verse. On ἄγρας xwv, see note to v. 540, supra. "The second syllable of düvous is short. This verse is composed of a trochaic dipodia and a single dochmiac. Compare v. 857, Ω τάλας, ὦ ταλαίφρων γύναι. If Hermann (de Metr. p. 441), Bothe, Lobeck, and Erfurdt had been aware of this fact, they would have been spared the necessity of torturing the second verse of the antistrophe into a double dochmiac." ELMSLEY.

839. τίς Ολυμπ. θεᾶν. Lobeck understands the Oreades and Dryades haunting Mount Olympos, in Mysia, which, as Strabo (L. X. 186, T. IV.) complains, the Tragedians yswygapnro usually confounded with Mount Ida. See note to v. 678, supra. - ῥυτῶν. SCHOL. : τῶν ῥεόντων, παρὰ Tv pú. The metre of this verse consists of a dactylic penthemimeres and a single dochmius.

840. Βοσπορίων. Schol.: τῶν εἰς τὸν Βόσπορον ῥεόντων Τρωικῶν ποταμῶν· δύο δέ εἰσι Βόσποροι· ὁ μὲν κατὰ τὴν Προποντίδα, ὁ δὲ Θρακικός, ὡς φησὶ Φιλέας. Εἰς τὸ αὐτό.] ἴσως τῶν Ἑλλησποντίων. The last supposition is confirmed by Esch. Pers. 722, 745, and the Scholiasts to those passages. The common copies and Aldus exhibit Βοσπορίων ποταμῶν ἴδρις. The latter word is omitted by Erfurdt, on the authority of the MSS. Mosq. a. b. Elmsley prefers the addition of vag in the corresponding antistrophic verse, and Hermann thinks that the word is too poetical to have been added by the interpreters. He has therefore placed a comma after Toraμav, and inserted äga in the antistrophe, which particle he pronounces to be non modo apta, sed pæne necessaria." Against this reasoning it may be fairly urged, that the correcting hand whose active industry we have already noticed was evidently that of no unlearned man, and the introduction of aga at v. 879, infra, will be seen by every reader to be altogether unnecessary, on account of its occurrence in the preceding verse, with which the words that follow are joined in close coherence by the pronoun

66

τοῖα.

841. Eo. Alicubi, anywhere. In such collocations as is, the

conjunction does not express doubt of there being any; but is nearly equiv alent to ὅστις. So in Latin, si quando is often used in the sense of aliquando. Lobeck compares Oppian. Hal. III. 165, φεύγουσι καὶ φῶτα καὶ εἴ ποθι καρτερὸν ἰχθύν. Synes. de Regn. p. 16. D, αἱ σαῦραι μόλις εἴ πη ἐκκύπτουσαι. See Ellendt to Arrian. Alex. IV. 17. 5; Wyttenbach to Plutarch. T. I. 980; Hermann ad Vig. p. 756 sqq.; Böckh in Plat. Min. p. 149; Heindorf to Plat. Parmen. 150. B. The expression probably originated in an ellipse. Hence Matthia (Gr. Gr. 556, note 2, and 617. f) explains the construction in our passage to be really this : ποίὶ πλαζόμενον λεύσσων, εἴ ποθι λεύσσει. Cf. Philokt. 1204, ξίφος, εἴ ποθεν, ἢ γένυν ἢ βελέων τι προπέμψατε, scil. εἴποθεν λαβεῖν δύνασθε. Xen. Anab. 5. 3. 3, oi de ἄλλοι ὑπό τε τῶν πολεμίων καὶ τῆς χιόνος καὶ εἴ τις νόσῳ, scil. ἀπώλετο. Id. Hell. 4. 2. 21, οὐκ ἀπέθανον αὐτῶν, πλὴν εἴ τις ἐν τῇ ξυμβολῇ ὑπὸ Τεγεατῶν. Hdt. 9. 7, ἡμῖν ἐστὶ πολλά τε καὶ εὖ ἔχοντα, εἰ τέοισι καὶ ἄλλοισι Ἑλλήνων, in place of which we find the plena locutio in Demosth. p. 701. 7, ἐγὼ δ ̓, εἴπερ τινὶ τοῦτο καὶ ἄλλῳ προσηκόντως εἴρηται, νομίζω κἀμοὶ νῦν ἁρμόττειν εἰπεῖν. See note to v. 179, supra ; Stallbaum to Plat. Rep. p. 497. E; Krüger to Xen. Anab. 1. 5. 1; Id. Griech. Sprachl. 65. 5. 9; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. 493; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 895. 2.

842. σχέτλια γὰρ ἐμέ. SCHOL. : δεινὰ γὰρ πράγματα ἐμὲ τὸν ἐπιπόνως πλανηθέντα μὴ εὐθυδρομῆσαι εἰς τὸ τῆς ζητήσεως τέλος, καθὸ ὁ Αἴας ἐποιήσατο τὴν ἔφοδον· τοῦτο γὰρ ἂν εἴη οὔριον. On the employment of the predicative adjective in the plural number, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 383; Reisig, Comm. Cr. in Ed. Kol. 326; Valcknäer ad Eur. Hipp. 370; Koen. ad Greg. p. 130; Hermann ad Vig. p. 739, 139. “The expression μακρῶν ἀλάταν πόνων is identical in meaning with μακροὺς ἀληθέντα πόνους, and the phrase ἀλᾶσθαι μακροὺς πόνους is similar to πόνους λατρεύειν οι πόνων λατρεία at Trach. 830.” WUNDER. Compare Eur. Androm. 307, παρέλυσε δ ̓ ἂν Ἑλλάδος ἀλγεινοὺς πόνους, οὓς ἀμφὶ Τροίαν δεκέτεις ἀλά. ληντο νέοι λόγχαις, and see notes to vv. 276, 410, 414, supra.

....

845. ̓Αλλ' ἀμενηνὸν . . . . ὅπου. ScnoL. : ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῦ Αἴαντος· σχέτλια ἂν εἴη μὴ ἐπιτετυχηκέναι αὐτῷ, ἀλλ ̓ ἦσθενηκέναι με τῇ ζητήσει. The MS. Δ. reads μεμηνότ', which is approved by Musgrave. Hermann renders, turpe est me tanto labore nihil effecisse, virumque morbo debilitatum frustra quæsivisse, and observes that the indignation of the Chorus arises principally from the circumstance, that, although they are in full possession of health and strength, they have not been able to overtake a man who had just recovered from an attack of virulent disease, and cannot, therefore, be thought capable of having gone to a great distance.