In our judgment, the word dμsvnvov is due to an interpolator, and should be banished from the text. In this way the verse will correspond with the antistrophic verse, where 'Axıλλéws, introduced by Triclinius for the unattained purpose of restoring the metre, is an addition which contributes nothing to the sense; for in our play there has been such constant reference to the contest for the armor of Achilles, that the poet must have held himself absolved from all necessity of a renewed mention either of the nature of the weapons, or of the hero to whom they had belonged. If we, then, suppose that there is no lacuna in that verse, the only reason for the insertion of μsvvóv in our own is at once removed. The word itself, as we may learn from the notes of Musgrave, Hermann, and Lobeck, only occasions difficulty. Taken in its most natural construction, it yields an inappropriate sense, for we should hardly expect that such an epithet as faint, feeble, would be applied to Aias. On the other hand, if we refer it, with the Scholiast, to the Chorus, the construction is deficient, since it wants an object, or, if avdga be that object, and the attributive adjective àμsvnvóv, which is placed immediately before it in the same case, should be separated from it and regarded as the subject, the structure of the sentence becomes in that case altogether unnatural. The meaning intended by the interpolator is difficult of explanation. It may be that he wished to mark the mental prostration of Aias, or to intimate his probable departure from the world, because the adjective in question is used chiefly of the ghosts or shades of the departed. Beyond all doubt, he thought the naked ävdga, without the article, too cold. But the brevity and abrupt termination of the lamentation when it has simply pointed out its proper object is in fine keeping with what we may presume to have been the condition of the Chorus after their laborious and anxious search, and the non-insertion of the article is fully vindicated by its absence in other passages, where its presence seems still more essential. See Philokt. 1228, and cf. Buttmann

to Philokt. 40.

846. Ιώ μοί μοι. SCHOL. : Τέκμησσα βοᾷ ἐπιτυχοῦσα τῷ σώματι, φαίνεται δὲ οὐδέπω ἔνοπτος οὖσα τῷ χορῷ. Tekmessa, as yet unseen by the Chorus, in her progress from the back of the stage approaches the grove and utters a cry of anguish on beholding the body of Aias. See note to v. 773, supra.

847. πάραυλος. SCHOL.: ἐγγύς, παρὰ τὴν αὐλήν· ἢ θρηνητικὴ παρὰ τοὺς αὐλούς. Eustathius, p. 1457. 54, βοὴν πάραυλον . . . . τὴν ἐξισουμένην αὐλῷ ἢ κατὰ θρηνῳδίαν ἢ διὰ τὸ τρανές. Lobeck remarks correctly, that if ragavλo; were a compound of avaós, it would signify dissonus, like

Tagáxogdos, ragáμovros (see note to v. 248, supra), and it is so used by Athenæus, IV. p. 164, F. Hence the first interpretation of the Scholiast is undoubtedly correct. Cf. Ed. Tyr. 785; Fragm. 446, ed. Dind., and see note to úvavλos at v. 584, above. On the word város, silva, as distinguished from ván, vallis, see Schneider to Xen. Anab. 5. 2. 31; Böckh, Explicc. p 286; Ellendt to Arrian, T. I. p. 14; Lenz in Matthiä, Miscell. Philolog. T. 1. 2. No. 3.

848. Ἰὼ τλήμων. SCHOL: τοῦτο ἐν τῷ ἐμφανεῖ γενομένη, ὅπερ δηλοῖ ὁ Χορός. 850. οἴκτῳ τῷδε συγκεκραμένην. By the noun οἶκτος we are to understand the piteous outcry of Tekmessa at vv. 846, 848. Cf. Trach. 863, κλύω τινὸς οἴκτου δι ̓ οἴκων ἀρτίως ὁρμωμένου. Asch. Theb. 51, οἶκτος οὔτις ἦν διὰ στόμα. Choëph, 51, τόνδε κλύουσαν οἶκτον. On the participle συγnengaμívny, see note to v. 123, supra.

851. Oxwx'. See Buttmann, Ausf. Griech. Sprachl. 114; Hdt. 9. 98. The form xwxa, which is read in Esch. Pers. 13, although defended by Aldus, Dindorf, and Blomfield, is nevertheless suspicious. Cf. Krüger, Griech. Sprachl. B. II. p. 134; Veitch, Irreg. Greek. Verbs, s. v. - διαπεπόρθημαι. Deleta or perdita sum. Cf. 1138, infra; Ed. Tyr. 1456; Trach. 1104; Pind. Ol. 11, 32; Nem. 3, 37; Blomfield, Gl. in Esch. Pers. 720; Heindorf to Plat. Protag. p. 340. A. With the accumulated verbs of analogous signification in this verse, Lobeck compares Plaut. Cist. II. 1. 5, exanimor, feror, differor.

853. ἀρτίως νεοσφαγής. Cf. Trach. 1130, τέθνηκεν ἀρτίως νεσοφαγής ; Plato de Legg. VII. 792. E, agríws voyevns; and on the pleonastic character of the expression see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 899. 2. On the employment of the local demonstrative pronoun ds in the adverbial signification hic, i. e. hoc loco, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 655; Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 471. 12; and compare vv. 1112, 1162, infra.

854. κρυφαίῳ. SCHOL. : ἀποκεκρυμμένῳ, εἰσδεδυκότι εἰς τὸ σῶμα· τὸ δὲ περιπτυχὴς κυριώτατα μὲν ὠνόμασται, ἡμῖν δὲ δυσμετάβλητον. τινὲς δὲ TEQINENUλIOμsvos. See note to v. 786, supra. Tekmessa finds the body so deeply penetrated by the weapon, that she exclaims that it is buried or hidden in her lord.

856. Ωμοι . ἄναξ, *. The MS. T. and Aldus read iμo. The MS. Dresd. b. lá o po, which is received by Brunck and Bothe. As the metre requires the insertion of a short syllable between avag and Tóvde, we have placed an asterisk after the former word. Elmsley supplies μs, but

with considerable hesitation. Compare Eur. Herakl. 434, O'μos, Tí dãr' ἔτερψας ὦ τάλαινά με Ἐλπὶς τοτ', οὐ μέλλουσα διατελεῖν χάριν; Another

instance of the omission of us occurs in the present tragedy, v. 952, where recent editors have followed Toup's proposal, and introduced it into the text.

857. Τόνδε συνναύταν. SCHOL.: ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐμέ, τὸν Χορόν, συνήθως. The MS. Dresd. a. reads τόνδε σύν.

858. Ω ταλαίφρων. Aldus and the majority of the manuscripts read ἰὼ τάλας, ὦ ταλαίφρων. The MSS. Lb. Γ. Δ. Par. C. and Triclinius read ταλαίφρον. See note to v. 606, supra.

860. Τίνος ποτ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἔρξε. The common reading is ἆρ ̓ ἔπραξε, against the metre. The emendation in the text is due to Hermann. HESYCHIUS:

ἔρξε· ἔπραξε. Cf. Philokt. 684; Æsch. Theb. 629. "Render, cujus manu necem sibi Aiax consciverit. It is exceedingly surprising that any commentator should have supposed that any other inquiry is addressed to Tekmessa by the Chorus. The words αὐτὸς πρὸς αὑτοῦ (on which see note to Trach. 877) in her reply evidently show that no other sense can here be borne. For the Chorus, although there is no doubt that it understood the words of Tekmessa, at v. 853, of the suicide of Aias, nevertheless supposes that a diligent inquiry should be made respecting the individual who at the solicitation of Aias laid violent hands upon his life. In the same way, at Trach. 389, the Chorus asks the nurse of Deianeira, upon receiving intelligence of her act of self-murder, who in the world could have fulfilled the prayer of her mistress and committed so monstrous a crime as her destruction. The allusion is doubtless to the custom prevalent in ancient times of procuring some confidential slave or faithful friend to inflict the fatal wound.” WUNDER. On the omission of the article before δύσμορος, see note to v. 845, supra; Valck näer to Eur. Hippol. 1066; Erfurdt to (Ed. Tyr. 1266; Matthia, Gr. Gr. 275. Cf. Elektr. 166, 450; Eur. Troad. 186; Æsch. Prom. 169.

861. Αὐτὸς πρὸς αὑτοῦ. Supply χειρός.

Cf. Trach. 891, αὐτὴ πρὸς

αὑτῆς; Ibid. 1132; Antig. 1177; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 635. 1; Blomfield to

Esch. Prom. 787. · Ἐν γάρ οἱ χθονί. SCHOL. : αὐτὸ τὸ σχῆμα, φησί, δηλοῖ, ὅτι ὑφ ̓ ἑαυτοῦ ἀνηρέθη· πᾶν δὲ ἀμυντήριον καὶ δόρυ καὶ ἔγχος καλοῦσιν οἱ νεώτεροι. περιπετὲς δέ, ᾧ περιέπεσεν. Eustathius, p. 644. 47, Σοφοκλῆς ἔγχος περιπετὲς εἰπεῖν ἐτόλμησεν, ᾧ περιπέπτωκεν Αἴας. HESYCHIUS : πηκτὸς θάνατος· ὁ τοῦ σαλαμινίου Αἴαντος τοῦ μανέντος, ὃς τῷ ξίφει ἐπιπεσὼν ἀπέθανε. PHOTIUS : πηκτὸς θάνατος· ὁ τοῦ Αἴαντος περιεπάγη γὰρ τῷ ξίφει. Lobeck compares Ælian, H. Α. 15. 10, ἄγκιστρα περιπαρέντα τοῖς ἰχθύσιν; Libanius, Decl. T. IV. p. 1081, ἰδόντες τῇ δείρῃ περιπείρονται ; Chrysost. Opp. T. III. 85. Α, ἑαυτῷ τὸ ξίφος περιέπειρε. Cf.

Blomfield, Gl. in Agam. 225 ; Klausen to Choeph. 555. · κατηγορεί. SCHOL. : σημαίνει, λέγει. Cf. Æsch. Agam. 271, εὖ γὰρ φρονοῦντος ὄμμα σου κατηγορεί.

863. οἷος ἄρ' αἱμάχθη;. SCHOL. : μόνος ἡματώθης. Cf. Antig. 1175, αὐτόχειρ αἱμάσσεται. See note to v. 708, supra. The MSS. Δ. Θ. read ιώ μοι, and in place of αἱμάχθης, the MSS. Par. Ε. Δ. Bar. a. b. Aug. C. Dresd. b. exhibit ἡμάχθη;. ἄφρακτος. HESYCHIUS: ἀφύλακτος.

Σοφοκλῆς Αἴαντι μαστιγοφόρῳ. Philostrat. V. Ap. 5. 35. 219, φιλῶν δεῖ πλειόνων, οὐδὲ ἀφράκτους χρὴ ταῦτα πράττειν. Dindorf has edited ἄφαρκτος, as more Attic, and this is supported by Antig. 958, where the MS. Laur. a. exhibits κατάφαρκτος. On the genitive φίλων, compare Antig. 840, φίλων ἄκλαυτος, and consult notes to v. 308, 530, supra.

864. Iã xã. SCHOL. : τοῦτο κατ' ἄλλης ἀρχῆς· βουλόμενοι γὰρ τὸ σῶμα θεάσασθαι τοῦτο λέγουσιν, ὃ διακωλύει ἡ Τέκμησσα,

865. ὁ δυστράπελος. SCHOL: δυσκίνητος, ἀμετάτρεπτος, ὃς οὐχ εὗρεν ἐκφυγὴν τῷ πάθει· οὕτω λέγουσι καὶ δυστράπελέν φασιν Αττικοὶ τὸν ἀμετακίνητον ἐν ὀργῇ ἢ διαθέσει ἢ φιλαργυρίᾳ, τὸν αὐτὸν δὲ καὶ ἀτράπελον. Εἰς τὸ αὐτό.] ὁ δύσκολος. δυσώνυμος· ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς λέγει ὁ Αἴας. See v. 405, supra. The common copies exhibit ὁ δυσώνυμος, but the article is omitted in the MSS. Bar. b. Harl. Mosq. a. b. and Suidas, s. V. Δυστράπελος. Cf. v. 902, infra; Porson to Eur. Orest. 1297.

| 866. περιπτυχεῖ φάρει. SCHOL.: περιλαμβάνοντι ἐνδύματι. καλύψω τῷ φάρει περιπτυχῆ ποιήσασα. ἦθος γυναικὸς τὸ μὴ ἀσχήμως δεικνύναι τὸ σῶμα.

867. παμπήδην. SCHOL. : παντελῶς, ὅλον τὸ σῶμα. Cf. Theogn. 615; Esch. Pers. 728; Id. Fragm. 151, ed. Dind.; Nicand. Alex. 526; Plutarch, Mor. p. 1065, E. Eustathius, 1502. 49, οἱ παλαιοὶ (“Philoxenos fortasse vel alius quis monosyllaborum venator.” LOBECK) ἀπὸ τοῦ πῶ τοῦ κτῶμαι καὶ τὸ πῶν καὶ παμπήδην καὶ παμπησία, like στήδην, βλήδην, κλήδην, etc. Etym. Μ. p. 363, ἐπιῤῥήδην ἀπὸ τοῦ ῥῶ τὸ λέγω, ὡς παρὰ τὸ τμῶ, τμήδην. This etymon is altogether incorrect ; παμπήδην is, like πάμπαν, a reduplicated form of πᾶν, with the common adverbial ending -δην.

....

868. Οὐδεὶς . . βλέπειν. "Upon this verse Brunck makes the following observation: major fortasse videretur vis sententiæ si legeretur oris κοὐ φίλος. We prefer the explanation of the Scholiast: ὑπερβολικῶς, ἐπεὶ οὐκ εἰκὸς ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς τοὺς φίλους μαλακίζεσθαι.

869. Φυσῶντ' ἄνω πρὸς ῥῖνας. "Vauvilliers and Wakefield, Silv. Critt. 1. 104, comparing Stat. Theb. 3. 90, Corruit extremisque animæ singul. tibus errans Alternus nunc ore venit nunc vulnere sanguis, direct us to write πρὸς ῥῖνος. The alteration is unnecessary ; since, before hemor

rhage can happen from the nostrils, the blood must be forced upwards to the nostrils." LOBECK. Græca res est nihil relure, and the communications of this verse are fully paralleled by the language of Hom. Od. 22. 18; Esch. Agam. 1393; Diony's. Antt. XI. 37. 2252.

872. ὡς ἀκμαῖος, εἰ βαίη, μόλο. Such is the reading exhibited by all the manuscripts, Suidas, s. v. 'Anpatos, and Moschopulus to I. 2. 322. Brunck corrected as äv änμaños, and adds the following observation: Sic omnino legendum. Ejecerat librariorum imperitia particulam "v, quæ salva structura lege abesse non potest. "We spare ourselves the trouble of transcribing, and our readers the trouble of perusing, what Wakefield (Silv. Critt. II. p. 127), Hermann (ad Vig. n. 284), Bothe, Lobeck, and Erfurdt have written on this passage. All these critics justly reject Brunck's emendation, but seem to acquiesce in his interpretation, quam intempestivus veniret! If this rendering is correct, we agree with Brunck in believing that must be inserted in some way or other. But why may not μόλοι be a real and proper optative, which, as is well known, never assumes ? The passage may be thus translated: Where is Teukros? If he comes at all, I wish that he may come in time to compose his brother's body. Utinam is one of the thousand and one significations of the particles. So Elektr. 126, κακᾷ τε χειρὶ πρόδοτον, ὡς ὁ τάδε πορὼν Ὅλοιτ', εἰ μοι θέμις τάδ' αὐδῶν. Ibid. 1226. ΗΛ. ἔχω σε χερσίν ; ΟΡ. ὡς τὰ λοίπ ̓ ἔχεις ἀεί ;” ELMSLEY. In opposition to this view, Lobeck contends that the "unnecessary addition of the words si veniat is exceedingly offensive, since it was certain that Teukros would presently return from his expedition"; and adds, that he "doubts if another example of the construction of the optative with the dubitative particle ɛ, such as the following, s, si xoμíσαιο, ταχέως κομίσαι», can be produced from any classical Greek writer.” In reference to the first point, we would observe, that this learned scholar seems to have overlooked the fact, that Tekmessa knew that Teukros had already arrived from Mysia, and therefore that the employment of the optative with does not, in conformity with Hermann's rule, imply that the realization of the wish, O that he may come just in time! etc., is conceived as in the highest degree uncertain or impossible. See Nitzsch to Hom. Od. p. 47. In Xen. Hell. 4. 1. 38, εἴθ ̓ ὦ λῷστε σὺ τοιοῦτος ὢν Qinos žμiv gevoso, Agesilaos cannot be considered as intending to represent to Pharnabazos his wish that the Persian satrap should join the Lakedaimonians as a mere supposition whose realization was, in his own opinion, all but impossible. That s is frequently employed in an optative signification is sufficiently shown by the examples cited in Elmsley's note,