has been explained above. For the words before us would, if the punctuation of Lobeck were retained, be equivalent to ἔχοντες, οὐκ ἴσασιν ἔχοντες. The consideration which should press most strongly on the student is not how certain words may be constructed, but how the sense of the passage and the intention of the writer require them to be constructed. Hence, whilst at one place the interpretation nesciunt se habere might be the most appropriate, at another, the rendering quum habeant, habere se nesciunt might be yet more suitable. With the sentiment contained in these verses, the editors compare Plat. Rep. 432. D, one of iv raïs Xigoiv ἔχοντες ζητοῦσιν ἐνίοτε ὁ ἔχουσι. Liban. Epist. MDCCCIV. 684, κείμενον ἐν χεροῖν οὐκ εἰδὼς, ὃ γνώσεται ἀπελθόν. Pythag. Carm. Aur. 55, ἀγάθων Téλas övTWV oùx oogãos. Plaut. Captiv. 1. 2, tum denique homines nostra intelligimus bona, quum, quæ in potestate habuimus, ea amisimus. Ego, postquam gnatus tuus potitu' st hostium, expertus, quanti fuerit, nunc desidero. Horat. Od. 3. 24. 31, virtutem incolumen odimus, sublatam ex oculis quærimus invidi. Shakspeare, Much Ado about Nothing, Act IV. Sc. 1: "For it so falls out That what we have, we prize not to the worth The virtue that possession would not show us Whiles it was ours." 910. Ἐμο.... γλυκύς. SCHOL. : μᾶλλον ἐμοὶ πικρὸς τέθνηκεν ἤπερ ἐκείνοις γλυκύς· ἐπεὶ ὧν ἐπεθύμει ἔτυχεν· οὐκ ἂν οὖν ἐπεγγελῷεν αὐτῷ οἱ ἐχθροί, ὡς αὐτοὶ τῆς ἀπωλείας αἴτιοι γενόμενοι. The MS. La. reads ἦ. 66 Musgrave compares Hom. Il. 1. 117, βούλομ ̓ ἐγὼ λαὸν σόον ἔμμεναι, ἢ ἀπολέσθαι. Brunck and Erfurdt are silent. Would not a better sense be produced by reading εἰ κείνοις γλυκύς ? We have already proposed the same correction in v. 179, supra." ELMSLEY. Nitzsch, to Plat. Ion. p. 69, takes offence at the omission of the comparative μãλλov, and asserts that the particle is not comparative, but disjunctive: mihi acerba sive illis dulcis ejus mors acciderit, ipsi vero felix fuit; and that the stress of the sentence is laid upon the copula di, avrã dì rigvós. This explanation would require that should be placed twice. His objection to the ellipse of aλov is shared, as it would seem, by Elmsley, who, through that excessive partiality for the particles which he has betrayed both at v. 179, supra, and in his note on Ed. Tyr. 112, has proposed an emendation which accords but poorly either with the meaning of the passage or the character and disposition of Tekmessa. Absorbed in the exclusive ut equivalent to μo That the comparlearnt from Hom. terance of her own feelings, she simply states that the death of Aias has brought more anguish to herself than pleasure to his enemies. According to Elmsley's correction, the sense would be, If it is gratifying to them, and pleasing to him, it grieves me. The common reading, which is defended by Eustathius, p. 1521. 42, and Suidas, s. v. Tasuxos, is πικρὸς τέθνηκεν, καὶ μᾶλλον πικρός, ἢ κείνοις γλυκύς. ative is sometimes used after uãλλov omitted, may be Il. 11. 319, Τρωσὶν δὴ βόλεται δοῦναι κράτος ήέπερ ἡμῖν. οὖν ἡμᾶς δίκαιον ἔχειν τὸ ἕτερον κέρας, ἤπερ ̓Αθηναίους. 1, ζητοῦσι κερδαίνειν ἢ ἡμᾶς πείθειν. Cf. Jelf's Gr. Gr. 779, Obs. 3; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 757; Schafer ad Bos. Ell. Gr. p. 758; Kritz to Sallust. Cat. VIII. 1; Matthiä ad Cic. pro Rosc. Amer. 20. 55; Arnold to Thuk. 3. 23, upon whose observations Göller remarks, Ad comprobandam omissionem adverbii μã220v nihil valet locus Soph. Ai. 966 (910), quem Arnoldus adfert, ubi positivus ingó; accipiendus est pro comparativo ea ratione quam Hermannus ad Vig. p. 884 sq. exposuit." Hdt. 9. 26, οὕτω Lysias de Aff. Tyr. 66 912. væg λey. Wunder remarks upon these words, that they might have been omitted, salvo sensu, on account of the preceding expression ἠράσθη τυχεῖν. We most heartily wish that all such criticism had been spared. Sophokles says nothing, "quod salvo sensu omitti poterat." The slightest attention to the meaning of Tekmessa will indicate the reason which induced the poet to emphasize the thought she was anxious to express by the apparent repetition of it which these words contain. See v. 650, supra, and compare v. 1058, below; Elektr. 519; Œd. Tyr. 338; Antig. 468. On the genitive with gáren, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 498. 913. Πῶς δῆτα.... κάτα ; This and the four following verses are given to the Chorus in Aldus and some few manuscripts; how incorrectly may be learnt from the word oiyncov at v. 919. The MSS. La. pr. Lb. T. A. and Aldus read rí dra, which is preferred by Porson, Præf. ad Hek. p. xxxi., who corrects the remainder of the verse as follows, rí dãra roûdi y' iyyiλäev äv xára; Elmsley, Cens. Porsoni Hek. p. 72, conjectures that the true reading is τοῦδ ̓ ἂν ἐγγελῷεν ἂν κάτα. The common reading is unobjectionable. Porson's assertion, to Eur. Hek. v. 1214, that the Tragedians do not say ἐπεγγελᾶν κατά τινος is sufficiently disproved by Lobeck, who cites Elektr. 835; Philokt. 328; Ed. Kol. 1339. 914. os. See Jelf's Gr. Gr. 611, and on the sentiment consult note to v. 895, supra. οὐ κείνοισιν, οὔ. "This use of the negative particle is elegant. See our observations on v. 444, supra. The second où is commonly followed by ἀλλά. Cf. Ar. Acharn. 421; Demosth. De Fuls. Leg. pp. 372. 13; 399. 24; 413. 16; 421. 17, &c. Sometimes, however, as in the passage before us, this is not the case. .... Cf. Ar. Ran. 1308; MeSee Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 608; "These three verses, for two conclusive reasons, ought long since to have been banished from the text. The first is, that they contain an unnecessary and offensive repetition of a sentiment which has already been expressed with far more emphasis and power at the commencement of this address; and the second is, that they destroy the metrical correspondence of the verses in this interchange of dialogue and lamentation between Tekmessa and the Chorus. For in this portion of the play, the verses from line 824 to 875 form a system, whose distribution into song and dialogue is repeated in a precisely similar arrangement of the verses which commence at line 876 and terminate at line 914." SCHÖLL. v Evos. Equivalent to zaves, i. e. paraíws. See Jelf's ̓Αλλ' ἐμοὶ . . . . διοίχεται. Lobeck compares Trachin. 41, πλὴν ἐμοὶ πικρὰς ὠδῖνας αὐτοῦ προσβαλὼν ἀποίχεται. Gr. Gr. 622. I. a. As these are the last words uttered by Tekmessa, we take the present opportunity of calling the attention of our readers to the exceeding beauty of the poet's delineation of her character. It is difficult to exaggerate the touching perfection which so often blesses the world in the form of woman, but we doubt exceedingly if a higher ideal of the feminine nature can be found than the gentle and devoted " spear-won bride" of Aias. How vulgar are his heroisms when placed in contrast with her retiring modesty and grace! How preeminent and entire her love! One thought alone occupies her mind, one hope alone is busy at her heart, from which one prayer whose purport never varies rises to the gods, the preservation and the safety of her most beloved Aias. On his life her all of earthly happiness depends. Her parents had long since perished amid the horrors of a siege which had reduced her ancestral home to desolation; she has no other protector against the contingencies of the most unhappy of all earthly fates, and the vindictive malice of her husband's foes. Who, in reading her appeal to Aias, and more especially the beautiful lines, Tís δῆτ ̓ ἐμοὶ γένοιτ ̓ ἂν ἀντὶ σοῦ πατρίς; Τίς πλοῦτος; ἐν σοὶ πᾶσ ̓ ἔγωγε owloμas (vv. 493, 494), can fail to recall the language of Andromache (Il. 6. 429), immortal as the passion which inspired its utterance, "ExTog, ἄτας σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴς καὶ πότνια μήτηρ δε κασίγνητος, σὺ δέ μοι θαλερὸς TagánaITIS? When imminent danger threatens the life of him upon whom her whole hope and love are fixed, how beautifully does she recall, with some violence to the modesty which breathes in all she utters, the "tender grace of a day that is dead," in the pathetic allusion to the past enjoyments of their mutual love (v. 495 sq.). What words could portray more strikingly the exquisite and most womanly attributes of her character than her own language at v. 465, which we present in the translation of Professor Felton: "And therefore, ever since Thy bed I shared, my thoughts dwelt lovingly on thine." This love knows neither diminution nor eclipse. However harsh the words of Aias, she is neither chilled by his silence nor overawed by his threats her one, long, earnest prayer is for his life and welfare. With the thoughtfulness of a true mother's love, she removes her little son from the presence of his raging father, and for so doing is subsequently rewarded with the expression of her husband's thanks (v. 511). Let us, moreover, notice the trusting confidence of her true, woman-like affection. Without a thought of the necessity for additional corroboration, she implicitly believes and confidently reaffirms every statement that the hero in his darkest moments makes. She not only exculpates him from blame, but shares his resentment against his foes, and, long after Aias in the full possession of his faculties had ceased to reiterate his former charges against the Atreidai and Odysseus, heaps imprecations upon them, as, to her thought, the murderers of her lord. And when the catastrophe has happened, how real and sincere her anguish! How characteristic of such love as hers that she should welcome the remembrance, that, after all, Aias had perished, not by the machinations of his foes, but of his own free choice, and that this event, notwithstanding the legacy of anguish it had bequeathed to her, was pleasant to himself (v. 910). We feel it a relief that the poet has not attempted to depict the fulness of that grief which Tekmessa buried in her Aias's grave; that he has simply foreshadowed it in the simple words, the last she utters in this play, Alas yae̟ avτοῖς οὐκέτ ̓ ἐστίν. ̓Αλλ' ἐμοὶ λιπὼν ἀνίας καὶ γόους διοίχεται (v. 916 sq.). In all this, there is nothing excessive or misplaced. Sophokles has drawn entirely from nature, and all he writes is founded on its truth. The purity, the firmness and depth of soul, the impassioned eloquence, and, above all, the sustained affection which, whilst it meets us first and leaves us last, gives form and substance and grace and the breath of life and love to every part of the poet's conception, conspire to render Tekmessa our ideal of female loveliness and truth. And for the consolation of those who are concerned at the false and senseless attacks which some detractors so con tinually urge against the modesty and virtue of female life in ancient days, we cannot forbear repeating, that the Sophoklean delineation bears the character of exactest portraiture. It is evident that the poet paints from life; the countenance may have been made to shine, and the raiment made white and glistening, "The idea of her life has sweetly crept Into his study of imagination, And every lovely organ of her life Has come apparelled in more precious habit, More moving delicate, and full of life, Into the eye and prospect of his soul, Than when she lived indeed," but the identity of face and form with that of the source from which he drew is still left evident to all. 918. Ιώ μοί μοι. Scot.: δεῖ γενέσθαι βοὴν, ἣν ἀκούσας ὁ χορὸς, ἐφί στησι γνωρίζει τὸ φθέγμα τοῦ Τεύκρου βοῶντος. 66 920. ἄτης τῆσδ ̓ ἐπίσκοπον μέλος. SCHOL. : σημαντικὸν, ἔφορον, ούχ ἡμαρτηκὸς τῆς συμφορᾶς, ἀλλ ̓ ἐστοχασμένον. HESYCHIUS: ἐπίσκοπα· τὰ τυγχάνοντα τοῦ σκοποῦ. " The word επίσκοπος denotes strictly ὁ ἐπὶ σκόπον βάλλων. Accordingly, we find τοξότης ἐπίσκοπος and ἐπίσκοποι oloroi, Themist. XVIII. 217. B (see Wernsdorf to Himer. Ecl. XIV. 3; Wyttenbach to Julian. p. 161 sq.; Jacobs to Achill. Tat. p. 573); and hence there seems no impropriety in applying it as an epithet of things, quæ cum aliqua re congruunt eique consentanea sunt.' " LOBECK, Musgrave aptly compares Æsch. Eum. 902, ΧΟ. Τί οὖν μ' ἄνωγας τῇδ ̓ ἐφυμνῆσαι χθονί; ΑΘ. Ὁποῖα νίκης μὴ κακῆς ἐπίσκοπα. With the genitive, compare v. 154, supra; Plat. Gorg. 465. A, ro≈ ndios oroxáZerαi. Jelf's Gr. Gr. 506. 921. Ω φίλτατ' Αίας, κ.τ.λ. Teukros, who had been detained from repairing, immediately upon his return from Mysia, to the tent of Aias, in consequence of his detention and violent treatment by the Grecian soldiers, and who probably had not thought it necessary to accelerate his movements on account of the measures which, in compliance with the friendly admonitions of Kalchas, he had already taken to secure the confinement of Aias, now appears and learns that he has come too late to save his brother's life. Great as was the shock of news so contrary to the hopes with which he came to seek his presence, it is nevertheless to be observed that the sight the dead body inspires no burning thirst for vengeance on the men whose injustice had driven Aias to the commission of the fatal deed, but |