935. ἀνὴρ κεῖνος.

See note to v. 653, supra.

934. Touds.... μix. The MSS. T. . read intivos; the MSS. La. Lb. nsiva. On the inferential force of the particle ov, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 737. 2; Porson to Eur. Med. 585; and compare Philokt. 1306; Œd. Kol. 1199; Esch. Choeph. 95.

938. Οδός θ' ὁδῶν πασῶν. This is the reading of the Membranæ and the majority of the MSS. The MSS. La. (eraso &) Lb. I. A. read άñaσῶν. Turnebus has edited ὁδός τ' ανιάσασα δὴ πασῶν ὁδῶν, which is supported by the authority of one or two manuscripts. Brunck, on account of the absence of the cæsura in the common reading, prefers id, l'àñaσῶν ὁδὸς ἀν. δή.

939. ἣν δὴ νῦν ἔβην. The Edinburgh Reviewer (Vol. XIX. p. 79) observes, that the metre requires to be considered as an enclitic. See a note on xovs dá vvv in the Mus. Crit. Vol. II. p. 189." ELMSLEY. The note referred to, from the same pen, is to Eur. Iph. Taur. 1009: ""Axovε δή νυν. Scribendum dvov, ut in Orest. 231, 1179; Ar. Ran. 372. Eadem correctio fiat infra 1145; Suppl. 857; Iph. T. 753; Kykl. 440; Hel. 1041; Ion. 1539; Herakl. Fur. 1255; Soph. Elektr. 947." More correctly a writer in the Phil. Mus. I. 227: "In dvvy after an imperative, vvv is always enclitic; in vũ, dà or dà vũ, with an indicative, it always bears the meaning of time." See Jelf's Gr. Gr. 719, 720. 2. On the accusative

sc. dó, see notes to vv. 42, 836, supra.

....

942. Οξεία . θεοῦ τινός. SCHOL.: οὐ κοινῶς τὸ ὀξὺ ἐπὶ τῆς φήμης, ἀλλ ̓ ὁρμὴν ἴσχει ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀξιώματι προβεβηκόσι. τὸ δὲ ὡς θεοῦ, ἤτοι ὡς ἀπὸ θεοῦ, ἢ ὥσπερ θεοῦ· τοῦτο δὲ πρὸς τὴν φήμην μόνον, ἐπεὶ γίνεται βλάσφημον διὰ τῶν ἑξῆς. “ Read θεῶν τινός. The tragic poets usually say θεῶν τις rather than θεός τις. See vv. 430, 1001; Ed. Tyr. 42, 396; Antig. 598; Trach. 119; Philokt. 196; Elektr. 696. In the same manner ixfgvis is better than ἐχθρός τις, φίλων τις than φίλος τις, etc.” ELMSLEY. In opposition to this dictum, Lobeck cites Hom. Od. 10. 141; Pind Isthm. 8. 21; Apollon. Rh. II. 438; Theokrit. 20. 20; and a number of passages from prosewriters, not one of which is to the point, as Elmsley's observation is limited to the Tragedians. See, however, Æsch. Agam. 672, brós tis, ovn äveęwπos, οἴακος θιγών, Eur. Med. 248, ἢ πρὸς φίλον τιν, and consult Bast. Ep. Crit. p. 214. Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 230. The true distinction is that laid down by Hermann: "Ita recte dicas (4v 75), servari aliquem ab aliquo deorum, ubi quum sponte intelligatur, deos esse, qui servent hominem, illud tantum spectatur, non illum certum quendam, sed aliquem deorum Sed ubi deum esse, non hominem dicere voles, singulari uteris."

esse.

“ Το ὡς θεοῦ τινός supply βάζοντος, in the same way as at Trach. 768, ἀρτίκολλος ὥστε τέκτονος, the participle κολλῶντος is to be understood, and render, celeriter velut deo divulgante percrebuit mortis tuæ fama. Allusion is doubtless made in these words to the prayer of Aias to Zeus at v. 784, above, Πέμψον τιν ἡμῖν ἄγγελον, κακὴν φάτιν Τεύκρῳ φέροντα, and the swift rumor testifies to the fulfilment of his dying supplication." LOBECK. On the genitive σου, see note to v. 220, supra.

944. δείλαιος. The MSS. La. Lb. Γ. Δ. Θ. and Aldus read δύστηνος. 947. Ἴθ ἐκκάλυψον. SCHOL.: πρὸς τὸν χορόν φησιν ἢ τινὰ τῶν θερα. πόντων· ἡ γὰρ Τέκμησσα ἐπὶ τὸν παῖδα ἀπῄει. See note to v. 930, supra. With the general sentiment, Lobeck aptly compares Eur. Med. 1311, ἐκλύεθ ̓ ἁρμούς, ὡς ἴδω διπλοῦν κακόν. Hippol. 803, ἐκλύσαθ ̓ ἁρμούς, ὡς ἴδω πικρὰν θέαν.

948. Ω δυσθέατον .... πικρᾶς. Eustathius, p. 409. 45, ὁ Σοφοκλῆς ἐν στίχῳ ἑνὶ οὐκ ὤκνησε διπλόην θέσθαι συντάξεως, εἰπών, ὦ δυσθέατον ὄμμα καὶ τόλμης πικρᾶς. ἔχων γὰρ φάναι, ὦ δυσθέατον ὄμμα καὶ τόλμη πικρά, ὅμως ἐξήλλαξε την φράσιν διὰ τὸ καὶ οὕτω καὶ οὕτω δύνασθαι λέγεσθαι, οἷον, ὦ δυσθεάτου καὶ ὄψεως καὶ τολμήματος, καὶ πάλιν, ὦ δυσθέατος ὄψις καὶ τόλμημα. “So also Theokrit. XV. 124, ὦ ἔβενος, ὢ χρυσὸς, ὢ ἐκ λευκῶ ἐλέφαντος αἰετῶ .... φέροντος. Tryphiodor. 395, ὤμοι ἐμῶν ἀχέων, ὤμοι πατρώϊον ἄστυ. Liban. Declam. T. IV. p. 1015, ὦ κάλλους υἱέων, ὦ πλοκάμων ὥρα, ὢ προσώπου χάριτες, ὢ στέρνων φιλτάτων. Eur. Med. 496, φεῦ δεξιὰ χείρ', ἧς σὺ πόλλ ̓ ἐλαμβάνου, καὶ τῶνδε γονάτων. In this last example, however, another construction may be obtained by erasing the comma after ἐλαμβάνου.” LOBECK.

949. κατασπείρας. SenoL.: δαιμονίως καὶ τὸ σπείρας, οἷον, ἀρχὴν κακῶν παρασχών· ἢ τὸ σπείρας ἐπὶ πλήθους κακῶν τακτέον. See Dissen to Pind. Nem. VIII. p. 479.

.

950. Ποῖ γὰρ μολεῖν μοι, κ τ. λ. " Suidas, s. v. Ποῖ, reads με. Elmsley, Addend. ad Herakl. v. 693, observes correctly, that, whether we adopt the reading μοι or με, the participle αρήξαντ' is nevertheless to be regarded as in the accusative case. See his observations on Eur. Med. 553, and on (Ed. Kol. 1435." HERMANN. It frequently happens, even in prose-writers, that the accusative of the participle is referred to the infinitive, either as subject or predicate, when the accompanying substantive or pronoun, which might also have been joined to the infinitive in the accusative, is constructed according to the government of the primary verb. Plat. Lach. 186. D, παρακελεύομαί σοι μὴ ἀφίεσθαι Λάχητος ἀλλ' ἐρωτᾷν, λέγοντα, κ. τ. λ., where παρακελεύομαί σε μὴ ἀφίεσθαι would

....

have been equally correct. Xen. Anab. 1. 2. 1, svig.... x wagńyysiäev λæßóvra coùs ävògas. See Jelf's Gr. Gr. 675. b; Krüger, Griech. Sprachl. 55. 2. 7, and Index to Xen. Anab. s. v. Accusative; Lobeck to this verse; Klausen to Æsch. Choeph. 391; Porson to Ar. Plut. 286.

It was

952. Η πού με Τελαμών. SCHOL.: ἅμα μὲν πρὸς τῆς ἱστορίας, ὅτι ἐκβέβληται, ἅμα δὲ καὶ πρὸς τὸ πιθανὸν τῆς ὑπονοίας. All the manuscripts and Suidas, s. v. Eurgórwros, exhibitov Teλæμáv, contra metrum. The reading of the text, which has been received by all modern editors, is due to the emendation of Toup and Küster. See note to v. 850, supra ; Elmsley to Eur. Med. 1275; Edinb. Review. XXXVII. p. 69.extensively believed amongst the ancients, that the death of Aias was attributed to the neglect of Teukros by Telamon. Cf. Pausan. 1. 28. 12, Τεῦκρον πρῶτον λόγος ἔχει Τελαμῶνι οὕτως ἀπολογήσασθαι, μηδὲν ἐς τὸν Alavros lávarov sigyárban. Schol. Pind. ad Nem. 4. 76, i yàg Tiūngos ἐλθὼν μετὰ τὴν ἅλωσιν Ἰλίου ἐς Σαλαμῖνα, καὶ ὑπονοηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ Τελαμῶνος, ὡς αἴτιος γεγονὼς τοῦ φόνου τῷ Αἴαντι, φυγὼν ᾤκισε τὴν Κύπρον καὶ ἔσχεν avτñ≤ TÙY άe̟xýv. See the annotators to Hor. Od. 1. 7. 25, and to Cic. de Orat. II. 46.

955. Mnd UTUXOVTI. dov yeλãv. The MS. La.

the MS. T.

Not even when in happy circumstances.

reads "λswv (ye. ÿdiov); the MS. Lb. "λɛwr ; swy; and the MSS. A. Aug. B. do, the latter with the “ Homo ἀγέλαστος nunquam ἡδὺ γελᾷ, sed fieri potest ut aliquando rideat diov To siwlóros." LOBECK.

gloss οἰκεῖον.

956. Οὗτος τί κρύψει; SCHOL. : οἷον τίνος ἀπόσχοιτο λόγου. 957. Τὸν ἐκ .... νόθον. That I the bastard son of his slave won in war. "The expression dóu woλéμsov signifies booty taken in war, or in the present instance a γυνὴ δορίαλωτος. Compare v. 210, λέχος δουριάλωτον, where Tekmessa is meant. The allusion here is to Hesione, who was both a dogòs yigus (see note to v. 410, supra), and of foreign birth; on which account Teukros, who was her son, fears that he may be called voos by his father. According to Attic modes of thinking, the sons of an Athenian citizen by a mother who, however illustrious her descent, was yet of foreign extraction, were stigmatized as illegitimate, and by the laws of Solon were forbidden the jus civitatis. See Cuper. Obss. 1. 26. (Add C. F. Hermann's Manual of Grecian Antiqq. 118.) The epithet vélos, although not in an invidious sense, is applied to Teukros by Homer, Il. 8. 284, in order to distinguish him from Aias. In the words before us he predicts a twofold accusation on the part of Telamon; that through

See Ar.

κράτη do not

Cf. Ed. Tyr.

cowardice, and a traitorous desire to enjoy his brother's inheritance, he has betrayed him to his death; for voto, so long as any legitimate children survived, were not admitted to a share of the paternal wealth. Avv. 1648, and the observations of the Scholiasts there." JAEGER. 959. ὡς τὰ σὰ .... νέμοιμι σούς. “The words τὰ σὰ signify, as Brunck supposes, opes tuas, but imperium tuum. 237, γῆς τῆσδ', ἧς ἐγὼ κράτη τε καὶ θρόνους νέμω. Elektr. 651, δόμους ̓Ατρειδῶν σκῆπτρά τ' αμφέπειν τάδε. It is almost unnecessary to observe that the optative viμo is here correctly employed, on account of the participle #godóvra, or rather of the sense denoted by the participle, őri #goudana." WUNDER.

961. δύσοργος. Ad viam proclivis.

SCHOL. : τὸ μὲν δύσοργος ἐκ

φύσεως· λέγει γὰρ αὐτὸν ἀεὶ σκυθρωπόν· τὸ δὲ ἐν γήρᾳ βαρὺς εἰς ἐπίFor irascibility increases with advancing years.

τασιν.

Cic. ad Att. With the ex

XIV. 24, amariorem me facit senectus; stomachor omnia. pression yng Bagus, Lobeck compares Ed. Tyr. 17, oùv yńgg Bagus; Ælian. V. H. IX. 7, ßagùs væò yngws. On the force of the preposition, see note to v. 463, supra. Wunder to

962. πρὸς οὐδὲν . . . .

Philokt. 60.

66 θυμούμενος. Levissimam quamque ob causam ad jurgia irritabilis." BRUNCK. On the words rgòs ovdiv, for no cause, for the slightest reason, see Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 591. ß.

963. áπopiplńcoμal. The MSS. La. corr. Lb. A. O. Bar. Laud. Ven. Dresd. b. Aug. B. Lips. a. read πoppipńcoμai. A similar diversity in the reading of the manuscripts is found in Eur. Hek. 335, Androm. 10; but in Esch. Suppl. 487, Soph. Elektr. 512, all the books exhibit iẻpipony. See Porson, Adv. p. 195, Buttmann, Ausf. Griech. Sprachl. 100, Anm. 10. Cf. v. 788, supra. On the proleptic predicate aworós, see note to v. 69. "The poet represents Teukros as here predicting, in conformity with events which subsequently happened, what would be his future fate. For returning from the Trojan war without his brother, his father refused him a reception in his native land, he was driven into exile. See Vell. Paterc. 1.1; Virg. Æn. 1. 619.” JAEGER. See other authori

ties cited in note to v. 952, supra.

964. λόγοισιν. SCHOL. : ταῖς τοῦ πατρὸς λοιδορίαις. 966. παῦρα δ ̓ ὠφελήσιμα. The common reading is παῦρα δ' ὠφελήpo, which is defended by Toup ad Suid. II. p. 87, who adds the following explanation: in Troade multi sunt inimici, et qui ¿Qɛλñosμos, in paucis pλnopeos sunt! Lobeck cites Demosth. 430. 5; Isokrat. Ep. IV. 414. 7; Diod. XIII. 41; Dionys. Antt. 70. p. 1678, where the ex

pression πολλὰ χρήσιμος is found. Add Menand. Fr. p. 170, ἔνια χρήσ σιμος. Demosth. p. 193. 26, dλλò ovdiv xenoiun. In our passage, however, such an interpretation is wholly inadmissible. The true reading was first restored by Johnson.

968. πῶς ἀποσπάσω. SCHOL. : πῶς, φησί, τὸ σῶμα ἀπὸ τοῦ ξίφους ἑλκύσω ; συμπληρῶσαι δὲ βούλεται καὶ θάπτειν αὐτόν· καλῶς δὲ τῇ μὲν Τεκμήσση περιῆψε τὸ σκεπάσαι αὐτόν, ὡς γυναικί, τῷ δὲ Τεύκρῳ, ὡς ἀνδρὶ καὶ ἀδελφῷ, τὰ δέοντα ποιεῖν περὶ τὸ σῶμα. The MS. La. omits σ'.

969. Τοῦδ' αἰόλου κνώδοντος. SCHOL.: τῆς ἀκμῆς τοῦ ξίφους, τῆς ὀξείας εἰς τὸ καίνειν, ὡς ὁδούς· ἰδοῦσι γὰρ περιβάλλεται ὀξέσιν· ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ ἄκρου τὸ ξίφος δηλοῖ. Choeroboschus ap. Bekker. Anecd. Gr. p. 1395, ragà Σοφοκλεῖ τοῦδ ̓ αἰόλου κνώδοντος ἀντὶ τοῦ ξίφους. Cf. Antig. 1233, διπλοῦς κνώδοντας. Nicet. Annal. XV. 5. 302, τὸν σφαγέα κνώδοντα. The word xvádav (from xv) denotes strictly the cross-bars or projecting teeth on swords and hunting-spears (Silius, Pun. 1. 515; Xen. de Ven. 10. 3; Polluc. 5. 22), but is here used synecdochically, like the Latin mucro, to signify a sword. Lobeck doubts whether αιόλος κνώδων means a dark, i. e. a bloody sword, or is to be understood in the same manner as the Homeric expressions αιόλος ζωστήρ, θώρηξ, etc. Wunder's opinion, in note to v. 147, supra, is, that the epithet alóλos refers to the changing hues of light and shade on a well-polished blade. It appears to us that it points rather to the hilt, and that ringou, piercing, belongs to the blade.

970. Povéws. See note to v. 773, supra. Musgrave to Eur. Ion. 1252. g. This particle, whose origin and primary meaning are still undetermined, is often used in poetry (more frequently with the imperfect) to express the full discovery of a truth which previously had not been fully apprehended, but is now actually visible. Hermann renders by ergo, then. In Xen. Kyr. 7. 3. 6, ταῦτα ἀκούσας ὁ Κῦρος ἐπαίσατο ἄρα τὸν ungóv, Hartung explains it to mean an unexpectedly vehement action. Jelf, or rather Kühner (Gr. Gr. 788. 5) thinks it implies the discovery of a mistake, and that the action of Cyrus is a proof of his perception of it, whilst Klotz reduces it to the notion of conformity to the nature of things, and adds non mirum est Cyrum postquam mortem hominis familiaris audivit, femur percussisse; quo luctum proderet, sed rebus ita comparatis prorsus consentaneum, ut etiam hoc loco ga fere igitur significet." With its position in our verse, compare Elektr. 935, yà dì oùr xaçã nóyous τοιούσδ ̓ ἔχουσ ̓ ἔσπευδον, οὐκ εἰδεῖ ̓ ἄρα ἵν ̓ ἦμεν ἄτης. Ibid. 1185. On the collocation of the substantive in the same clause with its relative pronoun, see Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 474. a, and the numerous examples cited in Lobeck's