ται, ὡς ἐθάδος αὐτῷ οὔσης· ἔστι μέντοι ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς ἡ ̓Αθηνᾶ· δεῖ γὰρ τοῦτο χαρίζεσθαι τῷ θεατῇ· προθεραπεύει δὲ τὸν θεὸν ὁ Ὀδυσσεὺς καὶ οὕτω λέγει τὰ Αἴαντος. Brunck assents, observing, "Minerva e machine loquentis et spectatoribus conspicuæ vocem audiebat Ulysses, at ipse eam censebatur non videre, juxta veterum opinionem, deos quidem sæpe cum hominibus colloqui sed raro se iis in conspectum dare." The same view is supported by Wunder in a long note to this line in his Cens. p. 7, where he justifies the meaning which the Scholiast assigns to ToTTos, in opposition to the explanation of Suidas, oppsv igwμivn, defended by Lobeck. The eminent scholar last named inquires:- "Upon what principle and in conformity with what examples are we to receive the explanation of Brunck? Are we to believe that Philoktetes, Thoas, Theoklymenos, Ion, Peleus, Hippolytos, and Orestes did not behold upon the stage the divinities with whom they are represented to have conversed? Assuming, however, that this could be proved, how could the spectators in our own play have been persuaded to believe that the goddess, whom they distinctly perceived, and whom Aias recognized at the first glance, really avoided the gaze of Odysseus alone? The interpreters have been led into this mistake by considering ἄποπτον as equivalent in meaning to ἀθέατον, as stated by Suidas and the Grammarian associated with Ammonius, p. xlvi. But to express this sense the more ancient writers were accustomed to employ the words ἄοπτον οι ἄνοπτον, whilst to ἄποπτον they gave this signification quod e longinquo conspicitur vel clare, si in excelso est, vel obscure si longo intervallo distat." An immense number of passages then cited in order to justify this rendering, from which we select but two: Aristot. Rep. II. 12. 253. D, ὅπως ἄποπτος ἔσται ἡ Κορινθία ἐκ τοῦ xwparos, ut prospici possit. Plutarch. V. Lucull. 9, xaraQavns xai ἄποπτος. Add Galen. vol. 3. p. 222, καί τις ἐξ ἀπόπτου θεασάμε. νος ταῦρον εὐθὺς γνωρίζει τὸ ἄῤῥεν ἄνευ τοῦ κατασκέψασθαι τὰ γεννητικά μógia. The same explanation is also given by Hermann, and is supported by the passages from the Elektra (v. 1489) and (Edipus Rex (v. 762) to which Wunder refers in opposition, where there is no objection to our taking oTTov in the sense of remotum. comma precedes μws, instead of following it. error, comparing such passages as Eur. Alh. εὐτυχέστερον | Τοὐμοῦ νομίζω, καίπερ οὐ δοκοῦνθ ̓ ὅμως, Æsch. Choeph. 113, μέμνησ' Ορέστου, κεὶ θυραῖός ἐσθ ̓ ὅμως, and is followed by Hermann and all the more recent editors. See his note to Eur. Bacch. 787. Blom. field therefore is in error when he directs us (ad Æsch. Pers. 300) to restore

are

In the common copies the Elmsley first corrected this 938, φίλοι, γυναικὸς δαίμον

the comma after . Did no other authority than Ed. Kol. 957, ignμía με, κεἰ δίκαι ὅμως λέγω, σμικρὸν τίθησι, exist, it would be amply sufficient to justify the punctuation of Elmsley. Cf. Reisig, Enarr. ad Ed. Kol. 659.

17. κώδωνος ὡς Τυρσηνικῆς. "This verse is quoted by Suidas, s. xwdwv, the Scholiast to Soph. Ed. Kol. 124, and to Thuk, IV. 134, the last affirming that Thukydides said i xwdwv. Nor is the remark of our own Scholiast, ἡ κώδων θηλυκῶς ἀττικῶς, at variance with his statement. For Thukydides speaks of the κώδων used by sentinels and patrol (ὁ κώδων ὁ quλazrigos, Synes. Catast. p. 303. D, whence the appellation i púλaž rov κώδωνος, Parthen. c. VII. ; similarly, ὁ κώδων ὁ κατὰ τὴν ὀψοπωλίαν, Strabo XIV. 626; i iv rã ixtvorwaíw, Plutarch. Symp. IV.; Id. Quæst. IV. 2. p. 183), and that accustomed to be hung upon the beasts of burden (Diod. XVIII. 2), or attached to nets (Plutarch. V. Brut. XXX.), and that by which the arrival of various matutinal duties was announced (Lucian. Merc. cond. s. 31. p. 254, T. III. Bip.). But rãs nádwvos is found in Aristot. de Sens. c. VI. 446. 22, ed. Bekk., interpreted by tintinnabulum. The Scholiast to our verse asserts that the κώδων was τὸ πλατὺ τῆς σάλπιγγος, whilst Josephus, Antt. III. 12, 18, σύριγξ παρέχουσα εὖρος ἀρκοῦν ἐπὶ τῷ στόματι πρὸς ὑποδοχὴν πνεύματος εἰς κώδωνα ταῖς σάλπιγξι παραπλησίως τελοῦν, appears to denote by this word the upper orifice of the trumpet which the player applies to his mouth; unless we suppose, with Sambucus, that he wrote τελοῦσα, i. e. τελευτῶσα, meaning the lower or τὸ πλατὺ τῆς σάλπιγ yos, concerning which Athenæus speaks (IV. 185. A), affirming that in the tibia Phrygia the cornu corresponds with that part of the tuba which is called xúday. See also Eustathius, p. 1139. 60, who, according to the Schol. Ven. Z. 219, enumerates the various kinds of trumpets with greater accuracy than the Greek interpreters of Sophokles, and makes mention in the sixth place of the Tyrrhenian trumpet, ὁμοίαν Φρυγίῳ αὐλῷ τὸν κώδωνα nexλaoμévov xourav. Hence, on account of its deeper tone, the Tyrrhenian trumpet is frequently referred to by the Tragedians, see Esch. Eum. 556 (where it is spoken of as deep-toned, piercing, diárogos Tugonvien cáλy), Eur. Phan. 1393, Heraclid. 830, whose example is followed by later writers. Cf. Anth. Pal. c. VI. n. 151 and n. 350; Nonnus, XVII. 92; Gregor. Naz. Ep. ad Card. CXCIV.; and Eumath. de Ism. IV. p. 178." LOBECK. Consult in further illustration of this subject the admirable notes of Musgrave, Wesseling, and Billerbeck. The anachronism here committed by our poet in representing Odysseus as declaring that the accents of his beloved goddess fell upon his ears like the tones of

-

the brazen-mouthed Tyrrhenian bell or trumpet, has not escaped the observation of the old interpreters. Cf. the Schol. to Eur. Phan. 1392 with Porson's note. From Homer's never making mention of the σάλπιγξ in his poems, except only in comparisons (Π. 18. 219, 21. 388), it has been inferred, with great probability, that, although in existence in his time, it was not extensively known in Greece, and it is certain that it was not used until a late period in the armies of the leading states. Apitz has shown that Sophokles in our passage, and the author of Rhesus, v. 808, δέσποιν' ̓Αθάνα, φθέγματος γὰρ ἦσθόμην τοῦ σοῦ συνήθη γήρων, have imitated the language of Homer (Π. 2. 182), ὥς φάθ'· ὁ δὲ ξυνέηκε θεᾶς ὄπα φωνησάσης. In the same way the subsequent words ἐν πόνοισι γὰρ παροῦσ ̓ ἀμύνεις τοῖς ἐμοῖς ἀεί ποτε, together with v. 35 of our own play, πάντα γὰρ τά τ' οὖν πάρος τά τ' εἰσέπειτα σῇ κυβερνῶμαι χερί, are borrowed from I. 10. 278, ἥτε μοι αἰεὶ ἐν πάντεσσι πόνοισι παρίστασαι, ουδέ σε λήθω κινύμενος.

18. ἐπέγνως, thou hast found out, detected. Cf. Esch. Agam. 1598, κἄπειτ' ἐπιγνοὺς ἔργον οὐ καταίσιον, ᾤμωξεν. Thuh. 1. 132, καὶ παρα

ποιησάμενος σφραγίδα, ἵνα

19. Βάσιν κυκλοῦντα.

SCHOL. PAL. : περιερχόμενον, gressus circumagentem. Eur. Orest. 631, Μενέλαε, ποῖ σὸν πόδ ̓ ἐπὶ συννοίᾳ κυκλεῖς, διπλῆς μερίμνης διπτύχους ἰὼν ὁδούς ; Hermann thinks that Musgrave refines too much in deriving this expression from the peculiar mode of hunting prevalent among the ancients, in which the dogs were not set on until the lurking-place of the wild animal had been partially surrounded with nets, and that our phrase may with stricter accuracy be compared with such passages as Eur. Elektr. 561, τί δὲ κυκλεῖ πέριξ πόδα; Soph. Antig. 225, ὁδοῖς κυκλῶν ἐμαυτὸν εἰς ἀναστροφήν. Wunder, on the other hand, regards βάσιν κυκλοῦντα as a mere epexegesis of κυνηγετοῦντα in v. 5, and refers us in illustration of the significance of both expressions to Plat. Rep. p. 432 seq. : οὐκοῦν νῦν δὴ ἡμᾶς δεῖ ὥσπερ κυνηγέτας τινὰς θάμνον κύκλῳ περιίστασθαι προσέχοντας τὸν νοῦν μή πῃ διαφύγῃ ἡ δικαιοσύνη. καὶ ἀφανισθεῖσα ἄδηλος γένηται. σακεσφόρῳ. SCHOL.: οὐχ ἁπλῶς ὁπλοφόρῳ, ἀλλὰ κατ' ἐξοχήν. Ὅμηρος· Αἴας δ' ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε, φέρων σάκος, ἠΰτε πύργον. (Π. 7. 219.) Add Π. 11. 485, 17. 128. Ovid. Met. 13. 2, surgit ad hos clipei dominus septemplicis Aiax, after Homer, who, in the next verse to that cited by the Scholiast, applies the epithet ἑπταβόειον to the shield of Aias, whereas other shields, such as those of Teukros (Il.. 15. 479) and of Achilles (18. 481), are described as having a less number of folds or thicknesses. In Il. 5. 126, Tydeus is called σακέσπαλος. 21. Νυκτὸς τῆσδε. See Matth. Gr. Gr. § 377. 2. · ἄσκοπον. Hesy

chius renders by aliarov, and in this sense it is certainly used at Ed. Kol. 1682, wλánis oπoo, the unseen plains, viz. the nether world. Yet in our own verse the interpretation of Suidas, &gordóxnrov, inconceivable, incredible, is more appropriate. See the Scholiast to v. 40 and cf. Philokt. 1111, Elektr. 864, 1315, Esch. Choeph. 816. "Dicitur coros et locus qui non conspicitur, et tempus quod infinitum est (Trach. 246) et res quæ improvisa, incredibilis est." WUNDER. On the double accusative, see

Kühn. Gr. Gr. 545 and 583, ed. Jelf.

22. "Exu migávas. On this apparent periphrase for the simple verb, see Valckn. to Eur. Phon. 712; Matth. Gr. Gr. 559. b; and compare Antig. 22, 32, 77, Elektr. 590, Philokt. 600, Ed. Tyr. 699. The Tragedians frequently employ περαίνειν as a mere equivalent for ποιεῖν, πράττειν, in the sense of fucere, efficere, exsequi. Cf. Esch. Choeph. 830; Prom. 57; Eur. Ion. 1567. εἴπερ εἴργασται τάδε. Musgrave directs us to read sigɣarras y öde, on account of the ambiguity of the common reading. It seems to have escaped him that Sophokles invariably uses this verb in an active signification. See Antig. 267, 326; Philokt. 780, 928, 1172; Ed. Tyr. 279, 347. That it is employed, however, not only by Ionian and Attic prose-writers, but also by the other Tragedians, as a true passive, may be learnt from the examples quoted by Liddell and Scott, Lex. Gr., s. v. III.

23. Ἴσμεν γὰρ οὐδὲν τρανές. SUIDAS: Τρανές· σαφές. ἴσμεν γὰρ οὐδὲν τρανές, ἀλλ ̓ ἀλώμεθα. καὶ αὖθις. ἐς τὸ τρανὲς τὴν ἔρευναν ἐποιήσαντο. The Etym. M. p. 466. 12 reads us, of which no traces are found in the writings of the Tragedians. Hesychius with the Scholiast interprets Teaves as an adjective. PHOTIUS : τρανὲς τὸ σαφὲς οἱ τραγικοὶ λέγουσιν, but it is not to be met with in any other passage of the tragic poets. The Schol. Ienens. defines it as a defective noun (adjective): ráživ μšv ἔοικεν ἔχειν τριγενοῦς, οὐκ ἔχει δὲ τὰ λοιπὰ δυὸ γένη.

SCHOL. : τῷ νῷ πλανώμεθα.

ἀλώμεθα

24. Κἀγὼ θελοντής. “ Read θελοντής without the mark of elision. Aldus reads 'vos with the mark of elision at the beginning of a verse, v. 272. Although in the present instance λovrns is preceded by a vowel, the analogy of the parent word daw shows that circumstance is not material. We believe that neither θελοντής nor passage of the Tragedians." ELMSLEY. Soph., s. vv. θέλω and ἐθέλω. The form strengthened form, is not found in Homer, but there is great diversity in the writing of the later epic poets (cf. Apollon. Rh. 3. 960) and writers

ἐθελοντής is found in any other See Lobeck, and Ellendt's Lex. θέλω, of which ἐθέλω is only a

of bucolic poetry (Theocr. 8. 7). The Attic dramatists, on the contrary, use only a in senarii, whilst in the lyrical passages, as in the lyric poets generally with the exception of Pindar, who follows the Homeric usage (see Böckh. v. 1. Pyth. I. 62. 10, 5), both forms are used interchangeably. Although the present forms of liλy are excluded from tragic iambic trimeters on account of the anapæst, the imperfect 20 is found in dialogue. See below, vv. 88, 1391; Philokt. 1278 and elsewhere. In Attic prose, dia is the prevailing form, except in the phrases pointed out by Lobeck. In anapæstic verse both forms are used, although it is often difficult to determine which is to be preferred, on account of the great variations in the writing of the MSS. Lobeck has instanced Esch. Prom. 184, ἃς ἐθελήσῃ; 1067, πάσχειν ἐθέλω; Philoht. 145, ἰδεῖν ἐθέλεις. Add Ed. Tyr. 1314, o' idéλwv móλλ'àvigsola.. So Brunck from MS. B. and Hermann, the latter affirming with Lobeck that λ is more used in anapæstic numbers than the shorter form. All the remaining MSS. and old Edd. give θέλων. There are two instances in which it occurs in lyrical songs in the plays of Sophokles: Elektr. 132, oud' idéaw ægodime¡v róde, where the MSS. Aug. a. b. Ien. Flor. T. and Laur. a. exhibit oid' að liλw, to the destruction of the metre: oids íλw being suprascriptum in the latter manuscript. On the metre of the verse from Fragm. 596. Dind. olí iliλwv (or iliaw, for in Athen. p. 657. A. the MSS. differ) ròv diλqana, it is impossible to pronounce authoritatively. Hermann's emendation to Ed. Tyr. 1. c. is not approved by Ellendt. For λ is found both in choral songs and in songs rò σnnvñs. See Ed. Tyr. 205, 649, 651, 1356; Ed. Kol. 1222; Elektr. 1072; Trach. 1011. It is moreover found in anapæstie verse, τύμβον θέλομεν προσιδεῖν πατρὸς ἡμετέρου, ad. Kol. 1753. In all these instances the metre is satisfactorily preserved with the shorter form; but where both forms are equally applicable, deference must be shown to the authority of the books. In our own verse Dindorf writes with Elmsley, and λovrs is found in the MSS. La. Lb. R. 26. κατηναρισμένας, slain. Cf. Æsch. Choeph. 347, εἰ γὰρ ὑπ ̓ Ἰλίῳ προς τινος Λυκίων, πάτερ, δορίτμητος κατηναρίσθης. The simple verb is found also in the same signification, Agam. 1644, rí dù tòv ävdeα Tórd' οὐκ αὐτὸς ἠνάριζες; Pind. Nem. 6. 54, φαεννᾶς ὑιὸν εἶτ ̓ ἐνάριξεν (sc. ̓Αχι λεὺς) ̓Αόος ἀκμῷ ἔγχεος ζακότοιο.

.....

.....

27. 'Ex xugós. Hermann, objecting to Musgrave's statement that the preposition and genitive are here put for the simple dative of means or instrument, renders cominus. And in this sense we find them used in Xen. An. 3. 3. 15. Neue more accurately considers them to mean, non