employed it in this passage, he would have said ifirirair.Ki; ?. The orators generally, if not always, express this subjunctive and its corresponding optative by the auxiliary verb and the participle. Thus we find in the same relation frifiontrixui », p. 345. 29; • vn$i$nxlt ■"», p. 351. 9; <riruntns uriTi («tts), p. 363. 19; $i}aixoTts nrt, p. 411. 3. To return to Sophokles, the same arguments which lead us to suspect that nxu is the true reading in the verse before us, induce us to propose /3i/3x*i, I'hiluit. 493." Elmsley. The conjecture of this acute critic is supported by the authority of the MS. Ven., which exhibits Sixu, and by the scholion /tii hit in the MS. Ien. It is condemned, although without remark, by Matthia ad Eur. Plum. 93, and is pronounced inferior to %xy by Hermann and most subsequent editors.

266. TLZs yxe, for rru; yko ov, how can it but be, i. e. yes assuredly. See Matth. Gr. Gr. 611. 4 ; Scholefield, Append, ad JEsch. Eumen. 577; Koen. ad Greg. Cor. p. 144 ; and compare Xen. Mem. 4. 4. 13, elxam

'. fit* Tot o~txaiec Voolttim o^lxaios, o oi Ta aoixot aaixos \ Y\uf yotg ou;

268. 'flf «S' txovTuy, K.t.x. That thin is so you must be assured. On the construction of us with the participle, where we might have expected tn with a finite verb, or, as in Latin, the accusative with the infinitive, 7«.vTa. ourus 'ix.itv itria-rtzffo, see Lobeck to this verse, Blomfield ad ^Esch. Agam. 13S4, and Matthiii's Gr. Gr. 569. 7. Cf. also Philoht. 253; Antig. 1063; (Ed. Kol. 1583; Plat. Crit. p. 108. B, us lirit^x'i'it *i>r$ tvyytupn; i<rru. Tekmessa, in her reply, as J'ager accurately teaches, opposes WifretffQai « xt* ^o the language of the Chorus, "hthoixct ^*»i, etc., in the following sense: certa res est, a dis immissam Ajaci insaniam esse, non dubia, ut tibi videtur, i. e. that the malady of Aias is the infliction of some deity is not a mere matter of fearful conjecture, but of certainty and fact. "VVunder compares Ter. Andr. 3. 2. 30: opinor, narras; non recte accipis: certa res est.

269. irfoyfTTaTo. So Aldus and the manuscripts, with Eustathius, p. 527. 52. Brunck, relying upon the authority of the old grammarians, says that •x'irxp.a.i is not Attic. He has accordingly displaced the common reading xirxr&i for xirirxt at Eur. Ion. 90, Ar. Am. 573, 574, and in our own passage has written vreoArrsro. Porson to Eur. Med. I observes that "the Attics employ in the present Tiroput, -riTet^at, in the aorist Wropnv, 'rrrtzpfiv, the former of which I consider preferable, although not to be introduced in opposition to manuscripts. Brunck, therefore, has well edited irsrripxr in Soph. Aj. 657." Mceris, p. 311, *rim/*ai — TiTtTa.1 'Arnxoi; icintpai — vrirarxi "EAAnvsf. See Matth. Gr. Gr. horam, To \v%uxi* (see Toss, de Vit. Serm. 3. 21), the precise time being somewhat more accurately stated by Galen, de Pranot. ad Epig. 11. 638, T. XIV., u^a.% ivvetrvs a^ri Xv%»vr r.ftftUut. In the more advanced hours of the night, these lights either went out spontaneously, or were extinguished: Tio) vournv (puXuxh*-, i* ey Tr,( vvett o\ *-\t7ffret Tocs tt-rtptovs r&tv*vrTtf SaSaj -rjj Tuv Swrmt hyiftov'ict To T£» /3Ai£«£*i \>cbtloxfi Ft*}i8t, Nikeph. Greg. Hist. 15. 8, unless for purposes of convivial enjoyment in lucent proferuntur vigiles lucertice, Hor. Od. 3. 8. 14, which period is denoted by the phrase extremat lucenue, Propert. EI. 3. 8. 1. From these considerations, it is evident that Aias did not start upon his expedition prima nocte, as Schilfer asserts, but when the night was considerably advanced, or irfet vrguTov vvvo*, as the Scholiast explains and supports by the additional circumstance that this was an appropriate time for the consummation of his plot, as then all would be buried in deep sleep." Loiieck. Cf. infra, 278, aXXa. tu» y\ T«; lulu eTgaTOf ', Disscn to Find. Vyth. 11. 17; Klausen to -fl£sch. Agam. 737. "From the mere mention of the kap-TTtigts or foculi, we have therefore ample proof as to the time at which Sophokles intended to represent the foray of Aias to have taken place. So Quintus Calaber, 5. 1352 sq., distinctly testifies that Aias sallied forth during the night for the purpose of destroying the leaders of the army, and that upon the dawn of day, discovering the mental delusion by which the execution of his project had been defeated, he laid violent hands upon himself. Pindar, Isthm. 4. 58, whilst making no allusion to the slaughter of the cattle, states that he destroyed himself o-^la. h tumri, which expression, according to the Scholiast to that passage, may mean either the close of daj', qutim noctescit, or midnight, or the still further advanced period of the night. The last of these explanations is, however, supported by the testimony of Arktinos, who narrates that Aias destroyed himself irioi Toy ?(/{#* Other writers, as Ovid, Met. 13. 391, represent Aias to have fallen upon his sword in the assembly convened for the purpose of adjudicating the arms of Achilles, and Parrhasius has followed this representation in Armorum Judicio, Plin. XXXV. c. 5. The attack made upon the flocks, which is inconsistent with this statement, is expressly mentioned by Lesch.es, Exec. Proculi, p. 10, h ruv ovrXott x^ie-is yinrcti xa) 'Qtvfaivt

xa-a. fiovXijo-tv 'A6nva,s Xafifiavit, Atai Si iftftetvi); ytv'optvo; Tyiv Ti ?.<iav T&v *A%£uoiv Xu/jcetiviTat xect mvTov uvxioiT, as also by Lycophron, v. 454; Hor. Serm. 2. 3. 211 ; Hygin. Fab. CVIL, and others. The same myth is adopted by Sophokles as essential to the integrity of the plot, but the mental delusion is kept carefully separate from his death. The poet

mony of all the manuscripts, whilst the Scholiast says that ilnX/n is for Imvestr, iri£qX4«vt rtyurlearro. In its own strict meaning, however, this verb has the accusative instead of the genitive in Hdt. 8. 29, V&xtn rni risjiri'Sos %&'*', like the Latin verbs egredi, excedere, in Plin. Ep. 7. 83, Historia non debet egredi veritatem; Liv. 2. 2, Nescio an Romani .... modum excesserint; although in their strict signification, to go out, they are generally constructed with ex. So, also, Aristot. Pol. 3. 14, and metaphorically Nymphiodor. ap. Athen. XII. p. .536. A, T* ii/*i/t* i%ie%tr(ai. Besides Thuk, 1.15, ixhnpovt o-r^ttrtme ityirtti, the verb i£j'i*«j is found with the accusative in Trnchin. 159, which passage has not escaped Lobeck, and we read in Xen. Hell. 4. 2. 13, rtir ififiaXor ij.'i»«i, to march out of the Isthmus. So, too, Eur. Alkest. 187, xeu tiXx/m .... Vymtm; Ibid. 610, vftut Si ... . TotfuToLr' \\ntZaa.i vfrarnw eSov. In the signification to rush upon, attack, if ta/tirtxi is joined with the accusative in //. 15. 691, K/a' afr' lot'tSuv Ttrtrivur aitrot affair that ifogf*areti. See Gtiller ad Thuk. 3. 31. On the accusative with mii%trtai, see below, v. 466, in! ri rir xi%os gonXldi, in place of which we find the dative in (FA. Tyr. 572. Cf. Porson to Eur. Pharn. 831 ; Plato, Rep. 7, p. 537, in/Sir ra Tfioixirrm It>j ix^a-'ivtivij ', Ibid. p. 462. 15, orecr Si or, at yvraixif xat el avd^s; <reZ ytrrar ixfiufl rrlv fiXjxiav ', and again, p. 338. E, xat Tor Tevre ixfyz'novrtz

xe>.iZ,oveir, where Schneider has received Teirev from the MS. Ven. C, although acknowledging that revre, the reading of the MS. Ven. B. and Aldus, is "aeque bonum"; Eur. Here. F. 82, yctiett oeict ixfiaintr; Plat. Sgmpos. p. 183. B, on xeci hfivvm ftortu fvyyivpn ■xa.oa. faur ixfieciri T0» o(xtr, where, although one manuscript has ran oexen, the accusative is read in the MSS. Vat. A. Ven. B. Vind. 2. 7, Par. Aug. and Cyrillus c. Julian. 6, p. 187. In our own passage, «?;« is not the strict cognate accusative, nor does it express, as Mitchell observes, the actual cognate notion of the verb, but is rather what Kiihner terms the accusative of equivalent notion, i. e. a notion substituted for the true cognate notion, as being that *' wherein the action or state or effect of the verb for the time being consists, and being in a sort of opposition to it, as iEsch. Choeph. 144, armxnrltxriir Yixm = lirnror, which is the Vixnr, to suffer punishment of death in turn," where, however, Hermann directs us to write olvrixxrtiuviTv Ytxrt. This equivalent substantive can be resolved into a cognate substantive and a genitive; as at Eur. Or. 1519, arrttvyitv fovor = alynr fovor, or vice versa, as avrixotrSanTr Vtxnr = Sixriv Qurarov, or it might assume an adjectival form. Consult note to v. 410, infra.

279. 'OS'.... iti V. "The particle Si is frequently repeated in the