NOTES.

1. The scene of this play is laid in the midst of the tents occupied by the Salaminians in the Grecian camp before Troy, and more particularly in that of Aias, which we may suppose to have been situated somewhat in the background, and within sight of the sea. (Cf. Horn. //. 8. 226.) Odysseus is beheld in the act of tracing some freshly-graven footmarks upon the beach, when he is suddenly arrested by the voice of Athene, to whose counsels and aid other poets besides Sophokles have described him as largely indebted. (Cf. Horn. Jl. 10. 503 seq.) The various characters introduced into our drama were represented by three actors, (see Scholl's "Sophokles Leben und Wirken," § 58 ff.,) the first of whom personated Aias and Teukros, the second Athene, Tekmessa, and Agamemnon, the third Odysseus, the Messenger, and Menelaos. The corpse of Aias — around which Teukros, Tekmessa, and Eurysakes (xtZfav <r»»<r*!r»v) bearing in his hands the txrtgtoy Unanvooi (v. 1119), consisting of his own, his mother's, and Teukros's hair, are grouped — was represented by a xufn tfia\n, so made and draped as to exhibit a resemblance to the body of the deceased hero.

2. Vilaaxi <r fngiiftstir. The Scholiasts differ greatly in opinion

as to the correct mode of interpreting this verse ; — the point in dispute being, whether the poet means us to understand, triijos W l^l^ut, in an active, as ir^iffu rZv ■roXip.iuv, Diod. XIV. c. 80, or Tiloct ica.£ i%0£uv, in a passive signification; that is, whether Odysseus is represented as eagerly employed in preparing snares for the purpose of attacking his enemies, or in discomfiting some project which they have devised against himself. Both expressions may be applied with great propriety to a skilful general: To oZvXxfitiirxi T«» Tj>et%iv xai To Twv ivavriuv <rw» yrojfttlf or^aaiffVavsffpettt Galen de Parv. Pil. Exercc. III. 905. T. V. Lobeck pronounces in favor of the latter, considering this view to be more in harmony with the character of Odysseus, and the enterprise in which he is engaged; first, because he is celebrated as rit i'iikuv ^in;, Philostr. Imagg. 1. 862, more distinguished for his astuteness in escaping than his skill in devising snares, as is testified by Homer in Odt/ss. 4. 422, and by the entire Doloneia; and, secondly, because he is described in our passage as playing the part of a spy rather than that of an "insidiator." That this explanation is not in itself improbable may be learnt from Xen. Mem. 4. 2. 15, Ixv ol xXivrrt

Tl xxi xpTx^ri rx T6VTU1 (TMy iroXlfjC.iOjv), ah Oixxix icotriirii. Cf. Cic. dt

Off. 1. 30. 108, and Davis's note to Id. de Fin. III. 2. There is, however, great weight in the objection of Hermann, that to such an interpretation the insertion of the pronoun nvoi is in direct opposition. Nor has Lobeck been able to explain away this difficulty, but acknowledges that the addition of the pronoun would be far more intelligible, if by the noun xiija we understand some hostile attempt on the part of Odysseus. The connection of the verses and the sense of the whole passage present, moreover, additional obstacles to the reception of this exposition. For the poet proceeds, xxi vi>v Wi rxtivaTs . ... us rig tvgivos {Zxris, the particle xu f*ii in the first verse being opposed to xx) vu» in this sense: ut semper . . . . ita nunc qiioque, in order to connect closely the proceeding of Odysseus, described in the first two verses, with the subsequent details. Odysseus has followed the footsteps of Aias from the very spot where he was first observed by a scout with dripping sword, and has now arrived before his tent. As a welltrained hound pursues the track of some wild animal and ascertains its locality, in order that it may fall into the hands of the hunter, so has Odysseus followed the footprints of Aias in order to learn his whereabouts, to convict him as the perpetrator of the slaughter committed amongst the cattle of the Greeks, during the night which followed the adjudication of the arms of Achilles, and to take whatever preliminary steps may be necessary to secure his punishment. It cannot, therefore, be supposed that Odysseus was interested to inquire if Aias still contemplated any traitorous or hostile design, which must nevertheless be assumed if we decide in favor of the explanation above mentioned. Hermann asserts that the accus. «7ja» does not depend upon Xotxitxi, but upon tneuptm, and that he*A.trxt is inserted here as an infinitivus explicativtis, to which xbrir, i. e. irirfoo, must be supplied. Such a construction is undoubtedly very harsh, whilst a satisfactory answer is given to the objection against the construction of the infinitive with Sn^xi and H(x(rixi by Eur. Hel. 63, fas$ yxftui /»■, and 553, it fit hixrxi Xxfiil*; Theophyl. Hist. IV. 16. 115. B, rv/t.