187. ὑποβαλλόμενοι κλέπτουσι μύθους, are surreptitiously circulating secret accusations. SCHOL.: ὑποβαλλόμενοι· ὑποβλήτως λέγοντες, ἢ ἰδιοποιησά. μενοι· εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθῆ ταῦτα, ἀλλὰ πεπλασμένα ὑπὸ τοῦ βασιλέως ἢ Οδυσσέως.

188. Κλέπτουσι. SCHOL. : ὑποσπείρουσι. Neue directs us to compare v. 1081 below; Elektr. 37; Ant. 493; Trach. 437; Philokt. 57. On βασιλῆς, for which the greater number of the manuscripts give βασιλεῖς, see note to v. 369 infra.

189. Σισυφιδῶν. SCHOL. : γρ. Σισυφίδα. λέγεται γὰρ ἡ ̓Αντίκλεια ἀποστελλομένη ἀπὸ ̓Αρκαδίας ἐπὶ Ἰθάκην πρὸς Λαέρτην ἐπὶ γάμον, κατὰ τὴν ὁδὸν Σισύφῳ συνελθεῖν, ἐξ οὗ ἦν φύσει Οδυσσεύς. ὁ δὲ Σίσυφος Κορίνθου βασιλεὺς, πανοῦργος ἀνὴρ, περὶ οὗ φησιν Ὅμηρος · (Π. 6. 153.) ὁ κέρδιστος γένετ ̓ ἀνδρῶν· ὅστις ὑπὸ τοὺς ὄνυχας καὶ τὰς ἁπλὰς τῶν ζώων ἑαυτοῦ μονογράμματον ἔγραψε τὸ ὄνομα αὑτοῦ. Αὐτόλυκος δὲ κατ ̓ ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ ̓Εκέκαστο κλεπτοσύνη θ ̓ ὅρκῳ τε· (Od. 19. 395.) καὶ αὐτὰ τὰ κλεπτό. μενα παρ' αὐτοῦ τὴν μορφὴν ἤλλασσεν. κλέψας οὖν καὶ Σισύφου θρέμματα καὶ μεταβολών, ὅμως οὐκ ἔλαβε τὸν Σίσυφον, ἐπέγνω γὰρ αὐτὰ διὰ τῶν μονογραμμάτων· ἐπὶ τούτοις δὲ ἐξευμενιζόμενος τὸν Σίσυφον ἐξένισεν αὐτὸν, καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα αὑτοῦ ̓Αντίκλειαν συγκατέκλινεν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἔγκυον ἐξ αὐτοῦ γενομένην τὴν παῖδα συνώκισε Λαέρτη, διὸ Σισύφου ὁ Ὀδυσσεύς. τὸν δὲ Οδυσσέα Σισύφου συνήθως φησὶ Σοφοκλῆς καὶ ἐν Συνδείπνῳ· Ω πάντα πράσσων, ὡς ὁ Σίσυφος πολὺς ἔνδηλος ἐν σοὶ πανταχοῦ, μητρὸς πατήρ. καὶ Αἰσχύλος ἐν Ὅπλων κρίσει· Ἀλλ ̓ Αντικλείας ἆσσον ἦλθε Σίσυφος, τῆς σῆς λέγω τοι μητρὸς, ἣ σ ̓ ἐγείνατο. καὶ Εὐριπίδης ἐν Κύκλωπι (v. 102). Χαῖρ ̓, ὦ ξέν'· ὅστις δ ̓ εἶ, φράσον, πάτραν τε σήν. Ιθακος Οδυσσεὺς, γῆς Κεφαλλήνων ἄναξ. Οΐδ ̓ ἄνδρα κρόταλον, δριμὺ Σισύφου γένος. φαίνεται δὲ τὸ κακόηθες αὐτῷ καὶ διὰ τῆς γενέσεως. The later tradition, to which the Scholiast refers, that Antikleia was pregnant by Sisyphus previously to her marriage with Laërtes, and gave birth to Odysseus either after her arrival at Ithaka or on her journey to that island, is stated by Hyginus, Fab. 201. Cf. Philokt. 417, with the note of the Scholiast; Eur. Iph. A. 514; Ov. Met. 13. 32; Serv. ad Virg. An. 6. 529; Plut. Quæst. Græc.. 43; and the passages cited by the Scholiast to our own line. To the genitive τᾶς ἀσώτου . . . . γενεᾶς, Brunck directs us to supply τις ; Wun-der, ὁ, from the article in the preceding verse ; Hermann, βασιλεύς ; and Lobeck, ἔκγονος, which he derives from γενεᾶς. See Matth. Gr. Gr. 323

and note; comparing v. 202 below, Eur. Kykl. 41, πᾶ δή μοι γενναίων

μὲν πατέρων, γενναίων τ ̓ ἐκ τοκάδων, scil. γένεθλα ; ὦ τηθῶν ἀνδρειοτάτων, scil. θρέμματα.

ἀσώτου.

Arist. Ach. 549, ἀλλ'

SCHOL. : τῆς ἐξώλου;

καὶ μὴ δυναμένης σώζεσθαι ; Aristot. Eth. Nicom. 4. 1, τοὺς ἀκρατεῖς καὶ ἐς ἀκολασίαν δαπανηροὺς, ἀσώτους καλοῦμεν. The use of ἄνολβος, below, v. 1100, is somewhat similar. Klausen to Æsch. Agam. 1513 renders perniciosus.

The dativus

190. Μὴ μή μ', ἄναξ. SCHOL. : τὸ πλῆρες· μὴ μή μοι. "So also Suidas. Nevertheless it is incorrect that μo can suffer elision before a short vowel.” HERMANN. This eminent scholar decides that' is the accusative, and explains by stating that two constructions are blended into one in the sense, ne tibi malum in me opprobrium contrahe. ethicus is, however, so appropriate, and the expression μή μοι, μή μοι σύγε, is so frequently found before the imperative, or conjunctive used imperatively, that it is better to suppose, with Wunder, that Sophokles has availed himself of a license found in the epic poets (cf. Hom. Il. 14. 165), than to have recourse to the involved reasoning by which Hermann and Matthiä (Gr. Gr. 633. 7) would have us believe μ' to be the accusative. That the diphthong, as strongly maintained by the greater number of authorities, is never elided in the dramatists, seems doubtful. Cf. Philokt. 718, ἀλλὰ δέδοικ ̓, ὦ παι, μή μ' ἀτελῆς εὐχή; Eur. Bacch. 820, τοῦ χρόνου δέ σ ̓ οὐ φθονῶ, where see Elmsley. With the concluding words ἐφαλοις κλισίαις (= σκηναῖς ναυτικαῖς, supra, v. 3) ὄμμ ̓ ἔχων, Lobeck aptly compares Hor. Carm. III. 20, eripe te moræ ; ne semper udum Tibur et Esula declive contempleris arvum.

191. ἄρῃ. read ❝gns. scr. ἐπὶ σοῦ.

φόρῳ.

The MSS. Ric. Aug. B. Dresd. a. and Suidas s. Μή μοι SCHOL. : ἄρη καὶ περιποιήσῃ, ἤτοι ἐπάρῃς, αὐξήσῃς ἀπὸ σοῦ, HESYCHIUS : "Αρη, λήψη, οἴση• Σοφοκλῆς Αἴαντι μαστιγος See note to v. 129 supra.

192. 6 "Ανα, for ἀνάστηθι, is amongst those words whose pronunciation is preserved entire even where a vowel follows; and which, consequently, never throw away the final vowel.” HERMANN. See Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 42; Monk to Eur. Alk. 285. Eustathius to Il. 1, p. 75. 9: 'Exsivo dè καινότερον, ἐὰν ἡ ἀνὰ πρόθεσις ἀναβιβασθέντος τοῦ τόνου, λαμβάνηται ἀντὶ ῥήματος τοῦ ἀναστῆθι, ὡς τὸ ἀλλ ̓ ἄνα ἐξ ἑδράνων. SUIDAS : "Ανα· ἀνάστηθι. Όμηρος καὶ Σοφοκλῆς. ἀλλ ̓ ἄνα ἐξ ἑδράνων. ἀντὶ τοῦ, ἀλλ ̓ ἀνά. στηθι ἐκ τῶν θρόνων. καὶ ἄνα, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἄναξ, κατὰ ἀποκοπὴν τοῦ ξ. The hiatus is permitted in words of every description, and in every kind of metre, which are used as exclamations. So Philokt. 832, ἴθι ἴθι μοι παίων ; Eur. Troad. 98.

"I have

192,193. ὅπου μακραίωνι στηρίζει ποτὲ τῷδ ̓ ἀγωνίῳ σχολή. written ποτί (i. e. πρός) from conjecture, in place of ποτέ, the reading of

the books, which particle could only have been joined with %ov if the Chorus had been unacquainted with the whereabouts of Aias. Hermann interprets ἀγώνιον σχολήν, a bellicis negotiis cessationem. See to v. 49. But Aias is represented as intent upon maintaining this cessation, from deliberate choice and resolution. For such is the meaning of στηρίζεσθαι πρός τινι, which is a very similar expression to γίγνεσθαι πρὸς τῷ σκοπεῖν, πρὸς τοῖς πράγμασι. With the epic form ori compare Trach. 1214, TOTIαúWY; Tham. fr. 230, ed. Dind., Toriμaction." WUNder. The emendation is unnecessary. "Orov Torí is ubi tandem, and conveys no doubt as to the locality of Aias. It is a simple expression of impatience at not seeing him, as in d. Kol. 12, ὡς πυθώμεθα ὅπου ποτ ̓ ἐσμέν. Render but rise up from the seat wheresoever thou art resting in this longcontinued cessation from the combat.

194. "Arav ovgavíar qaiywv. Wunder, in conformity with the explanation of the Scholiast, τὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεμφθεῖσαν ἄτην, renders calamitatem divinitus immissam augens, and believes oùgavíav to have nearly the same meaning as six at v. 185 supra. He supports this explanation by citing ovgávov äxos, Antig. 418, where, with Blomfield to Esch. Pers. 579, he interprets ovgavíos divinitus ortus. Yet, as the Chorus cannot be understood to refer to the mental derangement of Aias, of which as yet it has received no certain information, but must be thought to allude simply to the reports spread abroad by Odysseus, the explanation given by the Scholiast in Parall., εἰς οὐράνιον ὕψος ἀναπτῶν τὴν βλάβην, i. e. τὴν κακὴν φάτιν, seems the more correct. So Hermann malum, quod est in rumore positum, in immensum accendens, i. e. augens. On the construction of rav (the accusative of closer specification) with the intransitive verb pay, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 555, and compare Ar. Thesm. 1041, πολυδάκρυτον ̓Αΐδα γόον φλέγουσαν ; Eur. Phan. 250, "Αρης αἷμα δάϊον φλέγει τῷδ ̓, ὅ μὴ τύχοι, πόλει.

I

195. Ατάρβητος. "The common copies exhibit d' áráe̟ßntα. have rejected ὧδ' on the authority of Suidas : ἀτάρβητος· ἄφοβος, ἄτρομας καὶ ἀταρβήτως ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀνειμένως παρὰ Σοφοκλεῖ, ἐχθρῶν δ ̓ ὕβρις άταgßnτws ögμã. The genuine reading, and that which alone accords with the metre, is drágßnros, on which compare the observation of Brunck : Apposita in quibusdam codd. varia lectio årágßnros, quæ orta e glossa videtur, argóμws, apóßws. The Scholiast, however, from his interpretation, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀταρβήτως, ὅ ἐστιν ἀνειμένως, seems to have read ἀτάρβητα.” DINDORF. Hermann has restored the feminine form dragßára, "mistaken by some grammarians for the neuter plural." Aldus and many manu

scripts read ὁρμᾶτ ̓, but the majority of the ancient copies support the reading of the text. Render, but insult flies fearless forth, and compare Hdt. 3. 56, ὁ λόγος ὥρμηται.

196. Ἐν εὐανέμοις βάσσαις. SCHOL. : λείπει. ὡς πῦρ ἐν εὐανέμοις βήσε σαις. “These are not convalles ventis perfate, but εὐάειαν παρέχουσαι.” ELLENDT. The observation of the Scholiast would apparently warrant the suspicion, that some words have dropped from the text, and that Sophokles probably wrote ἀτάρβητα πυρὸς δίκαν ὁρμᾶται. With this conjecture, compare the passage cited by Neue from Hom. Il. 14. 396, Οὔτε πυρὸς τόσσος γε πέλει βρόμος αιθομένοιο Οὔρεος ἐν βήσσης, ὅτε τ ̓ ὤρετο καιέμεν ὕλην. If nothing has perished, then εὐάνεμοι βᾶσσαι must refer to the valley in which the camp of the Greeks was situated.

197. καχαζόντων. "I have corrected the writing of the manuscripts and of Suidas s. καγχάζει), since the form καγχαζόντων (corrupted by the Cod. Γ. into βακχαζόντων) is not used by Attic writers. Ar. Eccles. 849, Γέρων δὲ χωρεῖ χλανίδα καὶ κονίποδα | ἔχων, καχάζων μεθ ̓ ἑτέρου νεανίου. By a similar error, Suidas in Ar. Nub. 1073, παίδων, γυναικῶν, κοττάβων, ὄψων, πότων, καχασμῶν, writes καγχασμῶν. The true reading, for which some books exhibit κιχλισμῶν, is preserved in the MS. Rav. That the metre of our verse may correspond with that of the preceding verses, I would suggest a further emendation : ἁπάντων καχαζόντων.” DINDORF.

199. ἕστακεν. ΗESYCHIUS : ἕστακε κεῖται. Compare below, v. 1018, ἔνθα μὴ καθεστήκῃ δέος ; ν. 1028, ἀλλ ̓ ἑστάτω μοι καὶ δέος ; Lucian, Dea Syr. 6, καί σφισι μεγάλα πένθεα ἵσταται ; Diod. XIII. 55, τοσαύτη κατάπληξις εἱστήκει. Other instances are cited by Dorville ad Char. p. 383.

200, sqq. SCHOL. : ναὸς ἀρωγοί· ἔξεισι Τέκμησσα καὶ διδάσκει τὸν χορὸν, ὅτι Αἴας ἐστὶν ὁ σφάξας τὰ ποίμνια· πυνθάνεται δὲ παρὰ τοῦ χοροῦ, ὅτι Ἑλληνικὰ ἦν τὰ σφαγέντα· ἑκάτερος οὖν παρ' ἑκατέρου τὸ ἀγνοούμενον μανθάνει· ἡ δὲ Τέκμησσα αἰχμάλωτος γυνὴ τοῦ Αἴαντος· πιθανῶς δὲ ἔξεισιν· οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ πολὺ δεῖ ἀπολοφύρεσθαι τὸν χορόν, ἀλλὰ προκόπτειν τὰ τῆς ὑποθέσεως. Ἡ δὲ διάθεσις εὖ ἔχει τῷ ποιητῇ· ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἄπεστι Τεῦκρος, καὶ Ευρυσάκης ἔτι νήπιος, Τέκμησσα κατολοφύρεται· οὐ γὰρ ἕτερον πρόσωπον γνήσιον τῷ Αἴαντι· αἱ δὲ τοιαῦται γυναῖκες ὑποτίθενται εὔνοιαν πρὸς τοὺς δεσπότας, ὡς Βρισηῖς πρὸς ̓Αχιλλέα. (Π. 1. 348; 19. 295 sqq.) Cod. Γ. ὦ ναός. In the following verse, two manuscripts have Ερεχθεια δῶν. The Scholiast interprets χθονίων by αὐτοχθόνων, but his observation to v. 134, although agreeing with the popular belief ὅτι ὁ χορὸς ἐσκεύασται

"The

....

ἀπὸ Σαλαμινίων, is not confirmed by the language of the poet at v. 575 and elsewhere in this play; nor does it in any way verify the opinion entertained by some (Philostr. Heroicc. 9. 720) that Aias devoted himself to the Athenians, as their military leader.” LOBECK. SCHOL. : Γενεᾶς Ερεχθειδῶν· διὰ τὸ τὴν Σαλαμῖνα συνῆφθαι τῇ ̓Αττικῇ, καὶ περισπούδαστον τοῖς ̓Αθηναίοις αὐτὴν κτήσασθαι· πρὸς εὔνοιαν οὖν τῶν ἀκροωμένων τοῦτο φησίν. Cf. infra, vv. 819, 1160. Strabo, IX. p. 394, says of the island of Salamis: καὶ νῦν μὲν ἔχουσιν ̓Αθηναῖοι τὴν νῆσον· τὸ δὲ παλαιὸν πρὸς Μεγαρέας ὑπῆρξεν αὐτοῖς ἔρις περὶ αὐτῆς, κ. τ. λ. The Oxford translator observes that the epithet here employed is "a political stroke to please the Athenians, and is probably derived from the tradition of the Æakidæ having passed over to Salamis from Ægina, which belonged to Attica. Aristotle, Rhet. 1. 15, alludes to a dispute between Athens and Megara respecting their title to Salamis, which the Athenians proved by citing these verses from Homer's Catalogue : Αἴας δ ̓ ἐκ Σαλαμῖνος ἄγεν δυοκαί δεκα νῆας | Στῆσε δ ̓ ἄγων, ἵν ̓ Αθηναίων ἵσταντο φάλαγγες. (Π. 2. 557, 558.) The second of these verses is stated by Quintilian (5. 11. 40) not to have been found in every edition, and Plutarch, in his Life of Solon (1. 10), mentions a report of Solon's having interpolated Homer in this passage. It is certain, however, that when Kleisthenes, the Alkmæonid, changed the names of the Athenian tribes into appellations derived from indigenous heroes, Aias alone of foreign extraction was admitted to this honor, and the tribe Aiantis was called after him. Herod. 5. 67.” For additional information upon this point, see Introduction.

203. Τοῦ Τελαμῶνος τηλόθεν. SCHOL. : ἤτοι τοῦ οἴκου, ὅ ἐστι τηλόθεν μακρὰν Φρυγίαν Σαλαμῖνος· ἢ οἱ πρὸ πολλοῦ κηδόμενοι, καὶ οὐχὶ νῦν μόνον· ἢ οἱ τηλόθεν ὄντες, ὅ ἐστι ξένοι κατὰ γένος, καὶ ὅμως τοῦ Τελαμῶνος οἴκου φειδόμενοι, εἰ καὶ μὴ προσήκομεν. The construction is not, as stated by Musgrave, οἱ τηλόθεν κηδόμενοι οἴκου τοῦ Τελαμῶνος, but οἱ κηδ. τοῦ Τελ. οἴκου τηλόθεν, scil. ὄντος. Philokt. 208, τηλόθεν αὐδά, i. e. οὖσα. With the sense here assigned to οίκος, compare Antig. 594, Λαβδακιδᾶν οἴκων ; Philokt. 180; Eur. Androm. 13.

204. All the manuscripts and old edd. ὁ δεινὸς ὁ μέγας. Eustathius, p. 275. 35, ὁ μέγας Αἴας, παρά Σοφοκλεί. Hermann and most recent editors have rejected the article before μέγας, in order that an anapast may not be followed immediately by a dactyl, and because the article so referred to δεινός would cohere in sense with μέγας and disconnect it from what follows. Its insertion is probably due to the copyists, from the fact of the epithet piyas being constantly associated with Aias in the writ