intended to refer to Menelaos only. At v. 1052, the intensity of the feelings elicited by his allusion to the interment of Aias again overmasters his judgment, and at the close of his harangue, in a perfect tempest of emotion, he distinctly proclaims, that neither Menelaos nor "the other general," meaning Agamemnon, shall compel him to renounce his determination to bury his brother. His violence and bitterness are at last (v. 1058 sq.) so excessive, as to call down rebuke and remonstrance even from the Chorus (v. 1062 sq.). 1040. Ta' àμægтávovoi....n. See note to v. 414, supra; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 548. c, 565. As to the difference in the meaning of n and λoyo, Wunder explains the former by verba or dicta, the latter by sermones or orationem. See his note to v. 715, supra, and compare Thuk. 3. 67. 6, λόγοι ἔπεσι κοσμούμενοι. 1044. Пo, "quibus locis, i. e. qua ex parte, quomodo." ELLENDT. Neue more correctly compares Ed. Tyr. 390, moũ où μávtis & capús; Philokt. 451, ποῦ χρὴ τίθεσθαι ταῦτα, ποῦ δ ̓ αἰνεῖν, ὅταν, κ.τ.λ. Add v. 1175, below. The particle in all these questions seems to convey a notion of negation. See Elmsley to Eur. Herakl. 371. In place of τοῦδε, the Scholiast apparently read rads, but see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 518. 1045. s'. The MS. Pal. reads "yay', a great improvement to the music of the verse, as Elmsley had conjectured. See Porson, Suppl. Præf. ad Hek. p. xxxvi.; Hermann, El. de Metr. p. 115; Elmsley ad Eur. Herakl. 371, and in Cens. Hek. Porson. p. 77. .... τῷδε σέ. 1047. Οὐδ ̓ ἔσθ ̓ ὅπου . SCHOL. : οὐδ ̓ ἔστιν ὅπου σοὶ πλέον προὔκειτο τοῦτον κοσμεῖν. "These words are interpreted by Hermann in the following manner: Neque usquam tibi majus fuit imperii jus, quo illum dictis parentem haberes, quam illi, quo ipse te. I do not agree. For θεσμός, so far as I am aware, never signifies jus, and for this reason I explain θεσμὸς ἀρχῆς by lex imperii, and consider the infinitive κοσμῆσαι, in the sense of regere or moderari, as dependent upon the substantive άgxs. Teukros says sarcastically, Neque magis tu unquam lege tenebaris, ut in illum imperium exerceas, quam ille, ut in te." WUNDER. "The Scholiasts differ 1049. Ὕπαρχος ἄλλων, οὐχ ὅλων στρατηγός. exceedingly as to the explanation of the first of these substantives; the point in dispute being whether Menelaos is thus called as i vrò άexão ἄλλων ὤν, or as ὁ ἄρχων ἄλλων, τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν δηλονότι καὶ οὐχ ἡμῶν ngarv. Those who have approved the latter explanation no doubt had in recollection that the same individual is frequently styled both ragxos and agxos (see Ellendt to Arrian, T. I. 258), but, retaining the old error in regard to the pleonastic use of prepositions, did not remark that ὕπαρχος here, as also at Eur. Hel. 1452, is said of τὸν ὑπ ̓ ἄλλοις ἄρχοντα, in the same way as ὑφηνίοχος denotes τὸν ὑπό τιν ἡνίοχον. See the accurate observations upon these compounds in Lehrs. de Aristarch. p. 115. That such is the meaning in which agxos is here employed, is evident from the words οὐχ ὅλων στρατηγός, which stand in unquestionable opposition to this noun. That ὅλων is used for πάντων is apparent from the examples cited by Döderlein, Synon. T. IV. p. 359, and on this account Erfurdt's emendation, ὅπλων, is altogether unnecessary. Cf. Anth. Pal. 679. Anall. Τ. III. 126, πολύολβος ὅλων πλέον ὧν τρέφε Κύπρος. Nonnus, 47. 482, ὅλας οἴστρησε γυναῖκας. Liban. Decl. T. IV. 596, ὅλαις ἂν μηχα ναῖς ἐθηρώμην. Lucian. de Luct. 6. 209, Τ. VII., τὴν τῶν ὅλων δεσποτείαν ἔχουσιν. Diodor. XII. 42, τὴν ὅλην ἡγεμονίαν ἔχων. See Dorvill. ad Char. p. 370; Coray in Stochasm. Prodrom. p. 80." LOBECK. Wunder adds Demosth. de Fals. Leg. p. 388. 11, ὑπὲρ τῶν ὅλων πεισθεὶς εἰρήνην ἄγειν. Id. c. Androt. p. 598. 13, τὴν γὰρ τῶν ὅλων σωτηρίαν. Diodor. Sic. I. 53, παρακληθῆναι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ὅλων δυναστείαν. The last five examples are sufficient evidence that awy is here of the neuter gender. TRICLINIUS : ἐπεὶ ἐνταῦθα 1052. Κόλαζε. SCHOL.: ἀντὶ τοῦ νουθέτει. ἡ κόλασις διὰ λόγων ἦν· διὰ τοῦτο τὰ ἔπη κόλαζ ̓ ἐκείνους φησίν. Render, ista superba oratione illos castiga. The expression τὰ σέμν' ἔπη κόλαζε ἐκείνους is for ἐκείνην τὴν κόλασιν κόλαζε ἐκείνους, the accusative of closer specification being substituted for the true cognate accusative, from the wish of the poet to define in more precise terms the express character of the chastisement to be inflicted. See notes to 410, 414, supra, and on the addition of the accusative of the patient, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 583. 95. Compare Ed. Tyr. 340, ἔπη ἃ νῦν σὺ τήνδ ̓ ἀτιμάζεις πόλιν ; Thuk. 1. 42, ἃ τὴν πόλιν ὕμνησα ; Demosth. de Cor. 1229. 4, ἃ αὐτοὺς ἐνεκωμίασαν καὶ ὅσα εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐβλασφήμησαν ; Plat. Phedr. p. 243. D, ἃ ψέγομεν τὸν ἔρωτα, all which passages, with several others, are quoted in Lobeck's μὴ φής, vetas. note. 1053. Εἴθ ̓ ἅτερος στρατηγός. SCHOL.: τὸν περὶ τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς λόγον ἀποφεύγει, ὡς δυσανάτρεπτον· ἐνδιατρίβει δὲ τῷ ὅτι οὐ πάντων εἰσὶν οἱ ἄρχον τες. 1056. οἱ πόνου πολλοῦ πλέῳ. SCHOL.: οἱ φιλοκίνδυνοι, οἱ πληρεῖς τῶν πόνων· λέγει δὲ τοὺς μισθοφόρους· οὐχ ὥσπερ μισθοφόρος τις ἐπὶ μισθῷ ἐστρα τεύσατο. “The explanation of Matthiä, οἱ πολυπονοῦντες, is more strictly accordant with the words of the poet than οἱ φιλοκίνδυνοι, as they are understood by the Scholiast.” DINDORF. “Neue observes correctly, that these words express compassion for those who were compelled to obey all the behests of the Atreidai." WUNDER. "Brunck, following the second explanation of the Scholiast, absurdly renders, ut qui labori parcentes nulli merent stipendia. On the contrary, the oi qoxívduvos, who, impelled by the thirst for adventure, seek peril and renown, Abenteurer (daring adventurers), are meant." HERMANN. 1057. ̓Αλλ' οὕνεχ ̓ ὅρκων. SCHOL. : τῶν γὰρ ἀριστέων συνελθόντων ἐπὶ τὴν τῆς Ἑλένης μνηστείαν, ὁ Τυνδαρέως πάντας ὅρκους ἀπῄτησεν συναγωνί ζεσθαι τῷ γαμοῦντι αὐτήν. καὶ στρατεύειν, εἴ τις ἁρπαγὴ γένοιτο περὶ τὴν 'Exívny s výμavt. See also Philokt. 72, with the observations of the Scholiast there; Eur. Iph. Aul. 49 sqq.; Apollodoros, III. 10. 8. 9. iváμotos. This is the reading of the MS. La. sec. Membr. Par. D. E. Mosq. a. Aug. C. Twμoros is exhibited by Aldus, and the remaining MSS. and old editions. 1058. οὐ γὰρ ἠξίου. Non enim honorabat. See Porson to Eur. Hek. 319, and add to the examples he has collected there, Eur. Orest. 1166, 1208; sch. Agam. 903. τοὺς μηδένας, scil. ὄντας, those who are mere nobodies, i. e. the worthless or insignificant. Eur. Iph. A. 371, roùs ovdivas. Cf. below, 1169; Valckenaer to Eur. Phon. 601; Elmsley to Herakl. 168; Reisig, Enarr. Ed. Kol. p. cxxv.; Wex to Antig. 1322; Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 437, Note 1; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 381, Obs. 3; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 118. 1059. πλείους .... ἧκε. SCHOL. BAR.: πολλοὺς ὑπηρέτας λαβὼν ὁ Αἴας καὶ τὸν ̓Αγαμέμνονα ἦλθεν ἐνταῦθα. "Such an explanation is absurd. It is evident that one or more heralds accompanied Menelaos, as we have already indicated in our Agáμaros girwα." LOBECK. Eustathius, p. 780. 46, οἱ κήρυκες οὐδ ̓ ὅλως προσφωνοῦνται ἀλλ' ἀργὰ καὶ νῦν παρεισάγονται πρόσωπα, ὁποῖα πολλὰ καὶ ὕστερον ποιοῦσιν οἱ σκηνικοί. Strepitum tuum non curabo, On the employment of the 1060. Τοῦ δὲ σοῦ ψόφου.. .orgaqinv. dum (so long as) es, qualis quidem nunc es. simple for the compound verb, see note to v. 721, supra, and on its construction with the genitive, notes to vv. 674, 701, supra; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 483, Obs. 3. 1061. s vs. Equivalent to ws äv is, quamdiu eris, qualis sis. Plat. Phedr. p. 243. Ε, ἕωσπερ ἂν ἦς, ὃς εἶ. In illustration of the employment of s v in a purely temporal signification, so long as, compare Philokt. 1330, ὡς ἂν αὑτὸς ἥλιον ταύτῃ μὲν αἴρῃ, τῇδε δ ̓ αὖ δύνῃ πάλιν (Hdt. 8. 143, ἔστ ̓ ἂν ὁ ἥλιος τὴν αὐτὴν ὁδὸν ἴῃ, τῇπερ καὶ νῦν ἔρχεται); (d. Kol. 1361, ὥσπερ ἂν ζῶ σοῦ φονέως μεμνημένος. The tyro will observe that the temporal conjunctions, in a purely hypothetical sense, are constructed with and the conjunctive, if the verb in the principal clause denotes time present or future, and with the optative, for the most part without av, if the principal verb expresses time past. See, however, note to v. 531, supra. Brunck, Lobeck, and Schäfer emend or av is. 1062. Οὐδ ̓ αὖ .... δάκνει. SCHOL.: ὑποτίθησι τῷ Τεύκροῳ παύσασθαι τῆς κατηγορίας, καὶ μάλιστα ἐν τοιούτῳ καιρῷ, ἐν ᾧ εὐεπιβούλευτός ἐστιν. ἢ τὸ ἐν κακοῖς τοῦτο δηλοῖ· οὐκ ἐπιτρέψει ἡ συμφορὰ ἄλλο τι νῦν πράσσειν, ἢ περὶ τὸ ἐνεστὸς κακὸν γίνεσθαι. .... 1063. xäv væigdin'. Be they never so just. Esch. Agam. 1396, rád' ἂν δικαίως ἦν· ὑπερδίκως μὲν οὖν .. κρατῆρ ̓ αὐτὸς ἐκπίνει μολών. These two verses were formerly assigned, the first to Menelaos, and the second to Teukros. The error was first corrected by Brunck, who has observed that they respond to the two verses (1035, 1036) which the Chorus addresses to Menelaos. 1064. Ὁ τοξότης .... φρονεῖν. The common reading σμικρὰ φρονεῖν, although supported by the recognition of Eustathius, p. 851. 60, and the Scholiast to Ar. Acharn. 710, is inadmissible. For, as Porson accurately remarks to Eur. Orest. 64, where a word ends in a short vowel, and two consonants follow it, which allow it to continue short, I believe that no instances undoubtedly genuine are to be found in which that syllable is made long. The true reading is exhibited by the MS. Laur. a. Lobeck properly comοὐ σμικρὸν φρονῶν; pares Eur. Herakl. 387, Ἐστὶν, σάφ' οἶδα, καὶ μάλ ̓ Isokrat. Pan. 151. p. 72; Demosth. Synt. p. 173. 23; Aristot. Rhet. III. 351. T. IV. ed. Buhl. The sarcasm of Menelaos will be understood by remembering that the practice of archery after the Persian wars had lost the dignity it enjoyed in the heroic age, and in the days of Sophokles was regarded with contempt. Pausanias (I. 23. 4) relates, that it was at this period abandoned to the inhabitants of Krete, and Plutarch (Apophth. Lac. p. 874. T. VI.), in the words οὐ μέλει μοι τοῦτο ὅτι ἀποθανοῦμαι, ἀλλ ̓ ὅτι ὑπὸ γυνίδος τοξότον, bears additional testimony to the contempt in which it was held by the Lakonians. See Eur. Herc. Fur. 158; Heyne to Hom. Il. 11. p. 187. .... 1065. Οὐ γὰρ · inτnoáμny. Non enim contemnendam hanc artem exerceo. See Valckenaer, Animadv. ad Ammon. III. 14. On the position of the adjective when used with a predicative force, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 459. 1. 1067. Κἂν ψιλὸς ἀρκέσαιμι. SCHOL.: τὰ τοιαῦτα σοφίσματα οὐκ οἰκεῖα τραγῳδίας· μετὰ γὰρ τὴν ἀναίρεσιν ἐπεκτεῖναι τὸ δρᾶμα θελήσας, ἐψυχρού σατο καὶ ἔλυσε τὸ τραγικὸν πάθος. Although we refrain from further observation, we trust that our silence will not be mistaken for approbation of such criticism. ·On rgiou in the following line, see note to v. 478, supra. 1069. With the sentiment, compare Shakspeare, II. Henry VI., Act III. Sc. 2 "Thrice is he armed that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though locked up in steel, 1070. κτείναντά με. "If this verse stood alone, we should be inclined to read κτείνοντα, comparing Eur. Androm. 809, πόσιν τρέμουσα, μή.... ἀποσταλῇ, | ἢ κατθάνη, κτείνουσα τοὺς οὐ χρῆν κτανεῖν, on which passage see the annotators. But the criticism of Teukros would hardly be applicable to κτείνοντα. There are also some passages in the tragedies in which an attempt or wish to kill is expressed by the aorist xrva instead of the imperfect ἔκτεινον. In the Ion of Euripides, Kreusa says to her son, v. 1291, Εκτεινα δ ̓ ὄντα πολέμιον δόμοις ἐμᾶς. So also, v. 1500, Εκτεινά σ' ἄκουσα.” ELMSLEY. On this use of the aorist to express conatus rei faciendæ, see by all means Jelf's Gr. Gr. 404, Obs. "Ex 1071. Κτείναντα ; κ. τ. λ. The MS. Γ. reads ή καὶ ζῆς θανών ; cellently the Scholiast : κτείναντα ὁ Μενέλαος εἶπεν, ὅσον ἐφ ̓ ἑαυτῷ, ὁ δὲ τῆς φωνῆς ἀντιλαμβάνεται· τὸ δὲ τοιοῦτο κωμῳδίας μᾶλλον, ἢ τραγῳδίας. Nor shall we find any reader who will not pronounce the reply of Teukros 'subfrigida.' I am, however, far from ignorant that time alters our modes of expression as well as of feeling, and readily believe that many things which we read without emotion may frequently have excited whole theatres to enthusiasm." LOBECK. "Where in all the world is the comic savor or frigidity of the passage before us? Are they to be found in the circumstance that Menelaos, in accordance with national habit, oversteps the actual truth, and charges Aias, not merely with the intention of killing him, but with having positively done so? This is impossible. Exaggerations of the truth, deliberate falsehood, malicious imputation, can and do occur in almost every tragedy. Hence it is necessary in the very representation of Truth, in the exhibition of a conflict against Fraud and Falsehood, that the overthrow of the vainglorious braggart should be clearly and distinctly recognized. Since, then, without sacrificing the dignity of tragedy, the poet was permitted to represent Menelaos as uttering the exaggerated expression that Aias had killed him, it is absurd to contend |