eminent services which Aias had rendered to the Greeks, and complains of the ingratitude of Agamemnon in retaining no grateful recollection of the repeated instances in which, to save his life, he had imperilled his own. He reminds him that, by the bravery and efforts of the deceased hero (see Hom. Il. 15. 415), the Grecian host was rescued from destruction by Hektor, and that, on a subsequent occasion, he went forth, of his own free will, to fulfil the lot which had appointed him to cope in single combat with the Trojan champion (vv. 1211-1225). “He was the doer of these deeds, and with him I, in actual presence, the slave, forsooth, and offspring of a barbarian mother!" (vv. 1226, 1227.) He next proceeds to refute the opprobrious terms in which his birth had been so repeatedly alluded to by his opponent, and retorts upon him the impiety and infamous reputation of his equally barbarian ancestors. Welcker, p. 260 sqq., has correctly shown, that, in the language Teukros uses upon this point, the poet seeks to gratify his audience by rebuking the arrogance of the Argives on account of their descent from Pelops. At the close of his address, he nobly declares, in allusion to the covert threats of Agamemnon at v. 1193 sq., that he shall defend his brother's remains from injury at the cost of his own life: Εὖ νυν τόδ ̓ ἴσθι, τοῦτον εἰ βαλεῖτέ που, | βαλεῖτε χ ̓ ἡμᾶς τρεῖς ὁμοῦ συγκειμένους· ] ἐπεὶ καλόν μοι τοῦδ ̓ ὑπερπονουμένῳ | θανεῖν (ν. 1246 sqq.).

1205. προδοῦσ'. Supply τὸν θανόντα, and upon the construction see

note to v. 564, supra.

1206. οὐδ ̓ ἐπὶ σμικρῶν λόγων.

"So Aldus and the manuscripts generally. The MSS. Dresd. a. Par. T. and the books which follow the Triclinian recension exhibit οὐδ ̓ ἐπὶ σμικρῶν πόνων. If Triclinius adopted this reading from correction, he did so foolishly. Every body is aware that the substantives os, λóyos, frequently denote that which words express, a thing or matter spoken of, and are hence almost equivalent in sense to gãyμa. See my note to Ed. Kol. 443. In just the same manner, then, as the language of Aias at v. 452, οὐκ ἂν πριαίμην οὐδενὸς λόγου βροτόν, means neither more nor less than the comic phrase οὐκ ἂν ἐρεβίνθου πριαίμην, vilissimo pretio non emerem, are the words οὐδ ̓ ἐπὶ σμικρῶν λόγων employed in our own passage to signify ne minimum quidem." BRUNCK. Erfurdt and Hermann agree with Stephanus in rendering, ne verbis quidem tenus, and suppose the meaning of Teukros to be this: that Agamemnon, in return for the illustrious services of Aias in protecting the safety of himself and the army under his command, ought at least to have made honorable mention of his name, and to have forborne all disparaging and contemptuous

reference to his exploits. Lobeck's translation, ne verbulo quidem (with which he compares the German expression, nicht mit einem armseeligen Worte gedenkt er deiner) is yet more felicitous. In illustration of the use and meaning of ixí, see Ed. Kol. 443, 746; Eur. Hippol. 1163; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 633. 3; Krüger, Griech. Sprachl. 68. 40, Anm. 5.

1207. οὗ σὺ πολλάκις. SCHOL. : οὐκ ἀξιοῦται τῆς παρὰ σοῦ μνήμης, οὗ πολλάκις, ὦ Αίαν, προεκινδύνευσας ἐν πολέμοις. παρὰ τὸ Ομηρικόν· Αἰεὶ ἔμην ψυχὴν παραβαλλόμενος πολεμίζειν (Π. 9. 322). On μνηστιν, see

Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 256, 728. Buttmann, Ausf. Griech. Sprachl.

119. 24.

1210. κανόνητ ̓ ἔπη. Such is the reading of Aldus and the MSS. La. Par. 1. The common copies exhibit xavón'. Consult note to v. 716,

supra.

1211. Οὐ μνημονεύεις. SCHOL. : καλῶς πρὸς τὸ Ποῦ βάντος ἢ ποῦ στάντος, οὗπερ οὐκ ἐγώ; (v. 1175). On the collocation οὐ μνημονεύεις ovner' ovdiv, vína, dost thou no longer hold in any remembrance the time when, - see Porson and Schäfer to Eur. Hek. 109, and compare Cic. Ep. ad Div. 7. 28, Memini cum mihi desipere videbare.

1212. 'Egxiwv. SCHOL.: λIT rò ivros. The MSS. Lc. Bar. a. read ivros in place of ouros, but that the genitive may be constructed directly with the participle is satisfactorily shown by Ed. Tyr. 238, yns siodéxeσθαι. Philoht. 648, ὁ μὴ νεώ; γε τῆς ἐμῆς ἔνι. Eur. Phan. 454, τόνδ' siordiğw ruxśwy. See Bernhardy, Synt. p. 137. · ἐγκεκλημένους. The common reading (for which the MSS. La. Bar. a. exhibit lyxexλsıμévovs) is iynenλoμévous. See Elmsley on Eur. Herak. Fur. 729; Matthiä on Id. Hek. 481; Schneider on Plat. Civ. T. III. p. 70; Baiter on Isokr. Paneg. 47. 43; and Buttmann, Ausf. Griech. Sprachl. 114. Lobeck quotes, in illustration of the passage generally, the following sarcastic verses of an unknown poet (manifestly spoken by Aias), which have been preserved by Charisius, IV. 252: Vidi te, Ulysse, saxo sternentem Hectora Vidi legentem clypeo classem doricam, ego tunc pudendam trepidus hortabar fugam.

1214. dupì.... idwλios. Lobeck compares Virg. Æn. 5. 662, Furit immissis Vulcanus habenis transtra per et remos (¿dáλ) et pictis abiete puppes (ἄκρα νεῶν). The words av μouvos are introduced in reply to the language of Agamemnon at v. 1175, supra.

1217. rápgwv izig. Cf. Hom. IП. 15. 355 sqq.

1219. οὐδὲ συμβῆναι ποδί. SCHOL.: πρὸς τὸ Ποῦ βάντος ἢ ποῦ στάντος. See note to v. 1175, supra.

....

1220. *Αρ' ὑμὶν . . ἔνδικα ; "The adjective dinov is used to signify both justum and verum. In the present passage, it must be understood in the latter meaning, and joined with iμív: vera secundum vestrum judicium. On this employment of the dative, see my note to Ed. Tyr. 40, and compare Eur. Phœn. 497 sq.: nai σopoïs nai tõîσi quúñois ävdina, where the dative is similarly used, and dina has also the same signification." WUNDER. Add Ed. Tyr. 553, Trach. 296, and consult notes to vv.

522, 574, supra; Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 388. a. - On the particle åga, nonne, see note to v. 264. Jacobs supposes, on account of its frigidity and the inappropriateness of the sentiment it expresses to the whole connection, that the verse is corrupt, and that the poet wrote something like the following : "Αρ' ὑμὶν οὗτος ταῦτ ̓ ἔδρασ ̓ ἅμ ̓, ἢ δίχα ;

1221. χὤτ. "Construct with the verb vnovεúsis, v. 1211." NEUE. 1222. Λαχών τε κακέλευστος. SCHOL. : κληρωθεὶς καὶ αὐθόρμητος. That the transaction referred to was wholly voluntary on the part of Aias may be learnt from Hom. 11. 7. 92, and that the actual lot was in entire conformity with his wishes is reiterated at v. 181 of the same book. The MSS. Lips. a. Flor. T. A. read with the Juntine editions Яλbev ävríos. 1223. Οὐ δραπέτην, κ. τ. λ. SCHOL.: οὐδὲν πανουργήσας περὶ τὸν κλῆρον, ἀλλ ̓ εὐξάμενος λαχεῖν αὐτόν. τοῦτο δὲ ἱστορεῖται περὶ Κρεσφόντου καὶ τῶν Αριστοδήμου παίδων, ὅτι πανούργως ὁ Κρεσφόντης βῶλον ὑγρὰν εἰς τὴν ὑδρίαν τοῦ ὕδατος ἔβαλε, κληρουμένων περὶ Μεσσήνης. οὐκ ἄτοπον δὲ τὸν Τεῦκρον λοιδορεῖν Αγαμέμνονι, ὑπὸ τοῦ πάθους προσαγόμενον· καὶ γὰρ Ἀχιλλεὺς οὐκ ἀπέσχετο λοιδορίας, καὶ οὐκ ὢν ἐν τοιούτῳ πάθει (II. 1. 122, 149, 225). [Εἰς τὸ αὐτό.] ἀνῆκται τοῖς χρόνοις ἡ ἱστορία ἡ περὶ Κρεσφόντου. Eustathius, p. 361. 26, adduces this verse as an example ávaxgovioμoõ súpetódov. The allusion is to the artifice by which Kresphontes, in the division of the Peloponnesos, obtained Messenia, the district he coveted. Among other modes of drawing lots practised by the ancients, one consisted in casting stones, inscribed with the name or some other distinctive mark of the party throwing, into a vessel filled with water. A person, not wishing his own lot to be the first drawn, surreptitiously threw into the urn some material which would either stick to the bottom of the vessel or dissolve in the water which it contained. It was thus, according to the Scholiast, that Kresphontes, by throwing a lump of earth into the lot-vessel, obtained the kingdom of Messenia. The reference to Kresphontes is of course an anachronism; but an anachronism which, told at the expense of Sparta, would not be disliked by the poet's audience." MITCHELL. Cf. v. 1079, supra; Apollodor. II. 8. 4; Pausan. IV. 3. 3; Plaut. Asin. 2. 6. 46; Salmasius ad Plaut. Casin. 2. 6. 22.

1225. ἅλμα κουφιεῖν. To make a light and ready bound. On the accusative cognate to the notion implied in the verb, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 548. d, 556. d, and compare Eur. Suppl. 1051, dúornvov aiwgnμa novqięw. Id. Elektr. 865, οὐράνιον πήδημα κουφίζουσα. Id. Troad. 343, xoupov algn

Baua, cited by Neue and Lobeck.

1227. Ο δοῦλος, οὐκ, κ. τ. λ. Compare the language of Agamemnon, vv. 1174, 1197, supra.

66

1228. ποῖ βλέπων. " Equivalent to πῶς βλέπων, quo vultu, qua fronte. Cf. Philokt. 110; Ar. Plut. 424; Id. Vesp. 895; Id. Lys. 886." ERFURDT. On the use of xai after interrogative words and particles to denote extreme impatience for reply, see Porson to Eur. Phœn. 1373; Hermann ad Vig. p. 837; Elmsley to Eur. Med. 1334; and compare Ed. Tyr. 1129; Trach. 314; Antig. 726, 770.

1230. IIśλoжα ßágßagov Þęúya. "Tzetzes, Chil. V. 448, makes the following observation· πῶς Σοφοκλῆς τὸν ἄνδρα Φρύγα φησὶν οὐκ οἶδα, λέγων ἀρχαῖον ὄντα Πέλοπα βάρβαρον Φρύγα. The same representation, however, is made by Herodotos (7. 11), Пiλ04 ¡ Þęúž, and Orosius (1. 12), Tantalus rex Phrygiorum. That the same interchange of the appellations Phrygian and Lydian is made by other writers may be seen in Markland's note on Maxim. XXXVI. 1. p. 179, and in truth the boundaries of Lydia and Phrygia were formerly ådiángitos.” LOBECK,

1231. ̓Ατρέα δ',.... τέκνων; Most modern editors place a comma both after ἔσπειρε and δυσσεβέστατον. Elmsley directs us to erase the comma after the latter, because it does not agree with 'Argia, but with δεῖπνον. We prefer to retain the comma after δυσσεβέστατον, and to expunge it after ἔσπειρε. On the formula ὃς αὖ σ' ἔσπειρε, see note to w. 1116, supra.

1233. μητρὸς ἐξέφυς Κρήσσης. Although Kressa is a proper name and a common appellation of Aerope (see Burmann to Ov. Trist. 2. 391), it is used by Teukros in this passage as a term of reproach and infamy. See Dorvill. ad Chariton. p. 332, and compare the language of the comedian Plato, as quoted by the Scholiast on Ar. Av. 798, τὸν μαινόμενον, τὸν Κρῆτα, τὸν μόγις Αττικόν. Menelaos is called by Lykophron, 150, ἡμίκρης, on account of the marriage of his father with Aerope." LOBECK. Apollodor. 3. 2. 2, and the Scholiast on Eur. Orest. 800.

Add

1233-1935. ἐφ ̓ ᾧ . . . . διαφθοράν. "Bothe cannot possibly be correct in considering anτòv vdga as the object of the verb ipйs, and in representing that Aerope's paramour was cast into the sea by the command of her father Katreus. Although this opinion is countenanced by the gram

:

matical connection of these words, it will be seen to be inadmissible from the circumstance, that no ancient writer has stated that this punishment overtook the adulterer, whilst all unite in testifying that it was inflicted upon Aerope herself, or at all events was decreed against her. It is the more incredible that Sophokles could have intended to make such a statement in this passage on account of its thorough inconsistency with his meaning and design. His object is simply to communicate certain disgraceful passages in the history of the immediate ancestors of Agamemnon, and could not be promoted by any reference to the fate of Aerope's paramour. We think it certain that Aerope, therefore, must be the object of ip. That Sophokles, however, does not adopt the story which Euripides is said to have followed in his tragedy of the Koñora, is clearly shown from the observations of our Scholiast upon the words ipñev iλλoïs ἰχθύσιν : ἡ ἱστορία ἐν ταῖς Κρήσσαις Εὐριπίδου, ὅτι διαφθαρεῖσαν αὐτὴν λάθρα ὑπὸ θεράποντος ὁ πατὴρ Ναυπλίῳ παρέδωκεν, ἐντειλάμενος ἀποποντῶσαι· ὁ δὲ οὐκ ἐποίησεν, ἀλλ ̓ ἐνηγγύησε Πλεισθένει. Now if Katreus is meant, as the commentators think, by the words i Qırúcas xarng, and we are to understand that Aerope while yet a virgin was detected by her father in the commission of her crime, (for it follows of necessity, that, if the offence of which the poet here accuses her was committed after her marriage, she could not have been detected in it by her father, since it is certain that he after her nuptials remained in Krete,) no one can ever understand how, after having been thrown into the sea in expiation of her guilt, she could possibly have married Atreus, as the poet asserts in the distinctest terms. For it is evidently impossible that we can interpret the words ¿çñnev.... diabogáv in such a manner as to sustain the notion that she was rescued from her watery grave, and afterwards joined in wedlock with Atreus. To this it must be added, that the words izazτòv ävdeα could not. have been applied to a servant of Katreus who had wrought his daughter's ruin. We cannot, therefore, doubt that Atreus, the father of Agamemnon, is referred to in the words rúas xarig, and that the general meaning intended by the poet is as follows: Aerope ab Atreo marito, natis jam Agamemnone et Menelao, quum in adulterio deprehensa esset, in mare præcipitata erat. The adulterer was, in all probability, Thyestes. With these views the Scholiast on Eur. Orest. 800 agrees: 'Argsùs ràv yuvaïna * Αερόπην τιμωρεῖται, ὅτι ἐμοιχεύετο Θυέστη, ῥίψας αὐτὴν εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ὡς φησὶ Σοφοκλῆς. The same testimony is given by the Scholiast on Liban. Decl. T. IV. p. 65 : Αερόπην τὴν τοῦ ̓Αγαμέμνονος μητέρα ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς ̓Ατρεὺς μοιχευομένην λαβὼν τῷ Θυέστη εἰς θάλασσαν ἔῤῥιψε. The