The

men in the training of horses for the purposes of draught, is here employed in an active signification. So raugodirns Búgoa, Anth. Pal. VI. n. 41. That adjectives with this termination were used also in a passive sense is evident from such expressions as lodirns oripavos, Pind. Fragm. XLV.; κηροδέτης σύριγξ, Euphor. ap. Athen. p. 184. Α ; συνδέτην ἔχων ἁλύσει μα κρᾷ Βαστάρνην πεντάπηχυν, Posidon. ap. Athen. p. 213. A. On the διπλῆ párriž, or double scourge, see Blomfield to Esch. Agam. 600; Klausen to Choeph. 356. "From this passage the title of the play has been derived, nor is there any reason to suppose, with Harles. ad Fabr. B. Gr. p. 196, that this appellation is a mere figment of the commentators. names of plays were frequently selected from trivial, and, so to speak, secondary circumstances ; Ιππόλυτος στεφανίας, καλυπτόμενος. If this tragedy had been exhibited, as stated by the author of the Trobios, under the title of AIAZ only, or, as Dikaiarchos testifies, under that of ΑΙΑΝΤΟΣ ΘΑΝΑΤΟΣ, it could not possibly have been distinguished from Aias the Lokrian. Eustathius, at p. 757. 16, and again at p. 1139. 61, calls it simply ròv μarıyopógov, and conjectures, from a comparison of the expression λnyà Aiós (v. 137 supra) with the Homeric phrase ▲òs μάστιγι, δαμέντες, that Aias is so termed ὡς θεομηνία περιπεσόντα. Clemens (in Strom. 6. 470), Athenæus (VII. 277. C), and Zenobius (Cent. IV. 4) term it Alavra μartıyopógov, whilst the ancient grammarians, and especially Stobæus, call it more briefly Alavra, for reasons that will be obvious to every reader. The precise time at which it was brought forward for public rehearsal is disputed. Böckh, de Trag. Pr. p. 137, suspects, from the language of Odysseus at the close of this play, that it was produced before the Philoktetes,' i. e. before the 92d Olympiad.” LOBECK.

236. δεννάζων. SCHOL. Bλao@nuv. On the accusative, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 566. 2. Saipav. "Musgrave rightly interprets 'malus genius.' The poet refers in these words to the insanity of Aias as the effect of divine interposition. In the same way, δαιμόνων τις and οὐδεὶς ἀνδρῶν are opposed in the Ed. Tyr. 1258 : λυσσῶντι δ ̓ αὐτῷ δαιμόνων δείκνυσί τις οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀνδρῶν, οἳ παρῆμεν ἐγγύθεν.” DINDORF. For further information on this subject, see Apuleius, De Deo Socratis, and Plutarch, De Genio Socratis and De Defectu Oraculorum. There is, however, considerable reason to mistrust the applicability of this explanation to the present passage, since the superstition which connected the lives and fortunes of men with demons was not prevalent among the Greeks in the times of the

Tragedians. Hence it seems preferable to understand by daiμay the deity hostile to Aias. See Lobeck to this line.

238. Ωρα τιν ἤδη. SCHOL. : καιρός ἐστιν ἤδη τινά, τουτέστιν ἕκαστον, ἡμῶν κρυψάμενον καλύμμασι τὴν κεφαλὴν, ἀρέσθαι κλοπὴν διὰ τῶν ποδῶν, ἤγουν φεύγειν διὰ τῆς ξηρᾶς, ἢ ἑζόμενον κατὰ τὸν ταχὺν ζυγὸν τῆς κωπηλα. σίας μεθεῖναι ἑαυτὸν καὶ ἀπολῦσαι διὰ νηὸς ποντοπόρου. Almost all the manuscripts, with Eustathius and Aldus, ga Tv' ồn ngãra, whilst a few, amongst which we must name the MS. Laur. a., insert after dn. In Eur. Phan. 1360, ἐπὶ κάρα τε λευκοπήχεις κτύπους χεροῖν, the greater number of the manuscripts exhibit xgara. On the pronoun ¬, placed here for us, see Jelf's Gr. Gr. 659. 2. That the ancients were accustomed to shroud their faces with a veil, under the influence of sorrow or for purposes of concealment, is evident from Hom. Od. 8. 92, äf 'Odvσεὺς κατὰ κρᾶτα καλυψάμενος γοάασκεν ; infra, v. 1089, ὑφ ̓ εἵματος xgupaís; Plaut. II. 2. 89, cave respexis, fuge, et operi caput; Sueton. Calig. c. 51, nam, qui deos tantopere contemneret, ad minima tonitrua et fulgura connivere, caput obvolvere, ad vero majora proripere se e strato sub lectumque condere solebat.

240. Ποντοπόρῳ να μεθεῖναι. SCHOL. : μετιέναι, φεύγειν. ἕκαστον ἡμῶν, φησὶ, δεῖ μεθεῖναι, τούτεστι ῥῖψαι ἑαυτὸν ἐν νηΐ καὶ φεύγειν. Brunck accepts this explanation, and renders the entire passage jam tempus est ergo, ut quisque obvoluto capite clam pedibus fugam arripiat, aut pontivagam insiliat in navem, insideatque celeris remigationis transtro. Hermann observes that it is harsh to understand avrov, and thinks that it would be more conformable with sound interpretation to supply the ellipse from the words θοὸν εἰρεσίας ζυγόν. He asserts that there is some confusion in the connection of ideas, and that, while the poet intended to say sięɛoíav vai με siva, solvere, liberum facere remorum usum, he also wished to add Cóμevov, and hence combined both expressions in the phrase θοὸν εἰρεσίας ζυγὸν ἑζόμενον, which is equivalent to ἐν τῷ θεῷ ζυγῷ ἑζόμενον, εἰρεσίαν μεθεῖναι τῇ vn. Against this view it may reasonably be urged, that the expression sigioíav μslsiva is found in no Greek writer, and that it is extremely difficult to explain satisfactorily the meaning of the dative vnt. For vnt sigsríav μstivaι can mean nothing else than to give up, or let go the oarage to the ship, which is in direct opposition to the sense that is most evidently required. Lobeck supposes that the phrase va μslsiva is used in the same sense as that expressed by Virgil, Æn. 6. 1, classi immittit habenas; Ovid, Trist. 1. 4. 16, aurigam video vela dedisse rati; Oppian. Hal. 1. 255, πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ πάντα χαλινὰ ἰθυντὴς ἀνίησιν ; i. e. that μεθεῖναι means to give

sails.

Neue compares Plat. Protag. p. 338. A, oùgía ipívra, where ipsivas is employed in the same absolute signification. "I believe that a literal and exact rendering of the whole passage will show most clearly what substantive must be supplied to μεθεῖναι. The Chorus says, Now it is time that we, with veil-enveloped head, should make our escape on foot, or, sitting on the swift seats of the rowers, intrust (our flight) to the sea-traversing ship. As the words βοὸν εἰρεσίας ζυγὸν ἑζόμενον, sitting upon the swift rowing-bank, are opposed to the thought conveyed by the expression Todo xλoràv agiola, on foot, or by running, so is the second idea contained in the words ποδοῖν κλοπὰν ἀρέσθαι (with which compare Eur. Rhes. 54. 126), I mean quy ȧgiobas, to take flight, or make one's escape, placed in antithesis to that found in the words ποντοπόρῳ νηῒ μεθεῖναι. Can it, then, be doubted that the substantive κλοπάν, i. e. φυγήν, should be supplied to μεθεῖναι ? Such an explanation removes all difficulty. The Chorus says, We must now either make our escape stealthily on foot, or, sitting on the rowing-bench, resign (or commit) it to our ships. Had the poet substituted ποσὶν φυγὰν ἀρέσθαι for ποδοῖν κλοπὰν ἀρέσθαι, no other interpretation would have been thought of. But that the two expressions are identical in meaning must be evident to all." WUNDER. With the accusative after ἑζόμενον, compare Æsch. Eum. 3, ἣ δὴ τὸ μητρὸς δευτέρα τόδ ̓ ἕζετο μαντεῖον ; Agam. 983, bgóvov; ibid. 190, ośλμæ ñμśvwv; Eur. Iph. Aul. 141, μή νυν μήτ' ἀλσώδεις ΐζου Κρήνας μήθ ̓ ὕπτῳ θελχθῇς.

66

241. ἐρέσσουσιν ἀπειλάς. Compare infra, 1267; Antig. 158; Philokt. 1135." NEUE.

242. λιθόλευστον "Αρη, equivalent to θάνατον λεύσιμον οι λιθόβλητον povov, death by stoning. Cf. infra, 521, 598; Antig. 36; Ed. Kol. 434 ; Esch. Theb. 183. The MSS. Laur. a. T. and others exhibit "Agnv. Dindorf asserts that this form was not employed by Attic writers. Yet we read in Demetr. Phal. de Eloc. CLXXVII. ὅλως τὸ ν δι ̓ εὐφημίαν ἐφέλNovrai di 'ATTIxoi, and in Esch. Theb. 45 the metre requires "Agny. Porson to Eur. Phan. 950 observes, "As usual, manuscripts fluctuate between "Agn and "Agny. For the future, I shall always adhere to "Agny, without noticing it to the reader." See Matth. Gr. Gr. 91.

243. αἶσ ̓ ἄπλατος. SCHOL. : ἀντὶ τοῦ μεγάλη μανία. The MS. Aug. B. ärλaros; the MS. Ien. λsros; the MS. I. and Suidas λαTos; and the two MSS. Barocc. λnros. Brunck renders quem fati vis inexpugnabilis urget. "Απλατος (abbreviated for ἀπέλατος) denotes strictly that which one cannot or dare not approach, and is thence used in the collateral sense of immense, monstrous, terrible. Compare Hes. Opp. 147,

οὐδέ τι σῖτον ἤσθιον, ἀλλ ̓ ἀδάμαντος ἔχον κρατερόφρονα θῦμον ἄπλητοι ; Theog. 151, τῶν ἑκατὸν μὲν χεῖρες ἀπ ̓ ὤμων ἀΐσσοντο ἄπλατοι ; Soph. Trach. 1093, ἄπλατον θρέμμα κἀπροσήγορον. On the perpetual confusion in the manuscripts between the words ἄπλατος, ἄπλητος, ἄπλαστος, ἄπλαTos, see Pierson ad Mar. p. 25; Elmsley to Eur. Med. 149; Buttmann's Gr. Gr. Vol. II. p. 208: and Mützell de emend. Theog. Hes. p. 54. 244. Οὐκ ἔτι. SCHOL. : οὐκέτι αὐτὸν κατέχει ἡ μανία.

....

Λαμπρᾶς

λήγει. "Triclinius observes that the south wind, when unaccompanied with storm, soon terminates. Hence, then, the general meaning of this passage is as follows: cito (öğús) desiit furere, ut Auster sine fulmine ortus." HERMANN.

246. φρόνιμος. SCHOL. : ἔμφρων γενόμενος ἤρξατο συμπαρακολουθεῖν τῇ συμφορᾷ καὶ ἀλγεῖν. In place of φρόνιμος, the reading of the majority of the manuscripts, gómov is found in some manuscripts of inferior reputation, and is preferred as "longe exquisitius" by Hermann and Ellendt.

247.

"oinria ráln, sufferings of one's own creation. Cf. infra, 870, ἀπ' οἰκείας σφαγῆς ; Elektr. 215, οἰκείας εἰς ἄτας ἐμπίπτεις.” NEUE. In the passage just cited from the Elektra, Hermann's explanation, that those mischiefs are spoken of quæ sibi Electra gignat ipsa, is open to the objection, that she personally is powerless to do aught that may injure her enemies, and that the Chorus intends simply to convey a warning that she should not be too profoundly affected by a sense of her own family misfortunes, lest she should thereby produce new troubles for herself. In our own verse, Ellendt renders by familiaris, in precisely the same force as oixałos is opposed to dλλórgios in Plat. Euthyd. p. 4. B; Rep. p. 463. B. Cf. Æsch. Αgam. 1220, χεῖρας κρεῶν πλήθοντες οἰκείας βορᾶς, their own flesh for food, of the children of Thyestes; Antig. 1249, wévbos oixstov otśyev ; d. Kol. 769, τοῖσιν οἰκείοις κακοῖς νοσοῦντα. Hence οἰκεῖος is frequently used in the sense of "dos, one's own, private: Hdt. 7. 10, oincía Žúvsors, one's own natural understanding; Thuk. 2. 40, oixsiwv äμa nai modITIKĀV ἐπιμέλεια; Id. 1. 41, τὰ οἰκεῖα χεῖρον τίθεσθαι. Render, therefore, calami. ties all his own, misfortunes peculiar to himself.

248. Tagaτgážavros. Wunder renders male vel turpiter facientis, after Wesseling. Stollberg, who edited this tragedy in 1668, quotes, in illustration of this signification of zagú in composition, the verbs #agaxogdiłwy a chorda aberro; яagaptiyyoμas, perperam, inconcinne loquor; zagaßaśTEV, Tagogar, hallucinari, perperam videre. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the Scholiast, συμπράξαντος καὶ μετασχόντος, is equally sound and more appropriate to the context, although he somewhat absurdly adds, sgioon δὲ ἡ παρὰ πρόθεσις.

249. ὑποτείνει. SCHOL. : αἴρει, ἐγείρει, ὑποβάλλει· ἀντὶ τοῦ κάτωθεν

εἰς ὕψος ἔτεινεν. See Liddell and Scott, s. v.

250. ̓Αλλ' εἰ . . . . λόγος.

....

"The Chorus says, Sed si liberatus est inMali enim præteriti nulla ratio

sania, optime se habere eum crediderim.

avтaι we must supply

habetur, i. e. facile quis obliviscitur. Hence to To xaxou from the following verse, i. e. insaniæ. So, also, at v. 266, to πεπαυμένος understand τῆς νόσου from the word νοσῶν immediately following. The verb surux must be taken impersonally (see my note to Trach. 189), or referred to Aias. The latter supposition is, in my judgment, the best; partly because it is more natural that the subject of this infinitive should be the same with that of the verb rizaurai, and partly because, if it be not referred to Aias, we shall inquire in vain, if Tux be received impersonally, with whom the survxía rests." WUNDER.

251. goúdov rou xanoũ, an evil that has gone by. The adjective godos, although most frequently applied to persons, is also used as an epithet of things quæ tolluntur et evanescunt. Cf. Ed. Kol. 660; Eur. Hek. 335; Androm. 1078; Ar. Nub. 718 sqq. Kühner must have forgotten this verse in asserting (Gr. Gr. 119, Obs. 4, ed. Jelf) that goudos is never employed except in the nominative singular and plural. μείων λόγος. SCHOL. : ἀντὶ τοῦ οὐδεὶς λόγος.

252. Πότερα δ'. ... uvv. The explanation of these words given by Tekmessa herself in v. 258 sqq. With the expression κοινὸς ἐν κοινοῖσι, comp. v. 442, μόνος μόνοις ; 590, Αφιλα παρ' ἀφίλοις ; Antig. 140, Too meds loous; and many other passages cited by the commentators. 255. Τό τοι διπλάζον, i. e. τοὺς φίλους λυπῶν καὶ αὐτὸς λυπεῖσθαι. Porson to Eur. Hek. 228 observes, that "the Tragedians are very partial to the introduction of the particle ro in gnomes or brief moral sentiments." Cf. Stallbaum ad Plat. Sympos. p. 219. A; Jelf's Gr. Gr. 736. 1.

256. Ἡμεῖς ἄρ ̓. SCHOL. : ἡμεῖς ἀντὶ τοῦ ὁ Αἴας νῦν μὴ νοσῶν ὀδυνῷ ἑαυτὸν διὰ τὰ πεπραγμένα. By using the plural pronoun, Tekmessa identifies herself with Aias, and indicates with true womanly feeling the intimate union of their loves and fortune. In the same way, Theseus calls the daughters of Edipus ràs raïdus nμãv in Ed. Kol. 1021. On the form áráμsola, see Matthia's Gr. Gr. 203. 3, and cf. infra, vv. 630, .631, 641.

260. φρονοῦντας. So all the manuscripts and old editions. "Sed quum Scholiastes scribat ygápera: ßhíxovtas, hoc præferendum judicavi." HERMANN. In this decision few will acquiesce. At v. 50 supra, we have already seen that these various readings are supported by no authority,