Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

34. Καιρόν, opportune. See below, v. 1254; Eur. Hel. 487 ; Kühn. 579, 580. 2. The prose-writers almost invariably, and the poets very frequently, add a preposition, generally is. Cf. Arist. Avv. 1672; Eur. Phœn. 105; Hipp. 899 ; infra, 1111. - σῇ κυβερνῶμαι χερί. This word is here used tropically, which is not so rare as some suppose. Cf. Xen. Kyr. 1. 15, ὥστε ἀεὶ τῇ αὐτοῦ γνώμῃ ἀξιοῦν κυβερνᾶσθαι. Ib. 8. 8. 1, τοσαύτη δὲ γενομένη μια γνώμῃ τῇ Κυροῦ ἐκυβερνᾶτο. Pind. Pyth. 5. 122, Διός τοι νόος μέγας κυβερνᾷ δαίμον ̓ ἀνδρῶν φίλων. Id. Fragm. 130, γλυκεῖα ἑλπίς, ἃ μάλιστα θνατῶν πολύστροφον γνώμαν κυβερνᾷ. Antiph. ap. Athen. 10. p. 444. C, διὰ φλεβῶν πᾶς κυβερνᾶται βίος. Wunder observes that the phrase κυβερνᾶν τινα πάντα, Οι κυβερνᾶσθαι ὑπό τινος πάντα, closely resembles the expression ὑπηρετεῖν τινι πάντα, equivalent to πᾶν ὑπηρέτημα ὑπηρετεῖν τινί.

.....

37. Τῇ σῇ ..... κυνηγίᾳ. SCHOL. : ἀντὶ τοῦ τῆς σῆς κυνηγίας, which reading is exhibited by the Cod. Pal., is adscriptum in Codd. Δ. and Par., and is preferred by H. Stephanus and Wesseling. A genitivus objectivus is found with πρόθυμος in Elektr. 3, ὧν πρόθυμος ἦσθ ̓ ἀεί. The form κυνηγιά is found in Aristot. Rhet. 1. 14, and often in the later prosewriters, as also in Eur. Bacch. 339, where, however, Elmsley and Matthiä write κυναγίαις, because the Tragedians, even in senarii, invariably employ the Doric form κυναγός. Cf. Æsch. Agam. 694, Eur. Hipp. 1397, Suppl. 888, Phon. 1177, Iph. T. 284, Soph. Elekt. 553. Add Phrynicus, p. 428: Κυνηγός· οἱ μὲν τραγικοὶ ποιηταὶ . . δωρίζουσι, τὸ ἢ εἰς ἃ μετατιθέντες κυναγός, where see Lobeck.

....

The ordo verborum is : καὶ πάλαι

εἰς ὁδὸν ἔβην, φύλαξ πρόθυμος τῇ σῇ κυνηγίᾳ.

With the sentiment compare

Hom. Od. v. 47 : διαμπερές ἥ σε φυλάσσω ἐν πάντεσσι πόνοις.

The first of these particles can

38. Η καί. Cf. infra, 44, 48, 97. only be rendered by the question. See Ellendt's Lex. Soph. I. 749; Hartung's Griech. Partik. I. 133.

39. Supply from the preceding verse: πρὸς καιρὸν πονεῖς· ὡς κ. τ. λ. Cf. Matth. Gr. Gr. 628. 5; Elmsl. to Eur. Med. 596. The omission of such a clause is frequent in Tragic dialogue. Hermann has received the writing of two MSS. : ἔργα τοῦδε in place of τοῦδε τἄργα.

40. Καὶ πρὸς τί δυσλόγιστον. SCHOL.: ἐπύθετο πρῶτον, εἰ αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ δράσας, εἶτα καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν πυνθάνεται· τὸ δὲ δυσλόγιστον ὅμοιον τῷ Πρᾶ. γος ἄσκοπον· ἀγνοεῖ γὰρ ἔτι τὴν μανίαν. Lobeck, referring δυσλόγιστον το the interrogative pronoun, explains, τί δ ̓ ἐστὶ τὸ δυσλόγιστον, πρὸς % ..... Wunder connects it with the verb ᾖξεν, and has followed Ruhnken, Ep. Crit. I. 33, in writing χερί. That the accus. χέρα may stand

has been shown by Lobeck, who, in his learned observations on this verse has demonstrated from a cloud of examples that this usage is borne out by a similar construction with the verbs πάλλειν, δινεῖν, θοάζειν, etc., and by Porson to Eur. Or. 1427, augav aloowy, whose note I cite in full. "Some very learned men, Wesseling, Ruhnken, Pierson, are so offended with the employment of this word alors in an active signification, that both in our own passage, and in Eur. Bacch. 147 and elsewhere, they change it into aidúors, while in Soph. Ai. 40, Ruhnken substitutes xgi for xiga. But verbs which denote motion take legitimately an accus. of the instrument or member, which is chiefly used. So rã ród' iražas, Eur. Hek. 1054, where róda is much more conveniently understood than Todi. Ibid. 53, riga ródw. Among the Attics Baiva is a neuter verb; nevertheless Euripides in Elektr. 94, 1182, has said Baive moda. Moreover Aristophanes, Eccles. 161, οὐκ ἂν προβαίην τὸν πόδα τὸν ἕτερον. Ibid. 1475, Μυκηνίδ' ἀρβύλαν κροβάς. Eur. Phan. 1427, Προβὰς δὲ κῶλον δεξιόν. Heracl. 802, inßàs róda. Sophokles in a MS. Photius in a note on Hesych. under "Oxos 'Axeσraios. Suid. under "Oxavov. "Oxois 'Antσταίοισιν ἐμβεβὼς πόδα. But it may be urged, although αἴσσειν χέρα may probably be right, does it follow that αἴσσειν αὔραν, φλόγα is so ? I reply, that the verb aloosy is certainly active; since, not to mention Homer, Sophokles in Ed. Kol. 1621 employs its passive arropa.." Consult also Herm. to Vig. p. 896; Kühn. Gr. Gr. 558. 2, ed Jelf. The declaration of Wunder in his Recens. des Ai. von Lobeck, p. 12 ff., that the accus. is not Greek, has been ably refuted by Hermann in Zimmerm. Zeitschr. f. Alterth. 1838, p. 362 ff.

41. τῶν ̓Αχιλλείων ὅπλων, on account of the arms of Achilles, i. e. their being denied to him. The genitive has been explained by a supposed ellipse of vixa or xág, but see Herm. ad Vig. p. 878, Kühn. Gr. Gr. 488, ed. Jelf, and compare Pind. Nem. 7, 36: oử xev öπ λ wv x o x wθεὶς ὁ καρτερὸς Αἴας ἔπαξε διὰ φρενῶν λευρὸν ξίφος ; Soph. Trach. 269, ὧν ἔχων χόλον; Philoht. 328, τίνος γὰρ ὧδε τὸν μέγαν χόλον κατ ̓ αὐτῶν ἐγκαλῶν ἐλήλυθας ; Eur. Alhest. 5, οὗ δὴ χολωθείς; The passages cited by Wunder from Cicero and Florus in illustration of the employment of the genitive are entirely inappropriate.

42. Tid' iμxíжTe fάow; does he make this hasty inroad (or attack) upon the cattle? Erfurdt and Hermann (ad Vig. p. 739, 195) incorrectly explain the construction ἐπεμπίπτειν βάσιν as identical with that of the expression exodas idov, whilst Matthiä (Gr. Gr. 408) and Rost (Gr. 104, 3. not. 4, 2), with equal inaccuracy, direct us to supply the prepo

sition κατά. The use of the accusative is, however, to be referred to such constructions as are explained in Kühn. 556. b, ed. Jelf. The expression, which is eminently Sophoklean, is for βαίνειν (or ἐπιβαίνειν) βάσιν, and may be compared with the formulæ, πήδημα πηδάν, πεσὼν πήδημα = πέσημα, Eur. Troad. 750; TÉTTWXE Tтúμатα, Soph. Antig. 1045; ávάorαow Orava, Philokt. 275. In place of Báo, the introduction of some substantive signifying an attack or hostile inroad might have been expected, but the poet sufficiently conveys this notion by the use of the verb ἐπεμπίπτειν. Lobeck aptly quotes Trach. 339, Toữ μe Tývd' ipíoracaι ßáoi; Eur. Phon. 300, γονυπετεῖς ἕδρας σε προσπιτνῶ.

43. χεῖρα χραίνεσθαι φόνῳ. That χραίνεσθαι is here used of mere physical defilement is evident from v. 428, below: wor' iv Toloïode xεłęαs αἱμάξαι βοτοῖς ; Æsch. Theb. 324, καπνῷ χραίνεται πόλισμα ; Eur. Ι. Α. 971, σίδηρον χραίνεσθαι αἵματι. Cf. Pors. ad Eur. Orest. 909. Elsewhere this verb denotes moral pollution, as at Ed. Tyr. 822, Eur. Hippol. 1266, Hek. 666, on which signification, see Ruhnken ad Tim. p. 276.

44. βούλευμ', consilium. The two Laurentian manuscripts read βούλημ', which is approved by Musgrave, and supported by the testimony of the Scholiast to Aristoph. Plut. v. 490. Wesseling believes that Bouλsvμa denotes a public decree; Bobanua, on the other hand, a private purpose or design; but this opinion is in opposition to the explicit statement of the Scholiast just mentioned : βούλευμα μὲν τὸ ἴδιον, βούλημα δὲ τοῦ δημοσίου ἡ γνώμη. On the frequent interchange of these words in the manuscripts, see Lobeck to this verse; Intpp. to Ar. Plut. 1. c.; Stallbaum to Plat. Phileb. p. 103; and on the formula s iπí, Kühn. Gr. Gr. 626, Obs. 1, ed. Jelf; Zeun. ad Vig. p. 567.

45. Kävikingažev. The MS. Laur. a. argážar', but with the correction γρ. ἐξέπραξεν. Cf. d. Kol. 945, τοὔργον τόδ ̓ ἐξέπραξα ; Antig. 303, ἐξέπραξαν ὡς δοῦναι δίκην ; Æsch. Pers. 720, καὶ τόδ ̓ ἐξέπραξε. On the force of naí in answers, see Kühn. Gr. Gr. 880. i, ed. Jelf; and on the conditional construction of the whole sentence, Ibid. 856. The verb xarαμsλ, used in the same absolute sense, to be heedless or neglectful, occurs below, v. 863; Xen. Anab. 5. 8. 1; Plat. Tim. p. 41, D.; Id. Hipp. M. p. 238. Α, ἄρχων αἱρεθεὶς κατημέλει.

46. Ποίαισι τόλμαις ταῖσδε.... On the coalition of the relative sentence with the interrogation, for ποῖαι ἦσαν αἵδε τόλμαι, αἷς ἐξέπραξεν ἄν, see Kühn. 881, ed. Jelf.; Ed. Kol. 388; and compare the Homeric formula Toy Tòv μubov SITES; Brunck renders qua audacia; whilst Wunder, asserting

that the words immediately following, xal geväv lgáru, and the use of the noun in the plural number, are entirely opposed to this interpretation, explains róλμas by machinationes, comparing Trach. 582; Eur. Hippol. 414; Ion. 1416. Billerbeck supposes that the datives depend upon πεποιθώς omitted, and quotes Ar. Plut. 449, ποίοισιν ὅπλοις ἢ δυνάμει πε ποιθότες ;

48. παρέστη. SCHOL. : ἐπλησίασεν ὑμῖν. Rightly, for παρέστη must be referred to the words of Athene in the preceding verse, νύκτωρ ἐφ' ὑμᾶς ὁρμᾶται.

49. Καὶ δή. This combination =jamjam, commodum, is often used in replies to express strongly the reality or certainty of any thing. Cf. Elektr. 310; Ed. Kol. 173; Antig. 245. - στρατηγίσιν πύλαις. SCHOL. : ταῖς täv oxnvãv túλais, i. e. at the doors (or tents) of the two commanders, Agamemnon and Menelaos. Compound adjectives are frequently employed by lyric and dramatic poets instead of the genitive of the substantive implied or contained in the compound, or instead of a substantive and attributive genitive, of which two notions the compound adjective is made up. See, below, vv. 55, 71, 284; Antig. 793, veixos avdgav čúvaiμov; Eur. Herc. F. 395, καρπὸν μηλοφόρον, for καρπὸν μήλων ; Æsch. Αgam. 272, εὐαγγέλοισιν ἐλπίσιν θυηπολεῖς, for ἐλπίσιν ἀγαθῆς ἀγγελίας ; Eur. Elektr. 126, ἄναγε πολύδακρυν ἡδονάν, for πολλῶν δακρύων ; Pind. Οl. III. 3, Θήρωνος Ολυμπιονίκαν ὕμνον, for νίκης Ολυμπικῆς. Matthiä, Gr. Gr. 446, Obs. 3. c, has collected very many additional examples.

50. πῶς ἐπέσχε χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου ; The Scholiast remarks: γράφε Tai xai di&ãoav, and this reading is found in the Cod. Flor. T. So, too, in a verse of an unknown tragic poet quoted by Athenæus, X. 433. F, p. 961, ed. Dindf. : ἔσχειν κελεύω χεῖρα διψῶσαν φόνου, in all probability imitated by Lycophron, v. 1171, μαιμῶν κορέσσαι χεῖρα διψῶσαν φόνου. The verb papay, which is a reduplicated form of the root, MA-, found in μάω (compare παιφάσσω from φάω, and λιλαίομαι from λάω), is seldom met with in the Tragedians, and perhaps, in addition to the present passage, only in Esch. Suppl. 872, papa pis. In support of its construction with the genitive, Lobeck cites Apollon. Arg. 269, pasμãv idntúos. intensive μaspárow, first met with in an epigram of Bianor, Anth. Pal. 9. 272, is nevertheless to be recognized in the verbal adjective paspantós (which in composition with a intensive occurs in Hes. Theog. 319, and Soph. Ed. Tyr. 171) and the appellative MauantŃs.

The

51. Εγώ σφ ̓ ἀπείργω. Cod. Flor. Γ. ἀπεῖρξα. SCHOL. : τὸ ἑξῆς· ἐγώ σφ ̓ ἀπείργω τῆς ἀνηκέστου χαρᾶς. On the words δυσφόρους βαλοῦσα

....

the Scholiast observes : καλῶς εἶπε γνώμας· οὐ γὰρ κλέψαι φησὶ τὴν ὄψιν ὥστε μὴ ὁρᾶν, ἀλλ ̓ ἐπ ̓ αὐτῇ γνώμην δύσφορον ἐπιβαλεῖν, ὡς οἴεσθαι ἰδεῖν τὰ μὴ ὄντα· τοῦτο δὲ οὐ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ἁμάρτημα, ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρότερον τῆς διανοίας. Lobeck remarks that by γνώμας we are here to understand those ludibria oculorum, by which the goddess turned Aias aside from the consummation of his plan to murder the Atridæ, quoting Celsus, IV. 8, "Quidam imaginibus falluntur, qualem insanientem Ajacem vel Orestem poetarum fabulæ ferunt." In Esch. Choeph. 1044, the word da is applied to such illusory appearances; and that these are to be distinguished from mental alienation is evident from Eur. Hel. 583, ñ yàg φρονῶ μὲν εὖ, τὸ δ ̓ ὄμμα μου νοσεῖ. Compare infra, v. 422, κεἰ μὴ τόδ ̓ ὄμμα καὶ φρένες διάστροφοι Γνώμης ἀπῆξαν τῆς ἐμῆς .... ; 667, ἔλυσεν αἰνὸν ἄχος ἀπ ̓ ὀμμάτων "Αρης. Hence there is no necessity for adopting Musgrave's proposal to substitute γλήμας, which is another form for λήμας, and denotes viscid secretions, that, gathering in the corner of the eye, derange vision. The adjective δυσφόρους is here παραφόρους, as the Scholiast correctly teaches. Cf. Luc. Fugit. 9, παράφορον βλέπειν. In v. 606, below, the Chorus calls the calamity which had befallen Aias δύσφορον ἄταν.

=

see

53 sqq. Kai gós Tε Tоíμvas. On the position of the particle Wunder to Ed. Kol. 33; Matthiä to Eur. Hek. 459; and cf. Œd. Tyr. 541; Philokt. 1294. copies we find a comma after asías, which Schäfer, with the approbation of Hermann, first erased, in order that the two genitives might be brought, although in different relations, under the government of govguara. Most grammarians explain this construction by stating that the substantive and one of the genitives form one compound notion, on which the other genitive grammatically depends (see Matth. Gr. Gr. 380, Obs. 1, and to Eur. Ion. 12; Bernhardy, Gr. Synt. p. 162); i. e. that ruumina λsías is for σύμμικτον-λείαν, and σύμμ. φρουρήματα βουκόλων for ἀγέλαι, ἃς φρουροῦσιν οἱ βουκόλοι. According to this explanation, λείας φρουρήματα signifies not merely the watching of the booty, i. e. the care taken of the captured cattle, but also the booty guarded (pecudes ex præda, curæ pastorum, traditæ); whilst the second genitive, Bouxóλwv, is associated with the verbal substantive, goughμara, in the same way as a genitive is often placed with passive participles, as, for example, at v. 765, below, QWròs næαTNpivn. Hence Wunder renders, prædam a bubulcis custoditam, or armenta a pastoribus custodita, but without citing a single analogous instance in support of his interpretation from any Greek writer. In prose, the words

σύμμικτά τε . ... φρουρήματα. In the common

« ÎnapoiContinuă »