Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

βουκόλων φρουρήματα could certainly have no other sense than the watching of herdsmen, i. e. the care of shepherds in the custody of something. In this signification, the name of the object or objects guarded by them could be adjoined in the genitive, in the same way as τὴν τοῦ Λάχητος τῶν νεῶν żeńv, Thuk. 3. 115, where the one genitive expresses an active, and the other a passive, relation. If, then, the expression λείας φρ. βουκόλων had been employed by a prose-writer, it would have been understood only of the herdsmen's care of the booty, or, in other words, the care of the shepherds in guarding the captured herds. But when it is remembered, that, in our passage, the flocks themselves are meant, it seems incredible that any license allowed to the tragic poets could have justified Sophokles in describing these cattle, in one and the same sentence, as govgnμara ToμÉVNY and goug. Aias or oμvv. The force of this objection will be more distinctly apprehended if attention is paid to the following observations of Lobeck. "Pylades is called raidsvμa II.rbśws, Eur. Elektr. 886; flocks, ποιμένων βοσκήματα, Kykl. 189, οι φυλλάδος Παρνησίας παιδεύματα, Androm. 1100 and also, periphrastically, Bornńμara μóoxwv, Bacch. 677, just as boys are denominated vɛoy αídwv égśμμara, Plat. Legg. VII. 789, B. In the same way Thetis is styled Nngiws yivelλov, Andr. 1273, and her sisters Nngnidwv yśvstλα, Nonn. XLIII. 258. But what Greek writer, conjoining both genitives, the subjective and the periphrastic, has called Pylades, from his having been brought up by Pittheus, Πυλάδου παίδευμα Πιτθέως, or focks μόσχων βοσκήματα ποιμένων ? Who has styled the mother of Achilles Νερέως γένεθλον Νηρηίδος, or men created by God, Θεοῦ γεννήματα ἀνθρώπων, or the boar captured by Meleagros Μελεάγρου ἄγραν κάπρου ? Nor are such expressions as Κάστορος ἄγαλμα Targidos, Eur. Hel. 209, and others of the same kind, which will be dis cussed in a more convenient place, at all pertinent to the verse under consideration. This, then, has been my reason for not altering the customary punctuation." Render, therefore, and I turn him from his intended goal upon the flocks, and the still mingled prey, the herdsmen's charge, not yet distributed. The captured herds are called rúra, because the sheep and oxen, of which they consisted, had not yet been separated from each other. Ellendt, Lex. Soph. T. 1, p. 16, pronounces asías a partitive genitive, and arías adaσra, ex universa præda nondum electa et partita. 55. nug. SCHOL. vì To xsięwv izols. See Seidler to Eur. Iph. Taur. 214; Kühn. Gr. Gr. 583, 91, ed. Jelf; and compare v. 357, below, αἷμ ̓ ἔδευσα, i. e. αἷμα δεῦον ἔχει; Eur. Suppl. 1211, τιτρώσκειν φόνον, for φόνον ποιεῖν τῷ τιτρώσκειν ; Herakl. 1183, ἔκτανε φοίνον αἷμα, for κτείνων

=

ἐποίησε. The Scholiast also explains φόνος πολύκερως as = πολλῶν κερα σφόρων ζώων φόνος, a signification which this adjective will scarcely be admitted to possess. The expression, many-horned slaughter, thus applied to the numerous cattle slain by Aias, however distasteful to modern ears, is assuredly not more extravagant than such phrases as τετρασκελὴς κενταυροπληθὴς πόλεμος, Eur. Herc. F. 1272, or γηγενής μάχη, Ion. 987. On the accentuation of the adjective woλúnsgws, see Kühn. 46. 2, ed. Jelf, and compare φιλόγελως, ἄκερως, ὑπέρπλεως.

56. odors, est quando, interdum. The correlative is ὅτ ̓ ἄλλοτε in v. 58, below. See Herm. ad Vig. 790; Böckh. not. crit. ad Pind. p. 406; and compare ἅτε μέν . . . ., ὅτε δ ̓ αὖτε, Ap. Rh. 1. 1270; ὅτε μέν...., ὅτ ̓ αὖ.. Id. 3. 1300. So τοτὲ μέν...., ἄλλοτε or ἄλλοτε δέ. Soph. Elektr. 739, τότ ̓ ἄλλος, ἄλλοθ ̓ ἕτερος ; Xen. Men. 1. 2. 20, αὐτὰρ ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς τότε μὲν κακός, ἄλλοτε δ ̓ ἐσθλός. The tyro should observe that wherever the forms rórs, ore, are used twice for wors.... Tors, sometimes.... sometimes, they are accented τοτέ...., ὁτέ.... On the use of ἔστι with a relative adverb, the demonst. being omitted, see Kühn. Gr. Gr. 817, Obs. 4. Wunder writes λλoσs in place of λλors, from his own conjecture.

58. iμTITYWY. See Elmsley to Eur. Herakl. 77, and to Med. 53, p. 86. The manuscripts generally exhibit μTITY: the MSS. Flor. T. and Laur. a. iurirTwv, the latter with the gloss ye. iμsov. The true accentuation is frequently preserved in the ancient copies. In the preceding verse, Wunder thinks that the participle xwv, on which the Scholiast observes yg. Tsível magáv, might have been omitted without injury to the sense; and Lobeck has remarked that the participles xv, Tagár, λαβών, μολών, ιών are frequently added φράσεως ἕνεκα, in such a way as to allow the freest interchange, and even entire omission. A more accurate decision, perhaps, would be to regard them as employed in the same way as the Tragedians are accustomed to use the infinitive at the end of a verse, for the purpose of giving distinctness to the representation, or dramatic force and vigor to the language.

60. Ωτρυνον, εἰσέβαλλον εἰς ἕρκη κακά. The MS. Laur. a., together with the Scholiast, append the gloss ye. is igivõv xaxńv, and from this Hermann formerly supposed is giv nanny, in certamen turpissimum, Wunder sis ägxvv nanny, to be the genuine reading. Upon these tentamina at emendation no remark can be necessary, as they are now abandoned even by their authors. In objection to the reading of the Scholiast, Lobeck excellently observes: "If Aias or any of his ancestors had been guilty of sacrilegious or unhallowed murder, then, indeed, the soßλáßsa attendant

upon such a deed could properly and truly be referred to the dark impulse of the Furies, just as that mental blindness which followed the parricidal guilt of Edipus, and involved his family in the most miserable destruction, is called gsväv ¿çıvús in Antig. 603. But since Aias had committed no such deed, not even Quintus (vv. 360, 452) ascribes his madness to an Erinnys, but to Lyssa or Mania, to whose agency Eschylus and Euripi. des, besides Orpheus (Arg. 872) and Nonnus (XXXI. 73, XLIV. 259), attributed the alienation of the minds of Pentheus and Herakles. The Latin poets, ignorant of the old religion, represent, it is true, not only these heroes, but Bacchus, Tereus, and Medea, as subjected to the influence of the Furies, whose office, as is well known, was circumscribed, in more ancient times, within far narrower limits. But should any one maintain that it was customary with the Greeks to impute all plans and actions, which, whilst unconnected with personal crime, had yet a dismal end, to the Erinnyes as their authors (compare Odyss. 15. 239; Il. 19. 87), and hence that the appellation 'Egvós is conferred generally upon a person distinguished for criminality (cf. Agam. 729; Eur. Orest. 1386, ed. Pors. ; Id. Med. 1256; Soph. Elektr. 809; Virg. Æn. 2. 573, Trojæ et patriæ communis Erinnys), not in a strict and proper sense, but on account of the resemblance observable between the melancholy issues of all counsels and actions in such persons as, on the one hand, were truly haunted by the Furies, and in those, on the other, who reaped ruin and disaster as the fruit of their own violence and folly, — I, indeed, will readily grant that the unfaltering pursuit after vengeance upon their enemies, and the consequent recklessness of their lives, might have been termed igus. And this appellation is thus used by a poet in the Anth. Pal. IX. n. 470, who, as some consolation to Aias, says : Οὐ γὰρ Οδυσσεὺς ἤλιτεν εἰς σε θέλων, βριαρὴ δέ σ' ἔπεφνεν ̓Αθήνη καὶ ἠεροφοῖτις Ερινύς. But the subject of the present passage is that short-lived mental or ocular delusion, which led Aias to the slaughter of the cattle; and even if it be true that Athene from the very moment of its occurrence foresaw that this act would terminate in the destruction of its author, she could certainly have given no intimation of this to the spectators in the first place, that she might not. destroy the pleasurable alternation of hope and fear, which the poet has striven to maintain throughout the entire play, and, in the second, that she might not be portrayed as somewhat too cruel in the estimation even of Odysseus himself." Hermann, in his last edition, has written, from his own conjecture, ὤτρυνον εἰς Ερινύων ἕρκη κακά, against which, although it undoubtedly renders gxn more intelligible, the preceding observations.

....

appear of equal force. There is no doubt, however, that the asyndeton, occurring, as it does, in an address signally free from excitement and passion, is exceedingly harsh; nor can it be justified by such passages as Elektr. 719, ἔφριζον, εἰσέβαλλον ἱππικαὶ πνοαί, and still less by v. 115 below, xe xgi, peídou undev. The phraseology is drawn from the language of the hunting-field, and contains a reference to the practice of driving the wild animal after which the chase was instituted into a circumscribed inclosure, where it was subsequently entangled in nets and slain. See St. John's 'Manners and Customs of Ancient Greece," Vol. I. pp. 222 sqq. We find the same metaphor in Elektr. 1477, iv μérois àgnvστάτοις πέπτωκα; Ibid. 829, χρυσοδέτοις ἕρκεσι γυναικῶν of the necklace of Eriphyle ; Eur. Elektr. 165, ὀλόμενος δολίοις βρόχων ἕρκεσιν; Æsch. Agam. 1620, divra roûtov rãs díxns iv igneov. On the use of oxos in the sense of a net, a snare, see Hdt. 7. 85; Ar. Avv. 528; Pind. Nem. 3. 89; Pyth. 2. 147. HESYCHIUS: ἕρκεσι· δικτύοις. Σοφοκλῆς ̓Αθάμαντι δευ

τέρω.

66

61. Kärur' irudń. Krüger, ad Dion. Hist. p. 376, remarks, “tura irud non cacophonon visum est Græcis." The same collocation is found, not only in the poets, as Eur. Sisyph. I. 9, Ar. Vesp. 322, Rann. 923, Eccl. 273, but in prose-writers also, as Dem. c. Near. 1375. 13, Dio Cass. 38. 32, 40. 64, Thuk. 5. 65, 8. 67, all which passages, with many others, are cited in Lobeck's note. In place of wovou, the MSS. La., Lb., and one or two others, with Aldus and the old Edd., read póvov, to which, as Schäfer justly observes, rouds is opposed. On the perpetual interchange of these nouns in ancient manuscripts, see Jacobs, Anth. Gr. I. 2. p. 227; Porson to Eur. Or. 1559. There can be no question that Tovou, as a word of larger import, is both more poetical and better suited to the verb λωφάω (fr. λόφος), which signifies to liberate the necks of cattle from the yoke, and hence generally to relieve from labor. HESYCHIUS: λwφῆσαι· ἀπὸ τοῦ τραχήλου τὸ ἄχθος ἀποθέσθαι, παῦσαι, λῆξαι, ἀναπαῦσαι, ἡσυχάσαι. PHOTIUS: κυρίως δὲ εἴρηται λωφῆσαι τὸ τὸ βάρος ἀπὸ τοῦ τραχήλου ἀποθέσθαι· λόφος γὰρ ὁ τράχηλος. It is constructed with the genitive in Esch. Prom. 376, 655, Plat. Phædr. p. 251. C, Legg. II. p. 934. B (see Kühn. Gr. 514, ed. Jelf); with άró and the genitive in Thuk. 6, 12; and in all the passages in which it is found, with the single exception of Esch. Prom. 27, is used intransitively in the meaning above mentioned.

63. is dóμovs noμíÇεraι, he brings with him to his own dwelling. So Hdt. 6. 118, Θηβαῖοι ἐκομίσαντο (τὸ ἄγαλμα) ἐπὶ Δήλιον ; Ar. Vesp. 833, ἐγὼ

[ocr errors]

δραμὼν αὐτὸς κομιοῦμαι δρύφακτον ἔνδοθεν ; Eur. Ι. Τ. 774, κόμισαί μ ̓ ἐς "Αργος. In the preceding verse the words δεσμοῖσι συνδήσας are to be referred simply to τοὺς ζῶντας βοῶν, he brings to his own dwelling the still surviving oxen, when he had further bound them together with thongs. 65. Καὶ νῦν κατ' οἴκους. With the apparent redundancy of this expression after ἐς δόμους in v. 63, Lobeck aptly compares Trach. 689, κατ' οἶκον ἐν δόμοις. Hermann writes συνδέτους with the MSS. Aug. Β. C. Yet the same συμπλοκή occurs in several compounds with us, as δυσξύνε τος, Eur. Phœn. 1510; δυσξύνθετος, Plut. Mor. p. 975. F; and τῆς ξυμ μάχου, below, v. 90.

66. Δείξω δὲ καὶ σοί. SCHOL. : πιθανὴ ἡ παρείσοδος τοῦ Αἴαντος· οὕτω γὰρ μεῖζον γίνεται τὸ πάθος τῆς τραγῳδίας, τῶν θεατῶν νῦν μὲν παραφρο νοῦντα, ὀλίγῳ δ ̓ ὕστερον ἔμφρονα θεωμένων· καὶ ἵνα ἰδὼν ὁ Ὀδυσσεὺς ἐξείπη τοῖς ἄλλοις Ἕλλησιν· οὕτω δὲ καὶ ἡ εὔνοια τῆς ̓Αθηνᾶς ἐνδείκνυται εἰς Οδυσσέα.

....

68. Θαρσῶν δὲ μίμνε μηδὲ . . . . ἄνδρ'. The sense is, μηδὲ συμφορὰν ἡγοῦ τὸν ἄνδρα γενήσεσθαι. So Ar. Eccl. 512, μὴ ξυμφορὰ γενήσεται τὸ πρᾶγμα. Lobeck and Schäfer consider μηδὲ συμφορὰν δίχου as inserted διὰ μέσου between μίμνε and its accusative, τὸν ἄνδρα. On the other hand, Erfurdt and Hermann deny that μive can be so constructed. It is most probable, however, that the accusative belongs equally to both imperatives, as in Hom. Π. 13. 476, ὣς μένεν Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτὸς, οὐδ ̓ ὑπεχώρει, Αἰνείαν ἐπιόντα βοηθόον, where ὑποχωρεῖν has the same construction as in Thuk. 2. 88; Euthyd. p. 133; Luc. Tox. 36. See note to v. 451 below.

69. ἀποστρόφους. By prolepsis for ὥστε ἀποστρόφους εἶναι, the sense being ὄμματα Αἴαντος ἀποστρέψω καὶ ἀπείρξω ἀπὸ τοῦ εἰσιδεῖν τὴν πρόσοψιν. Cf. Herm. ad Vig. p. 897; Seidl. ad Eur. Elektr. 442; Reisig, Comm. Cr. ad Ed. Kol. 1227; Stallb. Plat. Prot. 327. C, Valckn. Diatrib. 205 ; Kühn. Gr. 440. 2, ed. Jelf. So Ed. Kol. 1200, τῶν σῶν ἀδέρκτων ἐμμάτων τητώμενος ; Virg. En. 1, age diversos.

The reading πρόσοψιν, for

which the simple ὄψιν is more common, is confirmed by Eur. Phan. 1353, εἰσορῶ πρόσοψιν ἀγγέλου.

Athene now addresses herself

71. Οὗτος. Kühn. Gr. 476, ed. Jelf. to Aias. The MSS. La. Lb. Harl. αἰχμαλώτιδας as a proparoxytone, and this adjective is frequently so written by the old copyists, as at Eur. Hek. 1096, and several other places. They were doubtless misled by the analogy of termination in such words as ἡπειρῶτις, στρατιῶτις, etc. The expression δεσμοῖς ἀπευθύνοντα does not occur elsewhere, and has been variously explained.

SCHOL.· ἀπευθύνοντα· τιμωρίαν ἀπαιτοῦντα· ἐπι

« ÎnapoiContinuă »