91. Ω χαῖς ̓Αθάνα. SCHOL. : ἐπέγνω μὲν τὴν ̓Αθηνῶν· τὰ δ ̓ ἑξῆς τοῦ παραπαίοντος· οὕτω γὰρ ἂν προσκόψειεν ἡ ὑπόθεσις· οὐ παντελῶς δὲ ἀπώ. λετο αὐτοῦ τὸ ἡγεμονικὸν, ἀλλ' ἡ μανία γέγονε περὶ τὸ λογιστικόν· ἐμέμνητο μὲν γὰρ ὡς ἐχθροὺς ἀνελὼν, περὶ τὸ πρόσωπον δὲ ἐσφάλλετο, ὅτι ποίμνια ἀνεῖλε, καὶ διελογίζετο ἄνδρας ἀνηρηκέναι. The arrangement of the words will show that ὦ must be joined with χαῖρε, and not with ̓Αθάνα. Cf. Ed. R. 646; Eur. Med. 664; Or. 470. .... 95. Ἔβαψας ἔγχος πρὸς.. στρατῷ; ensem bene tinxisti in Argivorum exercitu? Cf. Plut. Moral. p. 914. D : χρησμόν τινα λέγουσιν ἁλιεῖς κομι σθῆναι προστάττοντα βαπτίζειν τὸν Διόνυσον πρὸς τὴν θάλατταν, for which we read, in the citation of the same oracle in the scholion to Hom. Π. 6. 136, ἐν πόντῳ Διόνυσον βαπτίζοιτε. On the pregnant force of πρός, here = προσέβαλες καὶ ἔβαψας ἔγχος ̓Αργ. στράτῳ, see Kühn. Gr. 645. d, ed. Jelf; Abresch, Anim. ad Esch. p. 528. In its strict signification, βάπτειν, to dip, is usually constructed with εἰς or iv. It has the same tropical sense as that in which it is here employed, in Æsch. Prom. 863, δίθηκτον ἐν σφαγαῖσι βάψασα ξίφος ; Eur. Phan. 1594, (φάσγανον) εἴσω σαρκὸς ἔβαψεν; Lycophr. 1121, εἰς σπλάγχν ̓ ἐχίδνης αὐτόχειρ βάψει ξίφος ; Dion. Hal. Antt. 4. 82, τὸν σίδηρον διὰ σπλάγχνων ; Ibid. 5. 15, τὴν αἰχμὴν εἰς τὰς πλευράς. Cf. Hor. Od. 3. 23. 12, Victima pontif cum secures Cervice (i. e. sanguine ex cervice ebulliente) tinget; Virg. En. 12. 357, dextræ mucronem extorquet, et alte Fulgentem tingit jugulo (i. e. sanguine tingit ensem jugulo infixum). On ἔγχος, gladium, compare vv. 274, 622, 862, with vv. 30, 786, 978, and consult the notes of Brunck to v. 622 below; Seidler to Eur. Elektr. 691; Hermann to Trach. 1026. 96. Κόμπος πάρεστι. Equivalent to ἔξεστι κομπάζειν, the boast is mine. κοὐκ ἀπαρνοῦμαι τὸ μή. By ellipsis for τὸ μὴ οὐχὶ βάψαι τὸ ξίφος ἐν τῷ στρατῷ. Cf. Ant. 443, καὶ φημὶ δρᾶσαι κοὐκ ἀπαρνοῦμαι τὸ μή; Plat. Gorg. 461. C, τίνα οἴει ἀπαρνήσεσθαι μὴ ὀυχὶ καὶ αὐτὸν ἐπίστασθαι, where see the admirable note of Woolsey, 2d ed. pp. 151, 152 ; Xen. Hell. 5. 2. 36, ὁ Ἰσμηνίας ἀπολογεῖτο μέν, οὐ μέντοι ἔπειθέ γε τὸ μὴ οὐ μεγαλοπράγμων τε καὶ κακοπράγμων εἶναι ; Dem. 19. 63, οὐδ ̓ ἄρνησίς ἐστιν αὐτοῖς τὸ μή ; Lucian. D. Μ. p. 94, νῦν μὲν, ὦ ̓Αλέξανδρε, οὐκ ἂν ἔξαρνος γένοιο, μὴ οὐκ ἐμὸς υἱὸς εἶναι, non negabis, quin filius meus sis. The infinitive with rò μn and rò un où is often placed where in Latin quin with the conjunctive would be used, i. e. after verbs or expressions which convey the notions of preventing, denying, omitting, dissuading, even when the infinitive, or the accusative with the infinitive, is not the regular or grammatical construction. See Kühn. Gr. 750. 2, ed. Jelf. Herm. ad Vig. p. 800. The poet had here an election between three different modes of expression : ἀρνοῦμαι or οὐκ ἀρνοῦμαι τὸ δρᾶται ; τὸ μὴ δρᾶσαι (where μή serves merely to strengthen the negation); τὸ μὴ οὐ δρᾶσαι, ut non, or quin. 97. xiga. The Cod. F. xigas, La. xiga (to be written xégas), a reading which is rendered objectionable by the termination of the preceding word. The phrase αἰχμάζειν χέρα, explained by the Scholiast σὺν αἰχμῇ xiga xiviv, but more accurately, perhaps, to arm the hand with the spear, is objected to by Musgrave, who proposes in its stead μažas xiga from v. 428, below. Lobeck justifies it by the Homeric aixμàs aixμág, but is opposed by Wunder, Cens. p. 35, who observes, that, as no accusative is ever found with aixμás except that of its cognate word, the expression is not Greek. Assuming that no example exactly similar can be found, this inference appears too strong after such expressions as ev xiga, v. 40 supra ; κώλα ἠκοντίζετο, Eur. Iph. Τ. 1381 ; χεῖρας ἐξηκόντισα, Ibid. 362. 98. "Nor'. Elmsley, comparing v. 39 above, would substitutes, as the particle especially employed in confirmatory rejoinder. The observation is both accurate and acute, but alteration is unnecessary. The plena locutio would be roFouror xμaoa wore...., as we learn from Eur. Phœn. 1606, οὐ τοσοῦτον ἀσύνετος πέφυκα, ὥστε ἐμηχανησάμην. A like omission of the demonstrative pronoun occurs in Eur. Or. 379, wor' oùx äv avròv γνωρίσαιμ ̓ ἂν εἰσιδών, cited by Lobeck. For the Cod. . '. Hence the remark of the Roman Scholiast : ἐὰν δασυνθῇ τὸ οι, ἔσται ἐπὶ τῶν ̓Ατρειδῶν, ἐὰν δὲ ψιλὸν, τὸ οἶδα, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐπίσταμαι. "Inanis de lectione dubitatio, quum orda debile sit et inutile, ode necessarium." DINDORF. 99. τὸ σόν, scil. ἔπος, thy language. Below, v. 1939, ἐπαινέσας τὸ σόν. Cf. Markland to Eur. Suppl. 257; Matth. Gr. 267. 1. The MSS. ἄνδρες, but the article is essential. 100. aquigriotar. Billerbeck follows Brunck in considering the dual to be here used for the plural, as often in Attic writers. Mitchell, from his reference to Matth. Gr. 203. 4, would seem to receive apagsiolwv as that form of the 3d pers. plur. imperat. which we often meet with in Ionic, Doric, and occasionally in some of the older Attic writers. Both are mistaken. The dual is here properly employed, since Aias refers to the Atride only. The language is sarcastic, and by räμa özλa we are to understand, not his own arms, but those of Achilles, which he represents not only as belonging of right to him, but, through the death of Agamemnon and Menelaos, as virtually in his own possession. 101. Εἶεν, τί γάρ.... Hermann first erased the colon after is, in order that its coherence with what follows might be more distinctly seen. See his note to Eur. Suppl. 795, and to Vig. p. 750. This punctuation best accords with the well-known definition of this word by the Grammarians, that it is a συγκατάθεσις μὲν τῶν εἰρημένων, συναφὴ δὲ πρὸς τὰ μέλλοντα. Moschopulus, Dict. Att., εἶεν· ποτὲ μὲν ἐπίῤῥημα ἀποθετικὸν καὶ προκαταστατικὸν τῶν τε εἰρημένων καὶ ῥηθησομένων· εἶεν, τί δή σοι παῖς ὁ τοῦ Λαερτίου. Grammaticus ap. Bekk. Lex. Seguer. p. 243. 1. 24, εἶεν· ἀντὶ τοῦ ταῦτα μὲν δὴ οὕτως· ἔστι γὰρ ἐπίῤῥημα ἀφοριστικόν· ἐπὶ γὰρ τοῖς ἤδη εἰρημένοις ἐπιλεγόμενον ἀφορίζει αὐτά. This word is very frequently used in Attic dialogue, either to express acquiescence in a statement already made, with an intimation that enough has been said respecting it (cf. Plat. Phedon. p. 260, εἶεν· σὺ γὰρ ἐπιστήμων· τί χρὴ ποιεῖν;), or to intimate the desirableness of passing on to the consideration of a new point or circumstance (cf. Demosth. Philipp. 1, p. 46, εἶεν· τί πρὸς τούτοις ἔτι;). In the first case, it may be rendered, enough of this ! in the second, but to continue, or well. Compare Ed. Kol. 476 ; Elektr. 534; Philokt. 1308 ; Ar. Nub. 176 ; Thesmoph. 407 ; Eur. Suppl. 1123. If it begins a verse in iambic trimeters, the last syllable is long; as in Æsch. Choeph. 646; Aristoph. Pac. 664. Some of the old Grammarians direct us to write (sv), in order that it may be distinguished from the Attic form of the 3d plur. optat. of εἶναι. .... 102. Ποῦ....τύχης. Cf. v. 367 below, οὐχ ὁρᾷς ἵν ̓ εἶ κακοῦ; Kühn, Gr. 527, ed. Jelf. With the expression τί γὰρ ἕστηκεν; Wunder aptly compares v. 928, τί γὰρ τέκνον | τὸ τοῦδε τοῦ μοι γῆς κυρεῖ τῆς Τρωάδος ; Philoht. 421; Trach. 336 ; Demosth. p. 242. 2, τί δ' ̓Αρίστρατος ἐν Σικυῶνι; καὶ τί Περίλαος ἐν Μεγάροις; οὐκ ἀπεῤῥιμένοι; 103. τοὐπίτριπτον κίναδος. SCHOL. : τὸ ἐξῶλες θηρίον. κίναδος γὰρ ἡ ἀλώπηξ· πάνυ δὲ κατατρέχει τοῦ Ὀδυσσέως, ὡς ἐχθίστου. "Others with greater accuracy render ἐπίτριπτον versutum, from a comparison of the words τρίμμα, περίτριμμα, ἐπίτριμμα, and of the highly apposite language of Andocides, de Myst. p. 49, ὦ συκοφάντα καὶ ἐπίτριπτον κίναδος. Cf. Osann de Ai. p. 100, sqq." WUNDER. A prior question is perhaps the true meaning of xivados, which occurs in Ar. Nub. 448; Avv. 429; Demosth. p. Cor. 281. 22 (162 ed. Diss.), where the Scholiast : κίναδος, τό, οὐδετέρως, θηρίον τι, οὗ τὸ δέρμα εἰς περικεφαλαίας κατασκευὴν ἐπεποίητο. Σικελιῶται δὲ τὸ κίναδος ἀλώπεκα ἐκάλουν. Hesychius explains by θηρίον, ὄφις, and Cicero, de Or. 8, by bellua. Hence it would seem to be identical in signification with κινώπετον, and to have been employed as a general ous. term for any wild animal, especially those that were dangerous or poisonCf. Democr. ap. Stob. 6. 44. 18, περὶ κιναδέων τε καὶ ἑρπετέων. However this may be, it is certain that xivados was used by the Attics as one of their rather extensive vocabulary of abusive epithets. See Eustathius, p. 481. 2; Etym. M. p. 514. 9. "Observe here the admirable skill and foresight with which the poet has constructed this whole scene. That his design might be apparent from the very outset, and the wretched fate of Aias excite the deepest commiseration in the minds of his audience, he brings together upon the stage the hero himself and his greatest foe, Odysseus. Now, since this could not be consistently accomplished unless through the non-recognition of Odysseus by Aias, the intervention of a divinity was necessary; and that this might not seem the result of mere casualty, instead of being connected most intimately with the circumstances and main action of the play, this office is with peculiar propriety assigned to Athene, as the patron goddess of Odysseus and the inflexible enemy of Aias. That such a part should be performed by her contributes greatly to the splendor of the drama's opening scenes. Care was nevertheless necessary not to portray Athene as too eagerly intent upon the destruction of Aias, in revenge for the injury she is said to have sustained at his hands (although Kalchas had declared him the object of her wrath, as the Messenger narrates, v. 715 below), for this would have been a revolting exhibition of cruelty and bloodthirstiness. Hence she is represented as saying that she has inflicted madness upon him in order to preserve the Atridæ, and is moreover described as lavishing her pity upon the afflicted hero, apparently with entire freedom from all vindictive feeling. The language, too, of the deluded Aias, when he makes his appearance upon the stage, is so framed as to impress us with the conviction, that we are not listening to the incoherent words of a raving maniac, but rather to those of a man overmastered by a simple error in opinion. Accordingly, the terms in which he expresses his sentiments and plans differ but slightly from his ordinary phraseology ; and it is only from such phrases as ἐπίτριπτον κίναdos that we can infer them to be less refined or choice than usual. In this way the dignity of his character is most skilfully preserved, and our pity for his misfortune raised to the highest, since we find his greatest enemy bewailing the fate of so illustrious a man, and a goddess teaching us in weighty words the necessity of abstaining from haughtiness and arrogance, and the duty of forbearing to triumph over the objects of our vengeance." HERMANN. 104. "Eywys, yes surely. The answer to inquiries is very frequently common. where. given in Attic dialogue by merely placing a pronoun with the omission of the verb which is used in the question. Compare Eur. Hippol. 90, οἶσθ' οὖν βροτοῖσιν ὃς καθέστηκεν νόμος ; · Οὐκ οἶδα, with Demosth. p. 14. 20, τί οὖν ; — σὺ γράφεις ταῦτ ̓ εἶναι στρατιωτικά; Μὰ Δί', οὐκ ἔγωγε. Should the answer be affirmative, the negative particle is of course omitted. The addition of the strengthening adverb ys, as well to pronouns as to other words which reply to a question (μάλιστά γε, ἥκιστά γε, πάνυ γε, is very See below, v. 1285; Trach. 1248; and very frequently elseτὸν σὸν ἐνστάτην. SCHOL. : ἤτοι κατὰ πάντα ἐνιστάμενόν σοι, ἢ ἰδιῶς ἐπὶ τῆς κρίσεως μόνον, οἷον τὸν ἀντίδικον. κυρίως δὲ ἐνστάτης, ὁ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἀντιστήκων τινὶ, ὡς εἰ λέγοι τις τὸν Οἰδίποδα τοῦ Λαΐου ἐνστάτην γεγενημένον. [Εἰς τὸ αὐτό.] ἐχθρὸν, ἀντίπαλον. Etym. M. p. 625. 24, wagà Σοφοκλεῖ ἐν Αἴαντι μαστιγοφόρῳ, τὸν σὸν ἐνστάτην λέγω ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀντιστάτην. Cf. Ælian. ap. Suid.: ὁ τῷ οἴκῳ γεγενημένος ἐνστάτης δαίμων ; Synes. Ep. 67, ὁ δῆμος παρῆν ἐνστάτης ; Scholiast to Oppian, Hal. 1. 152, τὴν γὰρ εν πρόθεσιν ἀντὶ τῆς αντι εὑρίσκομεν, ὡς παρὰ Σοφ. ἐν Αἴαντι· οἷον τὸν σὸν ἐνστάτην λέγω, ἢ ἀντιστάτην. Observe that Οδυσσέα is to be pronounced as a trisyllable. It is very doubtful whether the Attic poets preferred in such cases to avail themselves of synizesis or contraction. Eur. Alh. 25, ἱερη ; Ar. Ach. 1151, ξυγγραφή; Eur. Rhes. 710, Οδυσσῆ (but Phan. 927, σφάξαι Μενοικέα τόνδε); Lycophron. 1038, φονῆ, where the Scholiast remarks, κατὰ συναίρεσιν ἀττικήν. Cf. Lascaris, Gramm. L. III. E. 8, Τυδή, ̓Αχιλλῆ, φωνῆ.... ὁ Κέκκος φησὶ κατὰ συναίρεσιν ἀττικὴν γενέσθαι, quoted by Lobeck. Kühn. Gr. 96, Obs. 2, ed. Jelf; Dindorf ad Ar. Thesmoph. 26. 107. κερδάνης. The MS. Lips. a. κερδανεῖς, with ys suprascriptum. The conjunctive is required with giv on account of the negative in the preceding verse. See Kühn. Gr. 848. 4, ed. Jelf; and on the rhetorical change of the dependent sentence introduced by a conjunction into the form of direct interrogation, Id. 882. 1. So Xen. Mem. 1. 4. 14, ὅταν τί ποιήσωσι, νομιεῖς αὐτοὺς σοῦ φροντίζειν ; Eur. Med. 663, πρὶν ἂν τί δράσης ἢ τιν' ἐξίκῃ χθόνα. Cf. Fritzsch. in Quest. Luc. pp. 134 – 136. On the aorist εκέρδανα, see Kühn. 232, Obs. 1 ; Lobeck to Phryn. p. 25. 108. The particles πρὶν ἄν at the commencement of this verse, repeated from the words just uttered by Athene, and the absence of a finite verb in the conjunctive, show that the language of Aias is interrupted by the goddess. The books generally read ἑρκίου, which is defended by Schneider, from the analogy of similar adjectives with two forms, e. g. βάκχειος βάκχιος, ἵππειος ἵππιος, but is objected to by Elmsley, who observes as |