The Fragments of Sophocles, vol. 2/3

THE

FRAGMENTSOF

SOPHOCLES

IN THREE VOLUMES

VOLUME II

4

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESSC. F. CLAY, MANAGER

Hontum: FETTER LANE, E.C.

100 PRINCES STREET

$efo lorfe: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS

Bowbag, Calcutta an* fEafcras: MACMILLAN AND CO.,. LTD.

Toronto: J. M. DENT AND SONS, LTD.

2T<jfc2o: THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA

All rights

THE

FRAGMENTSOF

SOPHOCLES

EDITED

WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES FROM THE PAPERS OFSIR R. C. JEBB AND DR W. G. HEADLAM

BY

A. C. PEARSON, M.A.FORMERLY SCHOLAR OF CHRIST^ COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

VOLUME II

at the University Press

1917

pfl

JW3

CONTENTS OF VOLUME II

PAGES

FRAGMENTS OF NAMED PLAYS :

Introductions, text and notes . . i 330

5000KAEOY5

IQN

For the title see p. 23.

319

rrpos avSpos Icr6\ov TravrcL ytvvaicos

319 Orion flor. 7. 10 p. 51, 29 Zo-

0o/cXeous "lajvos.'

Trpes. . .0^pew.'Nauck favours F. W. Schmidt's pro-

posal to write e(r0\ov Trpos dvdpds, and

quotes in its support Choricius Gaz. p. 17e<7#Xou yap dvdp6s, ij Tpayydia (pvjcriv,

airavTa (ptpeiv /caXwy. Emphasis certainlyseems to require that order : cf. Ai. 1071/carrot KO.KOV Trpos dvdpos dvopa dtj^T^v

|fj.r]dev diKaiovv /ere. Eur. fr. 28. Schmidtadds a long list of examples. But the

rev'erse order is natural and correct in fr.

79, where see n. for -jrp6s c. gen. in this

sense. The sentiment is adapted fromthe current proverbial philosophy: cf.

Theogn. 657 fjirjdev dyav âXeTroto'iJ' d<ru>

0peVa...^7rei eVr' dvdpos iravra

dya6ov. Find. Pyth. 3. 82 ra t

(scil. Trrj/maTO.) \

ov dvvavrai vrjirioi

(fitpei-v, j

dXV dya6oi. Hence Herond.

3. 39 yvvaiKos eari Kprjyvi]$ <f>peiv trdvTa.

Eur. fr. 98 dXX' ev <ptpeiv XPV <rv/u.(f)opds

TOV evyevrj. Antiphan. fr. 281, II 125 K.ra TI^X^S <j)pfiv 5ei yvrjaiws TOV evyevTj.Menand. fr. 205, in 59 K. r6 y' dirb TTJS

T^XT;S (p^peiv del yvrjcrlus TOV cvyevfj.I transcribe the following from Nauck :

'Sophoclem imitatus videtur Menander:/cat Ta.ya.6a /cat TO, ica/ca Set irTaiovTa

(1. /j-foavTa) yevvaiws <j>tpeu> Com. 4 p. 264[fr. 672, III 195 K.]. dvopb* Ta irpoairi-irTovTa yevvalws (p^petv Com. 4. p. 293[fr. 771, in 215 K. Men. mon. 13].'Menandri vestigia legerunt multi : X/DTJ

yap TO. ffv/juriiTTOi'Ta yevvaius <ppeivNicetas Eugen. 9, 142. rd 5^ cvâL-vovTa dvdpi yevvaius deifopetv Vita Aesopi,

p. 46, 10. Ta Trpo(nrLirTOfTa...yevvaia}S

<ptpovT$ Dicaearchus q. d. Descr. Graeciae

30 in Muelleri Geogr. min. I. p. 105.

yfvvaiws (ptpovTes rd Trpo<nriirTOVTa Hip-parch. Stob. flor. 108, 8 1 p. 391 [iv

p. 982, i, Hense]. el8eir]v yevvaiws

<t>tpetv Ta irpoo-irliTTovTa Euseb. Stob.

flor. \, 85 p. 51 [in p. ^53, 3 Hense].STL Set yevvaius fapeiv rd Trpo<nriirTOVTaStob. flor. 108 inscr. ^Tretparo ptv <f>tpetv

yevvaius Charit. 5, 9, 8

p. 102, 19. dei yevvaiias rd crv(J.{3aivovTa

<t>tpiv schl. B //. fi 49. tptpfiv rd

(rvâivovTa yevvaius fXPW (fort, ere

XP'n) Sent, septem sap. (quas edidit

Woelfflin) v. 236.'

320

iv Aios apovcrOai

32O. 1 coni. M. Schmidt 2 /JLOVVOV A32O Stob.yfor. 103. 10 (= iv p. 904,

6 Hense) 2o0o/cX6)i>s "Iwvos.(ev...

There does not appear to be anynecessity for changing the text. Cer-

P. II.

tainly there is no probability in such wild

conjectures as Heimsoeth's eV Atos /carets

dpov<Ti /U.QVVOV dvdpcs 6XjStot, and Weeklein's fr Aids /cdTrots Sp^Treo-ât

dj'Spds 6Xj8(oi>, or in R. Ellis's dpourat

I04>OKAEOYZ

IJ.OVVQV evdaifjt-wv Xo/36s, which Campbellrashly adopts. Even if dpovadai. were

indefensible, Bergk's dpuevdai (i.e. ev At6s

KTjTroKTK yap ear1 > dpve<?6at \ IJ.OVVQV evai-

uvas o\povs: see his Kl. Schriften, n712) would be no improvement. Die-

terich (Nekyia, p. 21) suggested evdai-

/JLOVOS O\KOVS, i.e.l

only the blest mayplough

'

;but furrows are out of place

in a garden.Ai6s KTJirots probably refers to the

garden of the Hesperides, also known as

the garden of Hera (Callim. h. Art. 164,

Pherecyd. fr. 33 a [FHG I 79]), or the

garden of Oceanus (Ar. Nub. 271 'fi/cea-

vov Trarpos ev KTJTTOIS iepbv xP v 'i-GTare

Nvfj,<j>ais). This was by some authorities

placed in the extreme north (see on fr.

956), but most commonly in the west

beyond the stream of Oceanus. Herewere grown the golden apples whichGe presented to Hera on the occasion of

her marriage with Zeus : Pherecyd. I.e.

(Eratosth. catast. 3) ore tya.fj.eiTo rj "H/mirn-6 At6s, êpbvTtav avry T&V deCiv Suipa,

Tijv TTJV e\deiv <pepovo~av TO.

Idoucrav oe TTJV "Rpav 6av/md(raL, /cat eiirelv

Ka.Ta<j>vTeva'ai els rbv rCov BedvKTJTTOV, 8s T]V -jrapd rtf) "ArXajrt. Thespaced words serve to illustrate the

present passage, more particularly if wesuppose that the apples were treated bySophocles as symbolical of happiness.Cf. Eur. Hipp. 750 tV 6\/3i65wpos atfei

fadea | xûv evdai/j.oviav deols. ThusdpovicrOai is equivalent to (pvreveffdat or

(nreipeadai. : cf. Plat. P/iaedr. 2766 <nrov-

8rj depovs et's 'ASwi'tSos KTTJTTOVS ap&v (sc.

<nrepfj.a.Ta). In Find. Pyth. 9. 53 Aids

eôxov TTOTL KCLTTOV refers to the precinctof Ammon in Libya. 6Xf3ovs: the pluralis also found in Bacchyl. 3. 22 deov, debv

TIS dyXal'êTd), 6 yap apicrros oX/Bwv.

Similarly Eur. fr. 137 r&v yap TT\OVTUI>

6'5' dpiffTos | yevvalov Xe%os evpeiv. Themetre is ionic :

For the introduction of feet with anirrational long syllable see Aesch. Suppl.1032, 1040, Ar. Kan. 328, Thesm. ri7f.

321

/3ot>crraSa9 auXa? < ytpcrevti >

321. 1 x61/^ 1'05 H.: Keifj-evos cod. 2 xepa-eêt add. Dindorf

321 Hesych. IV p. 283OL et

lovi. Keipevos fj-ev

av\ds eiri x^PffOV % 5ia xeiP&v ^Xet ^ oi/rws

(aTrXws conj. Blaydes) eârevei.. Thename of the play was read Ly Musurusas "Icoj/t, and M. Schmidt suggestedSWiu; but Dindorf's view that Olvec

was intended by the corrector deserves

consideration (see Nauck on Eur. fr. 407).1 xeipiovos. In the winter season

the herds graze in the home meadows or

shelter in the byres, but in the summer

they are driven away to range over the

hills. H . defends his brilliant emendation

by quoting 0. T. 1138 (the shepherdbrings his flocks down from the moun-tains in September) x < M w v a !5' ijo-r] rdfj.d

T' ets ^TraiA' 670; |tfXavvov our6s r' es ra

Aai'ou ffrad/j.d. Dion Chrys. 7. 13 rbre

/j,ev 677 ^ dvdyicrjs avrov KaTefj.eivafj,ev,

ovirep eri/xo/Aev rds /SoOs exovres /cat rtfas

TreTronr)fJ.tvoi. nal av\rjv did v\wv ov

ovSe laxvpdv, (j.6(rxuv 'evexev, ws

ftp olfj.at Trpbs ai)Tb TTOV TO Oepos. TOV

fj.ev yap xei/icD/'os ev ro?s TreStots evefj.oiJ.ev,

vofj.rjv iKavrjv e"xovTes /cat iroXvv xiXoj' aTro-

Keifj.evoV TOV oe depovs dTrrfKavvoiJ-ev els rd

0/577.

2 xp<revei. The text of Hesychiusis corrupt or defective, but it seemscertain that x Pffvi must have beenused by Sophocles in the passage cited.

I agree therefore with Dindorf in thinkingthat it dropped out after atfAds, but notin assuming the loss of other words aswell, xe/xreuet*' is a rare word, but thesense in which Sophocles was most

likely to employ it is'to be on dry

land? : so Pûr. fr. 636, 3 TOV iraloa x^p-ffeveiv (j.6pos (Dobree's correction seems

certain). Plut. soil. an. 33 p. 982 B

The ace. av\ds would then resemble Phil.

144 Tbirov...ovTwa /carat, Eur. Suppl. 987Ti TTor' aideplav effTijKe ireTpav ; and otherinstances quoted by Kuehner-Gerth I

314. Since, however, Philostr. iun.

IQN KAMIKOI

imag. \^ rb /cijros ws x ePfff vffov

can be adduced in support of the meaning'to come to land,' we must not exclude

the possibility that av\ds was ace. ter-

mini. H. was inclined to regard tiri

xfytrov as a remnant of the Sophocleantext, and consequently to read irepixepffftiei

or e-rrixepfretei. (so Toup). But this wouldnot agree with the lemma of Hesychius,and I should prefer to suppose the wordsto be part of the explanation, qualifying

a verb otVet or j3aivet which has dis-

appeared. The gloss dia xflP&i> $X l ls

due to the fact that x^Pffo7 ^ >?s &m x Pff <-

irpo<ra.TrT<T6a.i. Thus Hesychius wouldhave given three renderings of the verb,' dwells on dry land, or manages, or

merely treads.' Welcker proposed fiov-

ordSos atiXijs ZTTI xe/xretfei, and Ellendtmade the same suggestion.

322

322 Hesych. I p. 220 d6rr<w rpa-n

Xcias. 2o0oK\77s (nui>.

The name of the play was conjecturedto be Sk&wi by Musurus, and "I OH/I bySchow, whom Nauck follows. M.Schmidt urges that the position of the

accent points to Qlv&v-g: but that title is

otherwise unknown, although it mighthave covered a reference to the 'A\#?aj>-

fyos. Dindorf agreed with Musurus.The word occurs again in OX. 19.

The gender of the gloss perhaps indicates

tnat the substantive to be supplied is

KAMIKOI

Herodotus (7. 169, 170) refers to the story of the violent

death of Minos at Camicus when he went to Sicily in his search

for Daedalus, but gives no details. For these we have to go to

other authorities.

After the death of his son Icarus, Daedalus continued his

flight and arrived safely at Camicus, where he was received bythe Sicanian king Cocalus, and soon became a welcome inmate

of his household. Meanwhile Minos pursued him relentlessly,

and in every place to which he came produced a spiral shell,

promising a large reward to anyone who should succeed in

threading it;

for he thought that in this way he would discover

Daedalus. When he showed the shell to Cocalus, in whose

palace Daedalus was concealed, the king undertook to performthe task and afterwards gave the shell to Daedalus. Daedalus

bored a hole in the shell, and fastening a thread to an ant waited

until the ant had passed from one end to the other. Minos,

finding his puzzle solved, felt sure that no one but Daedalus

possessed the necessary cunning, and at once demanded his

surrender. Cocalus promised to comply with his wishes, and

offered him the usual hospitalities of the age. Daedalus, how-

ever, had so endeared himself to the king's daughters by his

artistic skill that they determined to prevent the surrender

I 2

4 IO<t>OKAEOYI

of their favourite to his enemy, and contrived the death of Minos

by pouring boiling pitch over him when they attended him in

the bath. Such is the version of Zenob. 4. 92 (Paroem. I 112),

which is practically identical with Apollod. epit. I. 13 15, with

the exception that Apollodorus mentions another account sub-

stituting boiling water for the pitch. The latter alternative, as welearn from schol. Horn. B 145, was derived from Philostephanus

(FHG III 31) and Callimachus in the Atrm (fr. 5 Sch.), and

through Callimachus no doubt passed to Ovid (Ib. 290). Anadditional detail is mentioned by schol. Find. Nem. 4. 95 (59),

where Daedalus is said to have invented a contrivance for

carrying the water through a pipe in the roof so as to fall onMinos's head. The agency of the daughters, but without anydetailed explanation of their treachery, is recorded also byHygin. fab. 44, Conon 25, Pausan. 7. 4. 6 1

,and schol. Find.

Pyth. 6. 5. Diodorus, who as usual converts the myth into a

semblance of history, makes Daedalus the engineer of Cocalus,who constructs for him an impregnable fortress. Minos then

invades Sicily, but Cocalus entraps him by proposing a friendly

conference, and then suffocates him with the steam of the bath-

room (4. 78, 79). But long before his time Cocalus and the

invasion of Minos had become a part of the stock-in-trade of

the historians as an indispensable element in the narrative of the

Greek colonization of Sicily: see Philistus fr. I (FHG I 185),

Arist./0/. 2. 10. I27ib39, Strabo 273, 279, Diod. 12. 71, Heraclid.

Pont. 29 (FHG II 220).Fr. 324 leaves no doubt that the story of Sophocles was the

same as that which is preserved in Apollodorus. Wagner (Epit.Vat. p. 132) inferred that Apollodorus derived his material fromthe vTTodeais of Sophocles' play

2,and the conclusion would be

much more convincing than it is, if there were better reasons

than those given by Nauck for assigning fr. 325 to Sophocles.But whether boiling pitch or some other instrument was em-

ployed by the daughters in compassing the destruction of Minosmatters little

;in other respects, the main features of the plot

are securely fixed by the general agreement of the authorities.

The play was possibly known also by the alternative title

Minos, to which there is a solitary reference by Clement of

Alexandria (fr. 407). The usual title, wrongly altered to Ka/u/tto&

by Brunck, indicates that the chorus consisted of citizens of

Camicus, one of the few places in Sicily which are definitelyknown as Sicanian settlements. The site is usually located in

the neighbourhood of Agrigentum between that town and Minoa,1Inycus is mentioned in place of Camicus: hut see 10. 17. 4.

2 He is followed by Robert in Pauly-Wissowa iv 2001.

KAMIKOI 5

but, according to more recent researches, it was further to the

north, among the mountains which rise inland above the bathsof Selinus 1

.

The story was exploited by the Dorians of Crete as a justifi-cation for their colonizing movement, in the course of which

they occupied the south coast of Sicily, and it may thereforebe dated at least as early as the foundation of Gela in 689.

Recently, however, an attempt has been made by Bethe 2 to

show that the story of the tragic death of Minos at Camicuscontains a substratum of historical truth, representing the emi-

gration to Sicily of fragments of the Kefti people from Crete,which may be assumed to have taken place about 1200 B.C.

The legend is confirmed by the archaeological discoveries ofMinoan pottery in Sicily, and by the names Daidalion andMinoa given to pre-Hellenic settlements.

323

ev /cXetôt? 'A0rjvaia)v

323 Athen. 388 F TOV 5t 6v6fj.aTos

(SC. TrtpSli;) Q.VTWV frlOt <TVffTt\\OV<Tl TT]V

fj.0"r)i' <rv\\aj3rit'...iro\v de effri rb iKreivb-

/mevov jrapa rots'

ATTIKOCJ. So0o/c\^s Kct/zi-

KOIS'

6pvidos... Trcryots.' Phot. lex. p. 413,ii (= Suid. s.v.), n^pSt/cos hpbv irapa.

rrj d/cpOTroXei. EuTraAd//^ yap eytvovroTraces AaiSaXos /cat II?p5i, rjs vlbs KaXos

(KaXws Suid.), y <t>0ovri<ras 6 Aal5d\os

rrjs Txviis Zppufsfv avrbv Kara rrjs

Xews '

e0' $ 17 Htpdtt; eavTTjv'

'Adyvaioi 5^ avrty trifjirjaav.

Se ev Kayiit/cois (/cw/xt/cor? codd. : Personwished to make the same correction in

schol. Ant. 328) rbv virb AaiSdXou avaipe-Qvra HtpdiKa clvai TOVVO/U.CL.

Daedalus, according to one of the

stories told in connexion with him, wasan Athenian who was obliged to go into

exile, having been condemned for homi-cide by the council of the Areopagus.This was his reason for seeking the court

of Minos. The murder was committedthus: his sister's son Talos (Hellanicus

[FJffG i 56] ap. schol. Eur. Or. 1648,

al.), or Calos (Pausan. i. 11. 4. al.),

was his rival in ingenuity, and had in-

vented the saw by observation of a snake's

jawbone ;Daedalus was jealous, and

fearing to be put in the shade threw himover the cliffs of the Acropolis. Ac-

cording to Apollodorus (3. 214) and.

others, Perdix was the sister of Daedalus,who hanged herself in grief for her son's

death (Phot. Suid. I.e.}. Other authori-

ties (Ov. Met. 8. 255, Hygin. fab. 39,

244. 274, Serv. on Verg. Georg. i. 143,Aen. 6. 14, schol. Ov. Ib. 498) agreewith Sophocles in giving the name Perdix

to the nephew himself. It is not clear

whether IltpdiKos iepov and rd0os TdXw

(Lucian Pise. 42) were one and the same

spot, but the account of Pausanias showsthat the grave of Talos was, as we should

expect, close to the foot of the Acropolis.Robert in Pauly-Wissowa IV 1997 finds

it difficult to understand how Sophocleswas able to ignore the tradition attaching

. to the grave of Talos, or to re-christen

the site ; and similar doubts are expressed

by Gruppe in Bursian's/a^r^. cxxxvn619, criticizing Holland's attempt (Die

Sage von Daidalos, Leipzig 1902) to showthat Calos rather than Talos was the

name known to the version of the legend

adopted by Hellanicus. The evidence is

insufficient for the solution of such prob-lems ; but it is possible that contradictory

1 Freeman, Sicily, I 112.2 Rkein. Mits. LXV (1910) 200 232.

I000KAEOYI

stories were connected with the two

sanctuaries, and were already current in

Sophocles' time. We cannot even safelyassert that in Sophocles the invention of

the saw was suggested to Perdix by the

backbone of a fish, as Holland infers

from the accounts of Ovid and the others

whom he supposes to derive from Sopho-cles; for the incident formed no part of

the action of the play, and probably onlyreceived a brief mention in the course of

a narrative speech. Welcker (p. 433)

plausibly suggests that Minos recalled to

Daedalus the help he had received in his

earlier trouble.

1 f. Holland's proposal to read

,with KTO.V<J)V following the quotation

and qualified by v...irayois, appears to

me highly probable. t]X.6' thus means' came to Crete.' Meineke had sug-

gested r)v 5' e-rrwvvnos (r)v Blaydes). ForK\(ivols 'A.6r)vai<t)v Nauck conj. /cXei-

vo'tffi Ke/f/307ri5wj>, Mekler K\eivoiffi

d&v. Blaydes also proposedfor 7T^>5i/cos. For the absence of caesurasee Jebb on Ai. 855, but without the

context we cannot judge of the degree of

emphasis intended. opviBos. . .irepSiKos :

for the apposition of species to genus see

on Eur. Hel. 19.

324

dXta? cTTpa/BjjKov TTJcrSe, TCKVOV, t nva

ovvciifji0* evpelv, < 05 Sieiyoeiez' \ivov >

324. 2 ds dieipeiev \ivov supplevit Nauck

324 Athen. 86 D TWV

fj.vrj/j.ovevei Kal So0o/cX?7$ ev OVTUS

The allusion to the shell-fish called

<TTpdj3ri\os is made clear by the narrative

of Apollod. epit. i. 14 AaldaXov de

/cat /fa

Kd 7TO

yAXero d&creiv fuffObv rt 5id rov\ivov dtetpavri (dielpâvrt cod.,Zenob. : corr. Valckenaer), 5ta

vopifav evprffffiv AaldaXov. e\6iiov d ets

KA/J.IKOV rrjs ZticeXtas irapa Kw/caXor, Trap'

$ AatddXos (KPVTTTCTO, deiKwcri rbv Kox\ia.v.o 5e Xa/Stbi' irr}yyt\\TO dieipeiv (dielpêiv

cod., ditpj-eiv Zenob. : corr. Valckenaer)Kal AatSctXy 8ldu><nv 8 de e^di/'as /u.)jp[J,r)Kos

\ivov Kal rprjffas rbv KQ-)(\lav etao-e 5t' avrovdie\6eiv. \a(3uv 8e Mt^ws rb \Lvov Steip-

fji^vov (dieipyfj.frov cod., dieipyacrfjitvov

Zenob.: corr. Valckenaer) riadero b'vra

irap1

tKeivkp AaidaXov, Kal cvdtws cnryTei.Kc6/caXos 8 viroa-x^vos fKddffeiv e&vurevatirbv 8 de \ov(rd[Jivos VTTO r&v Kw/cdXov

QvyaTtpuv ?K\VTOS (see Thesaur. s.v.,

quoting Aretaeus) ly^vero' ws de evioi 0aat,fe<m KaraxvOels <(!5ari> juer7jXXa|ei'.

The whole of this is repeated by Zenob.

4. 92, with insignificant variations except

that the last sentence runs: 5 5 \ov<rd-

fj.evos (Xoi;6yUfos conj. Nauck) VTTO T&VKw/cdXon 6vya.rep<)}v avriped-rj $eov<?av iricr-

ffoiv eirixea/jiti>w avrip. Even before the

discovery of the epitome it had been in-

ferred by Robert (de Apollod. bib1. p. 49)that Zenobius copied his account from

Apollodorus, and Wagner (Rh. Mus.XLI 142) holds that in the last sentencethe original text of Apollodorus musthave been : 6 5e \ov<rd/j.evos virb T&V K.

%ov<ra.v iri(r<rav eTriê-cos 5^ evioi (fiaffiv, fcoTip

vdart iJLeri}\\aêv . See In-

troductory Note and on fr. 325. 8s

8iipiv XCvov \vas supplied by Nauckon the strength of the account given byZenobius, and it would be difficult tofind a better supplement. It is clear thatsome such words must have occurred in

the immediate context. For the assimi-lation of the optative dietpeiev to themood of dwai/meda see Goodwin 531,558. The device adopted by Daedalusrecalls the thread, also called \ivov in

Apollod. epit, i. 9 etc., which he gaveto Theseus to guide him on his returnfrom the labyrinth.

KAMIKOI

325

325 I admit this fragment for the

sake of convenience, in view of the cur-

rency which it has obtained from its

inclusion in Nauck's edition ; but the

case which he makes out in urging its

ascription to Sophocles is extremely weak.

Hesych. II p. 564 Kwv7)<rai (Kuveiaai cod.)

Tri<T<roKOTrrj(rai (Salmasius conj . 7rtcr<ro/cw-

vrj<rai, Nauck irlcra"r) Karaxpiffai) /cat

TrepieveyKelv. /cat iri.<r<roKuvr)TOi>

\yov(riv, OTOLV irL<ro"r) /caraxpt-rives virb irvpbs dirodd.v<i}(uv.

Kp-/iff<rcus /cat KpaTtVos (soAlberti for atax^Xos KO.I Kparivos /cp^crats

cod.). But we knoMj that the phraseused by Aeschylus in the Kprjcrvai was

jrHTaoKwrjTCi) irvpL (fr. 118, from Phot.lex. p. 430, 24); and that Cratinus (fr.

364, I il6K.) wrote Truro-o/ccoâs aprjv

[or dp-rjv, as Nauck and Headlam (C. fi.

X 438), or "Apr]s, as Bergk conjectured].Nauck argues that TT.

/j,. in Hesych. mustbe held to refer to Sophocles, on the

ground that it is an apt description of

the fate of Minos according to the account

given by Zenob. 4. 92 (quoted on fr. 324).

Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 132, uses this

fragment as if its authority were estab-

lished in support of his conclusion that

the passage in the epitome was derived

by Apollodorus from the Argument to

Sophocles' play : see Introductory Note.But this is to argue in a vicious circle:

and, even though it may be probable that

Sophocles adopted the version whichmade boiling pitch the instrument of

Minos's death, we are still very far

from being able to prove that he usedthe phrase -maaoKuv-riTov /mbpov in this

connexion or at all. It is worth re-

marking that Minos was a familiar figureon the Attic stage, and that he was held

up to scorn as a typical oppressor : see

Plut. Thes. 1 6 /ecu yap 6 MiVws del SterAei

/cct/cws O.KOVUV /cat \oi5opov/Aevos tv rots

'ATTI/C<KS dedrpois, to which Nauck addsLiban. Ill 64 oi>x bpare rbv Mti>w deiva

Trd<rx<>vTOi tiri TrjsffKrjvrjs; Now, althoughthese references may be partly satisfied

by the plays dealing with the adventuresof Theseus or the treachery of Scylla(Ov. Trist. 2. 393), it is improbable that

Sophocles was the only poet who foundoccasion to utilize the well-known story

concerning the ultimate fate of the odious

tyrant.

But, altogether apart from these con-

siderations, it is doubtful whether the

words Tri<r<TOKwvriToi> pdpov are suitable to

the circumstances of Minos's death. Our

only evidence affirms that after his bath,or while he was bathing, the daughtersof Cocalus poured boiling pitch over him.

TriffffOKwvrjTos /Jibpos, however, like iriaoT]-

pijs (Nauck for Tnao-ifipwv) nopos in the

oracle quoted by Heraclides Ponticus ap.Athen. 5243, is credibly explained as

referring to a mode of execution in

which the victim is tarred all over andthen set on fire. This kind of punish-

ment, which is not seldom mentioned, is

the same as the tunica molesta of Juv. 8.

235 (Mayor) : cf. Plat. Gorg. 475 C, Lucr.

3. 1017, Plant. Capt. 596.

326

TJ]V tLV K

326 5' add. H326 Etym. Flor. p. 143

aTro rov eidetv ytverai. /car'

Kai TO I (7-6 TP'LTOV conj. Nauck) 6/iot'ws.

So0o/cX^s Kaîi/cots (/cw//t/cots cod., Kayut-

Kiots Miller)l

rriv...KKpviJi^v'r}v^ dvri TOV

ydeev.It is more likely that 8* has accident-

ally been dropped than that rr\v is relative.

One might suspect that rr/v refers to

the <TTpdf3i>)\os of fr. 324. rj8iv is the

regular form before a vowel of the third

person sing, of the plup. of ol5a: see

Rutherford, N.P. p. 229 ff. IK 9eov does

not necessarily imply direct intervention

(' hidden by the god"), but is equivalentto divinitus, Oeddev, 'by divine decree.'

The phrase is fully illustrated by Head-lam, On editing Aesch. p. 106: add Eur.

Phoen. 1763 ras yap K dt&v dvdyKasdv-rjTbv OVTO. del fopeiv. Soph. fr. 314, 360.

0<t>OKAEOY!

327

ITMTTOI

327 n' oK(>>x 6ov(rit> M. Schmidt: /xe

Sûas anecd. Par. : corr. Dindorf

327 Hesych. II p. 5666xov<ri, fjiereupiôvcri. TTKTTOI /xe 2o0o-

Cramer, anecd. Paris. IV p. 52, 19OVGLV

[JUKOIS'

Etym. Gud. p. 360, 5

Holland wished to substitute iriffrat to

agree with irrtpvyes, but though wingsare undoubtedly meant, it is possiblethat some masculine noun served to

describe them.

oK&>Xvov<riv is a certain correction for

KOJXfvova-iv, a form which cannot be sup-

ported. For dKwxevu there is the positivestatement of Hesych. in p. 194, whoglosses it by #xeiy i <rvi>tx ll/ i and analogyis strongly in its favour. It is formedfrom 6K(axn, which is more common in

the compound dvoKuxti- The latter and

iv (j>opa

cod.| e/z0opcu5e07tas Hesych.,

its derivative verb di'oKa>xe(ye', which is

found in .7. 732 (avaKux^vei MSS), are

constantly corrupted to dva.Kux'n and

di'aKwx61'6"' (Cobet, N. L. p. 169). All

these forms go back ultimately to the

Ionic perfect of xw >i-e' OKWX*'- f r

Cobet has shown conclusively that <rwo-

Koixore should be read for crvvox&KOTe in

Horn. 6218 (Misc. Crit. p. 304). \t ...

St'fxas, a simple instance of ffxn^ - 'Iw^t-

/c6i/: Wilamowitz on Her. 162. Cf. Phil.

1301 /ues ^ Trpos, ev X ipa > anf see onEur. Hclid. 63, 172. In place of kv

<{>opa Ruhnken preferred afttpopel, whichhe justified by reference to Hesych. I

p. 1 66 afjuôpeiy (popr'up (i.e. according to

Ruhnken, d.fj.Qopei' T$ (popei<t>). But the

use of the preposition is characteristic of

Sophocles: Phil. 60 o'i cr' lv Xireus arel-

/j.o\ii>, Track. 886 tv

(sc. /u.r]<ra.TO da.va.rov).

KHAAAIQN SATYPIKOI

The story which appears to have been the central incident

of the play was related by Hesiod 1

(see EGF p. 89). Orion,whose mother was Euryale the daughter of Minos, had received

from his father Poseidon the power of walking on the waves.

He came to Chios where Oenopion, the son of Dionysus, puthis eyes out in revenge for a drunken insult offered to his daugh-ter Merope. The blinded outcast wandered to Lemnos, where

Hephaestus in pity gave him Cedalion, one of his servants, for a

guide. Taking Cedalion on his shoulders to direct his course,he proceeded towards the rising sun, and so soon as he met the

sun-god recovered his sight. Such is the story told by Eratosth.

catast. 32, schol. Nic. Ther. 15, Hygin. poet. astr. 2. 34, schol.

Arat. 322, together with further details about the fate of Orion,which do not concern the present play. Apollod. I. 25 varies

the account by stating that Orion came to the workshop of

Hephaestus and seized one of his slaves to act as guide. Servius

1 Kinkel and Rzach (fr. 1 7) include the extract in question among the fragmentsof the poem Astronomia: but see Wilamowitz GGN 1895, p. 232. The last-namedscholar holds that Cedalion was originally a dwarf (Sd/mAos: see on fr. 366).

KAMIKOI KHAAAIQN 9

on Verg. Aen. 10. 763 adds important details: (i) that Dionysusand the satyrs assisted Oenopion to blind Orion; (2) that Orionconsulted the oracle and was told that he would recover his

eyesight, if he walked with his eyes continually turned towardsthe east 1

. It will be observed that Vergil makes Orion so hugethat he can walk through the sea, and yet keep head andshoulders above the waves (cum pedes incedit medii per maxumaNerei

\ stagna viam scindens, uinero supereminet undas). Lucian

(de dorno 28) describes a picture in which the blind Orion was

carrying Cedalion on his shoulders : o S' avrw arjpalvei rrjv TT/OO?

TO (<M9 6Sov eVoôu/êi'O'?, KOI 6 "HXto? (f>avels larcu TTJV irripwviv,

KOI or/

H<afccrTO? ArjfjLvoOev eTna-Koirel TO epyov.From these facts it might be inferred that the scene of the

play was the workshop of Hephaestus at Lemnos, and that

the oracle mentioned by Servius was an element in the plot.But it is not easy to introduce the story of Oenopion's revengeor to discover the nature of the dramatic conflict. Hephaestus is

represented as taking the side of Orion, except possibly in Phere-

cydes, if he is the authority whom Apollodorus followed. On the

other hand, Dionysus and the satyrs are said to have assisted

Oenopion in a proceeding which recalls the Cyclops of Euripides.We can hardly attribute both these features to Sophocles ;

for

we should then be forced to recognize a conflict between He-

phaestus and Dionysus which is entirely inconsistent with the

cult-connexion of these deities: see Introductory Note to the

Daedalus (l p. 1 10), and cf. Stesich. fr. 72. In the Pandora weshall find satyrs working in the forge of Hephaestus ;

but there

is no adequate reason for supposing such a situation here. Thephallic character of Cedalion is implied in his name, which Wila-mowitz 2 no doubt rightly refers to Hesych. II p. 473 KtjSaXovalSoiov.

It should be added that according to schol. Horn. H 296 (cf.

Eustath. //. p. 987, n) Cedalion was a Naxian blacksmith, to

whom Hera apprenticed Hephaestus to learn his art. But it is

improbable that this statement gives the clue to Sophocles' plot,as Ahrens suggested, or that Hephaestus was handed over byCedalion to his servants the satyrs, in order to receive his

instruction from them 3.

1 Kuentzle in Roscher in 1038 thinks that the narrative of Servius was un-

doubtedly derived from Sophocles.2 Lc. p. 243.3 This however was the opinion of Wilamowitz (Lc. p. 237).

10 204>OKAEOY!

328

KOLlI 877 TL Kal TrapelKa rwvVTTO TOV Searos

328. 1 aprviJ.aT(f cod. : corr. L. Dindorf

328 Herodian ircpi /JLOV. Xe. p. 30,1 8 otidev ovSerepov ei's as \r)yov Kadapbvr$ f Trapa\r)yeL Kara TTJV CVIKTJV etidclav

ev xprjffei

'

EXXfyuv ,dXXd fjLOVov TO /c/âs...

Trpocr^d'rjKa de Kara TT]V -eviKrjv evOelav iv

X/)7?(rei 'EXXî'wi', eiret irapa 'E/caraty

(FHG I 30) eo"rt 'ra otaTairepiTTauevoi.'dXX' ou fori \tyeiv 5âs.

(ra.Tvpu

Hesch

6 re

cod.)al 5?7...5âTOS,' avrl TOV

I p. 464 Scares' Sôus.

i (/ctSaXi'y cod. ).

1 Kal Si]...Kak adduces a particularinstance in support of a general pro-

position : see Kuehner-Gerth n 125. It

is almost entirely a prose idiom. Here

perhaps something like'

I am altogetheramazed '

preceded, /cat rt /cat (Phil. 274),and moreover, is simpler and less em-

phatic. Blaydes would substitute Ko.1

TTOIJ TI /cat, after Phil. 308. irapeiKd

probably means 'I have neglected to put

in,' as Ellendt thinks. But in a suitable

context',!

have let fall' or 'handed over'

would be possible alternatives.

2 iiro c. gen. of the inner cause :

Hdt. I. 15 VTTO dtovs Kal KO.KOV

e. Sc'aros : Herodian quotesfrom Xenophan. fr. 37 D., which is

an exact parallel, as well as the anomalousHomeric /crcdreo-^t (a 218). The historyof these and similar forms is very intricate

and obscure, even if we assume the

existence of a stem Sear- : see Giles,

Manual, 354, 361 ; Brugmann, Comp.Gr. II p. 250 E. tr. There is no obvious

analogy which would give 5âros or trTrea-

Teffffi from stems in -e<r-. The scansionwas probably Scares (for *5etaros : cf.

Set'ous), but not certainly so, as 0/aâri in

Horn. h. Dem. 99 shows.

329

/xacrriytat,

329 Athen. 164 A /card yap TOV So0o-

Tpio<j>dyoi.'

Cf. Eustath. Od. p. 1404, 13/cat TO '

jttaaTryiat...dXXo7yHO(/>d'yot,' 8 Si)

K TUJJ/ TOV Zo0o/cXôi>s flvoiL \tyeTai.

KVTpcovs. This word occurs also in

Ar. Nub. 450, where the scholia givetwo explanations: (i) TOUT&TTI

Kal 0/)t/cr6s, Kadb Kal TOI)S

Tijirovs /caXou/uei', TOUS rots

'LTTTTOVS TvirTovTas. ThisBrunck's gl. Tr\r)TTuv. (2

TOLI Kal 6 /cX^TTTTjs 5td TO

rots /cXeTTTatj /cat K^VTpa Trpo(r<}>{pfff6ai.

It is obvious that the second explanation

TOIS

agrees with

\tye-

,dXXorpio<f)dyoi

satisfies the requirements of the present

passage, but not that the editors of

Aristophanes are right in entirely neg-

lecting the first. In fact there an active

meaning seems essential to the signifi-cance of the context.

dXXoTpio<j><ryoi was perhaps suggestedto Sophocles by a reminiscence of the

suitors of Penelope: Horn. 0160 tirel

dXXoTptov jSioTov vrjiroivbv dov<rii>.

The word does not seem to recur exceptin a late Byzantine gloss in Suidas s.v.

Epov/uidXia. The familiar TrapdcrtToj is

said to have been first used by Araros,the son of Aristophanes (Athen. 237 A).

KHAAAIQN ii

330

rot? [lev Xoyois rots crotcrii/ ov

ov [jiaXXov Y)

33O. 2 'j/ add. Bergk |\CVKTJ

Eustath., Xev/cr? araQ^t] ceteri

33O Schol. Plat. Charm. 1541*

Xeu/cr? trrdtf/u?;] irapoi/jiia eiri T&V aorj\a

TJ yap ev rots \CVKOI.S \L6ots

<TTd6/jLr

rj Xef/crj ovdev dtivarai deLKVvvat, did

TO /Jit) Trapa\\dTTLv Kaddirep i) Sid r^s

'Tots...0Td0,u77.' To the same effect

Phot. /<?.r. p. 217, ii, Suid. J.z/. XCUKT; (rrd-

fy7, Greg. Cypr. cod. Leid. 2. 67. Thelines are also quoted by Eustath. //.

p. 1033, 2, but without the name of the

poet. The grammatical tradition followed

Pausanias and Aelius Dionysius (fr. 247

Schw.).For the ruddled string of the carpenter

or stonemason which was used to marka straight line on the material see on fr.

474, 5. Hence the proverb 4v \cvipKUkp \evK7) <rrd6fj.il (Hesych. ill p. 29,Zenob. 4. 89, etc.) applied to anythingwhich is useless for a particular purpose.Socrates in Plat. Charm. I.e. describes

himself as drex^ws XCU/CTJ crrdd^ irpbs

rous KdXotfs : cf. Plut. de garrul. 22

p. 513 F &TTI fjikv ovv a.Te"xyG)S 17 \evKT)

(Trad/mr) TTjods TOUS Xo7ois 6 d56\effxos.The insertion of 'v before XCVKW was

\VKySuidae cod. A, Tucker: Xeu/cV

long since recommended by Bergk, butis not noticed by any editor except

Hartung. Ellendt thinks that the ad-

dition of the preposition is unnecessaryin poetry. But surely the form of the

proverb, even if we leave grammaticalconsiderations out of account, is stronglyin favour of the insertion. It is better,

however, to place the preposition before

Xldy both for metrical reasons and becauseit would somewhat more readily fall out

from that position: so Postgate, as sug-

gested to Tucker, who had independentlyproposed Bergk 's correction (C. R.xvm 245). It is strange that the dative

\evKrj ffTddfj,ri, which is found in oneMS of Suidas and possibly elsewhere,should not have approved itself to anyof the critics until it was conjecturallyrestored by Tucker (I.e.] : the words of

the person addressed and not the speakerare pronounced useless as a reK/j.^piov.

Bergk supposed that the speaker was the

blind Orion, who replied thus to the

verbal directions of Cedalion. OV...QV:

irregular but emphatic repetition. Cf.

Track. 1014 (Jebb's n.).

331

6V av yevrjTai ravra TTOLVT* ovov cr/aa.

331 6'<r' ai> yfrrjrai (orav yfryrai Dobree) scripsi: 6Vt av TL yLvrjrai vel

codd.|

raOra Dobree : ra codd., raXXa M. Schmidt

331 Phot. lex. p. 338, 1 6 and Suid.

s.v. ovov <md...2o0o/cX77S KrjdaXiuvi '6Vt

av TL yivTf)rai ra Trdvr' ovov ffKid.'

ovov o-Kid is explained as a proverbial

phrase for what is utterly worthless. It

occurs more often in the form irfpl ovov

o-Kids (/j.dxeffOai or the like) : so in Ar.

Vesp. 191, fr. 192 I 437 K. irepi TOV yapvfuv 6 ?r6XeAtos

|

vvv c<m; irepi 6vov <r:tas.

In Plat. Phaedr. 260 A, unless thosecritics are right who would bracket er/cias,

6vov <TKids appears to be merely a con-

temptuous paraphrase for 8vov ' a miser-able donkey.' Archippus, a poet of the

Old Comedy, wrote a play entitled ovov

ffKid or 6Vos (i 686 K.). The explanation

given by the authorities (scholl. Ar. Plat.,

Paroemiogr.) Phot., Suid.) is that a youngman travelling to Megara hired an ass to

carry his baggage, and when he desired

to rest during the midday heat of the sun

proposed to recline under the shadow of

the beast of burden. But the donkey-man objected, arguing that the donkeyhad only been hired for a specific purpose,and that in all other respects he remainedthe property of his owner. The hirer

replied that the animal was completely

12 !0<t>OKAEOY!

under his control for the day, and after

nearly coming to blows the disputants

agreed to submit their difference to the

decision of a law-court. We are also

informed (schol. Plat, mentions Aristides

[irepi irapoifu&v] as his source) that De-

mosthenes, finding the jury in an im-

portant case disinclined to listen to his

arguments, arrested their attention bytelling them this story, and when hehad sufficiently excited their curiosity,so that they desired to hear the sequel,he drove home his point that those

who are so eager about the conclusion

of a trifle ought to be all the more

ready to give their careful attention to

the defence on a capital charge. Theevidence appears conclusive that 6vov

aKid was proverbial in the fifth cen-

tury, and van Leeuwen's theory that its

currency as a proverb did not arise until

after the incident of Demosthenes' speechmust be rejected. For, as Didymus ap.

Harpocr. p. 151, i r pertinently remarked,the proverb is itself parodied by Demos-thenes in the de Pace (5. 25) irpbs irdvTas

irepi Trjs &> AeX$ots a/acts vvvi 7roXe//,?7<rcu.

The story about Demosthenes does not

require to be taken seriously ;but whether

the explanation of the proverb is as old

as the use of the proverb itself, and, if

not, what is the real origin of the

proverb, are questions to which noanswer can be given.

I have proposed 6V dv yfrrjTai (see cr.

n.), not thinking it likely that Sophocleswould have written on dv ytvijTai

(Blaydes) even in a satyric play (for

the divided anapaest see on fr. 388) :

Dobree's Srav, with a comma after raOra,does not seem to give a satisfactory sense.

Tucker thinks that the sense required is

'all his arguing to the contrary will bebut ovov <rKid,' and reads 6VMekler prefers orav eTriyiyvrjTal ri,

OVOV (TKld.

332

dVTOKTLTOVS

332 avTOKrirov? Salmasius: auro/criVrouj cod.

332 Hesych. I p. 32756/J.ovs' ov KaTe<TKeva<r/J.evovs, d\\' efc rau-

To/j-drov yeyevij/uL^vovs' rj roi)s oiVov/xeVofS.

2o0oKX7}s Kr]da\i(i}vi. For the last wordsof the gloss, which are meaningless,Heinsius restored 17 rous OVK (/J.TI Kuster)

perhaps rather 17 OVK

O,VTOKT{TOVS: cf. Aesch. Prom. 316

irTprjpe(f>7} O.VTOKTI.T' &vrpa, and for this

sense of aur6$ in composition see n. onfr. 130. Verg. Aen. i. 167 vivoquesedilia saxo. Nauck thinks 56/xous avro-

KTLTOVS was the order, but, if the wordswere next to each other, CLVTOKT'ITOVS

\

56,u.ovs is equally possible, or they mayhave been the beginning of a line.

333

repOpia

333 Etym. M. p. 753, 5 repdpeia...6 d*ftpos 6 MtXTjcrtos Xeya 6'ri [etâi] irepl

[a] &xpr)(TTa rtês <rirov8dovaiv, &VTI TOVKfvoa-rrovdia' irapd rb repdpeveuf Kai rep-

6pev6fj.evos êpeKpanj^ 'AypioiS- repdpia,IJ.tvroi. irvor) 8ia TOV I

i] 6iri<r6ia. Gais-ford's notes are as follows :

'elvai irepl a]

e

IT D' (cod. Dorvill.). 'irapd rb...$epe-er

KpdTT)s] IT Ke$ ewpf D. TepQpia, TTVOT^]

dypols repdpia irvorf oid TOV I' 17 oiri-

V (cod. Leidensis). 'dypois Tepdpi

T] dtd TOV Iij oiricrdia

K-fj Kevbv ewpa^ M' (cod. Marcianus).' Locus videtur sumptus ex SophoclisCedalione, sed verba non extrico.' Thename of Pherecrates' play was "Aypioi

(fr. 18, i 150 K.), and his words wererestored as Tepdpevo/uevos Kev e&parat. by

KHAAAIQN KAYTAIMHZTPA

Dindorf, and as Tep6pfv6fj.evos xevbv topcjtfet

by Nauek.Dindorf was the first to recognize that

Tepdpla irvor) was the quotation from

Sophocles, and that ntvroi belongs to the

grammarian distinguishing repOpia from

repOpeia. On a ship certain ropes werecalled Tfpdpioi: see Erotian gloss, Hippocr.

p. 127, I KCU oi Trepi vavv ^Treipoi rep-

dpiovs KaXus ovofj.dfrovfft TOVS iri

TOV iffTov. Schol. Ar. Eq. 440 oi

TO i /cdXoi, ovs eK<j>6povs Ka\ov<nv oi

vavTat, ovs orav ev8idi2 TO irvev/j-a, TrpuTovsK Trpypas %aXuJ<rt. This is not very

explicit, but we may infer that they were

ropes employed for reefing the sails, andthat they were fastened to the

(Ap. Rhod. i. 565). The meaningcomes out clearly in Ar. Eq. 440, whereTOVS Tepdpiovs trapiei, \

TO Tn/eu//,' \O.TTOV

yiyveTai is contrasted with ib. 436 TOU

Trodbs TrapieL' \

us ouros tfdrj KaiKlas 77 cru/co-

QavTias irvfl. One would infer from this

that TepOpia irvo'fi was not so much a fol-

lowing wind (o-rriffBia) as a stiff gale,

requiring the use of the end-ropes or

reefing-points. It should be added that

Ttpdpov'

end, point, top,' from which

Tep6p-io-s comes, is etymologically distinct

from Tepdpela 'empty chatter,' whichcontains a reduplicated root: see Brug-mann, Comp. Gr. II p. 95, ill p. 3 E. tr.

Mekler thinks that Tepdpta TTVO-TJ maysignify iropd-/} in a satyr-play.

KAYTAIMHITPA

For this title see I p. 219.

334

TOV 8' avralov

OV KOiOopaT

334. 1 avTov codd. 2 TrepidiveuovT ov KaOopaTt scripsi (TrepidtvfvovT'at

Burges) : TrepidivtovTa ovx opare (ovx opare B, ov x' opare C) codd.

334 Erotian. gloss. Hippocr. p. 45,10 O.VTOUOV Oebv (avTtovdeov ed.)' TOV j8\d-

firjs virovoov/mevov O.LTLOV faevOcu avdpuirov

(avdpuirois Welcker, but perhaps theword should be rejected altogether).dvTotov 5' icd\ovv oi ira\aioi TOV a&fppova

(so all the MSS, but the word is of course

corrupt. Welcker proposed 6\ob<ppova,Lobeck d(ri<f)pova or j3\a\{/i<t>pova, and

Wagner Ko.Kb(ppova\ but none of these

words is likely to have been used as an

explanation by Erotian. Burges sug-

gested ov <ro>0po'a, which gives the

wrong sense. I should restore (rutppo-

v<iovT>a, 'the punisher,' which seemsto satisfy the requirements of the passage),cos Kai 2o0o/cA?)s tv KXvTcu/J.i'rja-Tpq. \tyiuv'TOV 5e dvTaiov irepidivtovTa. ovx opare;'/cat*

'

5et/ia TrpoairaiovTa dvTaias êou.'

This very difficult and puzzling passageof Erotian has not been satisfactorilyemended. So far as Sophocles is con-

cerned, the most important question is

whether we are to recognize (i) two

separate fragments, according to the opin-ion of Burges, who gave them as 'TOV 5'

dvTaiov TrepidivevovT'

and '

/ecu dei/ma irpoa-TTVÔVT' dTr' dvTaias Oeov,' of Bergk,who conjectured 'TOV 5' dvTaiov Trepidrj-

(IT.= ' callidum esse') d' opctre' /cat

irpoffirvtovTO. TdvTaias Oeov' assign-

ing the second line to the Polyidus (fr.

400), and of Klein, the editor of Erotian,or .(2) a single quotation, with Kai

linking two co-ordinate clauses. On the

latter assumption Lobeck (Path. Prol.

p. 162) proposed TTJV dyxôv 5e irvp 8ovov-

opejs

dvTaias 0eov; and Campbell, with still

greater violence, TOV SLVTLOV TTVÔVTCL 5''

-y

, interpreting TOV ...6e6v as the

storm-wind sent by Artemis which de-

layed the Greeks at Aulis. Of these

alternatives I prefer the former for tworeasons: (i) the repetition of the adj.ctvrcuos after so short an interval in acontinuous passage is difficult to explain,

!04>OKAEOYI

unless the clauses are so balanced in

order to contrast the goddess, whoevershe may be, with the instrument whichshe employs. This is the solution of

Welcker, who thinks 'Antaeus' was a

demon in the service of Hecate (dvraias

flfov] ; but there is no evidence of the

existence of such a supernatural figure,

although Welcker's view is adopted byWernicke in Pauly-Wissowa I 2343.That dvTaiov is corrupt (see above) is in

the highest degree improbable. (2) Astill more serious obstacle to be over-

come by those who support the continuityof the quotation is that of the metre.This is either ignored, as by Welcker,-or thrust aside by the crude and im-

probable remedies already mentioned.

Nauck, who prints the reading of the

MSS practically unaltered, evidently re-

garded the passage as desperate. Forthe reasons given I have divided it into

two fragments, of which the former maybe rendered: 'ye do not perceive the

enemy (avenger) hovering near.' But it

is idle to guess at the nature of the

reference, when we cannot even tell whatwas the plot of the play from which the

words are quoted. The story of Cly-taemnestra would permit an allusion to

Aegisthus, or at a later time to Orestes.

rbv 8' dvraiov: this word acquired the

meaning'

hostile, harmful '

in the same

way as erai/nos: see on fr. 747, and cf.

frs. 72, 400. Etym. M. p. in, 49 Kal

dvrcuos, 6 /3Xci/3?7s aifrios. But dvraios is

particularly applied to the hostility of the

gods (so in Aesch. Pers. 606 f. e/xot yap

ravraia 0aiVercu 6eu>v, which is correctly

-explained by the schol.), and as an

epithet of Hecate has chthonian associa-

tions. Etym. M. p. in, 50 dvraia Kal

i] 'E/CCITT; ewiQeTiK&s. Hesych. I p. 209dvTaia...<Ti/ifj.aii>ei. 5 Kal daifj.ova. Kal ryv

'EfcdTTjj' 5e dvraiav \yovcrt.v airb TOU ^TTI-

irtfjureiv avrd. There avrd is corrupt,for Lobeck's view that it refers to 6cu-

fjiovia (sc. djTcua), which .he substitutes

for daifj.ova is unsatisfactory. Whyshould we not read avra, which is ex-

plained by Hesych. shortly before and

clearly accounts for the appellative ? In

any case eTrnr{fj.ireu> shows that Hecatewas so called as sending apparitions :

see on Eur. Hel. 570. The epithet wasalso attached to Rhea, and there aretwo traditional explanations : schol.

Apoll. Rhod. i. 1141 T) 'Pâ oi/rw X^yercu,di6n tvavria rots T\XI<TIJ> eytvero, ws 5t

Tives, avrairj i] evXirdvevros Kal evdvrrjTos.The second interpretation coincides withthe gloss i/c&nos given by Hesych. and

Etym. M. (cf. Aesch. fr. 2 23), but it is not

unlikely, as Gruppe (Gr. Myth. p. 15392)has already suggested, that evdisrrjTos andiKtcrios are really instances of euphemism :

see Etym. M. p. 388, 36 evdvTrjTos TJ

'Pâ' dvraLav yap avr^v tKdXovv dia rb

dvffdvTrjTov elvat Kal TOIS dTravTu&iv ev ro?5

6pe<rt Sva-xepa-ivew. Dieterich (Orphica,p. 14) points out that evdvrriTos frequentlyoccurs in prayers to 5alfj.ove$. In the caseof Antaeus, 'the adversary' or 'the ogre,'the generic term has been individualized.

irepiSivevovra, as translated above in

accordance with the Homeric use of

diveta, yields an appropriate sense; but

every conclusion is necessarily uncertain.ov KaOopdrc is suggested to suit the

anapaestic metre.

335

Sewa TrpocnraiovT d<77>' 6 .ov

335 5ewa H. : dei/j-a codd.| irpoffiraiovT

J

air' H.: TrpoairaiovTa cod. Cantabr.,ceteri codd., Trpovirvtovra vulgo |

dvrtas codd.

well authenticated, see the comm. onAesch. Prom. 910. Nauck formerly con-

jectured TrpoffTpoiraiov, and other views

have already been mentioned in the n.

on fr. 334. It is possible, as Bergkthought, that these words really belongto the Polyidus (fr. 400) ; but, so far as

the evidence of Erotian goes, they appearto be attributed to the Clytaemnestra, andwe have nothing to displace it.

335 Erotian.7<w.y. Hippocr. p. 46, i,

quoted on fr. 334. I adopt Headlam'srestoration (C.R. xm 3), though without

much confidence. It is somewhat closer

to the MSS than Wagner's deifia -n-pdcnraiov

r65' (Hesych. Ill p. 390 Trpdo-rraiov Trp6<r-

tparov, vtov), but I am reluctant to give

up 5et/Aa, which is exactly the right wordif dvraias 0eov means Hecate, as has beenshown to be probable: cf. El. 410, with

Jebb's note. For irpoffiraiw, which is not

KAYTAIMHITPA KOAXIAEX 15

KOAXIAEI

Sophocles was the only one of the three great tragedians to

put upon the stage the adventures of Jason in Colchis whichculminated in his capture of the Golden Fleece, after he hadsecured the powerful assistance of Medea. It is unnecessaryto recapitulate the familiar story, either as narrated with all its

details by Apollonius Rhodius in the third and the early partof the fourth book of the Argonautica, or even as summarized byApollod. i. 127 132. We must rather endeavour to ascertain

which parts of the current legend may reasonably be attributed

to Sophocles.The title reveals the scene of the action, and the fact that

the chorus was composed of women probably attendants of

Medea indicates the importance of her share in the plot. It

is highly probable that the hostility of Aeetes towards Jasonand his companions was attributed not merely to the savageand inhospitable disposition of the king, but partly at least

to an oracle, which, according to Herodorus {FHG II 39), ourearliest authority, declared that he would perish by the handsof his own kindred. In Apoll. Rhod. 3. 597 fif., where the fears ofAeetes are directed towards the sons of Phrixus and his daughterChalciope, the oracle is thus quoted :

ft) 9 7TOT6 ftt'lfyv

\evya\erjv ov Trarpos eireicKvev 'HeXtojo,

%pettw fiiv TTVKWOV re SoXoz/ /3oi/Xa9 re

(7(f)(oir6pr)(i arrjv re 7ro\VTp07roi>

On the other hand in Hyg'm.fab. 22 and Diod. 4. 47 the oracle

is made to warn Aeetes that the security of his kingdom de-

pended on his continued possession of the Golden Fleece. Thedouble task of ploughing with the fire-breathing bulls and sowingthe dragon's teeth was imposed by Aeetes (frs. 336, 341), as in

the ordinary version. The meeting between Jason and Medea,in which he asked for her help in the impending trial, took placebefore the spectators, and the instructions necessary to insure

his success were given to Jason in the course of the dialoguewhich ensued : see schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 1040 Socô/eX?}? 8e ev Tat?

KoX^tcriv elo-dyei rrjv M^Setaz; vTroTtOefjievrjv T&> 'Idcrovt, Trepl rov

a6\ov St' dfjLOifiaicov. There is nothing to show how the meetingwas brought about, whether through the intervention of Chal-

ciope and her sons as in Apollonius, or by some other means.

But it is probable that Medea's passion for Jason was kindled,if not by the direct instigation of Aphrodite, at least by somedivine agency: cf. Find. Pyth. 4. 213. Fr. 345 probably comes

16 ZOÔKAEOYI

from a passage descriptive of the power of Love;

but it is

curious that Ganymede was represented by Apollonius (3. 115)as playing with Eros, when the latter was summoned by his

mother in order that he might attract Medea to Jason. On the

same occasion Jason seems to have taken an oath, promising to

Medea that, if he succeeded in the trial, he would marry her andtake her back with him to Greece (fr. 339); but it is worthyof notice that in Apollonius (4. 88) the oath is introduced justbefore the final adventure in which the dragon guarding the

fleece was slain. It is pointed out in the notes to fr. 340 that

the allusion to Prometheus was probably made in the course of

a description of the Promethean ointment, which was given to

Jason to make him invulnerable. Welcker finds a reference

to the irapeicpavis on Prometheus in an obscure scholium onPind. Pyth. 5. 35 Kal Socô/cX?}? e ev T&> Ylpo/jurjêl rov

0\a)V \eyeiv TTJS fypovrjcrews avreêcrdai Kal/JLTJ rr}? /

thinking that Medea used the story of Prometheus as a moralto warn Jason to be forearmed against all contingencies. Thisis a far-fetched conjecture, and it is easier to suppose that the

name of Sophocles was introduced in error, and that the writer

of the note simply intended to quote Aesch. Prom. 86 1. The

scholia to Apollonius make it plain that at several points in this

part of his narrative the Alexandrian poet could be illustrated

from the play of Sophocles ;and the dramatic character of the

whole description of Medea's relations with Jason suggests that

Apollonius was influenced by the Colchides to an extent whichit is now impossible to trace.

The success of Jason in his trials was announced to Aeetes

by a messenger (fr. 341), but the subsequent development of theaction is unknown. It is obvious that there must have been afurther interview with Medea in preparation for the final seizure

of the fleece, unless indeed Sophocles adopted a version divergingwidely from Apollonius, such as that of the Naupactia?. Thatsuch was the case is rendered not unlikely by the fact that the two

poets certainly did not agree in their treatment of the relations

between Medea and her brother or half-brother Apsyrtus. Forthe various accounts of their parentage see on fr. 546, where it is

shown that Sophocles, both in the KoX^tSe? and in the S/eu&u,made Apsyrtus much younger than Medea. Fr. 343 (n.) provesthat in the present play Apsyrtus, a mere child, was killed in

1 So first Boeckh, Tr. Gr. princ. p. 121 : Schroeder preferred to readk ev < K6\xoty KCU AiVxôs tv > ry /ere.

See the considerable fragments, mostly quoted through Herodorus (FHG II 40),and collected in EGF p. 200 f. For the literary history of the Argonautic saga see

Jessen in Pauly-Wissowa n 745, 746.

KOAXIAEZ 17

the palace of Aeetes. The motive for the crime is not explained,but the scholiast on Apollonius, who gives a fuller account ofthe story as told by Pherecydes (FHG I 89), states that Medeatook the child from his bed at Jason's bidding, and brought himto the Argo ;

and that, when the pursuit began, he was killed

and his body cut in pieces and thrown into the river, clearlywith the object of delaying the pursuit. The natural inferenceis that a similar motive prompted the murder in the house

; for,

if the reason had been different, it would probably have beenstated by our authorities 1

.

336

yapKTTVOV(TL

Se

OL7TO

336. 2 ir\ev/j.6vui>

336 Schol. B Find. Pyth. 4. 3TOI)S Trvpiirvovs ratfpofs 'Ayrfyiaxos tv

(fr. 9) 'H0cu<7TOTeikroi;s X^yet. KO.I 2o-

0<ofcX?7S> ...iJgs de x<*X/coOs jSoCs aSep/j^d-

TOVS (^rjffiv'

'xaXKOffneXeis...^..,' Drach-mann notes that after the letters <ro0 there

is a gap of about 16 letters, and that in

the quotation after yap and w<r there are

spaces of a similar length. The traces

of letters which he prints as uos are

doubtful, with the exception of the accent

and . He adds that it is by no meanscertain that the fragment belongs to

Sophocles. The blurred letters suggestev rep 3>pij;({}, but it is not easy to reconcile

this with the other requirements of the

tradition.

1 ff. Bergk filled up the lacunae byproposing </ccu TO trav dd^pfiaroi irvpbs

but the newer collation of Drachmannindicates that a participle (. crAas

| -rrvpudtv} preceded txirvtova-i, and that

uxnrcp rather than ws followed ÛU/CTTÔ.

The difficulty of restoration is increased

by the obscurity of the introductory

(DO"

Bergk) Nauck : irvevftaTuv cod.

words, and I have not been able to find

anything in the authorities to justify ddep-

jj-drovs, if by that word in conjunctionwith xaX/cous it is meant that the bulls

had a covering of brass in place of ahide. Elsewhere they are constantlydescribed as brazen-footed and fire-

breathing with brazen nostrils: Phe-

recyd. fr. 71, Eur. Med. 478, Apoll.Rhod. 3. 410, Apollod. i. 128, Hygin.fab. 22, Ov. Met. 7. 105. Mekler (inBursians Jahresb. CXLVII 122) con-

jectured that in col. 19 of Here. pap.1012, discussed by Cronert in Kolotes u.

Menedemos, p. i2off., the words /uuKTTjpe

...airoffTafav 6\edplav x ^" may belonghere, and that the word after /U,I>KT^/> waset's (i.e. against the opponent).

TrXevjjLovwv (see cr. n.) is now generally

recognized as the only correct Attic form :

see Jebb on Track. 566. Cf. Moeris

p. 207, I TrXetf/u.faw 'Am/col, irvev/m.tiii'

"EXXTjj'es. For the confusion of irvev^d-TUP with 7T\evfji.6v(i}v see the edd. onAesch. Theb. 61.

1 From the recurrence of per agros in the Latin authorities (Cic. n. d. 3. 67,Ov. Her. 6. 129 etc.), it might be suggested that they were derived ultimately from asource which placed Apsyrtus' death in Colchis and not in Scythia. See however

Introductory Note to the S/J0cu.

P. II.

18 !04>OKAEOY!

337

337 Galen xvn i. p. 879 vwl 5'

o/teVei rots ypa/u./J.aTiKOis aKO\ov8r}(ravTa

TT]V eKelvwv Stdraijw eiTretV n Trept

TO)*' /card rrji' irt/juptya (rrjfJLaivofjL^vuv.

SOKCI p.tv yap avrijv eiri rrjs irvorfs So0o-

K\77S iv K6\xots Xeyeu/.'

dTrrje...<pbpov.'

Practically all our knowledge of the

word IT^P.<}H is derived from Galen's

discussion which is the source of the

present fragment. He also quotes frs.

338, 538 and 539, as well as fragmentsfrom Aeschylus, Ibycus, Callimachus, and

Euphorion. Outside Galen's notice TT^/X-

0i occurs only once in Nicander and

twice in Lycophron. The central notion

is air driven or expelled, a puff of wind',

hence Galen finds the meaning 71-1/017 in

the present passage, in fr. 538, and in

Aesch. fr. 195. It is thus applied to air

enclosed in water, a bubble: Nic. Ther.

272 at 5 TreXtoVcu\ <p\VKTaivai 7rû0itJ>

êiS6,uej/cu ueroto, where the schol. rightly

says : 7rû0it 5e rats 0i)<rcus, rcus hrots vSaffi yivo[levais 7ro/x.$6Xuti/.

Galen notes its employment to express

drops of rain (CTTI TU)J> Kara TOUS 6(j.fipovs

o-Taybvwv), quoting Callim. fr. 483 (ll

p. 640 Schneider), and Euphorion (v.

infr.}, both doubtful passages; and simi-

larly, drops of any liquid (eirl TTJs.fiavidos),

quoting Aesch. fr. 183 /AT/S' al'âros TT/J.-

<piya irpbs 7r^5y jSdXys, and fr. 206, a

difficult passage corrected by Headlam in

C. R. XV 18. In Ibycus fr. 17 TTVKIVO.S

ov Tre'Xas <f>6pov

the necessity for transposing the text

disappears. Thus it would seem that

7rû0t might be applied to a storm of

wind and rain, though the idea of a

whirlwind prevails in Aesch. fr. 195

Tfeis Trpos Tri/ody, 5.V evXaftov

7rt6yuei/oi, which is stated to

occur in a simile referring to storm-tossed

voyagers (/card nva Trapaj3o\i)v eirl xt*-/* --

ô/j^vwv elpTjfJLfrrjv), driving rain or mist

is undoubtedly meant. The extract how-ever follows fr. 539, and is included byGalen under the signification cloud (&ri

TOU vt<j>ovs doKe? Tera.x0a.i-)- Bergk main-tains that there has been a displacementin the text, that the quotation from Ibycus

ought actually to follow Aesch. fr. 183,and that eTri 5e TOV vt<f>ovs /ere. was the

concluding portion ofGalen's disquisition.But if we suppose Ibycus to have picturedhis travellers as enveloped in a blindingmist of rain-clouds, vtyi] is an intelligible

paraphrase of irvKivas irtfjifiiyas (cf.

Chrysippus II 701 Arn. TTJV ofj-ix^v

vtyos 5iaKexti/J*ei'ov...8/j.l3poi> d \d/3povi/5aroj /cat TTO\\OV e'/c ve<f)C)v (fiopdv), and

avu. In

Soph. fr. 538, which Galen, as we have

seen, includes under the gloss 70/017,

storm is perhaps the best translation,as comprehending the ideas of flashing

light, blasting wind, and possibly heavyrain (see n. in lot:.). At this point wemust notice the remarkable transition of

meaning by which ir^tpi^ comes to signifya ray of light (ttri rdv aKrivuv: cf. Phot.

lex. p. 409, 10 7re>0t' irvo-i}. Ai<rx^Xoj

Eavrplais firi ruv aKTlvuv) : so fr. 338,Aesch. fr. 170 o$re TT^Î^ rjKiov Trpoff-

dtpKerai, |

o#r' affrepwirbv 8/j.fj.a Aijrâs

K6pt}s. It may be surmised that in

strictness a moving, flashing light rather

than a steady flame is implied. Thus in

some respects Tr^^t^ is seen to resemble

irpticrT'fip, thefiery waterspout, as described

by Lucr. 6. 4246. Moreover the con-

catenation of the ideas of wind, cloud,and light is illustrated by the pronounce-ments of contemporary meteorology, par-

ticularly that of Anaximander (fr. 20

Diels), with whom Anaximenes (A 17

Diels) agreed: Act. plac. 3. 3 Trepi

fipovrOiv dffTpaTrdjv Kepavv&v TrpTja'Triptav re

Ka.iTV(p(i)V(i)v. 'A.i>a.j-ifji.av5pos K TOV irvei'j-

/*aros raurt irdvTa <rv[j-{$a.Lveiv' &TOLV yapTrepi\T](f)6eu vttyet. Travel (kaffdficvov tKireffT)

TTJ XeTTTonepeLa Kal Kov<j>6rrjTi, r6re TJ pev

pTJ&s rbv \f/6(poi>, i) 5e diaaToXij irapa TT\V

/j.e\aviav TOV v<f>ovs TOV Siavyaff fjibv

diroT\L. It should be added that Ly-cophron in v. 686 dKovffet KeWi ire/LKpidiav

&7ra and in v. 1106 employs 7reVt0t in

the sense of a ghost. This developmentwas no doubt influenced by popularbelief and philosophical speculation onthe nature of the i/'ux^. It is temptingto find the same meaning in the corruptline of Euphorion (Meineke, anal. Alex.

p. 1 1 8) : rjiredaval (so Bentley for etTre 5'

avdrj) Trtfupiyes e-TTiTpvCovert davbvTa (da-

vbvTuvt); but Galen's authority is not to

be lightly disregarded.The present fragment is unfortunately

KOAXIAEZ

corrupt. Bentley conjectured'lovlou TreXas irbpov or 7rû0t e a> <re\a<r-

06pou. (re\a(r<f>6pov seems certain, butM. Schmidt's 17X101; is clearly preferableto c 2. 7/Xtoy ffe\a<T(j>6pov is accordinglyadopted by Nauck, and with this readingwe should translate ' a wind came rushingfrom the blazing sun': cf. Aesch. Ag.1 1 79 f. Anyhow 7r<?,u0t could not mean'ray' in the face of Galen's statement.I cannot however help suspecting, on the

assumption that dirfee 7r4u0t...o-eXa<r-

<p6pov is sound, that the words refer to

the fiery breath of the bulls which Jasonwas required to yoke: Apoll. Rhod. 3.

410 0r6/AaTt <p\6ya <j)v<n6(t)i>Tes, 1048

diffffovtra <f>\6% 6Xouv ravpuv,1292 TTU/JOS <reXas d/u.Trveioi> res. Suchalso was Hermann's view when he pro-posed cl)s lirvov <reXo(T06pou; and soWecklein, as will be mentioned on fr.

339. <? i-n-fov, R. Ellis. In justificationof lirvov Hermann well quoted Ar. Pac.

8396.: but would Sophocles have usedthe simile in a tragedy? Postgate's Ifrvov ff\aff(p6pov (J. P. X 91), i.e. 'the

Tn^tf sprang away on its dark path,'does not yield a satisfactory meaning.The letters ivov suggest -irvov, but

irvpirvdov will not fit : yfrvos IK <re\a<r-

is perhaps possible.

338

KOLV

rrjAcerKOTTOV

338. 1 K&V eOcuj/mao-as Hermann : K&I>

2 TrjXtffKowov Bentley: rrjde VKoirCjv vulg.

338 Galen xvn i. p. 880 ttri dt TUVOLKrlvuv avrCov doKet xpf)(r6ai Tt$ rrjs TT^-

<f>iyos 6v&/jiaTi 2o0o/cX^s tv K6\x;ots Karardde TO, îrrj

' K&V . . .ISuv .'

For the meaning of irefufng see on fr.

^pvcreav ISatv.

vulg., Kdire8avfj.a<ra Bentley

337. It seems almost certain that thesewords refer to the brightness of the

golden fleece : cf. Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1706.For \pv<r4a.v scanned as a trisyllable

cf. fr. 483, and see Jebb on Track. 1099.

339

77

339 ITTOIJ.VVS scripsi : VTTO(JLVVS codd.

339 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 141, 12 =Bekk. anecd. p. 404, 21 and Suid. s.v.

avdvirovpyrfcran' T& avrairodovvai

J'i r

l (^ Phot.)

Welcker suggested that these wordswere spoken by Medea to Jason, askinghim to swear to make her his wife andtake her back to Greece, if she lent himher assistance. He quoted, among other

passages, Ov. Met. 7 94 servabere munerenostro'.

| servatusfiro?nJssadato,a.Tidi7jeno\>.

4. 92 (=Apollod. i. 129) M775eta...e7ra7-TO dtpas eyx eiP'iO

'

a(T ai>

%u> yvvaiKa Kal ei's 'EXXdSa

dydyTjrai. o.uocrai'TOS 5

This seems better than to supposeJason was asking Aeetes for an

/ere.

that

assurance that, if he performed the task

imposed, he should receive the fleece.

Wecklein (B. ph. W. 1898. 739) refers

this and frs. 337, 338 to the dialoguementioned by schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1040in the order 339, 337, 338.

virbiJivvfju (see cr. n.) does not occur,

except in the middle voice with the

technical sense of swearing an oath for

the purpose of staying legal proceedings.In view of the frequency with which

compounds with etri and virb are confused

(for examples see Cobet, N. L. p. 379,Coll. Crit. pp. 92, 505; Madvig, Adv.Crif. i p. 516), it is much more probablethat we should read eirojAvvs than that the

isolated vTrofjivfa is correct. It would be

easy with Wecklein to correct dvdvirovp-

yrjtreiv, but the difficult question as to

when, if ever, the aor. inf. is permissible

2 2

20 !04>OKAEOY!

in the place of the future after certain

verba dedarandi is not yet settled. SeeGoodw. 127, 136, Kuehner-Gerth I

196 f. There is no doubt that in manyof the instances discussed by Madvig(Adv. Crit. I p. I55ff.) and others the

future ought to be restored, and it is hard

to resist the claims of vexvpd<re<rdal

<paffiv in Ar. Ntib. 35 and of 8iKd<rfcrda.l

<f>a(ri fj.oi ibid. 1141. On the other hand,certain of these verbs show a tendency

to be accompanied by an inf. not in

oratio obliqiia : a good instance is Eur.

Or. 1527 /jL&pos, ei 8oKis fj.e T\TJVO.I

('expect me to deign') <rV Ka6ai/j.dât

dtpyv. So Tucker may be right (onAesch. Theb. 415) in holding that such

is the case with <t>-r)/J.i= tcara^/M

'

to

consent,' for which he quotes Theocr.

27. 59 0ifc /J.OL irdvra db/mev. virovpyeiv

xdpw occurs in Aesch. Prom. 662 andEur. Ale. 842.

340

ovK ap

34O Etym. M. p. 439, 2 /cai So0o-dvrl TOV

The Argument of the Promeiknn of

Aeschylus states : Keirat i] /JivdoTroda iv

ei irapd 2o0o/c\et iv K6\xots

Brunck), Trapd 5' Evpnrldri SXws

ov /cetrcu. Welcker (p. 335) inferred with

great probability that the occasion of the

digression in which the story of Prome-theus was recounted was the preparationof the magical ointment, which Medea

gave to Jason in order to protect him

against the attack of the fire-breathingbulls. This <t>dp/j.a.Koi> IIpofj.-rjdei.ot>, as it

was called, was made with the shreddingsof a plant which grew on the slopes of

the Caucasus ; it was gathered on the

spots where the devouring eagle had let

fall drops of Prometheus' blood (Apoll.Rhod. 3. 844 ff.). Cf. pseudo-Plut. de

jftuv. 5. 4 yevvarai 5' iv aury (Kawacry)jSordfTj IIjOOyLCTjêtos KaXovfj.ei'tj, TJV M^Setaffv\\eyovffa /cat Xetorpifiovva. Trpbs avriira-

6eias TOV Tra.rpbs exp^ctro (Cleanth. fr.

70). Val. Flacc. 7. 355 ff. Prop. i. 12.

10 lecta Prometheis dividit herba iugis,

appears to be an allusion to this story;otherwise it is difficult to account for the

mention of Prometheus. We may con-

clude then that this was one of the pointsin which Apollonius followed the lead of

Sophocles in the Colchides'. see Intro-

ductory Note. Observe that Pindar Pyth.4. 221 ffvv 5' Aa/<j> $ap//,a/fc6<rai<r' |

O.VTL-

ro/xa crTepeaV 68vvdv\

6tD/ce xp/e<r0cu is

TOP

quite general in his notice of the incident.

H. refers to the schol. on v. 889 JSt'us 5

6 7T0177T7JS TepareveTdi rd irepl rty piavTrap' ovdevi ydp rutv piforb/juav efpT/rcu, and

compares the fables connected with the

mandrake (pavdpaybpas), which the

ancients used in surgical operations to

cause insensibility to pain : Dioscorides

pp. 571, 574. He takes occasion thus to

translate the description of Apollonius :

It rose to birth

Of old time in the far Caucasian plains,When from the ravenous eagle fell to

earth

Some crystal blood of sad Prometheus'veins.

The flower thereof was as a cubit high,And in its colour as the saffron's hue,And raised upon two stalks; but under-

groundThe root was like new-severed flesh to

view.

This like the dark sap from a forest

tree,

She'd mown and gathered in a Caspianshell,

First in the running water bathing well,And seven times calling upon Brimo's

power,In sable weeds, at murky midnight

hour,Brimo of Earth, ah, nursing mother

dread,That walks abroad by night, and queens

it o'er the dead !

KOAXIAEZ 21

341

r? ftXacrTos OVK e/SXacrrei/

KOL Kpara <f)pias < y >OTrXcucri p,r)Tpbs

AI.

AIT.

341. 2 K/aara Bergk : /cd/ora cod.| 0/H'as raw' euX60a> <r<pTjKt!)fJiva cod.: 7* add.

J., ev\6(j>i{} (T(pr]K<t}/j.aTi corr. Valckenaer ex Hesych. IV p. 258 0/n'a5 eX60y (nj/ttfytaTi*

dj/ri TOU d?a0fc &prtos (avadvs opdios Hemsterhuis) 3 /^rpos e^5u Rutgers : /x^

v cod.

341 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1372

2o0o/c\7?j 5 ev KoXxiai ireiroirjKe rbv

ayytXov TOU AlifjTOv Trvdo^vov (-ov cod.)

Trept rwi' TrpoeipTjjjieva}!''

if . . . ouTrtxwpios'

;

\tyovTa'

Kal /cd/mi . . . 7rpo<re^5u.'

v. 2 is

quoted by Hesych. (v. cr. n.). Thewords of the schol. show that v. i

belongs to the king.1 Aeetes enquires of the messenger,

' Did not the native brood of the land

(i.e. the armed men) start up?' when

Jason had ploughed.2 The alteration Kpdra and the addi-

tion of / (although Kal alone might bedefended by Aesch. Pers. 239) are great

improvements at little or no cost. J.

translates: 'Yes and reared their heads,

bristling with plumed helms, as in armsof bronze they came forth from the wombof their mother (Earth),' and continues :

'Hesych. [iv p. 115] (T^TJKOS \6<pov TO

&Kpov TOU \6<j>ov. G<$>i]K.b(a is to pinch in

(like a wasp's waist): so of hair, Horn.P 52 TT\oxp-oi 0', o? xpwy Te K

(T(j>riK()VTQ ("tightly bound").is a part of the X60os, as appears fromAr. Pac. 1216, where, in a dialoguebetween Trygaeus and the Xo0o7rot6s, the

former admits, r6 (T^KdifjC ZX L ô\ovTToXtiv. It is the lower end, pinched in

to fit the <pd\os, or ridge of metal, on the

Kpavos (see art. Galea in Diet. Ant. n899). Cp. Ap. Rh. 3. 1354 ol 5' ^77

<rav avacrTaxveffKov apovpav | yt]-

(ppi^fv 8e irepi ffTtfiapois <ra.Ke(r<rii'

r' dfj.(piyijoi.s Kopvdecrffi re \a/u.Tro-

\*Apr)osTefjievos<p6ia-itJi.l3p6Tov.' For

ff<pr)Kii)/u,a. see also on fr. 29, and cf. gene-

rally Verg. Georg. 2. 142 (of the same

incident) nee galeis densisque virum segeshorruit hastis.

342

ecrracrav

342 Pollux 7. 68 apfj.6TTOi 5' &v

rais fcji/ais raurats (women's girdles) r6

\vffifavov eiireiv, 6 re TTJS 'A/x,a^"6vos fa&Trip,Kal 7) ev rats ~Zo(poK\eovs KoXxtcra' (so A:the rest have

yovv ';oj>TaUntil the MS known as A had been

collated by Bekker, whose edition ap-

peared in 1846, the texts of Pollux gaveIwffrripffLv in place of KoXxtVii' ;

and the

strangeness of the title puzzled the earlier

critics. Brunck did not believe in the

possibility of such a play ;but Welcker,

after some hesitation (Nachtr. p. 292),

pronounced in favour of a satyr-play onHeracles' quest of the Amazonian girdle

(Pind. fr. 172 Ka.lp.eTO. faxrrTj/xxs'

rj\0J>), appealing to the play of Epi-charmus entitled 'H/aa/fX^s 6 4irl rbv

{uffTTJpa (p. 104 Kaibel).But the recovery of the title does not

solve the whole difficulty. 4iri^<TTpadoes not occur elsewhere, and is not the

kind of word one would expect to find

in Sophocles; indeed, as Nauck remarks,not only are the words corrupt for

^Xojres at any rate is required but the

whole sentence is unlike tragedy. It

reads more like a mutilated fragmentfrom an Alexandrian writer of elegiacssuch as Callimachus or Euphorion. irepi-

faffTpa is used by Anaxandrides (fl. 375-350 B.C.) fr. 69, n 162 K.

22 I04>OKAEOYI

343

[6v

Ai//iy>ros e /caret TOV OIKOV TOV

343 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 228 Soô-/tX?7s 5e ef KoXxiVi 0?7<ri /cara TOV OIKOV TOV

Al-fjTovTov Traida (sciL"A\J/vpTov) o-<f>ayrjvai..

The same version of the story was fol-

lowed by Eur. Med. 1334 KTavovaa yap5rj <rbv Kd<riv irap^ffTtov, \

TO /caXXt-

irpippov elffejSiis'Apyovs 0vcc0os (cf. ib. 167

a&rxpws rd* tpbv KTelva<ra icd<riv), wherethe schol. states that it was also adopted

by Callimachus (fr. 411). The variations

given by the different authorities are con-

veniently summarized by Gruppe, Gr.

Myth. pp. 2664, 5755.

344

[Ne'cuyoa

344 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 242 Aiovv-

trios de 6 MiX?7<rios (a mistake for MU-

TiXvjvaios: FHG II 8) 'E/cdrT/i' nyTtpaKal Kipicrjs (sell. Xêi), ws irpofi-

o0o/cX?5j Nâipav fj.iav TWV Nijprjl-

5wv, 'H<ri'o5os 5e 'Idvlav.

This passage is usually regarded as an

inaccurate reference to fr. 546, but it is

difficult to see how the mistake could

have arisen, since it is certain that in the

2K60ai Sophocles made Idyia the motherof Medea. As there is nothing to showthat he did not make Neaera her motherin the KoXxt'Ses, it seems better to transfer

the fragment here. For further informa-

tion see on fr. 546.

345

vrraiOwv rr^v Ato?

345 Athen. 602 E 6 5 (scil. Sopho-cles) ev KoXxto"* vepl Ya.vv/j.r)5ovs TOV (TIVOL

A: corn Kaibel) \6yov TTOIOV/J-CVOS'

/j.-r)po?s...Tvpa.vvida.'

Ganymede was probably introduced as

an example of the pervasive strength of

Love, to whom Zeus, the sovereign of all,

was himself subject: cf. fr. 941, 15 Aios

Tvpavvci ir\eviJ.6vwv (Kvirpis). Theerotic element in the story of Ganymedeis post- Homeric, appearing first in Find.

Ol. r. 43 ff., 10. 104 ff., but by the endof the fifth century it was a familiar

allusion : in Eur. Or. 1390 Ganymedeis Aids eu^ras, in /. A. 1049 AIDS X^rpwvTpti<f>rjna <f>l\ov.

vira0wv, kindling. For the metaphorcf. Xen. Cyr. 5. i. 16 TO v-tv trvp TOVS

airTo^vov^ nda, oi 5e/caXoi /cat TOVS airudev

Oew/jLerovs v<j>airTov<Tiv UHTTC a.t6e<r0aiT ^pwrt. Aios -rupavv^Sa, by a familiar

idiom for 'royal Zeus,' after the patternof Oivo/mdov /3ta, fdvos 'A\Kiv6oio, QeCiv

(r^Sas, o/j./j,a vv/j.(pas and the rest : see

Kuehner-Gerth I 280. Cf. fr. 314, 252KuXXi^s

KOL\Ol>

346

TOV 0V7)TOV O.V0p(i)TTOL<$

346 Stob. flor. 22. 23 (in p. 589, 8

Hense) Soô/cXôi's KoXxtSes*'

Ka\bv...

tea.'

For the maxim 6vrjTa (fipovelv xptf see

on frs. 414, 590. Observe that dvBpwirois

combines with \.<ra.(=

dv6pu)Trii>a), not withfcra (f>poveiv in the sense of 'to agree withhis fellows,

3 and cf. Sosiph. fr. 3, 4 171' 5'

, /j.r)dv OVTCS evOt&s|

to*' ovpav<

KOAXIAEI KPEOYIA 23

347

347 Hesych. II p. 133 eT

e7raXXdcura. Soô/cXiys Ko\xt<riv>The heavier first aorists, such as tbrTiX-

\dx0?iv> 0p<pdrjv, ^\d(f>6r)v, t<f>a.vdr)v andso forth, passed out of use in late Greek,

giving way to dTrr)\\dyr}v, ^rpdcprjv etc.

Hence the former class is frequently

glossed by the latter, and some textual

corruption has arisen in consequence:see Valckenaer and Person on Eur. Phoen.

979 (986) and Headlam, On editing

Aeschylus, p. 104. But eTraXXcêfc doesnot occur, and eTraXXdrreti', never a corn-

mon word, is generally intransitive fromthe time of Aristotle onwards.

348

Kvvapa

348 Athen. 70 A Kivdpa'

TCU/TÎ/ So-

(j>OK\i)s ev ~Ko\xiffiv (/coxX/<rt CE) Kvvapav/fctXet. Herodian Philetaer. cod. Vat.

2226 (see L. Cohn in Rh. Mus. XLIII

416) vvdpa (1. Kvvdpa) 17 (Luavda. Trapa,

Zo0o/cXet' ot vvv nvvdpav (Kivdpav corr.

Nauck) \tyovtriv. For this word see onfr. 718.

349

349 Lex. Messan. f. 281 r. veo<?(f>.

8a...v avv ry i nada Kal TO (T0a5a<if >w.2o0o/cX^s KoXxots.

Vo<r<J>d8aoTos is otherwise unknown,and should mean 'newly struggling,' like

vedppvros and veoirvevffros ; for the verbal

from an intransitive verb see also on fr.

534. For the addition of the i, and the

application of ffâSaû see on fr. 848.

KPEOYZA

There are only two certain references to the title Ion (frs. 319,

320), which has been with high probability identified with the

Crensa.

Creusa was also the name of (i) Priam's daughter, the wife

of Aeneas, and (2) Medea's rival, who is commonly called Glauce

(Hygin. fab. 25). But, if the latter had been the Creusa of

Sophocles, we should surely have heard more about the play in

which she appeared. Although the fragments themselves throwno light on the nature of the plot, the general opinion is probablycorrect that the heroine was the daughter of Erechtheus and wife

of Xuthus, and that the story, like that of the Ion of Euripides,was concerned with the fortunes of her son Ion, who was born

24 Z04>OKAEOYI

from her union with Apollo in a cave on the Acropolis (Pausan.I. 28. 4). Until adopted into literature by the tragedians, it is

probable that the history of Ion's parentage was only preserved

orally in connexion with the local worship of Apollo at Athens.

At any rate, it finds no place in the mythological hand-books,and as we have no other channel of information than the playof Euripides, it is impossible to say which of the details are the

invention of that poet, and which, as belonging to the commonstock, may be assumed to have been retained by Sophocles.

Welcker infers from fr. 353 that the chorus consisted of

female attendants on Creusa. On the strength of Eur. Ion 323

/3o>/W fi efapfiov OVTTIWV r del feVo? he assigns frs. 354 and 356to Ion, and supposes him to be speaking of his own povertywhich made him dependent on the charity of visitors to the

temple. Fr. 357 is referred to a contemplated revelation of

Xuthus similar to his confession in Eur. Ion 550 ff.;

but it

might equally well be regarded as a cry of Creusa, when forced

to disclose her story.

350

TGLVT Icrrlv aXyicrr', r\v Trapov OecrOai

aurds TIS avrco rr^v ftXdftrjv Trpoo-Orj

35O. 1 &v Tr. 2 avry Tr.

35O Stob. flor. 4. 38 (ill p. 229, i

Hense : omitted by SMA, preserved

by Trine.) rou airrou Kpeovvq. (so Schovv

from two MSS, for which see on fr. 77 :

omitted by Trine.).(

TavT\..<f>tp<i)v.'

1 irapov : cf. Phil. 1099 eCr^ ye

irapbv <j)povTJ<rai \

roO Xyoi/os dal/novos ei'Xou

rb KCLKLOV alvelv. OeerOai KaXtos: it wouldseem here that rr)v (3\d(3r)j> is the object:cf. O. T. 633 vet/cos e5 6effdai. For rideffffai

in backgammon see on fr. 947. rldea-dai

KaXus (eD) is very common in Euripides :

see Bacch.^, Andr. 378, /fer. 605, /. A.

672, I. T. 1003, Hipp. 709, Or. 512.The active is also found, looking to the

object rather than to the agent : Hipp.521, El. 648, T.A. 401.2 njv (3Xd|3i]v. Nauck says 'malim

irTfj/ôv/jv,' finding an awkwardness, as I

suppose, in the article. But it is possiblethat the context would have made every-

thing clear, as would be the case if e.g.

TCjv $e avp.<f>opC)v preceded raOr', pro-

viding deffdai with an object. <j>6pcov is

used idiomatically of impetuous or im-

pulsive action, sponte, ultro. H. quotesAeschin. 3. 82 els TOVTO (pepwv

TO, -rrpaytiara, wore... Lucian (Hermot. 36)i. 778 <rv TOVTO -n-poapirdaas ZdwKas <j>epwv

rots ZrwtKots, (Icarotn. 5) ii. 757 TOGOVTOV

edet)<Tcu> fj.e Trjs TraXcuas dyvoias a,7raXXacu,were KO.I els fj.eiovs d-rropias (pepovTcs eve-

/SaXor, Diphilus fr. 64 (ll 562 K.) eiri

ravrr) Qepwv \

els TO nevov eirex^pevae

(ra.Trepd'rjs /meyas, and with eavrbv Aeschin.

3. 90 virepaXev eavrbv Qepwv Qr)(3aiois.

He adds that the idiom is illustrated in

the Thesaurus, s.v. (f>epw p. 721 D, andrefers to Hemsterhuis on Lucian (dial.mart. 6. 3) I 349. See also Holden onPlut. Them. 24, who has a good collection

of examples, and add Quint. 7. 381birirfxra TpcDas epeev \ d/u.(f>i irokiv Hpid/j.oio

faptav. It is probably colloquial like the

similar case of wj/ (Blaydes on Ar. Nub.

i3i)> and might be rendered 'if he goesand inflicts the hurt on himself.' Nauckproposed 6e\wv, Stadtmueller rpeûv, andF. W. Schmidt Qpov&v in its place ; andMekler conjectured rrj (3\d(Bri trpocrdrj

yt\uv. In place of avrw -irpoorOrj wemight have had TT/XKT^TCU : see Jebb onO. C. 154.

KPEOYIA

35i

Se ToX/xrj TT/OOS TO

TI y\a>(Tcr ICTTIV, S' 6 1/015.

351 Stob. yfor. 7. 8 (in p. 309, 15Hense) So0o:X^s Kptov<ra (Kpeofoq. or

Kpeotaa A, eel. om. S). '6'o>

ris...'oOy.'' Whoso boldly faces danger, his tongue

never errs nor is his purpose shaken.'The general sense is well illustrated byMenand. fr. 572, ill 175 K. 8rav TI -rrpaT-

Tfls o<riov, ayadriv eXirlda\ irp6(3a\\

<raur(p, TOVTO yiyv&aKW, 6Yi| To\fj.rj diKaiq.

Ko.1 0e6s ffvXXa.fj.fia.vet.. ToXp/jj is an instru-

mental dative of manner like \u>/3cus K-

Pa\eiv in Ai. 1392. Cf. Eur. Hel. 393/c6/7ry \eyu, Phoen. 1125 e(ridpTwi> 06^.In some examples the idea of cause mayhave been the more prominent: see

Kuehner-Gerth I 435, 439. irpos TOSeivov gpxcTcu, goes to meet the comingdanger. Cf. Eur. Hclid. 562 eTret v<t>a-

7775 7e Trpds TO dtivbvel/ui.' tytb, MeJ. 403

?/)TT' es ro deii>6v, Hec, 516 77 irpbs TO deivbit

1j\6ed' us ex^pdv... [Krdvovres; ('Did ye

approach the dread task?') Elmsley,on the strength of Eur. Med. 394 TO\U.TJS

5' etjut 7r/o6s TO Kaprepbv, proposedfor T6\M]7; but there, as Verrall pointedout, the meaning is rather '

to pursue thecourse of boldness.' op0ii is not easy to

render exactly. Although the adjectivesometimes comes near to the Englishtrue or good, it is strictly limited to theexternal aspect of an action as measured

by its result, and never carries with it anethical connotation analogous to that ofour sincere or straightforward. In O. T.

1220, Track. 374, Ai. 354 the meaningis simply to 'speak the truth'; in Ant.

1195 opôi' d\?7<?ei' dei 'the truth is best,'

i.e. as being incontrovertible ; but thereal sense of the word, that of justifica-tion or verification, comes out most

clearly in 0. T. 506 -rrpiv f5oi/x' opdbv &TOJ,ib. 852 rbv ye Aalov <pot>ov |

<f>avi St/ccuws

6p86v, Ant. 1178 TO#TTOS ws &p' opdbvtfvvffas. So here the brave man's wordscome true.

352

fJLV OVV OVK O~TL TO,

Oreo 8' o\e6pov ayec,ert KOLL TO

352. 2ij aJK-qdeC vel i] aXrjdeia codd.

352 Stob. flor. 12. 4 (in p. 444, ro

Hense) ToO avrov (so S : ZoôgTufovs

MA) K/aôuaa. '/ca\6i'.../<aX6j'.'

The sentiment is not unlike that of fr.

28, but is still nearer to Phil. 108 f.

NE. OVK aiffxpov i)yei drjra ra \f/ev8fj

\yeiv ; OA. o#V, el TO <rw# 771/011 ye TO

\l/evdos (ptpei. Cf. Diphil. fr. 48, n557 K. vTroXa/j-pdvu TO if/evdos eirl auT-t)-

ov8ev Trenroieia'dai dv<r-

Menand. fr. 777, in 216 K.5' eXeffdai \{/evdos 77 d\?7ês KO.KOV. Hartungsuggests that the lines were spoken byXuthus in reference to his intention to

conceal the relation of Ion to himself.

But the words more naturally suggestthe secret of Creusa.3 orvyyvaxTTo'v. Nauck would prefer

to read avyyvuTov : but see on fr. 203.

26 I04>OKAEOYI

353

XOP. OVT yapOVT OLV CKjJitTpOV

yap353. 1 x ante cure S 2 oXjSov

'

/j.av Seidler: a.v fere codd.

353 Stob. flor. 38. 26 (in p. 713,6 Hense) So0o/cXôi;s Kplouo-a. 'o#re...

If. yd[iov is qualified byMarriage above one's station was to beavoided: cf. Aesch. Prom. 913 r) <ro06s

rj <ro06s yv 6s| TrpcDros ey yvu/j.q, r65' ^3d-

(TTCKre /cai 7\c6cr<rp 5ie/Jiv9o\6yr)(rt' |ws

r6 KTjdevaat Ka6' eavrbv apurreijei //.a/cpy,

in reference to the saying of Pittacus Tr??

Kara (ravrov t\a (Diog. L. i. 80). Find. .

Pyth. 2. 34 XPV <^ KaT'

cturoj' cuel jravrb'i

bpav fj.trpov. Eur. fr. 214 /oJSos /ca^'

avrbv rbv ffo<f>6v KTaffdai 'x.ped^v. Rhes. 168

OVK ti; e/xaurou fjLei^bvuv ya/j.ivEur. fr. 502 6<rot yafjt-ovffi 5' 17 7

yd/AOVs | 77 TroXXa xP'ÂtaT'

ya/meiv. fr. 503 perptuvrpwv, /j.rpi(t)v 5e yd/m-wv |

| Kvpaai 6vr)Tot(TLv (LpurTov. Yor the

cf. Phryn. praep. soph.

6Soi . . .

codd. : traiecit Buecheler 8 ei)cu-

68, 9 de B.

x.Pvff t>*' î TOU

Eur. /<?

TrXoOros /cai

490

3 v8ov, of wealth stored in the house:

see on Eur. /ft/. 907, Phoen. 552.

, wish. See Headlam on Aesch.

word

. 1340.4 <j>0ovpai -yap oSoC. The sentence

is probably incomplete, as Ellendt re-

marks. ' For many there are that walk

in the paths of envy' seems to be the con-

text required. For 65ot then cf. Ant. 1274iv 5' tveiffev dypiais 65oTs. Find. Nem.! 2 5 XPV & *v ei^ê^ctts 65ots (TTdxovTa,

0.1 <pvq.. Pyth. 2. 85 5XX' dXXore

odots ffKo\ials. Buecheler con-

jectured oSovpoL or 68010-1, Seyffert oi

Qeoi. Weil divided the fragment into

three cola, of which the first ended with

otfr' &vtand the second with eucu-.

354

KalH.TI TL OavfJLacrrjs /xe TOU KtpSovs,

cSS' d^TeêcrOai. /cat yap ot [jiaKpov

0vr)TO)v eôucri, TOV ye KepSai

a7Tpl eyovTai, /cacrrt Trpos ra

6vv)Toi<Ti raXXa Seurep'* eicrt'

8* ouSel? oo/cei

del

354 Stob. y?^r. 91. 28 (ivi Hense) 2o0o/cXôvs Kpôucra.

354. 4

p. 742,'

/cat U77

Meineke conjectured that these lines

were written by Euripides, and that the

passage quoted from Sophocles by the

anthologist had accidentally fallen out.

It must be admitted that the concludinglines have the Euripidean tone ; but it is

worth notice that Sophocles is the only

tragedian who is known to have used

d,7rpi. Hense thinks that the Creusa

may have been a late play : see I p. 62.

2 ff. Nauck urges that instead of

KPEOYIA

fiiov we should rather expectTT\OUTOV fiadvv, which Blaydes modifies

to ir\LffTov filov (TTO\W piov, Herwerden).The criticism is beside the mark ; for the

sequence of thought is :

' Don't be sur-

prised that I cling to gain; for (i) the

passion for gain survives even in the old

(who have lost all other desires), (2)

money is the greatest good. Thus xai

in v. 2 corresponds to /cat in v. 4,

a more emphatic combination than re...

re: not only...but also. For avarice as

the special infirmity of old age see Arist.

rhet. i. 13. I3i9a14 a'i re yap e7ri0u/u'cu

ave'iKaffi Kal dovXetiovffi r

Thuc. i. 44 OVK ev ry d^peiy rrjs

TO Kepdalveiv, (ZvTrep TIV& <pa<ri,

T^pwei, dXXa TO Tifjidcrdai. Cic. de sen. 65.The reference in Thucydides may be

merely to proverbial wisdom, althoughit has been supposed that Simonides wasintended : Plut. sen. resp. ger. 5 p. 786 B

2,i/uui)vidr]s 2\eye irpbs TOUS eyifdXovvTas

avT$ <j)i\apyvpiat>, on TUV aXXwj/ dTreaTe-

pr)/j.vos did TO yrjpas r/dovuv virb /tuas eVt

yrjpofioo'KeiTai TTJS dirb TOV Kepdaiveiv.Hor.A.P. 169 niulta senem circumveniunt

incommoda, vel qttod | quaerit et in-

ventis miser abstinet ac timet uti. yoften appears as marking the apodosis of

a sentence, whether the protasis is in-

troduced by et or some other conjunction,or consists, as here, of a relative clause.

In such cases it may either emphasizea single word or spread its force over the

whole of the conclusion. See Neil on

Eq. p. ippf., who quotes Ant. 657 andEur. Bacch. 443 us 5' aS <ri> /3ckxa s e?pas...<f>p'ovdai *y' eKeivai. Meineke's TOVTTL-

Kepdalveiv is thus unnecessary, and the

simple verb suits the context better, as the

passages cited above will show: so fr. 28,

3. dirp{. For this word see Jebb onAt. 310, 1030. The prefix is from an

original sm- (Skt. sa), as in ct7ra, ctrrXoOs

etc. But the evidence for an aspirate in

airpit- is inconsiderable: cf. dXoxos andsee Brugmann Comp. Gr. i p. 421 E. tr.

It should be added that the ancient

authorities (Hesych., Etyni. A/., Suid.,

al.), all of whom go back to a single

source, derive the word from a privativeand Trpiu (irpLfa),

'to saw,' 6 ovx ottv T

irpiffai 5ia TTJV a^/m<f>va'iv. But the gloss of

Cyrillus a.irpi% 'iiriros' 6 ffK\T)pvj>0ds Kal

4vSaK<j}v Tbv xa^LVOt; tTTTros, when com-

pared with fr. 897, points in the true

direction. Cf. Alciphr. 3. 54 tyu 5'

CLTTplj; T&V Kp/UidT(t}V t%6 [JLT) V, aTTodo.-

VflV TTpOTfpOV TJ TTpO&Oai TL ^KelvOlS T&V

e/xoi TrTropi<Tu.tvwv atpoêyos. -irpos TCI

Xpiîxara. Cf. Antiph.fr. 232,11 nsK.a/3

3

ZffTi \rjpos -jroLVTa irpos TO yjpvaiov ;

Eur. fr. 95 dXX' ovdev yvytveia irpos TCL

XP^f^dTo.. See also on Eur. Phoen. 439ra ^pTj/xar' dvdp&Troiffi Tiyuicirara. Forthe use of 7rp6s,

'in comparison with,'

see Jebb on Ant. 1171, Ar. Lys. 860.5 ff. t(rl 8' ofrrives refers to the famous

scolion (8 Bergk) beginning vyiaivew fiev

&pL<TTov dvSpl dvaTtg. See also on fr. 356.

ef>i 8* ov8els KT. This seeminglyparadoxical statement would be less

startling to a Greek audience than it is

to us, for it would recall to them the

proverbial wisdom of Hesiod Op. 686

XjOTj/iara yap ^vxn TreXerat SeiXotVt fipo-

Tolffi, which is imitated by Timocles fr.

35, II 466 K. Tdpytipibv (TTIV al/j.a Kal

$VXT) PpoTois'

|

6'<ms 5e /J,TJ xei TOVTO, /n/5'

^KTrjffaTO, |

OVTOS fJLTa favTUV TCdvtJ'

/cws irepiiraTei. Similarly Diphilus fr.

J O5, n 574 K. trevia 5e TOIS ^xovfftv i>

(r/j.LKpa v6<ros. The thought that natural

advantages such as health and birth (cf.

Eur. EL 38, Phoen. 442) are not of muchavail, unless accompanied by sufficient

wealth, may be illustrated by Ar. Av.

605 tl>s avQpwirbs ye /ca/fois irpdTTwv dre-

Xfuis oi)5ets vyiaivti, Bacchyl. i. 55 ei 5'

vyieias |

OvaTos euv i:\axev, | faeiv r' dir'

otKei(ji)i> ^xetJ I 7ryt67"<HS epifrei. It is pro-

bable that these passages ought to beused to interpret Find. 01. 5. 23 vyi&Ta5' ei rts b'Xfiov apofi, which is understood

by the commentators of the righteoususe or acquisition of wealth. Aristo-

phanes coined the word ir\ov0vyieia to

denote supreme human bliss. For the

zeugma by which eVao-ros must be evolvedfrom ovdeis see Jebb on Ant. 262, Kueh-ner-Gerth n 567.

355

TL 8', cS yepaie ; TIS v avanrepol

355 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 1 19, 6 dva- cording to Reitzenstein the gloss was**'

, 77 eVcui/os, rj \oidopia. derived from Phrynichus (fr. 2 10 de B.).

'TI 5'...06jSos.' Ac- dvairTepovv is now for the first time estab-

28 !0<t>OKAEOY!

lished as belonging to the vocabulary of

Sophocles. Cf. Eur. Suppl. 89 us 06/3os

/x' avaiTTepoi. Or. 876 ayye\^

Aavaiduv TTO\LV. And for the meta-

phor in general see on fr. 941, n.

356

V (TTL

XMCTTOV Se TO rjv avocrov

\rj\fjis atv epa KaO*

8' or&>

356. 2 \UHTTOV d TO ^v B: \6t<rTov 5e Ifiv SMA.

356 Stob. flor. 103. 15 (iv p. 905,

roHense). 2o0oK-V<w Kpeoi/cnjs. '/cdX-

These verses are the recasting of anold piece of proverbial philosophy. Ac-

cording to Aristotle (eth. End. i. r inif.,

eth. N. i. 8. 14. io99a

25) there wasinscribed on the irpoirvXaLov of the ArjTttJov

at Delos (TO A^Xta/cov iriypa/j.fji.a) the

couplet /caXXicrroj' rb b~LKa.Lora.Tov'

\(^<TTOV

5' vyiaiveiv' TTO.VTWV TJOLGTOV 5' (or TJSiffTOv

5 7r^0ux') 06 rts ep^t TO Tvx.fiv. Thesame is found among the remains of

Theognis (255 f.) with the variant irpay/j-a

8 TtpirvbTaTov TOV in the second line.

Amongst the sayings attributed to Thalesin Stobaeusyfor. 3. 79 (in p. 172 Hense)is ijdiffTov ou 4TTi0vfj,is TV)(~IV (Diels,Vorsokr? p. . 522, 5). Nauck quotesStob. flor. 5. 123 Mevtdrjfjios veaviffKOv

Ttvbs flirovTos'

/j.eya eort (/AtyHTTov Diog.

a.v rts eiri.0vfji.fi'L. 2. 136) r6

e?7re'

uv nrj del.' Campbell refers to Plat.

Gorg. 505 A. Cf. Find. Pyth. i. 57...cSv 1-paTa.t Kaipbv

368 eP 5'

!

Eur. Andr.

peifrv ?) Tpoiai'

IXcar,2 Nauck, who thinks that the reading

of B is an interpolation, conjectures

XcpoToi' 5' det ffiv or \<gffTov b vaietv.

Tucker for the same reason proposedbut the copula seems

necessary in any case.

3 \T]\|/IS is objected to by Nauck, whowould substitute Ti/xeti' ira.pecrTi.v. It is

true that the word does not occur else-

where in tragedy, but it seems arbitraryto reject it. Cf. fr. 88, 8, Ai. 967. Notethe idiomatic use of OTO> = et TLVI, andsee on Eur. Hel. 272.

357

a7T\ff, aneXOe, TTOL- raS' OVK OLKovcrrd crot.

357 <TOL om. cod. Coisl., coniecerat Bekker

357 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 65, 18

(=Bekk. anecd. p. 373, 6) dfonxrrd' ws

Zo0o(cX^s (om. cod. Coisl., add. Dindorf)tv Trj (ry cod. Coisl.) Kpeovcrr] '#7reX#'...

<roi' Kal EvpiTridys d TroXXd/cts* 6 /x^roi< /cat > (add. Ellendt) d/cot'crt/x,a

TToXiTiKWTepov de \tyei b tpiVtôs

(fr. 13 de B.) TO aKovaTa /j.a\\ov if)TO

For aKovffi.fj.os see on fr. 745, whichis probably referred to above. Bergk's

conjecture that the words iv TT/ . . .

ought to be transposed so as to follow

d/roi/crt/xa <f>t)ffl, and dKOv<rLfj.a to beread for aKowTd, is ousted by the

new evidence. aKovcrTos, not audible,but Jit to be heard, as also in O. T. 1312,Eur. Andr. 1084 aicoucrat 5' OVK aKovcrQ'

6>ws dt\u. In Eur. Hel. 663 (see my n.}the word is corrupt, as well as in Eur. fr.

334, 4, where perhaps we should read

aVVCTTOV.

KPEOYIA KPIIIZ 29

358

358 Hesych. I p. 193dvi\ri<pa. So0o/c\77$ Kpeoverj

cod.). Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 131,17yiicu dvei\r)<pa. 2o0o/cX^s.The form ftcrâi appears first in Horn.

I 402. Afterwards it was generally re-

stricted to the Ionic dialect (see Weir

Smyth, 583. 4), but is found occasionallyin Plato and in Aesch. Prom. 821

O/A/U' KTr}/j.^vai. Philologists are not

agreed on the explanation of the phoneticirregularity, although a confusion withthe augment and the analogy of ftr-njica

and fypuya have been suggested : see

Brugmann, Comp. Gr. IV p. 23 f. E. tr.,

and Kuehner-Blass II 23 f. The fullest

collection of the facts will be found in

Curtius, Greek Verb, p. 358 E. tr.

359

359 Pollux 6. 174 K 5e TOV

X?7S...To'

Iffoddvarov

irdw dvcKrbv.

We cannot tell whether Sophocles fol-

lowed the analogy of laoveipos, tV60eos,

iffbirpeafivs etc., and used the adj. as anattribute of a noun like -rrddos (cf. Ai.1 1 5 davdrq yap LVOV irddos tKirefori) ;

or

whether after the pattern of tV6/Liotpos,

i<r6Kw\os etc., laoddvaroi may have beenan epithet of those who, like Saul and

Jonathan, 'in their death were notdivided.' Pollux condemns the com-

pound as an extravagance; and Jebbmade a curious slip (on Ai. 214^.) in

saying that'

Sophocles used iffoddvarov

as = ou irdvv dveKTbv,' especially in viewof his n. on O. T. 478.

KPIZIZ IATYPIKH

Although the evidence for this title is very scanty, the

existence of the play is free from doubt, and its subject the

Judgement of Paris on Mt Ida is clearly indicated by fr. 361 (n.).

The play was satyric, and was a sequel to the "Ep^; see I p. 139.To the evidence there adduced for the appearance of KPLO-LS and

in this connexion add Eur. Hel. 26 fjLopcfrrjs de\ovo-ca

rcpiffiv. ib. 678f

iva 6eol /jLop<f)av (f>aiSpvvav,

efjio\ev Kpia^. Tro. 924 e/cpive Tpiarabv ftVyo9 oSe rpLaawv 6ewv.

The subject is referred to in Horn. H 28 ff. *A\J;dv$pov evetc

arris,|

09 velicea-cre 6ed^ yore ol /j,6(T(Tav\ov IKOVTO,

| rrjv 8' jjvr)<r ',

r]ol Trope pa'x\oo-vvr)v dXeyeivrfv. No doubt Sophocles followed

the version of the Cypria, about which we only know that

Hermes conducted the goddesses to Mt Ida by the commandof Zeus, and that Alexander, moved by the promise of Helen's

hand, preferred Aphrodite to her rivals (EGF p. 17). Apollod.

epit. 3. 2 adds that Hera promised universal empire, and Athena

victory in war. See also n. on fr. 361.

IO<f>OKAEOYI

360

KOL ST) <j)dpL rcJS' &>9

36O Herodian irepi dixp- in Cramer,anecd. Oxon. ill p. 295, 8 (=gramm.Herm. p. 444) odev Kai TO 0dpos <rvaT\\ov

TO d, u>s Trapa So0o/cXe? ^ KpLffet <ra.TVpu<rj'

Kai...Ka\tiirTO[Jiai.' id. ?rept /xor. X$-.

p. 36, 23 dXXci /caret <TV(TTO\TJV Trapa/cXet e? T?;pei (fr. 586)

'ffiretidovcrav a

ev 5 Troi/ftXcfJ tpdpei,'< Kai ev Kpi<rei

PIKTJlicai dy <f>dpei> Tip5' ws e/xy /caXi/-

Trro/xat.' Several words were omitted in

the text of the last passage owing to the

eye of the scribe having wandered fromthe first appearance of 0d/>ei to the

second.

The meaning of rwS* s ep-w is obscure

('in dieses selbstgemachte Kleid' Har-

tung), and F. W. Schmidt conjecturedr4>5' ws %w and Naber T$ fivaffivy. Ja-nowski (Observat. in nomina vestium a

trag. Gr. prolata, Berlin, 1897) justifiedthe text by supposing that the words were

spoken by a satyr, who had appropriatedfor himself the robe of one of the

goddesses taking part in the submissionto Alexander's judgement. <J>apos is

Homeric and older than <papos; but theword is believed to be of foreign origin,which may account for a variable pro-nunciation. The usage of Euripidesfluctuates, but Aeschylus (except perhapsin Theb. 316) always has a, and Sopho-cles always a.

[rj

361 Athen. 687 C So0o/cX^s 5' 6

iv Kplffei (ei> Kprjffi A : corr. Tyrwhitt)

ov<rav Saliva ('fort, delendum,' Kaibel :

or should we read daifAOvlav?) p.vp(j) re

Trapdyet. Kai KaTOTTTpiofj.{vr)i>,

d 'Adyvav (f>p6vr)<riv ofoav Kai vovv,

AE : corr. Nauck) Kai yv/u.vafofjut)>ir]v.

It is hardly to be doubted that Athe-naeus had this play in view at 510 C,

where after quoting the well-knownanecdote of Sophocles recorded by Plat.

rep, 329 C, he proceeds : ^ycb 5^ (prjfj.1 Kai

T7)l> TOU HdpldoS KpiffLV VTTO T&V TTttXaiO-

T^pwv TreTroiTJffdai ridovrjs TT/OOS apertyov<rav fftiyKpiffiv

'

TrpoKpi6eiarjs yovv TTJS

s, avT-r) 5' iariv

If we leave out of account Hes. Op.

287 ff., this is the earliest instance re-

corded in literature of the allegorical

presentation of the conflict betweenPleasure and Virtue, which afterwards

became famous through the fable knownas the Choice of Heracles extracted byXenophon from the

T

tipai of Prodicus

(Diels, Fragm. d. Vorsokraliker^, p. 657).

Although the moral is implicit in the

story of the Kpi<ns, it is improbable that

it was enforced in the Cypria (Wilamo-

Sc'

oucra.]

witz, Eur. Her.t,ip. 101). It has evenbeen held by Stephani (Gmppe, Gr.

Myth. p. 6650) that the allegoricalmotive prevailed so strongly with Sopho-cles that he left out Hera altogether;but that is altogether unlikely. For the

allegorical treatment by the Stoics of the

opposition between Pleasure and Virtue

see Cleanth. fr. 90 (l 553 Arn.) and

Chrysipp. ap. Gell. N. A. 14. 4 (Arnimin p. 197) ; and generally for the sub-

sequent influence of Prodicus' apologueCougny, de Prodico Ceio, Paris 1857,

p. 79 ff., and Dieterich, Nekyia, p. 191.In describing the adornment of Aphro-

dite, Sophocles may have been influenced

by Horn. <r 192 /cdXXet /xev oi Tr/xDra

TrpocrwTrara KaXd Kadypev \ d/ijSpocrty, oi'y

Trep v<TTt<t>avos Kvdepeia \ xpferat, e8r'

av trj XapiTuv xP v i/J-epoevTa. But it is

much more likely that traces of Sophoclescan be recovered from Callimachus, Lav.Pall. 156*"., whose picture reproducesexactly the details mentioned by Athe-naeus :

fj,T] fj,6pa \WTpox6oi Tq. HaXXdSt /X7;5' dXa-

(01) yap 'Adavala

ofaere, /U7;5e KaroirTpov'

dei KaXbv 6/j.fj.d TO

Tyvas.oi)5' 6Va TOLV "\

KPIZII KQ<t>OI

o#r' es 6peixa\Kov peydXa 0eos otfre St-

/JLOVVTOS

2p\e\j/i> divav s dia(paivofj.evav'

ovd' "Hpa* KuTrpis de Siavyta xa^KOV\o1ffa

TToXXd/U TOP O.VTO.V SlS fJiT^6r]K KOfJ-OLV.

a 5 Sis e^KovTota ?ra/)' Evp&rq. rot

e/iiTrepd/iWs everpiâTO Xtrd Xa-

Xpt/xara rd's t'5t'as ^Kyova 0i>raXias,

{J /ccDpat, TO 5' ZpevOos dvedpa/me,o'iav

p68ov*cai I' ri /co/xia-crare

4> Kcurrwp (^ /cat

ofa"ere âi KTVO. ol ws OTTO

Meineke thinks that from Sophoclescame the description of Pallas runningin the stadium, as well as the comparisonof her blush to the morning rose or theflower of the pomegranate. See also onfr. 785.

KQ4>OI IATYPOI

The subject of this play is unknown : Welcker (Nachtr.

p. 295) conjectured that the * dumb ' men were homicides undera ban of silence, possibly on account of the murder of Icarius.

This is not very likely, if the iccofyoi composed the chorus. I

should rather be inclined to guess that the KOX/XH were * block-

heads'

(Hesych. II p. 566 Kwfyov avaio-07jrov pcopov: cf. schol. A i.

911 o iravra ACfc><o9...e'7o> Se, (frrjaiv, 6 avaiaB^TO^ Karrjiêkâa}^like Maccus and Bucco in the Oscan Atellanae (Marx in Pauly-Wissowa I 1918), or the stupidus of the later mime (Juv. 8. 197).

Perhaps we may compare fi\evvov' rov v<&Qr\ real fjiwpov ôocfrpcov

UpofjurjOel (Epicharm. fr. 119 K.). Wagner, who anticipated this

suggestion, inferred from fr. 362 that the subject was the gift offire by Prometheus to the satyrs, who provoked laughter by their

clumsiness and stupidity in using it. Headlam, who also thoughtof Prometheus (/. /Vxxxi 9), understood the title to refer to

the condition of the satyrs before their eyes were opened (cf.

Aesch. Prom. 463).

362

Trep ovov

362 Schol. Nic. 7^her. 343a TO ?rOp kKe\l/avra Kal rots

ol Xa/36^res efjLrjvva'av, ov

ols TOV Ata 0a<rti' etra.iveffa.vTa, (f)dpfji.aKov

aurots dyrjpaalas dovvaL roi)s 5^ Xa/Soiras

OLTTofyepew TO dupTjticv eiri ovov'

TOV de

dl\f/l Tlp6fJI.VOV 4\0IV efo

8<f)is, Kai TOV TTOTOV

TOV y-rjpus TO <t>dpu.aKov . 5co

v TOVS 60ets /ca#' exaffTov vedfewdTTodvo/mevovs TO yrjpas, TQV 5'

601^ TOV r?7S KpT/vys <pv\a.KO.

dittos, odev rots dyxQeww t/J-iroiei 8l\f/av.

t-ffTt 5 6 [Avdos ?rapd 2o0o/cXe? ev Ka>0oty.Aelian nat. an. 6. 51, who tells the same

. story in somewhat different language,adds: rt ovv; eyw TOV fjivdov

dXX' OVK &i> etiroifjii, tird Kal irpb

6 XT}? Tpayyftias iroirjTrjs

6 dvTaywvi(CGF I p. 149 Kaibel), Kai *I(3vKos 6

'Pyyivos (fr. 25) Kal 'ApiffTias (an early

tragedian, whose satyr-plays were especi-

lOÔKAEOYZ

ally celebrated, is meant : see Pauly-Wissowa II 899) Kal

'

Airo\\o<f>dvrjs (fr. 9,

I 799 K.) TTOtijTal K(j)/J.(j}dias q.8ov(nv abrbv.

The myth therefore was an old one :

Nicander prefaces his version in Ther.

343 358 with Aytiyios 5' apa juuflos ev

aifroiffi <f>opfirai.

'We have here one of those beast fables,

which are still told among the Arabs, to

account for the peculiarities of various

animals. Prometheus gave the stolen

fire to Man, but (according to one version)

they were dissatisfied because he had not

endowed them with perpetual youth; at

any rate, they foolishly informed againsttheir benefactor

;and Zeus rewarded

them with an antidote against old age.

They put the precious burden on an Ass's

back to carry. It was hot weather, andthe Ass, coming to a spring, besoughtthe Snake who guarded it to let himdrink. The Snake a di\f/ds said,

"I

will do so on condition that you give mewhat you are carrying on your back." So

they exchanged ;and hence the

every year renews his youth by castinghis slough (dTroStfercu TO yfjpas is the

regular phrase), but he also got the

Ass's thirst, which his bite inflicts uponhis victims' (H.).For the popular belief that the water

of a spring is guarded by a snake cf.

Eur. Phoen. 657 i-vda. <f>6vios rjv dpaKwv \

"Aptos (l)/j,6<t>p(i)v 0i;Xa | vdfjLar' i-vvdpa /ecu

\vTr\dvois eTTKTKOTruH', supr. fr. 226. TheStyx river in Arcadia was locally knownas the Dragon Water : see Frazer's Pan-sanias IV p. 252. Examples from all

parts of the world are collected by the

same writer in vol. v p. 44 f. The

precious burden entrusted to the donkey,and consequently imperilled, recalls the

proverb 6Vos aywv /jLvvrfpia, at least

according to one of its interpretationseTTt rdv avarices TL âffra^vrwv (Diogen.6. 98, Greg. Cypr. 3. 19 [Paroem. I

286, 369]).

363

972363 Schol. Apoll. Rhod. T.

Xeyercu 5e I'ouXos /ecu fabv TL,

TToKtiirovv'

fKartpudev yap xet

7r65as, uxnrep ij ffKoXoirfrdpa. 6e60pa<TTOS5 v

T"jj 7T/30S 4'aj'tai' tTn.<TTO\rj (fr. 185

Wimmer) KCU 6vov ty-tjaiv avrbv Ka\elff6ai,

cos irapd 2o0o/cXet tv Kwôis (rarvpois'

Kv\Hr0i$...l<T6<nrpios.' Phot. lex. p. 337,

17 6Vos iff6ffTrpios (6voais oairpios cod.),

$<ov TroXijTrovv (TK(i>\tjKU>8S, 6 avvetXyOtv

6/J.oiov Kvd/JU}) (paiverou. Hesych. Ill p. 209ovos i<r6<nrpios (&VOGI.S ovirpiov cod. : em.

Salmasius) Z<TTI 8t ffiov iro\tiirovv, dairplq

o/u,oiov, 6 Kal tov\6v TII>S (fraaiv.

'iov\os was evidently the woodlouse;see Hesych. n p. 62 Aetous, p. 30 eiXttos,

p. 356 i \TJOI, and Stephanus in Thes. s.v.

ovos p. 2037 B. From its resemblance to

a bean it came to be called /ctfa/u,os : Galende simpl. med. fac. xn p. 366 Kuehnrots Ka\ov/j.ti>ots 6vi<TKOts. fort de ^ya<r0atpo^ywej'a Kara TT]V ei's eavrbv <rvvo8ov,

aTTep 6vofj.dovvi rives T&V Trap1

r)fjuv Kvd-

/AOfS, e7rei5?7 TrapairXricnoi TOIS ^5a;5i'/u,otj

KvdfJiOis el<riv, tirav eauroOs cr0cu/3w<rwcri,

<paiol Kara ryv xpâv ovres. tiri de r^s

dypoiKias <TTLV ideiv 7rXc/<rrous TOVTOVS

yevvdifjitvovs virb rats vdpiai.?. It wasalso called the Kepdn(3vt- or j-v\o<f>dyos

jSoOs, Anton. Lib. 22.

Were it not that this is a satyric frag-

ment, one might feel sure that the correct

order of the words was 6Vosj I<r6(nrpi6s

Tt's to's. (H.)

364

ol 'iSatot Aa/crvXot.]

364 Schol. Ap. Rhod. i. 1126

So0o/cX^s 5 auroi)s (sc. the Idaean Dac-

tyls) $>pijyas /caXe? cv Ktoôls (rarijpois.

It is not possible within the limits of

a note to discuss adequately the diffi-

culties arising from the various notices

relating to the Idaean Dactyls : the fullest

storehouse of information is Lobeck's

Aglaophamus n 1156 1181. They are

often localized in Crete, but there is also

33

strong evidence placing their home onMt Ida in the Troad. The oldest is

that of the epic Phoronis (fr. 2 K.) evda

yor)TS |

'I5atot 3>ptiyes dvdpesOIK? Zvatov,

|

K A/uts Aa/AJ'ayuej'etfs re

/cat virepfiios "AK/J.O)V, | euTrdXa/Aot depd-

opflys 'AdprjffTfitjs, \

ot

TToXu^rtos 'H0a/o*roto |

vdirais, ioevra ffidrjpov, \

4s trvp T'

TJveyitav Kal dptirpfjrts Zpyov Ideifav. That

appears to be one of the authorities which

Sophocles followed in this and the follow-

ing fragments. Ephorus also testified to

the Phrygian origin of the Dactyls: Diod.

5- 64 1-VlOl 5' IffTOpOVfflV UIV eVrt KO.I "E00pOS(FHG I 253) rous 'ISafouj Aa/crtfXouj

yeveffdo.1 [ji.ev Kara r-r)t>"I8r)v TTJV eV fcpiryta,

diaftrjvai. 5t pcrd M/i/wos e/5 TTJV Efrpiairrjv.

id. 17. 7 yevtffdai 5' ev Totiry (cave on

Trojan Ida) X^yerat /cat TOVS 'ISaious

AaKTi/Xoi/s oOs ffL^pov epydvaadai TT/JWTOUS,

/jia06i>Tas ryv tpyafftav irapa rrjs TUV de&v

365

365 Zenob.

KA/tts C

4. 80 {Paroem. \ 106)

aiir?; TaTrerai ^?ri TW^

/cat

ets rwr Aa/cri/Xwj/, TTJV

vfipl<ras /cat <6re>

"I5?7...d0' o5 6 ffTepewTaros eyevero

(so cod. Ath. according to Miller,/zV/. G*r. p. 370: om. Zenob.)Unfortunately this passage is mutilated:

I have added the words fire and eîêrowhich seem to be demanded by the sense,but we also require the finite verb to

which KA/xts was the subject, describingthe punishment awarded to him for his

arrogance and impiety. Celmis is the

first name among the Dactyls accordingto the Phoronis (/.^.), and is mentionedwith Damnameneus as chief of the

Idaean Dactyls who discovered iron in

Cyprus by Clem. Alex, strom. i p. 362(EGF p. 150). In Nonnus 14. 39 he

appears as one of the Telchins : Gruppeidentifies him with 2/ceX/u.ts, one of Pos-

eidon's attendants in N-onn. 37. 164 etc.,

and connects the name with o-fcdX/x?;-

fj.dx<upa Hesych. iv. p. 37 (Gr. Myth.p. 8842). But in Ov. Met. 4. 281 wehave a trace of the story here alluded to :

te quoque, nunc a da mas, quondam fidis-

sime parvo \Celm i, /ovi, where it will be

observed that adamas answers to 6 (rre-

pewraros ffidrjpos, but Juppiter has takenthe place of Rhea as the offended deity.It seems to follow that Celmis was turnedinto iron as a punishment for insultingRhea. Rhea is here spoken of as themother of the Dactyls ; but Nonn. 14. 26identifies them with the Corybantes, andcalls them yrjyevês, explaining that Rheae/c xQovbs avTOT^Xearov dve^Xda'T'rjffe yevt-0\r)v. Usually, however, they are descri-

bed as attendants or assistants of Rhea,who, as mistress of the heights of Ida,made uê of their labours to work the

metallic ore buried beneath the mountain :

Pollux 2. 156, Diod. 17. 7, Strabo 473.The welcome given by the Dactyls to

the goddess on the occasion of one of

her visits to them was related by Hel-lanicus in schol. Ap. Rhod. i. 1129

Ad/cruXot ^KX^drjffav on evrbs "Idrjs

rrj 'Pî edeîwa' O.VTO TTJV

debv Kcd r&v 8aKTtj\wv avrijs TjâvTo. Weseem to discern the vestiges of a story of

the Philemon and Baucis type, which was

prevalent in various parts of Asia Minor.

Something of the same kind was related

of the daughters of Damon, the chief of

the Telchins; schol. Ov. Ibis 475 (p. 83Ellis). One of these was Dexithea, who is

mentioned by Bacchylides (Jebb, p. 188).

366

TOV? 7T/XWTOU9 (sc. 'IScuovs Aa/crvXov?)TreVre Se /cat dSeX<as

366 Strabo 473 Aa/crtfXous 5' 'ISat'ous

<paal rives KeK\f)ff6ai rods irpurovs oiK^ropas

rrjs Kara, rijv "Idrjif u7rwpeâj...2o0o/cX^5 5^

ottrauirevTe TOVS irpwrovs Apaevas ytvfffOat.,

P. II.

ot aidijpbv re e&vpov /cat elpyaaavro irpCiroi

/cat aXXa TroXXd TWV irpbs rov fllov XP7?

"^"

fiuv, irevrc 51 Kal dde\<f>as TOIJTUV, dirb 8e

rov dpi6fj,ov da.KTv\ovs K\r)6r)vat. aXXot 5'

34 I000KAEOYI

aXAws fj.vdvov<nv...TrdvTes oe ffiSrjpov elp- \ovs KK\^ff&ai \eyovcriv ol fj.ev Kara rbv

ydffdat uirb TOVTUV ev "Idy irp&rbv (pa<ri, dpiduov, on KaKewoi Trfrre r/ffav. Diod.irdvres 5e /ecu y6r)Ta$ vweiKâo'i KO.L irepl 5. 64 TOVTOIS 5' oi fj.ev eKarbv rbv dpi6/mbv

rr)v /j-yrtpa T&V 6e&v Kai fv 3>pvyiq. <^K^6ras yeyovtvai TrapadedwKacriv, ol 8e 5^/ca <pa.<riv

irepi rrfv "Id^v, 3>pvylav TT\V Tp^dda /ca- virdpxovTas rvxew Tavrr)? r??s irpotrriyopias,

XoOj/res dia TO ro!>s 3>ptiyas ewiKparfjaai rots eV rcus Xe.r<r ' da.KTV\ois 8vras iaa.pl-

Trhycriox&povs oVraj TTJS Tpotas enTreirop- 6/m.ovs. The most attractive explanationdrj/jLevys. of recent times is that of Wilamowitz,

Various explanations were given of the who finds in them an analogue of the

name Dactyls, such as that it was given dwarfs in Teutonic folk-lore: they werein virtue of their dexterity in handicrafts, Tom Thumbs who were called Idaioi

or because they grasped the hand of the because they lived in the woods (GGJVgoddess in welcome (fr. 365). Sophocles 1895, 241). Kaibel, however, in a post-is the earliest authority quoted for the humous paper (GGN 1901, 488 ff.), pre-numerical explanation, but it is unlikely ferred to interpret the Idaean Dactyls as

that he invented it : the Phoronis, as we phallic deities, supporting the explanationhave seen, only recognized three Dactyls. of Aa/cr^Xou /u^Tûa in Pausan. 8. 34. i

Cf. Pollux 2. 156 nai TO\JS 'IScu'ouj Acc/cri''- previously given by Belger.

AAKAINAI

The story of the play was taken from the Little Iliad of

Lesches, and is summarized in the epitome of Proclus {EGFp. 27) : Kai perd ravra (i.e. after the visit of Odysseus to Troydisguised as a beggar, when he was recognized by Helen andmade arrangements with her for the capture of the city) avv

^LOfjLrjSet TO TldXXdSwv erc/co/nlêi, e/c rrjs 'I\iov. The order of

events agrees with the evidence of Arist. poet. 23. I459b

6, wherein a list of tragedies taken from the Little Iliad the Trrcoêia anotherwise unknown title immediately precedes the JâKaivai.

The occasion is identified beyond question by fr. 367, as ex-

plained by the authorities which are quoted in the note 1.

The epitome of Proclus suggests that the information whichinduced Odysseus and Diomedes to undertake their dangerousadventure was derived from Helen by Odysseus on his previousvisit. This was to the effect that the possession of the Palladium

by the Greeks was essential to their success. According to

Apollod. epit. 5. 10 Helenus was captured on Mt Ida by Odys-seus, and, when brought into the Greek camp, was forced to

reveal this secret, together with other information concerningthe conditions necessary to the capture of the city. The sametradition is followed by Conon 34 and Qu. Smyrn. 10. 350. Onthe other hand, there are several passages recording that the

theft of the image was promoted by the treachery of Antenor,who not only informed the Greeks of its importance, but also

with the assistance of his wife Theano actually surrendered it to

1 The two visits of Odysseus to Troy are confused by Apollod. epit. 5. 13; andthe same mistake appears even in texts of the classical era. See n. on fr. 367.

KQ4>OI AAKAINAI 35

them (Diet. 5. 5. 8, schol. B Horn. Z 311, Suid. s.v. Ua\\aîov).There is nothing to show how Sophocles arranged these incidents,and it is doubtful whether the complicity of Antenor, which is

inconsistent with his character as portrayed in Homer, was first

introduced in one of the Cyclic epics, by the Attic tragedians, or

some later writer 1. Nevertheless, fr. 368 is particularly appro-

priate if addressed to Theano, as the custodian of the image2,

in order to induce her to hand it over. It is highly improbablethat Odysseus and Diomede removed the statue by violent entryinto the temple in the crude fashion suggested by Conon's nar-

rative 3; but, on the other hand, their success does not necessarily

imply that Theano and Antenor, or either of them, were actuated

by dishonourable motives.

The Spartan women, of whom the chorus consisted, must betaken to be the attendants of Helen

;for no others can be thought

of as likely to be present in Troy. Their sympathies would

naturally be enlisted in favour of the enterprise, and the homeof Helen was a rendezvous to which the two adventurers wouldbe likely to resort, especially if the theft had previously been

arranged with her 4. Fr. 957, which is attributed to the play by

Welcker and others, is suitable to Helen; but the source of

fr. 768 N. is now known to have been the Eurypylns, and the sup-

position that fr. 745 is addressed to Antenor is a mere guess.A much more important question arises in reference to

Welcker's suggestion that fr. 799 belongs to the Lacaenae. Theextract is taken from a speech of Odysseus attacking Diomedes ;

and there is no record of a quarrel between these heroes excepton the occasion of their return to the Greek camp after the theft

of the Palladium 5. Diomedes was carrying the image, which he

had managed to secure, but Odysseus wished to enjoy the sole

credit of the achievement and treacherously attempted to murderhis comrade. Diomedes, however, saw the flash of his sword in

time to ward off the blow, and, in order to prevent a repetitionof the trick, made Odysseus walk in front of him with his arms

bound, driving him into the camp by blows with the flat of his

1 See the different opinions expressed by R. Wagner in Pauly-Wissowa I 2352and Hol/inger on Lycophron 340.

2 Horn. Z 299.3Vergil also (A en. 2. 164 ff.) describes a forcible seizure and the slaying of the

guards.4Engelmann in Roscher in 1943 reproduces a vase-painting of Helen assisting in

the robbery of the Palladium. For the archaeological evidence see also O. Jahn,Der Raub des Palladion, Stolberg, 1845.

5 The authorities for what follows are cited in the n. to fr. 799. As againstBrunck's view, it should be observed that a quarrel between Odysseus and Diomedeshas no particular relevance to the plot of the Zvvdeiirvot, so far as we are acquaintedwith it.

32

36 I000KAEOYZ

sword. Hence, it was said, arose the proverb Ato/i^Seto? avdyicrj,

as applied to those who were forced to act against their will 1.

The strength of Welcker's case is materially increased by a glossof Hesychius (I p. 517), which, though unfortunately incomplete,

proves that something of the kind was related in the Little Iliad

(fr. 9 K.). It is obvious that this story was ill-suited to dramatic

representation, and it may be conjectured that the two heroes

contended with words rather than with blows for the possessionof the prize. Somehow or other their strife must have been

composed before they left the scene, possibly by the intervention

of the goddess herself.

Fr. 799 has not been included under this title, since its

ascription to the Lacaenae is, after all, hardly more than a

plausible conjecture.

367

367

a KOVK aftopfiopov.

dp6ppopov Blomfield : dpdppapov codd.

367 Pollux 9. 49 idpy 5t 7r6Xews...

TriMSes icai \f/a\l8es. &TTI 5 77 i/'aXij cZSoj

ot/coSo/AiJ/uaros'

17 TTOU /ecu 2o<pOK\r)s ev

AaKalvais X^yer'

arev^v... dfidpfiapov.'dXXA Kai IlXdrwj' ev rots N6/Aots [947 D]*'

d-fiK-qv 5' v-jrb 777? auroij ipya<rfiti>r}t> dvai

\f/a\LdaTrpofJi'r)KTj \Ldav iro\VTlfj,(i)v .'

The circumstances are sufficiently in-

dicated by Servius on Verg. Aen. i. 166Diomedes et Ulixes, ut alii dicunt, cuni-

cults, ut tf/zY, cloacis, ascenderunt arcemet occisis custodibus sustulerunt simu-lacrum. See also Ellis on Ov. Ibis 617(p. 165). Aristophanes alludes to the

incident in Vesp. 350 Zariv 6irr] 77$'

p&Ke<riv Kpv((>0ds, uxrircp

s, where schol. R, which is cor-

rupt, has ort TO ira\\d8iov 5i' v8popp6as

d<rri\dov ot Trcpi rbv 'Qdv<r<rta. But heconfuses it, as Starkie remarks, with the

occasion when Odysseus entered dis-

guised as a beggar (Eur. Hec. 240 etc.);

and the same mistake is made by An-tisth. At- 6 [p. 176 Bl. 2].

\J/aX(8a: sewer. In the passage of

Plato which Pollux quotes \f/a\ls is 'a

vault,' and is generally glossed by d\J/ls

(Suid. Hesych.); but the schol. there

hasâX5cr $roi Ka/u.dpai> , us vvv,

Kivr/aiv^ ^ vdpop6r)v ?j ap/mevov.

368

yap OVTTOT' e? ri

T"t]v /car

ravra.vfipw

368. 2 'Ap-yeWEllendt: 'Ap7e^s codd. 3 EY NAI N EIOTATAYTAcodd. VR: corr. Madvig, qui tamen ante raOra interpungit

368 Priscian Inst. 18. 197, n p. 302, addressed to Theano in order to persuade15 Attici, &pxu rovSe Kai r65e, tiri TOV her to give up the Palladium.

Ka,Tdpx<*>' Sophocles Aa/caivats '

êoi.../3^.' 2 'Ap'yciwv. The reading of the

The words may form part of a speech MSS is unintelligible; the only meaning

1 Welcker is mistaken in comparing the proverb with iri6ai>dyKi): it is morelike our 'Hobson's choice.' He also seems to be wrong in preferring the version of

Conon which gave the victory to Odysseus. As compared with Suid. and Zenob. it

shows obvious signs of interpolation. See also Frazer, Pausan. n p. 264.

AAKAINAI 37

which could be extracted from it 'an

outrage after the Argive pattern' is

unsuitable to the context. H. quotes in

support of the genitive At. 304 tiffrjv

KO.T' avTu>v tifipiv ^Kretcratr' i&v, Aesch.

Theb. 393 /caurds *ca0' avrov r^S' vfipiv

yuavTeurrai. He also refers to Liban.

4. ii. 10 [v 216, i Foerst.], whereMenelaus in the aTraiTycris addresses to the

Trojans a similar argument: 6rt (j.ev o$v

vfipi.<r/j.evoiKal rd deivorara ireirovdbTes

eo'TpaTevffafj.ev els yrjv rr\v vfjierepav, Kal

OVK apxovres dXX' dfj.vvdfj.ei'oi KTC. v(3piv.

The ace. after apxw is not common and is

in fact internal (' aggressors in insolence'),as may be seen from the examples quoted

by the lexx. : cf. EL 552 dpa<rd n \

\v-

irrjpdv. Here it is perhaps preferred to

the genitive, because the latter mightseem to imply that the Greeks were also

guilty of u/3/ais. Blaydes, however, wouldsubstitute TTJs...v^peus.3 waiv<rovTcu is followed by ace.

and dat. of the person: 'will grant...?The word is not common and hardlyexists in Attic prose. When used withan ace. rei it means '

to assent to,' as in

Aesch. Ag. 490 XAPiV fyvaivfoai is 'to

yield assent to joyful news.' Cf. [Eur.]Rhes. 172 eXojf 'A^cuous d&pd /xot t-vvai-

vecrov (mistranslated 'promise,' an im-

possible rendering). Xen. Cyr. 8. 5. 20ffvv rrj TOV irarpbs yvwfj.r] . . .ravrd <rot vvva.i-

veVcu (to obtain my father's approvalbefore assenting to your proposat).

Polyb. i. 67. 1 1 a 5e crvvaiveffavras r<$

o-Tparrjy^ ro.vo.vrlo. 717)6? roi)s iroXXouy

dvayy\\iv. Diog. L. i. 32 d/i06re/oot

<rvvriveaa.v QaXrj (rov rpiiroba}. Blaydesconj. vrau>&rowrt, but the indications

favour the middle (cr. n.), and there is nosufficient reason for rejecting it.

|it]

(jLa\ov. The uselessness of resistance to

superior might is proverbial : cf. e.g. Eur.fr. 604 Trpos K^vrpa /j.ij Xd/crife rots Kpa-Tov<ri <rov, fr. 716. See also on fr. 585.

369

vr/

Traucrer ap,ep(t)v

369 Herodian TT. /j,ov. \^. p. 40, 12

(ll 945 Lentz) r6 /u^rot -rrapd So0o/cXetv Aa/catVai? 5avoT-r}S eiprj/Atvov (eiprj/j.tvos

cod.)' v ^...Sacor^ros,' vyi&s SLV ^x.oi ei

irap' 6vo/j.a y^rni.o.nyQf.l'i].

We can only guess at the restoration

of this fragment, which appears to have

been obscure to the grammarians of the

second century A.D.

4vi5- Probably Lehrs was right in

restoring iv $ : Herwerden preferred ydy.H. points out that cv $ must have been

preceded by ij/j^pa or a synonym: Herond.

4. 50 ^(To-er' TjfJLtpr] Keivrj tv 77... KV^fffi,

Polyb. 39. 4. 10 tyaffKe TroXXd/cis otideirore

Ta^rrjv Zffeadai rr\v rj^pav iv $ ffv/j-^-jfiffeTai.

Heliod. 8. 5 &TTCU Kaipb* tv $...etffirpd-

|erat. Arr. Epict. I. 29. 41 crrat xpoj/os

rdxa- &<j> ...oi^ffovrai. The examples

show that a future tense is likely to follow,

but do not enable us to decide betweenTrauffevd' (Lobeck) and irafoerai (Bergk).Dindorfs irQ.vaa.ir

1

is unlikely. apcpuvis corrupt. The editors of Herodian give

dfjLepiwv, with doubtful sense. Lobeck

proposed dpyaXtwv, but Nauck's dfj-trpuv,

in the sense of immeasurable = d/j.eTpr]Tuv

or dv-ripidimajv , is much better. H . supportsit by quoting Simonid. fr. 37, 16 eud^ru

8' a/xerpov Katcbv. Soph. El. 236 KO.I ri

re /cat

/ra/coraros ?<J>v ; Liban. 4. 113. 2

Cv 374 IJ Foerst.] et Kal i^rpov eis

rj/j-as OVK oldev TJ TV^T;. Theocr. 15. 45fj.tipfjiaKes dvdpidfj.oi Kal a/j.eTpot. \i.6\Q<itv

are the labours of the Trojan war, for

which this word or ir6vot is frequently

employed: Ai. 1188, 1197, Aesch. fr.

131 5opi\v/j.dvTovs Acwawj' /u,6xôus, Ag.560, 1166, Eur. Andr. 305, A. P. 5. 13701) 5et'cras Aavautv deK^n] irbvov. Pind. P.

10. 42, describing the Hyperboreans,Tr6vwi> 5e Kal fJ.axdv Arep oiKtoun (H.).

SavoTTJTOS (50^6x77x05 Lehrs) is an obscure

word, and by most critics treated as

corrupt. The accentuation adopted byLehrs follows the authority of HerodianI p. 83, 8 Lentz, where SCU^TTJS occurs in

a list of nouns introduced by the wordsrd ets Tt)S iroXvffvXXafia 6r)\VK& (Bapti-

vovrai (not quoted by Chandler, 635).It is not quite clear what Herodian in-

tends to say. J. thinks he suggestedthat davorfy might be formed from a

proper name ; but the words ei irap' wopa.

ffXiuj-aTiffOetii certainly mean, 'if it wereformed from a noun.' The grammarian'sovofta includes our adjective (Dionys.Thrax p. 23 Uhlig); and Lehrs, whomLentz follows, thought that Herodianintended to refer to a suggested derivation

38 I04>OKAEOY!

from the adverb Sdv in the sense of x/- favour. Much better is Duentzer's dal'o-

1/167-775. But the natural inference is TTJTOS (also proposed by Herwerden),rather that he was in the dark about which should be provisionally accepted.davorris, and did not know of any ovo/ma In supporting it H. remarks that 7r6Xe/xoi>

to which it could be referred. Two other Kal Srjl'oTrjra is a frequent combination in

explanations have been given : (i) From Homer, e.g. H 29 vvv ^v Travawfjiev

Plut. quoni. adoL poet. 5 p. 11 C ddvov iroXe/JLov Kai drjl'oTTjTa, ib. 290 vvv /u.fv

yap Ma/ce56i>es rov ddvarov /caXoucri it is irav<r<j)fj.e<rda /wax7? 5 âi fajforfyrot : so in

in ferred that SaVor^s = 'mortality, misery' a Sibylline oracle quoted by Pausan. 10.

(L. and S.). (2) 8av6s (data)), dry, 9. n fJ-axw Kal 8-rfCorrira. He further

parched, occurs in Horn. O 322. Hence suggests (partly after Kiister) that the

ddv6rr}s might possibly refer to the obscure glosses in Hesychius I p. 525

parching and wearing toils of warfare: 8i>6<r' /ca/coTrXacro-wj' and bvbaovaL- 5ia/c6-' Aestus vel si locus ferebat sitis,' Lehrs. \f/ovat i<aKOTradri<rov(n are errors for ddios

Cf. avaivti}, ^ypaivw. But both the metre (Sîos) and 5cu<t><rou<ri (drjiucrovfft) re-

and the combination with /j-oxdw are spectively. Thus, the passage should

against the latter view. perhaps be restored : iv d Traixrecrd' d/m,-

Of the conjectures neither Lobeck's rpuv re jj.6-\ xdwv /cat Saibr^ros. For

TrXavbTTjTos, Blaydes's KaKdraros, nor the metre of the first line cf. Ai. 698 f.,

Bergk's ddpavdryros have much in their Kur. Hipp. 525.

AAOKOQN

The earliest mention of the Laocoon-story is in the Iliupersisof Arctinus (EOF p. 49). When the Greeks had withdrawn to

Tenedos, leaving the wooden horse behind them, the Trojansheld high festival in the belief that the war was over. Duringthe progress of the feast two serpents appeared, and killed

Laocoon with one of his sons. Aeneas and his family, alarmed

by the omen, fled to Mt Ida. It has been inferred from this

statement 1 that the death of the elder son of Laocoon typifiedthe downfall of Priam, who sprang from Ilus, the eldest son of

Tros;whereas the escape of Aeneas, the descendant of Assa-

racus, a younger son of Tros (Apollod. 3. 140), was symbolizedby the escape of the younger son of Laocoon. Anyhow, the

introduction of the repa? into the narrative of the Iliupersisserved the purpose of supplying a motive for the emigrationof Aeneas and his kindred from Troy to Ida. Dionysius of

Halicarnassus (fr. 373) provides a connecting link between

Sophocles and Arctinus, by stating that Aeneas was repre-sented in the Laocoon as removing to Ida by the advice of his

father Anchises, who inferred the impending destruction of

Troy not merely from his recollection of Aphrodite's behests,but also in part from the warnings recently given Trepl TOU?

AaoKowvrlSas. From the last words Robert draws the im-

portant inference that Sophocles differed from Arctinus in

1 The literary history of the myth of Laocoon, including the treatment by Sophocles,is discussed by C. Robert, Bild u. Lied, esp. at p. 192 ff.

AAKAINAI AAOKOQN 39

making both the sons of Laocoon perish, while Laocoon him-self survived 1

. He argues that Dionysius was not guilty of a

careless inexactitude of expression, since the greater number of

the authorities agree in stating that both sons were destroyed2

.

Lessing long since pointed out that Vergil was the first and

only poet who represented both the father and the two sons

as perishing, and Robert is of the same opinion3. Thus the

famous Vatican group can have nothing to do with the playof Sophocles

4. Robert proceeds to trace the influence of the

Sophoclean version in Lycophr. 347 KOL TrouSo/Spwro? Tlop-Kews VTJO-OVS St,Tr\as, where the serpent is described as

'

child-

devouring.'Servius on Verg. A en. 2. 204 (fr. 372) states that Sophocles

in the Laocoon gave the names of the serpents, and the same

authority (n. on fr. 372) cites the actual names from Lysimachusin the Nosti as Curifis and Periboea. These names are, in all

probability, a corruption of Hop/cis and ^Kapiftoia, as they are

recorded by Tzetzes on Lycophr. 344. Now, since Sophoclesnamed the serpents, Robert infers that Sophocles was the source

of Lysimachus, and also of the scholium on Lycophron. Butthe scholiast further describes the serpents as *

having sailed'

(TrXeucraz/re?) from the Calydnae islands, which recalls the treat-

ment of Bacchylides (fr. 51 J.= 32 B.) as recorded by Servius on

Verg. A en. 2. 201 sane Bacchylides de Laocoonte et uxore eius vel

de serpentibus a Calydnis insults venientibus atque in homines

conversis dicit. It seems impossible to give a satisfactory ex-

planation of these remarkable statements. Welcker, who first

called attention to the points of contact between the authorities,

observed that, if Sophocles mentioned their names, it must have

1 The validity of this reasoning was impugned by R. Foerster ( Verhandlungender 40 Versammlung deutscher Philologen in Gorlitz, 1889, p. 432 ff.), who argued that

AaoKooH'TtSas could properly be employed so as to include the father as well as the

sons. He quoted (among other examples) the use of Aeneadae in Verg. Aen. i. 157and ry ITpodocriq, T&V 'AvrrjvopidCov in Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. I. 46.

2Apollod. epit. 5. 18 states that the serpents devoured (KaTeff0iov<ni>) the sons of

Laocoon, but says nothing about the father. Qu. 12. 390 500 makes Athena the

enemy of Laocoon. The goddess blinded him, and the two sons were afterwards

killed by the serpents which swam across from Calydna; but the father survived.

Tzetz. Lye. 347 mentions the death of one son only, and so also Posthom. 714.3

p. 209. In that case the reference to Euphorion in Serv. Verg. Aen. i. 201 is

confined to the first sentence.4 The Vatican group was described by Plin. n.h. 36. 37. It is dated by Engel-

mann (in Roscher II 1839) about 1508.0. Robert, who states (p. 212) that there is

no representation of Laocoon in Greek art of the best time, puts it in the reign of

Titus. Engelmann (Arch. Stud., 1900, p. 25), however, thinks that the group wasinfluenced by Sophocles, and that Vergil in turn modelled his description on the

group. Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 6896, takes a similar view, holding that Soph, com-

bined the Iliupersis story with the version which spoke of the sons only as destroyed.

The latter was adopted by Bacchylides, whom Apollodorus and Quintus followed.

40

been because the serpents changed into men; for there could

be no other object in recording the names. Robert, however,

mainly on the ground that the word TrKevcravres could not

suitably be applied to serpents, concluded that they came over

in human form and were afterwards changed into serpents,thus attributing to Sophocles a tradition which is the exact

converse of the version of Bacchylides. But this conjecture is

not only improbable in itself, but inconsistent with the epitomeof Apollodorus (5. 18), which by various touches shows its con-

nexion with the Lycophron-scholia : Svo yap SpaKovres

â/jiVOL Sid TT)S OaXaacFrjs etc rwv 7T\rjo-iov vycrwv TOU?

viovs Kareo-Olovaiv 1.

According to Hygin. fab. 135 Laocoon, son of Acoetes (sub-stituted in error for Capys) and brother of Anchises, was a priestof Apollo who had incurred the anger of the god for disobeyinghim by marrying and begetting children. The names of his

sons are given as Antiphates and Thymbraeus2

. The cause of

Apollo's anger is differently given by Servius on Verg. Aen.

2. 20 1, who says that Laocoon had profaned the temple at

Thymbra, ante simulacrum numinis cum Antiopa uxore sua

coeundo. Now, the Lycophron-scholia make the temple of

Apollo Thymbraeus the scene of the disaster, and also differ

from Hyginus in making Laocoon the son of Antenor 3. Hence

Robert, who had already identified Sophocles as the source of

the scholiast, concludes that the circumstances of Laocoon's

guilt, as given by Servius, were also derived from Sophocles,

arguing that it was a favourite tragic motive to localize the

punishment at the place of the offence. He also considers that

Sophocles derived from Bacchylides the idea that Laocoon hadsinned against Apollo, as well as the version that both his sons

(but not he himself) perished4.

Probably the opening of the play described the rejoicingsof the Trojans at the supposed departure of the Greeks (fr. 370),and perhaps also the debate as to what should be done withthe wooden horse, in which Cassandra and Laocoon may haveuttered a warning of the impending danger but without success

(Apollod. 5. 17). It seems that a sacrifice to Poseidon in grati-

1 See also Engelmann in Roscher n 1840 ff.

2 Robert holds that the text of Hyginus has been considerably interpolated from

Vergil, i.e. from Aen. i. 201, 203, 231. M. Schmidt (p. xxv) regarded the whole

chapter as an interpolation by someone who was more familiar with Vergil and Ovidthan with the Greek sources. Foerster, however, argues strenuously in favour of its

genuineness, and since, for various reasons, it cannot have been derived from Arctinus,

Bacchylides, or Euphorion, he concludes that it must contain the version of Sophocles.3 Among Antenor's children Homer mentions K6w/ (A 248) and Aa65o/cos (A 87).4

op. cit. pp. 197, 200.

AAOKOQN 41

tude for removing their enemies was resolved upon (fr. 3/I)1

,

and Laocoon was perhaps instructed to carry it out. The sub-

sequent catastrophe must have been reported by a messenger,and either the same or another messenger announced the de-

parture of Aeneas (fr. 373). That Laocoon had sinned againstApollo, as stated by Servius, is probable enough ;

but it is

difficult to conceive him as merely the passive victim of destinythroughout the whole course of the action. In other words,the early transgression is too remote to serve as a dramatic

justification for the TreptTreVeta ;one would rather suspect that

Laocoon by some fresh demonstration of vftpis proved that thetime was ripe for divine vengeance. To have hurled a spearat the wooden horse is in itself not enough to convict him of

impiety (Aen. 2. 229 ff.); but the circumstances of the act maywell have been such as to stamp it with the mark of reckless

arrogance. Laocoon, the /-triz/Tt?, was perhaps a scoffer whoridiculed the notion of divine interference. Although there is

no direct evidence of this in our authorities, the character of

Laocoon so far as it may be gathered from Vergil and Quintusis quite consistent with such a supposition.

On the question of the identity of this play with the Ante-noridae see Introductory Note to that play (l p. 89).

370

8' dyvievs /3a>/xos aT/xta)i> irvpl

crraXay/xous, /3a/o/3a/oovs

37O. 2 crTa\ay/j.ovs D : ffTa\ay.u.ois Harpocrationis codd. plerique

37O Harpocr. p. 5, i dyvias...lev 5' This may have received the outpouringsdp ot wapa rots 'Arrt/cofs \ey6vevoi. dyvieis of libations, or have been decorated withoi irpb TUV OIKI.WV pu/ji.oi, u?s 0a<ri Kparwos ribbons and garlands : but it is a mistake

(fr. 375, i 118 K.) Kai Mtvavdpos (fr. 983, by reason of the obscure gloss in Hesych.Ill 249 K.). KCLI 2o00KX?7s tv ry Aao/f6- I p. 35 dyviefa 6 irpb r&v Qvp&v e<rruJ5 ^Sw/xos

wvn, nerdyuv ra '

Adyvaiwv 07? eis Tpoiap, ev a-xâo-i Kiovos to suppose that it was

(f>T}(rit

\tAfHrei...ctofffdai.1 There are generally used as a sacrificial altar or to

similar quotations in Bekk. anecd. p. 332, identify it with the j8o;,u6s ayviefo in the

6, Suid. s,v. dyviai, and Zonar. p. 20, text. The jSw/Aos ayvtefo, which is some-s.v. ctyvtas, but the name of the play is times briefly spoken of as cryutei/r, stood

not given in any of them. in front of the house either instead of

1 cryvwvs PWJXOS: see n. on Eur. the /aW, or with it, or with a statue of

Phoen. 631. The dyvtetis is explained Apollo 7r/>o<rraT7^>tos. Such altars, which

by grammarians and scholiasts as KIWV es were of the usual rectangular shape, were

o|t> \-/)ywi> or Kuvoeidrjs KIUV : and a stone commonly represented on the stage (Poll,

of this kind, the relic of an archaic 4. 123); and are referred to here, as in

fetish-worship (cf. dpyol \t0oi), was com- EL 634, Eur. Phoen. 274, and elsewhere,

monly placed in front of Athenian houses. For fuller details see Reisch in Pauly-

1 It will be noticed that the prayer of the chorus to Poseidon agrees with the

narrative of Vergil (Aen. 2. 201) and Hyginus.

42 !04>OKAEOYS

Wissowa I 910 913. Miss J. E. Harri-

son, Themis, p. 406 ff., treats the dyvtetis as

a fertility-symbol. a.T|Av, 'smoking.'

J. joins irvpL with Xd/xTret : the hyper-baton presents no difficulty : see n. onEur. Hel. 719 and Jebb on Ai. 723.2 <rTaA.a-yp.ovs. Although most MSS

of Harpocration have a-raXc^/nots, the

other sources give ffra\ayfj.ovs. Blaydeswished to read (TTa\ay/j.ols, /3a/o/3dpots

evofffuats. J. says: 'The ace. is right:it is cognate to dr/mifav (cp. Pherecr.

fr. 108, 14 1 174 K. Tj8i<TTOv drfiiôvra-

al.] of meat) "steaming with

the ooziness of myrrh," i.e. with the gum,called myrrh, distilled from an Arabiantree. Cp. Eur. Ion 1175 /cde0u/afffj.vpvris IS p fora, "burnt the ooziness ofthe myrrh as incense."' Cf. Eur. Tro.

1064 (T/ui,vpvr)s aiBeptas re Kcnrvdv, whichis also of Trojan altars. Incense (Xt/Sa-

vdoros) was commonly employed in the

ritual of Greek sacrifice (Ar. Vesp. 86 1) ;

but /3ap/3dpous suggests the profusion ofsuch spices characteristic of the East.

Hence Eur. fr. 773, 13 KatrixupioLS \

6<T/j.ai(ri dvîdoffLv elcrodovs Sofj-wv, wherethe scene is in farthest Ethiopia.

IIocriSoi>, os Atycuou

I yXau/cas ev-

Xcus crTriXaSecrcrt,.

371. 1 Aiyalovs xets Bergk, Aiyaiov pûeis Fritzsche, Aiyaiov irepi Tucker2 sq. irpuvbs Scaliger |

evavfyovs V 4 cr7rtXd5e<7<7t (rrondruv codd. : transp. Bergk,cnri\d5cr(riv ^TTUTTWV M. Schmidt, <nri\d8eff<ri dodfav Henning, iro\v<i)v Herwerden,(TKOTrcXbiv Kock, 2iropd8ii)v Tucker, vai&v Campbell, Ka6ifav vel da/j.ifav vel

Blaydes, ffrevdxuv Papabasileios

371 Ar. Ran. 665 AI. H6ffeiSov.

{VTLS. AI. 6s Aiyaiov irp&vasT)s ctX6$ ev j3vde<rii>. The

scholiast remarks : irapa rd 2o<pOK\tovsK AaoKbtoVTOS ( Hbffeioov . . .ffTOf^druv .'

1 f. The text presents serious diffi-

culties. It is at once clear that the first

^5et$ must have been erroneously in-

serted, since it cannot govern the accusa-

tive irpuvas. There is a further stumbling-block in the fact that irp&vas in Aristo-

phanes has no construction, and it is

hard to say whether the text of Aristo-

phanes has been corrupted from the

scholium or vice versa; the possibilitythat the two errors have occurred in-

dependently is more remote. None of

the critics has satisfactorily accountedfor the double blot. Tucker's remedy,which is the best that has been proposed,assumes the loss of irepl in its abbrevi-

ated form IT in both texts; but he does

not say whether he regards this as a

coincidence, or considers one omission to

have led to the other. J., supporting, quotes Phil. 392 (Fa) a rbv

i'efJLLS and for /x^5ei

Horn, a 72 $6pKvvos dvydr-rip, dXos drpv-

ytroio /JifdovTOS. Atyatav is for Aiyaiov

TreXdyous (irbvTov). The ellipse of the

noun is not common in our texts, but cf.

Eur. Hel. 766 ras ev Ai'ycuy <pdopds.

Hyps. fr. 3. II 27 TO.V Aiyalos eXiffcruv|

KVfjiOKTVTros dêt, fr. 41 II 103 5t' Aiyaiov5 riva Tr6pov...\ Schaefer (ap. Thesaur.)

quotes several examples from Lucian,

e.g. Hermot. 28. In A. P. 7. 256 (at-

tributed to Plato) oifte TTOT' Alyaioio

f3apvppo/j.ov oW/ma XiTrovres Stadtmueller

unnecessarily proposes fJSaros. irpwvas :

it has been suggested that irpuv here is

an inlet or gulf of the sea, as aXtoy irpZ/va.

is sometimes taken to be the Hellespontin Aesch. Pers. 135, 882. There is no

need, however, to give up the ordinary

rendering, headland. It was usual for

temples of Poseidon to be erected uponpromontories : hence Ar. Eq. 560 c5 5eX-

(pivwv /jLeStwv, Zovvidpare, w Fepata-rie irai

Kpoi'ou, Ach. 510 oiiTri Taivdpi*) deos. J.remarks :

'

0-7riXd5e<r<n has its propersense, .sra-rocks. Sophocles spoke of

Poseidon here as (i) ruling over

AAOKOQN 43

as at Sunium etc.: (2) or, surveying the

blue expanse of the open sea from the

rocks amidst the waves to which he has

risen from the depths.' |i&eis, whichoccurs also in Ant. 1119, is regarded bysome as an archaistic re- formation after

the substantival jjitSuv : see Smyth, Gk.

Melie Poets, p. 213.

o-TojAeiTwv is generally considered to be

corrupt, and most critics have requireda participle in its place. H., who hadabandoned his earlier proposal to read

Sowo-wi' or Sowiarwi', referring to Aesch.Cho. 802 w yw^ya vaiwv crT6fj.iov, suspectedthat by oTo/tdrwi/ the gateways to the

underworld were meant. This will

hardly do without some specificationeither express or implied in the context.

What if Taivapiwv followed, and this

were the original of Vergil's Taenarias

fauces (Georg. 4. 467)? So Find. Pyth.

4. 43 irap xQovLOV "Ai5a <7r6/ia, Taivapovet's iepdv. But there is another possibilitywhich deserves mention. The worshipof Poseidon on promontories was often

connected with the existence of a secure

harbour of refuge in the immediate

neighbourhood. This appears most

clearly in Eur. Cycl. 290 ff. ot rbv vbv,

u>j/ct,

eppv<rd[Ji.e(rda yfjs tv 'EXXdSos

iepetfs T' adpavffTOS Taivdpov fj.tvei \i/j.r)v|

MaXâs T' &Kpoi /ceu^^tSês r; re Zou-

vLov|

5/as 'Afldpas <rws virdpyvpos wtrpa \

TepaiffTiol re Kara<f)vyat. Hence the

titles dff(f)d\ios, Trava.a'<pd\ios, <raNrtj/e'ws

and the like: the details are collected

by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1158. Nowevavfjuiov, on the ordinary view, is either

(a) breezy or (b] calm, without muchobvious point. But in Eur. Andr. 749\ifjLtvas vrji>[j.ov$ = sheltered harbours.

We might then translate: 'Who holdest

sway on lofty crags over the entrance to

the blue waters of the sheltered cove.'

In any case, I think, Bergk's transposition

(TTOfjt.dT(t}v cririXddecra-i should be acceptedfor metrical reasons. This error is verycommon, and the enhoplic rhythm of

vv. 2, 3 can hardly be mistaken: the

first line, whether to be called enhoplicor logaoedic, should be compared with

O.C. 210 or Ai. 399 (Schroeder). eud-

v/j.os always has a, probably even in Ai.

197, except in A. P. 9. 555 (Crinagoras,circ. B.C. l\ A. D. 9) evdvefjiov XL/JL^VUV r'

TJTTLOV drpenir], a passage which also

illustrates the rendering suggested above.

372

[draconum nomina.^\

372 Servius on Verg. Aen. 2. 204

(speaking of the serpents which attacked

Laocoon) horuni sane draconum notnina

Sophocles in Laocoonte dicit.

Nauck discredits this statement alto-

gether, and thinks that it is due to con-

fusion of Sophocles himself with the

scholiasts who commented on his text.

This attitude, which he supports by a

reference to Aesch. fr. 376, Eur. fr. 1016and other passages, cannot be approved.The names are given by Tzetzes on

Lycophr. 344 as H6pKis and Xapi/Soia.Serv. on Verg. Aen. 2. 211, quoting as

his authority Lysimachus an Alexan-drian writer belonging to the second or

first century B.C. in the N6<rrot (FHGIII 240), presents them in the disguisedform of Curifis and Periboea (curifin et

periboeam : Thilo conj. Porcen ofin [8<pu>]

et Chariboeam}. Lycophr. 347 has /ecu

TrcuSojS/JtDroj YlopK^ws vr)<rov$ 6iir\ds,

referring to the Calydnae.H. points out that the serpent who

guarded the apples of the Hesperides is

named Ladon by Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1396.C. Keil (Anal. Epigr. 191 n.) adds

Glycon, the name of a snake in Lucian

Alex. 1 8.

For the significance of these names as

bearing on the plot of the play see In-

troductory Note.

44 20<t>OKAEOY!

373

AITEAO2

vvv 8' iv TrvXaiGTLv Aipea? 6 rrjs Oeov

TrdpecrT9

, CTT' ay/.ajz' irarep e)((ov KepavviovVCOTOV Karao~raoz'Ta fivcrcrivov <apos,KVK\OL 8* dvao'Tacr' OLK^TMV 7rafJi7r\.'YjOia.

<Two7raeTcu Se irXrjOos ol TTOCTOV Sofcet?,

ot T7jo~8' IpaxTi r^9 ciTroi/aas t&pvytov.

373. 1 Aiveias codd. 2 Kfpatiinov coni. Reiske 3 /xoroO Plutarchi codd.

plerique 4 KVK\OI B [v. tamen comm.]: KVK\eT vulg., Ki//cXy Reiske|

5' dj'ao'Taa''

scripsi : 5^ Tracrav codd.|TrafjnrXydia Blaydes : ira[Air\ir)0iai> codd., TrayK\rjpLav coni.

Bergk, ira/junr]<rlav Naecke 5sq. o-u/XTrXdferat meliores Dion. codd.| yap Bergk |

Tr\r)0os ol irbffov Herwerden : TrXfjdos oi)x offov codd.|Sofcets, ot Reiske: doKfi ffoi

codd.|TACTS' A: ro?<rS' ceteri codd.

town Aineia in Macedonia belonging to

the sixth century B.C., on which Aeneas is

represented carrying his father on his

shoulders, with his wife beside him

carrying a child in like manner (Bau-

meister, Denkmaler, fig. 1015). Cf.

Apollod. epit. 5. 21 AiVeias 5e 'A/yx'"" 7?"

rbv irartpa fiaffrdaas tyvye. Kepavvuov.' Anchises had been struck with lightningfor divulging his intercourse with Venus.

In the Homeric hymn to Aphrodite, the

goddess speaks thus to Anchises (v. 286) :

e 5^ Kev ej-elirris Kal eirevêai auppovi.

373 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. i. 48,

discussing various accounts of Aeneas'

migration from Troy to Italy :

2o0o:X77$r /JLCV 6 rpaytpdoiroibs tv Aao-Kb&VTL Spd/tari, /ieXXowTTjs aXlffKecrdcu r^s

7r6Xewj, ireTroirjKe rbv Mvdav dvaa-Kcva-

blJ.evov e/s rV "IS^v, Ke\fVffdh>roL virb rov

Kara rrjv ^vi\^.f\v iSv

al airb rdv

irepi TOVS AaoKouvrLSa^rbv /xeXXoira aiKedpov TTJS 7r6Xews

vulgo)

(Kiessling for

v. 3 is quoted by Plut. de virt. et vit.

i p. 100 D, without the name of poetor play : ti>s yap dp^/ut-ara Tpiftuvas euc65eis

Kal paKia Troiet, roO 5' 'A7%i<rou rb (rw/xa

codd. opt., Aid.) i'xw/>a irovypbv' V&TOV KaracrTdôvTa fivavivov

<pdpos.' For i/tiroi/ Wyttenbach has

(J.OTOV ('lint') in his text, although he

prefers vurov, which he assigns to Turne-bus. Bernardakis prints VUTOV without

mentioning any variant. Weil suggests

Pp6rov. It appears that most of Plut.'s

MSS have /toroO, the Riccardianus aloneV&TOV (Nauck, Paton).

1 Alve'as: for the authorities whichdeal with the departure of Aeneas see

the Introductory Note.2 f. 6ir* wjiwv : there is very little

doubt that this touch, which is explainedby the allusion of Kepavviov, goes backto Arctinus. The oldest evidence relatingto it appears to be that of a coin of the

Lri, |

Zevs ere x^\l/o\6evTi Kepavvy. Verg. Aen. 2. 648(Anchises speaks) ex quo me divom pater

atque homimtm rex\ fulminis adflavit

ventis et contigit igniS (J.) Allen andSikes suggest that the story is late, on the

ground that it appears first in Hyginus;but Rossbach (in Pauly-Wissowa I 2107)seems to be justified in tracing it to the

old epic saga. The alternative account

that Anchises was blinded by the lightningis ascribed to Theocritus by Servius onAen. 2. 35. See Wilamowitz, Textgesch.d. Bukol. p. 233.

v(orov...(f>dpos. Plutarch's i'x<*>pa TTO-

vrjpov êdidov leaves no doubt that heunderstood Sophocles as affirming that

the robe of Anchises was stained by the

discharge from his wound. So the wordsare taken by Wyttenbach, and by J., who

quotes for the ace. after Karao-rdfo; Phil.

823 i5pu>$ 7^ rot VLV irav /caTcurrdfei 5^/uas,

and Eur. Hec. 241 <pbvov <rTa\ay/j.ol <rr)v

AAOKOQN 45

ytvvv. But this view fails to

account for the genitive vtbrov, for whichno parallel can be adduced. And, if

the words mean 'dropping (matter) fromhis palsied back over his linen robe,' it

is very odd that the most important word

(i'xw/>a or the like) should be omitted.

If this line of interpretation is followed,the loss of a verse must be assumed.But the assumption is unnecessary, for

the words can naturally be explained'letting his linen robe drop over his

back.' Wyttenbach, who mentions this

as an alternative version, calls it 'durior

metaphora' : but cf. Horn. B 734/u.ev KO.T^xeVV eavbv irarpbs TT'

Aesch. Ag. 230 KpdKov fiafpas 5' ^s irttov

Xtova-a. I am glad to find that the sameview was taken by Meineke on Callim.

h. Dem. 5 /*?;5' a xareêuaro \oiro.v.

W. R. Paton in C. R. xxv 204, adopting/J.OTOV and reading Kfpavviov (coll. Ant.

1139) understands 'staining the fine coat

of Aeneas with the discharge from his

rag-bandage.' It may perhaps seemhazardous to assume that Plutarch mis-

understood Sophocles, but I believe that

VUTOV and JUOTOU were old rivals, andthat Plutarch chose the inferior. Theintrinsic superiority of VUTOV, as inter-

preted above, seems to me unquestionable:the punishment of Anchises was long

ago, and surely he had not suffered froma running sore ever since. Besides, onPaton's view, /J.OTOV is scarcely less harsh

than vurov. And why does Paton speakmore than once of a '

purple cloak '? Any-how, this is scarcely a case for correction

(dr/xou Burges, Xvdpy or d0py Blaydes).

PWOTO-IVOV 4>apos,' meant to be oriental

and barbarian. In Aesch. Pers. 128

j3vff<rlvois Ti-^TrXots are the garb of the

Persian mourners. Eur. Bacch. 821 AI.

<rTt\al vvv d/j.<pi x/>wri [3v<r<rivovs irtirXovs.\

HE. rl 817 r65'; s ywtUKoa e dvdpbs reXcD;'

(J.) The latter passage shows that

Pv<r<ros was also the delicate wear of

women: so Aesch. Theb. 1030, Theocr.

2. 73, fr. 439 n. This explanation suffi-

ciently accounts for </>d/>os, which is not

elsewhere in tragedy applied to male

attire, without supposing that it denotes

a gift of Aphrodite to Aeneas (Mekler in

Jahresb. cxxix 81).4 KvicXoi. See cr. n. Nauck and

Dindorf adopted Reiske's /rikXy (whichhowever Jacoby attributes to B), but

Hense rightly objected to a reading whichinvolves a clumsy syllepsis of %xuv > even

if it does not seem to assert that Aeneas

carried all his household, as well as his

father, on his back. Hense's ownremedy /cu/cXet 5e ?rai'TWJ'...and Blaydes'sKVK\el 5 <ru/A7rdV . . . fail to remove the

inelegant repetition of TTCIS. I have sub-

stituted 5' dvaffraff' (i.e. draararos 76^0-

/J.tvr]), which gives an appropriate meaning(cf. Eur. Hec. 494), and might easily havebeen corrupted to 5 ira<rav: the accusative

n-afjLirX-rjdtav was a consequential error.

It is impossible to accept Ellendt's viewthat KUK\I means l secum volvit, i.e. turba

circumfusus ingreditur.'

Papageorgiusrightly gave the preference to KVK\OI, for

the lexicons will show that KVK\IV cannotbe used for 'to encircle.' ira|iirXT]0tahas been objected to (see cr. n.), asaira eipri^vov, and because rXv}0os occursin the next line. But something mustbe allowed to accident, and Trafj.TrX-rjdla

is hardly the word to have been introducedas a gloss. Blaydes compares iroXvjrXrjdtq.fr. 667 and dvdpoTrXrjBia Aesch. Pers.

238. See also on fr. 915.5 <ruvoiroTcu. 'The anapaest in

the first foot, in a word of more thanthree syllables, is rare, though not in-

correct (cp. O. T. 20 dyopaia-i 6a.Kei).

<TU;U7rXdeTcu = (ri'jitTrXai'aTcu,' ' wanders

forth with him," emigrates from Troy.'(J.) Bergk's ydp (see cr. n.) is attractive

but unnecessary: see on fr. 576, 4.

ov\ oorov SoKtts can hardly be right. Its

natural meaning would be 'less than youthink': cf. Eur. Tro. 864 ri\dov Se

Tpoiav oi>x ti(rov doKeirt p.e \ yvvaiKbseiW/t'. Herwerden's conjecture restores

a familiar Greek idiom, irdtrov 5o*ets

being strictly parenthetic: cf. Ar. Eccl.

399 6 dfifjios dvafioq., irbaov doKeis ; Pac.

704 xctre/xx 7r60"' CITT' o?ei yeyevyad' ev rrj

irbXei. Eubul. fr. 82, II 192 K. f)<f>dviKe

iryXiKov Tivd\

oteffOe ptyedos. See also

Starkie on Ar. Vesp. 1428 (p. 425).

Theophil. fr. 2, II 473 K. /ri/Xt/ta...7ro)s

doKeis Kepavvtiet KCL\WS. Diphil. fr. 96, II

572 K. denrvei re Karadvs TTWS 5o/cets

Aawfi/cws. The idiom is obviouslycolloquial, 'you can't think how large,'but we have TTCOS doKeis in tragedy also at

Eur. Hipp. 446, Hec. u6o(/. A. 1590 is

a late forgery). The latter passage e/c

ya\T)V(jJv TrtDs doKeis Trpo<T<pdy/j.dTi>)v,' as

peaceful as you will,' is strangely mis-understood by some.6 ' Dind. and Herw. place a comma

after diroii<Las, to show that &pvyi> goeswith ir\fjdos. For

<!>/>i;= T/u6s, cp. Ai.

1054 (n.)' (J.) Rhythm shows that <l>pi>7w>is governed by oi'.

46 !0<t>OKAEOY!

374

TTOVOV

374 Stob. flor. 29. 38 (in p.

3 Hense) I 2o0o/cXôi;s Aao/cou'Tos.

o TTOVOL

635,'

TTO-

Though the words are simple enough,their exact intention has puzzled the

critics. Thus Dobree proposed ol \6yoi

y\VKels or ?/ /j.vr)/jir) y\VKv, doubtless with

the object of producing a closer corre-

spondence with the well-known line of

Euripides (fr. 133) dXX' ijdv TOL crudtvTa

fj.efj.vTja'6'at irbvwv. See also the illustra-

tions quoted on Eur. Hel. 665 i)dv TOL

jj.bx6uv K\veiv. But, if we compareAntisth. ap. Stob. flor. 29. 65 r)5ovas

Tas /j-era TOVS -rrbvovs OI.WKTOV, dXX' oi>x<-

rds irpb T&I> irbvuv, remembering that it

was Antisthenes who said fj-aveirjv /jt,aX\ov

7) riadeirjv, the point might appear to bethat labour brings its own reward with

it. Aesch. Ag. 798 evtppuv irovos ev

Hence Ellendt's Kbirov /zeraX-

and Meineke's /u,6x&ov 6" d?raX-

. H. would have agreed with

Meineke as against Ellendt on the groundthat irbvov, Kbirov or i^bxôv requires a

verb meaning to abate, cease', whereas

fjLTa\\daffiv is to shift, change, alter.

He accordingly approved TTOT/UOU yueraX-

(Nauck had conjectured irdrjuLov

s), comparing fr. 871. i,

Aesch. Theb. 692 5cu/uo'.../u,eTaXXaKT6s

(in a metaphor from a changing wind),Pers. 944 daL/Jnav yap 65'

e?r' e/io^ (schol. ^ Tvxn /

Eur. 7"r^. 101 /x.era/SaXXoyU^j'oi' dai/movo?

,Dinarch. i. 92 fj.fTotuvio'a.o'dai

l fj,Ta\\dâffdaL. Similar is

the intention of Tucker's irvbov, a wordnot to be lightly introduced. On the

other hand Hense, who does not alter

the text, evidently approves the meaning'a change of labour is sweet.' Only the

context could decide, but I am not satis-

fied that irbvov jueraXXax^J'Tos cannot

express a change from labour to ease.

Thus Eur. Her. 734 /iera/3oXd KOLK&V

probably signifies a release from suffering,and there is no doubt about the meaningof Eur. fr. 864 Traitor /xera/3oXds yapirbvwv dci 0iXw, and of Soph. fr. 314, 217/AercurrcKm irovwv. Gomperz defends his

conjecture oi 7601 for ot irbvoi by the

Homeric 76^ <pptva rcpiroân and y\vKvi>

1/j.tpov wpffe 76010, and other passages in

tragedy; but this is less attractive, as

the pleasure of weeping does not dependon the cessation of suffering. Stadt-

mueller's ot TTOTOI y\vKei$ is certainly to

be rejected.

yap

375

rov 7rape\06vTos Xdyo9.

375 Stob. flor. 29. 37 (in p. 635,I Hense) So0o/cXeovs AaoKouvros (so S. :

MA omit the extract). '/x6%0oi;...X67os.'

Meineke reads irbvov for ^6%ôu, con-

necting this with the last fr. (see n.).

Similarly Holzner conjectured ijdvs for

ovdels. Dindorf also concludes that the

two lines are to be read together. Butin fact they do not fit each other : herethe point is that no sooner is a sorrow

past than it is forgotten. Cf. Find. Isth.

8. 12 dXX' e/x.oi dti/j.a ^v irapoixbfJLfvov j

Kaprepav i-Travve fj.pi.[jLva.v. ov8cls...\6-

yos, 'no account is taken of...,' is a

phrase which Herodotus employs morethan once: see 7. 223 T]V 5 \6yos otidris

TOV dTToXXf/iôu, 8. 1 02 Mapdoviov de ijv

TL TrdBr] \6yos ovdeis yiyverai, 9. 80. Cf.

Aesch. Prom. 247 ftporCov ot r&v raXat-

Trwpwv \byov j

OVK %o~xv ovotv' (seeBlomfield in loc.}, Eur. fr. 94 TUV yapovvacrrwv TrXeto-ros eV ?r6Xet X67os, Med.

541 OVK a.v yv \6yos <redtv an examplewhich shows that it is sometimes difficult

to separate this meaning from that of

speech, reputation (/. T. 517). Sopho-cles has also OVK av wpiai/m-riv ovSevbs \6yovfiporbv KTC. Ai. 477, and /XTJ fyvvai TOV

arravTa VI.KO. \6yov O.C. 1225 (Jebb'sn.).Both the sense and the language are illus-

trated by Ai. 264 (ppovdov yap r/orj TOV

KaKov /j-fiwv \6yos.

AAOKOQN AAPIZAIOI 47

376

376 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 136, 28

<-<r/J-a<-- 2o<o/cX?7S Aao-Cf. Hesych. I

p.. 199 a.vi)\6Ki-

If we may judge by the analogy of

Eur. Suppl. 826 /card [MV ovv^v rjXoid-

<rfM0a, and of Aesch. Cho. 25 ovvxos&\oia veoTb^, the reference is to the

self-laceration of female mourners. It is

possible, however, that the meaning is

simply 'I am wounded,' for which cf.

Rhes. 796 padeiav aXoKa rpaify-taros \afi&v.So probably also Eur. Her, 164 KavriStp-KCTCU

j dopos raxâv d\OKa, rdîv eyuê^ws,which Wilamowitz interprets as a swiftly-

moving crop of spears.

377

377 Hesych. II p. 432 Kara/set KTTJS

(KarappdKT-tj^ Musurus)' dxrrbs, pvdj;. Kal

6 der6s. So0o/c\?7S Aao/c6ctTt (\aoK6ocncod.). Kal ras apirvias tv 3>(.vei (fr. 714).The eagle received this name from its

downward swoop as a bird of prey. Thesea-bird specifically so called is accord-

ingly described by Arist. h. an. 9. 12.

615* 28 6 5c KarappaKTr)? ffj /JLCV irepi

BdXarrav, OTO.V d Kadfj eavrbv et's TO

fiadv, fji^va xp6vov OVK eXdrrova ?) ocrov

irXtdpov 5U\6oi. ns. Also the verb Kara-

pd<r<reiv is used of the rapid descent of

a bird. Cf. [Arist..] mir. ausc. 79 : theDiomedean birds, if barbarians land in

their island, dviTrracrdat /ecu

Karapdffcreiv avrovs et's rds /ce0a\d$These birds were called cataractae bysome authorities : Plin. h. n. 10. 126.

Lycophron, who has KipKov KarappaKTijpos

(169), compares Paris to a bird of preyin describing him as ffiviv KarappaKrrjpa

(539). Athen. 393 B: if jackdaws see

their own reflection in a bowl of oil, ol

avT&v eiri TO ^'Xos /cat

iiri TOV /J.(f)a.Lvbp.evov KarapdrTov<n.

AAPIIAIOI

There can be no reasonable doubt that the subject of this

play was the final issue of the story of Acrisius and Danae.

According to Pherecydes in schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 1090 {FHGI 76), Perseus, leaving Dictys as sovereign of all the Seriphianswho were not destroyed by the Gorgon's head, returned to Argoswith his wife and mother. But Acrisius was no longer there

;

for, in fear of the oracle that he would be slain by his daughter'sson, he had withdrawn to the Pelasgian town of Larisa. Perseusfollowed him there, made himself known to his grandfather, and

persuaded him to accompany him to Argos. But before his

departure Perseus was a competitor in a local athletic contest

which included quoit-throwing. It so happened that the discus

thrown by Perseus, rebounding after its fall, wounded the foot of

Acrisius, who sickened and died at Larisa. This plot is clearlyindicated by frs. 378 and 379, and from the former it appears

48 10<t>OKAEOY!

that Acrisius himself gave the games, probably in honour of

the reconciliation with his grandson. The account in Apollod.2. 47, which agrees almost word for word with Zenob. i. 41, is

much shorter, but states that the games were held by Teuta-

midas, the king of Larisa, on the occasion of his father's funeral,

and that Perseus came to Larisa with the express object of con-

tending. On the other hand, Pausan. 2. 16. 2 says that Perseus

came to Larisa because he wished to see his mother's father, and'

to show him kindness by word and deed.' He makes no refer-

ence to the games, but merely states that Perseus, in the pride of

youth, rejoicing at the discovery of the discus, gave a public

display of his skill. Apollodorus speaks of the contest as the

pentathlon, but Pherecydes goes out of his way to deny that

the pentathlon had then been established. A late variation of

the story is given by Hygin. 63, in which the scene is trans-

ferred from Larisa to Seriphus, on the occasion of the funeral

games held after the death of Polydectes. The discus wascarried out of its proper direction by the wind, and broke the

head of Acrisius,

The similarity of the circumstances to the Amyclean legendof Hyacinthus and Apollo should be observed: see Eur. Hel.

1469 ff. (n.).

378

8' dya)va Trdyêvov

/cat /coiXa x/ouo"d/coXXa Kai TroLvdpyvpa', 19 dpiBôv e^TjKovTa 619.

378. 1 irdyt-evov Schneider et Schweighauser : irdy&va codd., irayêvd Kaibel,

rayi-frois Casaubon, irdyt-ev' dva.Ki>)pv<T<TTa.i Bothe

378 Athen. 466 B 6 6e irapa So0o- that this is only a special application,K\ei 4v rots Aapiffalois 'Aitplffios /ecu avros suggested by the context, of the essential

e/cTrw/uara 6'cra TrXeto-ra elêy, ws <f>r)<nv 6 subjectivity which belongs to the middle

rpayiKds 'iro\vv 5\..5is.' vv. 3, 4 are voice. See the excellent account given

repeated from Athenaeus in Eustath. //. by E. S. Thompson on Plat. Men. 93 D.

p. 1319, 48. The partiality of Sophocles for the middle

1 ird'yi VOV (see cr> n>)

^s ProDably voice is well known: parallel cases are

right, and the error was caused by assimi- O. T. 556 Trûâo-tfcu, Phil. 944 <j>7jva.<r6ai,

lation to the termination of dyuva: cf. frs. 16, 941. According to the other

Bacchyl. 10. 28 vay^vif xa^Tav fXcup authorities it was Teutamidas, and not

yXavKq. ffTftpavuad/jievov. For Sophocles' Acrisius, who gave the funeral games:fondness for compounds with iras see see Introductory Note.

Jebb on Track. 66 1. d-ydova here is 2 âXK-qXarovs Xepriras,'

cauldrons,

gathering rather than contest, as in Horn. kettles, of bronze, on stands (rpiTroSej).

J} 10 and elsewhere. KT]pv<r<rTcu : the A lebes is one of the prizes in the Homericmiddle is best treated as causative 'had funeral games, ^267.' (J.) Cf. El. 54

proclaimed:

; but it should be recognized rvirwâ âX/c^TrXcu/Jov, of the urn con-

AAPIZAIO.I 49

taining the supposed ashes of Orestes.

<}>piv, to win = (ptpeadai. So L 692TOVTWV 4veyKii)v iravra TairiVLKia, O. C. 6,

O. T. 590, 1190, Ant. 464 K^pSos <ptpei,

At. 436 evK\eiav (ptpwv.3 KoiXa is suspected by Kaibel, but

without sufficient cause. It is a technical

term of art, where the convex figures

produced by the chasing of the baser

metal are overlaid with gold (or silver) ;

and helps here to distinguish the cupswith gold ornamentation from those whichare of solid silver. So xPVffOK^^Trov

Stiras and XP- /cd\7rts in Antiphanes (fr.

237, II 115 K. and fr. 106, n 53 K.) :

Athenaeus saw at Capua a cup dedicatedto Artemis, dpyvpovv, c/c rCiv 'Ofj.r)piK&v

eTT&v KareffKevacraevov Kal evrervwdi^va

%XOV Ta ^7r77 Xpv** ^ ypd/n/naffiv, wj TO

N&rropos ov (466 E). See Sittl, Archaeol.

der Kunst, p. 216. The meaning of

/cotAos is fixed by [Arist.] oecon. 2. 24.

23 Aa/Sep K TV evbvrwv iep&v5(70? evTjv /cotXos apyvpo$...i56vTes Sf ol

(rrpcmwrcu Kal vofj.i<ravTs a rr a v T a elpai

apyvpov TO, dy6fj.va. Cf. Theopomp.(FHG I 298) ap. [Longin.] de sublim. 43.2 /cotXos apyvpos Kal xpi'O'os aireipya<rpfr osKal eKTTUfJiaTa Kal Kparrjpes, Lucian Gall.

24 xP vff * o KOtXos Trd/ATToXus.

4 U dpi0(i,ov I^TJKovTa 8Cs: 'twice

sixty in number,' not '

to the number (of)twice sixty.' Cf. Hdt. 7. 60 titrov e/ccurroi

irapel\ov TrXydos ts api.6iJ.6v. ib. 97 <rvve\-

dovra (ir\ola) es rbv dpi6fj,6v (pdvrj rpur-

XiXta. We should not therefore compareAesch. Pers. 342 6 iras dpL0fj,bs ds rpia-Kadas d^Ka

\

va&v.

Translate :

* He proclaims a greatcontest, open to all strangers ; and sets

forth, as prizes for them to win, kettles

wrought of bronze, and chased cupsoverlaid with gold, or of pure silver, six

score in all.'

379

Adpicra Trpoa-yovdjv

379 Aapto-(ra cod.]

Diels: ire\a<Tyidav cod., n.e\a<ryiduv Nicole

379 Schol. Gen. Horn. * 319 rives

ypd<povffi < did > 5tfo <f aXos (rxepddos, eirel

ev Qpad 'rtfMjSos vnb

5^ <pT)(rl irepLcrobv TO & Trap1

avrip elvai, ws

Trap' 'Ou-fipy 'yala <pepap<.os'

(see Allen

and Sikes, Homeric Hymns, p. 1). Kal

So0o/cX??s (v apxy A.api<T<rai<j)v 'Adpicraa

The eponymous heroine of the 1 hessa-

lian town was herself the daughter of

Pelasgus (Hellan. fr. 29 FHG I 49), andthe acropolis at Argos was called Larisaea

after her (Pausan. 2. 24. i). She fell

into the Peneios, while playing ball

(Eustath. Od. p. 1554, 34). For repre-sentations of her head on Thessalian

coins see B. V. Head, Hist. Num.z

p. 299. Larisa was also the name givento the wife of Cyzicus (Parthen. 28).

irpoflryovtov was evidently a puzzle, andthe grammarian's solution that <r was

P. II.

redundant shows that he understood the

meaning to be '

(our) Pelasgian ancestors.'

Nauck judged the word to be 'sine dubiovitiosum.' Van Leeuwen conjecturedTTpoa"it 6Xo>j/ (or Trpos yov&v)

Blaydes irpOTraTbpwv or dvyar^pcov

yiK&v, but none of these guesses is satis-

factory. It is perhaps possible that

irpoffybvwv meant 'after-born,' with the

preposition denoting the increase of the

race. Some support may be found in the

use of Trpoffyevrjs by Niceph. ap. WalzRhet. Gr. I 498, 7 Grj/Scuos TJV Aibvvffos Kal

Trpoffyevys 6e6s. Similarly irpoffytvvr)<rts,

for which see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 352.Eustratius (on Arist. eth.N. i. n p. 101,36Heylb.) has ai irpocryewtfo'eLS rCsv ^(adev

accretions. For the significance of

Larisa as a Pelasgian name in various

localities see Horn. B 840 f. (Leaf), and

Holm, Hist. Gr. I 60.

Z000KAEOYI

/cat rpirov PLKTOVTI Aa>riL>9

V Stcr/c^/xart.

38O. 2 "EXaros Bergk : Xa.os cod. (literam extritam r esse Montfaucon cense-

bat), eXa0/>6s vulgo

122, 123). Cf. Horn. h. 16. 3, Phere-

cydes fr. 8 (FHG I 71), Archinus fr. 2

(/^C iv 317).2 irpo<TTJ\J/v will not construe as the

text stands ; for there is no authority for

the interpretation given by L. and S.'to fasten oneself to, come very near to.

'

O.T. 668, however treated, is dissimilar.

Nauck suggests irpo<rrjêv, but this hardlyseems the right word. It is probablethat if we possessed the context there

would be no difficulty : the followingline may have been something like

38O Steph. Byz. p. 257, 4?r6Xts Qe<raa\ia.s...K\r)dr) airb Awrias

'EXdrou...6 TroXtrr/s, Awriei/s. SAapi<r<Talois

''/cat

/uoi...5i0vc7^m.'The speaker appears to be Perseus,

although Wilamowitz (Isyllos p. 6033)attributes the words to a messenger ; andit seems that in his third throw he was

baulked\>y Elatus, so that his quoit flew

wide and wounded Acrisius. Elatus is

known as a leader of the Lapithae livingat Larisa, and as the father of the Argo-naut Polyphemus: Hygin. fab. 14.

Dotion, here mentioned as his country,which according to Steph. was called

after his daughter Dotia, is the name

given to the eastern part of the Larisaean

plain. Wilamowitz (l-c.) argued that

Sophocles took the name Elatus and his

home Dotion directly from Hesiod (frs.

is used where we should expect the nomenactionis, rather than a noun expressingthe result; but Blaydes's ev SIffKov ô\rjis certainly not required. Cf. Track.

1213 77 Kal TTVpas 7r\77/>w/<ta TTJS

381

e TO) T0VrjKOTLTOV 0)^7' lirapKelv avrov o>s

381 Stob. flor. 125. n (iv p. 1139,6 Hense) 2o0o/cXôus Aapicrcraiuv. '/A7;5

...0a.voijfj.evov.'

It has generally been thought that

something is wrong with the text, whichseems to give the opposite of the sense

required. Hence Gesner altered nrjSe' to

Xpy 8^, which Dindorf, Wagner andothers adopt, and Tyrwhitt substituted

e7rauxj/ for eirapxeiv. Both are satis-

factory in point of meaning, for the

latter we might compare Horn, x 4 12

oi>x offLTfj KTOLfJitvouTW ^7r' dvdpdffLV euêrd-eur^cu; but it does not seem likely that

Xpy was corrupted to ^77 , or that so

good a word as eirapiceiv arose by acci-

dent. It is possible, as Ellendt and

Campbell contend, that the context

would have cleared up the obscurity ;

but the words seem to be part of a

direct admonition, and experiment will

show that it is not easy satisfactorily to

fill the gap. For the general sentiment

implied in the text as it stands cf. Eur.Phoen. 1320 ro?s yap davoutn xPV rbv ov

Te0vyK6Ta. | n/ias di86vTa xôvtov ed (refieiv

Qebv. The spirit of the precept is by nomeans that of 'doing unto others as wewould they should do unto us.' It is

merely another particular application ofthe maxim dv-rjra <}>povelv xp*) (see n fr

590), which itself illustrates the Greekdevotion to moderation and self-restraint

(fj.r)dv dyav). Similarly in El. 1171dvijTOv TrtyvKas Trarpos, 'HX6cr/>a, (f>pb-

vet, | dvyrbs 5' 'Opo~T7)s' were /XTJ \iav(rrfre, i.e. don't forget the limitations

imposed upon humanity, which requireyou to suffer, Orestes to die. Holznerdefended the text by quoting Eur. Hel.

1402 dXXd r/s Keivtp ^ dp t s|^vv Kardavovri

Karftaveiv ;

AAPIZAIOI AHMNIAI

KOLV

382

TTCIS

382 Kctv Tvpavvrj scripsi : /ecu rvpavvi Hesych., Kal rtpavvov Brunck| eireêrai

Nauck: eyylfcrat Hesych., tdifcrat Meineke, tylerai Grotius, e7rei/x Tat Semenow,Tri^r]Tc R. Ellis

382 Hesych. iv p. 336 u>s...Zo0o- F. W. Schmidt's cl>s TOV rvpavvov (or ws

K\rfS 5e Aapwa-a/ois dvrl TOV \iav. 'ws... <r', w rvpavve,} Tras ^7775 e/o <f>vyeiv, or

<pvyeii>.' Blaydes's ws rrji' rvpavviS' ei/xerat TTCIS rts

The restoration of this fragment is

a hopeless quest, unless a new edition of

Hesychius should yield fresh material.

At present, as Nauck says,'

ita editur,

de codicis scriptura non constat.' The

grammatical explanation \iav is of no

assistance, being merely a stock gloss of

worthless character: see Suid. s.v. u>s,

who quotes fr. 960 in illustration of the

same rendering. Similarly the schol. onAt. 39 TO ws O.VTL rov ctX7;#cD$. There is

no value in such random guesses as

The sense obtained by the vulg. u>s KCU

rvpoLvvov ?ras eQlercu <pvyelv and similar

attempts is unsatisfactory : as a generalstatement it is untrue or incomplete, andif particularized bears no relation to whatis known of the plot. My suggestionimplies that the words refer to the with-drawal of Acrisius to Larisa : 'beforesuch a danger, everyone even a king-would seek to fly.' For the gnomic futuresee Gildersleeve, 258.

383

383 Steph. Byz. p. 381, 14 Kpaveia,'

A/j.j3pa.Ki<i)Tt}i>...Tb eOviKbv Kpaveia-

So$oK\?5s Aaptcraiois (Xapicrcuos codd.).Craneia was a hill-fortress in the terri-

tory of Ambracia; and the range of

hills on the N. of the town was called

by the same name (Bursian, Geogr. I

34). Ambracia was a colony of Corinth,so that there may be a connexion withthe Corinthian Craneum, for which see

Frazer, Pausan. ill p. 18. The manfrom Craneia was probably a competitorat the games.

AHMNIAI

The;, arrival of the Argonauts at Lemnos was the first re-

corded incident in their voyage. They found it occupied onlyby women, under the rule of Hypsipyle, the daughter of Thoas.The Lemnian women had neglected the worship of Aphrodite,who in consequence made them offensive to their husbands, so that

they were abandoned in favour of Thracian concubines broughtover from the mainland. The wives in revenge massacred their

husbands and fathers, all except Hypsipyle, who saved the life

of her father Thoas. When the Argonauts landed, they formedalliances with the women; and Hypsipyle bore to Jason two sons,Euneus (Horn. H 468) and another known either as Nebrophonus

42

52 :>0<t>OKAEOY!

(Apollod.), Deipylus (Hygin.), or Thoas (A. P. 3. 10). Such is

the brief narrative of Apollodorus (i. 1 14*".), to which Asclepiades

(FHG III 303) adds nothing.The title might suggest that the central motive of the play

was the notorious crime committed by the women : cf. Aesch.

Cho. 629 KCLKWV be TTpeerftevera i TO Adfiviov \oyw. But schol.

Apoll. Rhod. i. 769 shows that both the present play and the

Hypsipyle of Aeschylus were concerned rather with the landingof the Argonauts and its consequences : OTI Se /juiyr)<rav ol

Âpyovavrai rat<? A.vffivuuft 'HpoSeo/oo? urropel ev rot? 'Apyo-vavrifcois (FHG II 38). AtVûXo? Se ev 'TîirvXy (p. 79 N.)ev OTrXo/9 (frrjcrlv aura? e7re\0ov<ras êifiaônevoi^ aTrelpyeiv,

\afielv optcov Trap9

avrwv aTrofSavras /jiiyrio-ecrdai avrals. %

K\r)s Be ev rai9 Arj/jiviais teal /jud^rjv lo-ftvpav ai5rou9 avvdtyai,

<j>r)o-iv.The statement of Aeschylus that the women armed

themselves and opposed the landing of the Argonauts agreeswith Apoll. Rhod. I. 635 Srjia rev-êa Bvcrat, e'<? aiyia\6v Trpo-

Xeovro...r) 8' a/jia rfjat oavTia<$ "T-^rnrvXeia |

Svv* evl revêai

Trar/309. So the habits of the women are described : rfjo-i Se

/3ovKO\i,ai re jSowv ^d\fCid re Svveiv revêa, Trvpocfropovs re

Siarfjiijâo-Oai, (ipovpas \ prjurepov Trdcryo-iv 'Affyvalr)? 7re\ev epywv(ib. 627 ff., with which we should probably compare fr. 387). Thestorm attested for Aeschylus and the battle-scene of Sophoclesare described with his usual elaboration by Statius (Theb. 5.

376 397). But the most important source for the whole in-

cident is Apollonius, who tones down the harsher features of

the story agreeably to the taste of the Alexandrian epoch (i.

609 909). The women appear in armour, but Aethalides is

sent to make terms, which are immediately granted. Then

Polyxo, the aged nurse of Hypsipyle, recommends that the

strangers be invited to settle in the island, in order that

the women may not lack protection in the days to come.

Iphinoe is ordered to ask Jason to enter the city. At his

interview with Hypsipyle, she conceals the murder of the men,representing that they were expelled by the women and are

living in Thrace. Subsequently all the Argonauts were wel-

comed within the walls, except Heracles, who remained by the

ship. After a delay of several days1

,Heracles rebuked them

for their indolence; the Argonauts at once made ready for de-

parture ;and Hypsipyle and Jason exchanged parting speeches,

mournfully acquiescing in the destiny which forced them to

separate. Hyginus (fab. 15) takes from Apollonius the pro-

posal of Polyxo, and also mentions Iphinoe, who is described

1 The stay lasted two years according to Ovid (Her. 6. 56), one year according to

Statius (Thet. 5. 460), and four months according to Valerius Flaccus (2. 367).

AHMNIAI 53

as ctistos portae and announces to Hypsipyle the arrival of the

Argonauts. Welcker, who assumes that the last-mentioneddetail is taken from Sophocles, assigns frs. 385 and 386 to a

speech of Iphinoe, and thinks that fr. 389 refers to her watch.He justly observes that there is nothing tragic in Apollonius'account 1

,and seeks to avoid the consequent difficulty by em-

phasizing the importance of the battle as the principal incident

of the play. This is hardly satisfactory ;for the battle cannot

have been much more than a skirmish, even when we give full

weight to the scholiast's epithet. The chief interest of the

subject for Sophocles must have been the opportunity whichit offered for delineating the character of a woman confrontedwith such exceptional difficulties. The climax of the action

must surely have been the departure of Jason less easily

effected, we may surmise, than in Apollonius ;and the play

may have ended with the selling of Hypsipyle into slaveryafter the discovery that Thoas was still alive (Apollod. 3. 65).In that case the unity of time would require that the landingand the battle were merely referred to as events that had

happened efo> rof) fy>a/Ltaro?.An isolated reference in Stephanus (fr. 386) implies that a

revised edition of the play was published.

384

XpucrTjs r dyîrep/Aoê? Trayo

384 Steph. Byz. p. 696, 16 Xptia-r], appeared beneath the sea. The date of

/Sapurwws, 17 ?r6Xis roG 'A7r6XXa>j'os 4yyf>s its destruction must have been subsequentAr]fj.vov. 2o0o/cX?7s A?7/m'ais

'

w...7ra7ot.' to the third Mithridatic war, since it is

Stephanus, who errs in confusing the alluded to, though not named, in Appian'sLemnian Chryse with Chrysa in the account of a sea-fight of Lucullus (App.Troad (see on fr. 40), makes a further Mithr. 77). The Admiralty chart showsblunder in describing it as 7r6Xis roG an extensive sand-bank immediately to

'ATTfSXXoH'os, a description probably in- the E. of Lemnos, and it has recentlytended for the other Chryse (Hesych. in been reported that ancient ruins have

p. 54 s.v. AVKCUOI>). Chryse was a small been observed on the sea-bottom. Ac-island to the E. of Lemnos, and the cording to a tradition mentioned byscene of the sacrifice at which Philoctetes Philostr. iun. imag. 18. 2, the altar of

was bitten by the serpent guarding the Chryse was erected by Jason on his

shrine of the nymph Chryse or, according voyage to Colchis. This is confirmed

to others, of the goddess Athena wor- by Doriades (A. P. 15. 26, 5), who calls

shipped under this name (Phil. 194, 1326). Jason X/>u<ras dtras. Whether SophoclesThence he was conveyed to Lemnos and introduced the name in that connexion

abandoned (ib. 270). Before the time of cannot be determined. Blaydes conj.Pausanias (8. 33. 4) it had been over- dyxiTtpftovos.whelmed by an inundation, and dis-

1 Hermann, Elem. Metr. p. 120, conjectured that the Aifcmcu was a satyr-play.

54 1000KAEOY1

385

[/caraXoyog

385 Schol. Find. Pyth. 4 . 303Travras 2o0o/cX?7S kv rats AT/MJHCUTI r

dpd/man KaraXtyei TOVS ets TO 'Apy$ovd(Te\06vTas <ri(d<f>os, Kal 6 AtVxtfXos iv

Ka/3et/30iS (p. 31 N.).As the statement covers more than the

contents of fr. 386, it has been printed

separately. The extant lists of Argonautsare those given by Find. Pyth. 4, Apoll.

Rhod. adinit. (reproduced with variations

by Hygin. fab. 14, Val. Flacc. i 352-486,Tzetz. Lye. 175), Apollod. i. inff.,Diod. 4. 41. There is evidence that

similar lists were recorded by Phere-

cydes (FHG I 87), Herodorus (FHG II

37 f-)> Cleon (schol. Ap. Rh. i. 77), and

possibly by Hesiod (schol. Ap. Rh.i. 45)-

386

386 Steph. Byz. p. 257, 5 AUTIOV

?r6Xis Geo"<raX/as...6 TroX/r^s Aametfs. So-

<f>oK\r)s Aapuraiois (fr. 380)... KO,I kv A?/-

No doubt these lines occurred in the

list of Argonauts. According to Find.

Pyth. 4. I25f. Admetus and Melampus,who were Jason's cousins, accompaniedtheir fathers Pheres and Amythaon.Thus his share in the expedition was an

early adventure of Admetus. Pheres is

not mentioned in the other lists. rfit,

common in Aeschylus, occurs twice in

Sophocles (cf. fr. 549), and twice in

Euripides (Her. 30, Hec. 323). Burgesconj. rjv x&- Aomeiis: see on fr. 380.

778' 6 Aft)TlU9

The son of Coronus is mentioned in the

Homeric catalogue (B 746). Coronuswas the son of Caeneus, who was a

distinguished leader of the Lapithae in

their fight with the Centaurs (Ap. Rh. i.

57 64). The Lapithae were the heroic

ancestors of the Thessalian nobility, andthe famous battle is the echo of some

prehistoric resettlement of Thessaly.Coronus, as king of the Lapithae nearMt Olympus, afterwards came into conflict

with the Dorians of Hestiaeotis; butHeracles came to the assistance of the

latter and slew Coronus (Diod. 4. 37,

Apollod. 7. 154).

387

387 air\a.Tov Bergk : airXaffrov codd.

387 Phot. p. 153, 3 ed. Reitz.

(=Bekk. anecd. p. 413, 14 and Etym.M. cod. Voss. p. 3270 Gaisf. ) dv/j,p\rjToi>'

om. Etym. M.}: Eustath. Od. p. 1405,

57irov

ti-edp\f/dfjLv'

(sic). The wordsair\a<TTov a%6fjifti\T)Tov are also recorded

without the name of the poet or the

play in Cramer, anecd. Par. iv p. 115, 4.

The name of the play is given by Hesych.

I p. 221 atypfiXriTov (dv/3\T]Tov cod. r

corr. Musurus) 6 fj.i)8ej>i diravrav (airavrq.

TJ cod. : corr. Nauck) bvvarbv, TJ dffvvdvTf}-

TOV. So0o/cX?7S A?7/uj/icus.

Welcker's suggestion that these wordswere spoken of Hypsipyle by Polyxo is

better than the alternative proposed byHartung that they are a piece of brag-

gadocio addressed by the Chorus to their

opponents. Necessity had made the

Lemnian women formidable adversaries :

Ap. Rhod. i. 627 T?7<n 5e f3ovK6\ial re

re dtiveiv| reyx ect

AHMNIAI 55

irvpo<f>6povs re 5tar/Aâ<7dcu dpotipas \ prji-

Tepov Trdffrjffiv 'Adrjvalrjs irtXev Zpyuv. Ov.Her. 6. 53 Lemniadesque viros nimiumquoque vincere norunt. But perhapsthe point is rather that their isolation wasdue to the general abhorrence of their

cruelty : Aesch. Cho. 633 deoffTvy/iry 5'

&X lI fipoT&v O.T ifjiwdtv dtxtTCLi yfros.

airXarov : see cr. n. Bergk's emenda-tion is certain. In Track. 1093 AirXarov

6pt/j.fj.a Kdirpoffr)yopoi>, where the languageis curiously similar, BT have dirXaffrov,

and in Ai. 256 aTrXcurros has the supportof F and other copies as well as of thebest tradition of Suid. fjebb's cr. n. is

not correct.] Meineke conj. dTreXao-roi'.

ov|j.f3\T]Tov. The adj. belongs to theorder of dTrp6<Tfj.axo$, dirpocr6fj.i\os, dirpba-

0opos, dwpoffrjyopos, and others such as

dTrpbfffiXiiTos (Bekk. anecd. p. 440, 15)or d<rvi>di>T-r)Tos', which are less well sup-

ported. e|6p\j/dp.7]v. The middle voice,

found also in EL 13, expresses the interest

of the agent.

avrb

388 rdx'

388 Schol. Plat. Hipp. mat. 288 B

Trapoi/j.ia, O.VTO 5etet, iri T&V dirwTotivTwv

u.^wi'TjTCu 5e avTTJs xai

ev Arj/J-viais oiircos* '

Taxv 5'

388

Setfec rovpyov &>s eyo> crac^

Meineke : rai) 5' avrb codd. fort. ot5'

Even if this was a satyr-play, it is ex-

tremely unlikely that Sophocles wouldhave commenced a line with raî) 5'

aur6, dividing the anapaest between twodistinct words (see Jebb on 0. C. 1361);and I am convinced that Meineke was

right in substituting rd\ avrd. Thefollowing points should be noted: (i)

rdâ is very common in Sophocles witha fut. in the sense of soon (see Ellendt

s.v.), but Taxti, quickly, only occurs in

Phil. 349. (2) rdxa is regularly em-

ployed in conjunction with the phraseaurd 5etei and its congeners : Ar. Lys.375 rovpyov rdx' O.VTO 5et|ei, Eur. Andr.

265 rb 6' Zpyov avrb ffijâvei rdâ, Ar.Ran. 1261 5e/ei STJ rdxa, Plat. Critias

1 08 C TOVTO olbv tffTiv avrb <rot rd%a dtj-

Xwo-et. (3) rdxa is usually glossed byrax^ws (Phot., Suid., Etym. M.)\ but,while the distinction between rdxa and

raxu indicated above prevails generally in

classical Greek, rayjo came to be usedin place of rdxa at a later date. Theintrusion of 6' will not surprise those who

have observed the ways of copyists.avro Segei is the common phrase (Plat.Theaet. 200 E, Hipp. mat. 288 B) for

which auro o-rj/mavei (Eur. Phoen. 623,Bacch. 976), atiro 5rj\u<rei (Dem. 19. 157)or ai/ro 5i5det (Plat. Prot. 324 A) maybe substituted. Sometimes we find the

noun added, as here and in other passages

already quoted (cf. Dem. 19. 167); some-times the verb stands impersonally (Ar.

Vesp. 994, Ran. 1261, Plat. Phileb. 20 C,

rep. 497 c). The latter part of the line

is almost certainly corrupt, as is gene-

rally admitted. I have suggested oI5'

^>cb <ra0tDs, relying on the parentheticuse of old' eytb in warnings of a similar

character : O. C. 852 XP^V jfyi ^' ^7^'

yvuffrj rd5e, ib. 1197 ^' ^7<*>> yvuffy/ca/coD

|6vfj.ov TeXevrrjj' (is KOLKT] rrpo<ryi-

yverai. Previous conjectures may bedivided into two classes: (i) those whichalter <ra0ws: ws y& ffa<f>ris Hense; ws

e7w (ro06s Boissonade; (2) those whichalter tyw : cos X^ycu, aa^cos Burges ; u>y

?X, cra^cDs Herwerden ; cos #xw i tra^cos

Wecklein; cos 5o/cco, <ra0cos Meineke.

Hense was justified in observing that the

examples of auro Selfrt show that it

should not be joined with

389

389 Hesych. I p. 296 d<rd\TriKTov

copai/. rb peffovvKTiov. e<rirtpas yap /ecu

opdpov <Td\iriov. Soô/cX^sBekk. anecd. p. 450, 26

Ijjpav TO /JLCffOvtiKTlOV. 0(5x0)

The phrase is parallel to the more com-

mon VVKTOS dupi. For the use of the

trumpet in the heroic age see on Eur.

Phoen. 1377, Jebb on Ai. 17. Pollux

(4. 86) mentions among the /j.tprj roG

roXcyufnpfaj <ra\irlyiJ.a.Tos both the eop-

WTIKOV or reveille, and the dvo.ira.vffT-fipt.ov

56 IO<t>OKAEOYI

as rb KaraêvyviJVTUv Tri(f>dcy/j.a. In Ai. times (Meisterhans3, p. 84). The state-

289 ff. Tecmessa enquires of Aias, rl ment of L. & S. to the contrary is

TfjvS ...q<f>op[j.q,s TTflpav afire TOV K\6(ai>\

erroneous; and of the older authorities<rd \TTiy"yos; dXXd vvv ye iras evdei L. Dindorf's view (in Steph. Thes.) has<r rpar 6s. proved more correct than Lobeck's (Phryn.

do-dXiriKTOS is to be preferred to dtrdX- p. 191). The epigraphic evidence has

rnyKTos, for ffa\7riyKT^s etc. are never been strengthened since the date offound on inscriptions, which show <ra\- Rutherford's note (A

rwv Phryn. p. 279).7rt/cT?7s and the like down to imperial

MANTEII H nOAYIAO!

The story of Folyidus and Glaucus is related most fully byHyginus (fab. 136) and Apollodorus (3. 17 20).

Glaucus, son of Minos and Pasiphae, when a child, fell into

a large vessel full of honey, and perished1

. Minos did not knowwhat had become of him, and consulted the oracle of Apollo (or,

according to Apollodorus, the Curetes). The response was as

follows 2. Minos had in his herds a wondrous cow, a prodigy

which changed its colour thrice a day, being in turn white, red,and black. Whoever, said the oracle, could find the most

appropriate object of comparison to the marvel, would also beable to give back the child alive to his father.

The soothsayers of Crete were called together, but failed to

solve the puzzle. Then a foreign diviner from Argos, Polyidusson of Coeranus, successfully accomplished the task by com-paring the cow to a mulberry, white in the bud, then red, and

finally black.

Polyidus was then required by Minos to find Glaucus. Theseer had recourse to augury, and at last discovered the deadchild 3

. But, when he brought the body to Minos, the latter de-manded that Polyidus should restore Glaucus to life. As theseer declared this to be impossible, Minos resolved to bury himalive in the same tomb with the corpse of the boy. Polyiduswas accordingly entombed

;but in the vault itself he found

a way of deliverance. A snake came to the dead body, and

Polyidus killed it with a stone 4. Presently he saw another snake

come, and cover the dead snake with a particular grass. Thenthe dead snake came to life. So Polyidus brought the same

1 For the association of vldot with death see Miss Harrison, Prole^. P' 38, Gruppe,Gr. Myth. p. 8165.

2 The answer is merely a riddle propounded as a test of intelligence, like the

aiviy/jia of the Sphinx (0. T. 393).3 For the details see on fr. 396. Apollodorus merely says that the discovery of

the child's body was effected did TWOS /j-avrdas.4According to Hyginus, with a sword, which Minos had ordered to be placed in

the vault.

AHMNIAI MANTEII 57

grass to the dead child, and resuscitated him. Minos, informed

by a passer-by who heard sounds in the tomb, caused it to be

opened, and having his son restored to him, sent back Polyidus,with many rewards, to Argos. Apollodorus adds that even so

Minos would not allow Polyidus to depart until he had impartedthe secret of his craft to Glaucus. Polyidus consented, but at the

moment of his departure caused Glaucus to spit into his mouth;

the result was that by so doing he forgot the art of divination

which he had recently acquired1

.

The main features of the story are summarized with a

rationalistic explanation by Palaephat. 27. From this legendarose the proverb TXavfco? TTIMV /zeXt dvea-rrj recorded by Apostol.5.48.

No doubt Phamenus mentioned in fr. 392 was one of the

prophets who failed where Polyidus succeeded. Fr. 394 perhapsrefers to their attempts to identify the portent by divination St'

/jL7Tvpa)v, just as fr. 396 seems to refer to the augury of Polyidus.It will be shown in the notes that Welcker was hardly right in

Interpreting fr. 393 of the restoration of Glaucus to life, or fr.

399 of his corpse as bringing a curse on Polyidus. He also re-

gards fr. 398 as coming from a messenger's speech describing a

sacrifice made when Polyidus and Glaucus were entombed. Butthe details of the sacrifice do not suit a funeral rite : they are

rather of a joyful, if primitive, character. It is more likely that

the reference is to a festival, on the occasion of which Glaucus

accidentally lost his life.

It should be pointed out in regard to the title of the playthat there are seven references to a play entitled MaVret9, andthree to a Polyidus. Frs. 390 and 391 prove that Polyidus wasmentioned more than once in the Maz/ret9. Fr. 395, first attri-

buted to this play by Bergk, shows that Sophocles treated the

story of Glaucus. It is a natural, if not an inevitable deduction

from these premisses that the play of Sophocles bore the alter-

native titles Mavreis rj Tlo\viSo$. The chorus then consisted of

jjLavreis, assistants of Polyidus, or perhaps Curetes, as Welcker

thought.The KpTja-crai of Aeschylus dealt with the same subject : see

note on fr. 395. For the Tlo\vtSo$ of Euripides, of which manyfragments survive, including the famous fr. 638, see Nauck

P- 558.

1 For the curious belief that the demonic influence could be expelled by spitting

see Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 8873.

58 IO<t>OKAEOYZ

390

opa) Trpoêipov TloXviSov TOV

39O irpb x tP&v (irpoxelpwv M) Etym. M.\

7roXw5 s M39O Etym. Paris, post Etym. Gitd. Sturz. Cf. Etym. M. p. 68 r, 25

p. ion (p. 1921 B Gaisf., previously pub- 5os...ev aXXots de did TOV I <rvt>eo-Ta\/ui.vov f

lished in Valckenaer, diatr. p. 200) ws irapd So<o/cXet '6pw.../tavrews,' /cat

=Cyrill. ap. Cramer, anecd. Paris. IV ird\w 6 ctur6s (6 auros om. F)

' OVK %O~TIV

p. 1 88, 29 HoXinSos* ourw /ecu 'ATroXXaîos et /UT? IloXvtcfy T noipavif.'' Xoipoôcr/c6s.6 TOV Apxifiiov (the author of the Homeric The Homeric form IloXtftSos (E 148,lexicon: fl. towards the end of the first N 663 yv dt rts Euxfyup HoXvldovcentury A.D.). KOI tan, <f>r]<ri, 7ro\vidfj,<)v, /xctj/nos ui<5s) is deduced by Wackernagel/mavTis u>v. OVTU) 5 Kal TO dpa/Aa îriypd- from 7roXi//t5/bs, which would normally<pTai irapcL

'

Apt.<rTO(pdvet. (i 508 K. : virb be shortened in Attic: cf.(f>6ivu (= (p8ivfu).

'ApivTotpdvovs anecd. Paris.}. (Mprvpei The form IloXêtSoj, which shows itacistic

5^ Kal 4>tX6êi'os (fl. early in the first cent. confusion, is entirely late. See Smyth,A.D.). Kal So0o/cX^s 5' tv Ma!/re<7t o~vv- Ionic Dialect, p. 187, and A. J. P. VIerreiXcj' '6/3to.../uaVTews,' Kal ira\(.v 'OVK 440, who however does not acceptZanv et /JLT] IIoX^S^ (no\vl8r)v Bekk.) WackernagePs argument. Fick in B.B.

T$ Koipdvov.' The extract is badly cor- xxvi 315 compares for the name the

rupted in Etym. Gud. p. 474, 27 ed. German 'Doktor Allwissend.'

391

OVK CCTTIV el[Jir)

TloXvtSw rw Koipdvov391 Tro\vid<i)t> Cyrill., Tro\vidr)v Etym. Gud. et Paris.

| T$ Koipdvy Etym. Paris. ,

T<JJ Kowi'vdxov vel T Koiivdvov codd. Gaisf. (Koipdvov agnovit Welcker)

391 See on fr. 390. Pherecydes also father's name perhaps indicates the asso-

mentioned Coeranus as the father of ciation of Polyidus with Crete;

for

Polyidus (FHG IV 638 A). The same Coeranus is a Cretan in Horn. P 6ir.

genealogy is recorded by Pausan. i. 43. So Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 122. Perhaps5, Apollod. 3. 1 8, Hygin. fab. 128, 136. the sense was, 'the quest is impossibleIn Pind. Ol. 13. 75 Polyidus is described for any save Polyidus.'

by the patronymic Koipavtdas. The

392

Tei/oecriou TTCUS

392 ai>6ds cod. teste Egenolff: oi>0os vulgo, avd6s Bergk, VVCTOS Lehrs,4>a/u,e'6s Kal leipeviov legendum coni. Nauck

| ^d/tevos cod.

392 Herodian irepl JJLOV. Xe. p. 8, p. XVIII of my ed.) lo-ropei OTL E35 â/tei/^s. So0oxX^s Majreo-t (/mavTeao-t ya/J.ridi<ra Teipevia e-rroirjffe 7ra?5as

cod.). 'âvâs...7rats.' pay, 3>a/j.evbv êpeKvdrjv XXwpti' Marrw.

Egenolff (Rhein. Mus. xxxv 100) re- Though the exact wording may be

ported that the reading of the MS, which doubtful, the coincidence of the name is

had previously been assumed to be %ovd6s, too remarkable to be the result of acci-

is actually Zavdds. This makes all the dent. 4>ap6vos : for the accentuation ofmore probable Nauck's ingenious con- these names see Chandler, 302. Theyjecture (see cr. n.), which is based on retain the original accent of the participle:schol. Eur. Phoen. 834 Helvavdpos (see Brugmann, Comp. Gr. I 542 E. tr.

MANTEIS 59'

393

avolâi TT)I>

393 Cramer, anecd. Oxon. I p. 226,8 /cXetw, Sirep ol "Iwi/es /cX^w 5ta roO 77 /cat

Kai rpayiKot. /cat 2o00K\^s ev

T/'l>%77S...7n;X77I'.' 01 /CW/U/COl 5e

did 8i<t>d6yyov.

Cramer edited /ce/cXto-^vt\v but Lud-wich (Rh. Mus. xxxvn 446, Aristarch.

II p. 656) reports that the MS has /ce/cXr;-

/j.tvr)i>. The testimony of the grammarianis accepted by modern critics, as holding

good for Ionic and old Attic, but in

regard to Attic generally there is less

agreement. Cobet, V. L. p. 159, re-

jected K\du and its derivatives every-where in Attic

;but /c^/cXetyuat still appears

in the best texts of the Orators (Dem.2. 1 6, 19. 315, Isocr. 4. 34, 6. 40).Before Euclides, there was no distinction

of symbols, but Meistexhans quotes /cXeto-

^v-r\v from an inscription of 347 B.C.

(3p. 36195). There can be no doubt that

KXflw is tragic, but that it should every-where be restored to Aristophanes (apartfrom any question of paratragoedia) doesnot appear to be so certain as is some-times assumed (Blaydes on Lys. 423).

), which some editors

print in Ar. Vesp. 198, has very little

claim to consideration : see Rutherford,New Phrynichus, p. 206, and for Ionic

Smyth, p. 250. %For the metaphor

' to open the closed

gate of the soul'

cf. Ant. 707 Sorts yap77 Qpovtiv /j,6vos doKei,

\-f} yXuffffav

aXXos TJ ^vxyv ^X lt/t

\

OVTOI 8ia-

UHftdyaav nevoL Scolia 7

(PLG III 645) e?0' etfv, 6iroi6s ru 771^

TO ffrfjdos 8ie\6vr\ frreiTa rbv

dvdpa (f)i\ov vojj.ifrew d56Xy <j>pevi. Eur.Med. 659 8rij} irdpeffTiv fjt,r) 0fXous TLILOLV

KQ.6a.pav dvoiâvra /cXr^Sa <f>pevwv,Tro. 662 Trpos rbv irapbvra irbaiv dva-TTTV^W <ppv a. It is sometimes thoughtthat these phrases are derived from anold fable relating to the creation of man(Smyth's Greek Melic Poets, p. 477); butthe notion that the mind of man is astorehouse or treasury in which he locks

away his thought need not necessarilyinvolve such an origin.

394

TO,?

394 /iaXXo3(?Tas AM : âXXoSereis B, /AaXXoSe'rovs Valckenaer

394 Schol. Eur. Phoen. 1256 rijs

KlATTeWS TO ffTbfjLO. pi(f deff/JLOVVTCS TTTl-

devav T Trvpl /cat err^pouv TTWS payqffeTai./cat TTOU rb ovpov dxovTifffi. So0o/cX?}s Iv

Majrecrt 'rds /xaXXoSeras /ct)<rrets.'

For the use in divination of these

'bladders tied with wool' J. refers to

the similar case of the gall-bladder (Ant.1010 n. ). On the strength of this com-ment Wecklein substituted /c^rews for

prjêis in the text of Euripides, and

Stengel maintained that without anyalteration vypdrTjr' evavriav should be so

explained : see my ed. of the Phoenissae

at p. 218. |iaXXo8ras should not be

changed to /iaXXoS^roi/s, as compoundadjectives in epic and lyric poetry are

frequently of three terminations : cf. EL1239 dd/ui-rirav, Ant. 134 dvTirvira (with

J. 'sn.), Aesch. Cho. 6SiravapK^Tas, Eum.

792 5v<rol<Tra, Pers. 599 Trept/cXtfoTa, Theb.

105 v<f>L\-/)Tai>, where Tucker quotesAlcaeus fr. 33, 2 Xa^Sai' x/3U <ro5 ^ Ta "

Find. Nem. 3. 2 iroXv^vav. Add fr.

314, 168.

6o 204>OKAEOY!

395

p,ev oiftr)XevKOv dvOovvra

fyoivlâvra yoyyvXov

395. 1 (lev om. Bekk. anecd., Phot.|

dvdovvra om. Eustath. 2 yoyyv\wvPhot., Bekk. anecd., crrpoyytiXov Eust. 3 Xa/x/Sdvei <rcp' Herwerden : Xa/u/Sdvets codd.

395 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 45, 4= Bekk.anecd. p. 361, 20 Kiyvirnov yijpas 2o0o-K\TJS (om. 2o0o/cX?7S Bekk. anecd.} '?rpcD-

Toi>...Aiyij'irTiov.' tnjpuUpet 5... (om.a T)/active i 5e Bekk. anecd.). Athen. 51 D/*6pa 5 ra crvKa/jiiva . . . 2o^>o/cX^s

'

Trpwrcw . . .

/x,6pov' (vv. i, 2). Eustath. //. p. 835, galso quotes the first two lines in supportof his statement that /*6pos occurs of the

fruit beside the neuter p.6pov.

Bergk was the first to see that this

passage belongs to the Polyidus, recog-

nizing its connexion with the story as

told by Hyginus and Apollodorus (3. 18

HoXiytSoS 6 KoipaôC T1T)V XP&Q.V TTJS /3oOS

eiKacre /Sdrou /capTry). P'rom Aesch. fr.

116 Xeu/co?j re 7ap /j.6poi<ri /cat iJ.e\a.yx>--

yuots|

/cat yitiXroTrp^Trrots (Spiderou TO.VTOV

XPOVOV it is natural to infer that his playKpycrcrai related to.the same subject. It

will be observed that in Aesch. the

berries of different colour are said to be

growing on the bush at the same time,whereas in Sophocles the successive

changes of colour are described.1 XeuKov dvOouvTd <rTa\vv. J. ren-

ders 'the white blossom of the bud.'

(rrdxus is that part of the stalk whichbreaks out in blossom and subsequentlyyields the fruit. Usually limited to corn,it is capable of a wider application (Xei-

jucii'os rjpivov crraxw Eur. Suppl. 448).

Theophrastus distinguishes ra

from ra evi TIVI irepiexofAeva, el fj.r) ns deirj

rbv araxw ws Trepte'ôj/ (h. pi. i. n. 4).

Thus \evKov is proleptic (blossoming into

whiteness). Cf. Aesch. Pers. 823 6/3/jts

yap eâvdovff' eKdpirwffev GTO.XUV |arrjs

(&Tf) comes to maturity after the sprout-

ing of i//3/ns).

2 M. Schmidt refers to this passagethe glosses of Hesychius i p. 439 yoyytiXov

arpoyyv\ov, ffK\r)p6v, and ybyyuv'

ywwpos.

<|>oiviavTa: 'when it hasempurpled....'

Blaydes conj. QowiffffovTo. or (poiviKovvTa,

but, even if it is dependent on 6'^r/, the

aor. is quite suitable. Goodw. 148.3 îreira seems to have been wrongly

repeated from v. 2. Nauck formerly

suggested T\OS 5^, but now prefersF. W. Schmidt's Trcirova. 8e. Wecklein

conj. opyuvra.. AlYvirrtov y'nPaS is an

oxymoron in place of iroXibv yijpas: for

AtyvwTios = black. Cf. Hesych. I p. 71,'

/xeXoVai (Tr. fr. adesp. 161

rr\v ariv TjXios Xci/x7ra>i' (pXoyl I

This is partly the pointin Ar. Thesm. 857 /j.e\avo<rijpiJ.aiov \e<Jjv :

the Egyptians were perhaps wilfully con-

fused with the Ethiopians. So Aesch.Prom. 877, Suppl. 160, 727. Fritzsche

on Ar. Thesm. 1082 holds that 7%)as is

equivalent to 'fructus qui maturuerit';but neither y-ripeiov

= pappus, nor yijpasof a serpent's slough, is an adequatesupport for his conclusion.

396

rovs yXafJivpovs Kara (j>op/3di>

396 Schol. Ar. Ran. 5886 %xwv XTj/ias, 6 CLKadapros [iraphvov ptt}-

, (j>acriv, rfv Atovi^crof]. KaXXi'0-

rpar6s8ri oOrws e/caXetro TXd/uuav, ws

Xdpcov. aXXoi 5e rbv \tjfj,u>vTa /cat divypov

(/J.dvTa(TlV R) TTl TlVfiiV OpVfUV'

TOl>S 7X0-fj.vpovs Kara <popfiav (/cara0op/3aV R).'Suidas has the substance of this scholium

in a different order and partly mutilated :

yXdfjidov. 6 \-rjfjLuv roi)s 6<f>6a\/J,ovs /cat 5tf7-

povs aurot)s xWI/> &* Xdpwi'. y\6.fjuav'

6 dxadapros. /cat So0o/cX^s ^?rt opvtov'

'

roi)s y\a/u.vpovs Kara <pop(3di>.' SimilarlyZonar. lex. p. 438.The fragment alludes to the skill of

Polyidus as an augur. Ael. nat. an. 8. 5.

mentions him among famous augurs : Kal

MANTEI1 61

aoovrai ye eirl ravry TTJ ffo<f>lq. Teipeffiat re

/cat Ho\vdd/J.avTes /cat IloMeidoi Kal 0eo/cXu-

fj-evoi Kal aXXot TroXXoi. Euripides (fr.

636) made him infer that the corpse wason dry land by observing the flight ofa sea-eagle, and discovering an owl supercellam vinariam sedentem atque apes ftt-

gantem (Hyg'n.fa&. 136), dpa<rai>i<rTws,

says Ael. nat. an. 5. 2, who rebukes

Euripides for giving this account, becausethere are no owls in Crete. The owl

(7Xau) no doubt pointed to Glaucus. Cf.

Claudian. bell. Get. 443 (quoted byWelcker) Cretaque, si verax narratur

fabula, vidit|

Minouni rupto puerumprodire sepulcro, | quern senior vates

avium clangor e repertum | graminerestituit ; mirae nam munere sortis

|

dul-

da mella necem, vitam dedit horridus

anguis. Perhaps we may infer fromAelian's remark that Sophocles did not

mention the owl.

Klister (on Suid.) justly remarked that

the sense of the words is obscure ; andthere is no direct authority for Portus's

rendering voraces in pastu. Still "yâ -

(Avpovs can hardly mean 'blear eyed,'and Hartung's 'rothaugigen Vogel nachFutter' is unintelligible. y\afji.vp6s is

a rare word, which might be synony-mous with y\dfj.d)v, as is shown bythe proverb in schol. Horn. 17 192 eV

Tv<f>\G>v 7r6Xei' y\a[j,vp6s f3acri\e6fi. HenceHesych. I p. 432 y\a/j.vp6v yXa/Audes.

Zvvypov. virboaKpvv, which is plainly akinto Etym. M. p. 232, 44 y\a/j.vpbv /cat

y\a/j.&ds' vypbv /cat Kai6jmevov (rriKoêvov

Toup) Sa/cptfotj 6fj./j.a' /cat y\a/j.vpotis,

evvypofilovs. The last words have the

appearance of being a gloss on our

passage, and suggest that Sophocles

was speaking of aquatic birds. Buteven if the reference was intended, it

would be hazardous to accept the inter-

pretation. For it is much more likely,as Lobeck thought (Path. El. i p. 93),that y\a/nvp6s was a by- form of \afj.vp6sand was used by Sophocles in the senseof greedy. The scholiast connected it

with y\d/j,uv, because that word is relatedto \v)/j,dv in a similar way. Moeris

p. 193, 30 y\ajut.uia-a 'Arrt/co/, Xrj/uDtraKOIVOV dfji.<j>5Tepa. (Blaydes should nothave proposed to substitute \afjivpovs.)

Probably however we should go furtherand infer from the association with

dKadapros that greediness connoted un-cleanness of feeding in the ceremonialsense. The order in Suid. Zonar. favoursthis view; but it is quite tenable, even if

schol. Ar. preserves the original form ofthe note. Some birds, and this would

apply particularly to the <Jb/j,o(j)dyoi (Arist.h. a. 9. i), were presumably ill-omened.Such was the vulture in all circumstances :

Anton. Lib. 21 yvira. irdvrwv opviOwv^X^ iffTOV #eo?s re /cat dvdp&iroLS. Butthe feeding of other birds might requirefor its interpretation the discriminatingintelligence of the expert : Aesch. Prom.

504 ya.[Ji\l/<i)l>VXUV T TTTTJO'lV GiUV&V ffKedp&S

| 5tc6/3t<r'...Kai diairav -fjvTLva t-xovff'

e'/cao-rot. No better illustration of the

omens to be gathered from the habits of

the birds of prey is required than thewell-known passage in the Agamemnondescribing the eagles feasting on the

pregnant hare: atari? yap tirtydovos

"Apre/uus dyvd |

TTTavoifftv nvai Trarpos |

avrbroKOv irpb X6%ou | [Aoyepav irrdKO.

dvo^tvoiffw'

| ffrvyei 5 Selirvov at'e-

TWV (139 ff.).

397

OUTCH 770(777

397 Stob. flor. 29. 25 (ill p. 632,2 Hense) Zoô/cXôus Mdfrewv. 'oflroi

It is obvious that the first part of theline is corrupt, and it has been variouslyemended. Valckenaer (on Eur. Phoen.

576) proposed otfrot 7' 4<pl%ei, but thecombination O#TOI 7' is open to serious

objection: see Neil on Ar. Eq. p. 194.This is avoided by Cobet's ouS^Tror'

e0tei, which however departs too far

from the tradition. Bamberger's otfroi

KaOiêi would imply 'striking from above,'

avev TTOVOV.

and Reisig's otfroi 7ro0' 2ei gives a wrongsense (see Jebb on O.T. 891). Meineke

accepted otfrot 7ro0' ctêi from O. Schneider.

Now in most of the passages which echothe famous lines of Hes. Op. 289 ff. T?)J

5' d/oerTjs idp&Ta 6eol npoira.poi.6fv Wt]Ka.v |

dddvaroi' ywa/cpos 5e /cat Spffios oTftos s

avTT\v|

/cat Tpyxfa TO irp&Tov WT)v 5'

eis &Kpov i'/cijrat,| prfl'dif] 8ij l-weira Tr^Xet,

XaXeTTTj irep ov<ra it will be found that

i/ceV0at (iKdveiv) is employed in conjunc-tion with TO axpov. Simon id. fr. 58 y/j,r) 5aK^0v/m.os idp&s ZvooOev

62 I000KAEOYI

es aKpov avdpeias. Quint. 14. 195os 5' OUTTOT' dvyp dperijs eVi rep/tad'

Xen. w<?w. 2. I. 20 ai 5e did /cap-

repias eTrt/ueXeicu TW> AcaXwj' re Kdyad&vtpyuv e^LKvelcrdai Troiou<nv. Tyrtae. fr.

12. 43 TavTift PUP TiS d^p dper^s s

d/fpoi' iKtffdai| ireipdodu. Find. .Mf/w. 6.

22 ?rp6s aKpov dperds rfKOov. Isth. 3. 50reXos a/cpov iK^ffOai. Plat. /W//. 268 E e?r'

aKpov d(piKvei(r0ai TO ^TOV/JLCVOV. Dio.

Chrys. 13. 35. Max. Tyr. 40. 4 di/e/crj-

pi>e 5f roi' d(pi.K.bfj.evov els TO aKpov u>s v

dyaffois apicrTov. (Partly from H.)Hence H. conjectured 7ro0' ?, holdingthat the simple verb might be used for

the compound (e0Jei) as in fr. 245 n.

(C.K. xvi 434); but he subsequentlyhesitated between this and Vt0tet on the

ground that Sophocles did not carry

through his figures consistently. Simi-

larly Tucker had suggested rt 0^77, but

the use of rt is questionable (ov8eiroTe0iei Blaydes). The simplest correction

would be 7rpo<rt'?7, which I should not

hesitate to adopt if the authority for

TrpoffLKvelffdan c. gen. were stronger than

it is : the construction is defended byVerrall and Tucker in Aesch. Cho. 103 1

,

but the legitimacy of the compound re-

quires more support before it can be

considered as established. Mekler con-

jectured VtTet)et.

It should be added that Stobaeus quotesEur. fr. 701 as if it immediately followed

this line ; but there can be no doubt that

this is an error, as he had assigned it to

Euripides shortly before (no. 9).

398

p*kv yo-p otos /xa\\o9, tfv 8' air d

OV&TJ T KOif)OLJ~

V T0r)<TaVpLCriJiVr)'

cvr\v Se 7ra/y/ca/>7reia cru/x/iiyrjs 6X0,19,

XITTOS r* eXaias, ACCU TO TrotActXajraro^

opyavov.

398. 1 8' d?r' d/uTrAou (d^w^Xuv Schwartz) Tucker: 5' dnirtXov Porphyr., 5' d/x-

irt\uv Clem., 5' AM' d/x7rAou Herwerden, de /cd/iurAou Grotius, 5e Kdfj.Trt\(*}t> Sylburg2 re om. Clem.

| evTedricravpHT/j.tv'r) Casaubon 3 TrayKap-jria, Clem., apud quern

vulgo post Sylburgium editur tri'/iît'yr/j 6Xa?y irayKapirta 4 Aaiou Clem. 5 %a.vdr)$

Clem., ovdov vel ôvtpov schol. Eur.

398 Porphyr. de abst. 2. 19 KO!

2o<t>oK\TJs 5iaypd<j>ui> TT\V deo<f>i\ij dvaiav

<f>i]fflv ev T(p Ho\vel8q>' 'rii>...opyavot>.'

The verses are also quoted with variation

in detail by Clem. Alex, strom. 4 p. 565KO.TO. TT)V wa\aidv ene'iv^v o.ir-r]vQiff^vf]v

irpoff(popa.v,irepi ^s 6 2o00KX7?s 7pd0et Kre.,

and v. 5 by the schol. on Eur. Phoen. 114.

We are not informed as to the occasion

or object of this sacrifice, but the corre-

spondence in detail with the yearlysacrifice to the Black Demeter at Phigaliais very remarkable: Pausan. 8. 42. u26v<ra Trj 6e$, Kadd /ecu ot eTrixcipioi vo/j.1-

frvcriv, ovdev, TO. 5e aTro T&V Mvopuv r&v

i)/j.tp<j)i>TO, re &\\a Kai d/uiTrtXov Kapirbv,

Kol /j.\i<r<rwv Te Kijpia Kai epiwv TO. fj.r) es

epyaaiav TTW TJKOVTO., dXXd eVt dvd-rr\ea TOV

oiffVTTov, d Tidâffiv lirl TOV j3w/j.bv (pKodo-

^.fl^vov irpb TOV a"jrr]\aiov, devTes 5^ /cara-

Xôvaiv O.VT&V i:\aiov. The sacrifice is

clearly one of the primitive bloodless

type, an offering of first-fruits to inducea continuance of fertility. That it is

also fireless (dVupos) is not directly stated,but is made probable by Eur. fr. 904Overlay airvpov irayKapirelas 5e"cu TrX-ripy

irpoxv6e'i<raj', and by the analogy of the

elpeffLwvTfj. H. inferred that the sacrifice

was chthonic (C. R. xvi 545). For the

significance of the dirvpa see his n. on

Ag. 70, Miss Harrison, Proleg. p. 93 ff.,

Farnell in C. R. xi 294. Wilamowitz

(de tr. Gr. fragm. p. 17) assumes that

the sacrifice was offered by Minos, andconnects it with the asceticism of the

Cretan mystics (Eur. fr. 472). Kappel-macher ( Wiener Eranos, p. 36) goesfurther and refers to the sacrifice of Minosoffered to the Charites (Apollod. 3. 210).But no particular inference appears to be

justifiable. Wool is generally mentionedas forming part of the offering, and in

the more primitive ritual unwashed wool

MANTEIZ

is specified : thus either prepared or in

its natural state it appears in the worshipof Zeus KTri<rios (Athen. 473 c), in the

ceremony known as Kepvcxpopia (Athen.478 D), and even in the invocation of theEumenides (O. C. 475). In EL 635û/j-ara TrdyKapwa are a propitiatory

offering to Apollo as averter of evil.

1 See cr. n. Nauck would preferrfv 5' evd/JLTreXos or TJV d ~Bai<xlov. Stahlin

reads d?r' dyUTrAwj' in his text of Clement,

attributing the correction to Schwartz.2 o-irovStj: a libation of wine, as dis-

tinguished from a drink-offering, togetherwith an offering of grapes, appears to be

contemplated. Miss Harrison formerly

(Prolegomena, p. 159) regarded the wine-

offering as a later addition to the simpleritual of antiquity, but now treats the

whole oblation as a magical rite intendedto stimulate the reproductive action of

nature (Themis, p. 294).3 -jrcryKapima : see cr. n. Since the

longer form is established by Eur. fr. 904,there seems to be no reason for accept-

ing the inferior rhythm introduced bySylburg into the text of Clement, and

formerly supposed to be the MS reading.For the short a cf. the Euripidean ya\-f]veia

and see n. on fr. 1050, Lobeck, Paralip.

p. 322: the converse case is illustrated

by avdaSla beside avdaSeia. oXcus is

not introduced here as an adjunct to the

sacrifice of a victim, but as an item

amongst the various first-fruits. So

Kpidai are mentioned among the contents

of the K^pvos Athen. 476 F. For its im-

portance in these rites cf. Plut. qu. Gr. 6,

p. 292 B, 01 TT\l<TTOl T&V 'EXXTJJ'UH' 7T/30S

TO.S TTO.VV TTCtXcUCtS dvffiaS ^ClVTO TCU5

4 cXcuas. Dind. writes Adas, but

both forms were in use in the fifth

century: see Meisterhans3 p. 32. KalKT. J. renders: 'And the fabric of

moulded wax, cunningly wrought by the

tawny bee.' Honey was commonly em-

ployed for the appeasement of chthonian

powers (/wetXt-yjttara : see Stengel, Gr.

Sakralalt? p. 90), but by no means ex-

clusively for this purpose, as we have

already seen. ov0TJs: see n. on Eur.

Hel. in i, and Wilamowitz on Eur. Her.

487 %ovd67TTepos /j.\Krcra. For opyavovin the sense of Zpyov cf. Eur. Phoen. 114XcuWoKTU'

'

A/j,<plovos opydvois, Bacch.

1208 \oyxoir oidov 6pyava.

399

6 TrpocrOev ikOaiv r\v apcuos /xot

fydpaids cod.399

399 Hesych. I p. 269 dpcuov'

/card-

<>. f) (u?s rb Mus., us Nauck) '6 irpb-

<r0v...veKV$' olov dpdv TrpofftTptfieTO KO.I

/careux1?" (Nauck for Kar' ei>x^)- 2o-

The meaning of dpcuos as an attribute

of vticvi is hardly doubtful, for it is norm-

ally applied to the dead, who as avengersexact retribution for the wrongs inflicted

upon them. See the passages quoted onfr. no, and especially Track. 1202, wherethe schol. has the gloss TL/uLwpbs dai/nwv

(Rohde, Psyche, I p. 264). Welcker

supposes that it is the corpse of Glaucuswhich is described as bringing a curse

upon Polyidus; Hartung that the speaker(Minos) attributes the death of his sonto a chance meeting with a corpse. Butneither view satisfies 6 irpbvdev tKO&v ;

and it is more likely that these words

refer to the first of the two snakes whichentered the vault while Polyidus was

imprisoned there, and was slain by himto prevent it from harming the body of

Glaucus: see Introductory Note. It maybe thought questionable whether the

corpse of an animal would be described

as dpaios. Frazer, however, has collected

copious stores of evidence in support of

the general proposition that 'the primi-tive hunter who slays an animal believes

himself exposed to the vengeance either

of its disembodied spirit or of all the

other animals of the same species, whomhe considers as knit together, like men,

by the ties of kin and the obligations of

the blood feud, and therefore as boundto resent the injury done to one of their

number.' (G. B. n 2p. 389.) Among

his examples are several attesting the

64 I000KAEOY1

reluctance of the American Indians to kill danger involved in the slaughter of the

a serpent for fear of exciting the male- sacred ox may be compared with the

volence of its spirit (ibid. p. 395). That offence of Agamemnon in killing a sacred

ideas of this kind were familiar to the stag in the precinct of Artemis at Aulis,Greeks can be readily established : see which involved the retributory sacrifice

especially the accounts of the Bouphonia of Iphigenia (El. 566 572). For the

in Pausan. i. 24. 4, i. 28. 10, with the break in the fifth foot, though containing;comments of Frazer (G. B. II

2p. 294) a spondee, see n. on Eur. Hclid. 640.

and Miss Harrison (Proleg. p. in). The

400

4OO Hesych. I p. 208 dvraiay TTO- been pointed out that Bergk proposed to

Xe/uias, exOp&s- 2o0o/cX^s IloXuetdy. assign the corrupt KO.I 5ei>ia irpoa-rraiovTa

The meaning of the word dvraios has dvraias 0eou to this play.been discussed on fr. 334, where it has

MEAEATPO!

The Homeric version of the legend of Meleager is as follows 1.

Artemis was wroth with Oeneus for omitting to sacrifice to her,when he made thank-offering to the other gods; and sent a wild

boar to ravage his crops. Meleager, the son of Oeneus, "collected

a large company of hunters, and with their assistance killed the

boar, but only after several lives had been lost. Artemis then

provoked a dispute between the Aetolians of Calydon and the

Curetes of Pleuron for the possession of the head and skin.

A fight ensued, in which, so long as Meleager kept the field,

the assaults of the Curetes were driven back. But Althaea, themother of Meleager, grieving for the death of her brother 2

,cursed

her son, and prayed to the powers of the nether world that he

might be destroyed. Meleager was incensed and withdrew fromthe war. Then the Curetes got the upper hand, and pressed hard

upon the defenders of Calydon. The elders sent an embassyof priests, promising Meleager a rich grant of land if he wouldcome out and fight ;

and his father Oeneus, his sisters, and his

mother also appealed to him, but in vain. At last, when themissiles of the foe reached his own chamber, and his wife

Cleopatra reminded him of the sufferings likely to fall uponthe inhabitants of a captured city, he yielded to her entreaties,and saved the Aetolians from their impending doom. It is not

directly stated by Homer that Meleager was killed in battle;

but his subsequent fate is clearly implied in the statement that

1 Horn. I 529 599.2Only one brother is mentioned. It is assumed that he was killed by Meleager

in the fight, altho' this is not directly stated.

MEAEATPOI 65

the implacable Erinys hearkened to Althaea's curse 1. The epics

known as the Eoeae (EGF p. 142) and the Minyas (EGF p. 216)agreed in the assertion that Meleager was killed by Apollo, whoassisted the Curetes against the Aetolians. There is thus noevidence that the fire-brand upon the preservation of which

Meleager's life depended was mentioned in any of the epics.But the absence of direct evidence is by no means conclusive

;

the story is too primitive to have been merely a literary in-

vention 2. Moreover, although the legend of the fire-brand was

familiar to the dramatists and owed a still wider extension totheir writings, Pausanias (10. 31. 4), when quoting the Pleuroniaeof Phrynichus (TGF p. 721) as containing the earliest allusionto it which is found in a play

3,adds that he did not introduce it

as if it were his own invention, but rather as though it was

already notorious throughout the Greek world. The versionof Bacchylides (5. 95 150) is of importance as showing that

the death of Meleager in battle was not necessarily inconsistent

with the story that he expired as soon as the brand was con-sumed in the fire 4

.

So far we find no reference to Atalanta. But the prevalentform 5 of the story relates that Meleager, who had invited Ata-lanta to take part in the hunt, fell in love with her, and insisted

on presenting her with the hide of the Calydonian boar. Thesons of Thestius were indignant that a woman should receive

the trophy, and took it from her. Meleager slew them in wrath,and restored the boar-skin. Then Althaea kindled the fire-

brand, and Meleager died. It is generally believed 6 that the

prominence of the love-motive in the later authorities is largelydue to the influence of Euripides, in whose Meleager (TGFp. 525) Atalanta undoubtedly took a leading part.

It becomes important to observe that Apollodorus, after

giving the last-mentioned version, which probably goes backto Euripides, adds another 7 as current in different authorities.

This consists mainly of an abstract of the Homeric story, with

the addition of the name of Iphiclus as that of one of the sons

of Thestius, and of a statement that Meleager was killed in

battle. There is also a supplement to the effect that, after the

1

571 : cf. B 642. See however Jebb's Bacchylides^ p. 469.2

Frazer, GB'* in p. 358. Croiset in Melanges Weil, p. 78, attributes iis intro-

duction to -Stesichorus ; but see Gruppe in BursiansJahresb. cxxxvn 150.3 Cf. Aesch. Cho. 603 fif.

4 The account of Nicander in Anton. Lib. 2 was formerly regarded as a late

conflation.5Apollod. i. 65 71, Ov. Met. 8. 270546, Hygin./^. 174, Diod. 4. 34.

6 See Robert in Herm. xxxm 130 159, Jebb, op. cit. p. 472, Escher in Pauly-Wissowa II 1892, Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 349.

7I- 72, 73-

p. ii. 5

66 ZQtOKAEOYZ

death of Meleager, Althaea and Cleopatra hanged themselves,and the women who mourned over his corpse were transformed

into birds. Here we meet with an incident which is known to

have been mentioned by Sophocles: Plin. nat. hist. 37. 11. 40Sophocles tragicus poeta... ultra Indiam fieri dixit (sc. electrwri} e

lacrimis meleagridum avium Meleagrum deflentium. quod et

credidisse eum vel sperasse aliis persuaderi posse quis non miretur?

quamve pueritiam tam imperitam posse reperiri, quae avium plo-ratus annuos credat lacrimasve tarn grandes, avesque e Graecia, ubi

Meleagerperiit.ploratum isse in Indos? (They were looking for

the tomb of Meleager: ib. 10. 26. 74 ) These neXeaypi&es (guinea-

fowl} are frequently referred to, and are generally located in the

island of Leros (Aelian nat. an. 4. 42, 5. 27, Athen. 655 B), but

also in Africa (Mnaseas fr. 41, FHG III 156). Strabo 215transfers them to the Eridanus, evidently confusing them with

the Heliades. They were also kept as sacred fowl on the

Acropolis (Phot, Suid.)1.

It has been inferred 2 that the plot of Sophocles is to befound in the second extract of Apollodorus, and that his play

approximated to the Homeric story. There is another pieceof evidence which points the same way: schol. A Horn. 1 575evrevdev ^.o<f)OK\r)s v rc5 MeXeaô) TOV -ôpov UTTO iepecov jrapij-

ya<yev. The agreement with Homer was hardly accidental, andit seems legitimate to conclude from it that the siege of Calydonby the Curetes was a leading feature in the development of the

plot3. If so, although Atalanta may have been mentioned as

taking part in the hunt, as Brunck inferred from fr. mi, hershare in the plot can only have been of minor importance.

Anyhow it is extremely unlikely that Euripides was the first

writer who connected Atalanta with the Calydonian hunt 4.

Aeschylus wrote an Atalanta, but nothing is known about its

contents.

1 R. Holland (in Roscher II 2588) thinks that the transference of the fteXeaypis to

mythology was the invention of Sophocles. He supposes that the domestic fowl wascalled [teXtaypos (Hesych. s.v. i] /carot/c/5ios Spvis) from /xeXedfeti', a cant term like

KOKKvfibas. The guinea-fowl received the same name, when first becoming knownat Athens, from its resemblance to the barn-door chicken. All this is somewhatfanciful.

2 So Preller, Gr. Myth, n3205, followed by Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 506, who

supposes that Meleager was reconciled with his mother, but too late. So also Kekule,as reported by Kuhnert in Roscher n 2596.

3 This conclusion agrees with the observation made by Ahrens that the reference

to the wild boar in fr. 401 implies that the hunt had taken place some time before the

inception of the dramatic action.4 See Pausan. 8. 45. 2, and Jebb, op. cit. p. 472.

MEAEAFPOZ 67

cruog

401

prjf^ CTT* Qlveoos

ATJTOVS TTCUS oo?/3d\os Bed.

4O1 Lucian symp. 25 el 5 deiirvov

ê/ca 6pyie<rda.l <TOL 5o/ctD, rb /card rbvOtWa evvorjffov. o\f/ei yap /cat TTJV "Apre/ui/

dyavaKTovcrav, OTI /ULOVIJV avrty ou irape-

\afiev e/cetj/os e?rt rrjv Ovviav, rovs dXXousQeovs e<ma)j'. (frycri 5e irepi aurwj/.../cai

Brunck was the first to refer these lines

to the Mdeager.1 crvos fie'Yiorov \pi]|j.a. This peri-

phrasis, the effect of which might be

represented by the adj. monstrous, is

elsewhere applied to a wild boar : Herod.I. 36 cS /3a<nAeO, u6s ^prâ. fA^ytcrTOv dve-

(pdvr) rj/juv ev ry X^PVt &* T ^PJO- 8ia<j>6eipei,

a passage which so closely resembles the

text of Sophocles that it may be regardedas another instance of the connexionbetween these two writers. H. quotesschol. Horn, x 9> telling the story of

Ancaeus the Samian, son of Poseidon,who was killed by a boar which wasravaging his land : a<f>vw ffwîj xpyt* -

<rv6s /j.eyd\ov tirifaprjffai rots 'A^JCcUov

X<*)piots. The idiom, which was partly

colloquial, is well illustrated by Blaydeson Ar. Lys. 1031 and Starkie on Vesp. 933.See also on Eur. Phoen. 198. yucus wascorrected by Cobet to -ytfas, but the dative

may well be right as involving the ideaof hostility, 'against': cf. Eur. Phoen.

1129 KctTrai/evs irpoffijye \6xov eir' 'H\^-

Acrpcus TruXats. The dative with irl to

express motion towards was obsolete in

the fifth century, though here and there

examples may be found like Aesch. Theb.

701 /U77 'X0r;s 65oi)s (Ti> raffd' t<p e/JSoûcusTriJXats. See also Headlam, On editing

Aeschylus, p. 50, who justifies Aesch. I.e.

as expressing the notion of destination.

402

Kpara4O2 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 95, 23 d/j.irv-

/cots /cat KaTa/j.TrvKots' "Lo<t>OK'

aT<pdi>oi<ri Kpara Kara/jLirvKols.'

5e /cat d/j.irvKUfJ.ao'iv (fr. 1002).The words aîrvKovv and

Were not previously known; but

/cd^w was used by Phalaecus in A. P. 13.

6, 3 Kiff<rdi>ois

The words as quoted appearto be out of order, and should probablyrun /cara/ATri'/cots j crre^dvoto'i Kpdra.

403

lo<f>6pov<$

4O3 Hesych. n p. 362 io<t>6povsrds t'loj*

Eustath. //. p. 994, 40 (repeated CW.

p. 1524, 25) mentions that Agathoclesread 5pv<riv lô<p6pOL<nv for dpvaiv v\piKO-

jAourtv in SJ 398. Agathocles was a

Stoicizing grammarian and pupil of Zeno-

dotus, who has been identified with the

writer of uiro/jiv-r)/j.aTa on historical and

geographical subjects (FUG IV 290,

Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa I 759). His

reasons, so far as they can be understood,were of an arbitrary character; and it

would be rash to assume that he was

recording an ancient variant. Everyonewill recall Verg. Aen. 6. 205 qtuile solet

silvis brumali frigore viscum \frondtvirere nova...talis erat species aztri fron-dentis opaca \

ilice. For the supersti-tions connecting the mistletoe with the

life of the oak, and for its identity with

52

6.8 20<t>OKAEOYI

the Golden Bough see Frazer G. B. in2 conversion of the Heliades into <p-qyol

p. 447 ff. R. Holland in Roscher II (schol. Eur. Hipp. 733). This is scarcelyr\n 1 . 1 r 1 r _ j_l

*! T7"._l '/. . -^T .l-'.~l-~

2588 explains the fr. by reference to the

Indian trees exuding electrum mentionedin Plin. n. h. 37. 39 and compares the

convincing. Kuhnert, ib. 2596, thinks

that the words came from a descriptionof the hunt. Cf. Dio Chr. 72. 14.

404

KVOLJJLO) TTOLTplO)

4O4 Hesych. n p. 544, which is set

out on fr. 288.

It was perhaps not so unreasonable as

the lexicographer thought to ascribe the

operation of the lot to the heroic age;for as a religious institution it has been

held to be of immemorial antiquity. For

the establishment of the lot at Athens see

Sandys on Arist. Ath. poL 8. i, and

Greenidge, Greek Constitutional History,

p. 138. M. Mayer (de Eur. mythop. 77)

strangely inferred that lots were drawnfor a duel to decide the dispute between

Calydon and the Thestiads.

405

4O5 Hesych. I p. 212

I(r6(3oiov, dvTi j8o6s Ka6ayia.f6fji.fvov. So-

This may be merely an echo of the

Homeric passages in which the ox is

mentioned as a standard of value : see

especially ^ 705, a 431. But it mayequally well contain an allusion to the

custom of offering cakes of meal fashioned

in the shape of an ox by those whose

means were insufficient to provide

living victim. Cf. Suid. s.v. povsTri T&V dvai<rdr)TU}v. oi yap Tr

i Trpoj3a.Tov,

Ms, atyos, /3o6s, opvidos, XTJJ^S, tdvero

^jSSo/ios 6 ej; et\ei5/9ou. Diogen. 3. 50(Paroem. I 224). A similar custom of

the Egyptians is mentioned by Hdt.2. 47.

406

4O6 Prov. ap. Miller, Melanges de

litt. gr. p. 369 dTTKra/Jiftw'

ra.i)Tt]v 6 Xpi/-

(ill p. 202 Arnim) rdrret Karal TO X ^POV & r<" s irpayp-affi trpo-

ctei irapa rb otriffw fialvew /x^-

TOV ovofj-aros So0o/cX^s tv MeXeci^py.The name of the play is omitted in cod.

Vat. 3. 36, Bodl. 754. Cf. [Plut.] prov.I. 3 (Paroem. I 321 OTrtcraû)- eirl TWV

ad '

irapa Tb oirlffw ftalveiv. Eustath. //.

p. 862, 5 v 5^ /card aTOixfiov \IK /cat

<j7ricra/i/3u> evptjTai ij els Totiirl<rw avaxupw.*(Ael. et Paus. fr. 415 Schwabe).The form 6iri<rd(j.l3wi> given by Vat.

Bodl. was rightly rejected by Ellendtbefore the publication of the Athoan

text. There is no sufficient ground to

displace the tradition that the word wasconnected with dvaftaivw, but it is notclear how it is related, if at all, to a/mûv(Aesch. fr. 103) or a^Sfj: see Etym. M.p. 81, 7. Analogy must have playeda considerable part in the history of

aa\dfj,pf) (fr. 1093), /ca/ca^/3?;, Xa/x/Sa,

Xripd/jL^r}and other obscure words with

a similar termination. If we concedethe verbal origin, the best parallel, sofar as concerns formation, is perhapse/uip\& in Hesych. n p. 73. This is de-rived by Hesych. from e/xjSX&reii' and

compared with the fern, hypocoristicsAw/9c6 and Aew, but by Lobeck (Path.Prol. p. 35 36 )

from eufiaXXw after

MEAEATPOI MOYZAI 69

He compares/ca/3X?7, eTrf/cX?;, 6fj.oK\^, tiriirXri, some ofwhich are as doubtful as their accents.

As regards meaning, the hypocoristic -wforms such as 0aXXw or K0fffj.w are closelyallied with nouns of agency, as Lobeckhas shown (Aglaoph. p. 733), quotingy\iXu> 6eXKT&, and others. There is

some evidence, collected by Lobeck, that

the termination was peculiarly Doric :

Hesych. II p. 485 KIV&' Kivrjo-is. Aw/nety.

id. I p. 203 dv6po)ir&' ij yvvfj, irapd Aci-

KUffiv. Epich. fr. 185 K. SU/>CIKW (the

city Syracuse). Athen. 109 A : Demetercalled 2m6 by the Syracusans. But,whatever may have been its literaryflavour, oTTKra/u/Sw was doubtless less

uncouth to Soph, than it seems to us;and we may conclude that its appearancein tragedy is as well justified as that of

êXXw (Aesch. Ag. 1355) or 3<wcw (Eur.El. 747).

For this title see p. 4.

MINQZ

407

OVK ecrrt rots jjirj Syooicrt

4O7 Clem. Alex, strom. 6 p. 741'

The famous maxim that God helpsthose who help themselves appears in

many forms, one of which 0eds 5e rots

dpyovtnv ov TraplffTarai (fr. adesp. 527)has already been referred to on fr. 308.The best known is Eur. fr. 402 ai)r65 rt

vvv 5p&v elra 8ai/j.ovas Kd\i'| ry yap

irovovvTi Kai debs ffv\\a/jt,^dvei, who was

following Aesch. Pers. 744 aXX' STOP

ffTretidr) TLS auros, x^ ê^s ûvaTrTerat, fr.

395 (pi\et 8e rcfJ Ka/JivovTi avcrirevSeiv de6s.

Cf. Eur. /. 71 910 TJV 5^ ris -rrpodvuos TJ, |

ffdtveiv r6 dflov /j,8.\\ov et/c6ra;s ^Xe ' El'

80 dpybs yap ovdeis Oeovs Zxw o.va <rr6/ua|

^

ai> t-vXXtyeiv dvev irbvov, Hel.

756 KOvSeis eir\oisrr)(r' [j.ir6poi<rLi> dpybs Wf.

The oldest source is perhaps Hes. Op.309 Kai T' 4pya6fj.evos TTO\V QLXreposaBava.Toi.ffLV

|g<T<reai rjdt /3/>orots [tdXa yap

ffTvytov<rii> depyovs. But the thought is

implied in Horn, y 26 (Athena is speaking)TTjXûax', aXXa fj.ev ai)r6s evi (ppevi (rrja-i

voiffffeis, |

aXXa 5e Kai daijjuav viro&ri<reTai,

where the ptv- clause is logically sub-ordinate. The Paroemiographers recordthe proverb <rvv

Xiri<ri

93> r>iogen. 8. n).dpyeiv (Zenob. 5.

MOYZAI

This title appears, according to Haupt's restoration, in an

inscription belonging to the first century B.C. (CIA II 992 I 25)1,

which contains a catalogue of books dedicated by certain ephebiin the library of a gymnasium. The only fragment quotedunder the title has in previous editions been attributed to the

It might be suggested that Mov&ai was an alternative title

to the Thamyras. Phrynichus employed it for a play which

1 Also published by Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 138. The letters ov<rai are

certain and are followed apparently by 'AXavdpos.

70 lOÔKAEOYZ

was produced at the same time as the Ranae of Aristophanes,and appears to have dealt with a similar subject (I 379 K.).

Nothing is known concerning the Mouo-cu of Ophelion (ll 294 K.)or that of Euphron (ill 321 K.).

408

4O8 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 83,22 aoXov ITTTTOV. ZooKX?s Motf(rcus Mu-ffols vulgo).

apoXos is the name given to a horsebefore he has shed his teeth, i.e. accordingto Aristotle (hist. an. 6. 22. 576* u) upto the age of4^ years. Plato distinguishesthree ages 7rit>Xois re ct/36Xots /cat reXe/awre Kal dpbXwv TOIS nfoois Kal avrols 617x015rAoy %owi fagg- 834 c). The best

authority is Arist. I.e., 576b

13 dK/m-dfei

8 Kal I'TTTOS Kal -rffjUovos fêrd roi)s /36Xou$'tirav 8e Trctz/ras uxn f36J3\r]K6TS, ov pddiov

yvwvai rrjv yXiKiav dib Kal \tyovcrt yvw-IJ.tfjv (yvufta al.) %x fLV

iOTO.V djSoXos y

'

Srav dt pe(3\i)Ktbs, OVK ^x iv - The last

sentence clearly alludes to a popular

TTTTOV

witticism. Bekk. anecd. p. 322, 2

seems to be inconsistent with Aristotle,

and is perhaps due to a confusion between

acquiring and casting the yvdo/j.oves, the

fourth set of teeth which an ass drops(Arist. 6. 23. 577* 21): see also Suid.,

Hesych., schol. Plat., Eustath. Od.

p. 1405, 20 /ecu 6 cfySoXos ITTTTOJ, 6

(f)a.<riv ^K^f^XtjKws TrwXos TOV

yv&pova 6d6vra. Phryn. praep. soph.

p. 33, 13 a(3o\ov KTTJVOS' TO /UTJ dirofie-

(B\-rjKO^ TWf ddbvras, 5i' u>v yvuptferai TJ

rj\iKla. A horse which had lost all its

milk teeth was known as KarrjprvK&s :

see the comm. on Aesch. Eutn. 476.

MYIOI

The title is recorded in the inscription already referred to in

connexion with the Movcrai (CIA II 992 I 24).

It is generally admitted that this play was concerned with

the fortunes of Telephus after his arrival in Mysia (see Intro-

ductory Note to the Aleadae^ I p. 48) ;and the subject of the

plot was traced by Welcker to Hygin./^. 100. King Teuthraswas threatened by Idas, who cannot have been the Apharid as

Hyginus states, but was probably a local freebooter from Mt Ida

(Thraemer, Pergamos, p. 376), at the time when Telephus arrived

in Mysia with his friend Parthenopaeus1

. Hyginus states that

Telephus came in search of his mother, following the commandof the oracle, and this agrees with other authorities quoted onI p. 47, to which may be added Suid. s.v. eVâro? Mucrwi> ir\elv

...evioi rrjv irapoifjiiav TOV xprjo-fjuov \eyovo~i, T?;Xe<ft) /jLavre

yeyovevai Trepl yovewv, eTrl rivets TOTTOVS e\6u*v evpoi TOU?

1 The two names were no doubt connected because both were reared amongst the

hills of Arcadia, Telephus on Mt Parthenius, Parthenopaeus on Mt Maenalus (Eur.Phoen. 1162 n.). Thraemer argues that Soph, would not have confused independent

legends.

MOYZAI MYZOI 71

TOV Be Oeov Trpoo-rdâi Tr\elv eVt TOV ea-ârov Mucrwz/. d<f)iicofjLvovB' et9 TevOpaviav, vkâQai yap ravra ra ^copia M.VCTOVS, eTTCTVêlvrfi /jbrjrpl avrov .(= schol. [Eur.] Rhes. 248). It is not certain,however, that this was the account of Sophocles ;

for we haveseen, in dealing with the Aleadae (p. 48), that Telephus hadincurred blood-guiltiness by killing his uncles, and his exile

may have been enjoined for the purpose of expiation (aTreviav-

TKT/ô?)1

. We hear of the consequent taboo laid upon Telephusin Arist. poet. 24. I46o a

32 ev Muo-ofc o afywvos ex Tyea<? et9

Trjv Muo-iav rjrcwv, which is generally referred to the Mysians of

Aeschylus (TGF p. 47); and the disability is connected with his

homicide by Amphis fr. 30 (II 244 K.) e/cvêv &We/> T^Xeô? |

TrpcoTov (Jiwirri (KOI BiKalay? TOVTO ye" \aTravTes dvBpO(f)6voi yap

elo-iv evl \6ytt)). However this may be, the Sophoclean Telephusdoes not seem to have been under a ban of silence on his ar-

rival: see fr. 411. Teuthras offered the succession to the throneand the hand of his adopted daughter Auge to the conquerorof Idas, and she was accordingly betrothed to Telephus, whowith the assistance of Parthenopaeus successfully accomplishedthe adventure. But Auge, who was faithful to the memory of

Heracles, prepared to slay her spouse on the wedding-night, andfor that purpose concealed a sword in her bedchamber. Herintention was frustrated by a miracle: for a huge serpent issued

from the ground to protect Telephus, so that Auge threw downher sword and confessed her treachery. Telephus was about to

exact vengeance upon her, when she called upon Heracles, as

the betrayer of her maidenhood. An explanation ensued;and

Telephus recognized his mother and returned with her to Tegea.Cf. Anth. Pal. 3. 2 TOV /3a9vv 'Ap/caSirjs 7rpo\i7ra)v Trdrov e'iveKa

a<T&' eTre^Tjv 70.9 TevOpavridSos, \ Tt/Xecô?, Hpa-? 70^09 avros vTrdp^cov, o<f>pa piv a^r dydyco 9 TreSov

That the story of Hyginus is old and derived froma tragic source is proved by Aelian nat. an. 3. 47 Bore IJLOL roi'9

rpaytoBovs. ..KOL irpo ye eiceivtov TOV$ /jLvdoTroiovs epecrOai ri (Bov-

\6fjLevoi roa-avTrjv dyvoLav...Karaêovo-i,...TOv Tr)\e(f)ov TOV fJ>rj

TreupaOevTos /j,ev TT)$ o/z-tXta9, avyicaTaK\ivevTOS Be Trj

/cal 7Tpdj;avTos av ra avTa (sc. rw OlBiTroBi), el /nrj 6elqi6ipl~ev o Bpd/ca)v, with a further reference to yva)pio~/judT(ov,

which is clearly intended for Telephus.The epigram quoted above was taken from the temple at

Cyzicus dedicated to Apollonis the mother of Attalus, in whichthe recognition-scene may have followed the description of

1 Two different motives appear to be conflated in Prov. app. i. 85 (Paroem.I 412).

72 !0<t>OKAEOY!

Sophocles. Further, Robert holds 1 that a series of events in

the life of Telephus which comprise the plot of the present

play is represented on the fragments of the smaller frieze of

the Pergamene altar. Fr. 411 clearly relates to the arrival in

Mysia, and Robert plausibly refers frs. 412 and 413 to a feast

held in honour of the betrothal of Telephus and Auge. Arguingfrom Aelian that the tragic plot abstracted by Hyginus wasknown in the imperial age, at a date when the works of the

lesser tragedians had perished, he concluded that the play,since it cannot have been the work of Euripides, must havebeen written either by Aeschylus or Sophocles. If Robert's

premisses are accepted, we can hardly hesitate to prefer the

claim of Sophocles ;but when he proceeds to compare the plots

of the Cresphontes and the Ion, and to infer that the Mysi mustbe later than the former (B.C. 427), because the recognition-scenetakes place in the 6d\ano<;, his reasoning fails to convince. Still

less can we follow Pilling (de Telephi fabula, diss. Hal. 1886,

p. 63), who holds that the story in Hyginus is copied from the

Iphigenia in Tauris of Euripides, and belongs therefore to a play

subsequently produced.Thraemer \Pergamos, p. 374 fT.) thought that Hyginus cannot

derive from Sophocles, since Telephus had only to proclaim his

errand in order at once to ensure recognition. The objectionhas been partly met by anticipation, and the absurdity of the

situation is in any case no greater than in the Oedipus Tyrannus,where it has been successfully overcome. When Thraemer

urges further that Sophocles followed the common version of

Apollodorus (3. 103 f.) and Diodorus (4. 33), he omits to addthat these writers record nothing concerning the recognitionwhich could serve as a basis for dramatic treatment.

For the historical facts which underly the legend see Ridge-way, Early Age of Greece, p. 1 8 1 .

409

rots /ca/cois Trpda-<Tov<riv rjBv KCU

\a6ecrOai TMV TrapecrTurojv KOLKMV.

4O9. 2 xbvw A

4O9 Stob. flor. 26. 4 (m p. 610, The sentiment is well illustrated by7 Hense) TOV avrov (SA: Z,o<j>OK\4ovs M. Eur. Or. 213 w Trdrvia \rjdt) T&V KO.K&V,The extract follows fr. 670) Mvo-uv. 'ws u>s el <ro07/ |

/ecu roun 8vffrvxov<rii> eikraia'...KO.K&V.' 0e6s. Nauck and Hense accept K&V for

1 Bild und Lied, p. 48. See also the detailed discussion by the same writer inArch. Jahrb. II 246 ff. O. Jahn, Telephos und Troilos, Kiel 1841, p. 65, approvedWelcker's identification.

MYIOI 73

KO.I from Cobet (Coll. Crit. p. 190), whoremarks 'reponendum est quod eo sensuconstanter did solet.' But this is putmuch too strongly. It is true that KO.V

would be defensible, if it were the tra-

ditional text, but there is no groundwhatever for impugning Kal. As amatter of fact, the passages where K&V is

used in a limiting sense without a verbare very few in number. From those

quoted by Jebb on EL 1482 (p. 224)Theocr. 23. 35 should be deducted, for

KOLV there has no authority. Add Ar.Phit. 126 eav 'a.TropKtyrjs <n> K&V fjuKpbv

Xpovov. Menand. fr. 342 (in 69 K.)eureX0e Kav vvv. Vesp. 92 TIV 5' otiv Kara-

Hfoy K&V &XVTIV. Lys. 671 el yap evdtlxrei

rts i)fj,u>v raiffSe K&V ff/j-iKpav \afiriv* InRan. 734, where Meineke conj. K&V for

Kal, and in Pint. 946 the same questionarises as here. Whether in all or any ofthese examples KO.V should be resolved asKal &v is a difficult question, on which

opinions are divided.

410

yapt Oo o

41 TjKKTTa codd.

41O Stob. flor. 98. 23 (iv p. 833,7 Hense) So0o/cXôvs Mvtr&p.

'

a/xox#os. . .

/xa/cdpraros.'

The traditional text is not quite clear,

and Tuckerhad some reason for suggestingthe addition of Ka/oDs after ?xuv - Theabsence of context necessarily leaves

a doubt, but on the assumption that

,u6x0oi>$, irbvovs or the like might havebeen supplied as the object to ^x<i}V

a construction for which see Jebb onTrack. 260, El. 962 the adverb mightstand in place of an adjective such as

eXaxtVrous in accordance with a well-

known idiom : cf. Thuc. 6. 27

fteifous \appavov, Dem. 20.

ras dTTia-rajs 7rp6s ^yuas airrous

Ellendt is inaccurate in treating riKia-ra

as an adjective and equating it with TO

For the general sense, which recalls

the pessimism of O.C. 1225, cf. Herond.fr. 5 B. u>s oiKirjv OVK Z&TIV ev/maptus

evpeiv |

&vev KaK&v faovaav'

5s 5' %x i

fj.e'iov|

TOIJTOV rt, [AOI> TOV ertpov 56Kieiv. (Susarion I 3 K. OVK ZGTIV

oiKlav dvev KaKov, Menand. fr. 589,III 176 K. &vev KaK&v yap oiKiav OLKOV-

fjiti>r]v|

OVK Z<TTLV evpeiv.} The metre,i.e. three bacchiacs (cf. Aesch. Ag. 1069,Cho. 390) followed by an iambic tripody,is unusual and, if the text is sound,almost certainly incomplete.

4ii'Acria /xe*> rj cru/XTracra /cXêrat,770X19 8e Mvcrcov Mvcrta

41 1 . 1 %eive codd. fere omnes

411 Strabo 356, quoting exampleswhere 7r6Xis is used by poets in place of

*y?7 or X^Pa'

2o00KX?7s 5' cv Mu<ro?s

''Ao-t'a. . .irpovriyopos.'1

11 <rv|xiraora : it must be assumedthat this is an answer to rlv"

1

TJK(I) yaTav ;

or the like.

2 iroXis, =xupa- Strabo quotes Eur.Ion 294, fr. 6,s8. So conversely x&Paand yT) are used where we should expect7r6Xts: see on Eur. Phoen. 636, 1058.'The land of the Mysians is called

Mysia.' It would be hypercritical to

require' The land belongs to the Mysians

and is called Mysia,' though the result

might be attained by putting a commaafter Muo-cDi'. Ellendt, relying on O. T.

1437 Qvrfr&v Qavovnai /m,ij8evbs irpwriyopos,thinks it 'more elegant' to render 'is

called Mysian by the Mysians.' But the

sense yielded is inferior. Dindorf reads

Mwfy, on the analogy, I suppose, of

ovoparl nva Trpoaayopeveiv : but the vul-

gate is just as good Greek. irpooifyoposis passive also in Phil. 1353 T< irpo<rr)-

yo/>os; 'who will speak to me?' Thereis no difficulty in its application to a placerather than to a person: cf. e.g. Piat.

rep. 428 D rl TTJV ir6\iv irpoffayopeveis ;

74 2000KAEOYI

412

Se <&pi> Tpiyaivos

Js tyvpvel TnyjcriSos

avTicnracrTa re

412. 1 re om. A altero loco A altero loco| vvyxopdiai A utroque loco

412 Athen. i83E fj-vyfj-ovevei 5e rou

rpiyibvov rotirov Kal 2.o<f>OK\fjs ev ^t^v

Mutnus ourws '

Tro\i>s...<rvyxopdLa,' Kal v

Qa/j.ijpa (fr. 239). The quotation from

the 'M.vaoi is repeated at 635 C.

1 f. We must suppose that the verb

governed by rptywvos occurred in a pre-vious line together with another subjectto which rp. is linked by 8c. Nauck is

alone in retaining <rvyxop8la ;for the

nominative is clearly preferable. J. ren-

ders: 'And many a Phrygian harp...,and in response to it (adv. )

resounds the

harmony ((rvyxopSia for avyxppbiq.} of the

Lydian lyre.' But it may be doubted

whether this is the true meaning of

avrfo-irao-Ta. It should be observed that

this passage and Phrynichus fr. ri (v.

infra) are adduced in support of the

interpretation given by Aristoxenus to

a particular passage of Pindar. And it

seems clear that it was Aristoxenus him-

self who quoted the use of avTicnraffTos

by Phrynichus and Sophocles as identical

with that of avrltydoyyos in Pind. fr. 125rbv pa T^p?rav5p6s 7ro#' 6 A^<r/3tos e&pe

j

wpiSroJ ei> SeiTTvoiffi AvSCov\ \f/a\fj.bv dvrl-

(pdoyyov v\{/ri\as dKOiW TT^KTÔS. This

refers explicitly to the TTTJKTIS, but Aris-

toxenus treated iryKrls and fidyaSis as

identical for the purpose he had in view

(cf. 635 E), and both of them belongedto the class of TroXi/xopSa. Thus we can

explain what in any other view of their

interpretation is unintelligible, why three

quotations relating to the TTTJKT/S are

inserted in the middle of a discussion

concerning the nature of the pdyaSis.Aristoxenus explained \f/a\/j.bv avrifidoy-

yov thus : 8ta TO Sia 5vo yev&v ci'/xa Kal

dia TracruJj' %x lv T^lv owipSiav avbp&v re

Kal iralduv. That is to say, the irrjKTis

(or /J,dya8is) had two sets of strings in

different octaves, so that it could be used

to accompany the antiphonal singing of

men and boys. Similarly here avritriraaTa

means '

doubly-twanged (notes)'

;and it

follows that the iryKris required to be

played with both hands. Notice how<rvyxpSCa gains in significance. Thedouble set of strings must also be in-

dicated by the epithet 8txop8os attributed

to the irrjKrls by Sopater ap. Athen.

1838; for it is incredible that the -jnjKris

(TroA^xopSos) had only two strings. It is

fair to admit that there were others

followed apparently by all modem editors

who gave the meaning'

responsive'

to-

avTi(pdoyyov in Pindar (Athen. 635 D) ;

but these were at any rate later than

Posidonius, and their authority cannot

reasonably be set against that of Aristo-

xenus.

rpfywvos,' a triangular harp, associated

with the TTTJKTIS (see on fr. 24 r).' (J.)

Plato banishes both instruments from his-

commonwealth : rep. 399 C rpiy&vuv dpa-Kal TryKTlSMv Kal Trdvrwv opyavuv, ova,

of> 6pt\f/o/j.i>. There is an excellent ac-

count of both in Susemihl and Hicks,.Politics ofAristotle, I p. 632 f. and p. 635,from which I quote :

'

Practically all the

ancients, agreeing with Aristotle, wereof opinion that the rpiyuvov, and more

especially the ffa^vK-rj [another triangular

instrument], were only suitable for loose

songs and melodies and persons of lightcharacter.' dvKo-iracrra, taken as ad-

verbial by J., might equally well be the

object of e<t>vfjivi (fr. 90) ; and this is

perhaps more in accordance with the

usage of the verb. J. quotes Phrynichusfr. 1 1 â\/uLoiaiv dvricnraffT^ deLSovTes /xA77 r

adding'

â\/x6s is the touching of acithara's or a lyre's strings

' and Diogenesfr. I. 9 âX/u,ots Tpiy&v&v TT^KT'L^WV dvri-

tyyois [

6\Kot$ KpKoti(ras /j-dyaSiv, i.e.

sounding the pdyaSis, a variety of the

TTTjfcris, with twangings that answer to

the noise of rpiyuvoL and irijKTlSes. In thelast passage all three instruments are said

to be played by Lydian maidens.

MYIOI 75

413

\jje\ia, Tidpas KOIcricrvpvatS'Y)

413 (\(/\\ia Bergk) scripsi : \}/a\tdas codd.

413 Pollux 10. 1 86 (jtaLrjs 5' Ai/ KO!

ffiffvpvav, Alffxôv /j.ev tv Kr(fr. 109) \tyovros

( Kara TTJS

XeopT&is,' 2o0o/cXôus 5' eV Muaots

...oroX^j'.' Hesych. IV p. 34 refers to

the present passage : ffio-vpvwdTjs trroX^

(Nauck conj. ffiarvpitud-r) O-TO\^V)' TOV CK

rrjs <rifftipvr)s ffTO\L<rfj,6v.

The words are intended to describe the

dress of an oriental grandee. On the

assumption that xJ/t'Xia is to be read, or

âXi5as interpreted in the same sense,the appropriateness of the first two wordsis clear. The form of dress which the

Greeks regarded as a Persian character-

istic was originally Median, and was

subsequently adopted from them by thePersians (Xen. Cyr. i. 3. 2, 8. 3. i).

Gold armlets (i^Xia) were worn as wellas collars (ffTpeirroL) : see Hdt. 9. 80,Xen. Cyr. 6. 4. 2. The ridpa or 'turban,'also known as Kvpfiaffla or Kidapis, a

small skull-cup made of cotton, was thenational head -gear of Asiatics; the kingalone was entitled to wear ridpav opdriv,i.e. stiffened so as to rise from the headlike the crown of a hat (Xen. anab. 2.5.23). The relevance of <ri<rvpvw8t] (rroXrjvis less obvious, alavpva is probably a

dialectical (Ion. Aeol.) variant of ffifftipa

(so Herwerden, Lex. Suppl. s.v.) : for noreliance can be placed on the distinction

drawn by Hesych. I.e. <ri<rvpva pv yapeldos' ffto~6pa 5e di<f>6pa et's

KTf. (This was probably an explanationprovided ad hoc, to suit the present pas-

sage : still less can we place confidence in

the schol. recc. of Aristophanes, whotake another view.) <ri<r6pa was a skincoat worn as an outer wrap or by rustics

(cf. ftairij), or used as a blanket. Sucha covering seems remote from the elegant

purple Kdvdvs, for which see Holden onXen. Cyr. i. 3. 2. But it was not somuch the material as the shape of thePersian robe, completely enveloping its

wearer, which excited the wonder of theGreeks. When made of a thick, woollymaterial it was called Kavvdicrjs : see

Pollux 7. 58, who also says that theKavdvs was sometimes made of skins.

The whole description in Ar. Vesp.

1132 ff. serves as a commentary on

ffiavpvudr) <rro\-f)v. Philocleon is afraid

of being smothered in the thick overcoatin which his son wishes to wrap him, andasks what it is. (1137) BA. oi plv Ka\ov<ri

Hep<rid\ oi 5 KO.VV aKyv.|

4>I. tyu 82

ffiavpav (pbftrjv Qv/maiTida. |

BA. KO&

6avfji.d y'. esSd/>5eis 701/3 ofl/c eX^Xutfas.

Telephus was as untravelled as Philocleon.

It seems therefore unnecessary to think

specifically of the military cloak knownas ftavdijas (Ael. Dion. fr. 252 Schw.,

Hesych. in p. 70, Pollux 7. 60). The<ri<rvpi>o<p6poi of Hdt. 7. 67 are half- civilized

warriors from Afghanistan. Cf. generallyThemist. or. 2. p. 360 ndpa 8 01) Troie?

icdvdvs ovd fj.av8ijas ov5

re KO.I

\f/a\idas (see cr. n.) is probably anerror : cf. fr. 367. Alternatively it meansa '

pair of scissors,' which is equally be-

side the mark. Ellendt thinks that \j/a\ts

may have been used with the meaning of

\f/t\Lov ;but of this there is no evidence,

and the corruption assumed by the adop-tion of Bergk's conjecture is simple

enough (YEAIA through YAAAIA to

TAAIAAC). ^Xta is clearly right in

Aesch. Prom. 54, where M has ^ctXta,

and both words are sometimes wronglywritten with XX.

414

a<

41 4 Hesych. I p. 335 ct00i'Tous yvufj.as'

H. compares 5ia<f>0ftpei,v yvwfj,rii> Aesch.

Ag. 923 (to let one's resolution weaken),

'

ob dta(f>6ep& Eur. Med. 1055. AddPlat. legg. 768 B d8ia(f>06pov$ rats SeT^recrt

(SiKdffTds),' unmoved by entreaties.' One

would expect the phrase to refer to the

76 ZO*OKAEOY2

deathless purpose of the gods, after the

pattern of Horn, ft 88 Zeus a<f>dira /xiy'Sea

et'Sws, h.Aphr.4$, Hes. Theog. 544, Horn.h. Dem. 321 Zei)$ dfpdtra et'5c6s. In Find.

/^M. 8. 71 êwv 5' OTrti'| &(j>6iToi> atr^w,

Sâp/ces, u/uer^patj TI^CUS the adj. is

against Gildersleeve's view that the geni-tive is objective ; but Schroeder adoptsa(j>dovov. Eur. Hel. 1014 6 vovs

\

rCiv

fj.v of), yvwfjiTjv 5' Zx et\

dddvarov refers to the imperishable con-

sciousness of ^VXTI- In any other con-

nexion to use dddvaros of a humanemotion ('fixed opinions,' Blaydes) wouldbe arrogant : Eur. fr. 799 wcnrep 5e dvr)Tov

KO.I Td (TUJ/i' TJflU)V 20U, [

OC/TW TTpOff^KCl

jji.r)5 TTJV opyyv ^x LVI

aâfaTOf oaris

<r<*)<{>poveiv eTrtVrarat, Trag. fr. adesp. 79.

415

41 5 Hesych. I p. -243 diroftddpa'

diro-

Parrjpia, rj /cXt/xa^ veus. 2to<f>oK\i)s Mfcrors.

Bekk. anecd. p. 426, 18 dirofiddpa.' diro-

Parripia (sic), otfrw 2o0o:\^j. Cf. Phryn.

praep. soph. p. 19, 8 de B.

Brasidas was wounded at Pylos as he

stepped ^?rt TT)v dirofiddpav (Thuc. 4. 12).

Dindorf in Thes. s.v. contends, on the

strength of the accent (dirofiaT77/340) in

Bekk. anecd.) that dirbftaQpa, was used by

Soph, (like tirlpadpa in Ap. Rhod. i. 421)for diro&aTripia = a sacrifice made on land-

ing. He quotes in support Dio Cass. 40.1 8 Kai rot 5ict/JaT77/Ha rd re dirbfiadpa ff<f>i<n

SwrxepeVrara fy6ro. This is an attrac-

tive suggestion : the objection to its adop-tion is that Dind. is obliged to infer that

the tradition of Hesychius has beenvitiated.

416 Hesych. I p. 259diroffirq.. 2o0o/cX^$ Mi'trots.

Nauck was inclined to approve M.Schmidt's conjecture that the lemmadTrodpv<j)i had been lost before dtro<rijpet..

He drew this inference from Etym. M.

p. 127, 19 dtro8p6<f>i- diroffirq., diro<rvpei:

but it is not unlikely that the reference

there is to Horn. ^ 187 dtroSpv<f>oL.

417

CLTTVpOV

41 7 Hesych. I p. 276 dirvpov ddvrov.

aTrupos, as an epithet of 6v<ria, serves

to describe the .bloodless offerings of

fruit, cereals, and liquids, as distin-

guished from the sacrifice of an animal

victim, because the former were not as

a general rule consumed by burningon the altar. See Farnell in C. R. xi

294 ff., who has established this mean-

ing for Aesch. Ag. 70, much in the same

way as it was afterwards independently

explained by Headlam. Cf. Eur. fr.

912, 4 dvfflav airvpov irayKapireias. TheRhodian sacrifice was a famous instance:

Find. 01. 7. revâv 5' dirvpots iepois \

&\<ros ev dKpotrdXi. See also fr. 398.

dirvpov here may have been the epithetof some such word as Tre\dvov, and

though there are other possibilities (see

Farnell, p. 296, Stengel in Fauly-Wis-sowa II 293) none is so likely as this.

The gloss ddvTov would then be referable

to the stricter sense of Bveiv'to consume

with fire,' for which see Miss Harrison,

Proleg. p. 55.

MYIOI MQMOI 77

418

418 Hesych. I p. 307 dffrpa^' inretorto is exactly in point. But the

ffK\rip6s'

So0o/fX7?s Mu<rwi' (Mutrots coni. explanation (TK\r)p6s hardly favours this,

Musurus). since tfarpeTrros, arptTrros (cf. "ArpoTros),

do-Tpcujyrjs may have been used for a and even drej/^s, which is frequentlystern gaze, as Ellendt thinks ; though applied to the eyesight, acquired theneither Aesch. Cho. 98 d<rTp6<j>oi<nv op- 'sense unbending in other connexions.

nor Hor. Carm. i. 2. 23 oculo

MQMOZ IATYPIKOI

The character of the fragments, apart from the direct evidenceof fr. 424, shows that the Mw/zo? was a satyr-play. Welcker 1

was certainly wrong in thinking that Kw/xo? rather than M<w/xo9was the real title. Choeroboscus in Theod. p. 376, 18 confusedthe play of Sophocles with one written by Achaeus (TGFp. 753)under the same title.

Momus is mentioned in Hes. Theog. 214 as one of thechildren of Night, but is scarcely referred to elsewhere in extantGreek literature, until he appears as a character in the dialoguesof Lucian. The only trace of his active participation in the

events of the heroic saga is to be found in schol. A Horn. A 5,

where the desire of Zeus to relieve the burden imposed uponthe earth by over-population is said to have been gratified in the

first instance by the Theban expedition, in which many lives

were lost : varepov Be 7rd\iv avjjLôvXw r< Ma>/-i<w

(sciL TroXXou? a7ra)\(7ei>), fjv Ato? j3ov\arjw "O/jujpos (

olo? re 171; icepavvols r) /cara/cXucr/zofc Trdvras SiatyOeipeiv. oirepTOV Mco/AOL' KayXiKTavTos, v'jroOeêvov 5e avrw rrjv ertSo? OvffTO-

/cal dwyarepos /caXfjs yevvav, ef a>v aôrepayv TroXe/xo?re KOI (Sapftdpois fyevero tcre. The abstract of the

Cypria given by Proclus (EGF p. 17) is too brief to provethat Momus is substituted by the scholiast for Themis 2

;but

whether he appeared in the epic narrative or not andthe scholiast certainly implies that he did the story of his

being taken into council is unquestionably old, and nothingelse is so likely to have been the subject of this play. In that

case, it was the first part of a trilogy not of course in the

technical sense of which the second and the third were the

"E/ot9 and the Kpta-i? (see I p. 139, II p. 29).

1 Nachtr. p. 298.zGruppe, p. 66 rr

78 IO<t>OKAEOYI

Wagner preferred to find the story of the play in the fable

related in Lucian Hermot. 20, according to which Momus foundfault with the model of Man made by Hephaestus, because there

were no windows in his chest to expose his inner feelings.

419

419 Hesych. I p. 136 d

<rts TIS. Kcu dXwTreKicu P.WIJ.WV, ws

/cX^s, oirep e<rrl tv (ru/mari Trddos yevbfj.evov.

This difficult and corrupt passage has

been severely treated by the critics, (i)

Soping's conjecture dX&ireKta u>s Zoô/fX^s

Mayx^j has so far won acceptance that the

fragment is generally reckoned under the

title MW/AOS. So Nauck, who however

Iceeps dXuirfKtai as the lemma. (2) M.Schmidt, bracketing the words /ecu dXw-Treifiai and oTrep...yei>6fj.evov as belongingto an earlier gloss, recasts the residue as

dXunr7?'

6 paxiTTjs fJ.vJ}v, ws S. 'Ivdxv :

see on fr. 263. This is an extremelyviolent proceeding, but it is (3) partially

accepted by Dindorf, who holds that the

explanation 8pxw^ Tt s alone relates to

Sophocles, and apparently acquiesces in

Soping's Mt6/x,y. Crusius on Herond. 7.

72 takes the same view as Dindorf. (4)

Ellendt follows Soping, but regards dXw-

7re/c? as a verb of the class discussed byRutherford, New Phryn. p. 153. The

general drift seems to me rather to be :

'And dXu>7r?? is used in scoffing at dXw-

ireKla, as by Sophocles.' But there is

evidently some corruption, and whether

it should be cured by such a reading as

dXwTre/acu' ûw/xw < fjLfvu > v (or could /uw-

[jLaffdai take a dat. on the analogy of

fj.(H<pea-6ai?) is hard to say. It is any-how more probable, apart from metrical

considerations, that Sophocles, like Cal-

limachus and Herondas, preferred d\uwr)%to the pseudo-scientific dXa>7re/c/a. I con*

elude, therefore, (i) that the evidencedoes not warrant the ascription of this

fr. to the MtDyuos ; (2) that a\uini shouldtake the place of dXunre/cfa in the text.

dXwirrjf;. Lobeck (ParaL p. 317 n.),

illustrating Kd-rrvos = otvos KOLTTVLOS and the

like, quotes the use of d\uirr), eX^0as,KiW, Koptf/Sas, olvrpos for dXwTre/cia, eXe-

0ai/n'a<m, etc. Cf. Callim. h. Art. 77 TO5' Arpixov eiWrt KO.I vvv

|yuecrcrdnoj' ar^pvoi.0

fjifrei ptpos, ws ore Kopari |0wros evidpvv-

d7Ti>eiiJ.a.T' dXwTTTj^. Herond.

72 60' ^S (l<6pO"r)s) d\WTTt)j; VOfffflTJl'

TotTyrat. The popular explanation is

given by Etym. M. p. 74, 53 i] yhpTO fyoj', Zvda. &v ovprjffr), rbv

&Ka.pirov iroiei, i-ypaivovffa KO.I rrjv

fiordvr}V, KO.I ertpav dva-

/3Xa0T77<rcu ov <rvyxupov<Ta. To the sameeffect schol. Callim. I.e.

420

42O Hesych. i p. 163 d^<f>iov

2o0o/cX^s Mw^ty. Bekk. anecd. p. 389,lo^Suid. s.v. &fj.<piov i>5vfji.a, I/J.O.TI.OV.

a|A(f>iov was probably a colloquial rather

than a literary word. It occurs in CIAIII 60, 4 /ecu cfyt0ia /cat otVô-ets and is

used vaguely for '

wraps'

in Dion. H.Ant. Rom. 4. 76 tiri K\lvt]s n\aaLv aliensea'Tpajfj.^v'rjs. Living on in the popular.speech, it came to the surface in the

Byzantine era. In Suid. it appears asa gloss on d/nTrexovrj. From Eustath.Od. p. 1421, 65 irt]vlov M tvTiv b yu,tros.

^ ov Kal '

xPV(reo 'n"1lViT01' &[J-<t>i.ov

' Hem-sterhuis conjectured that the last twowords were cited from Sophocles. But

they may be an inexact reference to Eur.Or. 841 : see Jebb on Ant. 292 (p. 249).For the accentuation see Chandler, 349.

MQMOI79

421

421 Hesych. I p. 184firapai. TO aidoiov, TI o-Tvyvdaai. So0o/cX?7S

cod.). To the same effect

L. and S. require correction.Cf. Pollux 2. r;6 TO ^VTOL

TO aldoTov wapd rots dpxaiois /cw/n/cotsPhot. ed. Reitz. p. 123, 8, but without (fr. adesp. 81, in 414 K.) dthe name of the play. For <TTvyi>d<ra.i, Xetrat. Suid. s.v. dveurriJ^cuwhich is corrupt, M. Schmidt conj./rrOcrat, Blaydes opyidtrai or opyrjcrai :

Blaydes conj. dva<TTv<Tai.

422

422 Hesych. I p. 204 dV0/>w<r/ce- dVw

tipua-Kc, dpxov (dpxovs cod.). 2o<poK\i)s

Mc6/i(f> (/cco/uy cod. ). The corrections

were made by Joseph Hill (1663).For this feature of tragic dancing cf.

Eur. Tro. 325 ird\\e wod' alOtpiov, ib. 332Avaye irdSa abv (so I would read and

connect). Ar. Vesp. 1492 oTcAos ovpdvibv

y' tK\(LKT'<.fav, ib. 1524 /cat

TIS, OTTWS|

LOOVTCS avw

oi deaTal. Instances of the

apocope of dvd in Sophocles are givenby Jebb on Ant. 1275. Both in Atticand Ionic apocope is sparingly employed,and appears to be a dying-out usage,surviving where it did owing to literaryassociation. Of the tragic poets Aeschy-lus uses it most freely. See Smyth, Ionic

Dialect, 322, and for the phonetichistory of apocope Monro, //. G? 180*.

423

423 Hesych. I p. 257 diro<TK6\vTTT'

<i7ro\e7ri("e (ctTroX^Trtfbi' cod.) /coi d?ro/c6Xoi;e.

0a(ri /ecu TOV TrepiTeT^^vov TO aloolov

direffKoXvfj.fj.frov (aTrecrKoXvfJi^vovcod.). So-

<J>oK\r)s Mw^y. Bekk. anecd. p. 435, 25diroo'KO\iJ T'ai

'

d(f)f\eiv TO dtp/ma, TJ diroyv-

fj.v}<rat. Zo</>o/cX?7s 5^ TO diroKbXove v

(corrected by Ellendt to diro-

TO diroi<6\ove ev Mw/x^). Cf.

p. 423, I dTrecr/coXuTrre Kvpiws TO

d<pr]pi, rjdrj 5t KO.L TO

Etym. M. p. 120, 27 d

/carax/)77<rrt/ca)s 5^ /cat tiri

H^voVj rj TO 5fpfj.a. d<pypr]fjifrov. Ael. Dion,

fr. 432 Schwabe. Blaydes refers to

diroOpidfciv in Ar. Ach. 158. Archilochushad used the word (fr. 124).

424

424 Bekk. anecd. p. So0o/cX^s

<TQ.TVplK<j).

apirt]v : a scythe, or

446, 12

cod.)

scythe-shaped

weapon, such as Perseus used againstthe Gorgon (Apollod. 2. 39), and Hera-

cles against the Hydra (Eur. Ion, 192).

8o

NAYF1AIOI KATAnAEQNNAYHAIOI HYPKAEYZ

Four fragments are cited from the /caraTrXewv (425 428),.

three from the Trvp/caevs (429 431), and five simply from the

No^7T?uo9 without a distinctive addition (433, 434, 436 438).Fr. 435 clearly belongs to the Trvp/caevs, if that was a separate

play. Now, the most famous incident connected with the nameof Nauplius was his conduct in displaying false lights on thesouthern promontory of Euboea for the purpose of drawing the

Greek fleet on to the rocks, when driven before the storm, in

order that so he might revenge himself for the judicial murderof his son Palamedes : Eur. ///. 767 ra NavTrXiov r' Evfloifcd

7Tvp7j-o\ijâra, Verg. A en. 1 1. 260 Euboicae cautes ultorque Ca-

phereus1

. Hyginus (fab. 116), after referring to the death ofthe Locrian Ajax, continues : ceteri noctu cum fidem deorum

inplorarent, Nauplius audivit sensitque tempus adesse ad per-

sequendas filii sui Palamedis iniurias. itaque tanquam auxiliumeis afferret^facem ardentem eo loco extulit, quo saxa acuta et locus

periculosissimus erat. illi credentes humanitatis causa id factumnaves eo duxerunt ; quo facto plurimae eorum confractae sunt

militesque plurimi cum ducibus tempestate occisi sunt membraqueeorum cum visceribus ad saxa illisa sunt : si qui autem potueruntad terrain natare a Nauplio interficiebantur

2. It is probable, but

not certain, that this story was related in the epic Nosti*, and in

a poem of Stesichorus bearing the same title 4. But Sophocles

is the earliest authority to whom the narration of Nauplius'

treachery can definitely be ascribed;

for it is patent that suchis the explanation of the title irvpicaevs. Cf. Pollux 9. 156 o

8' e/jLTrpijaas âX av vrvp/caevs ovofAaôiro tear A.la^v\ov Kal

%o<f)otc\ea OUT&K em^pd-âvra^ ra Spa/xara, rov /JLCV rov Ylpo-

fjir)t)ea, TOV Be TLV Navjrîov.

The alternative title /caraTrXeW prima facie suggests the

existence of another play, unless a strong reason to the con-

trary is forthcoming. After some hesitation, Welcker finallyconcluded that there was only one play with a double name 5

;

1 The chief passages referring to the incident are Lycophr. 384 386, Philostr.her. ii. 15, Apollod. epit. 6. n, Sen. Ag. 588 ff., schol. Eur. Or. 432, Quint. Sm.14. 614 ff. We may assume that Lucian de salt. 46 refers to the NatfTrXios ?ri;/j/coei/s :

Ka0' ^Kaffrov yovv T&V teei (at Troy) irea'dvTuv dpajuia. rrj (TKyvfj irp6KeiTai...i) Kara.

Ra\afj.'f]5ovs ^rt/JoiATj /cat i) NavirXlov dpyrj KTC.2 Hence I attempted to explain /AOJ^/CWTTOS in Eur. Hel. 1128.3 The words of Proclus are : et0' 6 irepi ras Ka<pr)pidas Tr^rpas 8rj\ovTai x fi/^^

(EGFy. 53). For modern opinions see Robert, Bild u. Lied, p. 182, Holzinger onLycophr. 385, Gruppe, p. 7003.

4 Fr. 33. The inference is drawn from Tzetz. Posthom. 750.5

p. 189.

NAYTTAIOI 81

and Dindorf took refuge in his familiar device of a new edition

published under a revised title. Now, the word /caraTrXeayv mustmean either 'landing' or 'returning by sea/ and one of the chief

objections to the views of Welcker and Dindorf is that such a

title does not seem appropriate to a play with the plot that hasbeen sketched above. To this Welcker replied (i) that Kara-TrXewv may have been merely descriptive of Nauplius as the Sailor,and without any relation to the plot. But that is a pure guess,which is hardly consistent with the use of Kara7r\elv\ and hewould evidently have preferred (2) the impossible alternative of

giving to KaraTT\ewv a causative meaning. R. Wagner 1

,who

accepted Welcker's conclusion, explained KaTair\e(ov as landingin Euboea, and inferred that Nauplius was an Argive, who cameto Euboea for the special purpose of destroying the Greek fleet.

He relied on the words tjxev et? EvjSoiav in schol. Eur. Or. 432.But the hypothesis of a double title is altogether improbable ;

and Welcker was only driven to adopt it, because he could find

no possible plot for the /earttTrXeW, and was unwilling to leave

the subject-matter unidentified.

A more plausible solution was proposed by Huschke 2,who

interpreted /caraTrXewv as landing at the Greek camp near Troy,and inferred that the play described the arrival of Nauplius to

exact retribution for the death of Palamedes, and the rejectionof his claim. He supported his contention by quoting schol.

Eur. Or. 432 Nav7r\tos 5e d/coicras ijXOev eh "\\iov, Stfcdcrai, TOV

fybvov TOV TratSd?* TWV Se EXXîxw /caro\i,ya)povvTa)v avrov, 727)09

TO Keâpiajjuevov rois pa<Ti\ev<jiv> avroTrXei eras /ere., to which maynow be added Apollod. epit. 6. 8 TOVTO jjbaBo&v NavTrXios

TTpcx; Tot/9 "EthXrjvas Kal rrjv TOV 7rai86<; cunrjTei TTOIVTJV

e VTTOcrTptyas, 009 TTCLVTU v -âpiôfjievwv T&> /3acrtX,et'

KTC. There is nothing in the fragments quoted from the *ara-

7r\a)v which assists a decision; but, since the unjust condemna-tion of Palamedes was the subject of the play so entitled, it

would seem that Sophocles must have largely readapted the

same material, if in another play he described the appeal of"

Nauplius against the previous verdict. But that is not all;

for there are good grounds for thinking, as will be shown in

the Introductory Note to the Palamedes, that the arrival of

Nauplius was actually included in that play.

However, Huschke's theory is not the only possibility ;for

there were many stories current concerning the malicious in-

juries inflicted by Nauplius upon the murderers of his son.

1Epit. Vat. p. 264 f.

2 Anal. Crit. p. 241. The same view is adopted by Nauck, who accordinglyrefers frs. 432 and 433 to the KarairX^wv. See also Meineke, Anal. Altx. p. 132.

p. ii. 6

82 !0<1>OKAEOY!

Thus, he punished Odysseus by throwing Penelope into the

sea (Eustath. Od. p. 1422, 8), and by causing his mother An-ticlea to hang herself on the receipt of false news relating to

her son's deatli (scholl. Horn. X 197, 202). Nor was his vengeancelimited to the house of the rival and accuser of Palamedes.In Lycophr. 1093 he is described as rotatcrS' e^'w/os fj,âval^

ol/co(f)6opa)v, spreading false news in the homes of the Greek

chieftains, and causing their wives to become faithless. In

particular, he was privy to the adultery of Clytaemnestra with

Aegisthus, he persuaded Aegialea, the wife of Diomedes, to

her ruin, and he incited Leucus, the foster-son of Idomeneus,to usurp his power and destroy his wife and daughter. Cf.

Apollod. epit. 6. 9 Trapairêwv ra? %(t)pas ra? 'EXX^wSa?rvai, KXi>-

VTTO A.GVKOV rjv /cai dvel\ AeO/co? a/Aa KXet-

aidvpq rrj Bvjarpl Tavrr)? ev rc3 vau> TTpocr^vyovcrrj, /cal Be/ca

7roXe9 aTTOcnraa-as rfjs Kp)jrrj<^ ervpavvrâe /ere1

. The arrival

of Nauplius on such an errand would naturally account for

the title /caraTrXeW, and I cannot help thinking that Lycophr.1217 is significant in the same connexion:

ov jap7TO/0/C6V9 St/eeoTrof <reXftAevtcov aTpo^âwv (f)v\atca

There was certainly material enough for a tragedy in the ruin of

the house of Idomeneus 2. It should be stated that R. Wagner',

arguing from the words &><? ol rpayucol \eyovo~Lv used by Apollod.2. 23 in reference to Clymene, the wife of Nauplius, derives the

major part of epit. 6. 8 11 from the Tpayw&ov/jiva of Ascle-

piades, but separates from it the passage relating to the seduction

of the women, which he traces through the Nosti of Lysimachusto an Alexandrian source. But this arbitrary division is not

generally approved4

;for there is no reason to suppose that

this part of the Nauplius-myth is any later than the story of

1 Brunck quoted Tzetz. Lycophr. 384, which we now know to have been derived

from Apollodorus, as probably containing the subject-matter of the NatfTrXios /cara-

7rX&<H', but his remark has passed almost completely unnoticed.2 See the n. on fr. 431. It should, of course, be observed that that fragment is

quoted from the Nct^TrXios irvpKafvs, but, as the plot of that play was, on the present

hypothesis, later in time than that of the /caraTrXewj', an allusion to an event which

may have been comprised in the latter is not excluded.3Epit. Vat. p. 269. He conjectures that the reference to the death of Nauplius

in Apollod. 2. 23 was taken from an oracle quoted in the closing scene of the

Sophoclean play.4 See Gruppe, p. 7003. Holzinger (on Lycophr. 610) thinks that these stories

were related in the Cypria or the Nosti.

NAYFTAIOZ 83

the Euboean shipwreck, or that of the false charge againstPalamedes.

Another alternative, which some may think more probable,has been put forward by J. Geffcken 1 on the strength of Apollod.2. 23, where it is stated that Nauplius, son of Poseidon andAmymone, spent a long life as a sea-farer, and was wont to enticeother voyagers to their death by kindling delusive flares. But at

last he himself met his end in the same trap through which hehad lured others to their destruction 2

. Nauplius here figures asthe piratical buccaneer, the terror of the high seas, who on his

return home is hoist with his own petard. The details are so

vaguely indicated that we cannot frame even the skeleton of a

tragic plot.

Lastly we may add that Vater 3 discovered a subject for theKaTair\e(ov in the relations of Nauplius with Aleos and Auge,supposing that the play was dramatically the earliest of thosewhich dealt with the story of Telephus. This is a solution whichfew will approve.

M. Schmidt conjectured that the gloss of Hesych. I p. 251v $avov rbv eVt $6\qy was taken from the Nauplius.

425Zev TravcrtXvTre ACCU A 105

(TTTOvSr] TplTOV KpCLTrjpOS

425 Schol. Find. Isth. 5 (6). 10 rbv The regular phrase is with the genitive8e rpirov Kparijpa Atds (rurrjpos ZXeyov, alone, as may be seen from the followingKaOa /cat So0o/cX??s ev NavTrXty 'Zeu... instances in the scholia to Sophocles:KparrjposS Schol. Plat. Charm. 167 A Ai. f e/c yu,era0opas r&v Kvvrjywv, ib. 1329rpirov ry Ait ffirevoerai re /cat 6 Kparijp ex /x,era0opas rwv KOIV&S eperrbvruv, El.

rpiros ridercu. 2o<f)OK\rjs XauTrXi^ '/cat... 1074 e/c /ieraôpas r&v vrj&v, O. T. 173

/cpaT?7/)os,' /cat IlKaruv noXtrei'ais (583 u). e/c /itraôpas r&v dvu vevbvruv /j.6yis tv

Schol. Plat. Phileb. 66 D TO rpirov ry ry vrixeadai., Ant. 158 e/c )Uera0o/)as r&v

<T(j)rripC\ e/c /weraôpas eiprjrai rov ev rats tpeacrbvruv, ib. 1086 eK fj.era(popas r&v<rvvovffiai.s eOovs. Soô/cX^s ev â.vw\itp epireruv, Track. 203 eK /ueraQopas roO

KarairXeovrt. eKipv&vro yap ev ai)rats ij\iov. See also Rutherford, Annotation,

Kparypes rpeis. /cat rbv p.ev irp&rov Atos p. 207.] It is clear that our passage was

'OXi/yUTTtou /cat de&v 'OXv/j-irLcov e\eyov, rbv a stock instance with the grammarians,de devrepov ypuuv, rbv 5e rpirov aurripos. and that all the quotations given above

The same note is given in Hesych. iv are derived from a common source : this

p. 178 s.v. rpiros Kparrjp: cf. Phot. lex. was in all probability Didymus, from

p. 604, 25 rpirov Kparripos' rov ffwrrjpos, whom they may have passed to Diogenian,

ov /cat reXetov eXeyov. [It may be ob- and thence to the Platonic scholia.

served incidentally that Nauck was quite iravoaXvire. Similarly Callim. h. i. 92

wrong in wishing to read eK /xeraôpas addresses Zeus as dwrop dTrr)fj,ovli)s. Plut.

efynjrai e/c rov in schol. Plat. Phileb. I.e. cotnm. not. 33 p. 1076 B: the Stoic

1 Hermes xxvi 38.2 The words edvo-<p6pei irpiv reXevrijaat are corrupt: see Wagner, Epit. Vat.

p. 265 f.

3Aleaden, p. 28 ff. For the story see I p. 46.

62

84 Z04>OKAEOYZ

doctrine that all men are sinners is

inconsistent with such titles given to

Zeus as Sam?/) or MeiXixios or 'AXe|i-KO.KOS.

2 rpirov Kpa-rrjpos. Three bowlswere mixed at a banquet, as stated above :

(j) the first in honour of Zeus Olympicsand the other Olympians, (2) the secondin honour of the heroes, and (3) the third

for Zeus Soter. To this last allusion is

frequent : Aesch. Siippl. 26 /ecu Zeus

SUJTTJ/) rptros, Ag. 257 (of Iphigenia)

TpiT6(nrovdov fijTTOTJJ.QV Traiava 0iXws eYfyia,

Eutn. 762 TOV Trdvra Kpaivovros rptrov

<ra;T?7/)os, fr. 55 rpirov Aids (rwr^pos ei>K-

raiav Xi/3a, with the ghastly parody of

Clytaemnestra in Ag. 1386.

426

OVTGL

426 Kal add. Meineke

426 Steph. Byz. p. 135,TO 5e do'TriS/r^s xai dcririSoCx

rcnrXeovTL '

dXX'...7re0/><ry-</ccu> '

u)S...Toeifyicuri'

(fr. 427).Meineke's Ka is the simplest remedy

for the syllable that is wanting : Papa-georgius prefers vw. Tucker suggested

7rcpnre<j)payfj.tvov, i.e. T

<rm86n]S follows the analogy

XuptTyi, affrirris and the rest (fr. 92 n.).

Dindorf writes irecpapy^vov here, and

the corresponding forms (<:<papa, etc.)

wherever the verb occurs in tragedy, al-

though the evidence of the MSS is all the

other way. Photius supports vav(f>apKTovin Ar. Ach. 95, and the inscriptional evi-

dence, though slight, indicates that t<f>apawas earlier than 0/ooa: see Meisterhans 3

,

p. 181. These facts are, however, hardlysufficient to establish with certainty that

Sophocles would have preferred

427

Cl)$ dcTTTtSoOÔS f)

427 Steph. Byz. quoted on fr. 426.It is not altogether clear, as Papageorgius

pointed out, whether this fragment is

quoted from the Nauplitis or fromanother play. In printing the line as

interrogative I follow a suggestion of

Wecklein (Berlin, philol. IVoch. 1890,

656). Blaydes conj. TIS TO^T/S or the

like, and /JLWV for o>s. There appearsto be a contrast made between the hoplite

(d<T7ri5oCxos) and the archer. The com-

parison is generally contemptuous of the

latter: Ai. H2off. 6 TO^TT/S ZOIKCV ou

povtiv. | .../ueV ti.v rt. K0fj.ira.ffeLas,

>' ft Xdôis. Eur. Her. 159 6s

dXXd r6^' ^Xan/5 I

K&KiffTov oir\ov /ere.

The Scythians were typical bowmen(Aesch. Prom. 737 2/ctf0as 5' d0tr?5as o? . . . cicri[36\ois Tbl~

Cho. 1 60 ^KvdiKa r' v

v ?py<& /SAT; ViTraXXwi' "Aprjs), but their

introduction into tragedy is anachronistic.

The Persian wars brought them to the

notice of the Athenians, and the Scythianpolice, public slaves and originally nodoubt recruited from a nucleus of Scy-thians, were established at Athens bySpeusinus (schol. Ar. Ach. 54) early in

or towards the middle of the fifth century.

428

tTTiKOTCL

428 Hesych. II p. 157 eVt/coTcr

iri/j.ofji.<pa (eiriôpâ. cod.), d TTCIS &v TIS

(airaffav rls cod.) //ÛI/'CUTO. 2o<t>OK\rjs

NainrX/y /caraTrXe'oj/Tt (j/au/cXt'w Kal TT\ÔVTI

cod.).

eiriKOTOs, an Aeschylean word, is else-

where always active ; for no inference

can be drawn from Cho. 626. In Find,fr. 109 ffT&aw airb irpcurtdos ^TTLKOTOV

av\d>v the epithet is transferred and. if

we had the text of Sophocles to which

Hesychius refers, we might find that thesame explanation applied here.

NAYTTAIO!

429

Ka Trecrcra Ka fto\ai

429 TrfVTdypafji.fj.a Eustath., Etymoll.

429 Pollux 9. 97 eireidjj 5e\f/rj<poi

jueV eiaiv ol Trerroi, irevre 8' eKarepos rCjv

TraibvTWv eix ej/ tiri wevre ypa/JL/j.u>v yei/c6-

rcos e'Lprjrai Soô/cXei'/cat Tretrcrd irevre-

ypauiMa. Kal Ktpwv jSoXat'.' Hesych. Ill

p. 325 Trecrcra irevTf ypdfj.fj.aTa Kal Kvfiuv

fio\ds. Soô/cX?;? NavTT\iif) irvpKa.fi. Trap'

6(rov irevTe ypa/u.fiais eiraLôv. Orion

Etym. p. 127, i quotes the words /cai

Tretrcrd irevrdypa-iJ.^ from Sophocles, andin Etym. M. p. 666, 18 and Eust. Od.

p. 1396, 60 the same words are quotedwithout an author's name. Eust. Od.

p. 1397, 29 So</>o/cX?7$'

/cat.../3oXa/.'

The reference is undoubtedly to the

inventions of Palamedes : fr. 479. ireo-crcl

7TVT'Ypa|JL(xa.' The invention of -rreTTela

and Kvfieia was ascribed to Theuth, the

Egyptian Hermes (Plat. Phaedr. 274 D).There are two forms of the game of

Treff<rot. (i) In the TTCVTC ypa/j./j.al each

player had five ^rj<f>oL, one placed on eachof five lines. Between the two sets of

five lines was the lepd ypafj.fjnf) (KIVCIV TOV

<x0' iepaj, "to try one's last chance":Poll. 9. 97). (2) The other form of

Trecrcrot was called 7r6\ets, these being the

X<!D/>cu or squares on the board (ir\ivdiov] :

the pieces were xtves. In both games the

object probably was to hem in and capturethe enemy's pieces (Diet. Ant. II n)'(J.). irevTC'YpajjijjLa appears to have beenfirst restored by Cobet (N.L. p. 775) for

the unclassical form irevrdypa./*^. Therule is thus stated by Phrynichus :

/cai

(CCCLXXVI R.). See also Ael. Dionys.fr. 153 Schw., Moeris p. 207, 34. Thegrammarian's dictum is borne out by thestone records, for it is only in post-classical times that the e passed into a,

owing to the analogy of rcrpa-, eirrd,tvvta and 5^/ca: see Meisterhans 3

, 62, 3,whose earliest example is irevrd^vou^

(100 B.C.). Further evidence is given byLobeck, Phryn. p. 413. For the workingof analogy in the form of the compoundsee Brugmann, Comp, Gr. n p. 28, E.tr.

Kvpv poXai is not merely dicing, butincludes Kv/3eia, a game of skill corre-

sponding to our backgammon, in whichthe luck of the Ki'tfioi might be counter-acted or improved by a skilful handlingof the pieces. Hesych. says : dia<j>tpec5 Trerreia Kvfidas. cv y ^v yap TOI>S /ctf/3ous

dvappiTTTOV(nv'

iv 8e r-g irerTeia avrb

/j.6vov rds if/rjfiovs /u.eTaKivov<n. See further

on fr. 947, and Diet. Ant. i 695.' At the Greek Ilium (Hissarlik), on

the plain of Troy; they showed the stoneon which Palamedes used to play 7re<r<roi.

Polemon fr. 32 (FHG ill 125)5ovs firi.voriffa.fJL^vov Kvfieiav /cai

ev 'IXty els wapafj-vdiov Xt/xou

TTJV vrpaTiav \L0os e/ce?. tdeLKvvro, icada

IloX^fjLdJV IffTopei, ((>'ou eTrfotrevoi'

'

(J.).

Orion (sufir.) quotes the inscription on an

d/Sd/ctoi', containing 36 letters, one for

each square: eupe cro</>6s /xe Xi/AoO irapai-

430

43O Hesych. in p. [41 va6K\rjpov

TrXdrrfv' vavTiK.i]v. NauTrXty irvpKael.

The explanation of Hesych. is pro-

bably right, although there is not anyother example of the adjective employedin this sense : vavK\rjpia is used for voyagein fr. 143. It may be suggested, how-

ever, that the words would be admirably

adapted to describe the equipment of

Nauplius' boat, of which he was at once

owner and navigator in his coasting voy-

ages (irapairMuv rds x^Pas ras 'EXXî/iSas

Apollod. epit. 6. 9). Cf. Lycophr. 1217

TropKevs dlKWTTov (r^X/xa vavffToX&v, whereTzetzes says: vvv 8t rbv Nai/n-Xtoi'

^TretSrj els a\iVTiKbi> cr/cd0oy ^/t/J

Similarly Palamedes, when he went to

Troy, r}ye...otiTe vavv oOre at>8pa. tdXX' 4v

iropQfj-dq vv OtaKi ry d5eX0y tirXcvore

(Philostr. her. n. ti).

86 IO<t>OKAEOY!

431

/caret) Kpefiavrai, crm^' OTTWS iv

431 a-Trifa rews cod. : corr. Dindorf

431 Herodian -n-epl pov. X^. p. 31,

23 TO, ei's fa Xrjyoisra ByXvxd, ei 2x L ^porAoiij dlxpovov, avveaT<i\fj,tvov avrb xet

ws TO p/a, ffX^fai ffirlfa' ton r5e eTSos

opvtov. So00KX?7sei'Nau7rXiy(dtf7n'ycod. :

corr. Schaefer) TrvpKael'

/cdTaj...p/ce0"t.'

Dindorfs correction (cr. n.) seems

certain, although Blaydes preferred <nri-

vl$C o>s, and Diels (nri? or' oiV. Whatwas the subject of KptpavTat. we do not

know, but I think 'no doubt can be felt

concerning the general character of the

context by anyone who will compare the

present passage with Horn, x 468 ff. w$ 5'

6V avrj K/%Xcu TavvffiTTTepOL r) ire\eiai

|

Vpxei tvnrWJ-uffi, r6 0' e<rTi)Kri tvi

av\LV effit/Jievai, 0Tiryep6s 5' i>7

KOITOS,|

ws at 7' eêlrjs /ce0a\aj x

ddvoiev.| fffftraipov 5 TroSecrtrt

?rep, of/ TI /xciXa 5^. That is to

say, Sophocles compares the death byhanging of malefactors or victims shame-

fully slain to birds caught in a net. Canany such incident be connected with the

story of Nauplius? It is a remarkablecoincidence that, if the plot of the

Na^TrXtos /caraTrX^wj' be such as has been

suggested in the Introductory Note, there

is a set of circumstances forming part of

the narrative which exactly fits the re-

quirements of the text. According to

Apollod. epit. 6. 10 Leucus, having se-

duced Meda, the wife of Idomeneus,

subsequently put her to death a/xa KXeio-t-

6tip$ rrj dvyarpl TavTrjs ev rig vaf irpofftyv-

yoti(rr}. And Lycophron, in his account of

the crime (1214 1225), which he ascribes

to the treacherous cunning of Nauplius,includes the sons of Idomeneus in the

list of victims : 8s oure TKVUV 0et<rr',o#re avyydfjLov |

/xî/os 0pâs, |

ov

He adds that their death was shameful

and mysterious : Trdj/ras 5' dvzyvois4v vau> Krevei,

|

'OyKaiov ftbdpov. Holzinger explainsthis to mean that they were treated like

(r<j>dyia sacrificed to the x^ OI/t01 : their

throats were cut while still alive, andtheir blood allowed to drop into the

ditch. If they were hanged in a rowover the /360pos. the disgrace was by so

much intensified. Bergk (PLG ill 597)wished to read < Kal > Kdrw < /cdpa >Kpfaavrcu KT. Cf. Find. fr. 161 ot ^vKO.TW Kdpa de<rfji,ol(ri dtdevTat (perhaps of

the K<?p:w7res, as Schroeder suggests), Ar.

Ach. 945 eiVep K Trodwv KOLTW Kdpa xpt-

natTo. But this is a false trail, if the

comparison with the Odyssey is to bemaintained. He rightly abandoned his

earlier conjecture dVarot, which was based

on Sen. Again. 592.

432

euro? 8e y Tjvpe retôs 'Apyeto>i>

432. 1 5c 7' ySpe Maass: otirfiriTvy' eSpes V, OUTOS 5' ^0eupe V2[= manus altera

correctrix Victorii] L| 'Ap7etot coni. Maass 2 (TTad^v Salmasius: arddfjifj 8'

V, (TTdO/Jujv V2L Boissonade, (TTd^^s Maass, arafl/uDj' r' Herwerden| e^p^/xara

codd. : 6ptff/j,aTa L. Dindorf, <ro<j>l<r/j.aTa Meineke|

mihi versus aliunde irrepsissevidetur

432 Achill. hag. ad Arat. Phaen.

(Petav. UranoL p. 122 B) p. 28, r Maass

yovra yap Na^TrXioi' ei<rayei<ovTo$...dij<riJ'.'

Achilles, who lived at the end of the secondor the beginning of the third century A.D.,was the writer of a commentary on the

<at'6juei>a of Aratus. For the sources fromwhich he drew see Uiels, Doxogr. p. 17foil. The name Tatius has probably been

given to him erroneously, owing to a con-

fusion with the romance- writer. His

fiffaywy-f), from which the above extract

is taken, was first published from cod.

NAYTTAIOZ

ra< re raura? ovpavia re crr/âra.

3 rauras codd. : r' di/'rds r' Mekler, 7rd<ra5 Herwerden|versum post v. 8 transposuit

Scaliger, post v. 7 Mekler

Laur. 28, 44 (L) by Petrus Victorius at

Florence in 1567. The text of Victorius

was reprinted by D. Petau in his Urano-

logium (Paris, 1630). The readings of

cod. Vat. 191 (V) were first given by H.Keil in Philol. I 157, but a new critical

edition based on a fresh collation of the

same MSS is to be found in E. Maass,Commentariorum in Aratum reliquiae

(1898).There is nothing to show whether this

fragment comes from the Nauplius, underwhich title it is usually printed, or the

Palamedes. Heath assigned it to the

Nauplins, on the ground that Naupliuswas not a character in the Palamedes :

see however p. 81.

The chief lists of the inventions of

Palamedes are to be found in Gorg.Palam. 30 ris yap dXXos eVoiâe rbv

dvdp&irLVOV filov wdpifjiov e* airbpov Kal

, rdeis

re ypaiTTotis <(>v\aKas TOV diKaiov,

ypd/j.[j.aTd re /j-vrj/m.^ opyavov, ptTpa re

/ecu err a 6/u,a ffvva\\ayu>i> einrdpovs 8ia\-

Xcryds, dpt6fJ.6v re xpt^j.ar

Trupo-otfs re Kparlffrovs Kal

dyyeXovs, ireffffovs re <rxoX?}s aXvirov dta-

; [Alcid.] Od. 11 a Kai (piKoffoêiv

rous vôi/s Kal

rdêts ^VplfK^cuds, ypd/j./u,ara, dpid/j,ovs, /x^-

rpa,Kriv, v6/j.iff/j.a, wvpffots. Schol. Eur. Or.

432 <pavi 5e avrbv evpeiv <fi pVKT wptas, Kal

fj.erpa Kal GTadfjLOvs, Kal Trerretas, Kal

ypdfj./j.ara, Kal 0i>XaKas, Kal diffKovs, Kal

dffTpaydXovs. Other passages will be

cited presently concerning the several

discoveries. By far the best account of

Palamedes is in Philostr. her. n.

J. translated vv. i 9 as follows: 'Andhe it was who devised a wall for the

Argives' host: his was the invention of

weights, numbers, and measures; he

taught men how to marshal armies andhow to know the heavenly signs. Hewas the first also who showed how to

count from one to ten and so to fifty andto a thousand ; he showed how soldiers

may signal by beacons ;and revealed

things which before were hidden. Hediscovered also how to measure terms

and periods of the stars, trusty signs for

watchers in the night-season (virvov

(pti\at;i)'

; or '

trusty signs of the time ofrest for watchers' i.e. of the time at

which one watch is to relieve another.

[Or, with 0uXcieis ;

*

(he invented) thewatches of the night trusty signs.']There are, however, serious difficulties

in the traditional text which must nowbe considered in detail. It is hardlypossible that Sophocles can havewritten the lines as they stand and hi

their present order; but with our existingmaterial the task of restoration seemsalmost hopeless.2 This v. interrupts the natural con-

nection between reixos and rdeis (see

below) ; moreover, evpâra is extremelyawkward in combination with rjtpe (or

tyrjvpe) ; and, lastly, there are no con-

necting links between re?%os and eupiûaraand between <rradfj.uv and dpifytwi/. Theattempts which have been made to curethese defects are not successful (see cr.

nn.); and I am inclined to think that

Posidonius or whoever first compiledthe quotation strung together a list of

the inventions from the play of Sophocles,without regard to the links which origi-

nally joined them. For the connexion of

Palamedes with weights, numbers, andmeasures see Philostr. her. 1 1 . i -rrpb yapdrj IIaXa/x,i75ous...oi)5e v6fj.L<Tfj.a fjv ovSe

<TTa6/j.a Kal fj.trpa oi)5e dpt0/jLii>, as well as

the passages cited above.3 rctt-cis is strangely joined with

0-^/uara, and that in turn is disconnected

from vv. 8 n, where the heavenly signsare described more in detail. In view of

Philostr. her. n. 3 rd 5' eV r$ ovpavf Kal

ei' ns T&V avrpwv dra^la re icai rdis,where Odysseus replies to Palamedes' ex-

planation of the eclipse, it is tempting to

suggest that rdeis here refers to the stars;

but we must not disregard the constant

mention of military tactics as one of

Palamedes' most famous discoveries. See

especially Aristid. II p. 339 Dind. eV Se

Ov Kal reXeurraroi' Kal TrXe&rrTjs a^tov

eeupe rd ra/crt/cd, y0' uv d'/xa

Kal T&V tvavrLuv KpelrToaiv elvai

airrois. In the following sentence,

ws fj.ev yap r/ rpayydla (fnjfflv,'

oi)5e T&V

/3oo-/CT7yLidrwi'of/Sev Sityepov' irpiv eKelvv

vvyyevtffdai is a tragic fragment which

Nauck has omitted from his collection.

88 I04>OKAEOYI

evos Se,/ca,

KCiK TO)V OKto9 YtXt' evOvs 69 1 crrparov

ov

<f)r)Vp8'

VTTVOV

T

p,Tpa Ka

ota o"y)p.avTrjpia,

eiâXacr0*1019 10

T

4 KaKelv V2L : /cd/cetpos V, rd/cetj/' (puncto post o"?7/u.ara deleto) Maass, /cat /catV Blaydes |

Tev%e V'^L: e&revj-e V, Trdirw^ 5 reue irpuTos Herwerden, /cdVetr' rae TrpcDros es

fe07os 6^/ca F. W. Schmidt|-jrp&Tov L. Dindorf 6 5s x 4'^ 4

'

ev0i>s L : 6s X 4^ a

evOvs V, /cat x t^ l0(rr ^ J coni. Nauck prob. Maass|

5s crrparou V: 5s <rr/>aru; L, /cat

(TTparou Gomperz | <f>pvKTUpla primitus V|

ets X 4^ 4'' ouros els (ev dels ols Mekler)

(Trpar^j Heath| post hunc versum v. g virvov <ûXdêis, ets d' ew o-rj^dvTpia transposuit

Heath 7 sq. 5eie et e<pt)vpe sedem mutasse suspicatur Nauck 9 0i;Xdeis

ôd Scaliger, (pv\a^L dela Maass, 0i;Xa^t Trtcrrd Wagner, <pv\at;i a-TiXirva M. Schmidt,

<f>v\a!;tv effdXd Keil, 0i;Xdêts, <rn/crd L. Campbell 1O i/eo^ Blomfield: I'awj'

codd.| Tro4.(j.avT7)p(TU> Heath: Trv/j.avT7Jp(riv V,

TrrjfjLavT^pffLvL 11 &PKTOV o~Tpo(pds

re V2L : dpKTov T ffTp6(peia V, apKTOv o~Tpo<pe1a coni. Maass lacunam inter ev6f/s et

3s (vel /cal) in v. 6 statuit, cetera in hunc ordinem disposuit H. Keil: r 245783119 ro. illud maluit Gomperz: 27839 10 ir i (avTos 8') 456. equidemversus sic transposuerim, v. 6 cum Nauckio aliis restitute: 1456972 3 8 ion:sed mendum altius latere suspicor

Tdvras (cr. n.) must either be deictic, or

like the Latin iste (Hie) 'those well-

known': Plat. Men. 76 A tiriireSov /caXets

rt Kal...<rTpc6v, olov TauTa rd ev rat's

yeufteTplats; H. suggested the substitu-

tion of ra/crds.

4 ff. KdKciv*. The pronoun mustrefer to what follows : and these thingstoo.... The reference in these lines is not

to number merely, but to the use of

number for the purpose of military dis-

cipline. Cf. Dio Chrys. 13. 21 e?ret57j 5e

TOVS re d'XXoi'S e5t'5ae ypd/m./j.aTa Kal ro)s

'ATpeldas dfjXov 6'rt Trp&TOvs, Kal /nerd rwi/

ypa/j.fj.dT(i}v TOVS (ppvKTovs STTWS XPV dv^xeivKal dpid/metv TO TrXfjOos, tirel irpbTepov OVK

f/8eo"av ovSe /caXws dpi&/j.TJ<rai rcV 6xXov,

uairep oi iroi/êves rd ?r/)6/3ara, where it

will be observed that exactly as here the

numbering is mentioned together with the

use of fire-signals. Aesch. fr. 182

Plat. rep. 522 D ridicules the

capacity of Agamemnon as a general, if

he did not know how to count : r) OVK

ewevbrfKas, OTI <py<riv (sc. Palamedes)evp&v Tds re ro^fts r<p o-TpaToirfS^

ev TXty /cat âpt^/xr^crat vavs

re /cat rdXXa Trdira, ws irpb TOU dvapidp,ri-

ruv OVTWV Kal TOV 'A.ya/jie/u.i'ovos, us eowev,

oi)5' citrous TroSas etxej/ ft'Soros, etirep dpi-

Ofjielv fj.r) rjTriffTaTo ; To the same effect

Aristides I.e. : o'. 8e TOGOVTOV a.ira.xov T v

ffvjj.Tra.vTas &v auroi)s dpid/mijoai, % rds j'aOs

07rj(rai rivts y<ra.v as 77701', wVr' ou5' oirocroi

rivls aurots oi /3a<riXe?v 6' re 'Aya.fj.t/j.i'ui'

Kal 6 MeÂaos ^/ueXXoi/ evprjcrfiv, wherehe is professedly quoting Plato. In v. 6the readings of Nauck and Gomperz (seecr. nn.) may be provisionally accepted,but the corruption probably lies deeper.Keil held that the remains of two separatelines had been combined in one.

7 can hardly have been written bySophocles as it stands. Nauck's trans-

position of gScigc and c<f>Tjvpc would bean improvement, but even then the line

is suspiciously tame. Platt (C.Q. v 66)thinks that the strengthening of thesecond verb by composition with a preposi-tion was characteristic of Sophocles, and

compares O. T. 1351 Zppvro Kave<ru<re.

For SeiKvtvai of invention cf. Ant,

300.8 ao-rpcov (xcrpa,

'

probably spatia,not as "distances," but as the "terms"or spaces of time between the risings and

settings, etc., as measuring the seasons'

(J.). The meaning is then more exactlydefined by ircpio-rpo^ds,

'

periods'

or

NAYnAIOI 89

*revolutions.' 7rept0Tp^<poj and 7rept<rrpo0T7

were scientific terms in astronomy : Plut.

</<? facie in orb. lun. 1 8 p. 931 A ov yap 6

77X10? Trepu&v KVK\OV &yet /cat irepurrptyeLirepi TTJV <re\r)i''rjv.

9 is corrupt and, however interpreted,does not seem to be in the right place.Hence the alteration in its position (seecr. n. on v. 6), which Dindorf accepts.

Campbell's ffTiKrd, 'branded,' is explainedas having the sense, (he discovered) 'howto put a mark upon their property.' It

has not been observed (i) that the ascrip-tion of the invention of (pv\a.Kai to Pala-

medes in schol. Eur. I.e. is in favour of

<pv\dîs, (2) that ffrj/mai'T^pia ought to

mean not 'signs' but 'seals' (Aesch.

Ag. 614). I suggest, therefore, 0iAdetsff ofa, i.e.

' and sentry-watches, whichare the seals making sleep secure.' The

practice of sealing up valuables, in order

to keep them intact, was so common that

its metaphorical application is natural :

see the passages collected by Blaydes onAr. Thesin. 415, Lysist. 1199. Mekler

suggests TiOaa-d, 'de stellis per noctis

silentium nautis viam indicantibus.'

10 re connects <rrpo0ds and duaiv

with the preceding nouns, i.e., if v. 9 is

out of its place, with p^rpa. and -jrepi-

<rrpo0dy. For possible rearrangementsof the whole piece see cr. n.

1 1 apKTOv <TTpo4>ds.'

If a season be

denoted, as the context suggests, o-rpo</>ds

may perhaps refer to the time in Sep-

tember when Arcturus begins to appearas a morning-star, the "coming round"or "return" of Arcturus (0. T. 1137).But it would more naturally mean " the

turning"

of the Great Bear round the

pole. Track. i3o8,pKTovffTpo<t>ddesKt\fv~doi. Horn. 2 487 &PKTOV #'...77 T' avrov

<rrpe'0erai'

(J.). Add Anacreont. 31

pMWWtriws iror' wpats | arp^tperat or'

"Ap/cros 77577 |

Kara xetpa TTJV BOUTOV. AsGreek seamen steered by the Great Bear,the meaning is probably quite general.

According to Hygin. poet. astr. i. 2,

schol. Horn. S 487, schol. Arat. 27, the

use of the constellation for navigators wasfirst taught by Nauplius, where he is nodoubt confused with his son. The pro-

posal of Maass to read &PKTOV <7Tpo0etais based on Philolaus ap. Stob. eel. I

p. 1 8 Wachs. a ras <r0atpas 6Xcds, a

very fanciful application of an obscure

original: see Diels, Vorsskr?^. 244, 10.

KVVOS i|/uxP*v Svo-iv'

Galen, v p. 347 K. ,

says that the TTITO\TI rod icvi>6s marks the

beginning of OTrwpa, which ends with the

rising of Arcturus (Appendix on O.T.

1137). The \f/vxph 8v<ris would be about

Sept. 24, when Sirius sets with the sun.

This ends the "dog-days." Pliny n.h.

i. 47 puts the rising of Canicula (S'rius)

15 days before Aug. r, i.e. on July 16.

i|n>xpdv 86ffiv, i.e. the autumnal setting, as

distinguished from the eapivT] Swris, 19

days after the vernal equinox (accordingto Pliny, n.h. 18. 69)' (J.).

433

Se VVKTI rrj /carouAaSi

433 Phot. lex. p. 150, 9 KarovXdda.

XciSt.' TT\V Kari\\ov<rav K

/cat eoi5A?75 diKr), i] eêi'p^fws. ot 5t rrj

Traj/wX^py fffo^vri rot? "EXX^q-tv o$\ov

ydp r6 oXtdpiov'

/cat 17 KaTcnrpbdcais atffcrjffiv

xet" "n ^0(pa5rj, dirb rijs Kara rb <rw/u.a

ydp.

ydp TO ffwrrp4Ûf'

"0/uLTjpos (per-

haps with reference to T 200). I haveadded 77 before /cararyt'Sas. The substance

of this, but not the reference to Sophocles,occurs also in Eustath. Od. p. 1769, 32(Ael. et Paus. fr. 225 Schw. ). The wordwas evidently obscure to the Alexandrians,and it is possible that even Sophocles,who no doubt used it with a traditional

meaning, would have been puzzled to

explain its history. Photius gives us the

choice of four explanations, of whichthe third at any rate (' dark, because scars

are black') may be discarded. The note

of Photius is abbreviated and confused

by Hesych. II p. 449 Karov\dda- rrjv

Ka.Ti\\ovaa.v /ecu etpyovffav. ft4\Ttov dt

TTJV Kar&Xedpov (ira.v&\0pov conj. M.

Schmidt) /cat <ru(TTpo0as %-xpvaa.v dvtuuv.

Apollonius Rhodius evidently preferredthe derivation from oXXu/u (' destructive') :

4. 1695 vv e06,3ei, TTJV irtp re KarovXdda

KlK\r}<TKOV<Til>, |

VUK.T* 6\otfv' OVK AffTpO.

ouaxavfv i^K dfj.apvya.1 \ /i^'7;$ ovpavbdev

8t ^Xaf xos W ra (SXX?; (oCXr; Merkel) |

wpwpet aKorlri fjiv^drfav dviovffa ftfptfipuv,

where the schol. has : ^ <TKOT(.V^ vi>

/carouXds /ca\e?rai Trapa TO 6\oov. Kal

irapd 2o<poK\ei tv Nai/irX^'VVKTI KOLTOV-

!0<t>OKAEOY!

Xa5i.' Part of this scholium has foundits way into Etyin. M. p. 497, 25, and

Etym. Gild. p. 308, [9. But we cannotleave out of account Hesych. II p. 440Ka.TL\d8a' i)/j.tpa x/wf/3"/1

>7, or II p. 27el'Xas

'

dy\as. ~f) TrvKvf). dyadrj. ffKorcivfi,

where irvKv-fj and aKorwti seem to refer

to a lemma ei\ds. The word may there-

fore mean a thick, dark night (spis sisnoctis se condidit unibris Verg. Aen. 2.

621), as Buttmann, Lexil. p. 271, ex-

plained it, through KarfiXeiv 'to wrap up.'

Etymologically it would then be con-

nected with oSXos '

fleecy' (land), oi)Xa/xos,

ov\ds ' a wallet.' The last explanation

of Photius is only a specialized applicationof the first (fr. 70 n.). Campbell comparesShakesp. Macb. 1.5.51 'Nor heaven peepthrough the blanket of the night.'

434TO) yap /ca/cois TTpdcrcrovTi

vvt; ICTTIV,

ev TraBovra Barepa Oavelv.

434. 2 sq. lacunam indicavi|

e5 iradovra i] 'rtpa. (S, yrtpa. M, eW erepa A)6aveiv codd., 6-fjr^pa. Oaveiv H. Grotius, ef> TraQovra. 5' 77 're/so. <t>6dvei Heath

434 Stob. flor. 104. 3 (IV p. 920, 13 Sa.va.roio Kix^fvov, ou5' u7rdXuas. I

Hense) So0o/cXe'ous Nau?rXiou. 'ry... cannot help suspecting, however, that the

general sense required is that which hasbeen fully illustrated by Headlam onAesch. Ag. 544, sorrow so intense that

relief from it is desired even at the price of

immediate death. AddDioChr.68.2. Butin that case something must have droppedout : e.g. vti% tffri, < /j.6x0uv 5' ijv TTOT'

rtpq. 6aveiv. This seems to have beenthe meaning required by Bamberger, whoconjectured v&. eft ira66vT' eu 5' t<rri

Orirtpq. daveiv (!), and by M. Schmidt,whose e5 iraduv ratf elr' tpy, davttv (evira.Q(j)v TLS A. Palmer) is equally impossible.In favour of this view, it should beobserved that the chapter of Stobaeus is

entitled ircpl KaKodai/movias, and that

6a,rtpq. is elsewhere similarly corrupted.Other conjectures are Seyffert's eu iradovrt.

5' r/[j.tpa. 0am, Conington's e5 iradovra 5'

earl dap&dveiv, and Heimsoeth's eu ira-

dovri 5' ev6tus <p6ivei. O. Hense pre-ferred vti, euTradovvTi 5' evdi>si)/j.pa. (pavei,

and Herwerden e5 Trda-xovri 5e fiia fj.vpia.

Nauck accepted eviraQovvra. 5'

from F. W. Schmidt (Meinekehad proposed eviratiovvTi 8' OVK ^pws

Oavelv, and Gomperz had improvedHeath's conjecture with rj^pa for r/V^pa).This was rendered by Jebb :

' Whena man is in trouble, one night seems an

age; but, when he is enjoying himself,

day comes all too soon'

(lit.'

surprises

him'). For the sense Gomperz quotedSapph. fr. 130 etfa<T0cu vuK.ro. atirf) yevt-ffdai 8iir\a.ffiai>. Theogn. 474 ou Trdffas

VVKTJIS yLyverai afipa, iradeiv. Lycophr.fr. 4 (TGFp. 818) 6 TTJV tu KaXwv

|

KO.T-

\a.fifv opvis'

rolffi 5' ovdîro) Kdpos. Henseadds Apollod. fr. 3 (ill 289 K.) rots yap(J.eplfJLV&<Tiv T KO.I XuTTOUyLCÔlS !

aTTtttra VVJ;

oiK (f)a(vff6a.L fiaKpd. A.P. 10. 26 ro?crt

fj^v ev Trpa,TTOV<riv airas 6 filos fipa.'xy* tffTiv,

|

rots 5^ KO.KWS /j.la vi>t; dir\eTos e<rrt xpôs.

fjtvpia resembles yuuptos XP^"OS O.C. 397,

617. For <p6dv<j), which, if not here, is

nowhere found in the extant remains of

Sophocles, cf. Horn. A 451 <f>0i] <re rAos

435 Aristid. I p. 259 (421 D.)NafTrXt'ou irdyas uTTOTrupons, cos <f>ri 2o0o-

/cXTjs, &îov Ty TrvpKdia rairrT? TrapajSaXetJ/

(i.e. to the destruction by fire of the

temple at Eleusis) ;

435

VTTOTTVpOVSThese words undoubtedly refer to the

beacons by means of which Naupliuslured the Greek fleet on to the rocks at

Caphereus. The story was an invitation

to the phrase-maker ;and the words

NAYTTAiO!

quoted may be illustrated by Eur. Hel.1 1 30 Alyaiais r' evaXotaiv d/crcus

|

d6\ioi>

dffrtpa \dfj.\f/as. Anth. Pal. 9. 429 6

êtf(TT7/s 5' birb vtiKTa Ka^rjpeirjs dirb

7^773775 j 7ri/3cr6s, 9. 289 irvpabs ore

5i>o0epc6T6pa WKrbs}

rj\j/eo-Aa. Sen. J/<?</. 66 1 ignefallaci

nociturus Argis | Nauplius ^ Ag. 591 wj^jra ducit perfida classemface.

436

436 Hesych. I p. 207 dvbpeos T^Xe/uos.

6 TT/OOS roi)s avdpas. So0o/cX?7STo the same effect Phot. ed.

Reitz. p. 144, 7.

Fighting is men's work : TroXeôs 5'

dvopeffffi /xeX^jrei Horn. Z 492, quoted in

Ar. Zjj. 520. Cf. Eur. Hclid. 71 r ch/Spu^

7ap dX:^. But the explanation of Hesy-chius, fighting with men, suggests a taunt

levelled against Nauplius, whose revengewas wreaked against the Greek chieftains

by assailing the virtue of their women-

kind: see Introductory Note. ThusSarpedon's compliment in Horn. II 492TroXe^KTTci juer' avdpaaw has its counterpartin Eur. Or. 754 ou yap a^M^Trjs irtyvxcv,ei> yvvaiî 5' &\KifAos. Aegisthus incurreda similar reproach : El. 302 6 vvv ywcuirds /-ta^cis ?roioi;/Aei/os. dvopeos, which

only occurs here, follows the Homeric

fyopt-r]. Herwerden thoughtpreferable, Blaydes avdpeos.

occurs, according to the MSS, in Theocr.

29. 19.

437

437 Schol. Ar. Pac. 1126 KaXXt-

orparos (frqal rbirov Ei)j3otas TO'

'

ATTO\\<J)VIOS 5e vabv <prj<riv elvai

Ei)/3oi'as. vv/JKpiK&t' 5 rives avrb <f>a.fflv,

8ri 6 Zei>5 r?7 "Hpq. fKel ffvveyeveTO. pt-Acai 2o0o/cX^s

'

Trpbs Tr^rpcuj 'EXu-'

(fr. 888), /cat

Nauck conjectures that only the wordsof fr. 888 belong to the Nauplius. No

cogent inference is possible, but the

locality (for which see on fr. 888) suits

the Trvpicaefa. The '

Elymnian bower '

refers to the celebration at the Elymnionof the rite of the tepds yd/jios, as also at

the Euboean Ocha : Steph. Byz. p. 362,16 s.v. Kd/>uoTos. For a list of the placesat which the cult was established see

Frazer, Golden Bough* ,I p. 228; Gruppe,

Gr. Myth. p. 1134^

438

438 Pollux 10. 134 KO.I 6\Kia Sc rd.

Trr)8d\ia v NauTrXiy dvbâffe (si\ Sopho-cles) Trapa rd '0/w^/oou (^ 350)

The critics are not agreed whether

e<p6\Kaiot> in Horn, is the rudder (so schol.

BPV, Apollon. lex. Horn. p. 315, Hesych.ii p. 243), or the lading-plank (Monro).In Ap. Rhod. 4. 1609 b\ni]iov is certainlynot the rudder, but we have no sufficient

reason to discredit the authority of Pollux.

Dindorf arbitrarily prefers 6X/ceta.

92 IO<f>OKAEOY5:

NAYIIKAA H nAYNTPIAI

The alternative titles are clearly established by a comparisonof Eustath. Od. p. 1553, 63 â\io-ra e, <f>acrlv,

vvrepov (7<f)ai,picrTi,Kr)<; 7r6\ecov /lev Kowfj Aafcebai/jioviot,,

Be 6 yueya? 'AXefa^Spo?, iSiwrwv Be Socô/cX?}? o rpayi/cos' o? KCLI

ore, (f>a(7i, ra? n\vvrpias Sfr5aavC, TO rfjs Nauo-t/caa? Trpoawrrov

&(f)aipa Traiôvcrrjs vTrofcpivo/Aevos lo"^\)pw^ evBotci/jirjo'ev with Athen.2O F aicpws Be eaâiptaev (sc. Soô/cX?)?), ore rrjv

/caOrjtce. Cf. Eustath. //. p. 381, IO Scxô/eXr}? TreptaSelvai o-ffxiipicraL, &)? 77 icar avrov eSrJXwcre Spa/juari/cr) Navariicaa.

From these passages we also obtain the interesting information

that Sophocles abandoned his usual practice by appearing him-self as an actor in the title-role. Since he took the part of a

woman, his piicpo<f>a)via was less of an objection than usual 1.

Though such stories must be accepted with reserve, it is probablysafe to infer that the Nausicaa was an early play. Philyllius, a

poet of the Old Comedy, wrote a TlXvvrpiai rj Navai/cda (l 784 K.),

and Eubulus, of the Middle, a Nav<ritcda (II 188 K.).The plot was of course taken from the sixth book of the

Odyssey, and its simplicity is remarkable;

for it may be con-

sidered certain that Sophocles followed the Homeric narrative

as closely as the nature of his art allowed. Cf. vit. Soph. 12

row? re yap pvOovs fyepeu icar fyi/o? roO Troirjrov ical rrjv 'OSva-

o"iav 8' ev TroAAoi? ^papao'iv a7roypd<j)rai'2

. Ahrens makes the

plausible suggestion that Athena spoke the prologue and ex-

plained the situation. There is no reason to suppose that the

story was recast in order to introduce a love-motive, and, unless

we make the improbable assumption of a change of scene, the

action cannot have reached to the departure of Odysseus fromPhaeacia. Fr. 781 probably belongs to this play, as is generally

supposed : but there is less likelihood that Welcker was right in

his conjecture with regard to fr. 766.There is no justification for the suggestion first made by

Casaubon 3 that the Nausicaa was a satyr-play.Pausanias (i. 22. 6) mentions a picture by Polygnotus repre-

senting Odysseus approaching Nausicaa and her maidens fromthe river-bank, and from this a vase-painting of the same subjectnow at Boston is supposed to be reproduced. Polygnotus, it is

suggested4

,had painted it as a votive tablet for Sophocles himself.

1 See Introductory Note to Thamyras, I p. 178.2 H. Schreyer, Nausikaa, Anh. p. 135 f., thinks that the Nausicaa of Sophocles

was the first piece of a trilogy, in which the Phaeaces was the second, and perhapsthe Niptra the third.

3Schweighauser's Athenaeus, ix p. 43.

4 See Gruppe in BursiansJahresb. CXXXVII 565.

NAYIIKAA 93

439

re

439 Xuwyeweti : veoirXwels vulgo ante Bekkerum

439 Pollux 7. 45 ewfl xai 6 eirev-

eVrtJ/ tv ry run/ 7roXXwj> xpTjaei, Stmstro /ecu TOVTQ r< 6v6fjt,an

6Wt, \TfiTTeov avro K T

nXuir/Mwi''7T^7r\ous...^7rej'5uTas.'

It may be conjectured that these wordsare taken from' a passage describing the

skill of the Phaeacian women: cf. Horn.

i} 108 offGov âuj/ces irepi -wavrwv

dvop&v |

. ..ws de yvvcuites \

IGTUV

GO.L' wtpi yap G<t>uri duxev 'A6rjvri \ ZpyaT' eirio-raa-dat irepiKaXXta /cai ^pevase<r0\ds.

vtjo-ai is loosely used for ixf>alvfiv.

The process of spinning, being preparatoryto that of weaving, was apt to be re-

garded as a part of the same operationrather than as a distinct art: see Plat.

polit. 282 C ff. Cf. Homer's use of

^wrjTos : here Soph, probably had in

mind 77 96 7r^7r\oi| XCTTTOI Itfprqrot

/Se/SXâro, Zpya yvvaiKuv. \ivo-yVis :

>? 107 Kaippovcrfftuv 5' 6dov(*}v aTroXet-

/Sercu vypbv i-Xatov, of the Phaeacianwomen at work. lirevSuTas. Thewomen of the Homeric age wore onlyone garment, the Tr^TrXos, which, though

generally of wool, might also, as we have

seen, in the case of a more luxurious

taste be made from the more costly linen

(Iw. Mueller, Privatalt?, p. 82). It is

best to assume that Soph, here follows

the Odyssey, and that t-rrevdirrr)? wasa word of general application, like eZ/ca,

vestis, or our 'robe.' Studniczka, how-ever (Beitrage, p. 28), understandingthat the Ionian tunic was the subject of

reference, read virevdtsras, i.e. linen under-

garments usually known as xtrw"ta in

the case of women worn beneath awoollen cloak. Cf. Strabo 734. If heis right, the error is earlier than the

ultimate source of Pollux. Moeris p. 2 13,

27 gives eTrevdtirrjs as the Hellenistic

equivalent of the Attic x47"^" : cf- Ael.

Dionys. fr. 325 Sch.

The upshot of Pollux's remarks is that

eirevSiJTrjs was later in common use, but

was not found in Attic. He then quotes

exceptions from Soph., pseudo-Thespis(TGF p. 832), and Nicochares. These

examples show that it was not a word of

precise meaning.

440

errapav avappoiftSel

JJLOL

44O Phot. ed. Reitz. p. i?o, iSdvap-poijSSetV '"0/A7;/)os (w 104) [i.v rb dvc.ppo(pei

"2o(poK\rjs de rouiavriov ZoiKev <eV>Nau-a-i/cda-

i

ox'r)fJ.a....Trd\iv.) The cod. gives

Zoitcev avTLKa 6xv/Jl'a Me7ra/)''7

(ri;Xa >whence

Reitzenstein restored as above. Hesych.I p. 181 dvapoi5ei' dvappocpei.

AiVx^Xos SaXa^ti'âts (fr. 217) dvrl TOV

8iairv(ii>. "OfJLTjpos d(/j. 104) dvawivei KO.I

dvappo(f)L /xerA Trotou ijxov

TTOLOVV rjx.ov c d.-' corr. H.). /cat

tv TSa.vai.Kaq. O.VTL TOV dva. purrei.

Schol. H Horn.//, 104 TLVS d TTJV \%tv

irepi TOV dvappiiTTei ^Taâv. Eustath. Od.

p. 1719, 41. The interpretation, 'throws

up (the ball) with a whirr,' for which H.

quoted Pollux 9. 106, must be abandoned

in view of the newly discovered evidence

of Photius.

Reitzenstein holds that the wordsdescribe the action of Charybdis, andthat dvappoifSSet does not contrast with

but rather explains îrdpav. Thus,whereas dvappoifideiv in Homer is

'

to

suck in,' here it signifies' to vomit forth.'

He adds that in p 236 ff. dv(ppotpdri<re is

subsequently split into 17TOI 5r' {en4vme

...dXX' 6r' dvappo&ie, and that Sophocles'words are intended to correspond to

/t 437 o<ftp

J

f$;/j.aeiei' OTrLaffu\

la'Toi' nai

Tpbiriv O.VTIS. oyjt\p.a., then, is the objectof tra.pa.v and refers to the spars on which

Odysseus buoyed himself (6ftevos 5'

: cf. e 371 d/t0' evl oovpan

94 2000KAEOYZ

fiatve, K^\r)0' w$ 'iirirov eXavvw). Forthe word Reitzenstein quotes the epigramin Ael. nal. an. \i. 45 'Apiova Ku/cXôs

vibv|

CK ZiKeXoO TreXdyovscruxrei' 6%77/ia r6de

(of the dolphin). It follows from this that

Odysseus must have told his story at con-

siderable length, as in Homer. 1 suggest,as an alternative, that the words formed

part of an account in which the arrival of

Odysseus on the Phaeacian coast wasdescribed (e 424 ff.).

If we might supply

KV/J.O. 6' OKTT' before 6'x)/ia, dvappoiftdctjrdXiv would correspond to e 430 iraXippo-diov d yiui> aDrts

|irXTJêv eTreffffti/Jievov,

TT/XOU 5^ fj.iv /*/3aXe irbvTip, and the

action of the returning wave hurling

Odysseus back into the deep sea mightseem to justify the grammarian's comment.In any case, it appears unnecessary to

follow E. Schwartz, who proposed oê?/xdXa | ^Trapav riffvxy 5' a. TT., in assuminga further corruption.

441

441 Pollux 10. 52 Z<TTI de

-i] Xa/j-TTTiv-rj 4v rrj So00KXôus Naixrt/co' /ecu

4v rots M.fvdv5pov'

AXteDatv (fr. 29, III

12 K.). The form is established byPosidippus fr. 10 (ill 338 K.) in Poll.

TO. 139 <ncr)va.s, oxovs, | piffKOvs, doprds,

rdxai/a, Xa^tTTTji'as, ovovs. Hesych. Ill

p. 1 1 \a/j.irr)vr)'

eldos a/xd^s e0' 77? 6xow-rai. Zvioi dTrrfvr}. TJ dpfJLa/j,d^r)S (cip/ua

/xd^77? cod. ) TrepKpavovs J3affi\iKT)s : simi-

larly Phot, and Suid., who add 77 P^LOV(i.e. raeda) TTpi<pav&, 6 <TTIV apfj.a ffKeira-

<rr6v' a covered waggon, or state-coach,.or royal chariot which is exactly an

o.-wr]VT] drawn by mules. So in Apoll.Rhod. 3. 841 Medea drives to the shrine of

Hecate in an dir-qvtj with her twelve hand-maidens who have yoked it to the mules,and then back again, with two of thembeside her, while the others run behind,

holding to the body of the wain (869).See also n. on Eur. Phoen. 847, Headlamon Aesch. Ag. 1023.

Pausanias (5. 19. 9), describing the

paintings on the chest of Cypselus at

Olympia, says : irapfftvovs 5 iri THJ.LOVUV,

rijv df eiTLKei/ji.^v'rjv Kd\vfJ./m.a M TT) Kf(j>a\fj,

fJiiôvffiv elvai /cat TTJV 8epd-eXaijvova'av eiri TOVS

Nausicaa in the Odyssey rides in an

NIOBH

Horn, fl 602 617 is our earliest authority for the story of

Niobe, who vaunted herself against Leto, boasting that she wasthe mother of many fair children, while Leto had borne onlytwo. Apollo and Artemis slew the sons and daughters of

Niobe;

and she herself was turned into stone, imprisonedamongst the rocky crags of Mt Sipylus, where the tears that

bedewed her bosom were perennial streams of running water.

The legend of Niobe's transformation is undoubtedly to be

explained by a certain configuration of rock on Mt Sipylus, which

appeared to the people of the locality to resemble a weepingwoman. Pausanias, who was a native of the district, states

(i. 21. 3) that on a nearer approach the illusion disappeared;and exactly the same account is given by Quintus, who no doubtalso wrote with the authority of an eye-witness (i. 293 306).

Although several suggestions have been put forward, the site

NAYIIKAA NIOBH 95

has not been identified with certainty by modern travellers :

see Frazer, Pausanias, III pp. 552 555. Sophocles twice refers

incidentally to Niobe in her stony solitude as a type of unceasingsorrow: see El. 150 153, Ant. 823 831.

Homer gives no hint of Niobe's parentage, nor any indication

that she dwelt elsewhere than in the neighbourhood of Sipylus.Later tradition was unanimous in making her the daughter of

the Lydian Tantalus, and wife of the Theban Amphion. Thedeath of the children, therefore, took place at Thebes

;but the

schol. Townl. on Horn. O 602 x

gives the important information

that in Sophocles' play Niobe returned to Lydia after herchildren had perished. The appearance of the same feature

in the account of Apollodorus (3. 47) tempts us to infer that

he was also following Sophocles, when he related that Artemisshot down the daughters in the house, and Apollo killed all the

sons while hunting on Cithaeron. Hygm.fab. 9 is to the sameeffect, except that he does not mention Cithaeron 2

,for which he

substitutes in silva. Apollodorus made one son and one daughter3

survive, and Hyginus one daughter only. It is, however, hardlycredible that Sophocles assented to a mitigation of Niobe's

suffering by allowing any of the children to escape. Ovid,whose narrative (Met. 6. 146 312) is more detailed than anyof the other extant versions, shows a true poetic instinct in

leaving no survivors; and Pausanias (2. 21. 10), in the spirit of

an historical student, finds the authority of Homer convincing.It is not possible to ascertain whether any of Ovid's rhetoric

is derived from a tragic source;

but it is worth notice that,

according to him, the sons were struck down by Apollo, not

while hunting on Cithaeron, but in the palaestra, where theywere practising athletic exercises. The daughters were killed

afterwards, as they stood mourning by their dead brothers, after

another defiant speech of Niobe. Here at least, as we shall see,

Ovid followed the order of events in Sophocles. For reasons

which are sufficiently obvious, Ovid felt himself obliged to

describe the transformation of Niobe as following immediatelyafter the death of her children and husband, as she sank amidst

their lifeless bodies and at once began to stiffen with grief. But,since it was necessary to take into account the Sipylus-tradition,he imagined Niobe as continuing to weep when she had become

1TI 5e (ru/x0o/)a ctur?7S (sc. Ni6îjs), us fj.v TLVCS ev Avdig., us 5e &LOI

Zo0o/cA7?s <5e> TOVS /tev iraidas tv QrjjSais airo\effdai, i>o<rTf)<rai <5> avT-rjv eis Avdiav.

Similarly Eustath. //. p. 1367, 22.2 The words in inonte Sipylo are bracketed by M. Schmidt, and must be due to

an error.3 He gives Amphion and Chloris as the names of the survivors, but neither of

these is included in the list of the fourteen children which appears a few lines before.

96 IO<t>OKAEOYZ

entirely stone, and then as carried off to her native land by the

rush of a mighty whirlwind 1. The language recalls a passage

of Plutarch (cons. Apoll. 28, p. 116 C), which is founded on some

poetical account of Niobe's end : el jovv 77 Nto/3^ Kara TOL><?

Tr]v i>7r6\r)tyi,v TavTijv OTi realrj

6a\e6ovTi jSiw

re Tetcvwv ftpiOoneva y\v/cepov

re\evrrjo-ei, OVK av OVTO)<? e&v<r)(patvv &>9 teal TO rjv 60e\eiv

K\i7relv &ia TO fieyeOos T7J9 avôpa^, KOI roi>9 Oeovs eirtKa-

\elo~6ai dvdp'jrao'TOv avTrjv 'yeveadau 7rpo9 dirotyXe'av TTJV

âXe7ra>TttT77i>. Welcker claimed the quotation for Sophocles,but Bergk included it in the lyric adespota (fr. 99)

2,and Nauck

in the same class of tragic fragments (fr. 373). Note that, ac-

cording to Plutarch, Niobe prayed to the gods that she mightperish. It can hardly be accidental that the same touch

reappears in Apollodorus, with the difference that there her

prayer to Zeus to be turned into stone is made after her return

to Sipylus3

. Having already recognized points of contact be-

tween Apollodorus and Sophocles, we might suggest that Niobe's

prayer came from the tragic poet ;but the link is too weak to

strengthen materially the title of Sophocles to the authorshipof the lyrics quoted by Plutarch.

Welcker thought that the appearance of Amphion was adramatic necessity in a play which described the downfall ofhis family. He supposed therefore that, as in Ovid, he com-mitted suicide, and that his death was announced by a messengerwho came out of the house 4

. When the death of the sons took

place at a distance from the palace on Mt Cithaeron it maybe^the news was brought to Niobe by their Trai&aywyos ; and

shortly afterwards the daughters were killed on the stage.Welcker's acute guess has been confirmed by the new frag-ments (fr. 442 ff.) published in the second volume of the OxfordPapyri (i897)

5. In the first of these one of the daughters is

represented calling for aid. In the second another, who is not

1 Et validi circmndata turbine venti|

in patriam rapta est (310). There is a

recent examination of Ovid's sources by Altenburg in Philol. LXIV 284 ff., who rejects

decisively the assumption of Ehwald and Ribbeck that a U7r60e<ris to Sophocles' playwas one of the chief of them.

2 Cf. Wilamowitz, Tr. Gr.fragg. p. 24.3

3- 47 ~nKV et's SiTriAov, KaKfl Ati evâni^vr) TT]V /J.op<f>i)i> els \idov /ier^SaXe.4 His death is otherwise accounted for by Pausan. 9. 5. 8 and by Hygin./o^. g r

where after the death of his children he attacks the temple of Apollo. In Luciande salt. 41 he goes mad.

5 Blass (Lit. Centralbl. 1897, 334) was the first to assign these frs. to the Niobeof Sophocles: see n. in loc.

NIOBH 97

yet wounded, is compared to a colt let loose from the yoke.The situation has been ingeniously analysed by Robert in Herm.XXXVI 368 fT.

1 The first Niobid died on the stage, but the Nurse,who followed her out, had her body carried into the palace byservants. Niobe appeared shortly after the arrival of the second

daughter, who died in her arms. Then she learnt from a mes-

senger that her sons had been slain on Cithaeron 2. In fr. 448

Plutarch has quoted an extract from this messenger's speech.It is not pretended that this reconstruction rests on a secure

foundation; but it is consistent with the meagre indications

afforded by the evidence.

A more difficult question is raised by the longer fragmentpublished among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (frs. 574, 575), whichcontains a speech of Tantalus, referring first to the fate of

Niobe, and afterwards to his own misfortunes. So much at

least appears to be certain, although some doubts have been

expressed3. Moreover, a strong case has been made in favour

of Sophoclean authorship4

,and the first editors and some other

critics treated it as an extract from the Niobe. But, althoughSophocles transferred the heroine to Lydia at the end of his

play, it is hard to see how such a speech can have belongedto it. Wecklein's expedient

5,that the fragment is taken from

a messenger's speech, is scarcely tenable : to attribute the verses

to another than Tantalus does violence to their natural trend,and the arrival of a messenger from Lydia is inconsistent with

the requirements of the situation. Are we then to suppose a

change of scene? I think that Robert was justified in his

vigorous protest that an epilogue enacted in Lydia is abso-

lutely excluded by the conditions of the Greek stage. How,for example, was the chorus composed of Theban women, as

Welcker thought to cross the sea? Niobe herself (he mighthave added) was conveyed by a storm-wind

;but that circum-

stance does not help to preserve the continuity of the action.

And, if these objections were not decisive, the assumption of

a double catastrophe, the earthquake at Sipylus immediately

succeeding the disaster at Thebes, would be hardly credible.

It should be added that G. Hermann, relying on the statement

of the Homeric scholiast, proposed to refer to Sophocles an

obscure passage in Arist. poet. 18. 1456* 16, where, in distin-

1 Revised and separately issued as Niobe, ein Marmorbild aus Pompeji, Halle,

1903. See the review by R. Engelmann in B. ph. W. 1904, 1430.2Meineke, Anal. Alex. p. 146, showed that Euphorion mentioned Cithaeron in

this connexion.3 I cannot agree with Robert that the verses may have nothing to do with Niobe.4 See note in loc.

5B.ph. W. 1900, 508.

p. ii. 7

98 ZO<t>OKAEOYZ

guishing the structure of epic and tragedy, the critic remarksthat dramatists who have attempted to include a multiplicity of

stories in a single tragedy have failed conspicuously; and givesas an instance those who, unlike Aeschylus, have taken as their

subject the whole tale of Niobe. The Oxyrhynchus fragmentmight certainly be used in support of Hermann's guess, but

more convincing evidence is required before we can attribute

to Sophocles such an artistic lapse. The Homeric scholium, as

Robert remarks, admits of a simple and obvious explanation :

either Niobe announced her own departure, or her destiny was

proclaimed in a divine eTrifyaveia. What then is to be madeof the Oxyrhynchus fragment? Wilamowitz 1

, agreeing that it

referred to Niobe, forbore to decide between Aeschylus and

Sophocles. But the arguments of Blass in favour of Sophocleshave not been refuted. Now that we have better reason to

credit the existence of the Tantalus of Sophocles, I suggestthat the new fragment should be assigned to that play, and haveendeavoured to show in the Introductory Note that it is suitable

to the circumstances of the story.

Valckenaer, followed by Welcker, Dindorf, and Wilamowitz 2,

attributed to Sophocles the verses printed by Nauck among the

adespota (fr. 7) :

6d\7rov(ra teal ^rvôva-a /cal TTOVW TTOVOV

etc VVKTOS fi\\dao-ovcra rov /ue#' rjfjuepav.

I see no reason for preferring Sophocles to Aeschylus, even if

they alone are to be considered.

XO.

442

]ereXa, 3>oL/3ov TTJS ff ojjiocnr6po[y

r[

ei<re[

TTO\V(TTOVOV O\_ 5KOPH.

442. 1 ev<r Gr-H 2 littera ante a vel X vel 5 vel K esse potest

442 This and the three following of the lining of a mummy-case, and the

fragments (Brit. Mus. Pap. DCXC) were handwriting is assigned to the third cen-

first published by Grenfell and Hunt in tury B.C. Blass (Lit. Centralbl. 1897,the second series of their Greek Papyri 334) first pointed oitt that they seemed to

(Oxford, 1897), p. 14. They formed part belong to the Niobe of Sophocles : the

i GGA 1900, 34.3 Tr. Gr, fr. p. 26, without giving reasons, irbvq irbvov recalls Ai. 866 etc.,

but cf. Aesch. Pers. 1042.

NIOBH 99

OTOTOTOTOTOr

e/cetcre 7178' eirovpura) TrdSa

Se rdprapd re[ya5

XO. (?)

Mr[

y[

10

7 e certum esse iudicat Bl (o> Gr-H) 8 at Gr-H11 va Gr-H, ai vel At Bl 15 <rwv Gr-H

O dX]Xd(r<ro,ucu Gr-H

identification is of course not certain, butit is highly probable, and no other hasbeen suggested.The same critic in Rh. Mus. LV 96 ff.

published a revised text after a minuteexamination of the originals, and his

results have been incorporated above.As regards the order of the fragments, Blass

thinks it possible that 445 might havestood above 443 and 444 above 442.Then, 443, n might have preceded 444,i, so that the four fragments would haveformed a continuous text. It will be ob-

served that Robert's reconstruction, whichis mentioned in the Introductory Note,does not agree with this order. There is

another fragment, published in Hibeh

Papyri I p. 45 (see p. 40), which was con-

sidered by the editors to belong to the

same group. Inasmuch, however, as the

remains are quite insignificant, and the

identification is uncertain, it has not been

reproduced here.

This fragment is a dialogue betweenone of the daughters, who has just been

struck, and the chorus. Blass completesv. 2 with /c6p77$, and v. 3 with rrjvd' a$

5/>6//.<f>, and begins v. 4 with ou5'. It is

assumed that durox^crdai., a wordhitherto unknown, means '

to miss the

mark.' The daughters were slain byArtemis (Apollod. 3. 46) ;

and she, there-

fore, must be the subject ofand do'Toxift?. But' since v. i apparentlybelongs to the lyrics of the Niobid, the

adoption of Blass's supplements involvesthe difficulty of reconciling an address to

Artemis in v. 3 with a reference to her in

the third person in v. 2. There is per-

haps another possibility, that v. 3 f. are

addressed to the Niobid, and that 7r65'

êXativeis should be written, followed by5(i}fj.dT<}i> r' dfieifj.tvTj (or ^|c6?rtos) /cara-

ffroxif??, if KdTao-Toxifcffdai might beunderstood as

*to be shot at.

' Then v. 2

might run <ri> 5' d\X<i...06/3y. Blass com-

pleted v. 4 Math el<rt8v /iteXos.

6 iroTpov has been proposed as a

supplement, but &cet<re rrjd' do not com-bine satisfactorily. cirovpi<ro> : observethe sea-faring metaphor, and see onfr. 726.7 |j.vxaXa supports the reading of the

MSS in Eur. Hel. 189 (n.); but, if /j.uxa\ovwas a noun (

=/tux<is), that passage would

still need some correction. y**-' tne

supplement was suggested by Eur. Hipp.1290 TrtDs ov% viro yrjs rdprapa Kpi/Trrets \

8 iroSa KaTairrtjfjft) should be addedto the list of examples collected on Eur.

Hel. 526. Cf. fr. 672.9 Blass pointed out that AWo/ucu was

a possible reading.

72

100 IO<t>OKAEOY2

443

r,.

Ticr/ceL

eXeaiX['

10

443. 2 yap Gr-H 8 w<r Gr-H 9 o sequitur vel r vel Blassio iudice:

5 dederant Gr-H 1O ad initium e ... iff Gr-H

443 5 <|i> \eai indicates lyrics.

7 Blass recognizes i?/ce TTCUS 0-65 els

(&)<9 is a lament of Niobe. Perhaps

1O <rt 7<ip ?r/)6

<r<a[jit]v;> is suggested by Eur. 7.7".

1478 Tl 701/3 | 7r/)6s T0

444

1 U7TO

yoricus /cat

p,\_

444. 1 TTCJ/ Gr-H 3 v (vel at) Bl

1 outr/a occurs in Track. 911.For the word see Wilamowitz on Eur.

Her. 337.2 The shortness of the line indicates

that it was an exclamation, of the chorus,

according to Blass.

3 recalls Ant. 631 rax eiV6/ue<r0a p.av-

rtdiv vwtprepov.4 TTwXos tSs airb vyov occurs in Eur.

Or. 45, where Herwerden restored virb

from Eubulus (fr. 75, n 190 K.) ap. Athen.

1 08 B. virb is adopted by Wecklein and

Murray, and the present passage confirmsit. Robert's view that the comparisonis applied to the flight of one of the

daughters might be supported by Eur.Bacch. 1056.

5 cipTiws is characteristic of Sophocles,in whose plays it occurs more than 30times: see Rutherford, New Phryn. p. 71,Starkie on Ar. Vesp. n. The fact that

it is not found in Aeschylus is significant.6 (j>oprji. Blass thinks the word was

used as in El. 715, 752.

NIOBH

445

101

TOTOTOTOTOT[

aypUa[

]ii>ocr

445. 1 w/*# Gr-H 6 a\X Gr-H| post hunc v. duo versus omnino deleti

445 5 Blass suggests riV a5r' air' arrival of a messenger.dypov (p&fjiev, which he refers to the

446

elvat, rots BvyaTepas KOLL urovs

446 Schol. Eur. Phoen. 159 *ai

2o0o/cX?}s ^j> Nt6/3?7 fTTO, (prjcrlv auras elvai

(/.<?. the daughters of Niobe) Kal TOJ)S

tipffevas (Kal foovs apeevas conj. Headlam).Lutat. in Stat. 7~/^. 6. 124 p. 203 Niobesecundum Homerum duodecimfilios habuit,

Sophocles autem dicit earn quatuordecimhabuisse.

Tragedy fixed the number of Niobe'schildren at fourteen for subsequent tra-

dition: see Ov. Met. 6. 182 f., Hygin.fab. n, Apollod. 3. 45, etc. Accordingto Aelian var. hist. 12. 36, Lasus ofHermione was the earliest authority for

this number. Aeschylus agreed (TGFp. 50). Before this there had been muchdiversity. Hesiod (fr. 61), Mimnermus(fr. 19), Pindar (fr. 65), and Bacchylides

(fr. 52 J.) mentioned twenty, althoughHesiod (according to another authority)had spoken of nineteen, Sappho (fr. 143) of

eighteen, and Alcinan made the numberten: see Aelian, I.e. Gruppe, p. 125 r

,

accounts for the differences betweentwelve and fourteen and between nine-

teen and twenty by the subsequent ad-

dition to the list of Chloris and Meli-

boea, said to be the names of survivingdaughters, or of one of them.Headlam in C.R. XIII 3 suggested. that

the number fourteen was chosen as suit-

able to the composition of a tragic chorus;but, so far as Sophocles was concerned, weknow for certain that some at least of the

daughters were acting parts.

447

Y) yap (f)i\.7j eya) roirSe TOV 7rpo(f)pTpov447

Schol.^BHorn. E 533 and schol.

E Horn. 9 186 TJ. ..dirt TOV rfv...KO.l irapa

So0o/cXei tv ry Ni6/37?'^ yap (ffv yap schol.

E) . . . Trpo<J>epTpov.'

The same scholia attest the reading 77

in O. T. 1 1 2 3, where L has $v. L presentsrj only in O.C. 973, 1366 : see Jebb onO.C. 768. Modern editors restore 77 in

tragedy wherever metre permits. TJV is

nowhere required in Aesch. or Soph., but

occurs occasionally before a vowel in

Euripides : see Rutherford, New Phry-nichus, p. 243, and add Hel. 992. Cobet

(N.L. p. 187), who was among the

earliest to call attention to Porphyrius'note, observes that even the examples

102 !04>OKAEOYI

which he quotes are corrupted by the

copyists. The fact that Porphyrius is

obliged to quote instances in support of

7? shows, as Dindorf justly remarked, that

the text of the dramatists had early suf-

fered corruption in this respect.

n-po<j>epTpov undoubtedly seems to

bear the meaning elder; nor is there anyvalid reason for denying it to the wordeither here or in 0. C. 153 1 r< 7rpo0e/)rdry

fjt,6v<{) <rr]fj,aiv, where Jebb is perhaps un-

necessarily cautious. Few will, I think,be satisfied with Campbell's rendering,' For I was dear to him who is mightierthan they.' Is it possible to adjust the

line to what we know of the plot?Welcker thinks that the speaker is one

of the daughters lamenting the death of

her favourite brother. In that case it is

certainly odd that we have irpo<pepTtpovrather than Trpoêprdrou ; and of course

the terminations are often confused.

Hartung, who reads 7rpo0e/)rdTy, seemsto imagine that irpo<f>epTa.Tov is the readingof the MSS. One might guess that oneof the daughters perhaps Chloris, whoaccording to one version was the onlysurvivor had been beloved by Apollo,the elder of Leto's two children. Thereis evidence of a previous friendshipbetween Leto and Niobe in Sappho's (fr.

31) Adrw KO.L Ni6/3a fj,d\a fj,ev 0lX

eYai/mt.

448

crreiXai

448 post u5 lacunam ostendunt BE

448 Plut. amat. 17 p. 760 D rCov fiev

yap TOV Soô/cXe'ous Nto/3t5u;> fiaXXo/JitvuvKal dvrfCTKbvTwv dva/caXetrctl ris ovdfra

J3or)6bv aXXop ovde ffv/m/JLaxov rj rbv po.Grt]v,'w...<rret\cu.' KXe6

/u,axoi' 5 TOV <J>a/xrd-

\iov fore Q"f)irovdev e" r/s airlas eVeXeurTjtrej'

a.ycovt6/j.evos.

Dindorf, Hartung, Ellendt, and Camp-bell ignore the lacuna after (3; con-

sequently, Ellendt gives the impossible

rendering in me curando te occupa, and

Hartung the equally impossible' umhiille

mich, mein Schild !

' Nauck merelyremarks '

post cS videntur verba nonnulla excidisse,' as if the gap were nomore than a probability. This is all the

more strange, since Wyttenbach (1797)had long since recorded the defect in the

MSS. According to Bernardakis, there is

a space in B sufficient for nine letters andin E for twelve. He suggests therefore co

0lXrar' alrtD <r' d/x0' ejj.oi (or d/u0' //.' e?)

o-reTXai Trtir\ov. aM</>' ^/*ol had previouslybeen proposed by Papageorgius, but it is

uncritical to fill the gap with words which

require an alteration in the text. I should

prefer something like w <0l\e,rd5'>d/x0' c/ioO, <rr\ai..., without de-

ciding whether (rretXat means '

start to

come hither'

or not. Mekler, adoptinga suggestion in Nauck's first edition that

the words oudtva ftorjdbv &\\ov ov8t (rtifj.-

fj,a\ov were part of the text of Sophocles,proceeds: </caXo?,u.' aj-uj<0tX'>dyu0'ÂtoG orretXai < xpoi> . He compares Eur.Bacch. 821.

The allusion to the ^paffrrjs is confirmed

by Athen. 601 A AiVx^Xos fttyas u>v

TTOtT^rrjs /cat 2o0o/cX^s yyov els TO, Qtarpadta r&v Tpayipdi&i' TOVS ^pojras, 8 /wei/ TOV

Trpos HaTpoK\ov, 6 5' v rrj

TOV T&V TralSwf . According to oneversion the beatify of Niobe's children

was an essential element in the story(Parthen. 33 els Zpiv a.(pLKo^v7]v ATJTOI

jrepl /caXXire/ci/i'as). Welcker points outthat TraiSepaorla was v6fj.ifj.ov at Thebes:see Plat. symp. 182 B, Xen. symp. 8.

34. Cic. rep. 4. 4 Thebanos, apud quosin amore ingenuorum libido etiam per-missam habet et solutam licentiam.

NIOBH 103

449

449 Harpocn p. 54, 25Avfflas ev T<p Trpos RvireiQriv (fr. 137).

ev d7ro5t'5cocri TO*' <r/ct6X77/ca -OUTW

5^ TO

TOV 6(pLV

8e fjt,d\\ov dv e'iri o'crrts TO,

dep/mLffTr/s, cbs vTroffr/fJiaLveTai Kal

ev Trj eKTrj MtXrjo-ta/cuij' 'Api<7Tei'5ou (FHGiv 326)

'

this reference is elucidated byReitzenstein, Das Mdrchen v. Amor u.

Psyche, p. 59 ff.

Cf. Hesych. I p. 475 Sep/uorijs' 6

0-/cu>Xr? 77 6 crrjs (Palmerius for f) CXTKVS

cod. : Reitzenstein would prefer 6/c/s)

6

Tot, Sep/xara eadiuv. 'Apt<TTap%os c^w.Bekk. anecd. p. 240, 14 Sepô-Tjjs

'

ot p.ev

(fxxriv etSos cr/cc6XT?/cos, 5 KareadLei. TO, 6Yp-

/j.a.Ta, 'Apurrapxos 5e 6'0eus eZSos. Thenotice which Harpocration records is care-

lessly truncated in Etym. M. p. 257, 36dep/j,T/(TTris' Au<7tas yu.ef TOP cr/cwXrj/ca (pt](f\v

Q\JT<J) \eyeffdoii) 'ApiVTapôs 5 TOJ' 6(piv.

e'iTj 5' ap /m.d\\ov 6 TO, dep/maTa ecrdiw e/c

ToO 5w, and in Suid. j.^., whose note is

identical with Etym. M. except that hehas Sep/j-LffTris, omits TO, before oVp/naTa,and substitutes eTvpuTepov OVTU Ka\ov-

/j.evos for CK TOV ^5w. That Sep/irja-TTjs

should be preferred to Sep/uoTTfc is indi-

cated not only by the frequent occurrence

of the corruption (revxt-ar-fiv is a variant

for Tvxn<rr-r]v in Aesch. Theb. 631), but

also by the derivation from 5w which it

would be unreasonable to doubt, fortified

as it is by the analogy of c5/*i

/Spw^TjcrTiys (Etym. M. p. 215, 58XopTO<pdyos

'

/cat 6Vos Sta Xtôv 6*

oyKrjtTT-rjs (see Stadtmueller on A. P. 9.

301), and possibly dA^rjo-TTjs. It is

probable that all these compound words

ought to be accented paroxytone, as

suggested by Lobeck (Paralip. p. 450 :

see also Chandler, 35). I have nodoubt that the reference is to a grubwhich lived on dried animal matter such

as hides. The Sep^cmjs is a literary con-

gener of the <njs and the /cts : Find. fr.

243 Kelvov (xpv(rov) ov (TTJS o5 /cts SdvrTet.

Ar. Lys. 730 (fyta) VTTO T&V (rtwv /caTa-

Ka.irTQiJ.ev a. Hor. Sat. 2. 3. 1 1 stragula

vestis, blattarum ac tinearum epulae.The citation of Lysias is significant that

we have to do with an object of commonexperience, although Aristotle, who dis-

cusses this class of insect in hist. an. 5.

32. 55 7b

i ff., does not specifically mention

He says (8ff.): Kal tv TO?S

/3ij3\iois aXXa yiyveTai (sc. ^5a) Ta /mev

8/j,oia TOIS ev TOIS t/iartots, TO, 5 TOIS cr/cop-

TTÔIS dvev Trjs oupas, ^t/cpa irdfjiirav KO!

6'Xws ev irdffiv tos elireiv ev TC TOIS ^poTsvypa.Lvofj,evots /cat ev TO?S vypots j-rjpaivo-

/nevois, Sera exei- Q-VT&V faty. Thus far

I am in agreement with M. Schmidt

(Didym. p. 21), but am unable to followhim when he suggests that Soph, was

comparing a rolling wave to the move-ment of the 5ep/*r7o-T^s, and that the

Hesychian gloss (II p. 29) d\v(nrd<Tdat'TO TrapaTrXr/criws Tots o<pe<ri Kal TOIS <r/cc6-

\TI^LV ievai may belong here, as if thewords were 6s ei'Xu<r7raTo dep/mr/ffTov diKr/v.

We have no material which enables usto understand the nature of the difference

between the interpretations of Aristarchusand Didymus, but it may be hazardedthat the controversy was merely whetherthe depftya-Tris -on whose identity theyagreed could be more correctly describedas 6'0ts or <r/cc6Xr;^. Ellendt consideredthat Aristarchus preferred the form 5ep-

/j-icTTris, and understood it of the serpentchanging his skin : but that is very un-

likely. It is perhaps not irrelevant to

quote from a letter of the poet Cowper,in answer to a criticism directed againsthis use of ' worm '

in place of '

serpent'

:

'

They are, however, without all doubt,convertible terms. A worm is a small

serpent, and a serpent is a large worm '

(Letters of W. Cowper, ed. J. G. Frazer,I p. 332). Schmidt thinks that the un-known grammarian who differed fromAristarchus and Didymus must have beenOrus or Cassius Longinus, but is inclined

to attach too much importance to the

controversy; for I cannot believe that

depfj.rjo'T'rjs was unintelligible to the Alex-andrians. See further on fr. 635. It

should be added that Dermestes is the

name given by zoologists to the type of

the genus Dermestidae, a branch of the

Coleoptera which comprises about 400species. The Dermestidae in the larval

state nearly all live on dried animalmatter (such as bacon-rind) and are verydestructive ;

the name is at least as old as

Linnaeus (c. 1758). The larval forms of

beetles are, I am told, usually designated' worms '

by those who are not zoologists.Thus the common ' meal-worm '

found in

flour is really the larval form of a beetle

Tenebrio.

104 I000KAEOYI

450

45O Athen. 176 F robs yapavXotfs, wv fj.vrinoi'fijei Zoô/cX^s ev

re KO.V TvuTraviffTals (fr. 644), ou/c aXXous

Tivas elvai aKotio(j.fv ij roi)s 3>pvylovs...T&v5' e\ti[j.<j)v av\&v fj.v-rnj.oveve i /ecu KaXXas ev

HedriTais (fr. 18, I 697 K.), 'I6/3as oe rot-

rovs Qpvy&v /*ev eli>ai evp-rj/ma, 6vofj.aeffdai.

de Kai (TKVTaXelas, /far' eêpdav rov

Trdxous (i.e. they are narrower than other

flutes), x.prjffdai 5' avrois Kai KuTrptous

077<ri KpcmVos 6 ve&repos ev QripaiJ.evri (fr.

3, II 290 K.).The Au/xos is thus described by Pollux

(4. 74) ' ^Xu/AOS TrjV fj.ev V\7]V TT^ll'OS T&

8' etiprifj.a $>pvy&v icepas 5' eKarepq(crept? conj. v. Jan) T&V av\G)v avavevov

(i.e. bent back from the straight) irp6<r-

effTiv, av\ef 5e rrj 3>pvyia 0et^. Its

form, with the bend in the left pipe,

may be seen in the illustration given byGuhl and Koner, Fig. 241 i, or in Diet.

01

Ant. ii 841. There seems to have beensome doubt whether Xv/uos was more

properly the name of a part of the flute

or of the flute itself: Hesych. n p. 71ra Trpwra r(av avX&v, a0' <3v 77

ot de cbrXcDs av\6v. Speciallycharacteristic of the Phrygian flute wasits deep note: Athen. 185 A, quoting

av\6v from Ion fr. 42, otfrw \eyuv'

/3api>s yap ofrros' Trap' 5 Kai

rb xepas aury TrpoffdTrTov<nv dvdXoyovv T

r&v <ra\7riyya}v Kwdwvt. Cf. Catull. 63.22 canit Phryx czirvo grave calamo. Thehorn-shaped addition is attested also byHesych. n p. 7 s.v. tyKepaijXris. HenceBerecynthiocornu\n.\lot. Carm. i. 18. 13.It seems highly probable that the spreadof the worship of the Great Motherfamiliarized the Greeks with this type of

flute. See generally v. Jan in Pauly-Wissowa II 2421.

451

KpOKOS

451 Schol. Soph. O.C. 684 KOLV rrj

6 So0o/cX?7s rbv Kphnov ai>TLKpvs T-rj

There is hardly any evidence elsewhereof a special connexion between the crocus

and the cult of Demeter, though baskets

of flowers of all kinds are often amongsther attributes. There is no special sig-nificance in the inclusion of the crocus

in the list of flowers which Persephonewas gathering when she was seized by

Pluto (Horn. //. Dem. 6). Schneidewin

pointed out that /cpo/rwro/, saffron-coloured

robes, were worn by the women at the

Thesmophoria, or festival of Demeter

6e<rfjt,o<t>6pos (Ar. Thesm. 138). But this

fact is not conclusive, inasmuch as the

colour appears also to be characteristic of

self-dedication to the service of other

deities : see the evidence collected byGruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 444, and especiallyAr. Lys. 645 with the scholia.

[EOANH4>OPOI]

The title is only once quoted, and is of doubtful authenticity.Welcker (p. 66) first drew attention to the difficulties inherent in

the supposition that the chorus consisted of gods fleeing van-

quished before mortal warriors, or despairing at the capture ofan earthly city. He inferred, accordingly, that the originalstatement from which the scholium was drawn did not relate to

a play bearing the title ôavôpot, ;but that Sophocles merely

recorded, perhaps in the Laocoon (cf. fr. 373), the fact of the

NIOBH OAYIIEYI AKANQOTTAHE 105

gods' appearance after the capture of Troy, each carrying his

own image on his shoulders. Later criticism has done nothingto diminish the force of Welcker's objections. But it is not so

easy to account for the corruption. If we assume that the

adjective goavTjcfropoi was a part of Sophocles' description, andthat the passage in which it occurred subsequently acquiredsome repute, the words eipyrai ev goavrjôpow may have had anintention similar to that of ev TOV o-KijTrrpov rfj 7rapaS6<rei etprj/cev

in Thuc. i. 9. Or ev goavrjcfropoi? may have taken the place of

7rl TWV goavrjfiopcov.

452

[oi 0ol TO. iavTtov

452 Schol. Aesch. Theb. 291 etprjrai Aen. i. 351 excessere omnes, adytis arisquc<5e Kai tv tZoav-tiôpois 2o0o/cX&>i;s ws ol relictis,

\

di qidbus imperium hoc steterat.

deol dirb rrjs 'IXtou <f>tpovo~u' eiri rQ>v WyUWf Tryphiod. 508 records the departure of

ra eavr&v j-6ava, dSbres tin dX/ovcercu. Apollo from Troy. The legend wasThe tradition that such an incident hardly invented by Sophocles, but we

occurred during the sack of Troy is cannot trace it to Arctinus or Stesichorus,confirmed by the schol. M on Aesch. although it was probably at least as old.

Theb. 203 (d\X' ovv deovs\

TOVS rfjs For the general belief that the protecting

<iXoi5<n7$ TroXeos eKXetirtiv \6yos) els rty god abandoned a conquered city see Hor.

fpolav yap roiovrbv TI efiaivero, and by Carm. 2. r. 25, Plin. n.h. 28. 2. 18, andschol. rec. X^yerai yap OTL 6're êXXe wop- the famous story of the siege of JerusalemdrjOyvai i] TpoLa, e^dv-rjaav oi 0eoi TOIJ related by Tac. hist. 5. 13. For the

Tpdxriv dvcXo/JLevoi K TUV va&v ra dyd\/j.aTa Roman formula of evocatio directed to

avr&v. It is referred to also by Eur. the gods of a hostile city see W. WardeTro. 25 (Poseidon speaks) XC^TTW TO K\ei- Fowler, Religious Experience of the

vbv "\\i.ov /3w/xotfs T' f/xoi/y, and by Verg. Roman People, p. 206.

OAYIIEYI AKANOOT7AHE H NIHTPA

Only one of the following fragments is quoted as belongingto the title N/Trrpa, but the identification of the play so entitled

with the 'OSvcrcrevs aKavOoTrX^ is established by Cic. Tusc. disp.

2. 48 non nimis in Niptris ille sapientissimus Graeciae saucius

lamentatur vel modice potius : 'Pedetemptim! inquit, 'etsedato nisu,

ne succussu arripiat maior dolor' Pacuvitis hoc melius quamSophocles : apud ilium enim perquam flebiliter Ulixes lamentaturin volnere, from which it has been justly inferred that the Niptraof Pacuvius was an adaptation of the 'O8uo-o-eu? a/cavOo7r\^ of

Sophocles1. The subject-matter is, as we shall see, sufficiently

1 There is just a possibility that Sophocles wrote a play entitled Niirrpa on the

return of Odysseus, following the later books of the Odyssey, as well as the dKavdo-

Tr\rj^, and that the Niptra of Pacuvius was a conflation of the two. This is mentionedfor reasons which will presently appear.

106 Z000KAEOYS

indicated by the title, and further confirmation may be drawnfrom Arist. poet. 14. I453

b33, where, in discussing the case of

a man killing his kinsman in ignorance, he points out that this

may occur efo> roO &pdfj,aros, as in the Oedipus of Sophocles, oreV avrfj -rfj rpayto&ia, olov 6 'AXtf/i,e&>z/ o 'AorfSayLta^ro? 77 6

T7]\eyovos 6 ev rrj rpavâria ^QSvcraei.

The circumstances of the death of Odysseus by the hand of

Telegonus, his son by Circe, were first reduced to a literary formin the epic Telegonia, the last of the Cyclic poems, generallyattributed to Eugamon (or Eugammon) of Cyrene, and datedc. 568 B.C. The excerpt of Proclus, so far as it is relevant to the

present purpose, mentions (EGF p. 57) the return of Odysseusfrom Thesprotia after the death of Callidice 1

,and continues

as follows. Meanwhile Telegonus, the son of Circe 2,who was

voyaging in search of his father, landed in Ithaca, and plunderedthe island. Odysseus came out to attack him, and the son un-

wittingly slew his father. On discovering his mistake, Telegonusconveyed his father's body to Circe's island, and took with him

Penelope and Telemachus. Circe made the three others im-

mortal, whereupon Telegonus was mated with Penelope, andTelemachus with Circe. Apollodorus (epit. 7. 36) repeats mostof this, with the addition that the spear with which Telegonuswounded Odysseus had a point made from the icevrpov of a

roach 3. Eustathius (Od. p. 1676, 45), commenting on \ 133,

explains that the spear of Telegonus was designed by Hephaestuswith a head of adamant, a golden shaft, and a point made as

stated above, and that the roach had been killed by Phorcysbecause it devoured the fish in lake Phorcis. He also emphasizesthe significance of a death which, coming from the sea, slew at

last the sea-worn hero, and refers to the verses of Oppiart(Halieut. 2. 497 ff.) :

TTOT alyaverj So\iîjpei KcoTrrjecro-rj

Tr]\6<yov(0 7ro\v<f)dpfj,aKos WTraae /jujrijp,

fyw Brjioi? a\LOV fjiopov avrdp ovr)<T(p

oTU) TT/oocre/eeXcre, KOI ov pade Trcoea T

eov, ypapa> Be ftorjSpofjbeovri, rotcfji

avra), rov fjLCKTTeve, Kaicr)v evefjbdgaro /crjpa.

evOa rov alo\6/jurjrw 'OSu<7cre<z, /jivpia, TTOVTOV

aA/yea fjuerpijo-avra iroKytc^TOKnTpv<ya)v oXryivoedGd /jiifj Karevrjparo

To the same effect the schol. on Horn. X 134, who adds that

1 Known to Sophocles as Euippe : see on Euryalus, I p. 1 46.2 Eustath. Od. p. 1796, 50 (EGF\>. 58) says that Eugammon made him son of

Calypso. See Gruppe, p. 7174.3rpvybves r biriadbKevrpoi Epich. fr. 66 K.

OAYZ2EYS AKANOOTTAHE 107

Hephaestus made the spear at the request of Circe. From Hygin.fab. 1 27 several fresh points emerge : ( I ) that Telegonus was driven

to Ithaca by a storm, and was forced by hunger to ravage the fields;

(2) that Telemachus accompanied Odysseus in his attack on the

raiders; (3) that the death of Odysseus was in accordance with an

oracle, quod ei responsum fuerat ut a filio caveret mortem; (4) that

the return to Aeaea and the subsequent marriages took place in

consequence of the command of Athena. There are also remark-able differences in detail, which maybe thought to indicate a dra-

matic origin, in the narrative of the vrroOeo-is to the Odyssey first

published by Buttmann from a Palatine MS and reprinted in Din-dorfs edition of the scholia (l p. 6, 13 23) : KOL J3ia)cras ^povovsTroXXoiW VTTO TOV ISiov TratSo? Trj\6y6vov TOV djro T?79 Ktp/e?79 avT(

yevofjbevov icarakvei rov ftiov. TOV y(ip drro TOV vlov ddvarov etc

TWCOV {jbavTevfjidTtov eX/flrtfw, TOV Trj\e/jiaôv e^fXarrero teal

o-vvelvai avTa> rraprjTelTo. ore ovv o Tr)\eyovos rrjv 'lOaKfjv tcaTe-

\a/3e fcal eavTOv rco TraTpl /caTe./j,r)W fir) TrpocrSeô/jLevcov avTov

<f)v\dfc(i)v KavTevOev fcpavyfjs yevo/Aewrjs co? STL VVICTOS 01^(7779,

'Qovo-o-evs rov Tr)\efjLaôv elvai, dvttrrareu /u,era f/(/>ou<?. real

crv/JL7r(7Ci)v Tr}\ey6vw TrX^Trerat UTT' avTov r&5 /cevTpo) r^9 Tpvyovos.KOL TOVTO) TW TpOTTw 'OSfO'O'ei'? dvaipeirai. jjbadwv ovv Tr)\eyovosOTI TOV TraTepa dvel\e TrevOrfaas avTov TTiKp&s dv6%Q)prj(76 r?}9

'IdaKys. A somewhat similar account appears in Dictys 6. 15.

It is evident from the allusions in later literature to the

parricide of Telegonus1

,and to the deadly weapon by which

Odysseus was killed 2,that the general outline of the story had

become a familiar theme 3.

So far there is no particular difficulty in forming a conceptionof the manner in which Sophocles may have dramatized this

material. Especially, we cannot fail to observe that the reiterated

references to Dodona in frs. 455,456, 460 and 461 are satisfactorily

explained by the statement in Hyginus and the Argument to

the Odyssey that Odysseus, like Laius and others 4,had been

warned by an oracle to beware of his own son. Observe also

that we have two forms of the story, according to which Odysseuseither went out to attack robbers or resisted the attempt to makea forcible entry into his house. Some may think fr. 458 agreesbetter with the former version, though it is scarcely decisive 5

.

1 Hor. Carm. 3. 29. 8 Telegom iuga parricidae. Ov. Trist. i. i. 114. Lucian,var. hist. 2. 35.

2 Schol. Ar. Plut. 303. Ov. Ibis 567. Philostr. vit. Ap. 6. 32, her. 3. 42.3 For the curious variation of the legend concerning Odysseus' death which

Aeschylus adopted in the ^'vxayuyol (fr. 275) see Gruppe, p. 7i5 2 . Add Sext. Emp.math. I 267.

4 For the parallels see Gruppe, p. 7155.5 Ribbeck thinks that the words were spoken by Telegonus, when demanding an

entry at the door.

io8 I04>OKAEOYI

But, when we endeavour to determine how Sophocles linked

the arrival of Telegonus to the earlier history of Odysseus, the

enquiry becomes more complex. Frs. 453 and 454 show that

the prophecy of Tiresias in the eleventh book of the Odysseywas included in the scheme of events preliminary to the action

;

and it may be assumed that the dramatist accepted the circum-

stances in which Odysseus met his end as fulfilling the earlier

prophecy1 as well as the oracle given at Dodona : Odvaros Se rot

ef aXo? avrw\ d/3\rj)(pos yuaXa roto? eXeuarerdU, 09 re <re 7re<f)vrj \

yrjpat, VTTO \t,irap<p dpTj/jievov, d/ju^l $e \aol\o\/3ioi eacrovrai.

Odysseus, then, had returned from his last journey, undertaken,it would seem, in order to make the offering to Poseidon whichTiresias had enjoined, and in the course of his travels in Epirushad learnt at Dodona of a specific danger threatening his life,

which appeared to be inconsistent with the earlier forecast. Thealternative title requires us to assume that Odysseus was not

recognized on his return, and that his identity was discovered bythe old nurse in the same manner as in the Odyssey*. Also, it

has been inferred from fr. 457, as well as from certain fragmentsof Pacuvius 3

, that, as in Homer, Odysseus related his adventures

at considerable length. But how can Sophocles have imposedsuch a feeble duplicate upon an audience which knew perfectlywell that all this had happened before? Wilamowitz 4

escapedfrom the difficulty by supposing that the story adopted wasa substitute for and not a sequel to the latter part of the Odyssey.The situation of Odysseus at the time of his return was the

same as that described in the fictitious narratives of f 321 flf. andr 271 ff.

5

Moreover, the whole of the struggle with the suitors

was omitted 6. He gets rid of this part of the history by taking

a hint from /3 113 ff., where Antinous suggests to Telemachusthat he should send his mother back to the house of her father

Icarius, so that she may be betrothed from there. Penelope,then, had been sent to Sparta, and Wilamowitz finds an allusion

to this event in Pacuv. fr. IV Spartam reportare instat: id si

perpetrat. Ingenious as this is, we shall not readily believe that

Sophocles would have put forward a version of the Return of

Odysseus so fundamentally at variance with the whole scheme

1 Ameis-Hentze (Anh. to Xi34) think that the whole story was built on a false

interpretation of e d\6s, which really meant 'away from the sea.'2

Cf. Pacuv. frs. I II. Cic. Titsc. 5. 46 called the nurse Anticlea, by a slip.

According to Wilamowitz, Sophocles described her simply as r/>o06s.3 The probability becomes greater, if Brunck was right in ascribing frs. 86 1 and

965 to this play. Wilamowitz added fr. 748 : but see note in loc.

4 Horn. Unterstick, p. 194(7.5 Note the reference to Dodona in 327 = r 296.VUrtheim (Mnem. xxix 54 f. ), agreeing otherwise with Wilamowitz, suggested

that the death of the suitors was announced in a messenger's speech.

OAYIIEYI AKANOOITAHE 109

of the Odyssey, while at the same time he followed that poemso closely in certain of its details 1

. Another attempt of a similar

kind was made by Svoronos, who explained the title NiTrrpa as

referring to the bathing of the hero's foot, after he had beenwounded by the poisonous barb 2

. But this ignores the evidenceof the Pacuvian fragments, even if the title already appropriatedto the scene in the Odyssey could have been applied to an

entirely different situation. Ribbeck 3 called attention to another

important consideration. If Odysseus returned openly to Ithaca,

why was he not recognized at once? However much protractedthe period of absence, he had no longer after the death of the

suitors the same motive for landing secretly. Ribbeck conse-

quently inferred that he came back in disguise because of the

danger against which he had been warned by the oracle at Dodona,that he was recognized by the nurse, and that he bound her over

to secrecy. Pacuv. fr. I shows that the recognition took place onthe stage. Ribbeck very fairly remarks that, though the fragmentsindicate that Pacuvius introduced a narrative of the adventures,fr. 457 is not enough to prove that Sophocles elaborated the theme,as if Odysseus were returning home for the first time. It mightbe urged against Ribbeck that for Odysseus to return to Ithaca in

disguise rather than openly was the most likely method of in-

curring the very danger which he was anxious to avoid. But he

is certainly right in suggesting that his first object after receivingthe answer must have been to protect himself against Telemachus

4.

We must apparently assume that at this juncture Telemachuswas ruling as his father's deputy, and continued friendly to him.

At least, there is nothing to suggest the contrary; but the desire

to shun the presence of Telemachus, and to get back to Ithaca

so as to put in motion a scheme for his removal from the island 5

,

may have prompted Odysseus to show himself first to Eumaeus,in whose hut the recognition by Euryclea might then have taken

place. If Odysseus desired to return without the knowledge of

Telemachus, the dramatic advantage of the scene with the nurse

is obvious. Or we might suppose, as an alternative, that

Telemachus was temporarily absent from home. In either case,

there is a strong reason for suspecting that Sophocles was the

source of the version quoted above from the Argument to the

1 See also on Nausicaa, p. 92.a Gaz. Arch, xni 1888, p. 270 ff. He sees in the sufferings of Odysseus a fulfil-

ment of the curse in Phil. 1113.3 Rom. Trag. p. 2708".4 Cf. the conduct of Oedipus in a similar predicament (O.T. 794). Another

parallel is the case of Althaemenes, the son of Catreus (Apollod. 3. 13).5 In Diet. 6. 14 Odysseus, warned by a dream, banishes Telemachus to Cephal-

lenia.

no I04>OKAEOYZ

Odyssey, so far as it relates to the precautions taken against

Telemachus, and the circumstances of Telegonus' arrival.

Especially significant is the statement that Odysseus, hearingthe noise, thought that it was caused by Telemachus, and leapt upsword in hand.

We assume, then, that the action of the earlier part of the

play was directed towards the attainment of security by Odysseus,when he believed that Telemachus was the source ofthe threatened

danger. So soon as this seemed to be composed by the voluntarywithdrawal of Telemachus, the inmates of the house were dis-

turbed by the boisterous summons of Telegonus. The conclusion

of the play must have comprised a messenger's description of the

conflict, and a scene in which the mortally wounded Odysseuswas brought on the stage

1

,the parentage of Telegonus was

ascertained 2,and a reconciliation with him was effected. To

this part of the play, when the prediction of the oracle was

apparently falsified, frs. 460 and 461 no doubt belonged, thoughWelcker 3 was hardly right in supposing that the oracle at Dodonawas mentioned for the first time at this point. This essential

matter must have been made known to the audience at an early

stage, as has already been indicated. It is clear that the final

scene resembled in many respects the conclusion of the Trachiniae\but whether Wilamowitz was right in pressing the parallel so far

as to include in it the betrothal of Penelope to Telegonus at the

bidding of Odysseus must remain an open question. Vurtheimthinks that Athena did not appear ex machina, but that the

concluding scene is correctly represented in the Argument to

the Odyssey.A play with the same title seems to have been written by

the tragic poet Apollodorus of Tarsus, whose date is unknown

(Suid. s.v.).

453

TO StopOV dfJL(j)l

453 Schol. Vat. Dionys. Thr. p. 239, Trodairds TO. edvLKa, 'Podtos, 6/>p- 2<r6' 6're

26 Hilg. (Bekk. anecd, p. 872, 17, and /cat ra Trotor^ros, Xev/c6s, av66s. So0oK'X^sCramer, anecd. Oxon. IV p. 330, 3) ry o$v (om. ed. Bekk.) 4v 'OSixro-et aKavdo-

1 This is proved by Cic. Tusc. 2. 48 ff.

2 Diet. 6. 15: Odysseus, feeling that his wound was fatal, thanked the gods that

he had not fallen by his son's hand, and that Telemachus was free from blood-guilt.Then he enquired about his opponent's origin and name, and in so doing disclosed

his own identity. Recognition, of course, followed.3 See his discussion, pp. 240 248.

OAYZ2EYI AKANOOTTAHE in

(8 add. ed. Bekk.) 7ro5a?r6s

dvTi TOV Trotos x/)r7"Âtet/os aKVpoXoyel (d/cpt-

{SoXoyei ed. Bekk.)'

7ro5a7roj'...w/iois.'

These are the words addressed to

Odysseus by the stranger whom he wasdestined to meet, according to the prophecyof Tiresias, after he had reached the land

of those to whom the sea was unknown :

Horn. X 127 oirirbTe KCV or) rot (rv/AfiXruJievos

&\\os odirrjs | 07777 ddriprj\oiybv %x LV ava

<j>ai5i/ut,({) ut/jLif).TO Swpov has been sus-

pected : Nauck pronounced the words*vix sana,' M. Schmidt proposed ir\wpov

uniting the fragment with 454 (jrooairbv

ire\<j)pov d. 0. .| allots dBrjpo^purov

opyavov 0^/;eis), Wecklein r65' u^tois, re-

ducing the text to a single line, and

assuming that fr. 454 preceded it, Campbellrod' tpyov, and Mekler TO \poi>. But it

is idle to alter the tradition. I suggestthat o&pov is used in the sense of a votive

offering (usually dvddrma: but see the

instances quoted by Rouse, Greek Votive

Offerings, p. 3233, and in the index at

p. 418), and that the stranger suspectedOdysseus of an intention to dedicate to

the god whose precinct he was approachingthe odd-looking tool which he was carryingon his shoulder. In Homer, at any rate,the oar is to be dedicated to Poseidon byOdysseus, presumably because he has donewith the sea and has no more need of it :

A 129 Kal r6re dr) yairj Tracts evrjpes

, with which may be compared

Theocr. 7. 155 as tirl ffwpy |

afrris e'-yw

Trdj-ai/JLi (j.ya TTTVOV. Rouse, op. cit. p. 70,finds no direct evidence for this custom in

classical times, but considers it in accord-

ance with Greek ways of thought. InA. P. 6. 4, among the offerings from the

fisherman Diophantus to Poseidon, areKal TOJ)S e d/cdron' dix&a8iovs ep^rcts.

Dindorf is not justified in discrediting the

grammarian's interpretation of iroSairov

as = iroiov. Similarly Apollon. de synt.

1.3. 26 tiri tdvucrjs vi>oias Trodcnros Xeyo/j-cu,

77 &r#' 6're dvOvTrdyerai. Kal ra v Trotor^rt,

5re \tyo/j.ev, Trodair6s ecrn Tpi/0wj/, fj^Xas

77 \evKos. The testimony of Phrynichusis not so clear (p. 56 Lob., p. 128 Ruth.);but Rutherford was too hasty in denyingthe possibility of iro8aTr6s= iroios in Attic.

There is at least a play upon the doublesense in [Dem.] 25. 40 Ttj ovv ouros &m;KV(j)v VT] Aid roO dri/j.ov. TrodaTr6s ; olos oi)s

[j.tv aiTidrai \VKOVS elvai (JLTJ ddKveiv d d

<pr]<ri <{>v\dTTeiv Trpoâra ai/ro

We have also the analogy of

for which see the examples collected byHeadlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. 34 ff.

ci(JL<|>l...wfjLoisis less accurate here than

in Homer's d/x0'w/iOi(rti'^xet(rd/cos(A 527).The preposition is in fact used somewhat

loosely (=

on), as in Eur. Phoen. 1516d/x0t K\ddovs eÔyUâ, ib. 1578 a%et 5^

TKV<J)V Zireff' d,a0t T^KVOKTCV. For the adj.cf. Achae. fr. 4 <j>ai8lfj.ovs /3/oaîovas.

454

454 Schol. HV Horn. X 128 drGiv adtpuv oKoOpevriKov opyavov.

yap Xeyercu Kvpius T&V dcrraxtycoj/

rd a.Kpa. \eyerai d rb TTTVOV (quotingN 588). 6 yU&roi 2o<pOK\TJs diredeâTO

TTJS ddripys Kivydpov, \tyuv ourws '

ai/xois. . .

<j)epuv.' Eustath. Od. p. 1675, 52 2o0o/cX?7S

5^, 0acrt, Trapa<ppdfav TO '0/J.r)piKoi> (pTjaiv*

U/J.OLS. ..(ptpuv.' The name of the play is

supplied by Hesych. i p. 64 ddr)p6ppwTovopyavov TT^V roptivrjv, 7} TT\V dd-qpav dvaKL-

The winnowing- fan (TTTIJOV) was a shovel

by which the grain was tossed into the

air, and the chaff dispersed. dQyp is

properly the beard or ear of corn, but in

relation to the process of winnowing it is

interchangeable with /caXd^Tj or

V opyavov

Cf. Lucian Anach. 25 oirep yap 5?j oi

\IK/J.}VTS TOV WVpbv, TOVTO 'TjfUl' Kal TO.

yv/j.vd<na epydfreTai v rots <rw/ta<rt, ryv^v axffjv Kal rows ddtpas dtrocpvcr&vTa,

Kadapbv o TOV napirbv SievKpivovvTa Kal

irpoffcrupetiovTa, where the schol. has

ddepas, Ta TOV dcrTaxvos K&Tpa. Theinterpretation attributed to Sophocles bythe schol. and Hesychius is assigned byEustathius to the veuTepoi, who thought'a spoon to stir porridge' a more appro-priate taunt of the landsman. On the

other hand, the ira\ai6Tpoi were agreedthat both Horn, and Soph, intended the

meaning 'chaff-consuming,' and that

dQripbfipuTov (for ddepbfipuTov] followed

the Homeric precedent. It is a pity that

Eustathius cites his authorities so vaguely.

112 !0<J>OKAEOY!

455

vaiwv Zeus 6 VOLLOS

455 6 vdios Wilamowitz: 6fu6s cod., o/x&mos Tennulius, 6 /Aavrelos Herwerden,6jj,6yvtos Meineke, '0\u>7rios (vel 6 Koipavos) Blaydes

455 Steph. Byz. p. 248, 2, quotedon fr. 460, is the source of this fragment.

For the heteroclite form AwSwvt see

Jebb on Track. 171 f. 6 vcuos is anobscure title of Zeus which seldom occurs

in literature. Dem. 21. 53: oracles fromDodona order the Athenians to send

Oewpol with three oxen and two sheep to

each ox rcj? Au ry Ncuy. Inscriptions in

considerable numbers are found in honourof Zeus Naos and Dione at Dodona

(A. B. Cook in C. R. xx 370). The

explanation of the title is disputed, but

the prevalent view is that it is connected

with v6.w (valui)' to flow

'

(see on fr. 270),and was given to a local god, worshippedat a fountain which sprang from the foot

of the sacred oak (O. Kern in Pauly-Wissowa v 1261). Schrader, however,

holding that raus and vabs are both de-

scended from a word meaning'

tree,'

interprets Zeus Ndios as' der im Baum-

stamme gefasste.' The ancients also con-

nected the word either with (i) vavs, or

(2) vabs ; and the latter view has recentlybeen upheld by Th. Reinach (Rev. Arch.vi 97 ff. ),

who compares for the develop-ment of Ndtos from Zeus Na6s that of

Ke/aauj'tos from Z. Ke/>aui/6s. If this ex-

planation is correct, the title is comparablewith Zeus /3oj/x6s on an inscription from

Syria: see C. Q. m 231. It would seem,however, that Sophocles in this passagefavours the derivation from PCUW, perhapsas signifying

' the god who dwells (in the

oak)': A. B. Cook in C. R. xvn 178compares tp-rjywvaie the reading of Zeno-dotus in Horn. II 233 with Hes. fr. 134,8 Rz. VOLOV 5' iv irvd^vt (pvjyov. See also

Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 7811, p. 1103^The only doubt attaching to the other-

wise convincing restoration of Wilamowitzis that fipor&v remains unexplained, unless,as he suggests, the following line wassomething like r&v evddd' eV

<p-f]fj.<u<Tt.v

dva.Ka\ovfJLfvos (Horn. Unters. p. 19640).

456

Ttt9

456 Steph. Byz. p. 248, 21

TT;S //.eVrot AwScii'T/s AwSuwcuos. . .

diro TOV Audtiovn , ws

'rds. . . AwSwpt5as.'

The priestesses at Dodona have beenthe subject of much discussion ; but the

material evidence, which is collected in

Jebb's Trachiniae, p. 202 ff.,need not be

repeated here. The uncertainty of moderninferences may be estimated by the fact

that, while Gruppe (p. 354), regarding the

doves as possessing magical powers over

the weather, makes the three old priestessesthe original custodians of the rain-charms,Kern (in Pauly-Wissowa v 1262) thinks

that the institution of priestesses was

temporary and late, being due to the

influence of Delphi. Thefollowingpointsshould be observed, (i) There is nodecisive evidence earlier than Pausan. 10.

12. io that the priestesses at Dodona

tepea?

were called IIeXeid,5es: see Farnell, Cults

of the Greek States, I p. 39 n. (2) Strabo

329, with whom the schol. on Track. 172agrees, records two conjectural explana-tions of the Dodonaean doves: either

(a) the flight of the doves was observedand interpreted by the priestesses, or

(/>}there were no doves, but only women

at Dodona; and the mistake was dueto old women being called TreXfcu in theMolossian dialect. (3) As Soph, mentionsboth doves (Track. 172) and priestessesas oracular, he must either be regarded as

a witness in favour of Strabo's first alter-

native, or as giving to the priestesses thename HeXeidSes (Jebb in loc.}. In thelatter case we should still have to ex-

plain why they were so called. It has

recently been suggested with some plausi-

bility that they represented a class of

magicians who, by intimate association

with the birds, had learnt to understand

OAYIIEYI AKANOOfTAHE

their language, and, as their interpreters,wore a kind of bird-dress when giving re-

sponse to theirquestioners ( W. R. Halliday,Greek Divination, p. 265 ff.). (4) Herod.2. 55 57 vouches the existence of three

priestesses at Dodona, but tries to explainaway the story about a speaking dove.

Kern is therefore not justified in sayingthat Soph, is dependent upon Herodotus.

icpe'as is a shortened form of tepeias

which is completely established by the

evidence collected in Meisterhans3, p. 40 :

it occurs on inscriptions fourteen timesfrom the fifth century onwards. It followsthat fe/)taj, restored by Valckenaer and

accepted by Dindorf, is wrong. Theforms with e should be restored four timesin Euripides, viz. Or. 261, /. T. 34,

1399, Bacch. 1114, in all of which theMSS give tfyeieu etc. except that in Or. Land the schol. have leplai.

457

eA.cuaecrcra

457 Hesych. II p. 57 eXcudrecra-a, vrjdvs

Stfscod.)- So0o/cX^s'05uo-(rei

TJTOL Xaideffffa dvTi TOV ffnatd,

dypia, TJ dirb TOV Xrjifecrdai irdvTa Xrjifo-

lievt] Kal KaTeadiovva, T} dirb TOV eXaiov

\nrapd. Phot. lex. p. 298, I vrjfivs eXcud-

e<rcra' eirl KifoXcoTros' SirceX^' dirb"Tf3Xr)s

TTJS eXaiypas. Hesych. Ill p. 153 vrjdvs

eXaidevaa- aTro [j-epovs îias 7r6Xews TTJS

eXairjpas "T/SXv/s.

'It is evident from the diverse ex-

planations in the first entry of Hesychiusthat eXaideo-a-a was preceded by someword, such as 5^ (so L. Uindorfin Thesaur.

p. 659 A) or re, which permitted doubtwhether it was elided or not, r eXcudecro-a

or re Xcudeaxra : just as in Horn, i 116,K 509, and h. Apoll. 197 the grammariansdoubted whether to read Xd%eta or eXdxeta :

other cases may be seen in Find. fr. 244and schol. Ar. Ach. 690.' (H.)Of the various interpretations offered

by the lexicographers there cannot bemuch hesitation in preferring that whichmakes Acude<r<Ta the equivalent of XiTrapd

('oily paunch'), for there is no evidence

that vrjSvs can be used in the metaphoricalsense of 'vale' or 'hollow,' like yovvbs.This view is supported by the Homericdescription of the Cyclops: t 296 avrap7ret KijicXuif/ u. eydXrj v e/iTrX^traro vrjSvv.

Cf. Eur. Cycl. 243 fffayfrTes aurka|

wXri<rov<ri vyb'vv TT]V tfjLfy, 303 vrjdvv Kal

yvddov TrXô-ai vtdev, 335 Kal Trj peylffTig,

yaffrpl Trjde, daipbvuv. For the connexionof the adj. with ZXaiov rather thanL. Dindorf compared Nonn. 5.

Xaiir]ei'TOS ^Kou<f>iffev dfj.<f>i.<j)opr]os.

The fantastic explanation of Photius

suggests that eXatde<r(ro could stand for'Sicilian

'

;for dirb ptpovs is the current

jargon of the scholia to express pars prototo\ see schol. Ai. 17 K&8wv...aTrb ftepovs5e TT}V (rdXTriyyd (frrjcri, Track. 680 yXuxwi-8 dirb jut,epovs T (34\fi. It appears there-

fore, as has been pointed out, that 2i/ceX^has dropped out in the second entry of

Hesychius. It is a curious coincidencethat the weapon with which Odysseusblinded the Cyclops is described as /j.oxXbs

(i 382 etc.).

458i p,v Ti? ovv efeicriz' el Se

^,77, Xeye.

458 Schol. Horn. A 135 in Cramer,anecd. Par. ill p. 5, 3 and p. 274, 31

SoÔKXrjs ev dxavOoirXriyi'el /btlr...Xye.'

Eustath. //. p. 66, 34 Kal Soô/cX^s'

el i^v

The line is quoted as an illustration of

the idiom (7ra/>dXeti/'is : Rutherford, An-

notation^ p. 319) according to which the

apodosis to the first of two alternative

suppositions is suppressed, because the

speaker passes on to emphasize the

second: 'if any one is going out (well

P. II.

and good); if not, speak.' The text ofthe Iliad runs : dXX' e /aev 5t6<rowi yepas.. .

el d Ke [AT) <J}(i)(riv, tyw d Kev avTbs

?Xw/iai. There are many examples in

Attic: see Kuehner-Gerth II 485, Good-win, 482, Shilleto on Thuc. i. 82,Herwerden in Mnem. XIX 338 ff. Cf.

Antiph. 6. 23 el /j.ev aury epbiT&vTi TdXrjdij

doKoiev Xtyew, el de /mrf, ^roi/tos TJ etcdiSovai.

Ar. Thesm. 536 el fjv ovv ns ZaTtv 'el de

/&/!, 7j/j.ei5...diro\f/iX<J}<rofJt.v.

8

Z000KAEOYS

459

eyyus OVTMV

459 Phot. lex. p. 400, 6 and Suid.

irapovffla...Kal eirl TOV irapeivai 5 rdffcre-

rcu, ws Kal iv rots N/Trrpots 2iO<j>OK\eovs

This is not, as might have been thought,an instance of abstract for concrete

(= ot 6771)5 6Vres Kal -jrapdvres), like Eur.

Ale. 606 dvdp&v <bepaib)v ev/j.evr)s Trapovffia.

For it is coupled in the lexicons with

Thuc. i. 128 RvdvTiot> yap e\wv rrj wpo-

rtpa irapovvia. Ribbeck suggested that

the words applied to the crisis, when

Telegonus arrived, and Odysseus invited

assistance from the neighbours.

460

vv 8*vvv

yv

OVT e/c ovre

46O. 1 K Meineke : els cod. Seguer. 2 7idXwi' Nauck : 71;... cod., yvvr] coni.

Montfaucon, fj.vx&v Conington, yvwv A. Gennadius, yrjptis TIS cur ireiaeiev {

vel irpo<f>TJTis...K do/j-uv 0drts temptabat Meineke

46O Steph. Byz. p. 247 sq.

...Xtyercu Kal AwSwr, rjsTrjv ytviKT]v So0o-

(fr. 455).

The full gloss AwSu^Tj is preserved in

a single MS: the quotations from Soph.are not found in the epitome.2 yvc&ft)V is a certain correction, for

this word is specially applied to the sanc-

tuary at Delphi. Thus we find Horn.

h. Ap. 396 x/3etwi/ *K Sd^vijs yvd\<i)v &JTO

Hapvrjaoio, as in Hes. Theog. 499, Aris-

tonous paean 37 (Smyth's Greek Melic

Poets, p. 527), where the reference appearsto be to the natural features of the

district. But in Eur. Ion 76 d\\' es

da<t>v<j)8r) yva\a ftrjffo/Jiai rd5e, id. 220,Phoen. 237 Trapd yU,e(r6 /u.0aXa 7âXa ôiôvthe precincts of the temple are clearlydescribed, and it has been inferred that

the name is applied to the temple as

a whole owing to the unique character ofthe adurov at Delphi, which was actuallya pit or cavern in the earth (Bayfield).' Eur. Andr. 1092 f. 6s dtao-Teixei Qeov

\

Xpvvou yifj,ovra yva\a, Orjcravpovs fipor&v

(at Delphi), where the words vabv eKirep-irai 6t\uv, just after (1095), show that

the reference is to chambers excavatedin the rock (perhaps subterranean) not to

natural valleys or ravines'

(J.).

461

/ecu TOV zv AwSoiz't iravdov

461 dalfjiov ffv\oyovfj.evov cod. : corr. Bloch

461 Johann. Alex, de ace. p. 12, 3wi/f 6 (1. ws) 2o0o/cX^s 'Odvcr-

Tr. :' make the god at Dodona to lose

his praises.' The participle is supple-

mentary : cf. Eur. .Phoen. 1171 TOUTO

Tratiffavres voaovv (n.). The words seemto belong to an occasion when the pre-diction of the oracle has apparently beenfalsified

;that is to say, when Odysseus

knows that he has received a mortal

hurt, but supposes that it has been in-

flicted by a stranger. See IntroductoryNote. Nauck needlessly suggested the

alteration of iravvov to iraffi : for the

position of the predicative participle in

that case see Kuehner-Gerth I 624.Blaydes conj. K\rfffov.

The quotation is preserved by Joannes

Philoponus, the well-known commentatoron Aristotle, who lived in the age of

Justinian. AwSwvi: fr. 455 (n.).

OAYIIEYI AKANOOTTAHE MAINOMENOZ 115

OAYIIEYI MAINOMENOZ

The story of Odysseus feigning madness in order to avoidthe obligation of joining the Trojan expedition is not mentionedin Homer, but his reluctance to take part in it is implied in

o> 115. In that passage the shade of Agamemnon recalls to

Amphimedon, one of the suitors of Penelope, how he and Mene-laus had stayed in his house, when visiting Ithaca for the purposeof persuading Odysseus to sail with them. The scholiast

explains that Odysseus did not hold back through cowardice,but because his wisdom enabled him to gauge the serious natureof the struggle. The ultimate source of Sophocles' play is to befound in the Cypria, which Proclus abstracts as follows (EGFp. 18): KOI fiaiveaOaL TrpocrTTOLtjcrdêvov rbv 'QSvcrcrea eirl TW

fjurj

6e\euv (TvaTparevf-aOai e^Mpacrav, Yla\a/jiij8ov^ VTroOefjuevou rbv

vlov Ti)\/jiaxov eVl fcoXa&iv 1

eâpirao-avre^. Apollodorus (epit.

3. 7), who may be following the same original,' is somewhat more

explicit, stating that Palamedes detected the fraud by seizingthe child Telemachus from his mother's arms and threateningto slay him with a drawn sword. Further details are given byHyginus (fab. 95). Odysseus had learnt from an oracle that, if

he went to Troy, he would return destitute and without his com-

panions after the lapse of twenty years. Accordingly, he

pretended to Agamemnon and Menelaus that hevyas mad,

assumed the sick man's head-gear2

,and yoked a horse and an

ox to the plough. Palamedes perceived the imposture, and,

taking the child Telemachus from his cradle, put him beneaththe plough with the words :

'

Lay aside your sham and join the

league.' Lucian (de dom. 30) describes a picture of the ploughing-scene, which agreed with the version of Apollodorus in repre-

senting Palamedes as drawing his sword upon the child.

Philostratus (her. n. 2), who says that the story is mentioned

by many poets, agrees with Hyginus as to the constitution of

the team, but Lycophr. 8156"., and Tzetzes in loc., substitute

an ass for the horse. Eustathius (Od. p. 1696, 20) and Lucian

(I.e.) merely state that different animals were yoked together.Various allusions to the subject show that its popularity was

chiefly due to the tragic poets : see Lucian de salt. 46, Aristfoef.8. 145 i

a 26. Cicero, indeed, implies (off. 3. 97) that it was their

1 Welcker's ^TTI KdXovffiv, accepted by Kinkel and Wagner, is hardly a satisfactorycorrection.

2Pileus, which no doubt represents the Greek wiXldiov : cf. Plat. rep. 406 D, Dem.

19. 255, Plut. Sol. 8. R. Schone (Hermes vi 125 f.) understood that wet bandageswere intended.

82

n6 I000KAEOYI

invention, and quotes a speech of Ajax apparently from the

Armorum indicium of Pacuvius or Accius (fab. inc. XXXI R.)

taunting Ulysses with breaking his oath 1. Sophocles himself

referred to the story in Phil. 1025 Kalroi av fjuev K\o7rf) re /cavdy/crj

>y6t9 eVXet? a/* avrols, much in the same way as it was men-tioned in Aesch. Ag. 832. There is thus ample evidence that

the legend was current in the early part of the fifth century, but

it is improbable that it formed the subject of the Palamedes of

Aeschylus2

.

We have no means of ascertaining how Sophocles dramatized

the material, or whether his version was the same as that epito-mized by Hyginus.

462

Trdvr olcrOa, TTOLVT eXe

yap 'ApyoXicrrt

462.tyvv vel

(p.vdov ...

Dindorf: ffvrrtfuretf cod.|

/j,ij(}ov$ yap'

A/ryoXiaTi... <pi\ei Herwerden,Blaydes), ffwrt/Jivci ftpaxv Papageorgiu

Weckleiu

462 Schol. Find. Isthm. 6. 87 (rbv

'A.pydwv Tpbirov \ dprffferaL irq. K' h ftpaxt-

crrots) ff^vTO/j-oi. de ov fj.bvov Aei/cwj'es, d\Xd

/cat 'A/ryetbt. So0o/cX^s '05vcr<Tei (JLCILVO-

2 I have accepted Dindorfs

v<i)v :

' my speech is brief, making a short

cut in Argive fashion.' The confusion

of the terminations of the infinitive and

the participle is common (e.g. 0.7\ 1170).

J. writes :

' Can the text be defended ?

Perhaps thus : fjivdos yap fipaxvs, for mystory is a short one, (vcrTt) 'ApyoXurri

ffwrtuvetv, if I may use Argive brevity.

Cf. Hdt. i. 24 ws /J.tv vvv iv

d-r)\&aai, trav etprjrai (followed by ws 5e

iv'

if the infin. is attached to

the meaning ought to be ' the speech is

too short for abbreviation'

: see Plat.

Menex. 239 B 6 xp vo * />%$ dîws

diriyri<Ta<r0ai. Find. Nem. 10. 19 ftpa-X^

/iot (7T6ua Trdi'r' dvayr)<ra<r6ai. Or, if it

is parenthetical after the model of <rvve-

\6vri et7T?j/ or ffwro^Tarov elirelv (Alexisfr. 245, 4, II 386 K.), we get the absurdresult :

' to speak briefly, my speech is

brief.' For Argive brevity see on fr. 64.

'Ap-yoXurrl resembles ^KvOiarl fr. 473,fr. 827, Awpiari Ar. Eg. 989,

. 15. 92, j3apfiapi<TTl

Ar. fr. 79, I 412 K. corresponding to thevbs. 'ApyoXlfa, @ap/3apifa, Aw/ai^w, S/cu-

Ql<*>; Blomfield's rule given by Jebb onO. C. 1251 cannot be supported (e.g.

d/JLaxel is perfectly sound as the loc. of

a/iaôs), and at best did not explain thedata. But his note (glossar. in Aesch.Prom. 216) is still worth consulting for

its collection of facts. There is no doubtthat T was often due to the false analogyof consonantal stems (Smyth in A. J. P.VI 419 ff.), and Monro thinks that a newadverbial ending -ri may have grown upin the same way (H. G. 2

no).

1 Cf. Ov. Met. 13. 36 ff.

2 The contrary is sometimes stated on the authority of Welcker, but see p. 132.

OAYIIEYZ MAINOMENOZ 117

463

KpeKTOLCTL VOJJLOLS

463 dpcKToiffL cod. (yp.

uvrai

ait)\ov

463 Hesych. II p. 3-23 6peKToi<rt

v6fji.ois' dvri TOV rpo~x,aioLS (rpo^cuos cod. :

rpax^cri vulgo). Soô/cX^s '05u<j-<rei fj.ai-

vo^vif. frtoi 8e KpeKTolffi (icpeKTois cod.).There can hardly be any doubt that

KpCKTofrri, first preferred by L. Dindorf, is

right. Kp^Kd) is strictly to strike a stringedinstrument with the plectrum, as con-

trasted with \fsd\\w, to use the ringers for

the same purpose. Thus KpeKTola-i vo/j.ois

should apply to a strain sung to the

accompaniment of the lyre. Cf. Ap.Rhod. 4. 908 (Orpheus with his lyremakes music to drown the song of the

Sirens) 6'0/>' &/j.v8ts K\oveovros iri(3pofj,-

A. P. 9. 584dKoval

fv Kiddpq.>5 JU.OL ô/)5a^ TrXa/cr pov d?re-

But uptud) is sometimes equiva-lent to t/'dXXw : Telest. fr. 5 roi 5'

J'OtS TTr)KTt8(i)V \f/0.\fJ,OlS Kp^KOV I

tifj.vov, A. P. 9. 433. See also on fr. 238.And it is used even for the music of the

flute : Ar. Av. 682 d\X' w Ka\\i/36av Kpt-Kovff'

|

av\bv. Aesch. Cho. 818 6/j.ov

KpeKrbv yorjruv v6/Jioi> is unfortunately

corrupt. Without the context we cannotdetermine the exact force which Sophoclesgave to K/>e/cT6s.

464

464 Hesych. II p. 79 e/j.irepys

pos.

As fyureipos is for /ui.-irep-ilo-s,

appears to postulate the stem e/i

On the other hand, the Attic Tr^/octs corre-

sponds to the Ionic ireipap and the

Lesbian tr^ppara (i.e. Trcp-fara etc.) :

Brugmann, Comp. Gr. I p. 146 E. tr.

fj.Trepr]s is entirely isolated, unless the

Alexandrian eytoreaôs is to be taken

into account. The latter word seems to

have no analogous formations in the -mo(-rnmo-) class, and, if it has any claim to

independence, efjLTrtipa.fj.os must be due to

the influence of Zfjnreipos. For ÛTrfya/Aos :

e'/A7rep??s Lobeck (Path. Pro/, p. 156) com-

pares iTa.fj.6s : tri/js. But the analogybreaks down, since trrjs does not belongto the -ea-- stems. Blaydes compares

465

465r)fj.a\d\f/ai. cod.

465 Hesych. II

Kpuif/ai, d<pavi<rai.

p. 276

It seems that we must either correct

the lemma to afj,a\d\{/a.i, or, as is more

probable, restore (with Nauck and M.Schmidt) ^/m.d\a.\f/v ticpvêv, 7)<pdvia.Ellendt mentions a third possibility, that

the gloss should be rewritten as

âvia-at. Cf. Phot. lex. p. 68, 3 rj/nd-

\airTev ZKpviTTev, ijtpdvi^fv. The wordonly occurs elsewhere in Lycophr. 33ov Trore yvdOots | Tpircwos 7)fj.d\a\f/ Kdp-X<*-pos KIJUV, unless Weil's dfJ,a.\a,irTOfji.{vav

is right in Aesch. Prom. 929. For theform dyuaXdrrw see Lobeck, Rhem. p. 250.

466

466 Hesych. n p. 324(j)V\\o\oyeiv, evdov<nav,

Evpnrldrjs At/ciym'y (fr. 478) /ecu

'Odv<rcrei fiatvo/jtvtj).

0piaiv was derived, no doubt in-

correctly, from 0/Koj/: hence the gloss

(f>v\\o\oyeiv. Cf. Etym. M. p. 455, 45

0pia' Kvplws TO. TTJS O-VKTJS <j>v\\a' Kal

0pidîv, rb <j>v\\o\o"ye'iv'

8rj\oi 8 Kal TO

evdovffLafeiv. But 0ptdeiv'

to be in-

spired'

or '

possessed'

is connected with

a group of words which show clearly the

same radical idea. Thus 0pla<ris is de-

fined by Suid. s.v. Bplafiftos as-f]

TU>V

iroirjTwv /.lavia. 0pla/j.(3o$, a hymn sungin procession in honour of Dionysus,

belongs to the same root, but is influenced

by the analogy of ta.fj.f3os. Probablydi6vpafj.ôs should be added, as formedfrom *5i-#/)a/ij3os, whatever is the originof the first syllable: see Sturtevant in

Class. Phil, v 330. Here belong also

the rare words 6pi<r<reiv and 0pia<rtiai : see

for the former Erotian p. 77, 5 0pl<rffiv

fji.aiv0'0ai, u>s Kal'

Api<rTo<f)dvr)5 6 ypafj.fj.a-

TLKOS (fr. 69 Nauck). dpLao-fiv dt cpaffl TO

KaTo. ^trxV i<rTa<r0ai, and for the latter,

which is glossed by [JLavTeveadai., Bekk.anecd. p. 265, 15, Etym. M. p. 455, 42.But the most interesting member of the

group is dpiai, the name given to pebblesu*ed in divination (at fiavTLKal ^TJÔI) :

see Frazer on Pausan. 7. 25. 10. Theywere personified as the Thriae, andlocalized on Parnassus as the nurses of

Apollo : for a full account of them see

Allen and Sikes, Homeric Hymns^p. 312. Hesych. n p. 325 gives 9ptwas eopTrj 'AtroXXwvos, and the same origin

may be assumed for the Thriasian plainat Eleusis (this was where Athena threwdown the dptal, when she was told that

they belonged to Apollo: Etym. M.,Bekk. anecd.}, and the Thriasian gate at

Athens (Plut. Pericl. 30). For frOpidfasee on fr. 544. Blaydes's proposal to

substitute Qvpffdfav (Ar. Lys. 1313) is

misconceived.

467

467 /may/j-ov Schleussner: â.yvov (sic] cod.

467 Phot. lex. p. 240, 10 fj-ayvov.

So0o/cX?7S 'Odvcrffei' rbv fJityav. rbv dwo-

fidcraovTa /ecu Ka6aipoi>Ta. This obscure

gloss is to some extent elucidated bya comparison with Hesych. in p. 62

fjLayfJ.6v' Tb Kaddp<riov. aTro/u.d<T<reiv yap

\tyoixnv OTO.V TrepiKa6aip(d<n rous ^vox^-ov-

/j.tvovs TLvl iradei. The presence of

dTTO/MLffffeLv in both passages can hardlybe accidental, and, although /may/Jibs is

not such a formation as we should expectfor the nornen agentis, ftayvov is altogether

unintelligible. So also Hesych. in p. 61

fjiaytSes'

als dirofJi.dTTova'L Kal Kadalpovat.Ellendt was probably right in ejecting

TOV /j.tyay as a Byzantine interpolation,

suggested by magnus. Barker had cor-

rected the text of Photius to fjidyov...Tov

(jiayta, and Naber, who agrees as to the

lemma, thinks that the reference is to

O. T. 387 and that 'OcWo-et is an error

for Ot'5/7To5t. For dw6(jiayfj,a see on fr.

34. Blaydes conj. V.Q,KTT]V. It is im-

possible to determine whether the fr.

belongs here or to the NiTrrpa. Dindorf

assigned it to the latter, but the subject-matter rather suggests the 'O8v(r<revs

fj.aiv6fji.evos.

It is perhaps worth observing that

schol. N on Horn. O 482 says rov Be

KadaipovTa Kal ayviTrjv i-Xeyov, but ayviTyvcan hardly have become /mayvov.

OAYIIEYI MAINOMENOZ OIKAHZ 119

OIKAHI

Pollux 10. 39 and schol. V Ar. Eq. 498 quote the lodes of

Sophocles, but no such person as locles is known to the mytho-graphers. Hence Welcker, following a suggestion of Brunck,and bringing frs. 313 and 1125 into the same connexion, inferred

that lodes was a mistake for Iphides. But, whereas Brunckdeclared for the brother of Heracles, Welcker agreed withBoeckh (Tr. Gr. princ. p. 129) that Iphiclus the son of Phylacus

occasionally known as Iphicles was meant. The story of

Iphiclus and the brothers Melampus and Bias is told in Horn.X 286 297, and was well known in later times

;see e.g. Prop.

2. 3. 5 1 ff. But the constant recurrence of the form "I^t/cXo? is

against Welcker's view, and the argument which he draws fromthe schol. on Apoll. Rh. i. 54 is based on an error. Dindorfadvocates an alternative suggestion of Brunck that 'To/eXr;? wasan error for Qlx\rj$, and supports it by showing that the same

corruption occurs in Eur. Suppl. 925, schol. Horn. X 326, andDiod. 4. 68. The mistake is curiously persistent, occurring at

least five times in the MSS of Apollodorus (i. 68, III. 3, 60, 63,

87), and probably also in schol. Eur. Phoen. 133 Ilept/itota? 7779

'ITTTTOVOV rov 'lo/cXeov? rov ^'Acrra/cov /ere. Assuming then that

the title lodes is due to corruption, it is difficult to resist the

inference that it should be replaced by Oecles. Welcker answersthat nothing is known of Oecles making it likely that he wouldhave given his name to a tragedy. That is true

;but it is also

possible that he was a character in the Alcmaeon (cf. Apollod. 3.

87), or perhaps even that he was represented as the companionof Heracles on his expedition against Laomedon (Apollod. 2.

134). Ahrens makes an alternative suggestion, that the subjectof the play was the appeal of Alcmaeon to his grandfather for

assistance and his rejection by him; but, even if the text of

Apollodorus warrants the inference drawn from it, the material

is scarcely sufficient for more than an episode.

468

rvXela

468 Pollux 10. 39 xai rvX-rj 8 Trap* to be an erroneous repetition than part of

Eu7r6Xi5t foriv iafrvTi kv rols K6\aiv (fr. the text of Sophocles. id. 7. 191

170, I 505 K.). d\\a /cat irapa Soô/cXet 2o0o/cX^s 5' t<jyr)'

K\tvopa<f>r)s ruX/a.'

cv T< 'Io/fXei XtyovTi [aXXa KCU]'

\ivop- Xivoppcujnj rvXeia : linen-woven cush-

pa<f>rj ruXela.' Fritzsche rejected the ions. rvX-rj was used in the KOIVJ for a

words dXXd Kai, which are more likely cushion, but the Atticists insist that the

120 IO<t>OKAEOYI

proper Attic word was Kv<paX\ov.

Moeris, p. 201, 20 KV<f>a\ov arrows,

~r6\rj e\\T)i>iKws. Phrynichus (CLI R,)

Ti>\r)i>, ft /ecu eupois TTOU, <ri> KVf<j>a.\ov \eye.

.Hesychius is more obscure (n p. 497):

Kve<t>a.\ov' Tu\rj. r\v Se r)/ui.eis rti\r)v, drri-

KOI rvXeiov. But his meaning appears to

be (so Lobeck, Phryn. p. 174) that,

though Kvt(t>a\\ov is the general term,rv\iov was sometimes found in Attic.

For the occasional appearance of rv\r) in

the same sense Pollux quotes Eupolis

(I.e.) and Antiphanes in the $awv (fr. 214,II 104 K.), and cites the compoundrvXv^dvT-rjs from Hyperides (fr. 125 K.).

The further statement that T^\TJ in Eupoliswas an lonicism must be understood to

mean that an old-fashioned word some-

times held its place. At any rate, 7-^X77

in the sense of cushion was not peculiarto that dialect, for it is so used twice in

Sappho (frs. 50, 81). Herodian irepl

fjiov. Xe. p. 39, 12, who quotes these

passages, insists as strongly as the Atti-

cists that Kv(<t>o.\\ov was the correct Attic

term, and adds the words o/ioW/uws r<

Tre/oiexo/x^y TT> irepi^xo^ffav, i.e. the

wrapping is called by the same name as

is properly given to the stuffing. Thuswe conclude that Kv(f>a\\ov originallymeant flock (Plat. fr. 97, I 627 K. wo-rep

KVf<pd\\<i)v T) TrrtXwj' aecra.yiJ.tvo'i), and

subsequently ousted the older TV\TI as

a current description, although at a still

later date it passed out of fashion, so

that r5X77 again prevailed. The adjective

\ii>oppa.(j>Ti may be illustrated by Ar. fr. 19,I 397 K. Kol vr) A' K TOV Sw/iarfou yf

v($v <ptpe | Kv<pa\\ov afMa Kal 7r/3ocr/ce0ct-

Xcuoi' r&v \ivCov. Pollux (10. 40),

quoting the last line, explains that the

intention is to distinguish linen cushions

from those covered with leather or woollenstuffs.

469'

Wi/caret, vow TOV

469 Ar. Eq. 498 'dXX' t9i...4p&v ':

on which the schol. remarks, irapd rb

~2iO<f>bn\eiov % 'IoK\ovs (V: Q 'loXdof al.).

It is not clear from the schol. 's commenthow much of the text is taken or parodiedfrom Sophocles. dXX' l'9i \a.ipa>v occurs

also in Nub. 510 and Pac. 729 at the

opening of the Ko/mndriov, where the actors

are dismissed from the stage: so Vesp.

1009 dXX' IT âtpovrfs STTOL f3oi\t<rdj

,

Ach. 1143 ?T 77 xa'

iPOVTS' û^ similar

formulae of farewell or dismissal are

found in tragedy: Track. 819 dXX' ep-Tr^rw

KOI

Eur. Phoen. 921 xa'

LP<J}V ^' '

v

yap ffdjv fj.e 5el fj.avTv/j.dTti)v, Ale. 811

Xalpuv idj '

ij/uuv deo"jroT&v /x.Aei /ca/cd,

Hipp. 1440 x.a^-Povffa Ka

"

i ff" <TTeW -

Shortly afterwards (Eq. 548) Aristophanesrecurs to the same phrasing : 'iv 6 71-0177x779

dTTtT? xaipwv, |

Kara vow -rrpdâs, | 0at5pos

\dfj.iroi>Ti /jLtTWTTii). Kara vovv, = ex animi

sententia, is found also in O.C. 1768dXX' el rdd' ?x l KOLT - vo^v Keiv<f. Kara

yv&fjiyv is more common, but is not so

used by Sophocles: see the comm. on

O.T. 1087.

OINEYZ

The evidence for this title is meagre and inconclusive : see

the notes on frs. 321, 732 and 26. The popularity of the subjectthe misfortunes of Oeneus in his old age affords perhaps

some slight presumption that it was dramatized by Sophocles,as well as by Euripides (TGF p. 536), Chaeremon (ib. p. 786),and Philocles (Suid.). Cf. Timocles fr. 6, 16 (II 453 K.)

yepwv T? arvêl, Kare/jiaOev TOV Qlvea. Ov. Her. 9- r 53

OIKAHI OINOMAOI 12*

sedet Agrius alto :\

Oenea deserturn nuda senecta premit. Thevariations in the story of his restoration may be seen in Apollod.i. 77 79, as compared with Hygin./^. 175, but cannot be dis-

cussed here.

470

Zev? 17X10)77-05

47O Philodem. de piet. p. 22 G. is quoted on fr. 26.

OINOMAOI

Out of seven fragments ascribed to this play five are quotedfrom the Oenomaus, one from the Hippodamia, and one without

any title. Most critics rightly treat the reference to the Hippo-damia as an error on the part of Stobaeus or his authority,

affording yet another instance of the substitution of the name of

one of the principal characters for the usual title of the play

(Introduction, i). But this evidence is not such as to requireus to follow Nauck in giving to the play the alternative titles

CKVo/iao? TI 'iTTTToS/ifjieta1

;the cases of the Nausicaa and the

Niptra are not analogous. On the other hand, it is improbableeither that Sophocles handled the same material twice, or that

the title Hippodamia related to the story of Chrysippus.Ribbeck's conjecture

2is equally unlikely. He concludes from

frs. 471, 473, and 477 that the Oenomaus was a satyr-play, but

that there was also a tragedy entitled Hippodamia, to which onlyfrs. 472 and 474 belong.

The story of Pelops and Oenomaus is most fully related in

Apollod. epit. 2. 3 9. Oenomaus, king of Pisa, had a daughterHippodamia, and either because he was himself enamoured of

her, as some would have it, or owing to an oracle which foretold

that her husband would kill him, prevented her betrothal byputting her suitors to death. For he made it a condition of

assent to his daughter's marriage that the candidate for her handmust take her with him on his chariot, and endeavour to escapeto the Isthmus of Corinth

;and that he himself should be at

1 That is to say, a double title does not appear to have been in vogue in the

learned world. It has been shown that double titles were not due to the author

(Introd. i).2 Rom. Trag. p. 442. Kramer, de Pel. fab. pp. 17 23, also held that the

Oenomaus was a satyr-play, but I do not know for what reasons. The reference to

the Kbpdaj; in Pausan. 6. 22. r does not help Ribbeck's case. So also Weizsacker in

Roscher in 773, who relies on fr. 473.

122 10<J>OKAEOYZ

liberty to kill the suitor, if he overtook him. Having armourand a chariot given to him by Ares, Oenomaus was successful in

destroying many aspirants1

,and nailed the skulls of his victims

in a row against the wall of his palace a warning to future

candidates. At length Pelops appeared, whose beauty so fired

the passion of Hippodamia that she implored Myrtilus, the son

of Hermes and charioteer of Oenomaus, who was himself in

love with her and ready to do her a favour, to assist her lover

against her father. Myrtilus, accordingly, caused the chariot of

Oenomaus to be overturned by omitting to insert the pins in the

naves of the wheels;and the king, unable to extricate himself

from the reins, was mortally injured, or (according to others)slain by Pelops. Recognizing that he had been cheated,Oenomaus with his dying breath invoked a curse upon Myrtilus.

Pelops proceeded on his journey with Hippodamia and Myrtilus.But on a certain occasion, when Pelops had left his car in order

to fetch a draught of water for Hippodamia, Myrtilus attemptedto violate her. Hearing of this from his wife, Pelops, being then

in the neighbourhood of the promontory of Geraestus, threw

Myrtilus into the sea which was subsequently called Myrtoan.Then Myrtilus, in his turn, cursed the race of Pelops as he fell.

Pelops travelled as far as the Ocean-stream, and, having been

purified by Hephaestus, returned to Pisa, and succeeded to the

sovereignty of Oenomaus.Before the commencement of this narrative Apollodorus

(epit. 2. 3) relates that Poseidon gave to his favourite Pelopsa winged car, which could pass over the sea without wetting its

axle. This statement corresponds with the account of Pindar

(Ol. I. 70 ff.),in which the victory of Pelops appears to be the

immediate consequence of the gift of the car (v. 86) : TOV

\

ebcorcev &i<f)pov re ^pvcreov irrepol-

17T7TOVS. 6\V 8' OlvOfjLClOV ftlciV\ TTCtpOeVOV T6 (TVVeVVOV. ThuS

there would seem to have been an early version of the story in

which Pelops succeeded by grace of Poseidon and the virtue ofhis magic car, so that the connivance of Myrtilus was not

required2

. It should be added that nothing is known as to the

appearance of the story in the epics, except that the suitors of

Hippodamia were catalogued in the Hesiodic Eoeae*. Still,

it is certain that Myrtilus was at an early date a prominentfigure in the legend ; for, apart from the evidence which connectshim with Elis, the narrative of Apollodorus coincides in several

1 Find. 01. i. 79 mentions the number as thirteen. Others gave twelve : Apollod.epit. i. 5. The lists in the scholia to Pindar and in Pausan. 6. 21 10 came from theHesiodic Eoeae (EGF\>* 141)*

2 Cf. Dio Chrys. 64. 1 4.3 See note supra.

OINOMAOI 123

respects with the account attributed to Pherecydes (FHG I 94)

by the scholiasts on Soph. El. 504 and A poll. Rhod. I. 752.The incidental allusions to Myrtilus in Soph. EL 504 and Eur.

Or. 990 treat him as the original cause of the misfortunes of the

Pelopidae ;and this is sufficient to show that he must have

played an important part in the tragedies which dealt specificallywith the fate of Oenomaus. Euripides also wrote an Oenomaus,which was probably produced with the Phoenissae in 409

J. It

was thus later than the present play, which was certainly earlier

than 4I42

;but the fragments of Euripides give no indication of

the character of his plot. Further, since we cannot tell whetherAccius imitated Sophocles or Euripides in his Oenomaus, noinference can be drawn from the Latin fragments.

It becomes pertinent to enquire how Sophocles contrived the

intervention of Myrtilus. In the account given by Hyginus(fab. 84) the love-motive is entirely absent. There Pelops is

frightened by the failures of his predecessors, and bribes Myrtilus

by promising him half of the kingdom as a reward for his

assistance. Subsequently, when returning homewards, he beganto fear the disgrace of acknowledging the plot, and, wishing to

avoid the consequences of keeping his word to Myrtilus, threwhim into the sea. Other variations are extant. Thus in Pausan.6. 20. 17 it is said that Myrtilus acted so as to cause the horses

of Oenomaus to shy. This is simply an inference from the

epithet TapagiTTTros, a title applied to Myrtilus, when worshippedas a hero in Elis. In Pausan. 8. 14. II Myrtilus is a lover of

Hippodamia who was bribed by the promise that he should

enjoy her company for one night. But, when subsequently hereminded Pelops of his oath, he was thrown overboard. Thereference to an oath induced Ribbeck 3 to make use of the storyfor the elucidation of fr. 472. The grossness of the details

makes us loth to assign it to Sophocles, although the allusion

in itself agrees well enough with the requirements of the supposedsituation. It should be observed, however, that in the accountof Apollodorus no bribe is mentioned

;and the oath may have

been exacted from Myrtilus by Hippodamia as a guarantee that

he would perform his undertaking. In any attempt to discover

the main outlines of the plot of Sophocles, the importance of

fr. 474 must not be overlooked. This agrees so remarkably well

with the words of Apollodorus4,that we may safely reject the

1 See Introduction to my edition, p. xxxiii.2 Fr. 476 is a quotation by Aristophanes in the Aves.3

P- 434-4

Spit. 2. 6 ou (sc. IIAoTros) TO /cdXXoj I5ov<ra i) 'Iinro5dfJi.eia

The same point comes out clearly in schol. Eur. Or. 990.

124 !0<t>OKAEOY!

version of Hyginus, and infer that Hippodamia took the chief

part in persuading Myrtilus to assist Pelops.Pisa was undoubtedly the scene of the action, as was also the

case in the play of Accius (frs. IV and X). Frs. 47 r and 473

suggest that soon after his arrival, which is perhaps referred to

in fr. 475, Pelops was reminded of the gruesome fate which hadovertaken former suitors. Fr. 476 is part of a chorus sung duringthe progress of the contest, from which we may perhaps infer

that, as in Apollodorus, the course extended from Elis to

Corinth.

It is impossible to say whether the sequel was announced bya messenger, or whether Pelops and Hippodamia returned in

person. It will be observed that Geraestus is mentioned not

only by Apollodorus and in other late texts 1

,but also by Euri-

pides2

,as the scene of Myrtilus' death. Our authorities have

not been careful to explain what Pelops was doing in Euboea,or how he got there. But, if we recognize that his possession of

the magic chariot, which moved as easily over sea as over land,is implied in the whole of Apollodorus' narrative, the solution of

the difficulty is brought a step nearer. Myrtilus was throwninto the sea, as they were passing along the coast of Euboea in

the course of a journey across the Aegean. And when Apollo-dorus adds that Pelops was purified by Hephaestus before hereturned to Pisa, we may conjecture that Lemnos was the goaltowards which they were travelling. There is clearly a reminis-

cence of the voyage across the sea in Pausan. 8. 14. u, when

Myrtilus is said to have been thrown overboard;but some

rationalist has substituted the ship for the car. The introduction

1 Tzetz. Lycophr. 156, schol. Eur. Or. 990.2 Eur. Or. 988 iroravbv IACV diwy/ma irutXwv

\ Te6pnnroj3dfj.ovi (TroXy Ile'Xoi/' ore|

ireXdyecri diedifipevffe MupTiXou <f)6vov \

diK&v es old/J.a irfrvrov, \ XevKOKVfJ.oo'iv\ irpbs

Tepaia-riais \TTOVT'IWV aa\wv

\ -^6<ri.v apfiareixras. The text, which has not always been

understood, should be thus explained :' Ever since P. in his four-horsed car guided

across the waves the swift course of his winged steeds,' etc. Even Weil, right in

other respects, misconceives the object of the journey. The winged car was originally,as we have seen, sufficient in itself to save Pelops: Ares was no match for Poseidonon the sea. But the introduction of Myrtilus obscured the reason for the traditional

belief that Pelops had crossed the sea in his chariot. Hence other reasons for

a sea-journey were invented and clumsily added to the revised legend. Still later,the existence of the magical powers was forgotten or discredited (see e.g. Palaeph. 30).To the evidence already quoted concerning the chariot add Philostr. imag. i. 16. 2 rbd' apfAa i<ra rrj yrj TTJV ddXarrav 5ta<rre%et, KO.I oi>5 pavis aw' avTrjs injdqL s TOV aôva,

/3e/3cu'a ok KOI rrj yy toiKvla virbKCLTai rots tTTTrots, ib. i. 29. i. Cic. Tusc. 2. 67 equiPelopis illi Neptunii qui per undas cttrrus suspenses rapuisse dicitntur.

Schol. Hom. B 104 says distinctly SiafiaivbvTwv yap avr&v 5ta TOV Alyalov. Various com-

binations, which cannot here be discussed, are made by Wilamovvitz in Herm. xvin7172; Robert, Bild u. Lied, p. 18735; Tiimpel in Roscher n 3315; Weizsacker, ib. in

771. The latter refers to an aryballos from Capua, where Pelops and Hippodamia are

represented travelling over the sea in a four-horsed car, while Myrtilus falls backwardsfrom it into the water.

OINOMAOZ 125

of Hephaestus as a god capable of purifying from blood-guiltwill occasion some surprise, and is possibly to be explained byhis occasional appearance as a sun-god

1. At any rate the

mention of the Ocean-stream is appropriate in this connexion, as

may be seen from Horn. 5 402.The Oenomaus was one of the most successful plays of

Sophocles, as may be gathered from the fact that it was still

acted at the rural Dionysia in the middle of the fourth century,when Aeschines the orator appeared in the title-role. HenceDem. 18. 1 80 o*> eV KoXXuro) iror Qlvoâov xatcws eVerpâ?, ib.

242 avTOTpayifcbs 7rl6r)>co<>, dpovpalos OtVo//,ao?. From Hesych. I

p. 287 we learn that the play was the Oenomaus of Sophocles :

apovpalos QlvofAaos' A/y/noo'êz'?;? Alo-îvijv OVTWS e(f)r],tTre* fcara

TTfV ÔOpaV 7TplVOCrT(i)V V7TKpiPTO 2<0(f)OfC\eOVS TOV QlvOfJidOV. In

the anonymous Life of Aeschines (ftioyp. p. 269, 26) we are told

on the authority of Demochares the nephew of Demosthenes,whose credibility is said to be open to doubt, that, when takingthe part of Oenomaus pursuing Pelops, he fell down in a ridicu-

lous manner, and was lifted to his feet by Sannio the choir-

master. From this it has been reasonably inferred by Ribbeck 2

that the start of the race was actually represented in the

orchestra.

471

17 //,> &>5 t Sacra-ova,

YI8

s

0)9 t rero/ce 770,180,

471 . 1 ei /j,ev cod. Apollon. |

clxrei codd. 2 etoWet TCKOI cod. Apollon., rj

cod. Towni. : corr. Cobet

471 Apollonius de pronom. p. 70 B contest by reminding him of the fate of

(ed. Schneider, p. 55, 20), discussing the all his predecessors. Even the mothers

formi', says: d|i07rtVT6re^6sT 62 oô/cX^s of the competitors deceived themselves

/mdprvs x/ 77<

7"ÂteJ/os e'" OtVo/u-dy'ei yuep wtrei with vain hopes each vaunting the

daaaova. ei8w<r etre/cot traiba.' Schol. speed of her own son.'

Townl. Horn. X 410 rivts rb cbcrei dia 1 t was a rare form of the nominative

roG I ypatfrovai Kol da.<rljvov<rtv, avT(*}vv/j.iav belonging to the pronoun of the third

e*5ex6/u.ei'oi rpirov irpoauirov avri TOV cos person, and corresponding to e>cu and

avT-t). d/\\' ov xPVTaL a^TV o TTOI^T^S. <rt). Dionys. Thrac. ap. Bekk. anecd. II

So00(cX7js OiVo/idy'

TI /JLV ijjoei ddffffova T; 640 irpbcwira, TrpwroT'uir&v /j.v yu ffv

5^ &ffiT<;ov TraiSa.' gaTiv o$i> 5l(f>doyyoi> t. It is here equivalent to aur^,'

that she

(i.e. oxrei in Homer's text). (herself).' There is very little evidence

'These verses,' says J.,'

may have for its existence beyond what is quotedbeen spoken, either by the Chorus (as above: Etym. M. p. 615, 6, explainingWelcker supposes, p. 355), or by Oeno- why certain pronouns (aur6s, OUT-OS, and

maus, in dissuading Pelops from the so forth) are called povoTrpdwirot,

1 See Gruppe, Gr. Myth. 1310. Malten, however, regards this as a very late

trait (Pauly-Wissowa vm 339).

126 !0<t>OKAEOY2

OVK ZxOVffi. TTpWTOV Kal 8ei>TpOV TTpOffblTTOV

/card, TT]V a.KO\ovdlav ' TO yap ey&, ffv, OVK

fiffl TOVTWV dXXa rou i. Priscian 13. i.

8 apud Graecos nominativus supradicti

pronorninis, id est ft, rarus est in usu :

cf. Etym. Gud. p. 278, 7. Bekkerwished to restore it in Plat. symp. 175 C,

223 D, and Stallbaum suggested that it

might be concealed in rep. 617 E, but

they have not convinced subsequenteditors. On the other hand, Hermann'sov8' airidrifft iv in Find. Pyth. 4. 36is accepted by Schroeder.

Dindorf, keeping T&OC, held that the

lines were trochaic 77 nkv tbs t Odvffov', -fj5'

wsJr&coi|TrcuSa, and Bergk, in order to get

a senarius, conjectured that we should read

TrcuS' i) fj.ev...T^KOL. Both assume that

If is long, whereas Apollonius p. 71 Aasserts that it is short: cf. Etym. M.

p. 588, 10 TOVTO yap TO t, ws TP'ITOV /3pct-

Xwoêvov Trpjcrwirov, <pe\KVffaTO TO It.

It is better, therefore, to accept Cobet's

TfTOKe (Coll. Crit. p. 191). althoughsomething might be said for T(KTOI.

But Blaydes, who has made the same

proposal, should not have explained it

as the oblique form of ZTIKTOV. Rather

it would represent TIKTU, a registering

present, as in Eur. Bacch. i, Ion 1560.See nn. on Eur. Hel. 568, Hclid. 208,and Gildersleeve, 201. G. Dronke in

Rh. Mus. IX 115 conjectured 77 5' us i

TrcuS' ZTLKTCV. H. proposed but did

not explain rti-oi. [Hartung, p. 123,also prints rôi, but thought that the

words were a conflation of two separate

fragments 77 /x-ev ws IAIV (sic) Odcraova

and r)5' ws fiiv ?re/ce ?rat5a.] Wacker-

nagel (Stttdien zum gr. Per/., Got-

tingen, 1904) objects to Cobet's cor-

rection on the ground that in older GreekTTOKa is not used as a perfect of result,

but means either (i) 'to have been de-

livered of a child, as in Hdt. r. 112;or

(2)' to be a mother,' as in Hes. Op. 591.

T^TOKC is by no means a certain correction,but Wackernagel's rule is probably too

stringent.

[The reference to Draco, p. 106, whichis sometimes quoted in this connexion is

valueless, for it has been established byLehrsand others that the writings passing

by this name are a forgery of the six-

teenth century.]

472

OpKOV Se77/30(TT^VT09

Kareo-Trj- Sicrcra yap <f)v\dcr<TeTai,

re

4T2. 1 Gesner : Trpore^^ros codd.

612,'

6'/>-

472 Stob. Jlor. 27. 6 (ini Hense).KOU. ..

1 irpo<TT0VTOS' the oath is an addi-

tional sanction to the bare word. Cf.

Dem. 22. 22 OTOLV ru i/a\ xpâ-d/xevos

\6yu) /ur) irapd<TX r)TaL """iffTtv wi> \tyei. So

EL 47 ayyeXXe 5' 'opuov (Reiske for opKip)

TrpocrTiêis. See also Jebb on Phil. 942Trpoadeis re X ?Pa Se^tdj'. Track. 255

OpKOV aVTW 7TpOO'{$ai\(i)V .

2 ^vx.ii here is aturnus in the wide

sense, moral and intellectual rather than

physical. For the separation of ^x7?

from the man himself cf. Ant. 175 d^-f]xa -

vov 8e iravTos dvdpbs KU,a.deiv| (j/vx'hv re

Kal <pp6vr)iJ.a Kal yv<Jofj.ir)v (Jebb), ib. 227.

<f>v\a<r<rTl\wv i*e/iîs applies

equally to the ^t\os Xoyos. Observe thatthe inf. is coordinate with an ace. of thedirect object. Cf. Horn. H 203 56s viK-rjv

AtavTi Kal ay\a6v eCôs dpfodai, Ant.

354 Kal avTwofAovs[ opyds eSiSdâro, Kal

|

...ovao^pa favyeiv fieXr]. Philem. fr.

,II 525 K., atrw 5' vyleiav

a&av,| Tp'iTov o

6(pei\eiv /j.T)dei>t. The free use of theinfinitive in such a way that it was re-

garded as suitable to express the direct

object marks an important stage in the

process by which it was ultimately re-

nominalized. The process was completedby the development of the articular

infinitive.

OINOMAOZ 127

The lines are supposed to be spokenby Hippodamia to Myrtilus : see Intro-

ductory Note. With respect to the sanc-

tion imposed by an oath contrast the

famous speech of Brutus in Shaksp. JuLCaes. ii. i. 114 ft"., where I would urge

that' the face of men '

is exactly parallelto 0tXwi> fjie/j.\f/iv

in v. 3, and means (as

Verity has already suggested) the resent-

ment of others at the discovery of atreacherous breach of obligation.

473

473 Athen. 4108, C

vcaXeircu <jj rets xet/ras dwe/uidTTOVT

5e

Hesych.lV p. 52 S/cutfiori %etp6/x,a-

Krpov' oi "ZiKvdai T&V \afj.j3avo/j.evuv ?roXe-

fiiuv (so Person for irb\av uv) rds /ce0aXds

eitdepovTes -tjaav (t'/cS. TO?S dep/macriv Lennep)O.VTL xeipo/xaKT/wf e^pcDiTo. Find. Isth.

3. 92 (4. 54) speaks of Heracles comingto Libya in order to stop Antaeus from

roofing his temple of Poseidon with the

skulls of visitors: the schol. says that in

legend this was the practice of the

Thracian Diomedes, and that Pindar is

peculiar in attaching it to Antaeus; but

that Bacchylides (p. 407 J.) representedEuenus as dealing thus with the un-

successful suitors for his daughter, and

Sophocles Oenomaus: t'Siws TOV 'Avralov

(pTfCTl T&V ]~V<j}V TU)V riTTW/J-^VUV TCHS Kpd-viois epe<j>eiv TOV TOV Hoveid&i'os vabv '

TOVTO yap i<TTopov<ri TOV Opo\a Aiofj.r/8r]v

Troieiv, Ba/c%i>X57?s de E&TJVOV iri TU>V

Map7r77<r<r>7s [Avyo'Tripuv, ot 5e Olvo/naov,

us 2o0j/cX^s. Similarly schol. BD Horn.I 557 and Tzetz. Lycophr. 159 mention

Oenomaus, Antaeus, Euenus, Phorbas,Diomedes, and Cycnus together as havingused the skulls of their conquered victims

to build a temple. For Oenomaus see

also Hygin. fab. 84 ntultis interfectisnovissime Pelops Tantali filius cumvenissc't et capita humana stiper valvas

fixa vidisset eorum qui Hippodaniiam in

uxorem petierant, Ov. Ibis 365 ut iuvenes

pereas, quorum vestigia vultus|

brachia

Pisaeae sustinutre fores. Ov. Fast. i.

557 (of Cacus). Philostr. imag. i. 29. i.

o OiV6âos KTf.lvwv TOI)S TTJS 'iTnrodafjieias

jj.vrjffTripa.s (ppovel TOIS TOVTWV axpoOiviois,av&iTTWv TO.S O.VT&V Ke<J)a\ds. Ribbeckthinks the same matter is referred to in

Accius Oenoni. fr. v horrida honestitudo

Europaeprincipumprimo ex loco. Sopho -

cles appears to be the only authoritywho asserts that Oenomaus scalped his

daughter's suitors :' shorn for a napkin

in the Scythian fashion'

; and we shall

probably not be wrong in adding this to

the list of cases where he has introducedinto his plays an episode or an allusion

borrowed from his reading of Herodotus

(see on fr. 29). Herod. 4. 64 describes

how the Scythian warrior brings homethe heads of all whom he has slain in

battle, and how he scalps them* andtreats the skin : opydvas 5e OLVTO are

Xetpb[ji.a.KTpov ^CTT/TCU. e/c de TUV %a\t-vdv TOV I'TTTTOU, Tbv avTOS e\avvei, K

TOVTOV efcbrrei /cat a7<iXXercu' 6s ydp av

aptCTTOS OVTOS

Herwerden, relying on Hesych. I.e.,

proposed eKoeoapêvos for tKKeKapfie'vos,and his conjecture has been accepted byNauck and Blaydes. But this is to

reduce to prose the subtle word-play of

the text, which with a grim irony suggeststhat the victim has been shorn ; for the

form of expression certainly recalls Ar.Thesm. 838 <TKd<f>iov dTroKeKap/m-^vrjv, Av.806 av de K0\f/ix({} ye ffKd(f><.ov (XTroTeTiX/uî'y,

the '

Scythian towel'

tonsure in placeof the 'Bowl.' So Ach. 849 KpartJ'oseu KCKap/uievos /-IOIÔP. . For the ace. after

the pass. part, corresponding to the

object of the active verb see Jebb onTrack. 157. Here the construction im-

plies that a second accusative (of result)

might have been attached to Keipu whenused in the active with a personal object,much in the same way as KaraTe^vu etc.

are followed by a double ace. (Kuehner-Gerth I 323, Starkie on Ar. Ach. 302).For the adv. 2Kv0urTi see on fr. 462 andcf. Parmeno ap. Athen. 221 A dvr/p ydp

COS V$(t}p ITTTTOS|

128 Z000KAEOYZ

474

TTeXoi// ivyya Orjparrjpiav

rft/r09,

aO-TpaTTTJV TLV OfJi/JLaTO)!^

Od\7TTai fJLv aurds, efoTTra 8' e/xe,

fjLTpa>v cxfrOaXfjiov, ware re/croz/os

IOVTOS opOovTdi K.ava)v.

474. 1 ToLav Ht\o\f/ ivyya Valckenaer (lVy7a Pal. ex Musuri coniectura inter-

polatum putat Kaibel) : Toidvd' tv o\j/ei \vyya A (Xiry/ca E) 3 77 tfdXTrerai Papa-georgius : ??0' a'XXeratA, ^#dX7rerat Ruhnken, ^/cfldXTrerai Boissonade

|

5' e/xe Brunck :

d /Jie A 5 irpiovTos Wecklein, taxovTos vel TidtvTos Herwerden, iVoOiros Valcke-

naer, IdbvTos Tyrwhitt

474 Athen. 564 B I,o<t>oK\r)s dt irov

irepl TOV /cdXXous TOU IleXoTros 5taXe7o-

/j.evr)v 7rot77<ra5 TTJV 'I'jnrodd/j.d.ai' (prjvl'TOidv5'...Kavd)v.'

1 f. See cr. n. For Xityya Erfurdt

substituted \iyya, and Schneider appearsto have been the first to suggest that the

Hesychian gloss (ill p. 52) Xiry^' TO Tbôv

was an error for Xfy (Lobeck, Paralip.

p. no). In Horn. A 125 Xi7|e /3t6s

(X^w or X/77w) is airaj; \eybfj.evov for*the bow twanged.' J. writes :

* As to

tvyya, the ifiry, or wryneck, called in

Greek from its cry (&{%*), is constantlymentioned as a love-charm. It wasbound on a wheel, and the revolution of

the wheel was supposed to draw men's

hearts with it. Pind. Mm. 4. 35 tvyyi5' 2X/co/*cu Tfrop, "by a charm." So

Simaetha, the witch, Theocr. 2. 17 tVy,X/te TI) TTJVOV /j,6v TTort 5u)/xa TOV (Lvopa.

Xen. mem. 3. II. 17 raura oy/c at/ei; TroX-

\&v <pL\Tp(av T /cat eTrwSwv /cat ivyywv

IVa ^?ri o-oi TTpcoroj' 2XKU auTTji/. Ar. Zyj-.

1109 TT; o-^ \y<j>6ti>Tes ivyyi ("thycharm," or

"spell"), where I is short, as

Ufa has I in Track. 787 (iin Theocr., as

ttffw has t in Horn, and Pind.). Here, if

X 7 7 a had better authority, it would be

much better than I'u77a, since, as aaTpairriv

suggests, the idea of an arrow, a glancedarted from the eye, would be more

appropriate than that of the ftry : cp.Aesch. Ag. 742 fji.a\6aKov 6^â.Twv /3Aos,

dijîdv/j-ov ZpuTos &vdo$, Suppl. 1 004 0/j.fj.a.Tos

dt\KT7)piov Irofeu/u,' ^Tre/tê*', t/x^pou vt/cc6-

/levos.'

I have discussed and illustrated the

phraseology which is applied to lover's

glances in C. R. xxm 255 ff., where this

passage is cited. Add Track. 548. J.

might have found support for his sugges-tion in view of drjpaTrjpiav from Aesch.

Ag. 1193 rj/mapTov, 77 dypu nTis uis ; But, apart from the obscurity of

Xfy and the extreme awkwardness of

retaining tv fiêi together with d/iyudrw^,the objection raised to ti;77a ignoresthe range of its metaphorical usage,which the passages quoted from Pindarand Aristophanes (amongst others) attest.

And the special aptness of ^7^ to the

gaze of the lover is proved by Heliod.8. 5 /nyd\r)v ds iretdu /c^cr^rai irpbs

avdpas tvyya TO. ywaiKeta KOL crvvoiKa,

/SX^/uâra, and by Lycophr. 310 irvpQ&pqfiaXuv tvyyt rb^wv the charm of Troilusfor Achilles where 1/771 is fantastically

joined to rbfav. I have, therefore, nohesitation in accepting (with Nauck)Valckenaer's brilliant emendation.

dorrpairrfv expresses a familiar metaphor :

Achill. Tat. 6. 6 ifiuv d' 6 Qtpcravdpos TOAcdXXos K irapadpoiJ.r)s, ws apirafo/j.fr'rjs

dXtara yap ei> TOIS 6(j>da.\/u.ois

i TO /cdXXos /ere. Heliod. i. 21

r) irpoTtpov avTbv T< /cdXXet /cara-

<TTpd\f/a<ra (so often in the Erotici), Pind.fr. 123 ras 5 Qeo^vov dfcrti/as TT/JOJ foauv

/uL<tp/Jia.pvoiffas dpcutels j

6s /J.TJ irody Kv/j.ai-

VTCU. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1015 rotos OTT^

âvdoio KiiprjaTt/s Alffovidao| (TTpdirTev

"E/3WS -rjdelav dirb <f>\6ycf TTJS 5' dpapvyds [

6<pda.\/j,&v r/pjrafev. Mosch. 2. 86 6<rcre

5' viroy\aij<rff<rKe /cat ifj.epov d<TTpdiJ/e-ffKev. The application is different in

Ar. Ach. 566 affTpairds fiXtTrwv.3 The metaphorical use of Kaieadai,

6fp/j,aii>e<rda.i, rtro, ardeo and the like is

too common to require illustration. ForddXireffdat cf. Aesch. Prom. 615, 677,Theocr. 14, 38, and for eoirTav Theocr.

7. 55 ai KO. Tbv AvKidav birT^êvov'

A(ppo5lTas piHrrjTcu, 23. 34 rav KpaSiavbiTTtviJievos oXiJivpa. K\av<r(is, Ar. Lys. 839abv Zpyov ijdrj TOVTOV

OINOMAO! 129

4 f. Translate :

'

Scanning with re-

sponsive vision as closely as the crafts-

man's straight-drawn plumb-line clingsto its level,' i.e. letting his glance gostraight to meet mine, no less directlythan the Kav&v draws its line. The fieryflash is a physical emanation from the

eye, which, making its way straight to

the eye of the beloved, is met in its course

by the responsive glance of mutual love

speeding as fast to the eye of the lover.

Cf. Heliod. 3. 7 i) r&v 4ptJoT<t>v ytveffis,

oh TO. 6pi!)/J,va Tr)v dpxyv dl5u<ri /cat oiov

a did r&v 6(p6a\/Jiu)v rd ird6rj rats

el<TTot;evovTai.... rdv yap v Tjfjiiv

re /cat alffB^ffewv iro\vKlvr)Tbv TI

/cat depubrarov o&cra 17 8\f/is 5e/cTt/cwr^pa

Trpos rds diroppolas yiyverai, ry /car' avrrjv

e/iTrtfpy irvevfJiaTi rds /xerajSdcreis T&V

ep&T(t)v iiriairdJ^vt]. Achill. Tat. I. 4

6<pda\[j.6s yap 656s ^pom/ct^ rpatf/xart.

Plut. qu. conv. 5. 7. 2 p. 68 1 B at yapT&V ev upa Kai r6 5td r&v

e/cTrtTrroz>, etV apa 0w? etre pev/ma,TOI)J ep&vras e'/cr?)/cet /cat airb\\v<ri /*e0'

Tjdovrjs a\yr)8t)vi /xe^tfy/x^^s. J.'s expla-nation is slightly different :

' "Measuring

an equal glance," i.e."respondingwith

measured glance to mine." The glanceof Pelops is ardent, but discreetlyobserves the limit which her glance pre-scribes.' But the idea of restraint is alien

to the passage ;the intention is to em-

phasize the exact correspondence of their

passionate glances. <TT, as, is com-

monly employed in Homer to introduce

a simile (Monro, H. G.2 285. 3. a.);but is very seldom found in Attic poetrywith a finite verb following : cf. Aesch.fr. 39 wcrre 5t7rX6ot

|

MKOI ve/3pbv

dfji<pi /xao-xdXats. Soph. fr. 840cilcrre diKrvov /career Tracrez/. Track. 112,

699. Tyrrell on Eur. Bacch. 1066.

Rhes. 972. These are the last echoes

of the Homeric idiom. <rrdQp.i\,'

is

aline,' says J., '(a piece of string, onwhich chalk or ochre is rubbed), drawn

tight from point to point. Kavwv (regtdd)is the carpenter's rule *. Ar. Av. 1004

<p /j.erpif)(r(t) Kav6vt irpoandds. Thesimile would fit, if the meaning werethat the carpenter is drawing or testingwith his Kav&v a line parallel to the line

traced by the (rTdd/j,rj. Hippodamia'sglance is the a-Tdd/j-rj : that of Pelops is

the Kavdv, which keeps its due distance

all along.' But oTdfyo/ and Kavuv are

not always so distinguished, and theyare actually identified by the schol. onHomer's eTri ffrdd^v Wvvev. See also

Eustath. Od. p. 1531, 62 and other

passages quoted on fr. 330. Here, at

least, I think there is little doubt that

Kav&v is the ruddled string (or rule), as in

Eur. Her. 945 <polvi.Ki Kavovi., and ffrdd/mr]

the line to be drawn on the material.

The significance of the comparison is

enhanced by the fact that the carpenter's

eye is engaged in finding the exact

measurement : Lucian Icaromenipp. 14^Trei /cat roi>? r^/croj/as 7ro\Xd/cts eupaKtvatyitot 5o/ctD darepif) r&v 6(pda\piCi3v ay.ei.vov

Trpos ro)s Kavbvas airevdtivovTas ra tf\a,

Pers. i. 66 oculo riibricam dirigat uno.

Thus, Trapd ffrdd/^rjv (ad amttssint) is

absolutely straight: see Wecklein onAesch. Ag. 1029 ci/iot re dov\ois iravra

/cat Trapd ffraQ^v ('rigorously exact').Tr. fr. adesp. 287 dK/>i/3s ot'd/ctcr/ua irpbs

<TTdd(j,-r)i> (3lov. Theocr. 25. 194 jcard

a-rdd/ji'rjv eÔT/cras. Eur. Ion 1514 Trap'

otai> ij\dofj.ev o-rdd^v fiiov has been well

explained by Bayfield. It follows that

there is no antithesis here between ara-

d/u.Tj and xav&v as separate implements for

measuring. Purser in Diet. Ant. i 354 a

takes a different view :

' The carpenterused to correct errors in the Kav&v by the

aid of his eye and the crratf/i?;.' This is

as if the Kavd>v itself needed adjustment,a contradiction in terms (cf. Dio Chrys.

62. 7). See also Diet. Ant. II 373b, 54ib ;

and Tyrrell on Eur. Tro. 6. The sound-

ness of IOVTOS (cr. n.)'

passing alongthe line

'

is established by Theogn. 945el/At Trapd ffrdB^t]v opdijv 686v, ovdert-

pdiffe |/cXiy6)Liei'os. For opOovrai cf. PhiL

1299 r)v r6

475Sta

t;aLv0v)v KaOaipovO* LTTTTOP

475 Pollux 10. 55 rty o \f/-/iKrpav... (Hartung).

opa>

ev

The words have been supposed to beaddressed by Hippodamia to Pelops(Welcker) or by Oenomaus to Myitilus

P. II.

The former view is better,

as t s implied that the person addressed

has completed a long journey. Campbellconjectured a-0' for a\

1 8wi t|/i]KTpas: the local force of

130 !0<t>OKAEOY!

the preposition is not entirely mergedin the instrumental either here or e.g. in

Ai. 575 frrx6 ^ta iro\vppa<pov ffrpttywv |

ir6pTraKos...ffaKOs. For \f/r]KTpa cf. Eur.

Hipp. 1174 \j/l)KTpaUfflV

2 Ka0aipov6' is followed by an abl.

gen. of separation : cf. Hdt. i. 44 rbv

avros (povov eKaffrjpe, Plut. Mar. 6 X^yercu

Kadapat XyffTripiuv TTJV

476

yevoipav

arpvyerovITT oTS/xa Xi/xâ?.

476. 1 derds codd. 2 a/j.TTOTadei'rjv Shilleto : a.v TTOTadeirjv codd.

476 Ar. Av. 1337 yevolâ v... \ifJivas,

where the schol. has tv rots KaXXicrrpdroirraura e" OtVoyttdou roO 2o0o/cXôus.

For the general sense, no doubt a

prayer of the Chorus to be transportedto the scene of the victory of Pelops, cf.

O. C. 1 08 1 ctd' deAXata TdxiVpwoTosTreXeids

| aWeplas ve<p\as K^paat/m' KT.Alcman fr. 26 /SeiXe 5?j /SciXe icrjpij\os efyv |

6Vr' e?ri /fi;/iaTos avdos a/x' dX/ci'6i'e<7crt

TTor^rai. Eur. Hipp. 733 ff. iVa /xe Trre-

povavav opviv...Qebs...ddr)' apdd-f)v 5' ^?rt

TTOVTI.OV KVfj.a.

1 aUros is the classical form : see

Meisterhans3p. 33.

2 f. dp/iroTaGei/qv is the certain cor-

rection of Shilleto (in Holden's Aristoph.

p. 582 [1848]): it was restored inde

pendently by Blaydes (on O. C. 1081).For the optative cf. Ai. 1217 ff. yevoi/j-av

...rots iepds STTWS irpoffeliroi/mfv 'AOdvas

(Jebb's n.). drpvy^Tov must go with

Xi>fas, which thus stands in a doublerelation to the context, unless we preferto say that it is supplied a second time

with otS/ua. For similar examples see

Kuehner-Gerth II 564 f. It is impos-sible to supply T^TOI/ with Campbellor ctX6s with Rogers al., or to render

' over the barren wilderness'

with Har-

tung, as if yaias or opovs were sup-

pressed. And, as against the latter view,it may be added that Sophocles wouldnot have employed the Homeric drpti-

yeros, for which see Allen and Sikes onh. Dem. 67, in a non- Homeric relation.

Nauck adopts Kock's virep <ai0tpos>arpvyerov, but ffirep aiOepos should at

least be justified and seems impossiblehere. Translate therefore: 'above the

barren waters, skimming the grey sea-

surge.' 6ir* otSfia, to express spacetraversed, is justified by Horn. /3 370otSt rl <re XPV !

"f^vrov ^TT' arptyerovKdKa Tra.ayen.ev oi)5' a\a\'r)a'6ai, Eur. Hec.

445 are irovTOirbpow: KOfj.L-|

^"etj doas a.Ka-

TOVS eir' olSfjia Xt/xvas, ib. 634 aXta^ TT'

olSfj.a vavffTO\r)<rb)v, /. T. 395 aêitov ^TT'

oI5,ua 8teTrtpa<Tei>, Hipp. 1273, Hel. 400e'?r' old/no. -rrbvTiOV yXavKr/s dX6s...dXa)/xai,

ib. 1501 y\a.\'Kov ^TT' o!5it' d'Xtoi'.

For the metre, which, if the first line

were complete, would consist of two

iambelegi followed by an iambic dimeter

catalectic, see J. W. White, Verse ofGreek Comedy, 496. Blaydes's proposalto drop UTT^P is therefore improbable.

477

XrjOovcrL yap rot

0rj\iav apviv

StefoSot

OTCLV TO/CO? wa

477. 1 \rj6ovat Diog. : irXriQovari Plut. 2 Traprj TO/COS Plut.

477 Diog. L. 4. 35 wpbs 8 rbv davei-

(TTLKOV Kai (pi\6\oyov eiiravrai TL ayvoeiv

Z<(>ri (sc. Arcesilaus)'

\^9oviri...can 5 ravra CK TOV Olvofj.dov rou

K\{<JVS. Arcesilaus used these lines to

rebuke a usurer who, while a student of

philosophy, asserted his ignorance in

answer (we may suppose) to a questionsubmitted to him. The point of the

witticism lies in the double meaning of

OINOMAOI nAAAMHAHZ

r6fcoj, which was intended to signify'

interest'

; and the innuendo was that

the respondent was keener in business

than in the pursuit of truth. FromDiogenes Laertius the quotation passedto Suid. s.v. diôdoL, and Zonar. s.v.

5ifo5o?, p. 517. Plut. quaest. conv. 8. i.

5 p. 718 A quotes the lines, without men-

tioning author or play, and with the

variants stated above, to illustrate the

impregnation of a mortal creature bydivine agency.

1 f. \TJ0ou<ri Krk . :

' For the hen is

not ware of the passage of the winds

(through her body), save when brooding-time is at hand.' The correctness of

\-qdovffi as against irXriOovvt, which is

given by the MSS of Plutarch, is estab-

lished by Gomperz, Nachlese, pp. 7 10.

He points out that the earliest exampleof TrXrjdb) with transitive force (TrXrjpovai

conj. Blaydes) is in a votive epigram from

Cyzicus belonging to the first century B.C.

(Kaibel, 874 a). Moreover, if Tr\r)duv<rt

is read, no intelligible sense can be elicited

from the passage, so that Duebner wasled to the assumption of a lacuna after

v. 2. The fact that Plutarch does not

give the source of his reference diminishes

the weight otherwise due to his authority,and makes it not unlikely that he is

quoting from memory. At the same

time, it is quite possible that the error

is due to his transcribers, and I cannot

agree with Gomperz that the appearanceof uTTOTTt/xTrXT/crt in the context proves that

TrXrjdovffi. came from Plutarch himself.

It seems most likely that Sophoclesalludes to the fable of the wind-egg (Ar.AV. 695 TLKTl TTpUTLffTOV VTTtJV^/Jl.tOV Nl> i]

/j-eXavoirrepos q>6v), as explained by Arist.

de gen. an. 3. i. 749* 34, hist. an. 6. 2.

560* 6, e(j>ijpia de /caXetrcu raOir6 Tiv&v, STL VTTO rijv eapivrjv utpav 0a-VOVTO.I SexdfJLevai TO. irveufj-ara alopvi-0es. Gomperz, however, points out that

the exact character of the reference is

uncertain, and that the poet may havebeen thinking of the impregnation of the

partridge: Arist. hist. an. 5. 5. 54ia 26:

ai de irtpdiKes av Kara SLV\JLOV <TTG)<ri.v ai

drjXeiai r&v appevuv, eynvoi ylvovrai.Plin. n. h. 10. 33. 102 si contra maressteterint feminae, aura ab hisJlante prae-

gnantesfiunt. Similar tales were current

(i) with reference to the sagacity of ewes :

Aelian nat. an. 7. 27 ra. ye H,T]V Trp60araKO.K?VO oldev, 6'rt avrots o ftoppas icai d

VOTOS (Tl'/i/XaXOJ'TCU TTpfa T6 rLKTCiV oti fJ,lOV

T&V avafiaivovTfav aura Kpi&v KT. (2) ofthe impregnation of mares by the westwind : Verg. G. 3. 272 ff. vere magis, quiavere calor redit ossibus, illae

|

ore omnesversae in Zephyrurn stant rupibus altis,

|

exceptantque levis auras, et saepe sine

ullis| coniugiis vento gravidae (with

Conington's note). Si&joSoi can hardlymean 'currents (directions),' as J. sug-

gested; usage requires the rendering

given above. Cf. Plat. Tim. 91 c T&S

roO TnW/AdTos 5ie65ous air o<j>parrot. Forthis reason it is impossible to accept his

proposal to give the words a larger mean-

ing, excluding the special reference to

virrivt/jua :

' A female bird knows, by the

west wind, when the spring has come,and with it the brooding-season.' Thegeneral purpose of the image is to illus-

trate the axiom, that men give very little

heed to many obvious facts, so long as

their own interests are not involved.

n-X-qv. Blaydes suggests the addition

of 7'.

T7AAAMHAH2

The epitome of Proclus records (EGF p. 20) the fact that the

death of Palamedes was related in the Cypria, but gives nodetails. Fortunately, however, Pausanias states (10. 31. 2) that

he had himself read in the Cypria that Palamedes was drownedon a fishing expedition, and that Diomedes and Odysseus werehis murderers. This version does not appear to have been followed

by any other extant authority, and it is generally assumed that all

the tragedians adopted an alternative account according to whichPalamedes was falsely accused of treason by Odysseus. The

story, which is most fully recounted by Hyginus (fab. 105), relates

92

132

how Odysseus plotted revenge against Palamedes for havingoutwitted him (see p. 1 15)

1. He sent a message to Agamemnon

that he had been warned in a dream that the site of the campshould be moved for a single day. Agamemnon gave orders for

this to be done, and Odysseus then buried a considerable quantityof gold by night on the spot where the tent of Palamedes stood.

He also composed a letter which he gave to a Phrygian prisonerto be conveyed to Priam, and instructed one of his soldiers to

intercept him at a short distance from the camp and to kill him.

On the following day, when the army had returned, a soldier

brought in the forged letter, which he had found on the Phry-gian's corpse. The letter purported to be written by Priam to

Palamedes, and to promise him the exact amount of gold which

Odysseus had buried, if he would betray the camp of Agamemnonaccording to his engagement. Palamedes denied his guilt, butwas convicted on the discovery of the buried gold, and put to

death by the whole army. Some of these details are varied bythe scholiast on Eur. Or. 432, where Agamemnon and Diomedesare the accomplices of Odysseus, a Phrygian captive with goldin his possession is compelled to forge the letter and is then slain,

and a slave of Palamedes is bribed to place the letter and the

gold under the bed of his master. Apollodorus (epit. 6. 8) clearlydid not follow the Cypria at this point ;

for he relates that Pala-

medes was stoned 2 to death in consequence of the plot concerted

by Odysseus with Agamemnon. That the treason-story wascurrent in tragedy is proved by Polyaen. I prooem. 1 2 olov &e

Katceivo crrpaTrjyrj/jia 'OSucro"e&>9 ol rpayayBol a&ovcn. Tla\a/JLr)8r}i'

evitcrjaev 'OSfo-crei/? ev Si/cacrTrjpia) rwv 'Aâtcoy V7ro8a\a)v avrov

Yj jSapftapiKov ^pvaiov, Kal o cro^)(t)Taro^ rwvf

EXX?Jt/&)z/

r/\w Trpo&ocrias. And in Plat. rep. $22 D the appearanceof Palamedes eV rat? rpayw&iais is connected with a speech whichhe seems to have made in his own defence. At any rate a speechof this kind probably occurred in the Palamedes of Aeschylus (fr.

182), as well as in the play of Euripides bearing the same name(fr. 5.78). It is noteworthy that the corresponding fragments in

Sophocles (frs. 479 and 432) are in the third person and that

fr. 432 was part of a speech by Nauplius. Thinking that

Nauplius could not have been a character in the present playBrunck, followed by Dindorf, assigned both of these passages to

the Nauplius (frs. 379, 380 D.). But that is impossible ;for the

1 Ahrens lays stress on Vergil's quia bella vetabat (Aen. i. 83), but we have noreason to connect this detail with Sophocles. The version of Dictys (2. 15) that

Palamedes was induced to descend into a well and then buried beneath a mass ofstones is certainly not tragic.

2Stoning is also mentioned by schol. Eur., Philostr. her. ir. n, Tzetz. Ante-

horn. 384.

TIAAAMHAHZ 133

authority which ascribes fr. 479 to the Palamedes should not be

questioned, whether it was that of Polemo or another. It is not

so clear that Vater 1 was right in assigning fr. 432 also to the

Palamedes;but the recurrence of OUTO? and eÔpe, as well as

the general similarity of the two passages, suggests that theyboth belonged to the same speech. It is, moreover, certain that

Nauplius appeared in the play of Aeschylus : fr. 1 8 1 rivo? Kareic-

ra<? evetca TralK epov /3Xa/3/?92

. In that case we must assumethat Nauplius came to Troy after his son's death to exact re-

tribution, but failed in his attempt owing to the influence of

Agamemnon, as is stated by Apollod. epit. 6. 8 and schol. Eur.

Or. 4323

. Welcker referred frs. 480 and 481 to the same speech.He also assigned to this play frs. 843, 855, 913, but none of themwith much probability.

478

478 [Ammon.] de diff. vocab. p. 76 critical. Schol. Eur. Or. 432 mentionsfodi Kal yivuvKe (yivov conj. Valckenaer) the bribing of a depdiruv to conceal the

dia<t>tpet....Td(T<Tov<TL 5 8/j.us Kal firl TOV gold under Palamedes' couch. Perhapsidiov (yivov Valckenaer) r6 1061. Zo0o- a Bepdwaiva undertook this role in the

K\rjs ev Ha\a^Sr)f

e#077 /uos...ô/)/ua;/x,6'?7.' version of Sophocles.'

Only be silent as

avTl TOV yivov. The words Zoô/cX??? tv you go forth.' Ellendt seems to take

Ha\a/j.r)or] rest on the sole authority of JJLOUVOV with efrpiu.wfji.ev'r), but so arrangeda MS in the British Museum. the line defies interpretation. For the

We have no knowledge of any female position of P.OVVOV after the imperativecharacter likely to appear in the Pa/a- cf. Track. 1 109 717)007-16X01 v.6vov,

'let her

medes to whom these words would be but come.' O. T. 837 rbv avopa TOV

applicable. Hartung supposes that POTTJPO. Trpo(rfj.ii>ai /j,6voi>,'

just to wait

Nauplius is speaking to his wife Cly- for.' Eur. Cycl. 219 ^ /ue

mene, but his method is entirely un- fj,6vov. For the form see. on fr. 852.

479ou Xt/ô^ OVTOS TOJ^S* CTraucre, crvv 0eto

xpovov re Staryoiâs cro^corara?

<f)\oicr/3ov /xera KQTTOV /ca^/xeôt?,

Trecrcrovs Kv/Sovs re repiTvov apyias a/co? ;

479. 1 T&vd' Scaliger : T6v5' Eust., ro?o-5' coni. Herwerden|

tTrav<re Herwerden :

Eust. 3 Kbirov Salmasius : KOTTTJV Eust.

479 Eustath. //. p. 228, 6 IlaXa/x^- IIoXûaH' iffTopei (see on fr. 429), <f>od

fS ^Trivor](Tafj.evou Kvfieiav KOL ireTTelav ev tirtcrffevov. TTJS 5 rotai/Ti/s eTrwoias TOV

els Trapa/uvdiav \ifj.ov /carao'xoj'Tos IlaXajU^Soi^s Kal TTJS evpfoews 5 TOV

ffTpaTiav \L6os e/cet toeiKWTo, Kada yv Kal avTTjv e/ceiôs eo*o0fo"aTO,

1 de Sopli. A lead. p. 27 sq.2 See also Wagner in Roscher ill 25.3 Such is also the opinion of R. Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 265. The alternative is

to leave fr. 432 for the Nauplius, and to find another speaker for fr. 479. But wouldnot Palamedes have been his own advocate, if the speech belonged to an crywy? Seealso Meineke, Anal. Alex. p. 16 1.

134 Z04>OKAEOYI

Soô/cX^y, 5s iv Spd/man 6yww-

evperrj H.a\afj.ridr] <f>fjffiv' ' ov

\i/jibv...(LKos;' v. 4 is quoted by Eustath.

Od. p. 1397? 9 from the Palamedes of

Sophocles on the authority of 6 TO, irepl'

EXXrjviKijS TraiSias ypd\l/as. The last-

named work was written by Suetonius

(c. 100 A.D.): see M. Schanz, Rom. Litt.

in p. 48. The authority of Eustathius

is, therefore, amply sufficient to refute

the opinion of Brunck, approved byDindorf, that these verses are to be

assigned to the Nauplius.The verses appear to have been spoken

either by the advocate of Palamedes, or

by Nauplius, who, according to Vater's

conjecture, arrived at the close of the

play : see on fr. 432 and the IntroductoryNote. Welcker's viefo that they are the

words of Palamedes himself is improbable.1 f. XLJJLOV. There was a tradition

of a famine while the fleet was delayed at

Aulis (Aesch. Ag. 203 irvoa.l...vi}a rides),

and that the inventiveness of Palamedeswas of assistance in relieving the distress

(schol. Eur. Or. 432). It is not clear,

however, whether that is the occasion to

which Sophocles here alludes. ' Whenthe Greek army were suffering from

famine, they were relieved by the OtVo-

77)671-01 of Delos, the daughters of Anius,Oivd), STTC/J/AU) and 'EXcus, who possessedthe gift of creating corn and wine and oil :

this was one of the incidents related in

the Cypria (EGF p. 29). According to

Lycophron (and the schol. and Eust. //.

p. 827, 44 referring to him) the famine wasat Troy: 581 at /ecu ffrparov fiouirfivav...

a\6avov<Tiv tXdovffai irore\

Sttfwpos ets

dvyarpbs etvao-rripiov, i.e. to 'Polretov.

In Apollod. epit. 3. 10 their powers are

briefly mentioned after Palamedes' death.'

[But nothing can be inferred from this,

as the narrative immediately afterwards

passes to the events at Aulis, and the

death of Palamedes is clearly mentionedout of its proper sequence.]

' Tzetzes

on Lycophr. 581 records that Agamemnonsent for them by means of Palamedes :

for Troy to fall, and promised that in the

meantime his daughters would providethe necessary supplies (FHG I 94).Immisch maintained (Rh. Mus. XLIV

301 ff.) against Welcker (Kp. Cycl. n107) that the stay at Delos, as well as the

allusion to the OtVorpoTroi, was included

in the narrative of the Cypria, and that it

occurred immediately after the first start

from Aulis : see Gruppe, Gr. Myth.p. 6685 . According to schol. Horn.

f 164 Simonides (fr. 24 : ev rcus /eareuxcus)

represented Odysseus and Menelaus as

sent to Delos in order to fetch the

daughters of Anius to Troy. We should

expect Sophocles to follow the version of

the Cypria, but it is uncertain whether it

contained the fetching of the QivoTpbirot.

by Palamedes. irav<r should be pre-ferred to ciTrwo-e, for which Sophocleswould have substituted ctTrûxre : see

Cobet, Coll. Crit. p. 35. In Thuc. 2.

84 modern texts have dieuBowro. <rvv

8<p elimv,' with reverence be it spoken.

'

avv 0$ and <rvv deois are generally anar-

throus when thus used : but see Jebb onAt. 383, and cp. Ar. Ran. 1199. Forthe phrase cf. Eur. Med. 625 &rws ydp,(TVV 0e< 5' eiprjcreTai, ya/ji,is TOLOVTOV

wffre <r' apveiffdai ydfj,ov, Ar. Plut. 114ol/j.ai yhp OI/ACU, <rvv 6f$ 8' et/>^<rerou, I

(jLfrwv, /j.TTrt/j.\f/aTO rets Oftwp&TOM 8td

TOV IlaXa/iTjSous, /ecu eXdovvai us TO

'PoLreiov ?Tp<j)ov avrotis.' (H.)

Pherecydes related that Anius urgedthe Greeks to stay with him at Delosuntil the tenth year, when it was fated

a7ra\Xcleif ere TTJS 600aXyU.as (para-

tragoedic). crvv Ofijjelirelv occurs in Plat.

Prof. 3176, Theaet. 1518 and elsewhere.3 4>Xo(<rf3ou: ''battle-din. Horn. E 322

etc.' (J.). If the discovery took place at

Aulis, it would refer to the storm which

prevented the fleet from sailing. In

a recent discussion of the word (Class.Phil, v 328) Sturtevant suggests that it

means '

wave, surge,' rather than '

roar,'

and that 'after buffeting the waves '

is

the natural rendering of this passage.4 ir<r<rovs Kv(3ovs re: see on fr. 429.

In Eur. /. A. 198 Protesilaus and Pala-

medes are represented as playing Treaffoi

at Aulis. Philostr. her. n. 2 OVTUV 5

T&V 'AxcucDi' v Av\i8i ireTTotis evpev oi/

padvfjiov iraidtdv, dXX' dyxivovv re Kal

%<ru ffTrovdijs. dp-yias. The use of this

word, as H. saw, confirms the suspicionthat Sophocles is alluding to the weari-

some time spent at Aulis : Aesch. Ag.202 ff. ?Tj'oat.../ca/f6(rxoXot...rpi^(fj KQ.T-

faivov dvOos'Apydvv. This is the

of the Iphigenia (fr. 308).

TTAAAMHAHI TTANAQPA 135

480

aKecrrpov

48O Hesych. I p. 96 aK<rrpov'

<j>dp- inventions : cf. acos in fr. 479. The/U.CIKW. 2o$oKX?7S IlaXctyiiTjSfl. equally isolated aKeffT-rip is used meta-

aK(TTpov suggests one of Palamedes' phorically in O.C. 714.

Spoird

481 Hesych. I p. 537 dpoird' Speirrd.

So0o/cX?7S FLaXa/m-ydr) (ira\a/j.'/idi cod.).This obscure statement seems to imply

that Sophocles used a verbal adjective

Spoiros with the meaning'

plucked.' Sucha formation is not easily supported byanalogy: we have To/u6s (beside r6/io?),

but with the active meaning; in com-

pounds, where the accent shifts, it is morecommon, as in /*erciT/>o7ros, TroXtfrpoTros,

irio~Koiros, evffKoiros, 6doiir6pos. Nor is the

existence of 5poir6$ proved by Etym. M.

191, 53 jSciros' 17 axavOa ws irapa. TO Kvpr6s

KvpTOS...o\>T<a /faros (qu. < irapa rd>

/3ar6s) jSctros, icai irapd TO optirw 8p6iros,

Kal /3aro5p67ros (Horn. h. Herm. 190).Here analogy seems to suggest 5po?r6s,

but the accentuation is probably due to

the fact that the whole clause is merelyintended as an analysis and explanatiouof the compound fiaroSpdiros. Hence M.Schmidt's view, to which Nauck inclines,

that dpoird is the remnant of some com-

pound such as <j)fj.6opoira or dprldpoira

(read as apn dpoird), is plausible. Blom-field (on Aesch. Theb. 324) suggestedddpoira- aopeirra. On the other hand,W. Dindorf advocated opwirrd (or, as heseems afterwards to have preferred,

dpuird)' dpeirrd from Suid. s.v. Spuira-

xtfa'

(Tvvdyb), rpirycD. opwirra. (al. dp&ird,and so Zonar. p. 572) yap TO. dpeirrd.

<-f)> ra optirava.'

dpwirrd would pre-

suppose a verb Spc^Trw or 5pw0w; more

probable than this would be Spvirrd

(from opiu<pw=

opTL>irT(a), which should berestored in Galen gloss. Hippocr. XIX 94bepirrd (or dpairrd)

'

effirapay^va., for

(rirapdvfffiv was used in explanation of

dptiiTTetv, but not of dptireiv' (H.).Welcker guessed that this and the pre-

ceding fragment referred to the con-

troversy between Palamedes and Odysseusas to the ravages of a flock of wolves,which Palamedes interpreted as a sign of

the coming plague, recommending the

army to adopt a vegetable diet : see

Philostr. her. n. 5.

T7ANAQPA H !4>YPOKOnOI

It is supposed, no doubt rightly, that the subject of this satyr-

play was the making of the first woman 1

, Pandora, and the result

for mankind of her arrival. The myth is related in Hes. Op. 60

105, and less completely in Theog. 570 589. Zeus determined

to punish men in retribution for the deceit practised by . Pro-

metheus in their favour, when he stole and gave to them the

fire which the king of the gods withheld (cf. Theog. 563). So he

1 Hesiod does not definitely say that Pandora was the first woman, but most

modern authorities agree with Pausanias (i. 24. 7) that such was his intention.

Goettling-Flach, however, on Hes. Op. 47 contend that the allegory figures a changefor the worse in woman's character.

136 ZOOKAEOYZ

bade Hephaestus to mix earth with water, and to fashion thereout

a lovely maiden of divine beauty with human voice and strength ;

Athena to teach her woman's handicraft; Aphrodite to endow

her with every grace and charm that should compel men's love;

and Hermes to give her shamelessness and deceit. The work of

Hephaestus is perhaps referred to in fr. 482. When the womanwas thus completely fashioned, she received the name Pandora,because all the Olympians had made her each a gift. ThenZeus ordered Hermes to conduct her and present her to Epi-metheus, who, though he had been warned by Prometheus never

to accept a gift from Zeus, lest it should be fraught with evil for

mankind, disregarded the advice, and discovered his mistakewhen it was too late. For up to that time men had lived without

any form of toil or disease;but the woman, on her arrival,

opened the lid of the jar in which all these evils were concealed,

and, before she could shut it down again, they all made their

escape, and ever since have been wandering over the earth,

bringing evil to whomsoever they come. Only Hope remainedbehind in the jar, when Pandora closed it again.

The title indicates that the satyrs in the play appeared as

Hammerers, and we must infer that they acted as assistants in

the workshop of Hephaestus, while he was engaged in shapingPandora. The connexion of satyrs wr

ith Hephaestus has alreadybeen noticed in the Daedalus (I p. no) and the Cedalion (n.

p. 9) ;but there is further evidence of their employment as

his workmen. Proclus in his commentary on Hesiod says :

$T}O\V OTL FLpO/JLIjOeVS TOV TOV KCIKOV TTidoV TTapa TO)V O~aTl>pd)V\a^(>v teal nrapaOe/jbevo^ T<> 'Ei7ri/jLrj0i, TraprpyyeiXe Trjv TIavSwpavl^r] SeâaOat, (on Op. 94). Is it rash to conjecture that the

authority whom Proclus followed was explaining the text of

Hesiod by reference to the play of Sophocles ? Otherwise it is

difficult to understand whence he derived the allusion to the

satyrs. In two epigrams of the Anthology (adesp. 412, 413Jacobs) satyrs are described as chained by the feet and workingin the smithy of Hephaestus in order to earn their living. In

the former of these the forging of the arms of Achilles is men-tioned as one of their tasks, and Jacobs conjectured that the

work of art which provided the opportunity of the epigrammatistwas a representation of some scene from a satyric drama, givingas possible originals the Myrmidons of Aeschylus

1

,and the

'A^XXe&>9 epaarai of Sophocles. But the reference to the

armour of Achilles should not prevent us from observingthat a plausible reconstruction of fr. 486 is favoured by the words

1 But the Myrmidons was not a satyr-play.

T7ANAQPA 137

/card KW\OV d\v/cTO7re&rja-i \v<ywOei<s and Tro&itcporov

tyas in the epigrams.The word crtyvpoKOTroi may be illustrated by the design re-

produced from a lekythos in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris

by Miss J. E. Harrison in/. H. S. XX IO6 1,where two men (not

satyrs), armed with large mallets, are represented hammeringthe colossal head of a woman. The head is not identified as

belonging to Pandora, but that identification is supported by the

painting on an amphora in the Ashmolean Museum reproducedby Prof. P. Gardner in /. H. S. XXI I fif. Here, however, it is

Epimetheus who carries a mallet and gazes at Pandora repre-sented either as rising from the ground or as an incompletestatue. It is possible that the last-mentioned design follows

a non-Hesiodic form of the myth, according to which Epimetheusmodelled his wife out of clay

2;but there is no evidence of any

such variant. Miss Harrison, however, undertook to show (/. H.S. XX 99) that the main subject of the play was the birth ofPandora and not the opening of her jar. For this purpose she

emphasized the association of Pandora with the earth-goddess(schol. Ar. Av. 971), and brought her Tri6o<$ into connexion withthe TTiOoiyla and the release of malevolent /o;pe?

3. More recently

Robert has maintained 4 that the satyr-chorus consisted not of

hammerers engaged in fashioning o-cf)vprj\ara, but of clod-

breakers who assisted Epimetheus in freeing Pandora from theearth

;that. fr. 482 refers not to the modelling of Pandora, but

to the making of a woman by Prometheus under her directions;

and that the designs on a lost amphora figured as no. 71 in

Miss Harrison's Prolegomena (p. 280) are to be interpreted in

the above sense.

Even if we admit the possible ambiguity of acfrvpoicoTroi,the considerations adduced seem insufficient to oust the proba-

bility that Sophocles followed in the main the Hesiodic tradition,

with such modifications as might be necessary to adapt it to

the conditions of a satyr-play. Moreover, the fashioning byPrometheus of the first mortals out of clay, though combined

by the mythographers5 with the story of Pandora, was repre-

sented by them as antecedent to her arrival.

The difficulties involved in the Hesiodic account, and the

origin of the version which made the 7n'0o? full of blessingsrather than of evils 6

,cannot be discussed here.

1 Also in Proleg. p. 279: see the discussion there of the whole subject.'* The suggestion is made by Gruppe in Bursiansjb. cxxxvn 588.3 See also Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 7619 and Mekler in Bursians Jl>. cxxix 30.4 Hermes, xi.ix 17 38.

5Apollod. I 45, 46; Hygm.fab. 142.

6 Of course Horn. O 527 could not be left out of account. See generally A. S. F.

Gow in Essays to Ridgeway, p. 99 ff.

13* IO<J>OKAEOYZ

482

KCLL irp&Tov apyov 7777X6^ op-yaêiv

482 Apxov EUV: apxov P0, dpxbv Huschke, dpyov Ruhnken|irl\ov EUV

dpydfav Cobeti schedae

482 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 6, i

(schol. Hippocr. v p. 480 Littre) 6pya<r-

/j.6s'6 /j,a\ayfj,6s /j.tfj.vTjTai rijs X&jews /cat

/cat 'Arrt/coi 5e Idlus \yov<ri.v opydtrat TO

ra vypd TOIS %-rjpois /itat /cat dva.<pvpa<rai

/cat olov Trr)\6v irotelv.

Observe that the language agrees with

Hesiod's description of the creation of

Pandora by Hephaestus : Op. 60 "H0at-ffrov

'

Kt\fv<re irfpiKXvrbv OTTI rdx^ra |

ap\ov: see cr. n. Ruhnken's dpyov(afterwards abandoned by its author in

favour of Apxov: see Tim. p. 180) is

a suitable epithet to express the inert,

lifeless clay, and Huschke's apxbv has

the advantage of recalling Horace's well-

known principilimo (Carni. i. 16. 13);

but the assonance of three successive

words ending in -ov is against the adop-tion of either. The variant dpydfav,which Klein reported from Cobet's MScollations, perhaps deserves consideration:

the sentence may have been continuedwith some such words as TrXcicrai veoxi^bv

(or ywatKbs) o-xâ. irr]X.ov op-yaêiv:cf. Phryn. praep. soph. p. 93, 2 (Bekk.anted, p. 53, 31) opydfeiv irrj\6v' rb 5ta-

/3/o^xetJ/ - ^ru) y^P T vypaiveiv oi dpxaiot,

\eyov<n. Pollux 7. 165 X^-yerai 5^ /cat

irrjXbv dpydfeiv. But these glosses mayrefer rather to Ar. Av. 839 -jrtfkov diroSte

opyavov. See also on frs. 787 and 510-The passage in Aristophanes shows that

the phrase was particularly applicable to-

the preparation of mortar or concrete in

building operations.

483

KpCL<;

483. 2 rtvovTa Emperius : y^/JLovra. A | xâ'>' r? s

MusurusTucker: vTroXatvrjs A, VTT*

483 Athen. 476 C /cat r&v TroirjT&v 5e

TroXXot irapdyovcri Trlvovras rof/s dpxa-iovs

K^paffi. . ./cat 2o0o/cX^s TLavdupqi'

/cat 7rX%>es

...VTro\aii>r)s.'

The second line is manifestly corruptin the MS and has been variously emended,though the correction of Musurus has

won general acceptance. Herwerden

adopted Wagner's eKTTLbvra in v. i andAdam's ytpovra in v. 2. H. was inclined

to prefer tuirlvovTi with rtvovTUL, and

thought there was an allusion to the

proverb pao xdXiji' at'pets' more power to

your elbow,' on which see Paroeni. I 1 16 :

fv rtf) nedtieiv atpeiv dvu TT\V fj.a<rxd\Tji>

elwdeffav /cat \eyeiv iia.axd\'t]v at pets*dvrl TOV Kwd(3)vlfLV KCU KaTa/JLWKdffda.i rats

But Tucker, who rightly insists

on the difficulty of vir6 if&Xfrijs is adopted,has, I think, found the right solution

(C.Q. II 203). The allusion to x^^vaoccurs constantly in descriptions of the

gaudia Veneris : see the passages quotedby Jebb on Track. 539 /cat vvv dv' oucrat

/jLLfj.vo/JLv /Atas virb|xât>/77s viray/cdXtcr/JWL,

and add A.P. 5. 168 ijtkov 5', birbrav

Kpfy-Q fJita TOVS <pi.\tovTas | xât"a, Kal

aivrjTai Ku?rpis VTT' d/m(pOT^po)v, Alciphr. l

38. 4 VTTO Tovfwv rjydTTa Koi/J.UfJ.frr) xâvi-diov, Lucian amor. 49 del rCiv veuv pdvf

us'

A.\Kif3id8ov Soj/cpaT^s, 6s virb /tta xâ~

/nvdi Trarpos UTTJ/OI/S KOLfjt,r)6-r), Athen. 219 B,

Prop. i. 4. 14 gaudia sub tacita ducereveste libct. For the use of rplfita cf.

iropvorpiij/, xoip6TPii/ - For xpv<rov tri-

syllabic see on fr. 338.

TTANAQPA

484

139

484 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 18,

17 (schol. V Hippocr. v p. 204 Littre)

eipr)Tdj>'ris tv"0pviffi <f>r)<rti> (Av.

529)'etra \a(36vTS TrcoXoOtr' adpbovs' \

o? 5' uvovvrai /JXi/idfoyres.' 6/xofws Kai

The grammarians (so also Suid., Etym.M.) derived the word (3\Lfuiffu> from

/SXiVtro; (fr. 778) ; but, so far as we can

tell, they have nothing in common. How-ever this may be, Schneidewin was

certainly wrong in supposing that the

reference quoted above belongs to fr. 778 ;

for Erotian was not concerned to illus-

trate the use of /JXtVcrw, and jSXi/tafeiJ',

employed as a vox amatoria, was ob-

viously suitable to the subject of the

Pandora. For the latter sense cf. EtynnM. p. 200, 38 {3\L/j.div

' TO TiT0o\aj3fiv,

f/yovv \f/y\a<pav TO. ar-^dt], Kal rous //.acrro)s

KaTa\a/j.f3dveiv rrj a<pf), Kal aiTTeffdai T&V

diropprjTdjv /jt-eX&v r(cv yvvaiKeluv, Kal

dieyeipeiv rds Tri$v/j.las, cos <pr)<ri Kpa/nVos

(fr. 302, I 100 K.)' wj <5e> paXaKov

TO XPUTÎOV < '7"> > w 6eol'\

ep\i[ji.aov avT-f/v, 17 5' ttppbvTL?ov8 &.' Similarly Bekk. anecd. p. 221,

16.

yap

485

485 Pollux 10. 44 aftls, f)v

tv TLavd&pa evovpydpav /caXet.

The same extract occurs in Cramer,anecd. Oxon. IV p. 60 (schol. Hermog.vn P- 735 Walz), and anecd. Par. IV

p. 12, 13, but in the latter frovprjQpov is

substituted for evovp^dpav. Blaydes pre-fers that form, on the analogy of

\v)6poi>, Kij/trjOpov etc.

486

486 HesycH. n p. 472

(<rvveppafj.vos cod.) TOUJ 7r65aj*

yap TO paTTTeiv, Kal \r)\ivov TO Tr\eKTbv, ws

'Apa/cp^coj' (fr. 37), Kal x^ vfj-a (x 7?^ aV'ta

Brunck) TO oir-fjTiov (M. Schmidt andW. Dindorf for rb (nrr)Tiov cod.). 2o0o-K\r)s Havdupq r) 20i/po/co7rots. Pollux 7.

83 (amongst cobblers' epyaXeia) owr/Tia 5t

Kal OTTTjriSta, a Kal XT/Xei^/wara Ka\ovv ol

TroiTjrai. ^tdXicrra 8e oi/rcos (JofOfj-aôv (i.e.

the word was especially applied to the

tools of...) rwf ra? <rx LVOV<* T^KOVTUV cos

Kal Kpdvrj (Hdt. 7. 89). Further con-

firmation is afforded by Hesych. IV

p. 283 xr/Xeêi* Tr\^Ket, pciTrret, and

olov OTTTjria, CHS ir\tKovaw T) .

L. and S. require correction, for there

can be no doubt on the above evidence

that x.Ti^6VFLa nieant an awl. The in-

terpretation' netted work, a cord

' wasdue to the false reading airapTtov in

Hesychius. Dindorf conjectured that the

lemma of Hesychius should be read as

/cex^XefyUtu ?r65as, and that this was a

tragic phrase taken either from Aeschylusor Sophocles (adesp. 220 N.). Weckleinin Berl. phil. Woch. 1890, 656 went

further, holding that Kex^Xeuyiicu 7r65cts andnot x1^61'/" is the quotation attributed

to the Pandora. So also Bapp in Roscherin 3064. This view, which is possibly

right (see p. 136), had already been anti-

cipated by Ellendt ; but the presumptionis rather the other way. There is not

sufficient evidence to distinguishand

!0<t>OKAEOY!

TTHAEY!

Fr. 487 shows that the subject of the play was the fortunes

of Peleus in his old age. It cannot therefore have dealt with

his purification by Acastus, the lying accusation of the dis-

appointed Astydamia, or the escape of Peleus from his peril onMt Pelion, although Ar. Nub. 1063 probably indicates that the

'earlier adventures had been represented on the tragic stage. It

is possible that Aristophanes was referring to the Peleus of

Euripides1

,unless fr. 619 should be held to warrant a different

conclusion. The well-known reference in Hor. A. P. 95 (et

tragicus plerumque dolet sermone pedestri \ Telephus et Peleus^cum pauper et exul uterque \ proicit ampullas et sesquipedalia

verba} cannot be attributed with certainty to any one period of

Peleus's chequered career;but most readers of Horace have

supposed that he was thinking of the exile twice suffered byPeleus in consequence of the deaths of Phocus and Eurytion.

In Horn. S 434 Peleus is said to be worn out by the weightof years, and in fl 488

2 and X 4933 there are somewhat more

definite allusions to the oppression of Peleus by his neighbours,and his inability to protect himself against them. In his abstract

of the Cyclic Nosti Proclus states (EGF p. 53) that on the

advice of Thetis Neoptolemus returned from Troy by land;

that in passing through Thrace he found Odysseus in Maronea;

and that he completed the rest of his journey and buried Phoenixwhen he died. Then follow the words, aur<k Se e/!? MoXoo-crou?

atyiKo/jievos ava<yvwpiêrai Hrj\eL. The clumsiness of the epito-mator is sufficiently obvious, but his words certainly seem to

imply that the meeting of Neoptolemus with Peleus took placein Molossia. Yet, although there is plenty of evidence to

connect Neoptolemus with Epirus4

,it is not elsewhere recorded

that Peleus removed to that country. That the incidents werein fact entirely separate appears probable from Apollod. epit. 6.

12 f, where, after a reference to the settlement of Neoptolemusin Molossia, it is stated that he succeeded to the sovereignty of

Achilles after the death of Peleus, who had been driven out bythe sons of Acastus. Other evidence makes the inference

certain. Euripides (Tro. 1126ff.) says that Neoptolemus has

1 So apparently Nauck (TGF p. 554); but he is certainly wron< in explainingEur. Tro. 1127 by reference to the story of Astydamia.

2 KCUfj.r}i>

irov Kelvov Trepifcu^rcu d/u,0Js ^6;>res| rdpovff\ oiW TLS ttrriv aprjv /cat

\oiybv afAvvai.3 eore 5^ /J.OI HT/XTJOS dyuu/uoj/os ef n ir^Trvtro-ai,

\ r) r' $x i Tipriv TroXecrtc /uera

~M.vpfJ.id6i>e(r(riv, \ 77 fj.iv dTifj.dfavo'iv a.v 'EXXada re 3>diijt> re /ere.4 Find. New. 4. 51, 7. 37.

HHAEYZ 141

sailed to Phthia, icaivds rivas\n^Xeo)? dfcov<ras auyu-ôpa?, w? viv

%6ovo<; |

"A/cacrros K/3/3\r)/cv 6 HeXiov <yovos. On these wordsthe scholiast comments

;o fj,tv Qvpi7rt,8r)s VTTO 'Afcdcrrov

(frrjo-lv /c-

rov TlrjXea' eicrl 8e 01 (fraa-lv1 VTTO rwv Svo avrov

, 'Ap%dv$pov real 'Ap^TeXoi/9, Kara rov /caipov ov e/xeXXope9 e TX/Of eiravievat, ^\7j\a(Tdai /cal l\6bvra et? drcdv-

TO) NeoTTToXeyLtft) TrpoaeXOetv Sid êifjiwva rfj KaS rfj vrjawreal êvio-devra VTTO MoXcDiô? T/I/O? "A^ttz/TO9 etcel Kara\vaaar6airbv ftiov. We seem to require here an alteration in order that

7rpocr6\0eiv may be referred to Neoptolemus instead of to

Peleus, as will presently appear from the fuller account of

Dictys. The schol. Townl. on Horn. H 488 explains : \eyei, Se

"Atcacrrov /cal rovs vlovs "ApxavSpov /cal 'Apîre^v. Themention of Archander and Architeles introduces an element of

confusion, since elsewhere they were called sons of Achaeus,whereas the sons of Acastus are known as Menalippus andPleisthenes. Consequently Tiimpel

2 would substitute 'AâtoOfor 'A/caarov in both places. The question is of subsidiary

importance for the present purpose ;and we may infer from

Euripides that Acastus and not Achaeus must have been the

traditional enemy of Peleus. The schol. on Pind. Pyth. 3. 167

appeals to the authority of Callimachus (fr. 372) for the vagueand probably corrupt statement o 8e IlT/Xei^ eV 'I/ca> ry vrô-w

drvâ-a^ rov ftiov oi/crpa)? /cal eVtwSuz'&K drcedavev. So Drach-mann reads, with ev 'I/ec5 from several MSS for ev Kc5 3

. Icus wasa small island east of Magnesia and north of Euboea (Strabo

436). It is obvious that ifj 'l/cay should also be restored in schol.

Eur., and the difficulty of explaining the removal of Peleus to

Cos at once disappears. This brings us to the detailed narrative

of Dictys (6. 7 9), which has with reason been suspected of

coming from a tragic source. Neoptolemus, while repairing his

storm-tossed ships in Molossia, learnt that Peleus had beendriven out by Acastus. Desirous of avenging his grandsire's

wrongs, he sent two of his companions to Thessaly, who re-

turned with a full report of the treachery of Acastus. Neopto-lemus at once put to sea, although the weather was unfavourable,and was wrecked on the Sepiades the rock-bound coast of

Magnesia4

losing all his fleet and most of his men, and himself

escaping with difficulty. Here he found Peleus, who hadconcealed himself in a gloomy cavern in order to avoid further

1 Some, as Bloch in Roscher ill 1843, think that this refers directly to Sophocles.2 Zusatz in Lief. 22 of Roscher's Lexikon.3 The correction had been previously made by Wilamowitz (Herm. XLIV 474 f.)

on the strength of A. P. 7. 2 r<70' on KevOei\

Kal Qtridos ya^rav a /3/9ax^w\o$ "I/cos.

4 Strabo 443.

142 1000KAEOY!

violence from Acastus, but was continually on the watch for sea-

farers, in the hope of obtaining news of his grandson. Whilehe was engaged in preparations for an attack upon Acastus,

Neoptolemus learnt that Menalippus and Pleisthenes, his sons,

had arrived in the neighbourhood on a hunting expedition.

Disguising himself as a native of lolcus, Neoptolemus announcedhis own death to the young men, and was subsequently invited

to join their party. Thus he obtained opportunities of killingthem separately, as well as their faithful servant Cinyras, whoarrived with the news that Acastus was on his way to jointhem. Neoptolemus then changed his disguise and appearedbefore Acastus in Phrygian dress as Mestor the son of Paris,

who had come to Thessaly as a captive of Neoptolemus. Acastuswas informed that Neoptolemus was lying asleep in a cave,

exhausted by his voyage. He accordingly hurried on to the cave

in order to surprise his enemy, but was met at the entrance byThetis, who had arrived to visit Peleus. The goddess rebukedAcastus for his cruelty to the house of Achilles, but persuadedNeoptolemus to spare his life. Acastus, overjoyed at the unex-

pected recovery of his freedom, willingly resigned the sovereigntyto Neoptolemus.

That some authorities should make Icus the scene of Peleus's

exile, and others a cavern in the Sepiades, is only such a variation

as we are accustomed to meet with in the heroic legends. It

would be idle to pretend that there is a strong case in favour of

the contention that the whole of the material in Dictys wastaken from the plot of Sophocles

1. But certain of its features,

such as the appearance of Thetis to compose the feud, are

unmistakably dramatic;and there is no other play which has

so good a claim to be considered its ultimate source as the Peleus

of Sophocles.Welcker proceeded to identify the Peleus with the Phthiotides,

but his arguments are quite unconvincing, (i) He makesthe unnecessary and unjustifiable assumption that Archanderand Architeles were sons of Peleus by a former marriage, andthat they had driven out and ill-treated their father, who was in

his dotage. The object of this is to work in fr. 696*. (2) Hestrangely supposes that fr. 694 was addressed to Peleus by the

speaker of fr. 487. It is of course possible that Peleus in exile

was visited by a chorus of women from Phthia, but a female

chorus generally indicates that a woman plays the leading part.

Besides, the proposed identification would compel us to make

1 See Welcker, p. 205 ff. ; Gruppe, p. 6993.2 On p. 257 he makes the extraordinary conjecture that ep dpa-parc in vit. Soph. 7

<(p. Hi Blaydes) refers to the Peleus. This needs no refutation.

FTHAEYI

the violent assumption that Aristotle in poet. 1 8. I456a I gave as

examples of tragedies of character the Peleus of Euripidescoupled with the Phthiotides (= Peleus} of Sophocles. It is far

more likely that the titles were distinct, and that Aristotle cited

two plays of Sophocles.That the Peleus was produced before B.C. 424 follows from

fr. 487 (n.).

487

TOV PJ,OLK.IOV OlKOVpOS

yepovrayajya) fccu>a7raiSev

Trakiv yap oLvSis TTCUS 6 yrjpdcTKtov dvijp.

487. 1 Aid/moj/ Sylburg : AlaKiov codd.

Clem, et Tryphonis nonnulli codd.2 Kal dvairaioevd) (om. TrdXiJ/)

487 Clem. Alex, strom. 6 p. 748

v. 2 is frequently attested : schol. Ar. Kq.1099 (KO.I vvv 6/j.avrbv eiri-rpeirw 001 TOV-

rovl| yepovTayuye'tv KavaTraideveiv rdXiff)

\ov 5e TO iafJL^LKOv iraptpdrjaei' dirb TOV

UT/X^WS Soô/cXôvs. Trypho rhet. VI I [

p. 741 Walz ws Trapa 2o0oK\et'

yepovTa,-

ywyu Kdvairaidevu TrdXtv.' Cocondriusrhet. VIII p. 784 Walz Kai 2o<poK\ijs awbTOV iraLoaybiyd) -ye/xwrcryuryuj. Plutarch

(Nic. ^ and praec. ger. reip. 13 p. 807 A)twice quotes the line yepovTaywy&v KO.VO.-

jjuffdapvew Sidovs, evidently from somecomic poet (adesp. fr. n, in 400 K.).

1 IlT]Xa: for the synizesis cf. Eur.

Phoen. 913 <r<pat;ai Mei'otâ TOVOC, Ai.

04 '05u(T(rea TOV aov iv<jTo.Tf]v \eyu^Jebb). Ai(iKiov: the adj. takes the

place of the normal gen. Aia/coD. Cf.

Ai. -134 TeXa/Aou/ie Trat. O.T. 267 ryAa/35a/cety iratSt. The idiom is Homeric :

see on Eur. Hclid. 192, Phoen.188^, 225,

1063. Copious illustrations are given byBlaydes on O.T. I.e., and Kuehner-Gerth I 261 f. oUovpos p-ovrj emphasizeshis destitution : he has none other to

give him tendance. But I think it also

.serves to mark his helplessness; for it

adds to the bitterness of old age to be

obliged to stay at home with the women(oiKoupia). That is the point of lolaus'

speech in Eur. Hclid. 700, and Wilamo-witz finds the same force in Her. 45

yap p.e Toi<r5' v dtt>/xa<ri | Tpo<p6v

2 -yepovTa-Yco-yu seems to have beena coinage of Soph, after iraidaywyu, re-

peated twenty years later in O. C. 348.In the meantime it caught the fancy ofthe comic poets (v. suf>r.). In the line

quoted by Plut. dva/juffdapveiv is either'

to get pay once more,' i.e. as a dicast,after having been put on the shelf; or

perhaps refers to a constant succession of

profitable services. dvairaiSevw iraXiv

is pleonastic, like /j.eTayvwvai ird\iv in

Phil. 1270. Logically no doubt a dis-

tinction may be made, in so far as ird\iv

denotes reversion to an earlier state anddva- repeated action (Ellendt) ; but this

is to refine too much. So TrdXtf avdis in

v - 3-

3 is a metrical rendering of the time-

worn proverb Sis iroudes ol ytpovres

(Diogen. 4. 18). This passage appearsto be the earliest allusion to it in litera-

ture, with the possible exception of

Cratin. fr. 24 (l 20 K.) TJV dp' dX^r/s 6

X6yos ws 5tj TTCUS ytpuv. Cf. Ar. Nub.

1417 yw 5 y' dvTeliroip.' Siv ws 5ts

Troupes ot ytpovTcs. Antiphon (ro<f>. fr.

136 B. [fr. 66 D.] ytjpoTpo<pla yap irpo<rtoiK

Trai8oTpo<pla. Plat. legg. 646 A ov fj.6vov

ap , ujs Zoixev, bytpuv Sis TTCUS 717^047' av,

dXXct Kai 6 fj,edvffdeis. Axioch. 367 B xal

T(f vq> 5is 7ra?5cs oi ytpovTes yiyvovTai.The same thought is implicit in fr. 695(n.). Theopomp. fr. 69, I 751 K. lun-

cus ap. Stob. flor. 116. 49 TV re \f/vxy

/card TTJV irapoi/ji.iav TTCUS ird\iv yeyovus.

144 I000KAEOY!

TO yap /cyoeio~croz> 17 TO tfiv

488 Stob. flor. 121. 9 (iv p. noi,Hense) So0o/<\ôi;s HT/X^WS' 'TO /X.TJ...

K-a/ciDs.' S does not give the name of

the play, and M omits the extract alto-

gether.Cf. Aesch. fr. go filov irovr)pov ffdvaTOS

VK\eo~Tpos, fr. 401 fafy TroKT/pcts 6di>aros

aiperurepos (where see Nauck). Eur. fr.

361 4yio 5 roi)s /caXcDs TfdvrjKbTas \ ^TJV

077,111 /j.a\\ov TOV /SX^Treii' TOUS fj.ij KdXws.

fr. 596 oik o&v TO W $9)v Kpeiff<r6v ecrr' r)

; Hec. 377 6avl)v 5' av

fj.a\\ov evrvx^ffrepos (scil. the

where he has met with calamity) | 77

Apollod. fr. 6 (ill 289 K. )ov

TOV ffv r>v opdKpeiTTovi. Philemon

fr. 203 (ill 532 K.) daveiv dpiaTov

(? &/j.eivov) effTiv r) r)v (r]v fts Mein.)d^X/ws. The same sentiment is more

fully expressed in fr. 952 (n.).

489

489 Ar. Av. 851'6

a /J.eya\a ffe/Jiva

\

TI dtieiv. The scholl. give

2o0oKXôi/s ^/c Il^Xews' avTl TOV r6 avro

<f>poi>&. In R however, TOUTO e/c II^X^wsis an interlinear comment attached to

irpbpaTov (v. 855).It is quite uncertain, as Nauck remarks,

how much belongs to Sophocles. Thescholiast does not necessarily mean morethan that the word bfj-oppodu was used bySophocles in the sense of '

I assent,' as

also in Ant. 536 f'iirep r/5' 6/noppodei. Thetransference may well have been a neo-

logism, for Eur. Or. 529 comes much

nearer to the original meaning (Kvpiws TO

a/ia /cat ffvfj.(f}d}ina3 tpfoffeiv). But at the

same time we cannot exclude the possi-

bility that the emphatic repetition of the

notion of assent was the point of the

parody from the Peleus. This is to someextent confirmed by the frequency withwhich 2xw and the aor - part, are employedin Sophocles as a periphrasis for the

perfect indicative : see the examplesquoted by Goodw. 47, Kuehner-Gerthn 61. The idiom occurs in a chorus at

Ant. 794 ffv Kal r65e pet/cos avopCov ^vvaiôv

tXfi * rapdâs. Rutherford concludes that

several lines of the Peleus were parodiedin vv. 851857.

4QO

Ira) Se HvOias ySoot

49O frw ter repetunt codd. : corr. Bentley (cum U et Aid.) |

T< 6e$ codd. :

Bentley

49O Ar. Av. 857 ?TW ITw iVw 5

IIu0ids /Sod T< Qeif. Bentley corrected

as above in order to make the line agreewith the antistrophic v. 901, and is fol-

lowed by most modern editors. Theschol. has: IIv0ids/3od* 77 /ier' ariXoO yivo-

l*.vt] /So?), TO Utidiov /A^Xos. ZvQfv Kal

irvOavXys yivcTai. OVTW 5^ ^Xeyoi' Tbv

Traiava. Kal TOVTO 5^ e/c

corr.

Cf.trw: ' raise the loud Pythian cry.'

Track. 207 KOIVOS apatvuv ?rw

Eur. ^/. 879 ITW ^vvav\o^ /Sod,

fr. 773, 58 ?TO> TeXcia yd/u-wv doidd. I. A.

1470 ?TW 5t Aavatdais ei>(j>r]/j,ia. Aesch.Theb. 947 ?TW 760$, ?TW 8dKpv. Eur. 70

&i>8pa$ LTW. Ion eleg. fr. 2, 7 (PLG II

253) TrW/xeJ',

nHAEYI 145

Vater not unreasonably inferred

that the triumphal song was raised in

honour of the return of Neoptolemusand the rescue of Peleus. We concludethat IIv0ids PO< was a paean in honourof Apollo, accompanied by the flute : Ar.continues <rvva.v\elT() 5 Xcupis ipdif.. SoPlut. Lys. ii /J.CTO. av\ov nai iraiav^v

av^TT\Vffv els AdâKOv. Pollux 4. 81

says that flutes suitable for paeans are

called 01 HvdiKot vjti\ovv 8e TO &xP v

atfXTjyuct, TO HvdiKov. irvdaijX'rjs, men-tioned by the schol., was the name givento the flute-player in the Pythian nome :

Smyth, Greek Melic Poets, p. LXI. Cf.ISGI 73 7, ed. Kaibel, 1890. But nothingso elaborate as the Pythian nome de-

scribed in Pollux 4. 84 is contemplatedhere.

4QI

/3oacro/xai Tapa rav

ftodv.

491 Ar. Nub. 1154fioav.' iu> K\a.T\ J/3oXo0-rdrcu KTC., whereschol. V has raura K TOV II^X^ws 2o</>o-

The authenticity of this fragment is

doubtful, since schol. R has Evpuridovin place of Eo0o/cXôi's preceded by irapaTO. K HT/X^WS, and continues 7ri<ôei

yap'

ub irvXaiaiv ij TIS ev 56/uotj : see Eur.

fr. 623. There is clearly some error, butit is impossible to ascertain how it arose.

Wilamowitz (Tr. 6>. fragg. p. 27) thinks

schol. V should be followed, since the

play of Soph, is elsewhere copied by Ar.

and his scholl. The same words arealso quoted in the scholia as occurring in

the Satyri of Phrynichus (fr. 46, I 382 K.),and there must, it would seem, have been

something in them which tickled theAttic fancy as expressive of a very loud

cry. Probably virtprovos suggested the

fortissimo of a musical score : cf. re^w,rbvos. Its only appearance elsewhere in

tragedy is as applied to the blast of the

Tyrrhenian trumpet (Aesch. Eum. 572).

Bergk conjectured fiodffofj.' apa. (&paAid.).

4Q2

492 Steph. Byz. p. 257, 90e0-

<raXtas...6 TroXtTT

0r)\VKov . . . Aamcts, ws 'IXtds TOV'

So0o/cX?js iv Il^Xe?'

j3curi\

For Dotion see on fr. 380. It may bethat Acastus (or his son), as hereditary

rrjs AwrtaSo?

lord of lolcus, would have been describedas king of Dotion, since Dotion wasreckoned as being within the confines of

Magnesia, to which lolcus also belonged(Strabo 436, 442).

493

r) \fjzvcrov, cu Zev, fJiij p? 6X179 avev 80/009.

493^Schol. Ar. Thesni. 870

\f/evaov, ul ZeO, TT^S tTriovcnrjs IXirLdos)des TO (rxyt* - M^vai/Spos (fr. 916, III

238 K.)'

010-0' 8 Troi-rjtrov.' So0o/cX7?s

Ilr^Xet'

/u,r) \f/ev(rov...5op6s.>

Antiatt.

(Bekk. anecd.) p. 107, 30 refers to this

passage as follows: /j.i] VO/^KTOV dvri TOU

P. II.

\J/eu<Tov.' It was formerly supposed that

Sophocles used /u-f? v6/ju<rov as well as fj^rj

\j/eii<rov in the Peleus. But it is muchmore probable that the text of the Anti-

atticist has been dislocated, and that

was originally cited from the

10

146 I04>OKAEOY!

comic poet Thugenides (fr. 3, ill 377 K.),in view of the evidence of Photius (lex.

p. 267, 8) and Suidas: fj-i] v6fu<rov avri

rou /XTJ vo/j.ia"r]s' oOrw QovKvdidrjs (Qayevidr)?

Suid. : Qovyevidys is due to Pierson on

Moeris, p. 334). Owing to some similar

confusion Suid. s.v. tytvvov quotes the

verse of Aristophanes as if it had been

written by rather than adapted from

Sophocles.JJLTJ x|/v<rov. It may be assumed that

Sophocles was imitating the three

Homeric examples: A 410 T$ pr) fj.l

irartpas Trod' O/XOI'TJ eV#eo rifj-fj, S 134 dXXaffv /xe/> /j.rj

TTW Karadtiffeo /uDXoj' "Aprjos,

W 248 #XXo <5e" TOI eptu, ffv Se w xôv

Zvdeo 6vfj.<j). Even these appear to be

isolated attempts to extend the develop-ment of the present imperative in pro-hibitions (Monro, H.G? 328), rather

than the survival of an earlier usage.dvu Sopos- The meaning might con-

ceivably be '

don't slay me unarmed? as

in Horn. 4> 50 yvpvbv, are/3 nbpudbs re

Kal d&iridos, oi>8' %xev ^7XOJ : but, apartfrom other objections, 86pv was a weaponof offence. We should interpret rather

'without (using) the sword,' i.e. far fromthe battle

;it is the prayer of the old

warrior to hear once more the clash of

arms. Of course Zeus is not thought of

as the actual agent, but as the ultimate

cause. On the other hand, dopv has not

yet reached the meaning' war '

or'

battle'

so decisively as e.g. in Eur. Ion

997 dedov or' -r]\dev s 86pv (Wilamowitzon Eur. Her. 158), although a spear is

not necessarily the weapon intended anymore than in Ai. 1056, or Eur. Tro. 387ovs 5' 2Xot d6pv. The phrase avev 8op6sand its equivalents do not always conveythe same nuance: see on fr. 941, 15, andEur. Hclid. 396. Generally perhaps, as

in Aesch. ILuni. 289 or Eur. Bacch. 804,the implication is only

' without usingforce.' Cf. Track. 1063 nbvy /me 5r; KadeiXe

(pa&ydvov dixa. Welcker thought that

there was a reference to the famous spearof Peleus (Horn. II 143), and that Zeushad promised him that it should never

fail his need ; Vater still more improbablythat Peleus was speaking of the assist-

ance of Neoptolemus, which he knew to

be near at hand.

494

KOL

494 Harpocr. p. 134, i

Kara Tt/xapxo

\eyov rb xwp aXei0ecr0cu,

IT)' 'ATTI/O?S 5taXe'/cTov,

6Vi //,?j7roTe Kal rb virb T&V

Lobeck, Phryn. p. 572) oCrws e

2o0o/cX7js 1177X61'

Kai...7rru%uij'.'

This is our best authority for the

meaning of the archaic word %r/pa\oi<pe'ii',

which hardly occurs except in allusion

to the law of Solon forbidding slaves to

frequent the gymnasia, as in Aeschin. I.e.

That it had passed out of use in the fourth

century is indicated by the fact that the

orator, referring to the omission fromthe law of an express enactment of the

licence implied in its veto, proceeds :

Kal OVK^TL irpoatypa\f/e'

rbv 5' eXevOepov

a\el(peadai. Kal yv/j.vdfrea'dai. The ex-

planation of Didymus is preserved also byEustath. //. p. 764, and by Hesych. in

p. 170; and i}pbs Idpus, 6 pi) virb \ovrpovdXX' virb yvp,va<ri<jjv Kal irbvuv ywofj-evos

(Plat. Phaedr. 239 c), is adduced in

Sia

support. The origin of the word wouldthen be due to the earlier use of oil as an

unguent exclusively in connexion with

the bath. An alternative view, but

inferior in authority, is preserved byElyin. M. p. 612, 20

(= Bekk. anted,

p. 284, l) rb v rcus TraXaicrrpcus yv/mva-

bfj.tvov Kbvti xpyvQai-, with which may be

compared Lucian Anach. 2 avrol e

eTTdyWWJ'Tat TY)V KbviV d\KTpvbvd3cos d0u/cr6repoi elev iv rats

oiyttat, TTJS \f/d/j.fj.ov rbv ohwdov d<paLpovcrr]s,

Kal pefiaioTtpav tv %T)p({J Trapexoâ-r]S TTJV

avTiXfj^Lv. Hermann-Bluemner, Gr. Pri-

vatalt., p. 213, reconciles the two state-

ments on the ground that, whereas oil

was used together with water in bathing,Kbvis was not

;and therefore the mention

of Kbvis )( water is intended to distinguish

ZripaXoKpew from x^rXcDaat'

/ier' e\aiov

\otiffaff6ai (Hesych. iv p. 301). The dis-

tinction is clearly marked in Galen xi

532: in taking a bath, the water remainson the surface; so it has to be rubbedinto the pores with oil, oirep &vbnaov oi

TraXaiol xurXoucr^cu /cat dvTeridtffdv ye

TTOIMENEZ

avrov TO $-r)pa\oi(peii>. But dXe0e<r0cuserved equally well to describe either

process, unless it was necessary to expressthe opposition between anointing after

bathing and at the gymnasium. Inas-

much as the use of oil was always pre-scribed for the latter, it is odd to find

Philostr. gymn. 58 condemning r)pa\ot-

<j)eiv together with irvpiaffdai as belongingto TTJS dypoiKortpas yv/j,va.<TTiKT]s. Jiithnercan only explain it by supposing that

Philostratus misunderstood the obsolete

term as if it referred to the anointing ofthe dry sweat which was excited by the

irvpia<ns. The same critic holds that

ZrjpoTptpe'ia-dcu denotes a dry rub, and is

not to be confounded with

Here we must apparently translate'

anointing (himself) through the folds ofhis tunic

'

; and Sophocles is guilty of ananachronism in referring to the heroic

age a practice which Thucydides (i. 6)states to have been introduced by the

Spartans: eyv/mv^dtja-dv re TrpcDrot, /cai e's

TO (pavepbv airodtivTes \iira fji^ra TOV yv/j.vd-

fc<r6ai ij\d\pavTo. But, if we are justifiedin drawing the inference apart from the

context, it would seem that in mentioningan athlete as clothed Sophocles supportsthe authority of Thucydides, afterwardsconfirmed by Plato (rep. 452 c), that the

complete stripping of the body was un-known to the Homeric Greeks.

495

tv

495 Steph. Byz. p. 392, 5

ys 6 KVKVOS /3a<ri\ev(re.

HrjXeT. Meineke wished to addQerra\ias before rjs, but, whether he is

right or not, the reference is undoubtedlyto the Thessalian district infested by the

robber Cycnus, the son of Ares, who wasslain by Heracles. Thus the reference

fits in with the topography of the play.Hesiod (Scut. 70) brings Cycnus to the

precinct of Apollo at Pagasae. Thesame neighbourhood is definitely namedby Eur. Her. 389 civ re

'Avavpov Trapd iryyas |

KVKVOVK.TO.V

| robots wXeffev, 'A/j,(pavai-

dpeiKTov. Later writers, while still

naming Thessaly, go farther afield : thusItonos in Achaea Phthiotis is mentionedas the scene of the fight with Cycnus byApollod. 2. 155, Diod. 4. 37, and Nico-laus of Damascus fr. 55 (FHG ill 389) ;

but Pausan. i. 27. 6 puts it in the neigh-bourhood of Peneus. Stephanus con-fused Cycnus with his namesake : see onfr. 499.

496

496 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 106,

13 AITTo^vxeiv'

So0o/cX^s Il^Xet.

L. and S. erroneously quote the refe-

rence in support of the meaning, to failin courage. There is no evidence that

Sophocles used the word in any other

than its ordinary sense, to faint. The

degraded form \enroip\>xiv , impossiblein verse, still lingers in many prose texts :

see Cobet, N.L. p. 79.

nOIMENES

The Tlotyu-eVe? comprised the events which immediately suc-

ceeded the first landing of the Greeks upon the Trojan coast,

and thus occupied the interval between the ?<vvenrvoi, and the

Such at least was the order of the narrative

1 See however I p. 121 for another view.

IO 2

i48 !04>OKAEOYZ

in the Cypria, if we may judge from the abstract of Proclus

{EGF p. 19): 7riTa ciTroâivovra^ auroi>9 els "\\LOV elp<yovcrLV ol

Tpa>e9, /cal 6vrjo-Kei UjOcoTecrtXao? v$r/

ETopo?. eireira 'A^tXXeu?avrovs rpeTrerat dve\a)v KVKVOV TOV TLoo-eiScovos, Kal rou? vetcpovs

dvaipovvrai. According to Apollodorus (epit. 3. 29 ff.),Thetis

had warned Achilles that the first man who landed must die.

The Trojans, hearing of the arrival of the Greeks, advancedunder arms to the coast, and prevented their landing by volleysof stones. Protesilaus was the first to step on shore, and killed

several of the Trojans before he was himself slain by Hector.

Then Achilles landed with the Myrmidons, and killed Cycnusby striking him on the head with a stone. The Trojans werescared by his death, and retreated to the city.

That the death of Protesilaus and the episode of Cycnusbelonged to this play appears to be established by frs. 497, 499,and 500, and the inclusion of fr. 501 is the natural consequence.Fr. 498 shows that Hector was one of the characters. On the

question whether Andromache also appeared see I p. 78. It is

not known whether the story of Laodamia was related in the

Cypria ;but it is barely possible that it was included in the

Tloi/jLeves, which was constructed from the Trojan standpoint1.

Welcker 2suggested that the action took place outside

a temple on the sea-coast, where Hector was surprised by the

sudden arrival of the enemy. Frs. 502 and 503 are with reason

assigned to the speech of a messenger who related the approachof the Greek fleet, and fr. 504 probably occurred in the samecontext. The chorus consisted of Phrygian shepherds, whose

pastoral labours were rudely interrupted by the fear of invasion.

Frs. 505, 515, 519, and 521 are thus entirely appropriate to their

character. For the same reason Welcker ascribed to this playfrs. 793 and 812.

It was probably not until after Hector's departure for the

spot whence danger threatened, that Cycnus appeared uponthe scene. This famous warrior was the son of Poseidon,and the king of Colonae, a town in the Troad opposite to Tene-dos 3

. The dazzling whiteness of his complexion obviouslysuggested by his name 4 was probably mentioned by the authorof the Cypria, as may be legitimately inferred from Theocr. 16.

49 (*rt9 av) drjXvv CLTTO xpoiijs K.VKVOV eyvw, i pr) (f)v\o7r i&a<?

1 Otherwise Gruppe, p. 6i5 14 .

2pp. 113 117: Ahrens however thought that the rustics must have fled in panic

to the city at the first alarm of war, and that the appearance of Andromache shows

decisively that Troy was the scene of the action.3 Strabo 586, Diod. 5. 83, Pausan. 10. 14. i. The king of Colonae and father

of Tennes is by many authorities treated as a separate personage.4 For the probable development of the legend see Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. no

TTOIMENEI 149

nrporepwv v/jLvr)(rav doiSoi; At any rate, something of the kind wasknown to Hesiod (fr. 119 Rz.) and Hellanicus (FHG I 49), andwe need not hesitate to suppose that Sophocles also made it

part of his description1

. The victory of Achilles over Cycnuswas reckoned amongst his most celebrated achievements: seeFind. Ol. 2. 91, Isth. 5. 39. Similarly Aristotle (rhet. 2. 22.

I396b

i8); coupling the death of Hector with that of Cycnus,explains why Achilles earned peculiar distinction through thedefeat of the latter : he was invulnerable (ar/xwro?), and stoppedthe disembarkation of the army. The legend that Cycnus wasinvulnerable was unquestionably old, and a fragment which hascome to light since the publication of Nauck's second edition

(fr. 500) proves that it was known to Sophocles. There weresimilar stories concerning the invulnerability of Ajax andAchilles 2

,which have been shown to be early ;

and the immunityof Ajax was recorded by Aeschylus

3. In all such cases arp&rro?

meant not so much indestructible as impervious to spear or

sword 4

;and that is no doubt the reason why we- meet the

tradition that Cycnus was crushed by a stone. That may havebeen the version of the Cypria* and it was still retained byLycophron

6;but there were others who were not unnaturally

dissatisfied with such a crude device. For it is unlikely that

Ovid, who describes the combat at length (Met. 12. 72 fif.),drew

entirely upon his own invention, when he made Cycnus trip overa stone, and Achilles throttle him by drawing tight the strap ofhis helmet (ib. 140 ff.).

Did he take a hint here from Sophocles?That Cycnus behaved as a somewhat arrogant boaster seems

to be indicated by fr. 501, and perhaps by fr. 507.Ar. Ran. 963 implies that Aeschylus put Cycnus on the

stage, but, as no confirmatory evidence is extant, it remainsdoubtful whether the statement applies to the son of Ares or

the son of Foseidon.

Hermann 7 inferred from the character of the fragments that

the IIo{//,eV9, if not a satyr-play, was scarcely a serious tragedy,and that it belonged to the class of tragi-comedies to which the

Alcestis of Euripides has often been assigned. That the play

1 Seneca probably borrowed from a dramatic source: Tro. 191 Neptunium I,

cana nitentem perculit i^^venem coma. Ag. 216 nivea proles Cycnus aequorei dei.

Perhaps in the Aethiopis: Gruppe, p. 6181.See Jebb's Ajax, p. xvm.This is made quite clear by reference to Horn. <

568, Eur. Phoen. 594, Hel. 8ro.

Gruppe, p. 671.v. 233 : I cannot see why von Holzinger seeks to avoid the natural interpretation

of the words.7 Philol. II 135. His view is supported by Wecklein (Sitzungsb. k. bayr. Akad.

1890, I p. 13). See however Decharme, Rev. t. gr. 1899, p. 296.

150 !04>OKAEOY!

contained comic touches is undeniable, but there is no groundfor affirming that its general character was satyric rather than

tragic.

497

[6 n/o&rrecriXecos VTTO TOVf/

Efcro/305

49T Schol. Lycophr. 530 Icrrope't 5e

So0o/cX?7s tv Hoiftta-ii' UTTO TOV '"EiKTOpos

dvaipedrjvai TOV Hp<i)T<rl\e(i)v.

The death of Protesilaus by the handof Hector was related in the Cypria

(EGFp. 19). Horn. B 701 Tbv 5' %KTave

AdpSavos dvrip |

vabs dirodpâKOVTa TroXi)

Trp&TLffTov 'AXO-I&V does not give the nameof his opponent ;

but Aristarchus (Lehrs,

p. 1 88) concluded that Hector could not

have been so described. The mytholo-gists and later writers follow the accountof the Cypria'. Apollod. epit. 3. 30,

Hygm.fad. 103, Lucian dial. mart. 23. i,

Ov. Met. 12. 67 Hectorea primus fataliter

hasta,|Frotesilae, cadis. J. A. Scott

(Class. Philol. vm 165) makes use of

this evidence in order to show that Hectordid not belong to the pre-Homeric tra-

dition.

498

/ecu

498 Phot. lex. p. 307, 17 and Suid.

s.v. %avG)'

KOTTidffit) (KOiridii) or avif)(rii)

/coTTido-w Herwerden). So0o/cX?ys llot^ffiv

E/crwp

<f}fjffiv

'

i)8/...xtpa.' Phot. lex. p. 307, 14and Suid. s.v. Zavfoei.

'

Koiridcrei. Hesych.Ill p. 168 avr)ffcu

'

KOTria<rai, I p. 253diroZavav

' KaKoiradeiv. The verb is thus

explained by Suid. s.v. avav iroveiv TOUS

KapTTOvs ras yvvaiKas TU>V xeipwv diet crvvex^)

T&V pl<av ipyacrlav. Cf. Poll. 7. 30 TO 5e

Ka.iJ.civ dirb TTJS tptovpylas ras xeâs ^vaveXêro. The grammarians, therefore,make it an intransitive disease-word,

properly said of women whose wrists

ache from carding wool (%aiveiv) ;and

it is used intransitively in Nicand. Ther.

383 r)5' biroTav vetipwv avdg, /ce%aXa(T/Aâ

(where the schol. refers it to the

numbing influence of cold on the fingers),

the only other place in which it appearsto occur. Here we must take x*Pa w ^tn

Trpoyvfj.vdffai only, but if the order hadbeen reversed it would have been natural

to treat x^Pa as internal object to âvrjaai.

Tr. 'It is pleasant to tire from labour andto practise the arm.' The aor. is in-

gressive. For the class of verbs in

question see Rutherford, New Phry-nichus, p. 153, where %a.vG) is omitted.

The pleasure is that of the athlete, whosemuscles are slack from disuse, in again

submitting to the stiffening of hard exer-

cise. Hilberg's objection (Princip d.

Silbenwagung, p. 215) to the scansion of

r)5v as a spondee cannot be approved:see on fr. 873.

499

fiorjv

499 Steph. Byz. p. 392, 6

(fr. 495). KOI iv

It has been thought that POTJ'V is cor-

rupt; but neither Ellendt's 7^771', whichis masculine, nor Wecklein's x.dbva has

any probability. O.C. 1057 niight becited in defence of the text. Headlamadduced Pindar's KvKvela, Mx 7

? (f tne

other Cycnus) Ol. n. 15. As Stephanushas in any case confused two different

persons, it does not seem unlikely that

TTOIMENEZ

his second illustration was still moreirrelevant as not being directly concernedwith locality at all. It is true that, as

Cycnus is not a place-name, we can

hardly compare Eur. Phoen. 301 Qoivuraav

fioav ; but the termination of the adjective

may have been intended to suggest a

local dialect. At least there is no obvious

reason why KVKVITIS should have been

preferred to KvKvela : late examples, like

Galen's 0ct/>/ia/cms j3/3Xos .referred to byLobeck, Paralip. p. 52, do not count.The country of Cycnus was Colonae orColona on the coast of the Troa^ oppo-site to Tenedos: Diod. 5. 83. Pausan.10. 14. 2.

ou

500

ov criSypos avrrerai

5OO Aristarch. comm. ffdf. r. 215

(Amherst Pap. II [1901] p. 3), col. ii 13

cTLdripif} de oi)5' apyvpy xpdrrcu] 2o00fc\^sev II[ot]/i&ri

' ou %aX/r6s...xpo6$.'The reference is cleai'ly to the invulner-

ability of Cycnus, for which see Intro-

ductory Note. The mention of

together with o-iS-rjpos points to the

general use of the former for weaponsof offence in the heroic age, although(rldypos was not entirely unknown in theconstruction of .cutting or piercing instru-

ments : see Leaf on Horn. S 34, Monroon T 1 3 , and Cauer, Grundfragen

2, p. 284 ff.

501

KOL K

pvrrjpi Kpova)v yXouroV VTTTLOV TroSds

5O1 . 1 /cat /^V Brunck, /cat ^77 a' coni. R. Ellis (#77 0-' Qvfipitovr' Blaydes) |

IPT' coni. Wagner |

Xw Hesych.: <r' eXw Brunck, 6'Xw M. Schmidt, /3dXw Blaydesconi. Blaydes | yXovrbv om. Hesych. |

irodds Phot. : TroXos Hesych.

thus requires the retention of Aw. Cf.

Eur. El. 608 ffti S\ K fiaOpuv yap was

avfipTjcrai 0tXots, which is sufficient to

justify the metaphorical use. Lycophr.770 fJt-tXaOpov apSfjv CK fiaOpuv avavraTov,of Odysseus' home in Ithaca, does not

imply literal destruction. Similarly A.P.

15. 22. 4 x/>f(ro/3a0ets 5' t<TTv<f>t\i' etc

6efjid\(3)v aVa/cras (misunderstood by Ed-monds, Gr. Bucol. Poets, p. 489). Theliteral meaning is common : A.P. 9. 97

Tpotrjv 5epKo/J.e6' e'/c ftdOpuv iracrav

', Pollux I. 12 K fiadpwv ava-

5O1 Hesych. ill p. 437 pvrrjpi Kpovw.6 Kuvi'os X^-yei '/cat ^t7/...7r6Xo5.' ZVIOL 5e

OVK ^TTl TOV Kl'lKVOV dXX' ^TTt TCOV IT0\ IJ.l<j}V ,

ware elvai rbv Xôv, favyovra.? atirous ryinrrttp irodl roi)s Idiovs "yXourous Trof/jcrb)

r^>TfTiv. Photius lex. p. 493, 13 quotesthe second line with the name of Sopho-cles attached to it. Welcker's ascriptionof the lines to the Hot/Aês is accepted byNauck, and is almost certainly right:see Introductory Note.

1 Kal[AT].

The recovery of the true

reading is very difficult in the absenceof the context, but the following points

may be noted, (i) The style of the

passage and the word t|3p(v are en-

tirely in keeping with the character of

a boaster who considered himself in-

vulnerable, although Welcker's reference

to Tzetz. Antehom. 257 in this connexionis an error. (2) Brunck's /cat iuf]v.,.d

>

t\& is an attractive conjecture which J.was inclined to

approve ;but the key to

the solution lies in recognizing that K

pdOpcov means funditus^'

utterly,' and

(veuv). Dio Chrys. 37. 42. Wecannot therefore render '

I will drive

(you). ..from your station' (J.), as if

jSadpuv referred to 'the position of the

Greeks on the rocks near the coast (fr.

50-2 irapa\iav irtrpav : cp. Ph. 1000 777?

r65' aiireivbv f3d0poi>).' (3) We concludethat the corruption is limited to the

opening syllables, and that Kal/J.-/J

<r' or

<r<' or even /XT? Kal a"1

(<r0') should be read,unless the quotation was intended to run

Kal /j.7}...vj3plfav. (4) The emendation

J52 lOÔKAEOYI

'of M. Schmidt (see cr. n. ) rests on a

comparison of Apostol. 12. 63 (Paroem.II 557) 6'Xy irodi

'

iri T&V ra^^ws TL TTOLOVV-

TU)v, 0/J.oia rfj'

o'Xy pvrripiS But the

phrase has no place in this context.

2 pvnrjpi. The simplest and best

explanation of the passage is that pvrrip

means a lash, as in Ai. 241 and else-

where, with inrrCov iro86s as genitive of

definition, i.e. (consisting of) the fiat ofthe foot. The burlesque tone was nodoubt in character. Pollux 9. 126 ex-

plains paOairvyifriv (Ar. Eq. 796) as the

game crtju^J ry ?ro5t TOV y\ovTov waieiv,

an explanation which goes back to

Aristophanes (fr. 82 Nauck). To somesuch form of horse-play Sophocles ap-

pears to allude : was it anything like'

running the gauntlet'

? Other explana-tions are as follows: (i) The schol. on

O.C. 900 quotes Praxiphanes, the Peri-

patetic and pupil of Theophrastus, as

having explained pvrrjpos in airevoeiv dirb

pvTTjpos by pXavrrjs, &KOVUV TO vTrodrjfjia

olov TUV TTQQ&V TO KoXv/uLjuLa. No doubt,as J. remarks, he derived the word from

pve(r6cu= ''protector'

of the foot. HenceMeineke (O.C. p. 211), with the approvalof Nauck, takes the word here as cal-

ceus, the shoe or sandal: cf. fr. 527Tra.pdppv/j.0. TroSos (n.). (2) Campbellunderstands,

' the hardened sole of the

foot,' compared to a piece of hide.

(3) Hesych. records an alternative view,to the effect that Cycnus threatens to

make his foe run so fast as to strike his

own buttocks with upturned feet. Inthat case for the use of xpovwv see onfr. 620.

502

(t)0ivos yap, TTpiv TIV av\LT<i)v opav,

orrparov crreiôvTa TrapaXiav

5O2. 1 auXiT&v Bekker:

Ath., xtXta vel x'^"" 5 Harpocr.vos jraida Ath. 3 Tr^Tpav Harpocr.5O2 Harpocr. p. 130, 16 Ndvviov . . .

'A7roXX65w/)os iv T$ irepi eraipuv Alya\tyeo-6at (pT)<ri TO.VT^V TTJV fTaipav 5ia rb

Qa\\bv rbv /caTTT/Xo?' KaTafpayeiv' 6rt yap

6a\\({j -âlpovffiv at alyej, /cat So0o/cX^sIIot

/u&rij> (irvKecnv AC, Tri^Xaio'ti' B)

' eudt-

y6s...7r^rpai'.' Athen. 587 A 6 ye 2o0o-K\TJS h HOLÔ-LV on OaXXofiayel r6 faov

<f>v)criv oi/rws'

ewdwbs...&Kpa.vS The ulti-

mate source of both quotations was

Apollodorus of Athens, the famous

grammarian of the second century B.C.,in his book Trepi T&V 'Ad^vrj<nv eratpt'Sw^

(Athen. 586 A). Different views are held

regarding the intermediate stages throughwhich the extract reached Harpocrationand Athenaeus (Schwartz in Pauly-Wis-sowa I 2863; Schultz, ibid. VII 2415).

' The extract is taken from the speechof a messenger, a goat-herd, who an-

nounces (to Hector) the approach of theGreeks (Welcker, p. n 4)'(J.).

1 icoOivos. For the adverbial use of

the temporal adj. see my n. on Eur. HeL651. Copious illustrations are given byBlaydes on Ar. Lys. 60 opdpiai. irpiv*re. The meaning may be either ' so

Harpocr., Ath. 2 xtâtpats Nauck:|

veotnrdda Casaubon : veoiraida Harpocr.,: &Kpav Ath.

early that none of the farm-servants sawme '

;or '

so early that none of them wasvisible.' It is against the former that

we only need a mark of time, and there

was no reason why the goat-herd shouldwish to escape notice. This consideration

induced Meineke to substitute irepav for

bpav. avXirwv. Hesych. I p. 322 has

avXrjTTjv' TOV TOV KOirpov tTri.{j.\oij[j.ei>ov

TUIV Trpof$a.Twv. This was corrected byMeineke (on Steph. Byz. p. 146, 10) to

at\lT-t]v on the strength of the readingi

av\r)Tr)v in the codex Rhedigeranus. It

is generally considered that the lemma of

Hesychius refers to the present passage,and M. Schmidt consequently wished to

read avXiT&v Ttt)v...irLju,\ovfj.ei>(i}v. In

Ap. Rhod. 4. 1487 auXtTT/s was restored

by Merkel for ai)Xeir?7s (avXrjTrjs four Paris

MSS). avXiTrjs comes ' from ai)X?J as= farm-yard (Horn. A 433, where sheepstand in it : 640 avXrjs ev x6pTot(ri KV\IV-

douevos /cara K6irpov)' (J.). For the formsee on fr. 92.2 OaXXov: Babr. 45. 7 rats fj.tv (wild

goats) tptpwv ?/3aX\e 0aXX6;/ # v\rjs, Ant.

TTOIMENE! 153

1 20 1 ev veoiracrLv OaXXols. Timaeus p. 136$a\A6s Trdv TO ddXXov. Kvpius d 6 rijs

tXalas itXddos : and his statement is con-

firmed by the evidence of literature,

where it nearly always means an olive-

branch. See Ruhnken in loc, for the

phrase QaXXov irpoaeieiv to dangle a bait,

like a branch before hungry cattle (H.).For TTpovfapuv cf. fr. 171, and for the

general sense Plut. poet. aud. n p. SOD77

'

a'i (StcjKet) TOV OaXXov.îjxaipais.

The loss of o~ was due to the fact that

before TT or r it was written as a small loopattached to them: so Auratus restored

077/xats Trovypats in Aesch. Cho. 1043 f r

<pTJfj.ai. irovTjpa.1 of M (H.).

3 <TTi\ovTa irapaXiav irerpav. Thewords may mean, as J. remarks, either

(i) 'advancing to the rocks by the sea,' or

(a)'

moving along'

(or' over ') them

(Aesch. Prom. 734 crretx' foypbrovs yvas,and see n. on Eur. Hel. 598). The latter

is preferable, so far as we can judge in

the absence of context; but it is difficult

to decide between Harpocration's irtrpavand Athenaeus' &Kpav. Cf. fr. 905 irapa-

.. .bdbv (of Theseus). Tucker

(C.R. xvin 245) suggested that TrXd/ca is

the true reading, and Wecklein thoughto-TbXov might be expected for arparbv.The older texts of both sources gaveTrap' dXt'ai'.

503

TTOipOLKOS; 'EXXrjo'Troz'Tis, a)pa[a Olpovs

TO) BOCTTTO/HTT?'

TT^Se JOLp #O,/ueTCU.

5O3Ellendt :

503vevfL

1 to? C: eie AT(^Se codd.

Athen. 319 A irr)Xauvs...uvr)uo-v lloi/J.eo'U'

'ef#'

2 rrdpavXos Bergk : Trdpot/cos AC

ol jj.

r6 ev

1 2v0''

probably refers to the coasts

of the Troad '

(J.). irr]Xa|Jivs was the

name given to the tunny which hadnot yet arrived at its full size, or, more

accurately, during the period lasting fromthe time it was six months old until the

end of its first year: Arist. h. an. 6. 17.

57 la

15 17 5' avrjo~i$ eo~Ti T&V dvvvlduv' OTav yap TCKWCTLV ol lÔves v ry

ylyvorrcu CK TOV yoO as KaXovffiv

o~Kop5vXas, Bv^dvTiot. 5' avîdas 5id

\iyais avâveffdai. rjuepais, Kai 4e p-uev TOV (pdivoTr&pov dua Tats

iv, eio-irXtovo-i 8e TOV Zapos TJd-r]

in}Xafji.v8s. ib. 57ia ii OOKOV&L 8'

IVO.L Trpefffivrepoi T&V irrjXauvSwi'.

In the same treatise (8. 13. 598* 26) Aris-

totle again states that dvvviSes and irrjXa-

uvSes pass into the Euxine from westernwaters in the spring and spend the

summer there. These passages will ex-

plain how the TrrjXa/mvs winters in the

Hellespont. Nauck thinks that Hesy-chius (in p. 331) and Photius (p. 428, 12),

who explain that irrfXauvs should bewritten 5id TOV v (not TnjXa/mis), are re-

ferring to this passage.2 irapavXos

'

EXXTjo-rrovTts,'

lodgednear us in the Hellespont. Cp. O.C.

785 ws TrdpavXov oiKiffrjs, "plant me near

the borders," At. 892' (J.). Bergkrestored ndpavXos from Hesych. ill p. 278TrdpavXos.

'

TrdpauAos'

RXXr]0"jrbvTOV utpa

Qtpovs.' i] /card TO Qtpos di<udovo-a. Cf.

OyuauXos fr. 24. Even so the reinforcement

of TrdpoiKos (' neighbouring' : Ant. 1155)

by TrdpavXos is hardly satisfactory.

wpcua : the TryXauvdes were distinguishedfrom TOL upaia, as the tunnies werecalled at a year old (Athen. 116 E).

The upaiov of Byzantium was esteemedthe choicest of delicacies: Archestratus

(in the r/dvirddeia, c. 330 B.C.) ap. Athen.

117 A av 5' d(piKy KXeivov RvfavTiov ei's

irb\iv ayvr/v, | upalov <pdye JJLOI râX ?

TrdXw O~TI yap <rd\bv|

/cai uaXaicov.

upaia means therefore'

reaching its

prime,' and this may also be the meaningof the disputed horaeum scotnbruin in

Plaut. Capt. 851.3 rfjSe: see cr. n.

'If r^5e be kept,

render: "since it is frequent for him,"i.e.,

"for it is his constant visitor." The

middle voice, which is found only here,= the act. eafj.lfa (O.C. 672)

'

(J.). Forthe Sophoclean middle see on fr. 858.The gloss of Hesychius (11 p. 299 0aui-

erar outXfi) is taken, probably with

justice, to refer to this passage ; but, in-

asmuch as dauifciv nowhere else has the

sense of d/uuXeTv c. dat., I incline to think

that Ellendt was right. The corruptionwas natural with r< Boo-iropiT-g preceding.

154 I04>OKAEOYI

5O45O4 Schol. Ar. Eq. 1150

504

TT\KTols 7rop(j)Vpa)v Orjpav Herwerden: Trop<j>ijpas codd.

| drjpa Tucker :

, ijiraj Tropfivpas ,

els 8

5e Toirrots ^<rrt /cat TO SAeap, ws

raparide/jicvos TO. 2o<po-'

K7iiu,oia'i...yfros.' Cf.

Hesych. II p. 475 Kri[j.6$' TrXeKrbv dyyelov,

ev y Xau-Pdvovai T<XS 7rop0i;pas.

KTj|a.oL(TL ir\KTois.' The form of

/O7jit6s meant here was like an eel-pot,"narrowing after the entrance, and then

widening again, with the rushes or osiers

projecting inside so as to make the return

more difficult than the entrance"

(Diet.Ant. II 546 b, referring to Pollux i. 47,where it is called K\>î\t]). The schol.

Ar. compares it to a strainer (^/x.6s [:soCratinus fr. 132, I 54 K. <rxoivivos ^/x6s]),

Oppian (Hal. 5. 591) describes how irop-

<j>vpcu are caught, in small weels (Kvprldes)made of rushes: Kvprides rjjSaial TaXdpots

yeyaaffiv 6/iotat (600). Herod, i. 191uses K6pTr), Plat. [Tim. 79 D T$ rov Ktprov

and elsewhere], Arist. h. an.

codd.

8. 2O. 603* 7 KtipTi{) Brjpevovvi TOI)S

Plin. n. h. 9. 132 capiuntur autem pur-purae parvulis rarisqiie textu veluti

nassis (''baskets, as it were," cp. Op-pian's TaXdpois 6/uotat) in alto iactis.

K-TJUOS meant also the funnel at the topof the Kados or KdStovcos (balloting urn) :

Ar. Vesp. 754 Katri.VTal-r)v ^TTI TOIS Krjfj.o'is\

\l/r]<pLô^v(iJv 6 TeXeirratos'

(J.). See onfr. 295.

7rop<j)vpwv was restored by Herwerdenfor reasons which seem indisputable.Either the plural is required, he says, or

something like dXieuTt/c6f must haveoccurred in the next line to agree with

7ôs (Melanges Weil, p. 182). Theformer alternative is much to be pre-ferred.

0T]p<x: see cr. n. I have acceptedTucker's emendation, which is a great

improvement. He supports it byXayLtjSd-vovffi of the schol. and Hesych., and finds

the same corruption in Tr. fr. adesp. 48400ei'pet (1. drjpq.) yap ij wpbvoia TT\V djSov-

\iav: see C.R. xvin 432.

505

yap ovres SecrTTOTcu

/cat K\vew.

5O5 Plut. Agis I aXXoTe aXXas 0opds0ep6/xej/oi, fjyXots Kal irddeffiv eiraKoiXov-

BOVVTCS, oVep ol 2o0o/cXôi;s /3oT?7pes ^TTI

T&V TTOlfJ.VLWl' \tyOVfflV'TOlL>TOl$...K\tieiV.'

That, he goes on to say, is the experi-ence of politicians who court the favour

of the mob; they find that it is the tail

which leads and they who follow. II.

renders :

' We are I Their masters and

their slaves ; to these we must,| Though

they be silent, hearken.'2 o-iwirwvTttv K\veiv is an oxymoron,

expressing a particular aspect of the

opposition of faffTrbrai to 8ov\evo/j,ev :

cf. Ant. 74 6'<ria iravovpyf)aacr\ Dobree

quoted Cic. pro Deiot. 18 fit in dominatu

servitus, in servitute dominatus.

506

/ecu ST) rovs IIocri8etoi>9

5O6. 1 reLx^dw Dindorf: TVX&V cod. Haun., Teix&v cod. Vind.,Nauck

|

iroafidiovs codd. 2 dpiy/cobs dwoaeHrafjifrri codd. : corr. Lehrs

5O6 Herodian ?rept pov. X^. p. n,4 6/iotws 5^ Kal dpaeviK&s KT-TJTIK&S Hoai-Setos (7ro(Tei5iOj cod.) ws 'Hpd/cXetos a^Xos.

The reading and interpretation areboth doubtful ; but it would seem that

Tpota must be the noun to which d7ro<m-

belongs, and that the impending

TTOIMENES 155

destruction of the city is described. Forairoffelecrdai is always used of '

throwingoff from oneself a covering or a burden :

cf. e.g. Ar. Nub. 287 dXX' diro&eia'dfj.ei'at

vtyos o/JL^ptov \

dOavdras t'Sectj. The tra-

ditional text (see cr. nn.) is unmetrical:

the remedy of Lehrs is simpler than the

assumption of a lacuna between IIo<rt-

deiovs and OptyKovs, as advised by Nauck,or the rearrangement proposed by AhrensKal STJ roi)s Hoaideiovs

\ TO'I^W dpiyKobs

d7ro(r<ra/^j>77. For errors of this kindsee on fr. 941, 10. In Horn. $ 446Poseidon alone is the builder of the

wall, IV apprjKTos TroXts el'??; though usu-

ally Apollo is mentioned as his colleague,as in Eur. Tro. 5. In the famous passageof Vergil (Aen. 2. 608 ff.) Poseidon is him-self the destroyer of his own handiwork :

hie, iibi disiectas moles avolsaque saxis\

saxa vides mixtoque undantetn pulverefumum, \ Neptunus muros magnoqtieemota tridenti

\ fundamenta quatit totam-

que a sedibus urbem\

emit. Similarly

Tryphiod. 680 f. recalls the builder of

the walls in speaking of their downfall :

retxetri <5 irTO\Lirop6ov eirl <p\6ya 6a)pr]-

âvT-es, { tpya Iloaeidduvos ty vvvfyevov

dvTjj.fj. Kal STJ is apparently equivalentto fjdrj. So also in the middle of the

sentence Hdt. 9. 66 irporepewv 5 rrjs

bdou bpa Kal dy (petiyovras TOI)S Hepffas.O. C. 173. Kuehner-Gerth II 125. Forthe stem-variation Hotnd- IlocmS-, whichis thought to be due to vowel-gradation,see Smyth, Ionic Dialect, 145. Ac-

cording to Ahrens's rule I is always short

in forms derived from the stemMeisterhans 3

, p. 54.

507

yvdOoicriv ef dp,<j)r)(Jiepov

5OT Suid. s.v. d/j,<pri/u,pov' rbv d/u.(f)r)~

TrvpeTOv. So0o/cX?ys

J. writes :

'If the subject to Qtpwv was

the sufferer, the sense is "bearing aboutwith him a chill in the jaws." But if

the subject was something external to

him (e-g' 06^3os), <f)pa}v = "bringing,causing

"such a chill. These words (like

those of fr. 501) are probably taken froma boastful speech of Cycnus, who imagineshis aspect as striking terror into someGreek chief (perhaps Achilles), whoseteeth will chatter, as with a feverish agueof fear (Welcker, p. 116).'

Kpv|xov,= l

chill,' as in Eur. fr. 682

avrrjs

Valck.); (J.) dfx<J>T][^pov. Theform is attested also by Etym. M. p. 89,

29 d^077/uep'6s' 6 Ka.dfiiJiepivbs

' Kal

/jepov Oyuot'ws. Phryn. (Bekk. anecd. p. 24,

31, p. 43, 3 de B.) dfj.(priiJ.epo3 Trvperbs.

dv dv.Q'riiJ.epivbv ol larpoi. The qiiotidianis an intermittent fever or ague, in whichthe paroxysms recur every 24 hours, as

contrasted with the tertian (rptrcuoj or

Stdrpiros), where the period returns in 48,and the yuar/an, in 72 hours (Plat. Tim.86 A). See Encycl. Brit.^ xvn 462.Cf. Shaksp. Henry V\\. i. 113 (Mistress

Quickly of Falstaff)*

Ah, poor heart !

he is so shaked of a burning quotidiantertian, that it is most lamentable to

behold.' * Tremors of the muscles, more

or less violent, accompany the cold sen-

sations, beginning with the muscles of

the lower jaw (chattering of the teeth}'

:

Encycl. Brit.11 xvn 461, art. Malaria.

508

Xdyw yap eX/co? ovStv olSa TTOV

8508 ol TT G

| rvxeiv G : xav ^v Suid.|fort, olda

5O8 Schol. Soph. At. 581 (edited byBind, from cod. G) OVK tanv larpov <ro<pov

\pr)<rdai. TOV rpai/ytxaTOS ^5?7 TO/UT;?

/cat 4v HOI/J.^(TI'

\6yip yap ^X/cos

Dovdev ol TT rvxtiv.'' The same comment

occurs in Suid. s.v. dpyveiv ^Tr^Sds, exceptthat Sophocles' words are given as X67^yap ovotv ?X/cos oldd irov xav ^v - Theversion of Suidas was understood byHemsterhuis to mean ' hard words break

no bones,' comparing Aesch. Theb. 385

156 !0*OKAEOYZ

oi)5' e\KOTrota yiyverai rd ffrj/mara. Butit is obvious that the tradition of cod. G,

though corrupt, is superior; and that the

meaning required to enforce the parallelis something like that which is obtained

by Meineke's conjecture oldd TTW

Similarly Gomperz oldd TTW \avbvictvai>, Papageorgius oldd TTOU

<TOjU7/s> (ovdev' oldd irov refj-elv Papa-basileios), . W. Schmidt ouXovrai xavov -

Nauck proposed (but subsequently aban-

doned) old' &KOVS TVXCLV (or rvxbv), andHeadlam \6yov yap X/cos ovdtv larpov

"ri'xf. It may be that Dindorf's TTW is

all that is required (see Jebb on Phil.

256), and that the beginning of the next

line, which completed the sense, has beenlost (e.g. <la<ri/j.ov crwr?7/)05>: for the

infinitive see Goodw. 915, 2 b). But

with such an original it is not easy to

account for xav t>v>which must be an

explanatory adscript. I suggest o?5a

ffvftwrvyfr (or, as is perhaps preferable,

crv/JLTTTVxtv) : although I cannot provethat ffv/j.TTTijo'o'b) was used for the closingof a wound like ovva.pij.bfa or avvapTG},there seems to be no reason why Sopho-cles should not have employed it in that

sense. This conjecture has been partially

anticipated, as I have since learnt, byTucker (C.R. xvin 246), who reads TTOU

(or TTW) TTTvxtv, and supports it by the

medical use of irrvyâ and TTTVKTOV as' a bandage.' For \by($ Gomperz aptly

compares Aesch. Theb. 702 Tedrjyfj.vov

TOL tf otf/c diraju.pXvi'eis \6y({), where the

different distribution of the emphasisshould be observed.

509

KVVOS re

5O9 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 109,

7 Tre\\6v'

inro(pat6v. dyvoovvres 5^ rives

ypd<j)ov<rt, Tre\iov...<l}s KO.L 2o0o/cX^s Iv

KO.I cv 'A/A0iapdy (fr. 114) <t>fjcil

T^XXT/s re /j.TjKddos /3oos pyvewv.'The glossary of Erotian has been entirelytransformed and considerably mutilatedin the course of transmission

;and the

present passage has suffered irreparable

damage. Thus Klein rightly points outthat some words must have been lost

before ws, since the intention cannot beto accuse Soph, of ignorance in adoptingthe form TrAtos. If this evidence stood

alone, we should probably infer that the

quotation from the Iloi.uês had also

been lost, but we know from anothersource (see on fr. 114) that the words

Kvvbs...pT)v<i)v do not come from the

Amphiaraus. It is generally assumedthat they represent an iambic trimeter

quoted from the Hoi/jtês : thus Duentzerwould emend the first part by writingaly6s re 7reXX?}s /ATj/cddos, and for the last

two words Brunck read pivbv j3o6s, Lo-beck /3oO r' apvevos, and Schneidewin

/3o6s| pivbv. Klein tentatively suggested

piv&v (vulg. pivtuv). I am not satisfied

that these corrupt words ever formeda piece of continuous verse, and cannotin any case accept the '

bleating cow '

which L. and S. and others ascribe to

Sophocles. p.T]Ka8os, with or without

aly6s, must mean a goat. It is impossible

/3o6? pto avoid the conclusion that ptjveuv is

corrupt ; Sophocles surely did not use the

Alexandrian pyv, a rare poetic word,

generally supposed to be a mistaken for-

mation due to iro\vpprjv and ignorance of

dpr/it (see on fr. 655). Still less can it

belong to Hippocrates or his interpreters.It may of course be a corruption of pivov,

especially if Schneidevvin's restoration of

fr. 114 is correct: for in that case weshould have to recognize in Erotian

a conflation of two separate quotations.But I have sometimes thought that

bfjvfwv might have come from ep/Ayvevuv,a scholiastic word (schol. El. 505), andthat the original intention was to quotefrom both plays merely enough to provethat Sophocles applied the word ?reXX6s

to the colour of a dog, a goat, and anox. ireXXos, which conies, I suppose,from *7re\-z'6-s, is akin to 7re\t6s, ire-

XtSi'os, ?roXi6s, IleXo^, Lat. pullus etc.

The accent wavers : thus the Mace-donian Pella is said to be so called

on /3ous a\>TT}v evpe Tre'XX?? Etym. M. p.

659, 38 ;but cf. Theocr. 5. 99 TOLV olv

rdv Tre\\a.v (-rreXXdv vulg.). In Arist.

h. an. 9. I. 6o9b 22 T&V tpwbi&v o re

TreXXos KOLL b \CVKOS it may be a noun, as

Lobeck points out (Paralip. p. 343). Asto the meaning J. remarks :

' Commonroot-sense, "pale"; then ash-coloured,

livid, black-and-blue, and so dark-

coloured.'

nOIMENEI 157

5109

ocrov ST) 7717X0^ opydcrai KOL\OV.

51 Didymus in Dem. Philipp. 12

(13) [fieri. Klassikertexte I p. 67] 2o0o-K\T)S ei> [IlotyuJ&riJ'

* '

g/JUff[y '] ocrov 5e[t TTJT?-

XOP 6pydo~ai /c[aX6]y.' So restored the

passage was rendered by Diels :

' hemixed with it so much water as wasneeded to prepare a good strain (Ton).'But this would seem to require 6Voi>, and,as Fuhr (Berl. phiL Woch. 1904, 1128)

has pointed out, 7777X65 does not requirean epithet, and the rendering of 7777X65

/caX6s is questionable. It seems better,

therefore, to accept Buecheler's con-

jecture 5-f). It should be added that

Cronert (Rh. Mus. LXil 387) deciphersAJ or possibly AJI in the papyrus, with

Ka[\6]v at the end of the line.

For irrjXov op-ydo-ai see on fr. 482.

817 TTOTC

yevvai rrj ei rrs

511. 1 drj Trore Cobet : cod.

511 Schol. M Eur. Andr. 276.6Matas re /cat AIDS TOKOS '

6 'EpyttTjs. f^fu^f-rat Se 7-775 iffroptas eKeivrjs Zvda <irepi>TOV fj,rj\ov rjKdov Kpi67)<r6/uLvai "Hpa /cat

'A6-r)va Kal'

A.<ppoolT-r) irapa ry IlctpiSi.

Toiavrd eart /cat ra irapa So0o/cXet iv rois

Hoifj-faLv '"I577s...ap/ia.' The last line is

undoubtedly referred to by Hesych. IV

p. 175 rpioXv/ATriov apfj.a' TO e/c rpiwj/

The lines from the Andromache onwhich the scholiast is commenting are as

follows: 6V' 'ISaiW|

s i/aTra^ ^\^' 6

Mat-1

as Te /cat Atos ro/cos,| rptTrcuXoi'

atfj,6vu}v| (rya^ TO KoXXifryes, |

IJ-OVOTpOTTOV VeOLVlOLV| (-pr)[J,6l> &'

|

av\dv. The scene represented is thearrival of the three goddesses on MtIda to submit themselves to the judgementof Paris. The contrast between the

majesty of the goddesses and the rustic

seclusion of Paris was especially attrac-

tive to Euripides who often recurs to thetheme : see Hel. 357, Hec. 644, 1.A. 180,

1291 ff. In all these passages, in orderto mark the contrast referred to, Parisis called the herdsnian : see Tr. fr. adesp.286 cbs Hpia/j.i5aicriv e/x0epr]s 6 /3ou/c6Xos,Headlam on Aesch. Ag. 718. There is

enough to show that the same feelingunderlies the present passage, but the

conditions are too uncertain to admit of

emendation. Even the character of the

metre cannot be determined ; for, al-

though it appears to be anapaestic, the

first two lines may consist of an enhoplicfollowed by a glyconic as in Ant. ii4of.In the latter case we might read ayevvrjT eirl j3ovo'Ta6/j,oi' or the like ; but, al-

though dyevvus is admitted in dialogue

by Eur. I.A. 1457, we should hardly

expect to find this peculiarly Attic wordin a Sophoclean lyric. The words TTJV

TTJS "IS?;? can hardly be anything but

a gloss or the remains of one, and the

text to which they were attached pro-babl contained 'Idaiav : see schol. Ai.

KT. If so, "Idrjs in the first line mustalso be an intruder, and, if dyewat con-

ceals a case of 07^X77, we should have to

write something like <Kopv<f)ds>iror<: /A77Xorp60oi;s | dy\av'Idaiav \...Tpio\ijfji,7riov ap/*a. Or dêwat

may be the remains of d yvva1< s > :

cf. Eur. I. A. 573 fytoXes, J Ildpis, 7/re

o~ti ye | |8oi'/c6Xos dp'yei'i'ats erpd07;s |

'1 5 a t a t s Trapd /ôtrxots. Of previous con-

jectures we may record those of (i) Her-mann : "I5r?s 7} 5?7 TTore /ti7?Xorp60oi' va^Ty

Kpiveiv 'fjvT-rfO'ev aywv 'Ep/xr^s Tpio\vfji.irioi>

d'p/ua. (2) Wecklein : "Idrjs|

ore jj.7}\oTp6-

<t>b}i> dye\&v Trot/mtves |

l5ov T. a. (3)

Mekler: oI5' ws ST^Trore w\orptxpy aq. |

y^vva...'fjvTr]a')

"157/s| rptoXi^/uTrtoi' d'p/ua

<vd7rat(ri> . He supposes that the

158 Z04>OKAEOYZ

words were addressed to Priam or He-cuba. (4) For dyevvai rrj Herwerden

conjectured ayev "A.rr], but despaired of

ei rrjv T7)s"Idr)s.

3 TpioX.vfj.mov app.a is correctly ex-

plained by the Hesychian gloss (supr.}.To us the metaphor seems forced, for

the phrase means nothing more than

' three goddesses coming together'

;but

it is exactly paralleled by Eur. 's rpi-rruXov

apjua 8a.Lôv<j}v and is common elsewhere,

especially with fevyos: Eur. fr. 357fcvyos rpurapOtvov (the three daughtersof Erechtheus), Tro. 924 ^Kpive rpurvov

o8e rpiav&v 6eut>, Phoen. 328 dirrj-

o/j-oiTT^pov (n.). Cf. also fr. 545.

512

512 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 97, 6

/JLVpOl'

2(>(pOK\TJ$ Hoi/U,(TlV*

dfAVpOVS TO-

TTOI/S'

^7ri0ert/cws avTtp txpfa -) <*>s 'Hpw-8iav6s. Cf. Hesych. I p. 154 Afivpoi'TOTroi ol Kadvypoi, Kal ayav ptovres. dirb

TOV fAvpeiv (1. ptipew), where it nowappears that the lemma should be

changed to &fj.vpoi T()TTOL. Lobeck, Path.

El. I p. 21, comparing "A/xupos as the

T07TOUS

name of a river in Thessaly, acceptedthe derivation from /utfpw. But Wilamo-witz thinks that the words refer to the

cattle-stalls,'

places that have no scent of

perfume': cf. fr. 565, 3. The latter is

certainly the meaning in Orac. Sibyll. 5.

129 rr\v AvKlys d/u-vpov Kal ryv fjivpiirvovv

513 Hesych. I p. 372

/3pbfji.ov (pepeKuvTa p6/j.ov cod. : corr. Mu-

surus)'

Qpvyiov av\6t>. 2o0o/f\?}s Ilot-

ntffw.For the deep note of the Phrygian

flute (oboe) see on fr. 450. Cf. Ar.

Nub. 313 Kal fjt.ov<ra papufipofAos av\uv.

Eur. Hel. 1350 5âr6r' es x^pas | fiapv-

J3po/j.ov av\6v reptydeiff' a\a\ay n<$ .

Lucr. 2. 619 raucisonoque minantiir

cornua cantu,|

et Phrygio stimnlat

nwnero cava tibia mentis. Hor. C. 3. 19.

19 cur Berecyntiae |

cessant flamina

tibiae? Strabo 471 5 5e roi/s auXous Bepe-KVVTIOVS KaXei Kal $>pvyiovs. Bergk's pro-

posal to read fibufiov for ftpbôv, after

Catull. 64. 263 etc., is a doubtful im-

provement. The Phrygian av\oL are also

mentioned in Eur. Bacch. 128, I.A. 577.For the form BepeKvvra cf. Aesch. fr.

158 Bep^Kwra x <^P J/ - The inhabitants

of the Berecyntian district, who by the

time of Strabo (p. 580) no longer existed

as an aggregate bearing that name, wereknown as Bep^/cwres or Bepe/cwrcu.

514

514 Hesych. iv p. 251

i Kd5/x,os avrd GK QoivlKTjs (ev 0otVt/cos

cod. : corr. Gronovius) KKo/jnKt>ai.

Blaydes conjectures <f>ot^c/ctoi(7i. Theearliest authority for the Phoenician

origin of the Greek alphabet is Hdt. 5.

58, who, after describing its introduction

by Cadmus, proceeds to account for the

name Phoenician becoming current :

"Tti)ves...7rapa\a/36vTes didaxy irapa T&VQOIVLKUV TO, 7pd/i /u,ara...e0dri(raj',

/cat rb 8iKat.ov Zcpepe effayayovTUves TT]v 'EXXd5a, QoiviKriia KK\TJ<r6at. Evenon a Teian inscription <poiviK-r]ia is the

name given to the letters inscribed onthe stone (IGA 497). Later authorities

such as Ephorus (FHG I 270), Aristotle

nOIMENEI 159

(fr. 501 R.). Pliny (. h. 7. 192), andTacitus (ann. n. 14), give similar

accounts; for it makes little difference

whether Cadmus is described as the

actual inventor, or merely the importerof the letters into Greece. The tradition

accords with the results of modern in-

vestigation (see Macan on Hdt. I.e.) ;

but there were other stories current,

ascribing the invention to Hermes, Pro-

metheus, Linus, Palamedes, or Cecrops.It is interesting to find Sophocles againin accord with Herodotus, though thename Qoiviicia appears to have prevailedapart from the story of Cadmus. Hdt.

5. 59 uses the term KaS/x^ta

515

515 Sext. Emp. math. i. 313 otfre

yap K r^xi/77 s TWOS fjie/mad^Kaaiv 6'rt oi

Trapa T^> Zo0o/cXet roi/^res' tw j3a\\r]v

'

\tyovres lit) /SacriXeu \fyovffi ^pvyicrri,dXXd Trap' aXXwi' aKoixravres. Hesych. I

p. 356 /3a\\r]i>'

fiaffiXevs, <&pvyurrl.This word, which is said to be Semitic

and akin to Baal and Bel, is introduced

in order to give an oriental colouring to

the dialect of the chorus. So in frs. 517,

520, and in the Troihis (frs. 631, 634)and 'EX^Tys yd/mos (fr. 183). It was oneof the few terms which would be easily

recognized : cf. Aesch. Pers. 660 (in the

invocation to Darius) j3a\\r}v dpxalost6i IKOV, where schol. M has

rov /SaatXâ. Ei)0optwi' 5e Oou-

piwv (firjai TT]i> did\KTov. /SaXX?^ f3a.cn-

Xeus /cara Qovpiovs. The curious statement

thus attributed to Euphorion is discredited

by Meineke, Ana!. Alex. p. 142, whocorrects Qovpluv to Qpvyiuv. Herodian

Trept /uLov. Xe. p. 17, 5 and Arcad. p. 9, i

also support the spelling j3a.\\r)v, so that

the weight of authority is strongly against/SaX^f, which Lobeck (Paral. p. 19: n.)and M. Schmidt on insufficient groundspreferred. The later scholia on Aesch.I.e. have the additional statement 8dev

Kal BaXâtov opos, 8 eari /3a<rtXt/c6i', whichalso appears in Eustath. //. p. 381, 17,Od. p. 1854, 26. They appear to havederived it from the account of the river

Sagaris given by the impudent forger,who attempted to foist upon Plutarchthe treatise de fluviis, and whose frauds

have been exposed by Hercher (pseudo-Plut. de fluv. 12. 3, 4): in the same

passage is a remark about the BaXXî/\idos, which is equally unworthy of cre-

dence, and another about Ballenaeus,the son of Ganymede, who founded a

festival in his father's honour.

516

az/aXwcrai

516 Hesych. I p.

d<f>ai>i<rai. Troi/uevecnv (so

rected by Soping to So0o/cX^s

177the cod. : cor-

For dâXcDaat = to destroy see on fr.

892.

517

517 Antiatt. p. 84, n j3a/H5-

/car' Soping conjectured /Sapi/Sdr^, (Sapiftav

TrXoiou. So0o/cX^s ^ IToi/x^crt in Hesych., without being aware of the

fiapipav (paptpdTav, Blomfield on Aesch. Sophoclean instance ;M. Schmidt pro-

Pers. 559) Xêt rbv vatryv rj rbv TT}S posed âpL^dv rj paplfiav. L. Dindorf

tTrtpepTjKOTa. Hesych. I p. 361 suggested that paplJ3ai>\eui> was the phrase'iv, fiapvdav rbv vav<ripdTr)v, ev in Sophocles, referring to the Greek

army setting out for Troy. But it

i6o

should be borne in mind that flapis is

usually a foreign boat, Egyptian (Aesch.

Suppl. 885) or Persian (Pers. 556); and

Lycophr. 747 applies it to the extem-

porized raft of Odysseus. In a late

epigram (A.P. 7. 365) it is used of

Charon's boat. We should therefore

expect it to denote a Trojan vessel

as in Eur. LA. 297, unless indeed the

chorus are supposed to be speaking of

the Greeks in their own dialect, as in

fr. 515. In regard to the formation of

the word itself, Sturtevant (Class. Phil.v 335) considers that the suffix ~fiijs

(-|8os) has a contemptuous force, and

compares Kctfc6/3as- eirt /ca/cy rjKwv ; ayofior

<r/cevo06/)oj, ^0^77776?; pd/u./3as* 6 OTJ/UUOS ;

all of which are glosses from Hesychius.Similar are fj.ov6pas, vv/u.<f)6pa.s (an epithetof Silenus, for which cf. fr. 314, 149);the contemptuous tone is clearly present,

although the derivation from ftalvu is

explicit. See also Lobeck, Phryn.p. 610.

518

518 Steph. Byz. p. 212, 20 TpaiK6s'6 "E\\r)v...TpaiKs 5e wapa 'AXK/xa>t (fr.

1 34) ai r&v 'EXXrjvwv /mrjTtpes, /ecu irapa

So0o/cXei ev HoifJitcriv.

It has been assumed from as early as

the third century B.C. down to our owntimes that the whole race which wasafterwards known as Hellenes had pre-

viously been called TpatKoi. It ought to

be enough to refute this fallacy that wecan trace the progress of the name Hel-

lenes, which ex hypothesi is later, fromits origin as a tribal appellation until it

finally becomes national. For there wasno Greek nation in prehistoric times.

Yet even Mommsen (Hist. I 140 E. tr.)

argues that 'the Italians had become

acquainted with the Greek nation before

the newer name Hellenes had supplantedthe older national designation Graeci.'

The earliest authority which can be in-

voked in support of the theory is Arist.

meteor, i. 14. 352b

2, who however only

says that the Selli and the people formerlyknown as TpaiKoi but afterwards as

Hellenes dwelt in the neighbourhood of

Dodona. But the case is different fromthe third century onwards, when the in-

fluence of Greece upon the outside worldbecame of more importance than her

national history. So the Parian Marble

(FHG I 542) : "EXXês (JovofJi.do'6'rja'av TO

Trpbrepov TpaiKoi Ka.\ovfj.evoi. Apollod. i.

50 : Hellen d0' avrov rows KaXov^vovsTpaiKOvs Trpo<T'rjy6pev<rev "EXXij^cts. By the

Alexandrian pedants Tpane6s began to beused in place of "EXX^v : see Callimachus

ap. Strab. 46 (fr. 104) and Etym. M.

p. 239, 15 (fr. 160), Lycophr. 532, 891,

1195 etc. But in classical literature

YpaiKds etc. are essentially local names;

Tpaia, (B 498) was somewhere in the

valley of the Asopus, and r/oaiVci? (Thuc.2. 23) was the coastland of Boeotia

opposite to Eretria. It is significant that

the Euboean colonization of Cumae was

according to tradition the earliest occasionon which Greek influences were broughtinto contact with the Italians. Such is

the evidence for the use of TpaiKds, andGrote's scepticism (n p. 270) in relation

to the statement of Stephanus is justified.Of course the grammarians were on the

look out for any scrap of evidence whichwould bolster up their theory of the old

YpaiKoi, but it is much more likely that

ypaiKes both in Alcman and in Sophocleswas nothing but a synonym of 7paes. Forthese reasons I have dropped the capitalletter. That is the view of Dittenberger in

Herm. XLI 100, who points out that the

Greeks had no ethnica in -/cos, and thinks

that Graecus was built up from Grains onItalian soil, and passed thence to the

later Greek authorities. See also Niesein Herm. xn 408, and Wilamowitz ib.

xxi 113. The question why the Romansgave to the"EXX?7ves the name Graeci has

been the subject of a good deal of dis-

cussion in recent years. It is well sum-marized by J. Miller in Pauly-Wissowavn 1693 f., who throws out the suggestionthat Grai may have been a purely Italian

designation of a strange people. G. Bu-

solt, Griech. Geschichte2,

I 198 f., holds

that the Boeotian r/xuVc?? was the dwelling-

place of a branch of the same peoplewhich had occupied the neighbourhoodof Dodona before the great migrations,and that the Italians learnt the namefrom these western tribes. See further

on fr. 1087.

nOIMENEI TTOAYEENH 161

519

lavva

519 According to Hesych. II p. 338,for which see on fr. 56, this word (or

was used by Sophocles for the

designation of a Greek woman,was probably meant.

Helen

520

TrapacrdyyaL

52O Claudius Casilo irapa rots'ATTL-

KOLS pTjTopcTL ^To6/j,va (Miller, Melangestie lit. gr. p. 397) = Lex. rhet. postPhot. p. 674, 27 a-ayydvSaL (for whichNauck rightly conjectured d<rTdv8ai, a

word used thrice by Plutarch and ex-

plained by Aelius Dionysius fr. 6 Schw.as equivalent to ayyapot.) dt oi dTroo-reX-

\6fj.vot. KaXovvrai. 2o0o/c\^s 5e iv IIoi-

fjifoi Kal EvpnridTqs eV SKV/HCUS (fr. 686)

irapaadyyas avrovs KeK\-r)Ka<rii>. expfy5e elireiv aayyavdas' 6 yap Trapaffdyyrjs

/j.^Tpov tcrri /ere. The same sense of

Trapacrdyyr)? is attested by Hesych. ill

p. 276 irapaffayyi\6yij}' oi Ntpffai. roi)s

diayy\\ovTas OUTW X^yowt, brilliantly

corrected by Papage6rgius to irapacrdyy-g

It is not likely that Soph, and Eur.made the blunder of confusing irapcurd'y-

YHS with ayyapos or do-TdvdTjs. But it maywell be that, in describing or referring to

the oriental couriers and the stages theysuccessively traversed (Hdt. 8. 98), theyspoke of the latter in such a way as to

cause a misunderstanding in the minds oftoo literal readers. Cf. fr. 125, and for

parasangs at Troy see onfr. 183. Weck-lein thinks that the use of the word was

intentionally comic, and claims it as

supporting Hermann's view of the play,for which see Introductory Note.

521

521 Herodian Trepi /m,ov, Xe. p. 46,1 8 Trapd 2o0o/c\e? v HoL^tnv efynyrcu TO

\{/6. Etym. M. p. 405, 32 rb\f/6

tv IIoi-

ptffi 2o0o/cXôi;s e-jri<j)dey/j.a. Cramer,anecd. Oxon. I p. 118, 14 TO yap \f>6 irapd

Tip 2o00KXe? rroifieviKov Tri<pdeyfj.a. ibid.

p. 343, 24 TO\f/o tTri<f>0yiJi.a wapd So0o-

KXet.

No monosyllabic adverb ends in -o,

but \|/6as tTri<J>6ey/m,a is an exception.

Eustath. //. p. 855, 29 (Ael. Dion. fr. 337Schw.) gives TO ^6 Trot/AeviKdv in a list of

similar exclamations. But ^6 in Phot.lex. p. 655, 12 is our '

pshaw !'

(girl TOW

crawpov /cat py ffvvaptffKovTos), and shouldnot have been confused with the shep-herd's call by L. and S.

' Etiam hodieexclamatio est pso ! aut so !

'

Blaydes.Cf.

\f/in fr. 314, 170.

nOAYZENH

The sacrifice of Polyxena in response to the demand of the

spirit of Achilles is well known from the Hecuba of Euripides ;

and it is certain that the Polyxena of Sophocles covered the

same ground as the first part of that play. So schol. Eur. Hec.

p. ii. ii

1 62 !0<t>OKAEOY!

I ra Trepl l\o\v%evr)v ecrnv evpeiv -rrapa ô(f)t)K\e2 ev

The incident was recorded in the Iliupersis, according to the

epitome of Proclus (EGF p. 50) : eireira efjuTrpija-avres rrjv TTO\IV

TIo\vêvr]v (T(f>ayidov(Ttv eVt rov rov 'A^tXXe<w9 rdfyov. It maybe that it was also contained in the Nosti

;for Proclus, in

abstracting that poem, after mentioning the quarrel of Aga-memnon and Menelaus (see on fr. 522), and the departure of

certain chieftains with Menelaus, states that, when Agamemnonwas about to sail (EGF p. 53), 'A^tXXeeo? ei&w\ov emfyavev rrei-

parau &ia/ca)\veiv rrpo\e<yov rd crv/jL/Brjcrofê^ci. In Euripides the

ghost so appearing required the sacrifice of Polyxena (ffec. 37,

95) ;but Proclus merely states that his object was to warn the

Greeks of the disasters that would attend their voyage, and to

dissuade them from starting. If, then, we are to assume that

the narrative of the Nosti did not overlap that of the Iliupersis,

it was a later poet who connected the appearance of the ghostwith Polyxena's death. According to schol. Eur. Hec. 41, Ibycus

(fr. 36) related that Polyxena was slain by Neoptolemus ;and

Longinus (de subL 15. 7) couples Simonides (fr. 2OQ)2 with

Sophocles for the excellence of their description of the ghostlyvision : Kara rov drrircKovv r&v 'EXXî/on; (sc. dfcpws 6 ^.o(f)OK\ij<f

7r(j)dvraaTai) eVl ra^XXeco? TrpoâLvoêvov rot? dvayofjuevow VTreprov rdcfrov, fjv OVK olS' el' rt? oifrw evap<yeaTepov i$a)\07roi7jo-e

îfjiwviôv. In Quint. 14. 178 Achilles appeared to Neoptolemusin a dream, and asked for Polyxena as his share of the booty.F. Noack (Iliupersis, p. u ff.) conjectured that Sophocles wasthe first to bring the appearance of the ghost into causal relation

with the sacrifice, and that Euripides attacked his version 3. But

the gaps in the evidence are too wide to permit us to entertain

such speculations.Welcker justly considers that the play opened with the

strife between the Atridae, and that, when Menelaus departed,

Agamemnon resolved to remain behind in order to propitiateAthena by sacrifice (fr. 522). He attributes fr. 887 to the

parodos of the chorus, who, if the conjecture is correct, musthave consisted rather of Greek soldiers than of Trojan captivewomen. The scene of the play was on the Trojan coast, pro-

bably in the neighbourhood of Sigeum, where Achilles was said

to have been buried 4. Welcker acutely remarks that the grave

1 See Wilamowitz, Einleitung, p. 14639.2 The only instance in which Simonides is known to have influenced tragedy,

according to Wilamowitz, Sappho u. Simonides, p. 1542-3 See Escher in Pauly-Wissowa I 241.4 For the tradition see Gruppe, p. 6911. In Horn, w 82 the tomb is d/cr^

T^, but it hai TrXarct 'EXXô-TrovT^, but it has often been pointed out that to HomerHellespont

'

included the open sea to the west of the Troad.

nOAYEENH 163

cannot have been represented on the stage, since the undeviatingusage of tragedy required that the sacrifice of Polyxena shouldbe reported by a messenger and not enacted before the eyes ofthe spectators. Hence he inferred that the ghost must havecome from the grave to the tent of Agamemnon. On the otherhand we have no right to disregard the evidence of Longinus,who distinctly speaks of the phantom as appearing above thetomb. In the present state of our knowledge, there does notseem to be any way of escape from this dilemma : for the identityof tomb and altar see on Eur. HeL 547, Holzinger on Lycophr.313, and the evidence since collected by Ridgeway, Origin ofTragedy, p. 137 ff. However this may be, the ghost certainlyappeared upon the stage (fr. 523); and that it was Agamemnonto whom his message was delivered is made additionallyprobable by fr. 526, which seems to foretell the murder byClytaemnestra. Clearly Agamemnon is also the speaker offr. 524; but whether that is part of an answer to the phantomintended to excuse the neglect of which he had complained, orcomes from a judgement delivered after hearing the conflictingclaims of Hecuba and Neoptolemus both of whom were

probably characters in the play can hardly be determined.Arist. poet. 23. I459

b7 gives a list of 'more than eight'

there are actually ten tragedies which are taken from the Little

Iliad, and among them is an otherwise unrecorded aTroTrXou?.

Welcker (p. 179) suggested that this was an alternative title ofthe Polyxena of Sophocles ;

and Ribbeck 1

agreed on the strengthof Longinus' words which have been quoted above. Thereference of this and other titles to the Little Iliad rather thanto the Iliupersis has given much difficulty ;

and it is generallysupposed that the concluding part of the Little Iliad was also

known as Ilinpersis'2'.

There is nothing to indicate that Sophocles made any use ofthe love-motive which some of the authorities have introducedinto the story of Achilles and Polyxena

3. It is, therefore, un-

necessary to discuss the question whether it is ancient, or, as

others prefer to suppose, the invention of late romancers 4.

1 Rom. Trag. p. 417.2 Allen in C.Q. II 84 thinks that the mistake was due to Aristotle.3 Collected by Escher in Pauly-Wissowa I 238, and Gruppe, p. 6943, who also

give references lo recent discussions.4 So Allen 'mJ.P. xxxi 218. On the other hand Tlirk in Roscher ill 2719 argues

from the archaeological evidence that even in the Cypria Achilles was represented as

enamoured of Polyxena, and that the idea was subsequently developed.

II 2

164 I04>OKAEOY1

522

CTV 8* av6i p,LfjiV(i)v TTOV /car*'

7701/^0,9 'OXv/iTTOV o-vvayaytov

522. 1 aov Cdh|

avTe com. Nauck|

TTOV Xylander : TT)V vel roC codd.

522 Strabo 470 6 5' ovv 2o$o/c\??s

Troikas rdv M^Xac? en TTJS Tpoias

diralpeiv ffirevSovTa ev rrj HO\V^VTJ, TOV

5' 'Ayafd/jLvova fjunpov u7roXet00?7/cu /3ovX6-

fj.vov TOV eiXd0"a<r0cu TTJV 'Ad-rjvdv xdpiv,

eiffdyei XtyovTa rbv 3/lcv^Xaov'

<rv...6wr)-

7r6Xei.'

In relating the strife between Aga-memnon and Menelaus, Sophocles seemsto have followed the account in Horn.

y i36ff., which agreed with that of the

Nosti\7

A6rjva 'Aya/j,tfji.vova Kal Mej^Xaopet's fyiv Kadl<TT'r)<ri irepi TOV ZtcrrXov. 'A-ya-

fj.ffji.vwv ptv ovv TOV TV)* 'A6i]v8.s îXao-6-

/xevos xuXov eTTifjL^vei (EGfp. 53).1 This line has been attacked on two

grounds: (i) because the Homeric av9i

does not occur elsewhere in tragedy.But it is not easy to emend, for Nauck's

a$re, though Aeschylean, is only used bySoph, at Track. 1009, and nowhere byEur. ; and this is just the place where wemight expect an echo of the HomericQ.WL fJL^veiv (A 492, ^ 674, e 208 and

many other examples quoted by Ebeling

s.v.): cf. y 155 of this very incident

f)/j.i(rees 5' dpa \aol tpyTVovTO /m

avQi Trap' 'Arpei'S^ 'Aya/j.[ju>ovi

\auv. (2) It has been thought that

(see cr. n.) points to Tfyd' or T

Hence r^5' e?r' (ev Blaydes) 'I5

Ellendt, Trjvd' dv' 'Idatav -^Qova. Hartung(adopted by Nauck). But irov givesa good sense here and is confused withTOV also at Ai. 546, Track. 908. Weck-lein supported TOV, agreeing with 'OXifyt-

7TOU.

2 The Mysian Olympus is in fact

a considerable distance from Ida, althoughStrabo calls it opopos (I.e. ). He adds, as

if to account for the confusion by which

Soph, speaks of Ida and Olympus as

forming the same range, that lour peaksof Ida towards Antandros are called

Olympi. Jebb on . Ai. 720 interpretsMuo'twi' Kprjfjivuiv as the spurs of Olympus.The herds are to be collected for a heca-tomb : Horn, y 144. For the ablatival

genitive without a prep. cf. Phil. 630veus ayovTa, O.T. 142 (jdOpwv

XiTroucra

523

re Kal

y\0ov, apcrevas

523. 1 dKTas Jacobs : cJ ras FP|

OTT' aiwi/as FP : corr. Canter| /ieXa/i^3a0ets P

2 TXtfoj' apaevas xods hue transposuit Heyne : post y6ovs (v. 3) habent FP-3 ^x^"as Grotius : rixoâ

523 Apollodorus (FHG I 429) quotedby Porphyrius ap. Stob. Eel. I 49. 50p. 419, I W. 'Axtpuv 5e Kal 'Axepov<rla

Xifj.vTj Tavr6v, us Kal So0o/cX^s iv HoXv^vyTrjv 'Ax'XX^ws ^VXTIV civdyei \eyovaav

vexp&v \tyuv Trai&v' OVK exovffas, dpaevasd xoas TOLS ovdev e/cr/?e0oi;(ras. The ex-

tract is quoted by Porphyrius verbatimfrom the twentieth book of the treatise

of Apollodorus irepi T&V Beuv. Apollo-dorus of Athens, the author of the xpoi'txa,and the colleague and contemporary of

Aristarchus, whose life extended probablyfrom about 180 B.C. no B.C., and was

spent at Athens, Alexandria, and Per-

gamus, was one of the most celebrated

critics of antiquity. The treatise irepi

6eui>, which may be regarded as a historyof Greek religion, was a work to quoteE. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa I 2875' das ihm, seinem Denken und seinemHerzen als eigenstes Eigentum gehortund dessen Verlust am schwersten zu

verschmerzen ist.'

1 diraiwvas ('joyless') is interpreted

nOAYEENH 165

by Apoljodorus : rds irau&v* OVK

The explanation of Valckenaer (on Eur.

Phoen. 1019), adopted by L. and S., that

the word is derived from aiwv, is clearly

wrong. The paean here and elsewhere

is typical of joy, and is contrasted with

the gloomy abode of the dead : so it is

said of Apollo (Aesch. Ag. 1059), ov y&PTOIOVTOS <JL>ffT OprjvrjTOv ri/êtc. Cf. Eur.

/. T. 182 rdv tv Bp-fivots (Aovo'av\

VKV<TI

ueXo/j-^vav, rdv ev ju,o\irais\

"AtSas v/Jivei

8ixo- Traidvuv. Hence, by oxymoron,funeral lamentations are described as'

paeans that are the portion of the dead '

:

see Eur. Hel. 177 ira.iavas vicv<n /teXo/u^-

vovs (n.), Suppl, 976 doidaL 6' as xpvao-/coytias 'A'TroXXwz' OVK ei>5xeTaL - In Aesch.

Ag. 650 Tfo.ia.va. 'Eptvvuv is applied to

a message heralding disaster. Hesych.I p. 224 s.v. aTTcuwj'toTos quotes Eur.

(fr. 77) for the sense 5u<r07?ôs. pXajx-pa0is,

' dark and deep'

(i.e. in the

depths of the nether world) : cf. Aesch.Prom. 219 Taprdpov fj.eXafMJSad'rjs Kevdfjuav.

Valckenaer's conjecture /u,eXaju,0ae?s, for

which see on Eur. Hel. 518, is quite un-

necessary : the fact that P (see cr. n.)has /*eXa/uj8a0eS is of no significance.2 Xiirovcra : the fern, is unusual as

compared with Eur. Hec. i, Aesch. Pers.

686, Horn. X 90, Bacchyl. 5. 78 (H.).There is no apparent reason for the

abnormal gender, which however the

context may have explained. Xtp.vTjs.

Acheron is imagined sometimes as a

river, sometimes as a lake (El. 138 ^f'At5a irayKoivov Xi'/was), and sometimesas both: thus Plato (Phaed. 113 A) de-

scribes the river Acheron as flowing into

the \lfjunj 'Axe/>ov<nds. After this wordthere seems to have been a disturbance

of the tradition : see cr. n. Heyne is

followed by Wachsmuth and Nauck.

Grotius, who preferred to substitute

y\0ov r)Xova'a $ 76015

| 'Ax^povros 6u-

TrXTjyos apa-evas x o(*J, is followed byBrunck: similarly Dindorf, except that

he prints 17x01/0-775 ydovs, with Heeren.

Musgrave (on Hel. I.e.} proposedri\dov, a/xrevas x<*5 I 'Ax^7as iixovvav 7601/5. apore

very difficult phrase. Apollodorus ex-

plained ap<revas as equivalent to rasovtev eKTpe<f>oljffa.s. ^Xca fj.ti> ykp rb.

KapTro<f>6pa., Apcreva 8 rd ayova ZXeyovb

of &p<njv ; but the statement of Apollo-dorus cannot be lightly regarded, andthe sense itself is unexceptionable : for

rivers were regarded by the Greeks as

the givers of life and nourishment, so that

dpcrrjv would be the negation of Kovpo-

r/)60os, as applied to them (see Tuckeron Aesch. Cho. 6: cf. Aesch. fr. 168

'Ivaxov-'-TraKTiv /3io5a>/xns). J. on the

other hand renders '

deep-sounding? com-

paring Phil. 1455 KCtl KTVTTOS dpfffJV

TTOVTOV 717)0/30X775,'

deep sound of the sea-

lashed cape,' Ar. Thesm. 124 (iddapiv]

dpyevL /3o 56/ct/xoi/, Pers. 6. 4 atqtie maremstrepitum fidis intendisse Latinae. Butin all these passages dp<rr)v or its Latin

equivalent is the epithet of a noun ex-

pressing sound, a fact which entirely

distinguishes them from the present.

Blaydes would read /3ods here. xo<^s

fur which Meineke on O.C. p. 203 pro-

posed pods, is nowhere else applied to the

waters of a river; and it may be con-

jectured that, but for its chthonian asso-

ciations, Sophocles would not haveventured to connect the word withAcheron in what must be taken to

be its literal sense ('outpourings'): cf.

(Horn, e 467) i] iro\vyovos KOA.

So far as I can discover, there appears to

be no other evidence for this meaning

3 6vTT\TJYas tjx<<ras "yoovs: (i) J.translated '

re-echoing the shrill strains

of lamentation,' interpreting 6vTr\T)ya.s'

striking a shrill note, striking shrilly onthe ear.' He compared b^vrbvuv ybuvin El. 244. (2) I prefer to understand'

wailing that accompanies fierce blows,'i.e. the cries of the mourners as theybeat their breasts and heads. Cf. Aesch.Cho. 23 6^x tPl G^v KTUTry, and see onEur. Hel. 372. The words are thus

a concise summary of Ai. 630 f. 6^vr6vovs

| dpTjvrjO-ei, x PoirâKT l & *v

ireffovvrai.|

SOUTTOI. For the

transference of the compound epithet cf.

O.C. 711 atixw - etfiTTTTOi', Ai. 55 TroXu/ce-

puv (pbvov, with Jebb's notes. yoovs : J.was inclined to distinguish this as a cog-nate ace. from i)x TIS. ..KUKvr6v in Track.

866. It is in fact impossible strictly to

separate those uses of the ace. which are

to be considered internal from the ace. of

the direct object: Delbriick has neatlymarked the transition by his phrase Ac-cusative of Result (Synt. i 376, 382). The

determining consideration is whether or

not the nomen actionis has acquired suchconcrete force, as to be regarded as some-

thing external to the agent.Ribbeck (Rom. Trag. p. 4 17) compared

with this passage Trag. fr. incert. xxxvm

1 66 S04>OKAEOYI

73 adsum atque advenio Acherunte vix viaalia atque ardua,

\ per spehmcas saxis

structas asperis pendentibus \ maxuniis,ubi rigida constat crassa caligo inferum,and conjectured that the lines belonged to

the TroadcstfAccius, who had drawn uponthe Polyxena of Soph, for his material.

H. renders :

From those unanthem'd and abysmalshores

I come, the birthless floods of Acheron,Still echoing to the sound of rending

groans.

524

ov yap TIS av Svvano Trpcopdrr)*; o-rparovTens TTacriv etfai KOL irpocrapKecrai yapiven-el ovS' 6 Kyoeurcraw Zeus e/ôv

ovr têTTOfJiftptov OUT' eTrav^yjcr< 8* > av \0a)v e's SLKTJV \6ya>v

524. 2 Trdfftv elcu Wecklein : Tracri 5etcu codd. 4 teiro/j.ppuv Grotius :

SA (-&v primitus A), fîrb^puv M, &TT' îro^pCiv Herwerden 5 5'

Dobree : dve\6uv codd.|

<?s X6yoi/ Sî/ Dobree|6'0Xai codd. ; corr. Brunck

524 Stob. flor. 49. 13 (iv p. 299, 3 O.C. 570 we should read uxrre fipaxta JJ.TJ

Hense) TOU ai/roO (.$r. Soô/cXecus, quod et aidetcrOai <ppdo~ai (MT? f/>7r^s Phil. 985).

ipsum S praebet lemmatecumaliisiuncto) 4 e|<Tro|Jippa>v is probably right (seecr. n.), and illustrates the fondness of

Sophocles for e in verbal compositioneven where, as here, it is added to

another preposition. Cf. 4!-e(pieo-6at Ai.

795, ^KTrpoTi/u-av Ant. 913, t&irevxto'OaiPhil. 668, %avevpto-Kiv ib. 991, tairo<t>6ei-

peiv Trach. 713,^5. 145, 857. The pointis well illustrated by Cobet, Coll. Crit.

p. 189, who, after giving a long list of

Sophoclean compounds with e/c, remarksthat they differ in no. respect from the

simple verbs, 'nisi quod simplices formaetoti populo sunt in ore, compositae Diis

et heroibus sunt propriae.' Dindorf

points out that fe7ro/uj3/>u)i> is used by

Tzetzes, Chil. 3. 59. For the sense

Brunck aptly quoted Theogn. 24 ff.

do~ToTo~iv 5' ovird) Trao'Lv ddew dvva/j.ai'

|

ov8v davfj.ao~T6v, HoXviratdij'

ov8e yap6 Zevs I otf0' vuv irdvTeo-o-' avodvei OVT'

1 irpo>paTr]s, the look-out man, is

treated as in command of the vessel,

although he was actually subject to the

orders of the KvfiepvfiTrjs, while superior to

the KeXeuo-T^s and the crew. Cf. fr. 142col. ii 5, Moschion ap. Athen. 209 A. Seean instructive note by Neil on Ar. Eq.543, who points out that in Aesch. Eum.1 6, 768 irpvfjivrjTrjs is poetic for KvfSepvrjTrjs.

For the metaphor cf. Demetr. de eloc. 78ZOIKCV aXXrjXois <TTparity6s, KVêpvrjr-rjs,

rjvio-%05' irdvres yap OVTOL apxovrts io~iv .

do"0aXws ovv epel/cal 6 rbv (TTparrfyov Kvfiep-

vrjTrjv \tyidv rrjs 7r6\e&js.

2 Trpoo-apKe'crai, a verb which Sopho-cles affects, is used with \aptv in the samemanner as <fdpeu>, 6kaQo.(. (Troieiadai) ,

vpaffo-Lv, didbvat, veveiv, but with height-ened sense 'grant a rich boon.' SoX.a,piv v-jrovpyeiv Aesch. Prom. 662, avdvir-

ovpyTJffat Soph. fr. 339, x&piTa ffvveic-

Trovtiv Eur. ffel. 1378. Wecklein'semendation is no doubt right, for 5et-

Kvtivai x^-Plv is unknown to tragedy. Forthe general sense cf. Ai. 1350 rbv rot

rtipavvov eti<rej3ii> ov pq.oi.ov.

3 eirtl ov8*. The synizesis occurs in

Phil. 446 (J.'s n.), 948, O.C. 1436, andelsewhere. For the freer practice of

comedy and Herondas see Starkie on Ar.

Vesp. 827. I have long thought that in

egularly contrasted

des on Ar. Ran.s re

with avxjJ-bs: see Blay1 1 20.

5 Is SCKTjv Xo-ywv. The editors havetoo hastily accepted Dobree's e's \6yovdlKyv. The phrase s \6yov (more com-

monly \6yovs) eXdetv TIVL means 'to have

an interview, conference with another'

:

thus, e.g. in Ar. Eq. 806 /ecu <rrc/jL(pv\i{>

s \byov Z\6ri (' have a good talk with,'

Neil). There is a copious collection of

examples in Blaydes's n. on Nub. 470.

nOAYZENH 167

8777* cycoy' av Ovrjros K

Ato? yevoi^v ev

re

6 7077' av dvrjTos K O. Hense : 670) dvrjrbs 7' a? ^/c SM, 670;p 0i>T)Tos wr Meineke 7 etypoveiv M

A,

Nowhere, so far as I know, is it used of

hostile arguments submitted to a judgefor decision. To Dobree the combination

\bywv dlKrj seemed absurd ; but it corre-

sponds to SiK-rjv \tyeii> (Ar. Vesp. 777),and to roi)s ava.yKo.Lov3 did \byuv ay&vas(Gorg. Hel. 13), which refers to a trial

in an Athenian law-court with its formal

speeches on either side. So here: 'if 2,.

should submit himself to trial on this

issue with men, he would be cast.'

\6yuv oLK-rj is the same as \6ycov dyuv(Eur. Phoen. 588 n., Hclid. 116 n.,

Thuc. 3. 67) ; \byuv a/j.L\\a is a Sophistic

display (Gorg. I.e., Wilamowitz on Eur.Her. 1255). dim) in the forensic sense is

familiar to Sophocles (Ai. 447, Ant. 742) :

cf. es olK-rjv foT-rjv Eur. I.T. 961. Onthis view 60Xoi is absolute : see Lexx.6 0VTJTOS K OVTJTTJS T (|)US

'. cf. EL589,^*7.384, O.T. 1397.7 v <f>povLv was current Attic for

'to be in one's right mind '

: Isae. 7. i

(Wyse). So in O.T. 552, 570, 600, 626,Ant. 755, frs. 108, 836. It is difficult to

see how, either in this sense or as 'to

have good will,' it can be used to limit

<ro0wre/>os. Herwerden, thinking the

phrase meaningless, suspected that e5

(fepovetv had taken the place of atfodirov,

but subsequently was content to pronouncethe line corrupt. Blaydes, reading TTWS

5rJT(t dvrjrds r' &v ^70* in v. 6, substituted

dv tppovetv for eu <t>poveiv. Wecklein sug-

gested irpofaprepos for (ro0wrepoj.

Perhaps the inf. is an error for eS

(ppov&v (fr. 462 n.) : 'How should I...

while of sound mind, aspire to be wiser

than Zeus ?' A moderate ambition is

the counterpart of a sound intelligence.Cf. Find. Isth. 4. 14/^7? /udTeue Zeus 76^-<r0cu. Eur. Suppl. 217 rb yavpov 5' iv

(ro<p<*}Tpoi (pride upsets the balance).Contrast fr. 592 (n.).

*

oiQepOS Se KOLTTO Xvyaiov

525 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 1121 vtix?vw6 \vyair)v~\ rr]i> (TKOTeivrjv, irapa rb \tiyos

TO (pvrbv. Kai yap eKflvo p,e\av. /cat rbv

XvxdfiavTa, olov \vydf3avTa, tirei

(iaivei.

Xvyaios has of course nothing to dowith \ijK7] light, although the attempt to

connect them lasted up to the time of

Curtius (G. E. I p. 197 E. tr.). But

rj\ijyrj and eTTTjXirydfw are probably akin.

Meineke conjectured wtyovs, but this is

unnecessary: Xvyaiy vtyei occurs in Eur.

Hclid. 855. Hartung with reason suggeststhat there is a reference to the stormwhich scattered the Greek fleet on their

homeward voyage.

526

(T aTTCtyOOS v8vTTJpiOS KOLKMV

526 Etym. M. p. 120, 48 aireipos...

X^yet 5 'Opos (see fr. 69) on <rr]/j,aii>i

XiT&va diôdov /JLTJ ôvra, u)S irapa

2o0o/cXeI iv IIoXv^j'T;'

yyr&v . . .KQ.K&V S

Philopon. in Ar. phys. 3. 4, p. 390, 20Vit. rbv KVK\OV aireipov (pap.v rip IJ.T) ^x Ll'

'

<pa<ri TOV /J.T]

Translate: 'A tunic that gives no

passage, a fatal swathing (awaits) thee.'

<r* was governed by some such word as

fj.tvti occurring in the context, and the

line is a prophecy of Agamemnon's death,

spoken perhaps, as Welcker thought, bythe ghost of Achilles.

aimpos and xaiccov echo the language

1 68 I000KAEOY!

of Aesch. Ag. 1381 f. &ireipov d(JL<pij3\r)-

ffTpov, uxnrep iytitiuv ,| Trepwrixifw, TrXoD-

TOV el'/xaros KaKbv, where Clytaemnestraherself describes the bathing-robe in

which she ensnared her husband. Cf.

Eum. 637 <j>apos TrepeaKTivuGev, v 5'

artp/Jiovi |

KîTTfi 7re5â"ctcr' avdpa ScuSciXy

Tr^TrXy, Eur. Or. 25 17 7r6<rtz> dirfipi}} irepi-

^SaXowr' L^da/wart\

^Kretvev. The order

of the words shows that KOLKUV is governedby evSvTtjpios, as if KO.K.OL were the

material of the envelopment,'

shroudingwith pains.' The genitive follows the

analogy of TrXi/pTjs, TroXutrreîys (O.T. 83),and the like: Kuehner-Gerth 417. i.

Blaydes unwarrantably proposes\v<rei (or #/>xet > with 5' for <r')

is not otherwise known, but is nearlyrelated (as e.g. trwr^pios to crwnj/o) to

evSvT-rip, which occurs only in Track. 674.It expresses therefore (see Jebb's note in

/or.) something which was worn as anornamental wrap on a special occasion,and its force cannot be more precisely

given in English than by some such wordas 'drapery.' Wecklein thought that

KO.K&V was an error, perhaps for \aj3ui> ;

but that would only shift the difficulty bymaking more prominent the awkward-ness of the double adjective.

527

TrapdppvjJia 770805

527 Trapapv/ma Hesych., irapdpvfjt.[Ji.a Phot.

527 Hesych. in p. 276/s IloXv^vr)

'

Trapdpv/j.a 7ro56s,' u>s

Kp/JiaiJi.t>(t)i> rivCov v(pa.ff^j.a,Tuv CK TOV ap-

HCITOS (ei'/uaros or pdfj./u.a.Tos was conjectured

by Toll) 7T/>6s KciXXos. rivts dt <TXOIV'IOJ> tv

rats vavaiv ol 8 vir65if)/ui,a. Phot. lex.

p. 389, I irapdpvfJifJLa ?ro56s'

TO. vTrodrifj-ara

rd pv6[jt.eva rows ?r65as.

The sense of irapa.ppvfj.a.To. in Xen.Hell. i. 6. 19 is well established, as beingcurtains of skins or felt hung along the side

of a ship to protect those using the decksor gangways. So Trapappfaei? vt&v in

Aesch. Suppl. 723. As the word means

literally' a side-protection,' it would not

be surprising to find it used in combina-tion with 7ro56s for a closed boot as

distinguished from a sandal. That is to

say, we might acquiesce in the explanationof Photius, if it was not for the mysteri-ous gloss of Hesychius, of which nothing

can be made. Campbell thinks that

he meant to describe an ornamental

hammer-cloth, which would give a satis-

factory meaning, although the words

hardly seem apt; but he subsequentlymakes the impossible suggestion that

Trapdppv/j.a= dppij\ai of Eur. Hipp. 1189,i.e. foot-holes to prevent from slipping.Ellendt maintained that, whoever put the

three interpretations together, could not

have read the text of Sophocles; but the

ultimate source, one would think, musthave been the commentary of Didymus.

I have given Trapdppu/xa (with Blaydes),as more in accordance with tragic analogy(i.e. iroftbs Trapdppvfj,

1

) ; but inscriptionalevidence is almost equally divided : see

Meisterhans,3p. 95343. Welcker, quoting

Aesch. C/io. 980 and Lycophr. 1 1 02

Kpoo-ffWTous pa<f>ds, found a further reference

to the entangling TT^TT\OS of fr. 526.

528

ot TI&IV TrepiKOTTTOvcn ra

ol y&p

528 Harpocr. p. 92, 23fjL&OL...dvTi TOV \e\v(JLa.(r^jAv

\viJ.a.ivt)fj.evol Tifftv ei&daai

TO, &Kpa, ws Kal So0o/fIt is possible that these words refer to

the mutilation of Deiphobus, althoughthere is no earlier extant authority for

that incident than Verg. Aen. 6. 494 ff.

For mutilation in general see on fr. 623.

nOAYEENH TTPIAMO! 169

nPIAMOI

The subject of the play is unknown, and Welcker (p. 159)took the view that the citations of the title were errors arisingfrom the appearance of Priam as a character in some one or

other of the Trojan plays. For examples of this kind of

mistake see Introduction, i. Here, however, there is a primafacie case in favour of the title

;and there is no reason why

Sophocles should not have composed a Priam, as Philocles did

(Suid.). One might guess that the plot related either (i) to thevisit of Priam to Achilles in order to ransom the body of Hector,described in Horn. O and dramatized by Aeschylus in his <&pv<yes

r)

ff

EtcTopos \vrpa (TGF p. 84), or (2) to the slaughter of Priam

by Neoptolemus at the altar of Zeu? 'Epicelos, an incident of the

sack of Troy contained in the 'I\iov Trepan of Arctinus, if notalso in the Little Iliad: see the authorities quoted by Frazer,

Pausanias, v p. 371, and Gruppe, p. 688. The former view was

adopted by Ahrens, who thought that Ylpiapos was an alternative

title of the Phryges^.

529

529 Poll. 7. 118 Kal Xarvirovs 5e 7/>a0is to 7pd0a>, and <r/ca0/s to

SoôKX?}?, OTTOU Kal e'pyaXeta TUV Xar^Trcov but does not seem to have been aware

dvo/mafci Xdas Kal yXapidas. Poll. 10. that Sylburg (on Etym. M. p. 778) had

147 oiKo86fj.ov ffKew) Xeiai, yXapides, ws anticipated the suggestion, or to have

So0(wcX?7s iv Hpiafjup. noticed that it receives some confirmationNo explanation of the form yXapiSts from the words which follow in Etym . M. :

is forthcoming; and H. proposed to sub- irapa TO yXaTrrw, rb KoiXai>TiKbv TUVstitute yXa<f>ides, holding that yXapides XiQwv. Cf. ib. p. 235, 7 yXv<j>is trapa rbwas a false reading which deceived the yXd<j)w, yXttpu... -fj iraparb yXairru yXa<f>islater writers. For yXapis is also attested Kal yXv<f>is. Etym. Gud. p. 126, 38by Etym. M. p. 233, 5 yXapis- Xi6oô'iKov yXapides, ol KoXaiTTrjpes irapa rb yXdirTWepyaXecov. KaXXi/u.axos (fr. 159)'

' Kal rb KoKairrw. Hesych. I p. 432 has the

yXapides <rra<fnL>\tj re KadiefA^vrj re /u.oXv- unintelligible gloss yXapls- o/)os. Ahrens/S5ts.' He points out that yXacpLs would conjectured that these tools were neededbe related to 7X0^0; (yXaTrru) as yXvfiis to make a sarcophagus for Hector.to yXtitftu (yXvirrw), pact's to pdirru,

530

XaTVTTOL

53O Pollux 7. 118: see on fr. 529. Another was Xt0oK6iros (Dem. 47. 65).The ordinary word for a stone-cutter was Xart/Tros is used by Philippus of Thessa-rather Xar6/xos, as is indicated by Xaro/xta. lonica (A. P. 7. 554).

1 See Introductory Note below.

1 70 Z04>OKAEOYI

531

Xeicti

531 Pollux 7. 118 and 10. 147 : see K TOV XecuVw rb 6/waX/w, probably refers

on fr. 529. There appears to be no to \eia 656s. Distinguish Xe?cu used for

other evidence fixing the meaning of this the weights of a loom.

word, for Etym. Gud. p. 364. 36 \eLav,

532

532 Schol. Ar. Vesp. 289 eyxvTpieis- mony of the grammarians: Hesych. iv

OTTO rCJv KTL0e^v(j3v waidiuv tv xuTPaiS ' p. 302 XVTplfciV (v "xyrpa <K>Tidtvai,oib Kal 2o0oKX?7S r6 tKTtdtvai (this is schol. Ar. Ran. 1190, Hesych. II p. 13Weil's brilliant emendation for cnroKTelvai) eyxvTplfeiv

' ^KTidtvat /3p^0os ev x^TPa'

XVTpl$iv $\cyi> tv Ilpiduif) Kal AtVx^Xos From schol. Plat. Mm. 315 c (= Suid.,

Aaiifj (fr. 122) Kal ^cpe/cpa/r^s (fr. 247, I JEtym. M. s.v.) we get the information

208 K. ). that eyxvTP'-a"rPiai- was the name given to

The custom of exposing children in the nurses who carried out the task of

earthenware pots may be illustrated by exposure. As we see from HerodotusAr. Ran. 1190 fire 8rj irp&rov fj.ev aitrbv that it was customary to use the same

yei>6/j.vov (sc. Oedipus) | xei/uwi'os oVros kind of pot for burying a dead child as

t^deffav ev offrpaKip \

'iva /*TJ '/cr/)a0eis for exposing it, this may explain an

yfroiro TOV Trarpbs 0o/e^s, Thesm. 505 rb obscure statement in the last-mentioned5 el<r<f>pe ypavs ev x^TPa T iraidiov, Hdt. authorities : ZXeyov 5 Kal TO /SXa^cu /cara-

i. 113 tdr)K ts rb ayyos, tv T<^ ^0epe TOV xvTpL<*ai i&? 'Apio-roâ^s, where Lobeck

(iralSa). Hence xvTP^ tv and restored 6a\f/at. Welcker referred the

for which we have the testi- allusion to the exposure of Paris.

T7POKPI!

The famous story of the loves of Cephalus and Procris is

told with many variations;and the elaborate and romantic

version contained in Ovid Met. J. 690 862, is a conglomeratecombining the legends of the Teumesian fox, of the love of

Aurora for Cephalus, of the hound which could outrun any four-

footed beast, and of the spear which never missed its aim, with

the simplest form of the original love-story. A similar remark

applies to the accounts given by Apollod. 3. 197 f, Anton.Lib. 41, and Hygin. fab. 189. The visit of Procris to Minos in

Crete, and the coarseness of the device by which she revengedherself upon Cephalus, are hardly likely to have been introduced

by Sophocles into his play. The original form of the Attic

myth is probably to be found in Pherecydes (FHG I 90), as

recorded by the schol. on Horn. X 321 : see also Eustath. Od.

p. 1688, 20. Cephalus, the son of Deioneus, married Procris,

the daughter of Erechtheus, and dwelt in Thoricus. Wishing

npiAMoi npOKPii 171

to test his wife's fidelity, he remained abroad for a period of

eight years, and at length returned to his own house in disguise.

Then, by a profusion of rich gifts, he set himself to seduceProcris

; and, when at last he seemed to be on the point of

success, he revealed his identity and rebuked his wife. A recon-

ciliation followed;

but the unremitting ardour with which

Cephalus devoted himself to the chase, aroused the suspicion ofProcris that he was secretly courting another woman. Her sus-

picion was confirmed by a conversation with a servant, whoadmitted that in a lonely spot on the mountain he had fre-

quently heard his master exclaim: &> ve$e\r], Trapayevov. Procris

determined to conceal herself at the place indicated, and to

await the issue. So, when she heard him repeating the cry, she

ran towards him;but Cephalus, amazed at her sudden appear-

ance, before he could recognize who she was, threw his javelinand killed her. Subsequently he sent for her father Erechtheusand gave her a splendid burial.

The conclusion of the story agrees with a vase-painting

reproduced by Rapp in Roscher II 1101 from Millingen, Ancientunedited Monuments, fig. 14, which represents Procris transfixed

by a spear, Cephalus on one side holding a hound by a leash,

and Erechtheus arriving on the other. Although there is noevidence respecting the contents of Sophocles' play, it seems

fairly certain that the accidental death of Procris must have beenthe climax of the action : rd 8' e? rrjv TIpo/cpiv, says Pausanias

(lO. 29. 6), /cal ol Trdvres aSov<riv...ov rpoTrov ereXevrrjaev VTTO

rov dv&pos.It should be added that the trial of Cephalus for homicide

before the court of the Areopagus was a familiar Athenian legend(schol. Eur. Or. 1649); and it might be argued that Sophocleswas hardly likely to have omitted to refer to it. In that case the

sole fragment that has been preserved was possibly taken froma description of the judges.

533

KoXacrrai /co/Trmrrou KOLKWV

533 Pollux 9. 140 TO, nh <rK\r]pct. TO, /3apus it may be said that the word is

5e ytcaXXo^ irpbs erepa Tr\i}v TOV (TriTifjnjTov, neutral (' valuer,''

appraiser ') ;but there

y K^xPT1'

- 1 2o0oK\77s eiiruv iv rrj UpdKpidi is no doubt that, like iriTl/j.iov (Jebb on'

/coXao'Tai.../ca/ccDi'.' 1. 915) and ^7riTt/uu>, it had a sinister

ciriTifiTjnjs is joined with KoXcumjs tone, to which ftapvs points. Strictly analso in Eur. Suppl. 255 TOVTUV KoKaaTty assessor of penalties, in the metaphoricalKa.TriTi/j.r)Tr)v, aj/tt^, where TOVTWV is neuter, sense it is perhaps best represented byas no doubt KaK&v is here. In Aesch. ' censurer.'

Prom. 77 ws ouTTtrt^TTjs ye rCov Zpywv

!0<t>OKAEOY!

PIZOTOMOI

The statement of Macrobius (fr. 534) shows that the playdealt with the magic practices of Medea, and, in view of the

events covered by the other plays relating to the fortunes of

Jason and Medea (KoV^'Se?, i^/cvOai), Welcker's inference 1 that

the plot comprised the cunning artifice by which Medea per-suaded the daughters of Pelias to destroy their father's life has

been generally accepted. The title clearly indicates the gatheringof medicinal or magical herbs

;for pi&ropos was applied as well

to those whom we should call sorcerers as to the legitimatefollowers of Asclepius. Cf. Theophr. h.p. 4. 5. I ra âp/âfcaJSrj

TGU? pleats KOI rot? O7rot?...cr)eoi> iravra TO, piôTOfjLOVfJutva, ib. 9.

I. 7'

L pôro/jLOL KOI ol rot)? {pap/AaKtooeis OTTOVS criAAeyoz'Te?, ib.

9. 8. I Trepl Travrtov (j)apfjiaKCt)oa)v olov tcapTrov ûXtcr/zoO $v\\Q9Vpi^wv Troa?' /ca\ov(7L yap /cal Troav evia TWV <f>apfjLaKCi)Sa>v ol pifa-

rofjboi. (It was a very improbable guess of M. Schmidt that the

gloss of Hesych. II p. 549 Kv/cXfifjuvos' TTOO, TW VTTO r

referred to the play of Sophocles.) Phot. lex. p. 488, 19 p

(l>apfjLaKis' fioraviKoi Lucian dial. d. 13. I (Heracles to Asclep-ius) av Se ptforoyu-05 el KOL aryvpriys. So we find with reference

to Medea herself in Ov. Met. 7. 226 et placitas (herbas) partimra dice revellit,

| partim succidit curvamine falcis aenae*. Cf.

ib. 264 illic Haemonia radices valle resedas|seminaquefloresque

et sitcos incoquit acres.

Euripides treated the same subject in his Peliades (TGFp. 550), which belonged to the year 455, and was the first playproduced by its author. There is nothing to show the date of

the present play, and the fragments give no indication from whichwe can trace the development of the plot. The dramatic versions

of the story no doubt contributed to its popularity in later times,but the allusions of Pindar (Pyth. 4. 251 rav IleX/ao <j>ovov) and

Pherecydes (FHG I 87 &>? e\6oi MijSeia ra> IleXta /caicov) are

enough to prove that it was not invented by the tragic poets3

.

The rejuvenation of Aeson was mentioned in the Cyclic Nosti

(EGF p. 55), and that of Jason himself by Pherecydes (FHGI 89) and Simonides (fr. 2O4)

4.

During the absence of the Argonauts Pelias had put Jason'sfather Aeson to death, or had forced him to commit suicide bydrinking bull's blood. Whereupon his wife Amphinome had

hanged herself in grief, or, according to another version, had

1p. 340 ff.

2 See n. on fr. 534.3Gruppe, p. 5784.

4Shakespeare's allusion (M. V. v i . 1 2 In such a night |

Medea gathered the en-

chanted herbs|

That did renew old Aeson} was doubtless taken from Golding's trans-

lation of the Metamorphoses.

PIZOTOMOI 173

fled to the royal hearth and there stabbed herself, cursing Peliasas the author of her sorrows. Even Promachus, Jason's youngerbrother, who was still a child, had been slain, in order that nopossible successor to the throne might be left. When the

Argonauts reached Thessaly on their return, Medea determinedto avenge her husband's wrongs. Accordingly, disguising herselfas an aged priestess of Artemis, she managed to effect an entranceinto the palace. She then announced to the king that the god-dess regarded him with special favour, and had come in personto give him renewed youth. By various magical tricks, and in

particular by secretly removing her disguise, and showing herself

as a young and beautiful woman, she won the confidence ofPelias and his daughters. The latter were ready to do anythingshe bade them, and when, after cutting up and boiling an old

ram, she pretended to produce in its place a lamb from the

cauldron, she had no difficulty in persuading them all with the

exception of Alcestis to take the same course with their father.

While Pelias was thus being done to death, Medea lighteda torch on the roof of the palace as a signal to the Argonauts,who were waiting in concealment outside. Then Jason, with the

help of his companions, seized the royal stronghold. Eventually,however, he surrendered the throne to Acastus, the son of Pelias,and withdrew to Corinth.

This narrative is principally taken from Diod. 4. 50 53, whichshould be compared with the accounts given in Apollod. I. 143 f.,

Hygm.fab. 24, Pausan. 8. 11.2, and Ov. Met. 7. 297 349. ThusOvid and Pausanias make Medea present herself to Pelias as

a suppliant, complaining of the wrongs she had suffered from

Jason. But Hartung's attempt to assign the version of Diodorusto Euripides, and that of Ovid to Sophocles, cannot be supported.Ovid and Hyginus entirely omit the motives which served to

excuse the cruelty of the revenge taken;but it is incredible

that Sophocles took no account of this tragic element in the.

story. The cruelty of Pelias is recorded by Diodorus and

Apollodorus; but the narrative of Diodorus is known to be basedon the prose romance of Dionysius Scytobrachion (c. 150 B.C.:

Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa V 930), and contains several incidents

which can hardly have come from an Attic tragedian1. There is

thus no evidence which we can safely use in reconstructing the

1Welcker, however, attributed this version to Sophocles. Robert, Arch. Ztg.

1875, p. 134, referred it to the Peliades. On the other hand, Schwartz, de Dionys.

Scytobr. p. 9, supposed that Ovid derived his material from Euripides, and that

Diodorus was indebted to some later tragedy. A sculptured relief representing Medeaand the Peliades is connected with this play by F. Winter in Neue Jahrb. f. kl.

Altert. xxin (1909) 706.

174 2000KAEOYI

plot of Sophocles ;but the unanimity of the authorities in

stating that the boiling of the ram was the device which pre-

vailed with the Peliades, makes it highly probable that it wasused by both tragic poets. Welcker thinks that both in Sopho-cles and Euripides the climax was reached when Medea signalled

to Jason from the roof of the palace a guess probable enough,but unsupported by evidence. He also conjectures that the

action of the play began with Medea's herb-gathering, and that

the introductory matter was explained in a narrative prologue.It may be questioned whether the chorus of PI&TO/JLOI, was

composed simply of attendants of Medea, or comprised the

king's daughters and other maidens from lolcus.

Nauck assigns to this play fr. 830 : see also on fr. 648.

534

r 8' e op,p,a

crrotô^ra 70/^775

/caSots

534. 1 ofjt.fj.aa-t Tpeirov<ra P (cod. Paris. 6371 saec. Xi) 3 /caStos P

534 Macrobius Sal. 5. 19. 8 haec res

nonne quaestione digna est, unde Vergilio

(Aeii. 4. 513) 'aeneae fakes' in mentemvenerint?ponam itaque Vergilianos versiis,

max exinde Sophoclis, quos Afaro acmu-latus est.

'

falcibus et messae ad lunam

quaeruntur aenis| pubentes herbae nigri

cum lacte veneni.' Sophoclis autem tra-

goedia id, de quo qtiaerimus, etiam titulo

praefert ; inscribitur enim 'P{~or6juoi.

in qua Medeam describit maleficas herbas

secantem, sed aversam, ne vi noxii odoris

ipsa interficeretur, et sucum qnidem her-

barum in cados aeneos refundenteni, ipsasauteni herbas aeneis falcibus exsecantem.

Sophoclis versus hi sunt '17

Several'

et paulo post'

at d^

1 eoircr(o \ Ps : she averts her eyesfrom the action which her hand performs:see on fr. 598. In rites of expiation and

purification, and generally where the

ritual of chthonian powers is concerned,it was customary to make the offeringwith head turned aside, and to leave the

spot without looking back. O. C. 490^Tretr' afapireiv tLffrpocpos (after an offeringto the Eumenides). Aesch. Cho. 97

, Kaddp/j,ad' ws rts ^/CTrûâs, TrdXii'|

Tevxosd<7Tpo(f>ot(rii> 6(j.fAacrii>. Horn.

e 350, K 528 ai)ros 5' airovb<r<t>i.

Theocr. 24. 94 pt^draj eu fj.d\a

Verg. <:/.$. iQifer cineres,

Aniarylli, foras riuoqnefluenti \ transque

caput iace, nee respexeris, Ov. Fast. 5.

437 aversusque iacit...nec respicit. The

underlying purpose is to avoid the dangerof looking directly at the evil spirits whoare at hand ; and the custom is illustrated

by the story of Orpheus and Eurydice.2 oirov KT. :

' the thick white sap

dripping from the cleft wood.' The

genitive is ablatival : see Jebb on El.

1422. With apywf(j>7)S Lobeck (Paralip.

p. 50) compares the use of o/ux^7? (Lat.

mibecula} for a sediment in the Hippo-cratean writings. Campbell, owing to

a misunderstanding, reads 0-rdfowra in

the sense of '

squeezing out.'

3 xa^K^ ltrt - After the introduction

of iron, bronze was retained for cere-

monial purposes by a conservative in-

stinct; and in course of time magicalvirtues were ascribed to it. Thus the

hair of the Flamen Dialis at Rome mightonly be cut with a bronze razor : Frazer,Golden Bottgh?, I p. 242. On p. 3445the same writer refers to the schol. on

PIZOTOMOI 175

as /ôaicr

âX/ceot?

at Se

KpvTrrovcrL

4 KoXvirrai Valckenaer : KaXvirrpai Pconi. Ellendt 7 ro/xas post

5 KpvTTTov<ri}> (om. ro/x,dj) P 6habet P, delevit Bentley

Theocr. 2. 36 TOP yap xaX/cov eir^dov ev

rcus K\ei\f/e<rt. TTJS ae\r]vr)$ /ecu ei> rots /caroi-

Xo/x.cj'ois, ^?rei5rj evo/j-ifero Kadapos elvai

Kal dTreXacrrtfcos T&V /xiacr/xdrwi/. In ^4;z/.

430 Antigone pours the xocu for Polynices

^K...f>KpoTrjTov %aX/ceas irpoxov. Seealso Conington on Verg. /.<:., Gruppe,8951- In Ov. /'iz.y/. 2. 577 the witch

pierces the fish's head acu aena, xa^-Ktouri is dissyllabic, as in Eur. Phoen.

1359 (xaXfois G only).4 KaXvirrai : see cr. n. There is

a similar error in Aesch. Ag. 319 whereCanter restored KCLTOTTTOV for Kdroirrpov.'

It probably refers to some coverings in

which the Kicrrai were wrapped, to

mark their sacred or mystic character'

(J. ). I should prefer to regard the verbal

adjective as having an active sense : so

&\l/av<TTos 0. T. 969 (where see Blaydes),

avToyvwros Ant. 875, iravcrvpros EL 851

(J.'s n.), AW/STJTOS Phil. 607, gfjiTrXrjKTOS

Ai. 1358, TrepippvTos Eur. Phoen. 209,

d^tXe/cros ib. 500, fj-evtros Ar. Av. 1620,

ev\oi.d6ptjTos Plut. ow/tf/. 13 p. 757 A,

dvot.Kov6/j.TjTos de curios. 5 p. 517 E. Seealso the comni. on Ant. ion /caXuTrr^s

TTi/zeXT/s, and n. on fr. 349.6 dXaXatojJievT) : see cr. n. Nauck

(Index, p. xi 1 1) accepted Ellendt's con-

jecture. dXctX?? is the joyous cry of

victory, and is associated in consequencewith the gods who are supreme in war

(Pind. fr. 225 'AXaXd, IIoXûoi; dvyarep),such as Ares (Cornut. 21) and Athena

(Pind. 01. 7. 37). It is true that in

general the d\a\aiy/a.6s of men answers to

the 6XoXu7/i6$ of women : Heliod. 3. 5

u)X6Xi;|aj' /uev al ywauccs, ^XdXaâi' 5'

oi avdpes, on the occasion of a processionat Delphi in honour of Neoptolemus.But, if the circumstances so required,the more sonorous cry might be uttered

by women: Eur. Bacch. 1133 at 5' -^Xd-

\aov, of the infuriated Bacchanals. Theword is more particularly connected with

the strange sounds heard in the wild rites

of non- Hellenic deities, such as Cybele(Eur. Hel. 1352) and Cotytto (Aesch. fr.

57), or with portentous and supernaturalvoices (Hdt. 8. 37). Hence we find

d\a\ay/m6s etc. used in Plutarch of

the cries of lost souls (ser. num. vind.

22 p. 564 K,fac. orb. lun. 29 p. 944 B), of

mourning women (consol. 7 p. 6ioc), andof the distracted ravings of Marius (Mar.

45). a\a\dfff6ai, therefore, does not ap-

pear to be out of place when applied to

the sorceress Medea in her invocation of

Hecate (cf. fr. 535). It must be admitted

that oXoXi^êtJ' is used by Ap. Rh. 3. 1215of the nymphs accompanying Hecate,and iilulare by Hor. Sat. i. 8. 25, Ov.Met. 7. 190: but some confusion of the

two words was inevitable, and we are

not justified in altering the text.

7 yvHLVTi t Herwerden wished to read

Tr/w/xj/ds, comparing Horn. M 149 (v\rjv)

irpvfivrjv iKra/j-vovTes ; but that would

destroy a touch characteristic of magicceremony, i.e. the laying aside of the

upper garment. So Verg. Aen. 4. 518,Hor. Kpod. 5. 25 expedita Sagana, wherethe schol. has :

'

succincta, ne defluentes

vestes impediment essent,' Sat. i. 8. 23vidi egomet ni^ra succinctam vaderepalla \

Canidiam pedibus nudis, Ov. Met. 7. 182

(of Medea) egreditur tectis vestes induta

recinctas,\

nuda' pedem, nudos umeris

infusa capillos, Senec. Med. 756 secreta

nudo nemora lustravi pede. Meklerrefers to Heim, Incantam. mag., Lips.

1892, p. 508, who brings forward several

examples to show the importance at-

tached to nudity in the celebration of

magic rites ;and also to Jos. Hooken-

bach, de nuditate sacra, Giessen, 1911.See also Warde Fowler, Roman Festivals,

p. 1093. xa^K *ots Spciravois, ^falcibusaenis Verg. I.e. So Ov. Met. 7. 227 (of

Medea) partim succidit cur^'amine falcis

1 76 !0<t>OKAEOYI

535r/

HXt SecTTrora KOLL irvp ie/odi>,

TTJS etôStas 'E/car^s eyx 9 >

TO Si' Ov\VfJi7TOV < TTpO > 7TO\OVO'a (j)pLKOI yrjs vaiovcT ie/>as ryotdSovs,

crT<f)ai>a)O'ap,V'r) Spvl Kal TrXe/cTOis

535. 2 eivodias Itali : cvodias L 3 OuXtf/xTroi; Valckenaer: 'OXi5yinrou L|

7iy>o7roXoO(ra scrips!: Tro\ov<ra L, TrwXo&ra Keil, TrciXXoucra Dobree, Tro\\6i> ye Valcke-

naer, 7r6X<o ovpdviov d\j>ov<ra 0^>et M. Schmidt 5 5pvt Ellendt: 5pvalL

|

TrXe/crois Valckenaer: TrXetVrous L 6 tiptop <rirdpri<n SpaKbvruv post Scali-

gerum Valckenaer : dytwi airdpovai dpaKovTas L

535 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1214 6Vt

5paKov<ri Kal dpvivif) K\d5it} 0T^0ert 17

'E/cdTTj KCU Soô/rX^s ^P 'PtôT6,uoi5 TOP

Xopov TreTroi^Ke \tyovTa '"HXie...5pa-

1 ff. irvp /ere.' Thou hallowed fire,

weapon of Hecate the road-goddess, that

she bears when ministering in Olympuson high and in her haunts by the sacred

cross-ways on earth.' There can be nodoubt that Sophocles here connects

Hecate with Helios as the moon-goddess,while at the same time recognizing the

other (chthonian) aspect of her power(v. 4). In both capacities she wields

the torch, to which are to be referred her

titles 0w(r06/)os (Eur. Hel. 569 n.), 5p5o-

06poj (Jebb on Bacchyl. fr. 23) and the

like. Most of the authorities (e.g.

Stending in Roscher I 1888) treat this

function as the natural attribute of a

lunar goddess; but Farnell (Cults ofGreek States, II p. 549) thinks that the

torch was originally a chthonian sym-bol. See also Heckenbach in Pauly-Wissowa vil 2777. Similarly Artemiswas d/j.<t>lrrvpos (Track. 216, cf. O.T.

206) : the double torch is explained byWiener (Rh. Mus. LVIII 333) as referringto the division of the month into twohalves. elvoStas, as a title of Hecate,is for the most part associated with

chthonian worship : see Jebb on Ant.

1199. Possibly it was suggested by fear

of brigands: Heckenbach, I.e. 2775. Cf.

Eur. Hel. 570 01) WKrlcpavTOv irpbiro\ovtvodias //,' opqs (n.), Ion 1048 Eivodla...a

rwv vvKTiir6\(>}v <p6db)v dvdcrcrets. ityXS>

weapon, is applied somewhat vaguely to

the torch, as an instrument borne by

Hecate in the exercise of her sacred

function: see on fr. 782. irpoiroXov<ra :

see cr. n. The common reading is Keil's

7ru)XoO(ra, of which J. says:'

TrwX^w, to

go about trading (and so simply"to

sell "), here reverts to its primitive sense,

going about, moving.' But there is no

authority for the meaning required. Mysuggestion rests on the assumption that

Hecate was the minister of Zeus in

Olympus (Ar. Ran. 1362 av 5' cJ, Aids

durvpovs dv^xovaa Xa/i7rd5as <5irrdras

X^poiv 'E/cdra), and of Persephone in the

world below : Horn. h. Dem. 439 f. TroXXo.

5' ap' d/j.<f>aydirr]<re K6ptjv Ar)/j.r)Tepos

dyvrjs' |

^/c rou oi irp6jroXos KCU otrduv

frrXer' avaffva. Discussing' the Hesiodic

Hecate' (Hes. Th. 411 ff.)in C.R. xn

392, G. C. W. Warr inferred that 'her

special participation in sacrificial offeringsto the gods must be explained in the

sense that offerings were made throughher to greater deities, rvhose servant she

was.' rpioSovs:' she was the goddess of

the cross-ways not necessarily because if

we travel by night the moonlight is de-

sirable when we come to them, but verypossibly because she was the mistress of

ghosts, and the cross-ways were haunted.'Farnell in C. ft. II 167: and so Gruppe,Gr. Myth. p. 1291. Cf. Cornut. 34.

p. 72 Lang evrevQev (from the three

phases of the moon) ^77 /cat rpiodiTis

CTreKXT/jdrj Kal rdv Tpt65ajf eTTOTrr^s tvo-

Hiffd-r), schol. Theocr. 2. 36 ISpvovro 5

TTJV 'E/rdTTjj/ iv rats r/)i65ots, dirt ^?rt T&V

Kadap/ut-druv Kal (Juaff/uLdruv 77 0e6s. Forrd 'E/carata see on fr. 734.

5 f. Spirt. For the crowning of He-cate with oak-leaves there does not seem

PIZOTOMOI IAAMQNEYS 177

to be any authority beyond this passageand Ap. Rhod. 3. 1215 irtpti- 6V IMV

e<?T<f)dv(avTo \ o~/JLepda\oi 5pvtvoi(ri /xera

TTTopdoiffL 8pdKoi>Tes. Cf. however Porphyr.de abst. 2. 16 /caret [trjva eKcurrov rats

vovfAyviais arecpavovvTa /cat <f>aidpiJi>ovTa,

rbv 'EpfjiTJv /cat TT\V 'E/cdT?7z>. Blaydes

strangely conjectured KV<TI. ir\KTois,which was corrupted to TrXetcrrous, is a

good instance of the confusion of K andIS: see Cobet, V.L. p. 124. 8pax6vTv:

cf. Lucian Philops. 22 /cat TO, IJLCV

60i67rous TIV, TO. 5e yopy6vi ûêprjs TO

/3Xâ/x.a, .../cat dirt T?;$ KOf^r)? rous 5pd-KOVTO.S ftoffTpVX'ndbv TTfpttKClTO,ei\ovfji^vovs Trepi rip auxâ /cat e?ri TWJ'

w/uuv friovs tffTre ipafjLevovs . Gruppe,GV. Myth. p. 12892, denies that she is

represented in art either as wreathed with

serpents or in serpent form. See also

Heckenbach, I.e. 2773.

536

Kopov cucrrwcras

536 iarwo-as irvp cod. : corr. Musurus

536 Hesych. I p. 87 dicrT^cras' 5ta-

âs /cat T?7|a

K6pov i(TTc6<ras

55 2 5

Phot. ed. Reitz.

dj/rt ro

Ellendt appears to be right in under-

standing Kopov as a waxen p^lppet or doll

fashioned to represent the victim, whichthe sorcerer melts in the fire in order to

make his magic influence effective. But,when he flatly asserts that the /c6/>os

represents Jason, who is bewitched byMedea, he overlooks the gender of the

participle. This meaning of K6pos (not

recognized by L. and S.) is implied in

/copo7r\d0os, and the word itself is foundin Suid. s.z>. KopoirXddoi' oi rous K6povsTr\aTTovTs /o?/> rj ytiîp = Timaeus, ed.

Ruhnk. p. 165. So Harpocr. s.v. Kopo-

7r\ddos, who gives /co/>as 17 /copous, andRuhnken shows that K^prj is better at-

tested. Kiister's Kvjpbv gives the samesense, and in that case atVrwo-as is re-

quired, a form which might be justified

by Ai. 515 av yap JJ.QI Trarpid* yo'Tuo'as

dopi. Duentzer, who refers to Pind. fr.

123, 6, thinks that the melting of

wax was introduced to symbolize the

wasting power of love. But the changedoes not seem to be necessary. Brunck

strangely preferred n6pr)v with the ex-

planation' de Jasone, qui Medeam ure-

bat.' Still less attractive is Hartung'sKOp/J.U>V.

The magical practice in which a waxenimage is burnt or stabbed, either as alove-charm or in order to cause death or

sickness, is sufficiently well known. Cf.

Theocr. 2. 28 us TOVTOV rbv Kypbv tyuffvv Sai/iLOvi T77/cw, |

cSs rdKOiO' UTT' pwros6 Mi)j/5tos afiriKo. AA0ts. Such arePlato's K-rjpiva /ut/t^/xara Treir\a(T^va.

(kgg' 933 B )- So Hor. Epod. 17. 76cereas imagines, Sat. i. 8. 30, Verg. EcL8. 76, Ov. Her. 6. 91 devovet absentes

simulacraque cerea fingit, et miserumtenues in iecur urget acus. The medievalwitches went through exactly the sameceremonies. A graphic account is givenin Holinshed's Chronicle of the be-

witching of King Duffe :

' who foundone of the Witches resting upon awoodden broche an image of waxe at

the fire, resembling in ech feature the

kings person, made and devised as is to

be thought, by craft and art of the Devill:

an other of them sat reciting certain

words of enchantment, and still basted

the image with a certain licour very

busily'

(History oj Scotland, vi p. 207).

Although, as already observed, the wordsof the fragment cannot apply directly to

Medea, it is natural to suppose that her

sorceries are actually in question.

ZAAMQNEYI ZATYPIKOI

Salmoneus was an Aeolid, brother of Sisyphus, Athamas,and Cretheus (Apollod. I. 51), and father of Tyro (Horn. X 235,

p. ii. 12

i;8 I000KAEOYI

Apollod. i. 90). Originally a Thessalian, he migrated to Elis,

where he founded the town known as Salmone (Steph. Byz.

p. 552, 5, Strabo 356), or Salmonia (Diod. 4. 68) in Pisatis 1. Cf.

Eur. fr. l4."Ei\\r)v yap, o>? \eyovcri, yiyverai Ato?,|

rov S' AtoXo?Ai'oXof Se ^lavfyos 'A#fta? re KprjQeix; 6' 09 r eVLov pools |

Oeov pavels eppitye 2aX//,a>z>ei>9 <f>\6ya. He wasa typical v/SpKTTijs, and was punished for his insolent presumptionin aspiring to be the equal of Zeus. In a literal sense he violated

Pindar's precept yu^ pd-reve Zeu9 yevevdai (Isth. 4. 14).

Salmoneus claimed to be Zeus himself, and ordered the

sacrifices to be made to him which were usually reserved for

Zeus. He even mocked the divine attributes by fastening to his

chariot tanned hides and brazen bowls so contrived as to imitate

the noise of thunder, and by copying the lightning with blazingtorches hurled into the sky. But Zeus struck him with his bolt,

and destroyed his city and all its inhabitants (Apollod. I. 89:cf. Hygin. fab. 61).

Vergil's allusion to him (Aen. 6. 585 fif.)must be quoted in

full:

vidi et crudelis dantem Salmonea poenas,dum flammas lovis et sonitus imitatur Olympi-.

quattuor hie invectus equis et lampada quassansper Graium populos mediaeque per Elidis urbemibat ovans, divumque sibi poscebat honorem^demens! qui nimbos et non imitabile fulmenaere et cornipedum pulsu simularet equorum.at pater omnipotens densa inter nubila telum

conforsit, non ille faces nee fumea taedis

lumina^ praecipitemque immani turbine adegit.What aere meant in v. 591 is doubtful; and some have inclined

to the view that a brazen bridge was intended, as also by Mani-lius (5. 91 ff.)- Anyhow, it is clear that Vergil did not follow

the same authority as Apollodorus. The legend was known to

Hesiod in some form; for he calls Salmoneus aSifcos (fr. 7, 5 Rz.).Eustath. Od. p. 1681, 63, denying that the impiety of Salmoneuswas known to Homer, ascribes its notoriety to ol veaiTepoi.

There is no trace of dramatic action in the story of Salmoneusso far as it is known to us

;but the sources are none too copious.

1 For the historical significance of this see Wilamowitz, Isyllos, p. 101.2 The commentators have discovered extraordinary subtleties of meaning in dum

imitatur, because they refuse to face the facts. Let anyone consider Cic. Tusc. i.

101 die, hospes, Spartae nos te hie vidisse iacentes, |

dum sanctis patriae legibus obse-

quimur; and, even without the help of the original, w eiv', dyyt\\iv Aax-eSai/iovtots

on rf/Se | Keifj.eda, roils Kelvwv prj/m-acri Treidofj.evoi, he might see that dum obsequimurwas simply

'

obedient.' So here dum imitatur^ 1-

as an imitator of.' The clause is

no longer temporal, and defies translation;but a full discussion would lead too far.

ZAAMQNEYZ 179

Robert 1 has recently referred to the play of Sophocles for the

interpretation of a much-disputed vase-painting. It was origin-

ally published by E. A. Gardner in A. J. Arch. 1899, ill 331, and

explained by him as depicting the madness of Athamas. Sub-

sequently, at the suggestion of Miss Harrison made independentlyof Robert, it was referred to Salmoneus by A. B. Cook in C. R.XVII 276, where a reproduction is given. But Cook did not

bring in Sophocles. Robert supposes that Salmoneus was putin chains by his subjects as a madman 2

,and was represented

brandishing his sham thunderbolt, after he had broken loose.

Even if it were certain, the identification would not carry us far.

Anthropologists seem to be agreed that Salmoneus was

originally a rain-maker, and that his action was afterwards mis-

understood : see Frazer, G.B? I p. 113; History of Kingship,

p. 197; Reinach, RA 1903, p. I54ff.; Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 82O5 ;

J. E. Harrison, Themis, p. 79.

537

raS' ecrrt /cîcr/xo? /cat

TO) KClXXiKOO-Cra/BoVVTi

Tidrjfja KOL fta\6vTL âX/ceto^ Kapa.

537. 2 Ka\\iKOTTafiovi>Ti Athen. 3 xaX/ceo? Blaydes

537 Athen. 487 D KaXeirai 5 navy* ffTa.fj.eda. Antiphanesfr. 55, II 33 K. Eur.

KCU rd eVi roD Korrapov e<peffTijK6s, tfi ov ras fr. 562. The ordinary prizes in the game\drayas ev 7rcu5t îre/m-Trov Sirep 6 So0o- were eggs, cake, and sweetmeats (Athen.

K\TJS Iv 'ZaXfjiuveT ^dX/ceio? t(prj Kapa, 666 D), but kisses are mentioned else-

X<?7u' otfrws 'rd5' tiri...Kapa.' where either in combination with such

For the reference to the game cottabus dainties or alone: Plato fr. 46, I 612 K.

see on fr. 277: we have here clearly de- iraifafjiev 5e irepl îXT/jtidrajf, Eubulus

fined the reward promised to the epao-r^s fr. 3, 3, II 165 K. Ofou 5 vLK-^r^piov

on condition of success. In order to rpeis raivias|

KCU ^rjKa tr^vre nal <j>i\-fj/j.aT'

succeed the Xcb-a must be so skilfully Ivvta..

thrown upon the 7rXd<Trt7^, that the latter 1 ff. As the text stands, the asyndetonin falling strikes the bronze head of the at the end of v. r is harsh, and a con-

fj.dvr)s. J. says : In the /c6rra/3os in the nective seems to be required to identify

museum at Perugia (from an Etruscan the vnoynipia with Kvurpos and <j>tXt]|id

tomb) an object of bronze, like a can- TWV \|/6<|>os. Jacobs proposed to remedydelabrum (pdjSSos), is surrounded at a this by substituting rd5' fore, Kviffpovs...

third of its height by a basin, and in a ^6^>ous, and removing the stop at the end

socket at the top is a small bronze figure of the line; the result would be satisfactory

with one leg and arm raised (the ndvi)s). (see on fr. 282), but the means are some-

Dict. Ant. I 559.' Cf. Critias fr. i B. what violent. M. Schmidt altered VIK^-

Korrapos K ZiKeXT/s e<m xôv^ tKirpeirts rripta to viK-qr-qpC a. Schweighauser

Zpyov |

dv vKoirbv $ \ardywv rot-a Kadi- preferred to put a full stop after TdS'

1Apophoreton der XLVII Versammlung deutscher Philol. u. Schulmanner, iiber-

reicht von der Graeca Halensis, Berlin 1903, p. 105.2Ilberg in Roscher IV 292 thinks that he was put in chains in consequence of the

oppression of his subjects, who had risen against him.

12 2

i8o I000KAEOYI

<rrl Kvi<T[A6s and simply to accept \{/6<f)ovs.

To the substitution of a for T, as sug-

gested by Adam and Villebrun, he

objected that the article cannot be spared ;

but this surely depends on the context.

Enger read n.6iJ.eva for Ti'077/u. Camp-bell proposed TrdpeoTi for rd5' tcrrl, Weck-lein more boldly 7X060-0-77? re KVKT/J.OV...

if/6<f>ov. None of these corrections is

convincing, and it is hazardous to alter

the idiomatic rd6" fori (Eur. Or. 1508,Hclid. 793 n. ), which may have referred

backward rather than forward. In v. 3Nauck's suggested T< j3d\\oi>Ti (for KCU

pa\bvTi) is condemned by Eur. fr. 562.

XciXKciov. There is no obvious reason

why the epic form of the adjective should

appear here only in tragedy, and Blaydesis perhaps right in regarding it as anerror for xd\Keov.

538

OLV

ere /ecu fid\oi.

538. 1 sq. Kepavvia o-e Dobree : Kepavvia wtij.<f>ti. codd.| /3dXot Bentley

XdjSoi codd.

538 Galen xvn i. p. 879 Koii 6

avros (fr. 337 had just been quoted) lv

crartipots '/cat rdx' av... \dfioi.'The reference is to the punishment of

Salmoneus. Dobree points out (Adv. II

365) that Kepavvia ir|i<f>i Ppovrrjs is a

case of hypallage, like etesia flabra aqui-lonum (Lucr. 5. 742). On such trans-

ferences of the epithet see Headlam in

C.R. xvi 434. This consideration also

serves to justify 8v<ro<r/j,las to which

xepavvlas should logically be attached :

thus there is no need for Madvig's pro-saic Svffofffj.ia, or for Nauck's 8v<ro/j.(3pLas.

For the meaning of 7re/*0i see on fr.

337 : it may be conveniently translated* storm

'

here, but Galen is substantially

right in treating irvorj as the central idea :

cf. Lat. aura. Sv<ro<r|ias refers to the

sulphurous fumes left behind by the

lightning : Sen. nat. qu. 2. 53. 2 quo-

cumque decidit fulmen^ ibi odorem esse

sulpuris certum est, Lucr. 6. 220 inusta

vaporis \ signa notaeque gravis halantis

sttlpuris auras. Cf. Horn./ 415 Zei>s

5' &fj.v8is ppovT-rjfff /ecu ^/>t/3aXe 1*774

| 77 5' eXeX/x^7? Tcio-a Atos

pavvy, \

iv d Oeeiov 77X77x0, JEJ 415ws 5' 6^' virb irXrjyrjs 7rar/)6s A46s e&piirri

8pvs \ 7rp6p/3i^"os, Seivi) 5e e e t o v yiyverai

65/A77 |^ avr^s. Herwerden's violent

with its objectionable rhythm, is entirely

unnecessary.

539

TTdLorcLv O\IJLV clyyeXco

539 fyiv Bentley: codd.

539 Galen xvn i. p. 88 1 4*1 d TOV

vtyovs doKei (sc. Tr^t^) rerdxdai Karar65e r6 ^TTOS ev SaX/iwi/et crartfpots irapa

.

The words ircurav otfiv cannot be ex-

plained in the absence of the context :

Hermann wished to substitute TrXô-osfor Trdffav and Blaydes TrXâs. Dobree(see on fr. 538) thought that the wordsin Galen (XAe/crat 5 oSros 6 X67os /cordriva irapapoXrjv tiri xflAta^"o^'/wi/ eipi]-

^vijv) referred to this fr. and not to Ibycus

fr. 17 (see on fr. 337), which ought to betransposed so as to precede it. Weshould interpret irepJHyi dyytXw irvpos as' the cloud which heralds the lightning,'if Galen's testimony is to be accepted.Cf. Ai. 1 148 (TftiKpov t>t<povs...Tts tKTTvevffas

uAyas xetM^" ?r^0t^, however, con-notes a rushing wind, and possibly hereis used to indicate the cold breeze whichsprings up on a hot day immediately inadvance of the gathering storm.

ZAAMQNEYZ IINQN 181

540

KapLKol rpdyoi

54O Hesych. II p. 413 KapiKoi rpayocws eureXwi' frvruv. 2o0o/cX^set fir} dpa viroffvyxtw (elTre

Meineke) rous RiXt/u'ovs.

The Carians were proverbially worth-

less : hence the well-known ev Kapl TOV

ewl T&V eV etfreXeVt ras Treipas

V (Zenob. 3. 59). Cf. Eur.

CycL 654 eV r Rapt /aj/Swetfo-o/zei', andother passages quoted by the schol. onPlat. Lack. 187 B. Cic. Place. 65 de tola

Caria nonne hoc vestra voce volgatum est,

si quid cum periculo experiri velis, in

Care id potissinium esse faciendum?Diogen. 6. 24 Avdol woi/rjpoi, Setfrepot 5'

i,| rpiroi dt TTOLVTUV Rapes e|a-

X^(rraroi. Prov. app. 2. 60 (Paroent. I

405) eV Kapos /ixoipa* ôuv ^ SoiyXou rdêi.

Rapes 5e tdvos ei)reX^s, alx/*a.\<aTi6fJici>ov

dei /cat 5oiXoi;/xej/oi', e'^ o5 /cat oi SoOXoi

Rapes eXeyovro. One may suppose that

the words were an abusive description of

the satyr-chorus. The commentator who

supposed that Sophocles confused Carian

with Cilician goats had more learningthan humour. The long-haired Cilician

goats were of considerable value in con-

nexion with the manufacture of the stuff

known as cilicmm (Plin. n.h. 8. 203).

Rop(T<xT??STpa7os(Cratin. fr. 338, 1 112 K.j,if rightly corrected, may mean either

bearded or Cilician.

541

541 Hesych. II p. 315 0fj/J.a'

TCIÔS, dvadrj/uLa ((Lvdy/Aa cod.).

SaX/uwpet (ffoKôvel cod.).' Incertum quomodo Soph, sit voce

usus: puto autem de donario? Ellendt.

But he has missed the significance of

rdcpos, which points to the particular

application of the other words. 0tj|ia

is an erection in honour of the dead (cf.

(Tri^-Xi;), just as cTrid'rjfji.a is the most

general term for a gravestone (Wyse onIsae. 2. 36). Thus it is glossed by #77/07,

a grave ( Aesch. Ag. 460) ; and by dvad-rj/ma,

because graves were dedicated to the

xOovioi by the survivors : so Pindar

(Nem. 10. 67) calls a tombstone &ya\/u.'

'A'tSa. Was the word used to describe

the puteal of Salmoneus ?

IINQN

Aristotle mentions a Sinon presumably the play of Sophocles

amongst the tragedies which were drawn from the Little Iliad

(poet. 23. 1459b

7). If Proclus is to be trusted, the Little Iliad

broke off at the point where the Trojans resolved to drag the

Wooden Horse into the city, and the Iliupersis began with the

debate as to what should be done with it1

. Although Sinon is

only named in connexion with the Iliupersis, as having entered

the city in a feigned character, and afterwards lighted a torch to

summon back the Greeks from Tenedos (EGF p. 49), it would

1 The question of the inter-relation of these epics has already (p. 163) been men-tioned. See also Frazer's Pausamas, v p. 362 f., Monro's Odyssey, p. 343.

1 82 !04>OKAEOYS

seem that he must have had a place in both poems, as the order

of the narrative in Apollodorus (epit. 5. 15, 19) suggests. More-

over, Tzetzes on Lycophr. 344 quotes a line of Lesches (fr. 1 1 K.),in referring to the occasion when Sinon held up the torch after

having persuaded the Trojans by his cunning to drag the horse

into the city. But it is sufficient for the present purpose to knowthat Sophocles undoubtedly derived the story of Sinon from the

epic Cycle.The nature of the stratagem by which Sinon induced the

Trojans to compass their own ruin is familiar to every one from

Vergil's description (A en. 2. 57 194), and need not be recapitu-lated here. How far Vergil, when composing Sinon's eloquent

appeal, may have used the Sophoclean model, it is impossible to

say ;but Heyne long since recognized that the speech was instinct

with the spirit of Attic tragedy1

. In v. 256 Vergil follows

a version which differs from the old tradition, by making the

ship of Agamemnon light a flare on the return from Tenedos as

a signal for Sinon to open the horse. This corresponds with the

passage in A en. 6. 518, where Helen holds up a torch on the

acropolis as a signal to Agamemnon 2. Hygm.fab. 108 seems to

follow Vergil; but Quint. 13. 23, Diet. 5. 12, and Tzetz. Posthom.

721 all agree with the version of the Cycle.

According to Serv. Verg. A en. 2. 79 and Tzetz. Lycophr. 344Sinon was son of Aesimus, grandson of Autolycus and Am-phithea, and so, through Anticlea, a first cousin of Odysseus.

Holzinger on Lycophr. I.e. thinks that the genealogy was at least

as old as Sophocles. Tumpel, on the other hand (Pauly-WissowaII 1085, 1957), regards it as due to a confusion by the mytho-grapher of the Homeric Amphithea with the wife of Tennes.But the tradition is clearly older than Lycophron, who musthave had some authority for calling Sinon îcrvfaia /civaBos.

Maass in Herm. XVII 618 conjectured that the name Sinon wasa shortened form of Sinopos, the eponymous founder of Sinope.

Quintus (12. 353 ff.) differs from the Vergilian account bymaking Sinon submit to mutilation and torture at the hands of

the Trojans before he will consent to reveal his story. But,

according to Tryphiod. 219 ff., Sinon voluntarily allowed his

body to be disfigured with wounds before the Greeks departed3,

1 ' Fuit Sinon etiam fabulae Sophocleae argumentum Hesychio laudatae. Exhac aut alia tragoedia profecisse videtur Virgilius in Sinonis oratione, quae Grae-carum tragoediarum eloquentiam et acumen redolet.' Excursus IV.

2 See also on fr. 177.3 So schol. Lycophr. p. 134, 12 5s at/CKrd^tevoj eavrbv Tr\r)<riov rov dovpeiov ITTTTOV

eKadrjTo. Immisch in Roscher iv 939 f. argues the existence of two distinct epicversions : in the Little Iliad, in which he gave his signal from the tomb of Achilles,and therefore did not enter the city, Sinon played an entirely subordinate part. See

IINQN 183

in order that the Trojans might discover him in this condition,and the more readily believe his tale.

542

cLWvcro-f.iv

542 Hesych. I p. 77 alQ6crcrii>'

ava<Tdeu>. 2,ii>ui>i Soô/cX^s. ibid.\>. 173dvaidticrcrw dvavdu. So0o/cX?;s SiVwPt

(ffiv(Jo(j.i] cod.).Cf. Bekk. anecd. p. 360, 21 QiOfoaw

dvcureLew, dvaKaieiv : for the last wordEllendt wrongly conjectured dvaKivelv,

and the text is now confirmed by Phot,

ed. Reitz. p. 50, 12 al0u<r<reiv dvaKaifLv,

dvcureleiv. It seems improbable that Soph,used both aiOucro'cu' and dvaidij(r<reiv in

the same play; but it is not easy to

choose between them. Eur. Tro. 344dvai.dijff<Tis <f>\6ya might seem to supportthe compound ; but this counts for little

in the case of so rare a word, and there

was evidently some ancient authority for

the use of the simple verb as ' to kindle*

Perhaps it was applied to the torch, withwhich Sinon signalled to the fleet (EOFp. 49, Apollod. epit. 5. 15, 19).

543

apprjrov

543 Hesych. I p. 289a<f>pao'Tov, dviffrdprjTov, a.trbpp'rjTo

ai^XP^v. So0o/f\77S Sb&w (aivvuvi cod.).The note has been so much cut down

that it is impossible to say for what

meaning the Sinon was cited. Perhapssome light is thrown upon it by ibid.

p. 279 dprirbv fiXafiepov, iro\v\poviov.

So0oK\77S (rvv&vvfjiov v<TTepos. Two glossesare there run together, and the obscure

explained by the derivation

of dpr)r6s from dci p7;r6s, i.e. del dia

/j.vir)fji,r)s e<r6/j.vov (Etym. M. p. 140, 42).Isaac Voss saw that the following words

belonged to app-rjTo^, and Alberti (after

Scaliger) emended the two last to 2>awdvurTdpijTos. If this is right, the quota-tion illustrates the less common sense'

unrecorded, unprecedented'

: cf. Bac-

chyl.fr. 14 (4 J.) o&8 yap pqarovTruXaj

| e&vpeiv.

544

V0pL(lKTO<S

544 Hesych. II p. 99 v6pia.KTos"

For frOtaKTos M. Schmidt conj.ori/c6s: but why not rather

evdedfcadai is common in late Greek.For Qpidfa see on fr. 466. Just before

this gloss Hesych. has tvOpidfriv irapa-KLvdv. dirb T&V fAavTiK&v dpiCiv. Cf.

'ibid. p. 108 evTeBplwKeve<TKva.KV, dirb T&V Qpiwv. 5ri\o? 5e Kttl

TO fiaKXftfiv, i'a-wV dwo TOV Aiovfoov Acre.,

where evdpibb) and frBptdfa are confused.

The lemma may belong to Menand. Sam.

241, but the latter part of the gloss is

clearly intended for tvreOplaicev, whichhas been conjectured in fr. 15.

also Bethe in Rh. Mtts. XLVI 518 ff., who conjectures that the increased importanceof Sinon was due to Sophocles.

1 84 I04>OKAEOYI

ZIIYOZ

The punishment of Sisyphus ( Horn. X 593 etc.) is better knownthan the crime for which he was condemned. But in the playthe fate of Sisyphus in Hades can only have been mentioned in

the concluding scene. For the main course of the action we are

left to choose between various accounts of his offence, (i) Heis said to have betrayed the plans of the gods (Serv. on Verg.Aen. 6. 616); but that is perhaps only a generalization from

(2) the story that Sisyphus blabbed to Asopus that Zeus hadcarried off his daughter Aegina (Apollod. i. 85 etc.). (3) Hy-ginus (fab. 60) states that he was punished propter impietatem.

Sisyphus, in feud with his brother Salmoneus, was told by Apollothat, if his brother's daughter Tyro should bear children to him,

they would avenge him on Salmoneus. But Tyro, hearing of

their destiny, destroyed the children whom Sisyphus had be-

gotten. A lacuna in the text prevents us from discovering the

crime of which Sisyphus was subsequently guilty. But these

stones are not characteristic of the knavish cunning for which the

name of Sisyphus became a by-word: see on fr. 567. Even in

Homer he was KepSio-ro? avbpwv (Z 153). (4) Pherecydes (FHG191), after giving the same account as Apollodorus of the original

offence, makes Zeus punish Sisyphus in the first place by sendingDeath to him. Sisyphus seized Death, and put him in chains,so that no one died, until Ares released Death and handed over

Sisyphus to him. But Sisyphus was not at the end of his re-

sources;for he commanded his wife Merope to omit the usual

funeral rites. Accordingly, when Sisyphus was in Hades, andthe offerings due to the gods of the nether world were withheld,he persuaded Persephone to let him go back to earth and punishhis wife for her neglect. But, when he got home, he refused

to return, until he was ultimately dragged back by force: see

schol. Soph. Phil. 625 /cdgf/

AtSou Oavoov\ Trpo? </><w9 aveKOelv,

<o(T7rep ovicelvov Trarrfp a passage which favours the conclusion

that these incidents were comprised in the plot of the Sisyphus.The story was known to Theognis (702 ff): ir\dova B

1

elSeir}?

v A.lo\i8ea),\

oare real ef 'AtSeo) Trokvibpiyaiv avf)\6ev>j

Hp<T6<f)6vr)v aliivKioiGi \6yois. Its dramatic possibilitiesare obvious, and the title StVuô? Spajrer^ indicates that

it formed the subject of a satyr-play of Aeschylus (TGFp. 74). It is uncertain whether the û'orô? TrerpoKvîar^ (ibid.)was a separate play; but, though regarded by Welcker (Nachtr.

p. 316) as a tragedy, its satyric character seems to be established 1.

1 Fr. 233 is probably decisive, since the ' Aetnaean beetle' is essentially a comictouch (Soph. fr. 162). Wilamowitz, Ho?n. Unters. p. 202, doubts the authenticity ofthe story attributed to Pherecydes.

ZIIY4>OI IKY0AI 185

Euripides wrote a satyric Sisyphus produced with the Troades in

415 B.C. (Aelian var. hist. 2. 8). There was also a play byCritias so entitled ( TGF p. 771). Welcker (p. 402) thought that

the solitary quotation from the Sisyphus of Sophocles was an

error, and that the intention was to refer to Aeschylus. This is

an opinion that can neither be proved nor refuted.

It should be added that Aristotle, taking Sisyphus as the

typical example of the defeat of a clever rogue, regards the

subject as rpayi/cbv ica\ $i\dv0pwirov (poet. 1 8. I456a

2l).

545

)^ r

545 rpiftyuv Musurus : fvy&v cod.

545 Hesych. II p. 256 fevyos rpurdp- the compound is similar to

Bevov Evpuridrjs 'Epex^f (fr. 357). xal d5e\0ds in O.C. 1055 (Jebb) : for the'

xaP'-TUV frywv.' 'Apt<r- metaphor see on fr. 511. On the number

"Opeus (fr. 576, I 539 K.) Kara- of the Charites see Pausan. 9. 35. i, who<?7rt TUV Tp&v (eTTi r6 y' cod.) says that the institution of the cult of

TO fevyos ZdrjKe'

fcvyos rpidovXov'

(-wv three Graces at Orchomenos was tra-

cod.). ditionally ascribed to Eteocles. TheThe compound, so far as it goes beyond earliest allusion to them in literature is

the idea of '

three,' implies a trinity Hes. Theog. 907. Miss Harrison in

exercising co-ordinate functions. Thus Proleg. p. 286 ff. discusses the developmentit may point to a closer union here than of this and other maiden-trinities : cf.

when applied to Hera, Athena, and Usener, Gotternamen, p. 131 ff. Others

Aphrodite in Eur. Hel. 357 (n.). rpiv- adopt Robert's view that three Graces

7e'ej Xdpires occurs also in Macedonius were always recognized at Athens :

(c. 550 A.D.), A. P. n. 27. The force of Escher in Pauly-Wissowa III 2151.

SKYOAI

The contents of the fragments show that the play was con-

cerned with the expedition of the Argonauts. Welcker 1 called

attention to a statement of the grammarian Sergius, explan. in

Donat. Gramm. Lat. IV. p. 490, 21 Keil : aliam scripsit Medeam

Sophocles, item in alio furoris actu aliam Eiiripides, aliam diversi

scriptores. ergo non de illis Medeis sentimns, quae occideruntfilios

silos, quasi multae sint, sed de illis quae scriptae sunt per varios

auctores. From this he drew the inference that in the 2tcv0ai

Medea was delineated as frenzied owing to the faithlessness of

her lover, since in the other plays in which she appearedand TôTo/i-ot) she had no occasion to exhibit this

1P-337ff-

1 86 ZOÔKAEOYI

passion; and further, that the situation must have been ana-

logous to that of the fourth book of Apollonius, where the

Colchians under the leadership of Apsyrtus overtook the Ar-

gonauts, and Medea treacherously betrayed her brother's life to

Jason. Nauck thinks that the grammarian invented a Medea of

Sophocles for his own purposes; but, even if he did follow some

genuine tradition, his words are too vague to justify any inference

concerning the plot of the Scythae. In any case, it is certain

that the story of Sophocles cannot have been the same as that

of Apollonius. For (i) fr. 546 shows that in the play Apsyrtuswas still a child; and (2) fr. 547 (n.) that the geographical con-

ditions assumed by Apollonius were entirely different from those

in Sophocles.Is there, then, any evidence which will help to determine the

subject ? The locality of the action may surely be inferred fromthe title, confirmed as it is by the mention of the Tanais in fr. 548,and the reference to Achillean barley in fr. 551 (n.)

1. If, then,

some point on the north-west coast of the Euxine was the scene

of the play, we may proceed to enquire what adventure of the

Argonauts is connected with that region. Fr. 546 proves that

the plot cannot have belonged to the outward journey, and we

may therefore leave out of account the arrival at Tauri, wherePerses brother of Aeetes was king, as recorded by Diod. 4. 44.Inasmuch as we are limited to the homeward voyage, the pursuit

by the Colchians and the death of Apsyrtus, which are variouslyrelated in the different versions, are the only subjects appropriateto the conditions. Now, the geographical data exclude the ver-

sion of Pherecydes (FHG I 89), in which the limbs of Apsyrtuswere thrown into the Phasis, and that of Hyginus (fab. 26) andother late authorities, who name Apsaros, a place in the south-east

corner of the Euxine, as the scene of the murder. The story of

Apollodorus (1.133) and Ovid alone remains, and seems to provideexactly what is required. Apollodorus relates that, when Medeasaw her father's ship getting nearer, she slew her brother, and

having cut his body into pieces threw them into the sea. Aeetes

delayed the pursuit in order to collect the limbs;and then buried

such as he could find at a place to which he gave the name Tomi.The situation of Tomi, where Ovid remained in banishment, wason the west coast of the Euxine, not far to the south of the mouthof the Ister; and Ovid frequently speaks of himself as living amongthe Scythians (e.g. Trist. 4. 9. 17, Pont. 4. 6. 5). The same neigh-

1 Nevertheless Vater (Argonautenzug, n 152) finds the plot in the Phaeacian

episode of Apoll. Rh. 4. 1001 ff. The same considerations apply to Ahrens, who putsthe scene of the action in Greece, and apparently thinks that the plot was similar

to that of Euripides' Medea.

IKY0AI 187

bourhood is brought into connexion with the murder of Apsyrtusby Aelian (nat. an. 14. 25), who speaks of the natives as living onthe boundaries of Scythia, and as engaged in repelling the attacks

of its inhabitants. It will be observed that Apollodorus supposesthat the murder took place on the ship, and that the mutilated

members were thrown into the sea. This proceeding could not

have been represented in a tragedy; and, if reported by a mes-

senger, would have left insufficient material for the rest of the

action. It is therefore worthy of remark that Ovid speaks of

Apsyrtus' limbs as scattered per agros (Ib. 433, Her. 6. 129, Trist.

3. 9. 27). According to the last-quoted passage, the Argonautshad landed at the spot afterwards known as Tomi, when the fleet

of Aeetes was seen approaching. Consequently they were ob-

liged to make a sudden departure, and Medea bethought herself

of the horrid device in order to detain her father. But the same

phrase recurs in Accius (fr. incert. XCIII, from Cic. n. d. 3. 67) :

postquam pater

adpropinqnat iamque paene ut comprehendatur parat,

puerum interea optruncat membraque articulatim dividit

perque agros passim dispergit corpus; id ea gratia,ut dum nati dissupatos artus captaret pawns,ipsa interea effugeret, ilium ut maeror tardaret sequi,

sibi salutem ut familiari pareret parricidio.Hence Zollner (Analecta Ovidiana, p. 48) drew the inference

that Ovid followed the description of Accius, and reconstructed

his Medea on that assumption. Ribbeck (Rom. Trag. p. 530)had previously suggested on different grounds that the Medea

(or Argonautae] of Accius followed the Scythae of Sophocles;and it is therefore possible that in Ovid we may find the traces

of Attic tragedy.The argument may be summed up as follows: (i) there is

no subject which seems so likely for the Scythae as the storywhich localized the death of Apsyrtus in Scythia; (2) there are

some indications that Ovid's version of this story was influenced

by earlier dramatic treatment. It is not a legitimate objectionthat Sophocles in the Colchides (fr. 343) had represented the

murder as perpetrated within the palace of Aeetes. Certainlyno tragic poet, when writing a new play taken from a legendary

cycle which he had previously used for dramatic purposes, would

have considered himself bound to reproduce exactly every detail

of his earlier narrative.

i88 !04>OKAEOYZ

546

ov yap K

oe)8XacrToz>,

re/a/oz't apTL y

EtSuta TToo' TTOT* 'O,Kavov eriAcrei/

546. (

ValckenaerNeaipasadd. Bergk post TKVOV \ (3\a<rTa.ve(rK6Ti)v

KO/JT; TIKTI> L : corr. Bergk, -riVrei mallet Nauck4 'ISuta

546 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 223 ev 5e

rots Zxutfats 6 Zo0o/c\77S erepo/mriTopa TTJS

MT/Sefas rdf "A\f/vpTov \tyei'

ofr yap.. .T'IK-

TCV.'

Valckenaer, diatr. p. 224, restored thelines as trochaic tetrameters (see cr. n.),and was obliged in consequence to reject

KO^TTJS as a gloss. This is possible (see

e.g. schol. on Track. 911). But it is

just as easy (with Bergk) to treat themas iambics : v. 3 is in any case corrupt,whether or not Bergk's insertion of Neat-

pas is right. J. remarks :

'It is perhaps

slightly in favour of Bergk's view thattrochaic tetrameters imply great excite-

ment. The speaker cannot be Medea(as Welcker assumes). Who then should

speak thus? Possibly Aeetes, if the fact

that Apsyrtus was only half-brother of

Medea was quoted, not to palliate her

conduct, but a helping to explain whyshe had no sisterly feeling for him.'Ribbeck thought that the lines were

spoken by Jason, or one of Medea's

partisans ; and this is perhaps a better

view.

The parentage of Medea and Apsyrtusis variously recorded. Hes. Theog. 958:Aeetes, son of Helios, Kovprjv 'ftneavow

oTa[J.oio| yrjfJie deCiv (3ov\r)(rtv

Ka\\LTrdpT]oi' , who bore to himMedea. The author of the Naupactia,one of the later epics, makes Eurylytethe wife of Aeetes and mother of Apsyrtus(frs. 4, 7 Kink.). Apoll. Rhod. 3. 242makes Asterodeia, a Caucasian nymph,mother of Apsyrtus, and puts his birth at

a time earlier than the marriage of Aeetesto Idyia, the youngest daughter of

Oceanus and Tethys. Lycophr. 1024calls Aeetes Et'Sinas TTQGIV. Followingthe same tradition, Cic. n.d. 3. 48, Ov.Her. 17. 232, Apollod. i. 129, Hygin.fab. 25 speak of Idyia as the motherof Medea. Tzetzes on Lycophr. 798 andelsewhere speaks of Idyia as the motherboth of Medea and of Apsyrtus : this,

however, is more likely to be a careless

blunder than to be drawn from an in-

dependent authority.An entirely different legend, which

cannot be traced further back than Diony-sius Scytobrachion (see p. 173), makesMedea the daughter of Hecate and of

Aeetes, Hecate's uncle: see Diod. 4. 45,schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 200 (FHG n 8).

Leaving out of account the last-men-

tioned version, we find traces of twodifferent stories, according as Apsyrtuswas represented to be older or youngerthan his half-sister. Of these Apolloniusadopted the one, and Sophocles the

other: see on fr. 343. The use of dprtcontrasted with irpCv irore shows that here,as in the Colchii/es, Apsyrtus was repre-sented as a child. It is generally con-

sidered that schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 242 (fr.

344) is an inexact reference to the present

passage. The schol., however, distinctlystates that Sophocles made Neaera the

mother of Medea; and for aught weknow to the contrary, the account in the

Colchides may have been to that effect.

That Sophocles was not consistent is

perhaps suggested by the words kv 5e rots

Z/ci}0ais (sitpr.},

2 KOITTJS here = concubitus, in whichsense the plural is more common, as was

pointed out by Verrall on Eur. Med. 434.3 pXdo-T6o-K and /3\a<rrdve(r/ce (see

cr. n.) are alike unexampled. Dobree,who thought the passage came from a

chorus, wished to read j8\d<rrav e?xe or

&rxe, comparing 0. C. 972. Bergk, whoinserted Neaipas and accepted (S\ao-rd-

ve<rKe, ended the line with TTJV 5', anelision also found in 0. T. 29, O. C. 17,

and elsewhere in Sophocles. But /3\a<r-

rAveffKe cannot stand after ^Xacrroi/.Headlam (C.R. xin 4) conjectured TKVOV

s, TJV 'Idvia irp'iv wore|... 'i^KeavoO

Koprj, but then Medea's mother is

not mentioned and Idyia was not the

mother of Neaera. Better, but not con-

ZKY0AI 1 89

vincing, is R. Ellis's proposal yv apri

/3XacrT?7, rr\v 5' 'Idvia irpiv wore\

'ftfceam

0#0"' (-TIKTCV.

4 E 18via was altered to 'ISuta (Hesiod,I.e.) by Valckenaer for metrical reasons.

In the present state of our knowledge it

seems better to follow the MSS.

for the prodelision see on Eur. Hel. 263,and for the error in the order of the

words on fr. 126. Nauck was not justi-

fied in requiring rtKret : either mightstand, just as in English we might say

indifferently 'was' or 'is the mother.'

See Jebb on 0. T. 870.

547

547 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 284 'E:a-

rcuos (FHG I 13) de tcrropei AU? fK8td6vai.

e/j rr\v dai\aa(ra.v rbv âcrtr, oi)5e did Tavdi-

dos %ir\Vffa,i> (eK7rXeu<rou coni. H. Keil),

dXXd Kara rbv avrbv irXovv /ca#' $v Kai

irpbrepov, ws 2o<poK\fjs tv ^Kvdats lo~ropei.

The earliest version of the Argonautic

voyage made the heroes return throughthe Phasis to the Oceanus, and thence

southwards to the Red Sea and Libya.This seems to have been the account

adopted by Hesiod (fr. 63, 64 Rz.).

When it was discovered that the Phasis

did not communicate with the eastern

sea, it was currently held that the Argo-nauts returned by the same course as theyhad chosen for their outward journey: cf.

Eur. Med. 432, 1263. But, inasmuch

as it became impossible to ignore the

traces of their expedition lelt by the

Argonauts in Africa,later accounts broughtthem back to the Mediterranean Sea fromthe west. This was effected either bythe adoption of a tradition that theysailed up the Tanais to its source, andthence carried their vessel on their

shoulders to the shore of the northernocean (Diod. 4. 56) ;

or in accordancewith the version popularized by Apollo-nius, which rested on the belief that theDanube was divided into two branchesand descended by the western of theminto the Adriatic Sea. See in this con-nexion Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece,

p. 366. Gruppe, p. 563 f. Jessen in

Pauly-Wissowa I 768.

548

\_VTTO Taz/aiSo? Sio/Hecr#ai ras rjireipovs.]

548 Schol. Dionys. Per. 10 p. 323,

23 AtVx^Xos 5e tv Upo^dei \vo/j.tv<p (fr.

197) Kai So0o/cX7)s fv Sfi/0cus virb TOVTOV

(sc. Ta.vdi.dos) diopifecrdai (pyai rds rjireipovs.

This quotation is printed by Nauck andDindorf in conjunction with fr. 547, but

has nothing to do with it, and should

clearly be separated.The view that the Tanais was the

boundary of Europe and Asia was also

held by the geographers: Strabo 490 rrj

5 EupwTTT? ffwexfy <?TIV r/ 'Acr/a Kara rbv

Tdvaiv o~vi>dTTTOvo~a CH)TT/, 491 rbv TdvaiV,

tivirep rrjs Evpuir-rjs Kai rfjs 'Atrias optov

vired/j.fda, 492 opiov U7r6/feirai TfjsJ&tiptbtnisKai T??S 'AaLas 6 Tdva'is 7rora/t6s. Editorsfail to observe that this is the point of

Hor. Carm. 3. 10. i extremum Tanainsi biberes, Lyce.

549

re /cat

549 Athen. 189 C /caXoD<rt 5' dpaevt-Ku>3 roi)s av\uvas, wtrrrep QovKvdidvjs iv

rfj 5' (103) Kai Trdfres KaraXoydd^v <rvy-

ypa<pels, ol 5

778'

H. refers to Ap. Rhod. 4. 228 235, in

which Aeetes, infuriated at the escape of

Medea, threatens the Colchians with his

190

dire displeasure if they fail to find her

on land or sea. The present fragmentcontains a description of the places to be

searched by the pursuers :

'cliffs and

hollows and creeks along the shore.' In

Eur. /. T. 106 Pylades proposes to

Orestes : upv^wiAtv Sûetj |

/car' &vrp a

ir6vTos voTldt. diaK\vffi ut\as, and in

v. 262 the herdsman describes the placewhere they were discovered : y\v rts 8iap-

pcb Kv/j-drcov TroXXy <rdXy |KoiXwTros

dy/u.6s, Trop<j>vpevTi,Kai artyat.was conjectured by Her-

mann ;but we have no reason to mistrust

the grammatical tradition. In Track.

100 Jebb supports irovrias, the original

reading of L, against irovriovs of A andmost of the other MSS. Blaydes, takingthe" same view, wished to introduce -fjdl

irovrias here a needless change. In Ar.

Av. 244 only F, as corrected, giveseXeioi'S. Cf. Philostr. imag. 2. 6. i fv

airaXrj auXwvt. For the general sense

Abresch compared Verg. Georg. 3. 276saxa per et scopulas et depressas convalles.

For TJ8c see on fr. 386.

550

55O Hesych. I p. 347 d^dXa/cros'

os, a\j/r)\A(f>i)Tos, d/cpdr^Tos (1. dupb-as in Phot. inf.). SKI^CUS (so

Musurus for OKvdav) 2o0o/cX?7S. The

meaning is unscathed: see Phot. lex.

p. 359, 5 OVK dTfoi/'dXaKTOS* OVK dKponjTos

ov8' dppdirio~Tos. Bekk. anecd. p. 475, 31

d^d\\aKTov d\f/ij\d(prjTov. Hesych. IV

p. 305 \pd\aKr6v OVK dvevptjrov [the glossis corrupt, but is admirably corrected byH. to OVK dvv6vvTov

, referring to Thes.

s.v. evdvvw p. 2284 B. Wilamowitz gives

&\f/d\a.KTOv OVK tpevvtjTbv (dvepevvijTOV

Musurus)]. \l/a.\d<ra(a with its compoundsand derivatives is not a common word ;

but it is probably connected with \[/rj\a(pu

and Lat. palpo. Cf. Ar. Lys. 275Qw d\l/d\a.KTos

' came off scot-free'

where the schol. has dirad^s, drt/Aw^ros.This explanation passed into Suid. s.v.,

who adds d^dXanrov yap rb aQiKrov.

OVTUS Kparys (fr. 46, i 143 K.) : see also

s.v. 8ia\f/a\dTTff6ai. Ar. Lys. 84 q.irep

iepettv TOI/J.' vTro\t>a\d<T(TTe (' contrectatis ').

âXdêts (Lycophr. 139) is explainedKpoweis, \f/r)\a<f>r)<reis in Etym. M. p. 817,

14. H. compares dveiri.K6ppi.(rTOS Com.fr. adesp. 935 (in 568 K.), a comic for-

mation from tiri Kfrppys Tvirreiv. Wenow have irpo\f/o.\d^ (fr. 314, 241) and

6pdo\f/d\aKTos (ib. 249, 321).

551 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p.1 6 dxtXX^Ses' KpiO&v eTSos, wvKal

'

A.ptffTocpdvrjs (Eq. 119) /cat

Hesych. I p. 344 dxtXXeiwj/

cod.)'

'iTTTreOcriJ' ApicrTO(pdi'r)5 /cat So0o-/C\T}S 2Ki50cus dxtXXei'o)!' (d%iXXiwi' cod.).

[eicrt 5e Kal 'AxtXX^ws dp6/J.oi irepi Tavr-qv

TTJV vijffov.] Zvioi 5e T&V \VK(OV. Kuster

recognized that the words within brackets

belong to the previous gloss, which runs

thus: 'AxtXXeioi' TrXd/ca (Tr. fr. adesp.

2O2)' T7)V 'AxtXX^WS VTJffOV, TTfV KeVKT)V

It is not directly stated, but is surelyto be inferred, that the Achillean cakes

were made of barley imported to Athensfrom the north coast of the Euxine,

where the cult of Achilles prevailed fromthe mouth of the Ister to the Tauric

Chersonese, and particularly in connexionwith the island ACVK-TJ and the 'AxtXXews

8pbiJ,oi: see for the details Escher in

Pauly-Wissowa I 223^ And perhapseven the gloss \CVKUIV is not without sig-nificance: the white Achillean barley

suggested the white island of Achilles.

As an argument tending in the samedirection it may be added that an allusion

to Achillean bafley grown in the neigh-bourhood of the Pontus would be especi-

ally appropriate to the scene of the

Scythae. dxtXXVSes was the name givento the 'Ax^XXetoi KpiOai, and dxiXXeta to

the barley meal (<xX0tra) : see Bekk.

IKYOAI ZKYPIOI 191

anecd, 474, 7 14. Athen. 114 F.

Pherecrates (fr. 130. 4, I 182 K.) also

mentions 'Ax^XXetoi pafat as a part of

the abundant fare which was providedfor the ancients in the days when Cronoswas king (Cratin. fr. 165, I 64 K.) ; andAchillean meal was served to those whowere entitled to the privilege of O^TTJCTIS

ev TTvravfii) (schol. Ar. Eq. 819). It

might seem probable therefore that

Bekk. anecd. 474, 14 'Ax^XXetoi xiQai' ai

eureXets should be corrected to evyeveisfrom the text of schol. Ar. Suid. s.v.'

Ax<-X\ei<j}v also has KpidCov Kadapdv /cat

evyev&v, followed by 'Axt'XXeiot Kpidai'

ai eureXets, where Kiister wished to

restore evyevtis. But the difficulty wouldin any case remain that the despisedbarley-cake appears to be spoken of as

a dainty by the comic poets. So Eustath.

Od. p. 1445, 55 ftoKti 5 rb &\<t>iroi> etfre-

\4frepov aXevpov ?pcu...r& r&v rpvûv-TUV tâtard, <SX0tra ovro. Kara llavaav iai'

(fr. 329 Schw.), otvy KaltXaty Me/ia-yâ^ 5e5evfji.ei>a. oûoiws Kai if 'AxtXXe/a /*afa,

^XO^'O'c' TI- us tliffa talpeTov. 17$ 'Ax^XXetacXtyero ra &\<pira. It may be suggestedby way of explanation that the Achilleancake was honoured as a survival of the

primitive diet rather than prized as a

luxury. fftTTjcrts tv irpvTavely would

naturally retain features derived from its

early history (Frazer mJ.P. xiv 147 ff.) ;

and in that case we might compare the

spicae adoreae, which the Vestals groundand cooked (W. Warde Fowler, RomanFestivals,'^. 149), and the barley-cakesoffered in sacrifice at Eleusis (Pausan. i.

38. 6). Eustath. //. p. 749, n arguesthat the celebrity of 'Achillean' barley-cake is not to be taken as evidence of

luxury in the heroic age.

552

552 Hesych. I p. 408 fivdlfav'-wovri-

fav tv fivdy. S/cu0cus (so M. Schmidt:VKvOai cod.). Schow recognized that the

reference intended was to the Scythae of

Sophocles.{3u9(uv, for to sink a ship, became

fairly common in later Greek.

IKYPIOI

The title of this play is generally given as 'Ztcupioi, but twice

as ^Kvpiai by Hesychius. The former is confirmed by CIA II

992 (Marmor Piraeicum): see Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 157.

Euripides also wrote a 2/cvpioi, the subject of which was

undoubtedly the concealment of Achilles by Thetis among the

daughters of Lycomedes, and his discovery through the ingen-

uity of Odysseus, when a deputation was sent from the Achaeansto enquire for him 1

. Brunck inferred that the ^tcvpioi of Sopho-cles contained the same subject-matter, and evidently thoughtthat the citation of Sophocles by the younger Philostratus (fr.

553), in his description of the scene at Scyros when the envoysarrived from the Greek army, pointed in the same direction.

1 Eur. fr. 682 is decisive.

192 10<t>OKAEOY!

The latter argument is discounted by the fact that the com-

panion picture of Neoptolemus at Scyros immediately follows.

Brunck also assigned to Sophocles1 the fragment (Soph. fr. 497 D.

= Tr. fr. adesp. 9 N.2) quoted from the 'Ztcvpioi, by Plut de aud.

poet. 13 p. 34 D (cf. de adul. et am. 33 p. 72 E, pseudo-Plut.

pro nobil. 21 [VII p. 274 Bern.]) rrjv Se vrpo? rov 'A^tXXeo. rov eV

%rcvp(i) KaOrifjievov ev rat? rrapOevois yeyevrjêvr^v eVtTrXT/fti/ VTCO

rov 'O&uo"O"e&)9

GV S\ <w TO \a/j,7rpov </>a>? arroGftevvvs yevovs,

aivi$, apiorov rrarpos 'R\\^vcov 7670)? ;

If one could be certain that the lines were written by Sophocles,

they would of course be decisive as to the nature of the plot.

Brunck found the style suggestive of Sophocles, catching an

echo, I suppose, of Phil. 3 and 1284. But that is commonplace(Eur. Med. 405, Hclid. 235, Hel. 942, fr. 231, 2) ;

and no inference

can be drawn from the use of <<w9. Brunck's suggestion metwith considerable approval, and Welcker 2 reconstructed the playon this basis. He held that fr. 557 was addressed by Diomedto Lycomedes

3

inappropriately enough ;for what have we to

do with the death of Tydeus ? Dindorf and Ahrens followed

Brunck, and Nauck agreed ; but, while favouring the ascriptionto Sophocles of the fragment from Plutarch, he nevertheless

printed it amongst the adespota. But there have not been

wanting critics to take another view. Tyrwhitt4 identified the

subject with the departure of Neoptolemus from Scyros in

obedience to the summons of Odysseus and Phoenix, who hadbeen despatched to Lycomedes in consequence of the disclosure

of Helenus that the co-operation of the son of Achilles wasessential to success. In recent years the opinion of Tyrwhitthas been revived by Robert 5 and Engelmann

6,and I cannot

but think that fr. 557 is decisive in its favour. These words, if

spoken by Neoptolemus in conversation with Phoenix seem to

be exactly in place7

;but they have no ascertainable relevance

to the story of Achilles and Deidamia. It would follow that

Sophocles and Euripides made use of the same title for legendswhich, though parallel, were entirely distinct from each other;and some might prefer to avoid this conclusion. Yet Euripidesdid not hesitate to employ the title of Phrynichus' Phoenissaefor an entirely different purpose. Engelmann formerly

8 identified

1 Barnes had given it to Euripides.2pp. 102 107.

3 So also Hartung.4 On Arist. poet. p. 149.

5 Bild tmd Lied> p. 3440 .

6Archaologische Stndien zu den Tragikern, 1900, p. 29 ff.

; Zeitschr. f. bildende

Kunsi, XLIII (1908) 312 ff.

7 See n. in loc. : the affection of Neoptolemus for his father is also brought out in

Phil. 350.8

p. 49.

IKYPIOI 193

the ^KvpioL with the tragedy NeoTrroXe/^ mentioned in Arist.

poet. 23. I459b

6, a view which he has since abandoned.The fetching of Neoptolemus from Scyros was related in the

Little Iliad'. KOI NeoTrroXe/ioz' 'OSu<7<76i>9 e'/e îcvpov ciyaywv rdO7r\a SiBcoo-L ra rov Trarpos" KCLI 'A^tXXeu? aura) ffravraêTat,

(EOF p. 36). This agrees with Horn. X 308 f.

'

Apollodorus(epit. 5. u) supplies the reason for the despatch of the envoys,and states that Phoenix was sent with Odysseus. It is im-

portant to note that the same account was adopted by Sophoclesin Phil. 344. We may perhaps infer from Philostratus (I.e.) that

Odysseus remained in the background, and that Phoenix inten-

tionally or by accident was the first to meet the boy.In Quint 7. 169 ff. Odysseus and Diomedes come to Scyros

to fetch Neoptolemus ;and the reason for the innovation appears

incidentally. They were the same envoys who had summonedAchilles to take the fatal journey; and the coincidence increasedDeidamia's anxiety for her child, as she lay awake in the night(242 ff.).

No doubt in Sophocles also the parting of the boyfrom his mother was the climax of the action : the archaeo-

logical evidence alone, if its relevance were established, would beconclusive. May we not also infer that Sophocles brought theearlier mission within the purview of the characters, that

Odysseus felt it as a difficulty in his way, and that the hostilityof Lycomedes and Deidamia was aroused by their earlier ex-

perience ? That such was the case is at least probable. Althoughit has sometimes been thought that the story of the bringing-upof Achilles as a girl among the daughters of Lycomedes was of

late origin1

,it was the subject of a painting by Polygnotus

(Pausan. I. 22. 6) and must have been known to Sophocles as

well as to Euripides. The Iliad shows acquaintance with a version

according to which Achilles sacked Scyros (I 668), and doubtless

received Deidamia as part of the spoil. According to the Little

Iliad (fr. 4 K.) this was after the abortive landing in Mysia.

553

553 Philostr. iun. imag. i S/cu/oos... also by Dionys. Perieg. 521 2/fOp6$ r'

rjv 6 6eios Zo0oK\77S dve/jubdea *aXe?. ê/*6e<r<ra Kal aliretvr] Ueirdprjdos.

Scyros was described as'

wind-swept'

1 See Gruppe, p. 6691. Bethe, however, believes (Theb. Heldenl. p. 81) that it

was to be found in the Cypria.

P. II. 13

194 !0<t>OKAEOY!

yap

554

TrdXe/xos dypevew554 Stob. fior. 51. 24 (iv p. 333, 4

Hense) So0ox\?7S ZKU/>I'OIS (S omits the

name of the play).'

0tXet...rl*fff.'

Mekler (Bursians Jahresb. cxxv 212)

suggests that these words contain an

allusion to the name Neoptolemus : see

the Introductory Note. They are, how-

ever, more appropriate to the death of

Achilles, and may have belonged to the

same episode as fr. 557. There can be

no mistake as to the sinister meaning:the young are the prey of war. Cf.

A.P. g. 362, 24 oude At/oil/ Aa0ef irav-

depKâ 0oiVtos dvrjp \

"EXXdSos d/j.w(ai>

aya/jiov GT&yjov KTC. In the same waywar is said to destroy the noblest : see

on fr. 724. But, as war is the special

province of the young, so is couragetheir peculiar virtue: Tyrtae. fr. 8, isff.,

9, [3 175' aperf, r65' &ed\ov ev dvOptitroLcriv

apitrrov |

Ka\\ia'T6v re (ptpetv yiyverai

dvdpl ve($. Eur. fr. 237 veavlavydp avdpaXP?) ToX/ioV det, fr. 1052 veavias yap 6'oris

j, \ K>M*? /u<ovot> Kai crdp/ces.

555

r/TTOvrovavrai. roiv TaXcLLTTtopcov /3poTa*v,

of? ovre $aLfJLa)v oure TIS OvrjTa*

7T\OVTOV TTOT CLV VtlptieV d^'lOLV

XeTTTCUS 771 pOTTrjCTLV ZfJLTToXaS

del Trapapp'nrTQVTts ol Tro\v<j)0opoi

r) eorwa-av aKp8avav r)SiwXecrai'.

555. 1 17 SM, om. A 2 evrfrCsv F. W. Schmidt: deuv codd.|

Meineke: vep&v codd. 3 veifj.et.ev Brunck: veifj.eiav codd. 4 XeTrr^s vel

XcTrrfjs codd. : corr. Meineke| irippoTrr)i<Tt.v S, l-rrt.ppoirri<yiv M, e-rrl potrri<nv A, eirl

piiriffiv Meineke 6 775 tus av (clxrav vel &yav M) SMA: corr. Person| 77

SMA: corr. Meineke.

555 Stob. fior. 59. 3 (iv p. 400, to

TIense) 2o^>o/cXôi;s *2iKvpiwv. '77 TTOVTO-

vavrai. . .di&XeffavS

The sequence of thought is :

'

the risks

run by seafaring folk in the hope of gainare so great that no reward however rich

can compensate them.'

1 TWV raXaiircopwv Pporaiv. For the

partitive genitive as predicate see Kuehner-Gerth 418. i (a), Madv. 5ic. Butthe words are ill adapted to express the

thought that seafarers are the mostwretched people in the world, since ol

ra\aiTrwpoi (Bporot includes the wholehuman race : cf. fr. 945, Aesch. Prom.

247, Eur. Suppl. 734, fr. 196. Still, wecan hardly regard as probable such con-

jectures as 0eO, trovTovavTuv ws raXat-

irwpov yevos (Meineke), or r&v irovTovav-

TWV rot TaXalirupov yevos (F. W. Schmidt).Mekler (PhiloL Liv 376), objecting to

the compound, proposed to reconstruct

as follows : < a^rfxra-vrov idvSvvov

TrdXat >| rjirrovTO vavrai r&

fivO&v : but, as Wecklein remarked,raXcuTrwpoH' is against this view. Thesimplest solution would be to assume the

loss of a line after fipoT&v, containing the

idea : /idXtcrr' ad rpiôvcnv afr\ov fiiov.

Bernhardy unnecessarily suspected the

genuineness of the whole fragment (Gr.Lift, ii3 2 p. 334).

2f. The MS reading must be corrupt,and a contrast between dai/Aw and rts

6e)v does not seem likely here : see how-ever Tucker on Aesch. Theb. 510.

(r) Enger substituted ri/x7? X^pif for de&v

vepuv with irbvwv for x<*Plv m the follow-

ing line.' This view recognizes that dîav

requires a correlative, but fails to observethat the risk to be recompensed is stated

in the following lines, which are in effect

a commentary upon dj-iav, and as suchare introduced without a connecting par-

ZKYPIOI 195

tide (H. adds 5' after XeTTTGUj). Moreoverthe antithesis of oa.ip.wv and Tv\f\ requires

justification: contrast e.g. Aesch. Ag.667 ff. (2) F. W. Schmidt read oure ns

Qv-qT&v irbvwv irXdffTWv TTOT', following in

part the same lines as Enger. But otfre

ns dvTjT&v, thus baldly contrasted, is

a logical anticlimax after oaip-wv : if no

god in the fullness of his power can give

compensation, how should we expect it

of a mere man? The same remark

applies to (3) J., who was inclined to

retain the text of the MSS with OVTJTUVfor Qe&v. (4) For these reasons I have

accepted Meineke's solution, except that

I have replaced Qe&v by dvijruv rather

than by fipoT&v. Thus we have ' no divine

being nor man however rich'

: yt\i<av

irXovrov is introduced, because K^pdos

(v. 6) is the motive inducing the sailor's

risk. Such are \\\z Altalicis condicionibus

of Horace, which would never tempt the

merchant, were he not indocilis pauperiempati (Carm. i. i. 18). Cf. Antiph. fr.

101, II 51 K. (Diogen. 4. 83, Men. mon.

664) ev yrj irtveo'dai Kpetrrov T) ir\ovrovvTa

TrXeu/. The security which wealth gives

explains the metaphor of 7ro\i)s irXovrov

\ifj.7}v in Aesch. Pers. 253, Eur. Or.

1077. Sai|x<ov should probably be taken

strictly; for the 8ai/j.oves were 7rXouro56Tcu

(Hes. Op. 125). For TT\OVTOV Mekler

ingeniously suggested TrXoO TOV.

4 ff.'

For, whether success or failure

attend these poor wretches, they hazard

distant ventures on all too slender a

chance.' The emphasis is on the openingwords, which explain why the sailor

cannot earn aj-ia x&P 1-*'- ne *s always

taking too big a risk. Thus the mainstress of the sentence is thrown on the

participial clause, as so often happens in

Greek: Eur. Hel. 1214, Helid. in,Phoen. 484. There is a good examplein Andoc. 2. 7 KardirovTi TO. yeyevrjfjieva

avTbv...fj.i) redvavai ('to be obliged to

reveal the truth in order to escape death ').'

Xeirral poirai, turnings of the scale

which a small thing may decide. Cp.Eur. Hipp. 1163 58opK yvroi 0<2s eiri

<r/MKpas poirTjs (of a man hovering betweenlife and death)' (J.). Following this

and similar phrases, Blaydes conj.

eiri poirrjs ydp', but the dative is correct,as e.g. in Xen. mem. 2. i. 18 eir' dyadrjt\wMi. The thought that the seaman is

always close to death protected by aninch or two of timber is one of thosethat continually recur in Greek (and theimitative Latin) literature : Horn. 628rvrdbv ydp VTTCK davdroio <ppovrcu, Arat.

phaen. 298 6\iyov 8e 5id %6\ov di'5' fpfaet,Anacharsis in Diog. L. i. 103 paOuv

da.KTv\ovs flvai rb irdxos rijs

TOffovrov^(f)tj TOV davdrov ro^j

trtx* 1-'', Juv. 12. 57 i nunc et

ventis animam committe, dolato| confisus

ligno, digitis a morte reniotus| quattnor

aut septem, si sit latissima, taedae, id.

14. 289. See especially Eur. fr. 921ddjpl TrbvTOV KVfjLar' evptos TTpq....<rpiKpa.! j

eaurous firirp^Trovo'iv \iri<riv. Liban.

progymn. i. 1240 ot TrXwr^pej ir\rj<yLov

txwres TOV Qa.va.TQV irXtouvi, X cirri)?

i-XOVT s et>s 0'ioT'rjpia.v f\Trida TO, tfXa.

Meineke's ^?rt pnriffiv was a bad con-

jecture, which was adopted by Nauckand Dindorf, although the former ulti-

mately reverted to eirl poiratcriv (Index,

p. xi 1 1). It was suggested by the proverbK&V eiri ptTros TrXôis the avaricious manwould go to sea ' on a mat '

for whichsee Eur. fr. 397, Ar. Far. 699 (Blaydes).The word piiris meant

' a fan,' or 'bellows,'and had a short penultimate in the obliquecases (Ar. ^^.669,888): Nauck quotedHerodian TT. dixpbvwv, anecd. Ox. in

p. 299, 10 rb yuA/roi Kapts /cat piiris i] ptvKOLVT] ffvvfjdeia. e/cretWt, ij S TUV '

Adrjvaiuv5idXe/fros ffVffT^XXei, but strangely thoughtthat piirifftv was none the. less admissible.The MSS justify the retention of the

locative form poirijfftv : see on fr. 659, 9.ot 7To\v<j>0opoi derives its force from

the idiomatic use of (pdeipetrdcu to expressthe wanderings of storm-tossed or ship-wrecked mariners: cf. Eur. Hel. 774irbaov XP VOV

I

TOVTOV 'trl vdirois d\iov

<f>deipov irXdvov, ib. 766 (n.), and see

Blomfield's glossary on Aesch. Pers. 457.To translate, with L. and S.,

'

bravingruin and danger

'

is entirely to mistakethe tone of the passage. The adj. is usedwith the same intention in Aesch. Prom.660 (of lo) T&S iro\v(f>dbpovs Ti)xa* and

846 T?}S iro\v(pd6pov

132

!0*OKAEOYZ

556

ovoev yap aXyos olovrj TroXX?) 077.

556 SOT) Person ad Eur. Hec. 1090: fonj SMA

556 Stob.yft?r. 116. 28 (iv p. 1043,

15 Hense) So0o/c\ôus Zitvpiwv 'ouSe^...

fo?;.' The name of the play is omitted

by S.

F. W. Schmidt, and, independently of

him, Nauck (Melanges gr. rom. VI

p. 127), proposed ax#os for aX-yos, an

attractive conjecture, which is supported

by the evidence of parallel passages, andthe easiness of the change. Cf. Eur.

Htr. 637 &xQo? 8e TO yrjpas cu'ei| (lapv-

pov Afovas <TKOIT\<I)Vj

eiri Kpari /cetrat.

Menand. mon. 745 xa^ 7rov T yijpds etrrti'

See however [Pherecr.Jfr. 248 (l 208 K.) c3 7%>as, u>s eiraxQtsdvdpuirouTiv el, /cat Traj/rax^ \VTrrjp6v.ov8ev...olov: cf. Ant. 295 ovdev yapdvdp&Trouriv olov apyvpos |

/ca/cdp vo/uLicrfj,'

f/SXacTTe. The phrase became colloquial :

'there's nothing like it.' So Ar. Av.

966 dXX' ouSey olov COT' dfcoOcrai rtDi/ ttrQiv,

Lys- 135- Dem. 20. 46 ovdev yap olov

d/coO(rat ai)rou TOV vbpov. Plat. Gorg,447 C ovSev olov TO avrbv epwav, u> Sw-

/cpares, ^/'a?. 481 B.

557

d\X et fte^ 17^ K\a.Lovcriv lacrOoii KOLKOL

/cat roi> OavovTCL Sa/cyouots d^tcrrai/at,

6 xpvo'bs vjcrarov KTrjp.a TOV /cXatetv az/ ^.i/Oi/ 8', cS ye/oate, ravr' dî/vrw? e)(t.

roi/ ei> rcttâ) KpvffrOevTa npbs TO<f>a><;

a

TTGLTTJP ye SaKpva)i>yapes

557. 3 TITTOV codd.

w codd.| 76 B: Te rell.

5 TOV iv Bergk : TOV

7 et's codd.SM, TO /xev A 6 /ecu

557 Stob.y??r. 124. 17 (iv p. 1127,i Hense) ~2o<f>oK\ôvs CK S/cupiwf (so S,

(TKVpibJVl M, (TO(pOK\toVS (TKV-

piwv A).' aXV et...ets 0<Ss.'

It has been pointed out in the Intro-

ductory Note that this fragment supports

Engelmann's view of the plot, and that

the words are more suitable as addressed

by Neoptolemus to Phoenix than if

spoken by Diomedes as a consolation to

Lycomedes. There is perhaps some con-

firmation of this contention in Quint. 7.

174, where the envoys on their arrival at

Scyros find Neoptolemus engaged in

practising the arts of war: Kaiirep ptyaTlp6fJ,VOV Kfjp | d/*0t TTdTpds KTOL-

/j.tvot.0' TO yap Trpoirdpoide irtirvaro.

Campbell also remarks that 'the Frag-ments indicate some representation of

the sorrow caused at Scyros by the newsof the death of Achilles.'

1 f. The commonplace that tears areof no avail to bring the dead back to

life appears first in Horn, ft 550 ov ydp TI

/cax^/uepos vlos coto,|

ovdt fj.iv'

irpiv /cat KO.KQV a\\o irddrja-da.

Cf. EL 137 d\X' ofrroi TOV 7' e 'Ai5a|

irayKolvov X^j/as iraT^p' dv-|

(TTdcreis O^TC

760:5 O#TC \iTaT<riv, Eur. Ale. 985 TQ\Ô.

5', ov ydp di'dêts TTOT' Zvepdev |K\aib)i>

TOVS (ftQi^vov^ dvw. fr. 332 5o/ce?s TOP

"Aidrjv a&v TI <f>povTlfciv yowv |/cat iraid'

dvrjffeiv TOV <r6v, el ^Xot? ffT^veiv ;

3 6 x.pv<ros. The same point is madeby Philemon in the 2dp5tos (fr. 73, n497 K. ): et Ta Sd/c/au' TJJUUV T&V KOLKUV ^v

(pdpfj-aKov, |

det 0' 6 K\aijaas TOV iroveiv

TravTo, | ?7XXarT6yUe<70' av oditpva 86vTe$

Xpvffiov, where there would seem to bea reminiscence of Sophocles.4 ravr' dvTjvvTWS î :

'

this is afruitless task.' Cf. Eur. Hel. 1285 <ri> 5',

IKYPIOI 197

u rdXatva, JJ.T)Vt rots

Toffovrov (n.). For the word see also

Emped. fr. 12 D. ZK re 7ct/> ovSdft' t6vros

KO.I r' tbv ect7r-

KO.\ Airverov. Thegeneral sense follows Horn, ft 524 ov ydpns irpijj-is (&VV<TLS schol. Ven.) TrAercu

icpvepoio ydoLo: cf. Stob. flor. 122. 14

7r/)6s avrbv, ws ouoVi' irpovpyov irotet

K\ai<ji)v, 6Y ai/rd ydp TOI TOVTO, <:<pt], K\ai(*).

5 was condemned by Herwerden,with whom Nauck agrees. It is un-

necessary to the sense, and 7r/>6s TO 0tDs

&yeiv is carelessly repeated in v. 7 ; butthe verse should not on that account be

rashly rejected. For similar repetition,see Jebb on O.C. 554, Phil. 1268, and n.

on Eur. Hel. 674. Blaydes thinks that,if the line is kept, TOUT' should be readin v. 4. But it hardly needs proof that

TaOTa looks forward as well as TOUTO: see

e.g. Hdt. i. 125.6 Kcifjiol yap...yt. KCLL belongs to 4/j.oi

alone; and ye is often found after ydp,but always with a word intervening: see

the examples quoted by Neil on Ar. Eg.p. 196. They will also convince anyonewho refers to them that Blaydes's pro-

posal to read %dpLV 7e SaKpvuv irar-ftp is

quite unnecessary. Saicpvv X*PIV' ^

tears would serve,' is like O.C. 443 Zirovs

fffUKpov x<*-P<-v (J-'s n

-): see a lso Eur.

Hel. 1182, 1254.H. renders as follows :

Could we but medicine ills by weepingfor them,

And raise the dead again to life with

tears,

Gold were of poorer price comparedwith grief.

But, aged sir, it is not possible,Once in the grave, to bring him back

again :

My father, I know well, if tears could

do it,

Had been brought back to light.

558

558

558 Hesych. I p. 258(rTlj3<ji)V,

(Kvpicus cod.). M. Schmidt conjectured&TTO a-TijBov, which is unlikely.

a/nxxTTipiis is solitary, i.e. away fromthe track. Cf. do-Ti^s, of places (O.C.26, At. 657). We must not expect to

find that all similar compounds follow

exactly the same pattern, and it wouldbe better if we ceased to speak of themas

'

active'

or '

passive.' The words

belonging to an apparently homogeneousclass may have sprung up at different

times, and may not all have been based onthe same analogy. Thus e.g. dn^TrroXis

(0. T. 1000) seems to imply dTro 7r6\ews

awocrTL

(dTrooTt/S^s Musurus) Brunck : ct7roa-Tt'/3...cod.

elvai' to be away from the city,

'

althoughin its ultimate analysis dTro- may havebeen an attribute rather than a preposition,i.e.

'

having the city away.'

But, so soon

as the proportion dTr67rroXis : aTroXis or

the like was established, a number of other

words seems to have been formed onthis model, such as dir66eos (fr. 267),

aTToêvos (0. T. 196), dTr6Ttjuos (ibid. 215),

dir6/ji.op<pos (fr. 1022), aTr60e0Tos, diroxp'n-

/uaTos (Aesch. Cho. 274), dTr6/x,oi'<ros,

dir6<f>ovos (Wedd on Eur. Or. 163). Onthe other hand, dirdcriros, dwodeiirvos,

dTrb/Mcrdos, &<piinros, dw6/A<XXOS may have

developed otherwise. Forsee fr. 639.

559


avTocrcrvTov

pi'ots cod.). Bekk. anecd. p. 467, 31

(Phryn. fr. 281 de B.) avT6<rvvTOv'

airro-

Aesch. Eum. 1 70 has ai5T6a-<rim>5,

K\-TITOS. The -<7<r- is due to the etymologyof <re6u (qieu-) : see Jebb on Bacchyl. 16.

90, and Brugmann, Comp. Gr. I 489.

I 98 ZOÔKAEOYZ

560

56O Hesych. I p. 346 dxP^ârov remarks.

(dx/377Mara cod.)* dddiravov. So(/>o/fX?)s Elsewhere a\pT][iaTOS is applied to per-

2/civHois. We might just as well read sons ('needy'). Similar formations are

dddirava, as M. Schmidt dvodovros. dyvvaiKos etc.

561

561 Hesych. II p. 237: see on fr. 'negligent'; or from eS and u>pa=

(f>povTis,

200. Cf. ibid. V()pideiv'

6Xryw/>etj', /X.T/ so that Kara, avricfipao'iv ftfwpos becomes

(XfLV (frpovrida, irapanoveiv. Phot. lex. 6 jwrj (ppovrifav. For dvTi<j>pa<ris see on

P- 39 7 euwpidfcut d<ppoi>Ti<TTii' Kara fr. 116. The grammarians were not far

dvTi<j>pa<nv'

wpa (1. &pa] yap i] Qpovrls. wrong when deriving from upa ; for' to

Etym. M. p. 401, 37 shows that the take a thing easily' is to show slight

meaning of etfw/oos ('careless') was traced respect towards it : cf. eui7^s. On the

by two paths, either from evwpetv in the strength of the above evidence Personsense of '

to be up early,' 6' <TTL <f>v\d<r<riv, restored evupidfav in Aesch. Prom. 17and so per contrarium (Kara dvTl<ppa<riv) for the otherwise unknown

SYNAEirTNOI

It has already been remarked in connexion with the'

<rv\\oyo<; that a succession of scholars beginning with J. Toup(Epist. crit. p. 133), who was followed by Brunck, Dindorf, and

Nauck, identified that play with the ^vv^snrvoi. A contributoryreason was the title 'Aâtwi/ a-vvbenrvov recorded by Athenaeus

(fr. 565), although there is no doubt that 2vv$ei7rvoi is correct:

cf. Athen. 365 B SioTrep rives teal TO ô(f)OK\eov<; Spaâ Kara TO

ov$6Tpov eTTL<ypd$eiv dîovcnv Hvv&eiTrvov 1. But the chief weight

of the case for identification rested on the assumption, now provedto be erroneous, that the banquet of Tenedos was the occasion of

the principal incident included in the 'A%aia)v <rvX\oyos. On the

other hand, Welcker, followed by Ahrens, Wagner, and Cope (onArist. rhet. 2. 24. i4Oi

b17), held that the plays were distinct.

He argued (pp. 232 240) that the subject of the ^vv^znrvoi wasthe same as that of the later books of the Odyssey, in which the

disguised Odysseus contrived the overthrow of the suitors, so that

fr. 565 was brought into comparison with the conduct of Ctesippusdescribed in v. 299 ff. It is unnecessary to discuss Welcker's

1 Dindorf (PhiloL xxx 112) was inclined to restore this form.

IKYPIOI lYNAEIfTNOI 199

theory, since the fragment first published by Fredrich (fr. 562),in which Thetis addresses Achilles, upsets it once for all.

The nature of the plot is hardly doubtful. We learn fromArist. rhet. 2. 24. 1401

b17 f) ei rt? <j)alrj

TO eVt SeiTrvov K

Ti/j,L(t)TaTOv' Bui yap TO pr) fcXTjOrjvai 6 'A^tAAeu?'Aâm? eV TereSo>' o S' o>9 drwaô/jievos e/Jbijvicrev, (rvveftr) Be

TOVTO eVt TOV/j,rj fcXrjOfjvai, Philodem. Trepl opyrjs p. 66 ( Vol.

Here. Ox. 150 irapaTrefKÔevre^ VTTO TWOS eo-TiwvTos wcnrep 6 So<o-? r)

KCLTO, TL TOIOVTO 7rapo\iy(0pr)06VTS, OVTTW yap\eya), that in a play of Sophocles Achilles became in-

censed with the Greeks at Tenedos, considering himself slightedeither by not receiving an invitation to a banquet or by the mannerof the invitation. The occasion is fixed by the allusion of Proclus,from which it appears that Sophocles derived his material fromthe Cypria (EGF p. 19): eireiTa rcaTa7r\ovo-i,v et? TeveSov, /cal

evwxpvpevwv CLVTWV t&ikoKTtjTrjs v<fS vBpov 7T\r)yl<> Bt,a rrjv

oo-fjbiav ev Arj/jLvq) /car6\i(f>Br) teal 'A^tXXeu? vo~Tpo<$

SiacfrepeTai Trpos *Ay&p4p*oval. The stay at Tenedos occurred

immediately before the landing at Ilion, and Philoctetes wasbitten by the snake during the same banquet at which Achilles

showed his resentment at the lateness of his invitation. It is

obvious that the scraps preserved by Plutarch (fr. 566) belongto the play mentioned by Aristotle and Philodemus

;and the

title of the 'Evv&eiTrvoi strongly suggests that this was the playin question. The extant quotations assist the identification :

thus, the address to Odysseus in fr. 567 is a suitable pendantto fr. 566, and the appearance of Thetis as dea ex machina

(fr. 562) is almost decisive in conjunction with the rest of the

evidence. The banquet at Tenedos must not be identified with

the occasion briefly described in Horn. 6 75 82, in spite of the

words ev Sam BaXeiy : for (i) the quarrel mentioned in the

Odyssey took place at a later period of the siege, and (2) the

altercation at Tenedos was between Achilles and Agamemnon,not, as in the Odyssey, between Achilles and Odysseus. In re-

ference to the latter point, it is true that Odysseus bandied words

with Achilles in the play; but his motive was not to exalt his

own achievements. Achilles had threatened to return home,and Odysseus cunningly prevented him from carrying out his

threat by suggesting that his real motive was cowardice, andthat the alleged slight was a mere pretence. It should be added

1 It has sometimes been supposed that the banquet, which was represented in this

play, is referred to in Cramer anecd. Par. in 55, 23 (schol. Horn. I 168) 6 <t>oti>i TTCU-

dayuyfa TJV 'Ax i^^ws > &\6uv 5e els deav rrjs <rvyi<pOTri(re(i)S TOV TroA^wou, eKparCov 'AXO-I&V (TvvffTta6rjva.i ^tcer' avruv Iv ry irapa TOV 'Ayafd/Avovos yeyovdTi

200 Z04>OKAEOYZ

that Nauck assigns to this controversy Tr. fr. adesp. 35 r/rot

arparevaeis rj /JLWWV^ ear) fcaicos.

A question of some difficulty touching the character of the

play remains to be considered. How are we to account for

the unusual coarseness of fr. 565, and in what relation does it

stand to the corresponding passage of Aeschylus (fr. 180)?

(1) Naber (Mnem. XI 185) explained the similarity byquoting Quintil. 10. I. 66 tragoedias primus in lucem Aeschylus

protulit, sublimis et gravis et grandiloqtMS saepe usque ad vitium,sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus : propter qtwd correctas

ems fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus poetis A thenienses

permiserunt, suntque eo modo mitlti coronati, and concludes that

the 'ZvvSenrvoL was nothing more than a revised adaptation of

the 'OaroXoyoL This view gained the approval of Nauck andothers (see n, on fr. 565), but appears to me altogether incredible;

and I am glad to find that it is unhesitatingly rejected both byWilamowitz and by Wecklein (Telephosmythiis, p. 8)

1. But it is

strange that those who propounded it did not observe that, since

the subject of the Ôaro\6yoi was the relations of Odysseus with

the suitors, it could not have been refurbished as a drama

depicting the quarrel of Achilles and Agamemnon. Welcker

interpreted ocrroXoyoi as the beggars who gathered round the

table of the suitors, but Wecklein gives good reasons for refer-

ring it to the collection of the bones after the burning of a corpse,and identifies the ocrroXoyoi with the relatives of the murderedsuitors whose arrival to exact vengeance from Odysseus is related

in w 412 fif. Both scholars agree, as against Hermann, Nauckand others, that the 'Oo-ro\6yoL was a tragedy and not a satyr-

play; and Wecklein argues forcibly that the character of fr. 180is not inconsistent with tragedy, so long as the difference betweennarrative and representation is borne in mind. The scene wouldnot have been represented on the stage, but might have beendescribed by a messenger in a tragic situation (cf. Aesch. Cho.

75 iff).

(2) For similar reasons it has been inferred that the %vv-SeiTrvoi was a satyr-play: 'satyricum fuisse drama ex fr. 140

[565] luculenter apparet' (Nauck). But there can be no satyr-

play without a chorus of satyrs (see I p. 168); and, though the

satyrs might have been introduced as cooks (cf. fr. 563), just as

they appear elsewhere as hammerers (cr^vpo/coTrot: p. 136) and

acolytes (Ktjpv/ces: TGF p. 36), it is difficult to imagine how or

why they came to Tenedos, and the title ^vvbenrvot, rather pointsto a chorus of chieftains. Welcker also argues that the lyrical

fragment (fr. 568) is too serious in tone for a satyr-chorus. On1 See also Weil in Rev. des It. gr. in 342.

IYNAEITTNOI 201

the other hand, it is contrary to the character of Sophocleantragedy to permit the introduction of a deliberate imitation of

Aeschylus, and the peculiarities of fr. 565 are in no wise parallelto the casual repetitions referred to in the note on fr. 142, col. ii 24.But the ^vvbeiTTvoi, even if technically rpaywBia, was by no meansa tragedy in the modern sense of the word. Its leading motivewas trivial enough, and even in the few fragments that remainit is possible to recognize here and there a bantering tone (seefrs. 563, 564). We are driven to the conclusion that the %vv-SeiTrvoi, belonged to that class of play of which the Alcestis of

Euripides is the only extant specimen, but that the comicelement was broader and more pronounced than in the workof Euripides. In such a production it would not be surprisingto find a jovial reminiscence of the indignities suffered byOdysseus in the very words which Aeschylus assigned to

Odysseus himself. It may be that Sophocles occasionallyrelaxed the severity of his genius by the composition of adrama cast in a lighter and more cheerful vein, and by suchmeans displayed the bon viveur and darling of Athenian societywhom we know otherwise solely by repute: see vit. Soph. 5

(p. li Bl.), Athen. 604 D. We must add Cic. ep. Quint, fr. 2.

1 6. 3 'Zvv&eLTTvovs 2o(f)OK\eov<t, quamqnam a te actam fabellamvideo esse festive, nnllo modo probavi^, although its import is not

entirely clear. As against the view of Tyrrell and Nauck that

an incident in the camp of Caesar is referred to, must be set

the fact that Quintus was at this time largely occupied in

writing or adapting tragedies, and used to send them on to

Marcus for his approval (l p. 173). We may render therefore:'

I

don't care about the ^vvbenrvoi, of Sophocles, although I perceivethat you have treated 2

it wittily.' So read the passage confirms

the view of the play which has been reached on other grounds.

1 Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 620, takes a similar line, but readsfactam to? actam (after

Biicheler). The conclusion recommended may be thought inconsistent with the argu-ments advanced above (l p. 198), in relation to the composition of the Inachus. The

question is not so much whether a tragedy could be substituted for a satyr-play as the

fourth member of a tetralogy, for that is decided by the example of the Alcestis ; as

whether a play characterized by an absence of serious motive could be produced as a

tragedy. The Si^SeiTn/oi, in which a satyr-chorus appears to be unsuitable, is aninstance which suggests an answer in the affirmative. But the evidence is so frag-

mentary and the countervailing considerations, to which attention has been directed,

are so weighty that we may well hesitate to pronounce judgement. The use of

TpayySia in Poll. i. 224, where he may be referring to this play as well as to Aesch.fr. 1 80, scarcely possesses the importance which has been assigned to it by somecritics. The Aeschylean Kd/3et/>ot (TGF p. 31), which is inferentially described as

Tpayydia in Athen. 428 F, seems to have been largely comic, as Wecklein (I.e. p. 1 1 f.)

points out.2 For ago applied to literary performance cf. Lucr. r. 138 multa novis verbis prae-

sertini cum sit agendum, Liv. 10. 31 Samnitiitm bella, qitae continua per quartum iamvolunien.. .

2O2 IO<t>OKAEOYl

562

wpovcra TTOVTLOV yopov

562. 1 \dTrovaa schol. Dion. Thr. 2 Nrjp-rjiduv wpovaa (upovcra

anon.) post TTOVTIOV xP v habent codd. : corr. Wilamowitz

562 Anon, irepl rpbiruv in cod. Athen.

1083 (published by C. Fredrich in GGN1896, p. 337 ff.) ytveTdi d dvaaTpoc^r] KO.I

Sta ir\ibvwv /j.epu>v TOV \6yov, cl?s irapa,

So0o/cXet ev SvvdelirvoLS i) Oeris Trpos TOV'

\nrov<ra /AV TTOVTIOV "xopov'

TO yap e^s otfrws ecrrL

jrdvTtov xP v \urovaa. Nripijidwv wpovaa.OTt juera at AVTI TOV ?rpos at Kal trap

1

'H(ri65y. The same extract appears in

schol. Dionys. Thrac. p. 460, 3 Hilgard,but proceeds as follows after <f>rjfft : \d-

irovffa fJiev irbvriQv xP v Nrjprjidwv wpovffa.

OTI pera <rt avri TOV irpbs <re (upovaa}. Kal

-rrap

1

'H(ri65(fj....So Hilgard prints, and he

evidently thought that yuera 0-^ originallyformed part of the quotation from Soph.(d upov<ra...fj,tTa'?), plausibly enough so

far as concerns the text which he was

editing. But, when the two citations are

compared, it is evident that the scribe of

schol. Dion. Thr. left out a number of

words by letting his eye pass from one

wpovffa to the other. Whether this error

was connected, and if so how with themistake made in the order of the wordsin the quotation itself are questions whichwe cannot answer. The mysterious clause

6Vi...'H<j-t65y, for which cf. Phot. lex.

p. 260, 13, remains unexplained: Fred-rich regarded it as a marginal gloss incor-

porated in the text. That a reference to

Hesiod has fallen out seems obvious, butit is still possible that /uero, at occurred in

Soph., scarcely that it illustrated the

anastrophe.It is reasonable to suppose that Thetis

arrived at the end of the play in order to

compose the feud. Wilamowitz remarkedthat the appearance of a deus ex machina

might be treated as an indication of late

date, if it were certain that Thetis didnot appear in the Cypria.

563

(f)vpaT, /xacrcrero) ns, eyêirw08' CLvr^p ov irplv av

<f>aiyr)

/cat ySous e/ayar^s epyaerai.

563. 1 Bergk : cod.

563 Athen. 686 A rots iraial irapa-

K\vofjiai /caret, TOV So0o/cXâ 6s ev Zw-dtlTrvois (ptjcrl

'

<j>opeiTe...epyATcu.'1 <f>vpdr (see cr. n.) was first sug-

gested by Bergk, who however subse-

quently abandoned it in favour of the

inferior KopelTe. Meineke appears to

have made the same correction indepen-

dently, and it is almost certainly right.

0opetTe without an object expressed has

no meaning and cannot be used abso-

lutely; nor does the context here suggestan object which might be supplied. Onthe other hand 0upare is altogether apt.The reference is to the preparation of a

/xdfa, which, as distinguished from loaves

baked of wheaten meal (&PTOV irtaaeiv or

6'5' dvT]p cod.

was a lump of barley meal (<x\0tra)kneaded together (yucWw), then dried in

a mould, and afterwards without further

cooking moistened with water, oil, or wineor combinations of such liquids before

being eaten. The technical term for thelast-mentioned mixture, i.e. the result ofthe final moistening, was (f>v<rTrj or (pvpa/jt.a,

and that is the process which (pvpare heredescribes. Cf. Thuc. 3. 49 -fjadidv re a/xaeXavvovres otvtj} KOL eXai^ dX0ira 7re0i>pa-

yu&'a. It is possible, as Hermann-Bluem-ner, Privatalt. p. 218, observe, that this

illustrates Moeris p. 2 1 1 , 30 (f>varrj irepi-

CTTTOJyU&'WS TO (pVpafAO. T&V d\<f>iTUV, OTO.V/JiT]

ytvrjTai. juafa, as being a case where therehas been no preliminary kneading. It

SYNAEiniSIOI 203

will be observed that Qvpav and /j.d<T(reu>

are distinguished, in that the former ex-

presses the mixing with liquid, and the

latter the manipulation of the dough;but, as the two actions may be concur-

rent, both words, and especially /idto-crew,

are sometimes used less strictly. Cf. Xen.

Cyr. 6. 2. 28 Kal yap Sorts dX0iTo<rire?,

fldari ju.e/j.ayfj.tv'r]!' ad TTJV jjiafav e<rdiei.

Schol. Plat. rep. 372 B Tr^cu'res apro-

7rotT7<ravres, (jLagavres 5e <pvpd<ravTes. Herewe may take it that the process is de-

scribed in its double aspect. 1-yX6^ ig

followed by Kparijpa in place of the normal

^yXeZif olvov ei's Kparypa. Cf. Find. Nem.

9. 50 eyKipvaTU ris /J.tv (scil. /cpctr^pa), justas we can readily speak in English of'

mixing a bowl,' or '

pouring out a

glass.'2 f.

' This man is like a plough-ox ;

he never works until he has eaten well.'

For irplv av with the subjunctive in general

suppositions see Goodw. 645. It has

been suggested that the person referred

to may be either Ajax, Diomedes, or

Achilles ; and it is of course possible that

by 6'5' av-tjp the speaker may intend to

describe himself (O. T. 534, etc.). ofioiaKCU: cf. Plat. Ion 531 D d\\' oi>x 6,uotws

Treiroi'/iKao-L Kal "O/^/oos. So foot. Kai in

0. T. 1187 ws v/JLas t<ra Kal TO fîjS^v fu>0~as

4vapidfj.&, Eur. EL 994 xcupe, vefiifa o*'

'{era Kal /j.a,Kapas. For the adverbial 6'yuoia

cf. Thuc. 7. 29 TO yapytvos TO TWV QpaK&vrots /m\to

-ra TOV fiapfiapLKOv, tv $

was used by Archilochus (fr. 39).The stall-fed ox became proverbial for re-

freshment as a reward of labour: Philostr.

imag. 2. 10. 4, describing the murder of

Agamemnon in Homer's words, /Sous tirl

(paTvy (5535)' TOVTl yap TO êrd rous

TTQVOVS Kal TOW deiTTvtp. Here the appli-cation is different : the ox must be keptfed, or he will not work. Person's 6' 5'

avijp 6s was no doubt intended to bringthe passage into accordance with the

proverb.

5.64

OVTOI yzvziov o)Se X/01? St^XtêsKcUriTrcuSa Kal yeVei

Ka\elcr6aL TraiSa, TOV Trar/oo?

564. Casaubon: 5i77\et0^s A

564 Athen. 679 A irepl &v Kal

K\fjs liwdflTTVip (so Casaubon :

A, 2,vvdtirvois Musurus) <pr)<rli',

J. thinks that the words may have beenaddressed by Odysseus to the youthfulAchilles, with the object of exasperatinghim : cf. fr. 566.

1 8iT]\t(j)s (5ta\ei0w), sleek with un-

guents i.e. long enough to be so anointednot merely beginning to sprout (J.).

The reference may be to the archaic and

quasi-oriental dressing of the beard, which

prevailed to some extent in the periodbefore the Persian wars (Iwan-Mueller,Privatalt? 54 p. 91); but even later

some kind of treatment in the Kovpeiovwas usual. For (popecv ytveiov, see onfr. 930. Herwerden conj. 8irjpe<f)ts with/cotfrt iraLOLK avTiKv^fMia in v. 2.

2 avTtircuSa. (i) Like a child, Aesch.Euni. 38 oeicrava yap ypavs ov5tv, avTiirais

nv ovv. In Eur. Andr. 326 OvyaTpbsis one who is little more than

3 /m.r)Tpbs Nauck : yao~Tpbs cod.

a child. (2) Here, however, it means*

grown up' no longer a child (so L. and

S.). Bekk. anecd. p. 407, 16

6 Trpoo'Tj/Sos Kal dvSpdtrais Kal virpTOV iraiSbs r/Ai/c/ajf. Lucian Am. i

K TTJS avTiiratoos i]\iKias ets TOVS

KptBeis. This shows that dpTITTCUS denotedthe age just below that of the 07?/3os (i.e.

just below 18). Cf. Polyb. 27. 13. 4,

where a person described as dvTiirat8a

KaTa TTJV rjXiKiav SvTa who is sent to

Rome for education is called fj,eipdKiov

(J.). There is an instructive list of the

words appropriate to the ascending agespreserved in Eustath. Od. p. 1788, 53 ff.

from the grammarian Alexion. Of the

age intermediate between irais and tyrjfios

he says : TTJV 8 ej-fjs i]\iKiav ol i*.v ird\-

\r]Ka, ol 8 ftovTraida (Ar. Vesp. r2o6), ol

The word is used several times by Plut-

arch to describe one whom we should

call a youth. The most notable case is

when it is applied to Scipio Aemilianus,

204 !0<t>OKAEOY!

taking part in the battle of Pydna at the

age of 17 (Aem. Paull. 21): see also

Philop. i, Dion 55, Cic. 7, Pomp. 76.

J. also suggested, as Tucker independentlyconjectured, that dvSpoiraiSa (fr. 619)should be read ;

but this is unnecessary.: high-born. Eur. Tro. 674

yevei TrXoi/ry re Kavdpelq. /meyav,

Menand. Epitr. 120 ol -njXi/coOroi Kal

TOIOVTOI T$ yevei. Moschion fr. 9 So^rj

irpbade ital yevei fteyas \ "Apyovs Svvdarrjs.

Wecklein thinks that the sense requiresus to substitute rrfv yeveidSa (or waprjiSa)

( Telephosmythus, p. 10).

3 fiTjTpos is Nauck's brilliant emen-dation for yaffrpbs : he points out that the

same corruption has affected the MSS of

Stobaeus in a quotation of Find. Nem. 6.

i ff. (eel. ii p. 121, 20 Wachs.). To becalled a mother's child was opprobriousmuch in the same way as we apply the

word 'molly-coddle.' Cf. El. 365 f.

e%bv Trarpb$...7rai8a KCKX^ffdai, KaXov\rfy

fj.r)rpos, Aesch. Theb. 777 dapcreire, Trcudes

fjLrjrepuv Ttdpa.fJ.iJ.tvai. H. (in C.R. XI

57 f.) aptly compared fj.afjifj.66peirroi (Lo-beck Phryn. p. 299), fj.afj.fj.6.Kvdo(. Ar.Ran. 990 with Blaydes's note, and rydaX-XaSovsCom. fr. adesp. 17, ill 401 K. SoEur. EL 933 ff. Kaxdvovs (rrvyu \

rovs

TrcuSas, 6'<rns rov jmev (Lpcrevos trarpbs \

OVK

&vbfj.a<rra(. rrjs 8 fAyrpbt ev 7r6Xei. But

Clytaemnestra's words in the same playot fj.v elcriv apfftviav, |

ol 5' ai5 <pi\ovffi

//.Tjrepas /uaXXov ?rarp6s ( r 103 f.) are con-ceived in an entirely different spirit. Cf.

Eur. fr. 1064. 4, where the son says to his

mother: 'Hove you, (rr^/ryw 5 rbv (ptiyavra.

r&v TrdvTWv ftpoT&v | /udXi<r0' opifa roOro,

KO.I <ri)ytiTj <t>6bi>ei

\

KCLVOV yap e^/SXaaroj'oi)5' av eh av^p | yvvaiubs avxêiev (Coraesfor atiSycreiei') , dXXa TOU 7rar/)6s.' Aesch.

Eum. 741, Tyrtae. fr. u. Thus, by wayof honourable salutation or impressive

appeal, the father's name was alwaysmentioned : Ael. var. hist. 6. 2 6 'Apua-ridov Trats... Trarpbdev o&v rbv veaviav irpo-

<renrol/, Kv8aivuv avrbv '0/x77/3tKws, Horn.

K 68 irarpbdev e/c yeverjs bvoâ^wv avSpa

eKa<rrov, Hdt. 6. 14, Thuc. 7. 69. The

sting of the taunt as addressed to Achilles

may be judged by the frequency of his de-

scription as son of Thetis : Eur. Hec. 388iraiSa QenSos, Andr. 108 TTCUS aXias

OenSos, LA. 208 rbv a Qeris reite, Rhes.

977 'AxiXXea 0M5os, LT. 537 QeriSos

5' 6 rys X77/)^5os eari 7rais eri. ;"/. 450

irarrip lirnbra^ rpe<t>fv...Qeri8os elvaXiov

yovov, ib. 454, cf. Hel. 847.The sense would still be the same if

ya<rrp6s were retained, as Conington

pointed out in Herm. n 142 ff. The

only question is whether Sophocles wouldhave ventured upon a phrase for whichno parallel has hitherto been found.

We might perhaps compare Find. Pyth.

4. 99 ris avdpuiruv <re -)âfj.a(.yeveuv TroXtcis

| eavr)Kev ya<rrp6s ;

Campbell wrongly understood yaarpbsTratSa as 'his belly's heir,' and was even

inclined to explain Snr)\i<t>es as ' smearedwith viands.'

565

afjL(j)l ovpavyv7Tpl S'

6/X-&J KOLpCL

TO Tev\os ov fjivpov rrveov

S' ov (1X779 OCT/XT)? VTTO.

565 Athen. 17 C r&v 5' dXXwv iroir]-

r&v evioL ras /ca^' avrovs Tro\vre\eias Kai

padv/j.ias dveirefj.TTov cos oucras /cat Kara ra

Tpwt/cd. AtVx^Xos 701)1' airpeir&s TTOV

Trapdyei /J,e6uovras TOI)S "EXXr/âs tus Kal

rds dfj.i8as dXXijXois -rrepiKarayvfoai. \eyei

yovv (fr. 180)'6'5' eariv 6's ?ror' d^0' ^/xoi /SAos

yeXuroTroibv, ri)v KO.KOfffJ.ov otpdvrjv

eppiif/ev ov5' r}fj.apre- irepi 8' (j,$ Kapq.

efj.oi.

Kal 2o0o/cX?7s 5e ev'

'dXX'...u7ro.' Eustathius O^/. p. 1828,

30 also quotes the passage on the autho-

rity of Athenaeus. For the allusion in

Pollux 2. 224 17 rpayipbla rijv d/u.iSa

ovpdvrjv Kd\ea-e see p. 20 1.

The verses of Aeschylus are taken fromthe '00-7-0X6701, a satyr-play probably be-

longing to the same tetralogy as the

n^j/eXoTr?;. The speaker in Aeschylusseems to have been Odysseus (Tzetzes on

Lycophr. 778) : and the offender 6 ptyas

IYNAEITTNOI 205

was one of the drunken suitors, perhapsCtesippus (Wecklein). In fr. 179 Eury-machus is mentioned by name, and his

insults (doubtless to Odysseus) are de-

scribed. The plagiarism of Sophocles andthe reproduction from Aeschylus of a line

and a half verbatim are very remarkable;and it would not be easy to find a parallelin the existing remains of Greek tragedy.

Schweighauser, in a valuable note onAthenaeus (vol. vi p. 143), quotes several

instances where whole lines are incor-

porated bodily into his own work by a

later writer; but the pertinent examplesare confined to comedy. Such are the

cases of Eubulus and Alexis (Athen.25 F), of Antiphanes and Eriphas (84 BC),and of Antiphanes and Epicrates (262 CD).The imitation of Eur. fr. 385 by Agathonand Theodectes (Athen. 454 B F) is not

analogous ; still less that of Theognis byTheophilus (Athen. 560 A). Thus it ap-

pears that direct copying was practisedmore commonly in comedy than in tra-

gedy ;and possibly something of the same

licence attached to all plays of the less

severe type. At any rate the passagecertainly does not prove that Sophocles'

adapted'

the 'QcrroXoyoi in this play, as

has sometimes been inferred (e.g. byGruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 6713). See Intro-

ductory Note (p. 201).1 d|i<j>l 0v|iu), in passion (prae zra).

So Eur. Or. 825 6a.va.rov djU0i 06/3y Tvv-

dapis ia-xyvt, Aesch. Cho. 545 77 5' dfj.(f>l

rdp/Set ry5' TT(f^w^v irddei, Apoll. Rhod.2. 96 65' d/J.(p' ddvvr) yvv rjpiire. irepi is

somewhat more common : see e.g. Aesch.Cho. 35. The construction plainly pointsback to the adverbial origin of the pre-

position.2 Kapa : for the form see Jebb on

0. C. 564.3 ov p.vpov irve'ov. H

, commentingon Aesch. Ag. 1311 ov "Zvpiov ay\di<rfjut

5t6/icuru' X^-yets, quotes Ar. Ran. 1 1 50At6vro-e, wiveis olvov OVK dvdo<r/j.iav, Pint.

703 ov \ifiavwTbv yap e'w. For irvelv

(Avpov see Blaydes on Ar. Pac. 525.4 eSeifiaToufrnv, scared, is not with-

out a touch of hyperbole, but does notmerit the suspicion of Nauck and Her-

werden, the latter of whom wished to

substitute 4\ei)\a.Tovfj,'r)v. Weil also con-

jectured TjS-rjfji.ovovfji.ev. We may assumethat the speaker, who, according to thesame critic, can have been none otherthan Thersites, fled panic-stricken. Forthe proceeding itself cf. Dem. 54. 4 roi)s

TrcuSas fTviTTOv /cat rots dfitdas Ka.Tfo-Keoa.v-

vvov.

OA.

566

ra Tyooia? elcropwv

AXOA. ov TO

3

eyyus *EiKTa>p ecrriv ov pivziv KOL\OV.

566. 4 ov fjLveiv vulgo : dvpalveiv, OvKaivetv, ov Kaiveiv apud Plut. codices quoquereperiuntur

566 Plut. quomodo adul. 36 p. 74 A6 jrapa, 2o0o/c\t rbv 'A^tXXâ irapo^vvuv'05u(rcreus ov <f>fio~LV opyiêcdai 5ia TO 8ei-

irvov, dXX' (

TJdr}' <f)r}o~i 'ra

SOIKO.S,' /cat TT/JOS raura TTO.\LV r

diayavaKTOvvTOS Kal dTroir\iv \tyovTos

Toup was the first who recognized that

this passage belongs to the 'Lvvoeiirvoi :

the cause assigned to Achilles' anger(which Wyttenbach did not understand)is sufficient to fix the reference. Weck-lein, who adopts 0vfj,atviv, finds here a

parody of the MTÎJ, and of the threat

of Achilles in I 356. See IntroductoryNote. H. renders thus :

OD. Already, at the sight of builded

Troy,Art thou afraid?...

OD. I knowWhat thou dost shrink from, not

from ill report,But Hector is at hand, no time

to stay !

1 elo-opwv. The scene of the playwas Tenedos, an island not more than

2O6 IOct>OKAEOYI

five miles distant from the west coast of

the Troad. 48wXia, dwellings, as in ELJ 393-3 TO

\LT[icXvciv follows the negative

verb (f>fvyeis. Cf. O. C. 1740 Kal irdpos

dTTf<pvy r(; TCI a<f>($v r6 pi) Trirveiv

/cctKws. See Goodw. 811.

4 Nauck adopts dvpaiveiv, originallyrecommended by Valckenaer on Phoen.

p. 312, but rejected by Brunck and Din-

dorf. H. supports ov fttvetv by quotingAristid. II p. 434 (a speech of Odysseusto Achilles based on the ninth book of the

Iliad] rl 5' &rrcu eroi TOV TT\OV

...Ka\bv 8 rrj S/cupy vvv

ri Nereis TT/>OS rbv -rraida TOV aavrov ; T[

Trj yvvaiid d6%ei j elvai {3e\Ti(av enrwj/ ; KOI

TI Xyo> 2iKvpov $ yvvaiKa; dXXa ri

oi TptDes; d/j' ov <j>etiyeiv <re

ovde/u-iav ff<t}Tijpiav ear

Wyttenbach had already noticed

this point of agreement, but thought that

Bv/uLaiveiv might equally well be defended

by p. 437 Trcti/Tws 5e (sc. "E/crw/s Xêt)ovdt TOV Adpdavov rbv CCLVTOV irpbyovov

T V AlttKOU TOV (ToD, ff

Trjv /m.TJviv, TO 5' ciXT/flej

avTbv dppwdeiv. Tucker proposed <rv/j.-

Paiveiv (O.K. XVII 190).

.567

3) TTOLVTCi TTpOLCrO'toV, fo>5 6 ]SuTV</)O9

ev$rj\os .v croL irdvTa ô> /xT^rpo?

567. 2 irdvTa. x<*> G (coniecerant Vater et Conington) : TravTaxov L

567 Schol. Soph. Ai. igo Tbv 5e

/ecu v 'Svvoelirvip 'c5...7raT77p.'

For the story that Anticlea was with

child by Sisyphus before she came to

Laertes see Jebb on Phil. 417. Nowthat G (see cr. n.) confirms Vater's con-

jecture, we need not consider such sug-

gestions as Nauck's 2io~v(f)os iraTrip in v. I

and fJiTjTpbs irbvis in v. 2 (modified byWecklein to irdvTO. KOV), or Weil's KpvirTbs

Besides, the allusion to Auto-

Hermes Chione

Autolycus AmphitheaI

lycus, 85 dvdp&TTOvs eK^KaffTO K\eiTToavvri0' opKip Te (Horn, r 395), is too good to

lose. H. points out that Libanius (decl.

5- 61, v 339 T 4 Foerst.) does not fail to

make Achilles use this taunt against

Odysseus: fdya IMVT&V virdp&ie rots

TTOVIfJpOtf 1 TpV<j>G}VTS &V TOiS d\\OTploiSbirbcrov 6\ov<riv, eZr' diroSbvTes, ev rots

tots yeypdif/ovTCLi. ciXX' ou5' Airro-

$ irdtnr(f} ry cry TOUT' ch>

efrrep ectXw AcXoTr^s,

ret 0w/)ia.' The genealogy is :

\VK($

Aesimus

Sinon

According to one form of the story,

as told by the scholiast on the Ajax,Autolycus, having been outwitted by

Sisyphus in knavery, gave his daughterto the latter in order to conciliate him.

The relationship to Sinon, another trick-

ster, is attested by Lycophr. 344. (See

p. 182.)1 f. TravTO. irpao-o-wv bears the in-

nuendo of iravovpyos, capable of every

(evil) deed. Cf. Apollod. fr. 13, 8 (in

291 K.) TrpdTTovffi TrdvTa- TT\V yap alaxv-

vt]v TrciXcu, |

iraffav dTroXwX^/facrt. Blaydes

conjectures u> irav o~b irpdo~o~(t)v, which is

Anticlea Sisyphus (Laertes)

Odysseus

unnecessary, but agrees with fr. 189 u>

irav av T0\/mr)<ra<ra. The phraseologyvaries: cf. O. C. 761 w irdvTa ToK^Cjv, Ar.

Nub. 375, El.6i$ xuP L̂V &" et>s 7rÎ/ tpyov,Tr. fr. adesp. 4 TOV TTOLV dp&vTos )( TOV

diKaiov. But irdvTa. iroielv etc. are not

necessarily used in a bad sense : see onEur. Hclid. 841, and add O. T. 145, 265.The combination of iroXvs and irdvTa

is awkward, but not necessarily illogical :

'how much you resemble Sisyphus al-

ways' or 'in every case' ('Thou meddlingknave, how plain the Sisyphus |

shows in

thee always, and thy mother's father !

'

H.).

lYNAEIfTNOI 207

Jebb has pointed out (on O.T. 475) that

the adverbial iravra is very frequent in

Sophocles after verbs as well as adjec-tives : Ant. 640 yvufJLijs Trarpyas Trd^r'

o-madev ccrTOLvai.. The adverbial TTO\VS is

like Eur. Bacch. 300 OTO.V yap 6 debs ts TO

(rcD/i' t\dy 7roXi;s, Or. 1200 TO Trpwrov r)v

7roXi>s Trapfj. H. was inclined to take 6

2iVi>0os as = ' the character of Sisyphus'

(TO Si(n/0etoj'), referring to his discussion

of rbv avdpa in C. R. XV at p. 394 ; but

it is more likely that the article has its

ordinary force. 6v8r]\os. Blaydes pre-fers etfoSjXos, and the words are easilyconfused ;

but there is nothing against

ZvSrjXo'i, which occurs in Ant. 405.For Sisyphus as the type of knavery

cf. Horn. Z 153 tvda. 5e St<ru0os ZVKCV 6

ytver' dvSp&v, Ar. Ach. 391Tas

568

\d0a crruye/oa

fiiov fipayvv

568 Stob. Jlor. 26. i (ill p. 609, 6

Hense)

568. 1 lliepi<ri Grotius 2, Kavriparo? (KavtpavTos Grotius) J. : Kal dvdparos

SMA, /cai dvdperos Trine., /cat dvdpcrios Heath, Kal axdpLTos Herwerden, /cat dfd/>e<rroy

Voss, Kavdparos Schneidewin|

o5 8tiva<ris Buecheler: <j}8wd<reis codd., a

([Avao-is Grotius) vulgo 3 dvarols Grotius: tfai'dTois codd.|

Schneidewin: euTroT/xoTare codd.

clause is contrasted with oblivion, andthat music is not introduced solely as

the healer of pain. H. suggested that

the argument was intended to awake the

ambition of the offended Achilles.

1 f. For the rhythm of these lines (anAlcmanic quaternion followed by a paroe-miac [enhoplic] with catalexis) cf. Soph.Ant. ii4o(= 1149), 7;Y7fA.95,Eur. Hipp.164, Med. 993.

The sentiment, that oblivion covers

achievement in the absence of the record

of the Muses, is Pindaric: see Ol. 10.918rav KaXd />cus doiSas dVe/o |

...ets'AtSa

o-Ta6fjt,bv| O.VTTIP iKtjTai KTC. Nem. 7. 12

Tat /jLeydXai yap dX/cai|

VKOTOV iro\vv

v/mvuv i-xovTi fabfJLfvcu. So Hor. Carm.

4. 9. 26 illacrumabiles| urgentur ignoti-

que longa \ node, carent quia vale sac.ro.

That lasting fame is the meed which

poetry alone confers is the burden of

Sappho's well-known fr. 68 KarddvoKra8 Keiffeai irora, K&V /j-va/JLOff^va (Tfdev

\

otire r6r' otfr' tiarepov ov yaps J3p6duv \

T&V K Hiepias. Henceit may be inferred that the reference is

not merely to the passing joy of musicat the banquet, as has sometimes been

supposed. Bergk (PLG in 101) indeed

conjectured that a fragment of Sappho,Xd#a HiepiffL crrvyepd Kal avd/xrios, hadcoalesced with a passage of Sophocleswhich ran: (Ad0a 5 ^bvov <pdpfji.aKov)

odtivas| /weXôts einroT/u.OTaTa dvarois

\

dv-

^Xowa KTC.; and Campbell indepen-dently, it would seem arrived at asimilar conclusion. But the necessityfor this is avoided, if we recognize that

the power of song invoked in the second

There is an almost identical combinationin Eur. Ale. 89 f. ov /j.dv ovde TIS d/u.(piir6-

\k)v|ffTarlfeTai dn<pl ?ruXas IIip(Sa>v :

it is impossible to justify the subordina-tion of the genitive to arvyepd and dvrj-

paros by the analogy of such cases as 0. C.

1519, 1722, and the simplest remedywould be to accept the old correction

ITtepto-t. But the text of the whole frag-ment is so doubtful, that it is perhapsmore likely that a word has fallen out

(dot&us for example) which would have

supported the genitive. It is improbablethat IliepiSuv depended on Xd0a, althoughsome critics appear to have taken that

view.Kdvijparos.

See cr. n. Thereis no authority for dvdperos, which L. andS. translate 'slothful.' J. 's emendationis based on the occurrence of dvfyaffTos

, and the analogy of dv^poros,

208 !04>OKAEOY!

dv^vvros, and di^/cecrros : he refers to his

n. on Track. 247.4 dv'x.ov<ra KTC. :

'

sustaining the

narrow pathway of life,' as if it wouldelse be washed away by the pressure of

the neighbouring seas (dXtep/câ 'I0-0yu,oO

Seipdda, Find. Isth. i. 9). This remark-able figure, which will not bear logical

analysis, has no exact parallel in Greekliterature, although the contrast of the

insignificance of life with the immensityof eternity often appears. Perhaps the

best illustration is in Anih. Pal. 7. 472/Avpios r)v, wvdpwwe, xp6vos irpb roO, ax/u

Trpbs -f)& | TjXfles, x& XOITTOS ftvplos ei's

|

T/S nolpa. fays uTToXe^Trerat, T;

tiffOV OffffOV| ffTiyflT] KO.I (TTiyfJLTJS 1 TL

Xayu,?;X6T/)oi''

I fJiiKpri <rev fwrj Te6\i/j.ju.frrj

KTC. The comparison of time to a <rTiy/u.-rj

is attributed to Simonides (fr. 196). J.recalls

' From the great deep to the great

deep he goes,' quoting O.C. 1226 firjvat

KfWev oOevirep r//cei iro\v detirepov cbs rd-

Xwra (n.) See also fr. 572. For the

metaphorical use of dv^xovffa cf. Find.

Pyth. 2. 88 debit... 6s dvexei rbre IJLCV TO,

Kelvuv, TOT' avO' ergots |

5w/cei' ptyaKvdos. It might be thought that the re-

ference intended was to the shortness of

life's journey. This is Nauck's view,who would substitute oljj,ot> for I<r0fj.6v ;

but it is less suitable to dv^xov(ra -

569

569 Hesych. i p. 58$01>OS TI

(avv detirv cod., 2,vv8eLirvots Boeckh). Cf.

Steph. Byz. p. 32, 3 'Afciwrcu, tdvos TTJS

s, ws'EXXdj/tKOj tv rots irepl Avdiav

(FHG I 61). Suid. s.v. 'Afet&rot*tdvos. Zonar. p. 55. Hesych. I

p. 220 'Aîwrat- ^j/os TpydSos is ob-

viously corrupt.The names 'Afaoi and 'Afei^s are

mentioned on the quota-lists of the tri-

butaries of the Athenian empire underthe division 'EXX7;<r7r6'Tio5 06/>os ; but

Boeckh (Staatsk? II p. 665) restored

in a single instance, where the

name occurs among the Ionian tributaries.

He accordingly inferred that a secondbranch of the same tribe had settled onthe south coast of the Troad. They are

perhaps to be identified with the inhabi-

tants of Azus or Azes (gen. "Afbu), whoconstructed wooden images of Athene,and worshipped them before a sea-voyage.These images resembled the golden figure-heads of the goddess which were fixed onthe bows of ships. The Trojan Palladiumwas originally brought from Azus to the

Phrygian king Tros. Such is the sub-

stance of the information given by schol.

B Horn. Z 311, which is not elsewhereattested.

570

57O Schol. Soph. O.C. 10

5e v SwSetTTi'y ptftrjXov TOV Idu

This is repeated in Etym. M. p. 194, 5,

where tv Oldiirodi is the vulgate, but tv

2w5ei7rj>^ is given by the codd. DPM.The transferred sense of 18^/377X0$, cor-

responding to the Lat. profanus, is foundalso in Eur. fr. 648 ov yap 0fj.is ^^rj\ovaTTTecrdcu Sbijuav, and in the Orphic line

(fr. 41) deidti) ^vveTOiai, 6vpa$ 6' eirideade

1, both quoted by the schol. The

latter line is alluded to by Plat. Symp.2i8B [Diels, Vorsokr? 475, i], and byHor. Carm. 3. i. i and Verg. Aen. 6.

258. Cf. Callirn. h. Dem. 3 xaA"" Qdcra-

<rde /3e/3aXot, Herond. 4. 47 O^T' 6pyr) ere

KpriyuTjv o$Te| ^/3?/Xos aivei. In Heliod.

3. 13 TOI)S fJi^v dr) fiejSrjXovs Kai> di.a\d6oi.i>,

TT]v 8 (ro(pou yvGiffw OVK civ 8ia<f)ijyoi.ev it

has become the exact equivalent of Idiu-

T?;S, 'layman' in the wider sense.

IYNAEITTNOI TANTAAOI 209

571

571 See on fr. 129. The only safe (K 567 etc.), El. 747 avv 5' eXiWereuinference is that Sophocles used the word 77*777-0?$ ifj.acrii', Eur. Hipp. 1245 %w f^v

jj.d(r6XT]S (or fjt.d<r6\r)) in this play, in what eV btanuv Xu0eis| r^rfav inavruv. The

sense we cannot tell. Wecklein's in- same critic (Rh. Mus. XLI 469) held that

genious suggestion that /Act <rd\7]Tas TO/JIOVS fj.d<rd\Tjs was the only genuine form, andis actually the quotation is attractive, but that /j.dffO\r) was an error. He is followedfar from certain. In that case we should by Bruno Keil (Herm. xxn 645).

compare Homer's

TANTAAOZ

To corroborate the doubtful testimony of fr. 572 in favour of

Sophocles having written a play entitled Tantalus, we now havethe explicit quotation in the Lexicon Messanense (fr. 573). Thereis thus no more reason for entertaining a doubt in the case of

Sophocles than in relation to the similar citations from Phry-nichus (TGF p. 722), Aristias (ib. p. 726), and Aristarchus of

Tegea (ib. p. 728).

Tantalus, like Sisyphus, is better known for the punishmentssaid to have been inflicted upon him than for the transgressionwhich aroused the divine anger. Various acts of impiety are

recorded against him, each having the common characteristic

of wanton treachery in his dealings with the gods : the details

are conveniently summarized by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 6564.The accidental preservation of fr. 573, referring to the inter-

vention of Hermes, has probably revealed the version which

Sophocles dramatized. See schol. Find. OL I. 91 ol fj,ev yapavrov (sc. Tantalus) <f>acnv vrroKelcrdai îrrv\w rw Af8ta? opei,alriav Tiva TTpoo-riOevres, 009 Hav&dpea)<; o Mi\rj(rio<;

rov Kvva T?79 K/aryTT;?, ov o Zev? <f>v\a/ca rov lepov^ eir) rc3 Tavrd\a). rov Se Ata aTrocrretXat

rov viroêâfjuevov rov 3e yaaXXoi/ \fr6v86fjbevov KOL

eiriopfcrjaai, 009 OVK ovros Trap' avrq) rov KVVOS ' real OVTO>

rov Ata, irciQelvai /car' avrov ÎTTV\OV ro 0/009, oirep earl rov \iOov.

The errand of Hermes and his recovery of the golden dog are

also related in schol. Horn, r 518, v 66, Eustath. Od. p. 1875,

32 35. It is curious that the particular punishment here re-

corded, that Tantalus was buried under Mt Sipylus, should also

fit the language of fr. 572.I have also brought under this title the papyrus fr. 574, which

p. ii. 14

210 IQcpOKAEOYI

is assigned to Sophocles by the preponderance of critical opinion,but cannot be reconciled with the scheme of the Niobe for reasons

given in the Introductory Note to that play (p. 97). The speakeris admitted to be Tantalus, and the scene Sipylus, to which Niobereturned after the death of her children. See Apollod. 3. 47 avrr)

r7/3a? a7ro\L7rovaa Trpo? rov Trarepa TdvraXov '?JKV et?

y, fca/cel Au evga/jievrj rrjv [jiopfyrjv et<? \i0ov yu.ere/3aXe, icai

Bd/cpva vv/crcap KOI yae#' rj/Aepav rov \L6ov. It would notbe unnatural for the punishment which Tantalus suffered vicari-

ously in the person of his daughter to be described in the playwhich chronicled his own downfall.

It should also be observed that the latter part of the papyrusfragments is especially suitable to Tantalus, as is shown in the

notes. The destruction of his royal seat by an earthquake is

plainly referred to in fr. 575, 2 ff. Cf. Arist. meteor. 2. 8. 368b31

<y6vofjLvov o-eicrjjLov ra Trepl ^nrvXov averpaTrt], Strabo 58. Lessscientific writers record the tradition that a city on Mt Sipylusfell into a chasm and was buried beneath a lake : Pausan. 7. 24.

13, Aristid. I 229 (p. 372 D.). And Tantalus himself, as we have

seen, was fabled to have been buried beneath the mountain. Tothe authorities cited above may be added Asclepiad. fr. 20 {FHGHI 305 =schol. Horn. X 582).

572

XOP. y8ioT7J9 ptv yap y^povos eVrl

Kpv<f)0els 8' VTTO yrjs /cetrai

TOV

572. 1 chori notam habet S 2 Kpv<p6eis 5' virb Grotius : Kpv<j>0ei(ra VTTO Sj

redrew Cobet : 6vr)Tos vulg., davdrif coni. H.

572 Siob.far. 121. 3 (iv p. 1097, 3 /3i'os oXfyos e<rrt /ecu <rTiy/j.aios irpbs rbv

Hense) Soô^ TO.VTOL (so S : M and A direipov aluva. Hipparch. Pythag. ap.omit the extract).

'

/3ior7?s . . .xphvov .' Stob.jfor. 108. 81 (Diels, Vorsokr* n p.

For the title see Introductory Note. I38 > H) ws ?r/)6s rbv ^v/j-iravTa alCiva. eêra-

The contrast between the brevity of life $OVTI ppaxuTarov ex VT^ t avdpioirot TOV

and the infinity of time after death ap-rds fwas âvov KO.\\U;TOV cv ry pltp oiovel

pears earliest in Semonid. Amorg. fr. 3TLva TrapeTridrjîav iroiyirovvTai eir' evdv^lq.

iroXXos yap four es rb redvavai xî/os, |

KarapiuvavTes. Cic. Att. 12. 18, Catull.

fw/iei/ 5' apifffjif iravpa (way)KdHU<s erea. : 5- 5- The moral drawn is for the mo^tsee also ori fr. 568. Cf. Ant. 74 eirel part that of Amphis (cited by H.) fr. 8,

TrXeiwv x/><W |

8v del /*' apeffKeiv TO'IS II 238 K. -jrlvf,iraiê,

6vrjTos 6 /St'os, 0X^705Kdru T&V evOdde, Eur. Ale. 672 ^ /u.i)v

ovni 7V X/3^05 'I

o ddfaros 5' dddvaros

TTO\IJV ye TOV KOLTU \oyio/j.ai\ xp6i>ov, TO <TTLV, av aira.$- ns diroddfr).

Se ^rfv a-/uLiKp6f, Anth. Pal. 10. 78 irtxrov 2 rcOvccos : see cr. n. Cobet holds

Xpovov ev66.be fj.ifj.veis, \ws -rrpbs eKelvov that the corruption was caused by the

6\ov Tbv fjifTa TavTa (Mo* ; Plut. cons. letters re dropping out after -rat, so that

Apoll. 31 p. H7E Ko.1 yap 6 fj.aKp{>TaTOs ONEHZ passed to 0NHTOZ (Coll.

TANTAAOZ 211

Crit. p. 192). The Attic scansion wasto make the word trisyllabic (redveus /cat

reOveGxra. SiflpT^vws Herod. Philetaer.

in Pierson's Moeris, p. 449) : cf. Ar.Av. 476. For the syncopated form see

Rutherford on Babr. 45. 9. Euripidesadopts the Homeric scansion in SuppL273 (hexam.), where Reiske restored

for re dvardv. It was for

supposing that 6vrjT6s could be used for

'dead' that Croker was trounced byMacaulay in the review of his edition ofBoswell. Gomperz (Bruchstiicke, p. 31)defended 8i>ijT6s as merely

'

homo,' butin that case the word is singularly ill-

chosen.

573

573 Lex. Messan. f. 282 v. x/"7"

0>tun56s <rbv (xpr)ifj,(t}5..v cod. : corr. Rabe)ry i 2 o0o/cA7?s TaprdXy

'

'Ep/^s. . .xp>7ia--

fjiwi.d6v (JM3.Ti.vJ trap' 6 (&i cod. : corr.

Rabe) /cat %/)77(r/iaji5ta J&vpnridrjs Aavdr).

<(>dTiv. This word is applied to an

oracular speech in O. T. 151, 310, 323,and 1440; and also in Eur. Pkoen. 23,

Snppl. 834. For the significance of this

fr. in reference to the plot see Introduc-

tory Note.

574

KOL ei/coz/icr/x, wapa,

574. 2 TT vel u legi potest |

TWj>5e7rt/u,u'os0o/3wj' pap. 3 irjKovi.o'n.a eid-rjTepa pap.

574 These mutilated lines have been

deciphered from two pieces of papyrus,which were published as No. ccxni in

Oxyr. Pap. II p. 23, and denoted a and b

respectively. Each of these pieces con-

tains to the right of the principal fragmentvery scanty traces of letters in the next

column; but nothing of these is legible

except Kepav[v6s~\ in b n. It is possiblethat a II was placed above b I ; and, if

so, the speech extended over three

columns, which were perhaps only of

moderate length. In any case it is cer-

tain that a I (fr. 574) did not immediatelyprecede b \ (fr. 575), although the size of

the interval which separated them cannotbe determined.The handwriting, which is assigned to

the second century A.D., is of a roughcharacter, and the numerous blunders

and misspellings suggest that we haveto decipher the copy of a schoolboy. The

corruption in the parts of the lines whichare preserved is so great that the restora-

tion of the missing letters is rendered

unusually difficult, and the true readingscan hardly be recovered without radical

alterations. The tragic lines are writtenon the verso of the papyrus, and the recto

is occupied with some accounts which aredated in the first century A.D.

The first fragment appears to refer to

the fate of Niobe, and it follows that

Lydia was the scene of the play fromwhich it came. The speaker was pro-bably Tantalus, who in the other fragmentlaments the loss of his kingdom, andreflects upon the instability of fortune.

Blass inferred that ^the description of

Niobe turned to stone must have comefrom the Niobe of Aeschylus or Sopho-cles, and decided in favour of the latter,

partly because it is known that Sophoclesmade Niobe return to Lydia at theend of his play (p. 95), and partly on lin-

guistic grounds. The latter are as fol-

lows: (i) In fr. 574, 2 eirel is late in

the sentence: cf. Soph. Phil. 1343,Track. 1174 (eireidri), 0. T. 801 (ore).

Nothing similar is found in Aeschylus,but eirel is not accepted here by Wecklein.

(2) Sophocles has several compounds in

which \idos occurs, and Aeschylus hasnone. (3) fffffrei c. inf. occurs also in

142

212

rr ei/<:eXoi> Trer/ocus,

jv 8' e/c]eii>7?9oT8a /cci>

77177019, a/ v]ypw KaXv

ejcrôz' Oa^ô^- rj yap <=vi

. roiyapovv B\_ap\crovvTi

770,1809 /A]^ oiKTpa 10

vo$ Se]

19

4 iVceXoi' (i'/ce\o5 sec. Cronert) pap. | Trtrpois pap. 5 Kai.fj.ayov(nrayas pap.6 7T7?7ds, iV (Tr^ds- dujypif) G H) supplevi | KaXafii pap. 7 irvev/j-eda pap.8 litterae 5t non omnino certae, 5 tamen vix aliter legi potest | ireTpoi<riv pap. : corr.

Wecklein| v/j.7ra\iv ffdevei pap. O dapaovvrt scripsi: 0. .peircu pap., deupovvri

G H, op&vri Wecklein 11 17 Qeoiviv fyoKev e/s scripsi: vaiôKovO pap. (litteram

^ incertam spatium unius litterae ante e sequitur) 12 crdtvos 5^ supplevi |

airtaa-

^"o'..pap. (vel avTL\a$ov)

1 f. Perhaps a^Typ uv iraij(ro/ji.ai..., but

it is not easy to connect the words in the

next line, or to frame a suitable subordi-

nate clause. The general sense mightbe,

'

since god alone has given me these

alarms.' Wecklein, who supposed that

a messenger was the speaker, restored

eKelvos flire T&vtf eTnj/SoAos tybfiwv. In

that case the following lines contain the

speech of Tantalus as reported by the

messenger.3 ft should be compared with the de-

scription of Niobe's fate in Ant. 823 ff.

KoS(|>ai<riv recalls Horn, fl 54 KW^V yapSTJ yaiav deiiflfa jj-eveaLvuv (imitated byMoschion fr. 7 : see esp. v. 5 TO crtD/xa

/cw0ou TCL^LV i\7)(f>ev ir^rpov). otSa,

recognize, of immediate perception : so

Eur. Bacch. 1269 ou/c olda TO^'TTOS TOVTO.

Grenfell and Hunt suggested as analternative /cu>//./xaros 0-rdyas (coll. Apoll.Rhod. 4. 626), but this phrase would beharsher than the nearest available paral-lels Eur. Her. 450 oa<Twv Tryyds, ib. 625vd/xar' ocrffuv. For the following wordssee cr. n. The objection to Blass's read-

ing is the extremely awkward asyndeton,to avoid which I have introduced Iva.

Ka\vf3i is an otherwise unknown meta-

plasm : cf. Aw5o)j/i fr. 455. Similar

examples are the Homeric uoyuW, IKTIVO.

attributed to Aristophanes and others,

and the idvSvvL of Alcaeus (fr. 138). See

Lobeck, Paralip. p. i69ff.8 aKapStois, lifeless, is based on the

use of Kapdia as vital principle which is

Ant. 1044, but not in Aeschylus. -

(4)

Toiyapovi> occurs four times in Sophocles,never in Aeschylus.. (5) <r<f>6dpa occurs

in El. 1050^ Ai. 150, but not in Aeschylus.

(6) KVK\eiv occurs in Ai. 19, Ant. 226,but not in Aeschylus. Not all these

items are of equal moment, but Blass is

certainly entitled to say that their sum

outweighs the fact that Slvypos which is

not certain and aKrjTTTovxta are peculiarto Aeschylus. He might have strength-ened his case by adducing the resemblance

of fr. 575, 9 f. to Soph. fr. 871. But these

conclusions have not been universally ac-

cepted. Thus Robert (Herm. xxxvi 386)admitted that the lines were Sophoclean,but held that they did not belong to the

Niobe, for reasons which have alreadybeen discussed (p. 97). On the other

hand, Wecklein (B. ph. W. 1900, p. 508)

strongly supported the claim of Aeschylus,and was of opinion that both fragmentscame from a messenger's speech. Thelatter conclusion was also adopted byCronert (Arch.f. Papyrus/. I 511). Forthe inference drawn in the present edition

see Introductory Note.Our knowledge of the tragic vocabulary

is enlarged by the appearance in these

lines of ei'/c6j/t0yxa (used by Phalaecus in

Anth. Pal. 13.6), ei/ceXos, reiêiv, d/cct/>-

5tos, and \idovv.

The supplements and corrections, un-

less otherwise stated in the cr. nn., are

due to the first editors, Grenfell and Hunt,or to Blass, who assisted them.

TANTAAOI 213

discussed in the n. on Eur. Hclid. 583.Add Quint. 3. 154 K4a<r<Te de oi 6a\epbv

K%>. Theogn. 977 has the odd phrase

Kpadirjv e$ Tre&ro^cu, which is our slang'I will give myself a good time.

'

9 deupovvTi is surely impossible, andWecklein's bp&vri scarcely suits the data,

although the corruption is in any case

considerable. I take Oapo-ovvri to expressthe earlier confidence of Tantalus in the

security of his good fortune : cf. Aesch.

fr. 159. The forms with -pp- are some-times given in our MSS, as in 0. C. 491.For the word cf. Isocr. 7. 3 bpiJo rCov irb-

'. . .rds /idXtara dappovvas et's TrAeurrous

11 f. Grenfell and Hunt restored rb

(3poTol, but the combination of

iaravai ndxas Qeoivt with /j.oipu>v dvria is

not altogether satisfactory, and the state-

ment that men shrink from opposing the

gods is contradicted by the infatuation of

Niobe, who was not a solitary instance

of such daring. On the other hand, the

proximity of di>Tiafov- to /j-oLpwy is surelynot accidental, but must point to noipaXircus arpeTTTos, an idea which is illus-

trated by Headlam on Aesch. Ag. 70.The text is of course incomplete, but

might have continued (ex. gr.) TTWS Kedva

7rpdou(r' ; Then the sequence of thoughtwould be, 'though my heart once so

proud is sore for my daughter's sin and

punishment, yet destiny is inflexible andI must submit.' For the general sense

.cf. fr. 196, Eur. fr. 716, Tr. fr. adesp.

312.

575

7TOV p.OL JVpOLVVOL CTK

(TV

; TTOV

VTOfJLOV

vv

]oi>T5 aiaz

yap rpoôv10

575. 2 rjirpa pap. 3 ffKîrpovx^<- pap. 5 77 incertum | \eyai pap. (X in-

certum)'

9 a incertum (e legi potest) | rpexov pap. 1O ante r fort, vel

i vel v

575. 1 The connexion of thought

may have been represented by dXX' ou5'

a7rX<Ss yap waidbs KTC.

2 For the destruction of the capital of

Tantalus see Introductory Note.

6 ff. KaKwv is perhaps governed byKparetv, and the sense may have been'I seemed so well protected as to be

superior to sorrow.' Tantalus was a

typical instance of the unexpected over-

throw of great prosperity: see Find. 01.

i. 53 58 and Aesch. fr. 159.9f. *For the Wheel of Fortune cf.

fr. 871 dXX' ov(j.bs aid 7r6r/xos Iv TTVKVQ

deov \ rpox<? KwXetTcu Kal ,eraXXd(T<m

<$>b<nv. The restoration of v. 10 suggested

by Blass is ijyov/j.^vT] TLS 5e<r7r6rts.

214 !04>OKAEOYZ

TEYKPOI

As this play is quoted by Aristophanes in the Nubes, it musthave been produced before B.C. 423. Ahrens suggested that it

might have been prompted by the interest evoked by Cimon's

expedition to Cyprus in 450 B.C.; and from the allusion in the

Ajax presently to be quoted it might be argued that the Teticer

was earlier than that play.There can be little doubt that the subject was the return of

Teucer to Salamis from Troy, his repudiation by his father

Telamon on account of the death of Ajax, and his departureto Cyprus where he was commanded to found another Salamis

(Vellei. Pat. i. i). The anger of Telamon is anticipated byTeucer in the Ajax (1007 1019); and Ribbeck assigns fr. 894to the Teucer accordingly. It is generally believed that Sopho-cles was closely followed by Pacuvius, whose Teucer was one of

the most famous Roman tragedies, and is several times quoted

by Cicero (Ribbeck, p. 224 ft). There was a famous scene in

Pacuvius in which Telamon denounced Teucer for returningwithout Ajax. From this Cicero quotes four lines in de orat.

2. 193, which also contain a reference to the loss of Eurysaces1.

It is a fair inference that these features were reproduced from

Sophocles. It is highly probable that Cicero also refers directlyto the play of Sophocles : Cic. Tusc. 3. 71 itaque Oileus ille apudSophoclem, qui Telamonem ante de Aiacis morte consolatus esset,

is cum audivisset de suo fractus est. Then he quotes a Latin

version of the Greek original which is preserved by Stobaeus

(fr. 576) and by his MSS referred to the Oedipus*. Cicero's

introductory remarks shows that QlStTro&i, is probably a cor-

ruption of 'Ot\e; but there is no play with the latter title,

nor was Oileus a likely hero of tragedy. His name was therefore

preserved in the source of Stobaeus as the person referred to

in the extract, and not as having given his name to the workfrom which it is quoted. It has also been suggested that hewas a character in the Ata? Ao/epd?, but the circumstances of that

play (see I p. 8 ff.) make the supposition unlikely, especially as it

would follow that Telamon also appeared in it. Consequently

1Segregare abs te ausu's aut sine illo Salaminetn ingredi* \ neque paternum aspectum

es verities, quom aetate exacta indigent \

liberum lacerasti orbasti exstinxti, nequefratris necis,

\ neque eius gnati parvi, qui tibi in tutelam est traditus ? There doesnot seem to be any evidence throwing light on the fate of Eurysaces, other than that

which has been cited in the Introductory Note to the play so entitled (i p. 165).2 From the fact that Cicero quotes ,his own translation of Sophocles, Ribbeck

inferred that there was no corresponding passage in Pacuvius, but refused to go sofar as to deny that Oileus appeared at all in the Latin play.

TEYKPOI 215

it seems that Oileus must have been represented in the Teuceras visiting Telamon and being at hand when the news of the

death of the greater Ajax arrived. It was natural that this

should precede the intelligence of the storm in which the

Locrian Ajax perished ; the latter would be given by a survivor,whose ship had escaped from the dispersal and destruction of the

fleet 1.

Much more remarkable is the fact that Odysseus was one of

the characters; for his presence at Salamis after the storm in-

volves a departure from the scheme of the Odyssey, which weshould not have expected in Sophocles. Whether it was Odys-seus who described the storm (fr. 578) and brought to Oileus the

news of his son's death cannot be determined;but that he arrived

before Teucer, with whom he certainly engaged in altercation, is

made probable by the evidence of Aristotle, who alone mentionshim in this connexion: rhet. 3. 15. I4i6b I icoivos 8* fi/juôlv 6

T07TO? TO (TV/JL/SoXa \6JLV, OLOV V TO) TeVKpW 6 'OSl><T0-ei>9 OTl

ol/ceios TcG Tlpidfjifp' 77 yap 'Ho-iovr) a^6\(j)rj' o Se on o irarrjpTW TIpidfAw, 6 TeXa/^r/)^, KOI on (avros add. Roemer) ov

&v fcaracT/coTTCDv. The meaning is as follows :

' Bothaccuser and accused can use the topic of signs : thus in the

Teucer Odysseus argues that Teucer is friendly to the enemyby reason of his connexion with Priam, whose sister Hesionewas his mother; to this Teucer rejoins that his loyalty should

be inferred, (i) from the fact that his father Telamon had beenPriam's enemy ; (2) because, if he had been a traitor, he wouldhave denounced the spies, which he did not.' The second argu-ment appears to refer to the occasion when Odysseus entered

Troy in disguise, and was recognized by Helen (Horn. 8 242 fT.,

Eur. Hec. 239 ff., R/ies. 710). It is clear that Teucer was regardedwith suspicion by many of the Achaean chieftains (At. 1021 tV

Tpoia befjboi |

7ro\\ol jj,ev eÔpoL, Travpa S' a><eX?Jcr/>ia) ; and, if

Odysseus accused him of treachery, it should be rememberedthat he anticipated a similar charge from Telamon (Ai. 1013 fT.

T(]v etc So/?o? yejcora TroXeyLttou v66ov,\

rov $ei\ia irpooovra /cal

tcarcavSpta \ere, (f)i\rar' ATa<?, rj 86\ot,(T(,v). The play is again

referred to in rhct. 2. 23. I398a 4 XXo? etc T&V etprjfjLevwv icaff

(IVTOVS 7T/909 TOV eiTTOVTCl' $ia<f>pl, Se O TpOTTO?, OLOV 6V TO) TeVK(.(D'

(j> e^prjaaro 'lîtcpdrrj^ TTpo? 'Apio-TocfrwvTa, eVepo/aeô? el irpoooiTj

av ra? vavs 67rl ^prj/jLaaw ov (j)d(TKOvTos Se, elra, eiTrev, crv /Aev (^v

'Apio-To<f)u>v OVK av 7TjOoSot7?9, 70) 8' u>v 'I^t/cpaTT/? ; Aristotle is

introducing the topic according to which a speaker can makean argument directed against himself recoil upon the accuser.

1 For the storm see fr. 578. It is mentioned more than once in the fragments of

Pacuvius.

216 IO<J>OKAEOYI

This, he says, is peculiarly effective, as may be seen in the Teucer.

The reference intended was evidently famous, or else Aristotle

would have given the details;but to us it is entirely obscure.

Cope suggests that the scene between Teucer and Odysseus is

again the subject of the allusion; and that Teucer, under accusa-

tion of having caused his brother's death, thus rebuts the charge :

'

If you, Odysseus, are shocked at such a crime, do you supposethat /, Teucer, could have been guilty of it?' If it is permissibleto guess at all, we may well believe that the force of the retort

lay in the suggestion that a charge of treachery came ill fromone who was the greatest master of cunning (SoXto? 'O/oeeTT???

"

Phil. 608 etc.). The defence of Teucer, when pleading againstconviction for having contributed to his brother's death, was so

notorious that he was said to have been the first man whowas obliged to state his case without leaving his ship, as in the

procedure of the court at Phreattys (Pausan. i. 28. 12).

Welcker (p. 194 ff.)uses several of the fragments of Pacuvius

towards the reconstruction of the play, and has no hesitation in

assigning to it (after Blomfield) Tr. fir. adesp. 569 Tev/cpos Se

rofou xpobftevos (f)6i8a)\ia | VTrep rd^pov TT^SoWa? Go-rrjorev Qpvyas,verses which he thinks came from Teucer's own lips. This

is hardly more probable than Ribbeck's conjecture1 that Soph.

fr. 894 refers to Telamon;but there is more reason for hesitation

in reference to Tr. fr. adesp. 318 TO> yap Ka\ws Trpdcraovn Traaa

777 irarph. The sentiment was proverbial, and occurs as a sena-

rius in more than one form (Ar. Plut\ 1151, Macar. 6. 45); butCicero's evidence shows that the saying patria est ubicumque est

bene (Tusc. 5. 108) was commonly associated with the name of

Teucer. It is of course possible that he followed Pacuvius, andthat the source of Pacuvius was not Sophocles ;

but this is not

very likely, in view of the celebrity which attached to the Sopho-clean version. In Teucer's case, the words bear an obviousreference to his forced withdrawal to Cyprus ;

and it is difficult

to see in what way the settlement at the Cyprian Salamis couldhave been introduced into the end of the play, unless a godappeared and directed Teucer to sail thither, or some intimation

through an oracle was given to him concerning the will of the

gods2

. Such indeed was the tradition, as may be seen fromEur. Hel. 148 e? 777^ eva\iav Kvirpov, ov

/JL6k<nri<Tv

\

oliceiv

, ovofjia VYjcriwriKovI â\a/jiLi>a Ot/Aevov TT?? e'/ret

1 He compares it with Pacuv. fr. vm nos ilium interea proliciendo propitiaturos

faatl |remur, and infers that Teucer had friends and supporters at' Salamis.

2 Cf. Zenob. 5. 74 (Paroem. I 149) ircura 777 Trarpis' TOVTO fj,epo$ ecrri xprycr/ttoO, ov

dveiXev 6 6e6s MeXey ry IleXacryy irepi Oi'/c^crews (JLavTevoiJ.v<. The association of thesaw with an oracle is worth notice, but of course proves nothing with regard to

Teucer.

TEYKP01 217

irdrpas, and Hor. Cann. I. 7. 28 certus enim promisit Apollo

ambiguam telhire nova Salamina futuram \and it is probable

that in this case tradition was followed by Sophocles, even if.

he was not its original source.

The settlement of Teucer in Cyprus was known to Pindar 1

and Aeschylus2

;but it is impossible to say whether Welcker 3

was right in his conjecture that the repudiation by Telamonwas one of the incidents recorded in the Nosti.

576

8* av /zeytcrTOUS /cat crcx/HwraTousVO. * -P / > r> c/^toot? av oto? e<rrt vvv ooe,

/caXai? /ca/ca)9 irpacrcrovTi crv^JLTrapaivecra

orav Se Satyu,a)z> dvSpbs evrvôv^ TO Trpi

TrXacrrtyy' epeiorrj TOV yStou TraXippoirov,TCL TroXXa </>povSa /cat /caXws

576. 1 au B: av SMA 3 Gv/JLirapaivtaas scripsi :

4 orav 5' 6 oaip-wv B 5 TrXdffTiyy' Lobeck et Ellcndt :

poirov Meineke : iraKivrpotrov MA, TrciXii' rpoirov Scodd.

codd.

ira\ip-

576 Stob. y&?r. 114. 6 (iv p. 1018,18 Hense) So0o/cXeoi/s Oi'5i7ro5i (so MA:

AS has 01). 'rot's 8\..elpr]}j.{va.' Cicero

gives a Latin version of the passagein Tusc. 3. 71 itaqiie Oileus ille apndSophoclem, qui Telamonem antea de

Aiacis morte consolatus esset, is cumaudivisset de suo fractus est. de cunts

commutata mentc sic dicitur :

nee vero tanta praeditus sapientia

qnisquam est qui aliorum aerumnamdictis adlevans

non idem, cn?n fortuna mutata im-

petuinconvertat, clade subita frangatur sita,

ut ilia ad alios dicta et praecepta ex-

cidant.

Unless Hense is right in suggesting that

a quotation from either Oediptis is lost,

Cicero's introductory words prove that the

reading OidiTrodi is an error, and that theA

OI of S represents an original 'OtXe? or

'OiX^ws. This in its turn must havedescended from a fuller statement, suchas fs 'OtXâ aiVirrerat or irepi 'OiX^ws

X^yet Toi6.Se : see Introductory Note. It

is highly improbable that there was a

play entitled Oileus ; and Welcker's hy-

pothesis that the lines belong to the

Teucer deserves acceptance in the presentstate of the evidence. For the generalsense of the passage Headlam (J.P. xx305) quoted Aesch. Prom. 279, 351 andTr. fr. adesp. 342 \a<f>pbv irapaivelv

1 afi : see cr. n. The same corrup-tion occurs in Ear. Ahdr. 240, and in

all probability in Phil. 572.3 The infinitive <rvpirap<uvfoai cannot

be explained as the text stands in the

MSS; and it is generally assumed that

/caXcDs, for which Headlam (J.P. xx 305),

Blaydes, and Nauck (Index, p. xm) have

independently suggested 5e/otfs, Cobet

gave KaXovs, and Stadtmueller i/capotfs,

is corrupt. H. quotes Aristid. II 491oeLvol TLves elffi vovdtretv frtpovs, d</>^reseavTotis. Mimnerm. Trag. fr. i ( TGFp. 829) detvol yap avopi wavres eff/uev

evK\ij $G}vri. (fidovTJcrai Kardav6vTOL 5'

atVetrat. He points out that schol. Eur.

Hipp. 92 1 explains oeivbv (rofpKTTrjv etTra?

by aXydus /caXdv diddcrKa\ot> eliras, andthat in Eunap. p. 58 ovdev virofTTa'i oewbvthere is a v.l. KaKbv. Similarly he wishedto restore 8etv6v y' tpura for ptyav y'

1 Nern. 4 . 46 f.2 Pers. 897. p. 191

218 I04>OKAEOYI

a in Eur. Med. 698, on the strengthof Eur. fr. 850, ib. 1054, Hermesianax

(Athen. 599 B) 96. But, as Hense re-

marks, /fctXws is confirmed by v. 6. I

cannot however agree with the last-namedcritic that the inf. depends on olos; for

that idiom would require clous to balancethe antecedent. The simple correction

<rujAirapaiW(ras makes everything co-

herent, and gives its due weight to vvv,which is otherwise pointless :

' the wisest

men are no better than Oileus in his

present mind, although he once gave goodadvice to a sufferer.' The three followinglines thus stand in their proper relation, as

explicatory of the opening sentence : the

function of 5e (v. 4) in such a connexion

(= ydp) is familiar (Eur. Hel. 544 n.).5 irXdo-Tiyy' epeio-rj KTC.

' The verb

-"push," "press" i.e. here, depress."When the destiny of a man, once pros-

perous, presses the scale of his fortune in

the contrary direction." Cic. : ctim for-tuna mtttata impettim converlat. This

probably points to /mourny' : Cic. under-

stood, "when his destiny lays on the

scourge in a new direction"

i.e. afflicts

him, who before was exempt. Cf. Eur.Andr. 844 avraiav

\ epeiaw Tr\a.ydv ("in-flict it "). But TOV fBiov condemns /m.dffTi.y'

and confirms 7rXd<m77'. Cp. O. C. 1508poirr] filov /J.OL, Tr. 82 ev odv poirrj rotyde

Kei/Ji^vij}, fr. 555, 4 poiralfftv , Plat. Tim.

63 B Tideis ets ir\d<TTiyya.5, atpuv TOV

fuy6v, "weighing them in scales, whenhe raises the balance," etc. iraXippoirov

(used by Eur.) would be more strictly

appropriate to the metaphor ''''inclining

in the opposite direction." But -rraXiv-

Tpo-rrov is also correct, marking the reversal

of fortune.'( ] . ) In my opinion, Cicero's

paraphrase is too loose to be of any use

in determining the reading of his original,and I do not think it likely that he read

fj.d<TTi.y\ However, ir\daTiyy' is clearly

preferable (cf. Anon, ap Stob. eel. 1.6. 13.= Lyr. fr. adesp. r 39 /ecu TO re wXaffTtyyiSodtv naKa.pi<rToTa.Tov reXedei, in an addressto Fortune, Trag. fr. adesp. 179 avu>/j.a\oi,

ir\d<TTiyys dcrrarov TI^S), and the con-fusion of the two words here supports the

contention of those who would restore

fj-affTiyi. in Aesch. Cho. 289. fyetcn? is

entirely appropriate, as its usage shows,and Blaydes (on Ar. Ran. 1378, Pac.

1248) should not have proposed TrXd-

(Tnyya ptyy or Kpotiar) : the figure of

dai/jiuv tpddwv need not be so crudelyconceived as to recall the dvo rfpe of

Horn. X 210. On the other hand,Meineke's iraKLppoirov is a great improve-ment (Lucian Amor. 4 KaOdirep

Tpvrdvr) rats ^TT' dyu,^>6re/)a

iffoppbttws ra\avTvo/j,ai), and should be

adopted; it would be difficult to find a

parallel for ira.\ivTpoirov as here employed.Soph, may have written Tra\ivpo-rros: see

Meisterhans3, p. 112. In Diod. 17. 33

Ta\avTvero yap devpo /cat e'/ceure (T/ /x,dx??)

TT/S T/OOTT^S tva\\d yiyvo^vris Madvig(Adv. Cril. p. 506) restored poir^s.6 elpT]p.cva. Blaydes required evp?)-

H&a, and the words are sometimes con-

fused (0. C. 1 1 88) ; but elpr)/Jiei>a conveysa direct reference to <rv/j.irapaii't<ras.

577

crov repifjiv

rj8' ap* iv CTKOTO) XTJOov(rd

rjSovals(craw

577. 3 \-f)6ova-d /xe Papageorgius : \adova~d /xe vulg.

epivtis M, &rcref epiwvs A4 &7au>' epwvs S,

577 Stob. flor. 122. 10 (iv p. 1114,

14 Hense) 2o0o/cX&>us Tetf/cpov.'cbs ap*

...tif/evff/Atvov.'

The speaker is Telamon, on hearing of

the death of Ajax. H. renders :

'O my son !

What mockery was the joy I had of

thee,

When praised, as though alive ! Andall the while

'Twas fawning in the dark, a treach-

erous FiendThat fooled me with false pleasure !

'

1 ap' here and in v. 3 marks surprisethat a previous impression has been falsi-

fied by the event. When the state or

TEYKPOZ 219

action denoted by the verb continues in

the present, English idiom generally re-

quires the present indicative : see Gilder-

sleeve, 220, Starkie on Ar. Vesp. 314.But there is no essential difference be-

tween a passage like the present, and the

famous cry of Heracles : w rX^/xof dperrj,

\6yos dp' r)<rd'- eyu 5e <re\

us Zpyov

TjffKow GV 5' dp' eSovXeues Ti>xy (Tr. fr.

adesp. 374).2 repxj/iv : the cognate ace. requires

the addition of Kevr/v. See on Eur. Hclid,

990.3 ws VTOS, with tTepTr6fj,rjv : 'think-

ing that thou wast alive.' For \TJ0ovcracf. Ant. 532.4 &raiv'. For the metaphor of the

\al6apyos KVWV see on fr. 885. valvovaa

arrj is an Aeschylean figure (Headlam on

Ag. 724, 1228). Cf. Plut. Rom. 7 6 No-

fj.r)T(i}p...ovK tyevye ryv eXwida ffatvov<rav,

'did not disregard the blandishments of

hope.'

578

fip

ovpavov 8*

ovrrj 8'

ooppyrj

578. 1 sq. ovpavov (vel ovpavov 5' ?) dTrrjo~Tpa\fs V

578 Schol. Ar. Nub. 583 ppovrrj 5'

tppdyrj 5i' a<TTpairri<i\ Trapd TO. ev 'FevKpy

So0o/c\eoys (irapa r<$ ev So00K\&>i;s TevKpyV)

'

ovpavov... affTpaTrTJs.^

This schol. is not in R. Nauck (Index,

p. XIIl) said '

eppayrj di aldtpos requiro,'and Blaydes approved. But 81' do-TpaTrTjs,

though difficult, is not manifestly corrupt.Thus it might be said either (i) that the

thunder finds an outlet by means of the

lightning, or (2) that acrTpawf) is conceived

as locally extended, as if we could say'the thunder burst across the flash.'

The latter alternative is to be preferred,

especially if w'e take into account the im-

perfect knowledge of the time. Popularnotions of science would then be derived

from the speculations of the Ionian phy-sicists; and Anaximander (Diels, Vor-

sokr? p. 20, 2) and Anaximenes (ibid.

p. 25, n) agreed in deducing thunder and

lightning from the operation of Trvev/j.a :

orav yap irepi\ri<pdV (sc. TO irvev/na) vtyfi.

Trctê? (3iao~d,u.evoi> K7Tô~r) rrj \eirrou,epeiaKal KOV(f)6rr)Ti, rod' ij /j.v prjt;is rov \[/o<pov,

TJ d diao~ro\i) irapd TTJV /j.e\aviav TOV

vc<j>ovs TOV diavyao-fjibv dtroTeXei. If wethink of ppovTTJ and do-Tpairri alike as

Trvev/u.aTa, i.e. \TTTo/uLepr) ffu/maTa, the

language of Sophocles is more easily in-

telligible. (3) Starkie's 'thunder mixedwith lightning

'

seems to imply a succession

in space or time. This is possible, butseems somewhat forced, if compared withthe examples given in Kuehner-GerthI 482.The reference is to the storm which

scattered the Greek fleet on its return

from Troy : see Introductory Note.

579

579 Steph. Byz. p. 399, 20

Tra/yos (7r6Xts R), ire

Cychreus (or Cenchreus: Diod. 4. 72),

son of Poseidon and Salamis, was anancient hero-king of Salamis. WhenTelamon came there as an exile after

the death of Phocus, he was welcomed

by Cychreus, and ultimately succeededhim on the throne (Apollod. 3. 161).

Trayos

Legend also connected him with a

dragon. Either he was the dragonhimself, and actually appeared to the

Athenians in this form at the battle of

Salamis (Pausan. i. 36. i); or was called

Ophis by reason of his cruelty, a later

variation (Arr. Nic. fr. 72 = FHG in

599); or kept it as his familiar (Hesiodfr. 107 Rz.); or slew it with his ownhand, and delivered the island from its

220 Z04>OKAEOYI

depredations (Apollod. I.e., Diod. 4. 72). that there is an echo of Sophocles in

The island was sometimes called Cychreia Lycophr. 451, where he mentions theafter him (Strabo 393 : cf. Aesch. Pers. cave of Cychreus in connexion with the

573 d/crds d/*0t Kvxpdas). He had a banishment of Teucer: 6 ptv Trarpds

sanctuary at Salamis, and was worshipped M<VA0cuatJ> 17X01 0-77)77/^1/05 \ Kvxpeios av-there as well as at Athens and Eleusis rpuv RuKcipov re

(Plat. Thes. 10, Sol. 9). It is possible

THAE4>OI

Kaibel in Herm. XXIII 268 ff. published from the notes ofPh. Bonarotti a Rhodian inscription dated about 100 B.C. in

which the Telephus of Sophocles is apparently mentioned as a

satyr-play1. If his reading is correct, Welcker's identification of

the Telephus with the Mysians cannot be accepted. The subjectis entirely unknown

;but the mountains of Arcadia were the

best of all scenes -for a chorus of satyrs, and the circumstancesof Telephus' birth and his subsequent discovery by Heracles

provided a suitable setting. As an illustration of the uncertaintyof all such speculations, it may be mentioned that Wecklein

(Telephosmythus, p. 22) finds the material of the Telephus in

the same passage of Moses Chorenensis (frogymn. 3. 3) whichWilamowitz selected as the basis for his reconstruction of

Euripides' Auge. The extract is quoted in full by Nauck, TGFP- 436.

Vater {Aleaden, p. 31) conjectured, though for unsatisfactoryreasons, that the Telephus was a satyr-play, but there is no pro-

bability in his view that the subject was the wounding of Telephusand his subsequent healing by Achilles. The same suggestionwas made independently by Thraemer (Pergamos, p. 3/9), and

by Pilling ( TelepJi. fab. p. 24). These critics could not anticipatethat the healing of Telephus would prove to have been a leadingfeature in the 'Aâtcoi/ av\\oyos (l p. 95).

580

58O Hesych. I p. 53 dei06pos- dei- <j>povpo<>- del diapfrw 6/iotws riderai 'icai

6a\r]s. 2o0o/cX?7s TijX^y. dei(ppovpos e-jriTov dirjveKovs, is of a puzzling character.6 If dei<p6pos was the word used by Sopho-

(sic)- da Jta^vwy, <m\d\7js. id. I p. 89 c ies , it becomes necessary to restore it onal<f>povpof alddX-rj. 2o<poK\r)s. p. 89 for afypovpos, as Alberti proposed.

This evidence, to which we should Then the second dei0aX//'s on p. 53 must

perhaps add Etym. M. p. 21, 45 dei- be deleted (with M. Schmidt); and we

1 See IG xn r. 125, where Hiller v. Gaertringen follows Kaibel. But the

inferences drawn from the stone fragments are considered doubtful by other critics

(E. Bethe, Prolegomena zrir Geschichte des Theaters, p. 245 f. ;A. Wilhelm,

Urkunden, p. 205 ff.).

TEYKPOI THPEYS 221

may hold that the lemma detypovpos refers /cX^s TT/XC^^. Cobet was of the sameto Ant. 892. But, if that is the right opinion : see N. L. p. 343, ColL Crit.

solution, it is a very strange coincidence p. 192. Then aeupbpos, which does not

that deida\ris should have been foisted in occur elsewhere, is merely a diplomaticas a gloss to aeitppovpos on p. 53, while blunder for adcppovpos. We must assume

dei06/>os on p. 89, properly glossed by that in deitppovpos, as often happens (Eur.

aeidaXris, was corrupted to afypovpos. It Phoen. 2 n.j, the second member of the

is more probable that the solution pro- compound would tend to lose its dis-

posed by Porson (ap. Dobree on Ar. Nub. tinctive force ; and the gloss aei0a.\r)y is

518) is correct, viz. that the two glosses confirmed by Cratin. fr. 98 (i 43 K.) T<

on p. 53 should be run together as r' deufipotipif) /aeXiX^ry Kdpa T

dei(ppovpos- del Sta^vuv, dettfaX^s. So<o- (r$ r' dei<f>6py conj. Koc4c).

THPEY1

Although Thucydides implies (2. 29) that the legend of

Tereus was familiar to poetry, no detailed account is in existence

which can be traced to an earlier date than the era of Sophocles.In Horn, r 5i8ff. the nightingale is the daughter of Pandareos,

lamenting her son Itylus, whom she had slain 8t dcfrpaSla?. Thefather of the boy is said to be Zethus. The scholia explain thelines by narratives which have no connexion with the Attic story,as it has become known to us from later sources. In Hes. Op.

568 and Sappho fr. 88 the swallow is called daughter of

Pandion, and Aelian (yar. hist. 12. 20) certainly suggests that

Hesiod elsewhere (fr. 125 Rz.) referred to the vigil of the night-

ingale as the consequence of the impious banquet. But the first

explicit reference in literature which corresponds in detail withthe later story is in Aesch. Suppl. 60 ff., where the nightingale is

identified with the wife of Tereus bewailing her son slain by her

own hand. Thenceforward the lament of the nightingale for

Itys became a commonplace : Ag. 1442, Soph. El. 107, 148,Eur. fr. 773, 23, Rhes. 545 etc.

There is remarkably little variation in the complete accountsof the story which have been preserved by the mythographers,so that it is possible to present a narrative drawn from the

consensus of the chief authorities.

Tereus the Thracian was wedded to Procne daughter of

Pandion 1

,who after a time desired to receive a visit from her

sister Philomela, and requested her husband to go to Athens to

fetch her. Tereus, however, became enamoured of Philomela,and abused his opportunity by violating her

; but, fearing lest the

rumour of his crime should reach the ears of Procne, before

leaving her he cut out Philomela's tongue. Philomela then wovean embroidered picture of the outrage which had been inflicted

1 In some authorities the betrothal of Procne is spoken of as a favour bestowed

upon Tereus for assistance rendered against Labdacus (Apollod. 3. 193: cf. Ov. Met.6. 4^4).

222 I000KAEOYZ

upon her, and contrived that it should be conveyed to Procne.

When Procne learnt the truth for Tereus had made excuse that

Philomela was dead she sought out her sister, and, in concert

with her and in order to be revenged upon her husband, killed

her son Itys, cooked his flesh, and served it as a meal to Tereus.

When he had feasted, the sisters discovered the truth to himand took to flight. Tereus, spurning the table from him, and

seizing his sword, rushed after them. Then the gods in pity

changed Procne into a nightingale and Philomela into a

swallow;and Tereus became a hoopoe.

The above features, subject to certain unimportant reserva-

tions, are common to Ov. Met. 6. 433 674, Apollod. 3. 193 195,schol. Ar. Av. 212, Conon 31, Liban. narr. 12 p. 1103, Achill.

Tat. 5. 5, Eustath. Od. p. 1875, Nonn. 4. 321, 12. 75; and theyare brought into connexion with Sophocles by Tzetzes on Hes. Op.

566, who, after briefly stating the chief points in the story,concludes with the words ypdcfrei 8e Trepl rovrov S^<ôX^9 eV rc5

Trjpel SpdfjLaTi. It is well known that certain Latin writers 1

,

including Ovid, owing perhaps to a mistaken etymology, madePhilomela the nightingale instead of Procne, and that someof them also represented her as the wife of Tereus (Coningtonon Verg. Ed. 6. 78). The latter change was a necessary conse-

quence of the former, since it was unnatural to convert the

tongueless Philomela into a nightingale. Eustathius makes the

confusion even worse by adopting the latter change without the

former.

Hyginus (fab. 45) alone is .responsible for a version differingin certain essential features. In this Tereus pretends that

Procne is dead and asks for Philomela to take her place. Whenhis request is granted, an escort is sent with Philomela, but

Tereus throws them into the sea. After he had worked his will

on Philomela, he entrusted her to Lynceus a Thracian king,whose wife Laethusa, being friendly to Procne, handed over to

her the supposed mistress of Tereus. Meanwhile, Tereus hadbeen warned by divination that his son Itys was threatened

with danger from a relative. Suspecting that his brother Dryaswas plotting against his son, Tereus slew Dryas. The storyends in the usual manner

;but Procne, in accordance with the

Latin variation already mentioned, becomes the swallow, andwhat is much more remarkable, as we shall presently see Tereusis changed into a hawk (accipiter). Since this version certainlydoes not proceed from Sophocles, we need not delay over it.

There was no justification for Welcker's proposal to incorporatethe episode of Dryas, which occurs nowhere else, in his recon-

1 So also Agatharchides (GGM I 114, 33).

THPEYS 223

struction of the present play. Ribbeck . (Rom. Trag. p. 35 ff.)

conjectured that the version of Hyginus was adopted by Livius

Andronicus; it would be more interesting to discover who first

propounded it.

We have more information about the Tereus than aboutmost of the lost plays of Sophocles. It was probably producedshortly before the Aves of Aristophanes (414 B.C.)

1

, in which the

Hoopoe formerly Tereus is a leadingcharacter. His appearanceexcited surprise (99): TO /6a//,<o9 rjfuv aov ye\oiov </>aiWrat. Buthe replies that it is all the fault of Sophocles : roiavra pevroi,

2tO(f)OK\er)S \vpaiveTai \

ev rat? TpaywSiatcriv e/jue rovTrjpea. Theschol. explains : ev yap ro> Trjpel ôtyo/cXrjs ewoirjo'ev avrov

d7ra)pvi0(Dfjbvov KCLL rrjv Upofcvrjv' ev a> eo-fccoê 7ro\\a rov Trjpea.Lest any one should be troubled by the concluding clause, it is

perhaps worth while to remark that it is only an unintelligentcomment on \vfjLaLverai. Some of the commentators supposethat the dress of Epops in the Aves was a caricature of Tereusas he appeared on the tragic stage after his metamorphosis. But

Rogers justly remarks that Sophocles 'was far too great anartist to have exhibited the transformation on the stage (#*coram populo . . .in avem Procne vertatur, Horace, A.P. 185 7), orto have introduced Tereus afterwards in the guise of a hoopoe/Later in the comedy (280) another eVox/r appears, and is

described : ovroai fjbev eo-ri <&i\oK\eovs| ef ITI-OTTO?, eya) Be TOVTOV

TraTTTTo?. On this the scholiast remarks that Philocles had writtena Tereus in the tetralogy llav&iovis. The innuendo is that

Philocles had plagiarized Sophocles, whose play was the earlier :

6 2o0otfA,r}? TTpGorov Tov 'Fijpea eTroirjcrev, etra ^tXo/cX^?. EvenNauck treats this statement as if irpwrov was vr/jcoTo?

2. How-

ever, there is no trace of Aeschylus or Euripides having composedon the subject ;

and consequently Welcker argued that the

important fragment (fr. 304 N. 2

) quoted from Aeschylus byAristotle really belonged to Sophocles. Though Tereus is not

mentioned, it would not be easy to find any context to whichthis fragment would be so well adapted as to a description by a

messenger of his transformation 3. Welcker's position has been

strengthened by Oder 4,who pointed out that the earlier form of

1 But Hiller v. Gaertringen (p. 36) makes it earlier than 421, on the ground that

Eumolpus in the Erechtheus of Euripides was copied from Sophocles' Tereus. Observe

that, if Eur. Her. 1021 f. implies that the Tereus was already in existence, the datewould be not later than 420; for the Heracles probably belongs to the years 420 416.

2 ' Inter Graecos primus Sophocles.' Brunck actually printed TT/OWTOS, I do notknow on what authority.

3 Welcker preferred to suppose that Hermes appeared as dens ex machina.4 Rh. Mus. XLIII 541. On the same s'ide are Gruppe, p. 924 ; Bernhardy, Gr.

Lit? II 2 p. 335; Ribbeck, p. 577.

224 !04>OKAEOY!

the legend transformed Tereus into a hawk, that this wasfollowed by Aeschylus in the Supplices (/ctp/crj\arov T drjSovos,

63), and that Sophocles' substitution of the hoopoe rests on un-

impeachable evidence. It is obvious that the fable of the changeof colour and shape in the hoopoe is especially well adapted to

explain and justify the novelty introduced into the story of

Tereus, for whatever reason the hoopoe came to be associated

with him. The simplest view to take is that the existence ofthe popular superstition identifying the two birds was the causeof the alteration in the legend. If the hoopoe was a rare andunfamiliar bird in the fifth century B.C., as Oder argues, there is

the less reason to feel surprise at its substitution for the hawk.

For, in spite of its appearance, the hoopoe is actually a shy andtimid bird, which is scared even by the flight of a passingswallow. Oder also showed that the periphrastic 7r0877X0)era?

e'êt and the use of rjviKa were characteristic of Sophocles, andthat both are unfamiliar to Aeschylus. Although one is loth

to conclude that Aristotle's 1

memory was at fault, he has been

guilty of a similar error, as Welcker remarks, in attributingEur. fr. 515, i to Sophocles. On the whole, although thescholiast on Aristophanes is not decisive of the chronology,Welcker's case is so strong that I have included the fragmentin the remains of this play (fr. 581).

The other references to the play of Sophocles are unimport-ant : Liban. decl. IV p. 369 f. /eaXoJ? apa ol rpaywBol ravraeSiSacrtcov, TOV Trjpea, rrjv TipoKvrjv. Ov. Trist. 2. 389 fecit amorsubitas volucres cum paelice regem, | quaeque suum luget mine

quoque mater Itym, following v. 381 omne genus scripti gravitatetragoedia vincit. The title was also employed by the comic

poets Cantharus, Alexandrides, and Philetaerus;and at Rome

the subject was adapted by Livius Andronicus and Accius.The next question is where Sophocles laid the scene of the

play. From frs. 582 and 587 it would be natural to conclude thatthe action took place in Thrace, in agreement with the statementsof the majority of the ancient authorities. Thucydides, however,energetically protested (2. 29) : 6 flev h &av\ia -7% <&>/aSo? vvv

Ka\ovfjLV7]S 777? 6 'Yrjpevs w/cei, Tore VTTO paicojv oiKOV{j,vr]s, KOITO epyov TO Trepl TOV "Irui> at yvvcuices ei> Trj 777 TavTrj eirpaâv.He was followed by Strabo (423), Pausani'as (l. 41. 8, 10.

4. 9), and Conon (31). Welcker and Ribbeck assume that

Sophocles agreed with Thucydides ;whereas M. Mayer

2, holding

1Dittmeyer holds that the Qth book of the hist. an. is spurious, having been com-

piled from Theophrastus and other sources at the beginning of the third century. Seealso Gercke in Pauly-Wissowa n 1047.

2 Herm. xxvii 491. See also Gruppe, p. 927.

THPEYI 225

that the protest of Thucydides was directed against the presentplay, conjectures that Sophocles deliberately altered the localityfrom Daulis to Thrace. Certainly there is no evidence that

Sophocles used 'Thracian' in any other than its ordinary sense,and it seems likely that, so far as the poetic tradition was con-

cerned, Thucydides was the innovator rather than Sophocles.That is not to say that he did not know of a local tradition

connecting Tereus with Daulis;and the historical question as to

the presence of Thracians in southern Greece is another matter

altogether1

.

Anyhow, it is important to remember that the gruesomehistory was enacted among a rude and savage people (cf. fr. 587);and the terrible revenge exacted by the Athenian women showsthe effect upon their character of alien surroundings andbarbarous treatment (cf. frs. 583, 584). For Tereus in the

character of a fierce barbarian see on fr. 581, 3. In this connexionWelcker makes much of the festival on the mountains of the

Dionysian trieterica, which Ovid alone 2 of the authorities records

(587 ff.), telling how Procne disguised herself as a bacchant to

seek out her sister's hiding-place in the wilds. But there is

reason to suppose that the discovery was not effected in exactlythe same way by Sophocles. Fr. 595 is of supreme importanceas attesting the use made of the embroidered robe

;but it also

appears that Philomela employed an intermediary who was

acquainted with the details of her story (fr. 588), whereas in

Ovid the whole truth is gathered by Procne from the robe. Un-less it was covertly smuggled into the palace, some pretext musthave been devised to warrant its presentation to Procne.

Libanius shows appreciation of this point, by stating that it wassent on the occasion of a festival when it was customary for the

Thracian women to make presents to the queen. This mayperhaps go back to Sophocles. The other fragments are not of

much importance for the elucidation of the plot. Fr. 583 is

clearly a lament of Procne for her estrangement from home ties,

and suggests that her desire for the presence of Philomela wasthe original cause in Sophocles, as in Ovid, of all the subsequenttroubles. Fr. 584 was probably addressed by Procne to the

chorus : Welcker's idea that it followed an invocation of the

absent Philomela is less likely. Fr. 585 is the consolation

offered to Procne by the chorus, or by Philomela's messenger,after she has learnt of the outrage. For fr. 586 see note in loc.

1 See Kretschmer, Einl. in d. Gesch. d. gr. Sprache, p. 242.2 Welcker and Ribbeck find it also in Accius. Hiller v. Gaertringen refers to the

festival of the 'Aypiuvia, when the priest of Dionysus pursued a woman with a drawnsword (Plut. qu. Gr. 38 p. -299 F).

P. II. 15

226 SO<t>OKAEOY!

Fr. 582 is, according to Welcker and Ribbeck, the cry of Tereus

after his discovery of the women's revenge. Frs. 581 and 589

belong to the announcement of the final destiny of the chief

characters, whether this was made by a messenger or by a god.Fr. 590 probably comprised the concluding words of the drama.

581

TOVTOV 8' eTTOTTTrjV 770770, TO)V OLVTOV

Opacrvv TrerpaiLov opviv Iv

os 77/H [Jiv fyavevTi 8ia77a\6 irrepov

KipKov Xendpyov $vo yap ovv

re yavrov z^Suo? /xtct9

8' otrcjpas r\viK av av&rjVIV aV0LS dp,(f)LV(j[)IJirjO-L

del Se jJLicreira^S' aV aX\ov eig TOTTOV

epujfjiovs Kal TTOLJOVS airoiKiel. 10

581 . 4 <f>avfrri Nauck : (jxtivovrai AaCa, <pa.ii>oi>Ti ceteri

|

8iaira\i W. Gilbert :

dia.Trd\\L codd. (5ia/3dX\et AaCaD a) 6 KO.VTOV codd. 7 ty'iK SLV %a.v6y

Camot: Iva. Karaâvdij codd., ^vk' âvdrj Conington 9 /mlffei Da, yuio-î Ca

,

/xto-e? PAa|

rbv 5^ PEaCa|

dTrdXXou Ea,

do-TraXXoi/ P, aTraXwi' Aa,rovde ila\\^tjs

rbirov Jos. Scaliger, T&V d IlaXX^j'^s rbiruv Camus, TtDi/5' d?raXXa7eis rbiruv coni.

Heath 1O dTrot/ciel Salmasius: dTrot/ctVei codd., ^Tro^xeTcu Heath

581 Arist. A/>/. ^w. 9. 49. 633a

ig 3 Opaoruv is a popular error, as appliedi 5^ /ecu 6 ^TTO^ r6 x/^M" fai to the TTO^: see Introductory Note. But

WO-TTC/O ireiroL^Kev AiVx^Xos ey irtTpaiov,'

living amongst the rocks,' andOVTOV 5'...a7roi/aVet.' Plin. w.A. so 'solitary,' is consistent with the bird's

10. 86 (sc. formam et coloreni) mutat et habits. For the word cf. Eur. El. 805,

upupa, ut tradit Aeschylus poeta. Pliny and see Jebb on O. T. 476. 4v irav-

is hardly an independent witness. For Tevx^J describes the rather formidable

the reasons which seem to prove that appearance of the bird. It has a long,Aristotle was mistaken in referring these pointed bill, variegated plumage and a

lines to Aeschylus rather than to Sopho- large erectile crest (EncycL Brit. s.v. ).

cles see Introductory Note. But there is a more particular reference to

1 TOVTOV 8* shows that a reference to Tereus, who was represented on the stagethe metamorphosis of Procne and Philo- as a warlike savage: cf. Ar. Lys. 563mela went before. ?iro\|/(cf. z//^//Vz,Varro repos 5' a5 0/>$ TreXrrjv creiwv Ka.K.bvTiov

ling. Lat. 5. 76) is explained as eTroTrr?;* uxrirep 6 frjpefa, where we should pro-

spectator. Oder (I.e. p. 553) points out bably recognize an allusion to Sophocles.that in consequence of this derivation it Xen. mem. 3. 9. i (pavepbv 8 on /ecu

O&T'became associated with the name Tereus AaKedai/jt,6vioi O&T' &v Qpq.%ii> ev

(Trjpelv). Cf. schol. Ar. Av. 102 6 \ey6- Kai a.KovTlois...edt\oi.v

fj.ei>os Typed* irapa rb rrjpeiv TT\V 'Ico. In Apollod. 3. 195 Tereus pursues the

Etym. M. p. 757, 45 Typefa, 6 Typuv TO. women with an axe. But this touch mayTjSovTjv dyelpai dwa/j-fva, Kal aKpacriq. ijdo- be connected with the Asiatic version in

v&v XeXij/i/tôs. schol. Horn. T 518.2 K<xiro8T]X,w(ras ^Xei: f r tne Sopho- 4 SiairaXci: to ply the wing, like

clean periphrasis see on fr. 489. vuf^dv irrepbv (fr. 941, n n.). The pre-

THPEYZ 227

position probably expresses the separatemovement of the two pinions.

5 f. 8uo KTC. : 'for he will display twoforms coming from a single birth, the

fledgeling's and his own,' i.e. as TTCUS (cf.

K ?rcu56s) he is KipKos before he becomeshimself (tiroif/). But the expression is so

obscure as to be scarcely intelligible.7 vas oirwpas refers to the early part

of July, before the extreme heat of the

dog-star. Cf. Hes. Op. 597 5/^w<ri 5'

eTroTpvveiv A^/iTyrepos lepbv CLKTT]V\dive/Aev,

e3r' av Trpwra <f>avrj <r0vo$ 'Qapiwvos, \

X&PW *v evati xal ^vrpoâKif v dXwjj.8 d(JL<})Lva)fXT]<ri can scarcely mean

* surround '

(Stephanus). Rather: 'a

dappled pinion will guide (set in motion)him on either side.' irrepv^ vo)/j,q. (opvida)is an intelligible variation of 8pvis vufta

jrrepbv (v. 4). Cf. Hesych. in p. 403TTTpOv6/J.OS' TO?S 7TTe/30?S VO/UWCTa, (1. V(t}-

fAuxra [vel vôvtra Dind.]) Ka.1 veiô^^vrj,where the last word suggests Trrepovo/uLos

as an alternative. Lobeck on Ai. 604restored Trrepovw/j-os. irrepv^ vu/J.qi is not

a less artificial inversion than Vergil'svina cadis onerat (A en. i. 195).

9 f. These lines seem to be echoed in

Aelian nat. an. 3. 26 ol ^TTOTT^S el<riv bpvl-duv d-mjv^ffTaToi, KaL yuot 5oKou<ri TU>V irpo-

repwv r&v dvdpuTTLK&j' ev fj.v^fj.r] nai /JL^VTOI

Kal plffet TOV ytvovs TOV T&V yvvaiK&vviroir\^KfLv ras /caXtas ev rats ^/)^/xotsKal rois irdyots rots u^Xots. This

suggests that rtD^S' in the text refers to

Procne and Philomela, from whom the

two\f/ withdraws in loathing, with airo

used as in fr. 583, 8. But diroiKiei

will not construe as it stands. Eitherthen (i) we should adopt Heath's ruvd'

dTTdXXcryeis TOTTUV, with 5pvfj,oijs KTC. as

the direct object of diroiKiei, or (2) wemight read something like rwj/S' eavrbvK rbiruv, with Spv/jiotis as ace. termini

like Pind. Pyth. 4. 258 rdv TTOTC Ka\\t-\

arav dirt^Krja'av -pbv<g \

vatrov. M. Mayerin Herm. xxvn 492 f. reads davXbv els

rbirov, followed by dpv/uLotis r', in orderto introduce a play upon the names of

the Megarian Pagae, Drymos, and Dau-lis ; and refers to Soph, the derivation

from daavs recorded by Strabo 423 andothers.

582

prjl Trpeo-fiicrTOv creXa?

582 Schol. A Horn. 705 (j>t\iinros

TTJS ^0-175 dao-vvo/JLtv-rjs TO irpoo-yyopt-

"2,o(poK\ovsK.bv oi/rws yap

d i/'tXtDs 6

In the matter of inter-aspiration the

practice of the Greeks was not constant,but a medial aspirate is occasionally foundon Attic inscriptions in such words as

etfbpKos and TrdpeSpos : Meisterhans3 , p. 88.

The Alexandrian grammarians laid downthe rule that the aspirate should bewritten only when the word was a true

compound, with each member retaininga distinct force; but that if a singlenotion had resulted, as would occur par-

ticularly in the case of proper names, it

should be omitted. Thus they wrote

eva'ifJLiijf but Eyaiyu.wi', du<t>id\os but Eu-

ptfaXos ; but there was not a completeagreement about (i/ctfaXos, because some

thought it a mere synonym of w/cus. Fora full discussion see Thumb, Untersuch.H. d. Spir. asp., 1889, p. 69; Blass, Pro-nunciation of ancient Greek, p. 96 E. tr.;

Lehrs, Aristarch? p. 317.

(juXfarirois. The Thracian love of

horses appears in Homer: liriroirbXuv

Qp-QKuv N 4, 3 227. Cf. Hes. Op. 505QpyKys i7nrorp6(f)ov, Eur. Hec. g <t>l\nnrov\abv evdfowv dopl, 428 0iXi7T7rots Qprjî,

1089 Q/>l?K">?s etfiTTTrov 7^05. Every onewill remember the horses of Rhesus.

irpco-pio-Tov, most revered : cf. Aesch.Theb. 377 Trpto~l3i<rTot> aarpuv, inf. fr. 605.Bothe proposed a^Sas for crAas, and

Blaydes and Nauck were inclined to

adopt it ; but the text is free from ob-

jection. There was a temple of Helioson the Thracian Chersonese (CIG add.

2016 d), but there does not appear to bemuch evidence of the prevalence of his

cult in Thrace. Possibly the intention

was to classify the Thracians with other

barbarian sun-worshippers : see on fr.

752. Hiller v. Gaertringen thinks that

Sophocles described Thracian sun-wor-

ship after Aeschylus in the Bassarae

(TGF p. 9).

152

228

583

vvv'

ovSev

ravry

aXXa

OifJiCIH,,

yct/>

8' e's

a i>ecu p,ev ev vrarposdvOp(i)TT(i)V filOV

TraZSas OLVOLCL rpcfai.

583. 2 ravrr]v A 3 /A^

7<xp ey Trarpds B (cod. Paris. 1985),Trdpras codd.

| 7;&vota codd.

ev<j>pove$ codd., %/j.(ppova Nikitin

Trarpos Valckenaer: /A^ 701/3 Trarpos SMA, /êy

7<xp Trcipos Scaliger 5 TrcuSas F. W. Schmidt:6 5' om. SMA, add. A2

| t/j.<f>poves Dobree:

583 Stob. fior. 68. 19 (iv p. 517,

15 Hense) Soô/cX&ws 'Etjpei.l vvv '...

fxw-1

J. renders the whole passage as follows :

' But now, separated from my home

(xwpfc), I am undone. Often, indeed,

have I observed how miserable my sex

is in this respect. When we are girls,

our life in our father's house is the

sweetest, methinks, that can fall to

mortal ;for the days of thoughtless child-

hood are ever glad. But when we cometo years of discretion, we are thrust out,

and sold in marriage far away from our

ancestral gods and from our parents;some of us to other parts of Hellas, someto barbarians, some into houses where all

is strange (0,77077),some into places of re-

proach. And in all this, when once the

nuptial night is past, we must acquiesce,and deem that it is well.'

I agree with F. W. Schmidt that the

tone of these verses recalls Euripidesrather than Sophocles, but they should

not be rejected in the face of the evidence

on mere suspicion. See also I p. 62.

1 ff. These lines are open to suspicionfor several reasons: (i) the obscurity of

\upCs, (2) the unusual meaning of|3X.c\|/a

iffKe\â.iJ.T)vor e^powcra, (3) the relation

of ravTTj, (4) the awkwardness of ovScv

o-p.v after ovSev cljii. J.'s translation

implies that xwP's Xw /3t(rê' (ra which,

although harsh, is possible grammatically

(Eur. Hclid. 321 n.); and that

qualifies ovMv tafjiev and refers to

i.e. in respect of our separation from

home. It is possible, however, that ravr-r)

looks forward (Jebb on 0. C. 787) : 'this

is the view I have formed of womankind,that we are naught.' But in either case

the difficulty of finding a parallel to

t/3\e\(/a remains, although fr. 302 is some-

what similar, and Gomperz thinks it a

sufficient defence to refer to Dindorf's

Lexicon. Cobet, Co!!. Crit. p. 193,whose brief comment is

' verba sensu

vacua,' writes: vvv 5' ov dtei/mt ^w/ois...

cUfÂm" 877 (coll. Eur. fr. 84). F. W.Schmidt and Wecklein, accepting 017 Siet/a,

give veupts and Trp&rov (cf. Eur. Med. 292)

respectively for xwP* s and the former also

proposes t\[/fj-a ravr^. M. Schmidt con-

jectured ffov 5' for vvv 5', and Bergk cJ

XXwpJs for xwP'J - Herwerden wrote ov

vvv 5' iv TJ/JUV xw/^s, with KaXX?? for ravr-iy.

This gives good sense, but is too violent

to be probable. Gomperz understood

Xwp/s as privatim, seorsum, i.e. individu-

ally rather than as belonging to the clasis

of women. He compares Eur. Hec. 86b-

Xwpis roOro KOV KOIVOV ffrpar^, but there

the contrast is much more clearly ex-

pressed. Holzner's rendering'

I am notisolated (or divided) in opinion

'

(coll.

Tr. fr. adesp. 482) is surely impossible.For the general cast of the sentence cf.

Eur. Hipp. 375 17577 TTOT' ctXAus VVKTOS

ev fACLKpy XP^V|

ffv-rjTiiov efipovTiff' rj 5i-

00aprcu /3/os. The loss of V after \&vand before irarpos is exactly paralleledin Liban. I 35. 2 oi u,kv eavruv eyevovro,as corrected by Cobet Misc. Crit. p. 146to oi ntv ev eavruv. Cobet has shown

(see also N. L. p. 413) that scribes con-

stantly corrupted the phrase iv eavTov

yevtffQai, which they did not understand.For the ellipse, common in Attic also

after es, see Blaydes on Ar. Ntib. 964.

Jebb on Phil. 950 seems to prefer the

dative (iv eavrf etc.) when used meta-

phorically.4 ot|iai. Wagner quite unnecessarily

conjectured of/o^, and Meineke wished to

transpose act (v. 5) and ol/x-at.

5 iraiSas: Schmidt's elegant conjee-

THPEYS 229

TO*V re (vcravrtov ao,77/305 aVS/oa5, at Se

Sa)fJiaO\ at'

7rippo0a.Kal ravT*, eVetSdi/ ev<j)p6vY] êv^rj /ua,

Kal

at p,ev

at 8' ei? 10

7 die]u,iro\ou/j.eda codd. : corr. Valckenaer 1O 077577 Wagner: dXrjd^ SMA,077077 B, aTrrjvij vel d/ie/i^T? Kock, d/êidij Meineke, d\LTpd Schneidewin, croXeirro

Jacobs, aK\rjpa (vel 0777^77) Herwerden, aSrjXa (vel &<n]/j,a) Holzner, 0x77577 Rud.Prinz

j 7)5' eirippoda Schneidewin

ture (see cr. n.) happily restores the sense.

H. well compares the beautiful passage in

the Trachiniae (144 150), where Deianira

speaks of her own wedded life, and the

words that Ajax addresses to his boy(Ai. 552 ff.), especially iv r <J>povfti>

yap /u,r)5t> TJdiffTos ftios, |

2ojs TO xa'PetI//ecu rb Xi/7re?cr0cu /Jiddris. The interpolatedline there (TO ^77 Qpovelv yap Kdpr' avt*}-

8vvov Kai<6v) introduces the broader gene-ralization that 'ignorance is bliss,' for

which see on fr. 86. Brunck's proposalto substitute dyvoia for avoid spoils the

allusion to childish light-heartedness, but

deserved consideration, so long as iravras

stood in the text. For the lengtheningof the final a in dvoia see Jebb on Phil.

129, and for the use of T/>e<w his n. on

O. T. 374.7 8iji-iro\o)(jL9a, made traffic of,

bought and sold, with did expressing

mutuality. But the vb. does not1

neces-

sarily imply that the father received

money for parting with his daughter.It is more likely that Sophocles was

thinking of the Athenian custom of

providing a dowry, to which Euripidesalludes in passages with a similar tone

to this (Med. 232, Hipp. 628).8 Oewv irarpcowv suggested to an

Athenian his right to participate in the

worship of the phratries, the most im-

portant mark of citizenship : see Plat.

Euthyd. 302 B, C. For the use in

Sophocles see Jebb on O. C. 756. <xiro,

away from, as in dirb 6a\dffo-r}^ (Hdt. 4.

18), cbro 775 ctXoxoio (Horn. B 292), and

the like. There is no need for Blaydes's

7Tjo6crw.

1O d.T]8TJ...e'rrippo6a : see cr. n. J.

writes :

'

eirippoSa, "open to reproach ";

see on Ant. 413^. e-jripp66ois \

KaKoiffiv.

Tr. 263 TroXXd fj.lv X670is | eireppod-rja-e.

Hesych. II p. 166 iTTipp^-t\ro.- Tri\J/oya'

[Nauck conjectured tirippoda r

which is to beg the question. M. Schmidtalso suspected a reference to this passage,suggesting e-rrippoQa- tirtpprjTa, ^trLôya'}.' The new home may be uncongenial to

the young wife either because it placesher among strange surroundings (oLTJOrj) ;

or because it has unworthy or discredit-

able associations (tirippoda}.'' But theantithesis is false, as Brunck remarked :

'

quibuscunque moribus sit et qualicunquefortuna utatur vir hospes vel barbarus,cui puella nuptum datur, haud secusinsueta est, quo ducitur, domus. '

Camp-bell and others quote Eur. Med. 238 c's

Kaivd 5' 77^77 Kal v6fj.ovs d(pLy^vr]v in sup-port of d?7077 ; but, as it refers to marriagegenerally from the woman's point of view,it is really against them. Moreover, theword tirippodos should mean rather abu-

sive, hostile, and it is 'a far cry to the

supposed sense jlagitiosns, even if the

word can be used passively. The houseintended is that where the new-comerwill meet with nothing but fault-findingand unfriendliness from the inmates.The simplest correction of dXtjdij appearsto me to be cb?^, which, as I have since

found, has been anticipated by Wagner,Seyffert, Meineke, and Headlam (J.P.xxni 272). Thus we get a natural con-trast : in the one case the wife is offended

by her new surroundings, and in the otherher Kf]d(TTai will not tolerate her intru-

sion. In Track. 869 077^775 appears to

be an error for 01775775 (vulg.) or dytjdrjs

(Jebb); and in Eur. ffef.jiS I still thinkthat d-rjdiav should take the place of

drjdiav. Prinz's di<v)5rj (communicated to

me by Mekler) seems to mean '

ill-

kept.'

llf. The sentiment is based upon a

popular maxim : Eur. Tro. 665 KCUTOI

u,C ({xfipovr] xaX |

230 ZOÔKAEOYI

ets dvSpbs Xe'xos. Cf. Track. 149.However that might be, the wife was

expected to show unqualified obedience:Eur. El. 1052 yvvaiKa yap XP*1

7r6<rei, \ TJTIS (^pevrjp^. eirai-

vciv is hardly more than 'to accept.'

Cf. Ai. 1401 ei/*' eVao'eVas TO <rbv.

584

TroXXa ere 17X0} yStou

S' el yrjs /AT) TreTretpaorat

584. 2 yudXiaTa Brunck : KaXKiara SMA

584 Stob. yfor. 3

Hense) Zoô/cXe'oi'S

12 (ill p. 724, 5'TroXXd...

This and the next fragment are pro-

bably taken from a dialogue betweenProcne and the chorus, as Hartung has

suggested.If. <r...pfov: cf. El. 1027 77X0; <re

TOV vov. The construction was also collo-

quial : Ar. Ach. 1008 ^Xw <re TTJS evftov-

\las, Xen. symp.^. 45 ftyXw <re rou TrXot/rof.

In the following line the clause introduced

by ei is co-ordinate with the genitive, and

might have been replaced by TOV /trj Treirei-

paffdai /ere. See on Eur. //<?/. 85 ou rapa(r^'EX^r^y et arvyeis dav/mao~Tov, Kuehner-Gerth n 369. Cf. fr. 845.

585

HpoKvrj, SrjXov aXX' O/AW?Oela Ovrirovs oz^ra? euTrera)? <f)4peiv.

ra

585 Stob.y?^r. 108. 58 (iv p. 972, 4

Hense) 2o<poK\ovs fypei. 'aXyeivd..,

0^pei>'.' The lemma is omitted by S.

1 SrjXov is parenthetical : sc. eVW.

For this use see on fr. 631.2 T<X Oeia. Nauck proposed ra dvrjTa,

but that is demonstrably wrong. Thereis no similarity to fr. 590, but the generalsense is that of Eur. Hel. 253, for whichsee on fr. 258. So Eur. Med. 1018

Soph. fr. 680, fr. 964, Eur. fr. 98 dXX'

(f>tpeu> XPV ffv/uL<f>opa.SToi> fvyevTj. The appro-

priateness of TO. êta, i.e. fleiyXara (fr.

650 n.), in this context appears from Phil.

1316 dvffpWTTOlffl TO.S fA.v K 6e(t)V\ Tl5%aS

8o0iffas tffr1

avayKalov (ptpetv, 0. C. 1694TO <j)pov K deov /caXcDs (fitpeiv XP^t Eur.Phoen. 382 Bet fapeiv TO. r&v 6ewv, ib.

1763 ray yap K 6cwv dvdyKas dvrjrovovTa del 0^peiv, Hclid. 618 rd Beuv (f>pe }

Aesch. Pers. 296 o/xws 5' dvdyicrj irr)ôvas

PpoTols <j>tpeiv, |

de&v SiobvTwv, Soph.fr. 196, Quint. 7. 55 ôt/ce 5^ Bvt)rbv ZovTa

|

dXeyeivd.

586

CLVTTJV, iv Se Trot/ctXw <f)dpi

586 Herodian TT. /xoi'. Xe^. p. 36, 23

(0dpos) /card O~VO~TO\TIV (/card ffTo\r)v ev

cod.) ?rapd 2o0o/cXet eV TTjpet (djretj'ei cod. )'

o~Trev8ovffav...(f>dpei.' id. TT. OLxpbvwv ap.Cramer, anecd. Oxon. HI p. 295 tftfep :ai

ro 0dpos o~ti<rTe\\ov TO a, ws irapa 2o0o/cXet...^v T7;pet '<77reu5oi^(raj'...0dpet.' Pseudo-Draco p. 35 (

= Gramm. Herm. p. 444) is

not an independent authority. See ge-

nerally on fr. 360.Welcker thinks that the line describes

Procne hurrying to her sister's side. It

is more likely that it refers to the mes-

senger's description of Philomela, whomOvid (Met. 6. 451) introduces thus: ecce

venit magno dives Philomela paratu, |

divitior forma. So Hartung and pre-

sumably Blaydes, who needlessly emendse!5e (or w5e) Trot/aXy V </>dpei : but I sus-

pect that the 'embroidered robe' was the

garment which Philomela wove to informher sister (fr. 595). The sequence may

THPEYI 231

have been, '(I asked of her) what shewas ready enough (to tell); for on the

embroidered robe....' <rir6i>8ov<rav avTtjv

probably implies a contrast like that of

Soph. Phil. 1178 <pi\a IJLOL (f>i\a TCLVTO.

Trapr/yyeiXas CKOVTI re irpdofffLv. Horn.

293 rl fie ffiretidovra Kal afnbv\

drpvveis; A 73 urrpvve irdpos fj.efj.aviav

'A.d-f]vr)v. Aesch. Prom. 409 opfiw/jLtvy

fioi rbvS1 e0wvas \6yov. Lucan I. 291et ipsi \

in bellum prone tantum tamenaddidit irae

\ accenditqtie ducem, etc.

587

<$)i\dpyvpov fjitv nav TO ftdpfiapov yeVos.

587 Stob. flor. 10. 25 (ill p. 414, 3

Hense) So0o/c\ôus Trjpeu'

(piXdpyvpov

No doubt this was spoken with parti-cular reference to the Thracians (fr. 582),who were distinguished for their crueltyand rapacity: see some good remarks byGrote, in p. 437 f. Thucydides describes

the avarice of the kings of the Odrysae(2. 97) : KareoT'fiffavTo yap rouvavriov TIJS

Tlepo-uv (3a<ri\elas rbv v6fj.ov, ovra fikv Kal

rots aXXois Qpai, Xa/j.fidveii' /j.d\\ov 97

5id6vai...ov yap ffv irpdâi ovdfr, /U.T;5156^-

ra 5&pa. The Thracian king Polymestorkilled Polydorus in order to secure the

gold which had been entrusted to him :

see Eur. Hec. 710, 774, etc. The wordsare very similar to Ant. 1055 TO fj.avTi.Kbv

yap irav (piXdpyvpov -yôs.

588

Odpcrei' Xeycov raXrjOes ov o-<f)a\fj TTOTC.

o-0a\^ L : ff<f>d\\ri (vel -77) SMA588 Stob. Jlor. 13. 5 (ill p. 457, 8 see on fr. 955. Hence Ant. 1195 6p6bv

Hense) 2o$o/cXôvs e/cT^/j^ws (Hense from aMjdeC det,' truth never fails.

' Another

metaphor is used by Eur. fr. 289 rrjs 5'

dXêias 656s| 0aiJX7? n's ten, 'the way

of truth is plain?

retpeffiov L: evpi r-rjpel S, (ro0o/cXôus

ei MA). '^dp<rct...7rore.'

he strength of truth was proverbial :

589

avovs .Ktlvo<Z' at S' dz/oucrre/oa)? ert

Kivov r)H,vvavro < irpbs TO > Kaprepovo'crrts yap iv KaKolon OvjAOjOels

TrpooraTTTei Trjs VO<TOV TO

i&TlV OVK e

TL Cobet : avotiffrep1

ZTI S, dvo^xrrepaL y' In Brunck,

pai TroXu Gaisford 2 irpos TO KapTepov Bamberger : KapTepdv codd., KapT

Grotius, Kara TO KapTtpov Porson, /cwrepwrara R. Ellis, KapTepeiv 8tov Tucker,

(ppevL L. Campbell

589. 1

pai TroXu Gaisford

589 Stob. Jlor. 20. 32, 33(111 p. 545,6 Hense) 2o00KX&>i>s T^pet. '<5U/ous...

KaKuv."1 The extract is omitted in MA.

In S the lemma is as above, and vv. 3 5

are joined to the first two lines. In the

Paris MS 1985 (B) the last three lines

appear as a separate extract.

'Welcker (p. 383) supposes that the

Thracian chorus is here speaking. Buta comment by them would usually be

confined to two verses. Perhaps the

passage comes from the close of a mes-

senger's p^ts.' (J.)1 dvoucrWpws. For the form of the

comparative adverb see on Eur. Hclid.

543; Kuehner-Blass I 577. The irregu-

larity is much affected by Isocrates andis not uncommon in Plato. Cf.fr. 1015.2 irpos TO Kaprp6v is the best of the

attempts which have been made (see

232 !0<J>OKAEOY!

cr. n.) to supply the gap indicated by the

reading of the MSS. The phrase occurs

in Aesch. Prom, 228 ws ov /car' iayyv ovde

wpbs TO KapTepbv \ 'X.pfi'n b~b\($ de TOVS

vwepexovTas Kparelv. Cf. Phil. 594 irpos

l<rxvos Kpdros, Aesch. Ag. 135 (XT-TIM))

[j.oipa XciTrdijei irpbs TO fiiaiov, Tr. fr. adesp.

496 fj,rj yu,ou<707roi'ei Trpos TO vmriwrepov.The scribe's eye was deceived by the

homoioteleuton.4 [mov. Cobet (Coll. Crit. p. 194)

proposed to substitute %etpo>', in order to

obtain the meaning'

the remedy is worsethan the disease' : but this is practicallythe sense given by the text, if we recog-nize that in.iôv = i too strong (for the

disease),' i.e. more powerful than its cure

warrants 'more grievous than the disease

itself.' There is an excellent parallel in

Aesch. Ag. 208 eirel de KCLI iriKpov \ x^-/zctTos dXXo /uLrJx a P \ fipiBvTepov irpb-

fjLOi<rii>|

fj.di>Tis #K\ayi;ev. See also O. C.

438 (quoted by Ruehl) rbv 0u/jt.bv eKdpa-

fj.bvTO. yuot|/uietfu Ko\a<TTT]t> T&V irplv

Tiu*a.pTr)n.evwv, where however Jebb holds

that the gen. does not follow /ue^w.

' The sin of Tereus deserved chastise-

ment, but, by chastising it thus, the sisters

have "healed evil with evil." There is

an allusion to the proverb KO.KOV KO.K$tao-0ai.' (J.) For the proverb see onfr. 77. The unskilful physician uses

drugs which make the disease worse :

Plat. Prot. 340 E KO.KOV &pa /J,OL eipyaoTcu..KO.I eifjil TIS ye\oios larpos' iibfjievos

(ji.e'ifov TO v bariiia. TTOIO), Plut. cupid. div.

2 p. 523 E fiireiv Trpbs TOV TT\OVTOV uxrirep

laTpbv a\dova' 'TO cpa.piJ.aK6v <rov

TT/V vbffov yuei'^w TTote? (Com. fr. adesp.

455 in 494 K.),' Eur. fr. 292 Trpbs TT\V

vbffov TOI Kctl Tbv ia.Tpbv xpcwv \

IbbvT*

a.Ke'iadai, ^.77 eTrira^ ra (pdpfjiaKa. \5i56ir',

av JLCTJ raura Trj vbffq Trp^wrj.

5 KaKuiv. Cobet wished to substitute

r^X J/1? s ôr this word, and Gomperz in-

geniously conjectured d/ccDj/, which Nauck

adopted. But /ca/ccDi/, to be joined with

laTpbs, is right, notwithstanding its awk-wardness after ev KO.KOI<TI (Jebb on 0. C.

554). The allusion to the proverb men-tioned in the last note is continued.

590

OvrjTa (frpovelv ^pj] Qvr)TJ)v

TOVTO AcaretSdra? a>9 OVK

Ato? ouSet?

ort

XOP.

59O Stob. flor. 22. 22 (ill p. 589, 3

Hense) TOV O.VTOV (sc. Sophoclis) T^pe?

(TOV avTov ayypei S, TOV O.VTOV dyf/pei. A,

o~0(poK\eovs dyripei M, o~o<f>OK\ovs T7?pe? B

[cod. Paris. 1985]. M. Schmidt conjec-tured a Tvpoi or Tvpoi a, Buecheler 2o0.

'Arpei. Hense points out that the last-

named title fits the alphabetical order of

plays followed by the anthologist, and that

the only reason for not accepting it is

that the Atreus is not elsewhere cited in

the collection).'

6vr)Td...TeTe\t<rdai.'

1 The metre is defective, and the

best remedy that has been proposed is

Grotius's dvrjTTjv d (f>vai.v xpi) dvrjrd <f>po-

veiv. Nauck thinks that QVT]TT\V de <ppo-

veiv xP'h QvyTb- (pvciv would be equally

good, but the separation of 6vr\rr\v ..,<pvaw

is better avoided. When the same critic

goes on to speak of Meineke's dvrjTovs

<pvvTas or Hense's QVT\TT}V yevedv as easier

changes which might be adopted, the

proposition is disputable. For the orderof the words to be shifted is a commonsource of error, as Headlam and others

have shown ; but that dvrjTovswould be likely to become dvr,TT]

or that yevedv might be glossed by (pucriv,

it is difficult to believe. Campbell sug-gests Qvr)TT)v -^vxyv or Qvr\Ti]v ye (pvaw.

\f/vxri is hardly the right word, and,

though ye might be defended (e.g. byAt. 476), its position is not so unassail-

able that it ought to be gratuitously in-

troduced. Buecheler deleted dvrjT^v <pv<n.v

altogether. A more attractive proposalis that of Schenkl (G.G.A. 1895, 485)and Mekler to add ev after <pvffiv. Cobet

(Coll. Crit. p. 195) pointed out that

dvrjTovs 6Was was normal in this con-

nexion, and should be preferred to dvrjTovs

<f)vvTas. The sentiment is a maxim ofGreek proverbial philosophy which the

poets repeated with variations of phrase :

THPEYI 233

TTOL/J

eifj.ev a&ras,

fr. 6 1

Find. Pyth. 3. 59 xp*1 Ta

dai/j.6v<i}v fj.affTevtfji.ev

yvdvTa TO irdp 7ro56s, oi'as

Istk. 4. 1 6 dvOLTO. OvaTOiffL

ov yap efffr OTTWS ra flew?-

\

<Ti /Spore'a <ppevi- \

QVO.TO.S 5' oVd

e<pv. Epicharm. fr. 263 K. 01/ard

Xpfy TOV dvaTbv, OVK ada.va.Ta TOV dvaTov

<ppove?v. Aesch. Pers. 822 ws oux UTT^P-

êu dvaTov ovTa xpi) <f>poveiv. Soph. fr.

346, Track. 473. Eur. Bacch. 395 rd

.0-o06j> 5' 01) cro0a TO re /UTJ Ovr/Ta (f>poveiv,

Ale. 799 #i/ras 8e OVIJTOVS dvrjTa /cai <f>pove'iv

Trag. fr. adesp. 308 avdpwirovdec (ppovflv avdpuiriva. Antiphanes

fr. 289 (II 127 K.) el tfj'ijros el, /SArtore,fivriTa KOI (ppovei. Hor. Carm. 2. n. 11

quid aeternis minorem constHis aninium

fatigas ? There is a fresh application in

Eur. fr. 799 uxnrep 5e Qvr\Tov K.a.1 TO o"u)/u,'

<pv, |

I

Aristotle criticizes it as a rule of life :

eth. N. 10. 7. H77 b32 ov XPV ê /cara

TOUS TrapaivovvTas avdpuirtva (frpoveiv av-

fipwrrov 6vTa ovSe 6vr)Ta TOV BVTJTOV, d\X'

e0' offov ei>5xeTat' adavariêiv Kai travTa

Troieiv TT/Q^S r6 r)v /card r6 KpaTtaTOv T&Vv avT$. A merely sophistical refinement

appears in [Isocr.] i. 32 adavaTa. ptv

fj.eya\6\f/i>xos elvai, dvTjTa 5^

/JLOVS

Ty <rvfj.[j.{Tp<i}$ T&V virapxovTW2 KareiSoras: for the plural, which

is employed /card <Tvve<riv t cf. Phil. 356trrpards

I eK^dvTa iras fi(nraeT\ 6fJ.vvvT5' fipvis ey<r^-

aTroppoijSSei |3oas, | avopo<f>dbpov /3e-

es o?yu,aros X^TTOS.

irXrJv Aios /ere. The ^/'^r endsthe words 17 TroXXa /Sporots ?(rrt'

iv| yvQvai- irplv loelv 5' oi)5ets /uai'-

rts|

rcoi' /m\\6vTd3v, 6 TL irpdêi, and it is

highly probable, as Jebb thought, that wehave here the conclusion of the Terms.So in Eur. Med. 1415 the usual doxologyis introduced with the variation

3with

Zei)s eV 'OX^?r^. The notion of

Zeus (or the gods) as the only dispenserof fortune is implicit in Thuc. 6. 78 01)

yap olbv re r^s re eiridv(j.ias /cat TTJS rvx^]^TOV avTbv oûoiws Ta/uiiav yevtcrdat. Ob-serve that ra/ut'as as a verbal noun is

followed by an indirect question (ort XPVTT\{<rdai), just as in Eur. Or. 1324 dXX(

/j.oi | 06/3oj rts elcreXrjXvd1

TJVTLV' ev 56/xois |

.../cXi/w /So^ the noun is used with the

construction of 0o/3oOjwcu. Hence the

so-called objective gen. T&V /j.e\\6vTuv is

a loose genitive of connexion, and the

phrase is incomplete without the subor-

dinate clause: cf. Thuc. r. 61 i] dyye\ia6'ri

591

dvOpa>7r(t)v, \LI

KOL p,arpos rjfJLas ap.epa rovs ov-

/3d(T/cet 8e

rou? 8' oX/3o? TI^V, rou9 Se SouXeta?

591. 1 &/ 00X0^ Bergk : e^ 0uXw' ((pvXwv S) SMA, eV 0i;Xy Tricl. 2 ,10777)65 S |

Dindorf : r/âs codd. [quod tamen silentio negare videtur Hense] | d/i^pa sus-

pectum 5 q. post SoiAet'as lacunam statuit Nauck, ^xe*' in &TX' mutato|

Brunck : dvdyKTjs codd.

591 Stob.y?0r. 86. 12 (=iv p. 706, 4

Hense) 2o0o/cX77? Trjpei.f

tv

J. writes :' The Thracian Chorus (from

the first ffTa.ffifj.ov) sing this ode, in a

Dorian strophe, affirming a principlewhich belonged to the spirit of the

Dionysiac cult the freedom and equalityof men (Welcker, p. 379). If dp-tpa in

v. 2 is sound, the sense is :

" The humanrace is one; one day (cp. fr. 583, n)gave us our common origin from sire

and mother." More literally: "Oneday brought forth all of us, one humankind, from sire and mother." iro.Tp6s,

Uranos : jxarpos, Gaia : from whom wasborn lapetos, father of Prometheus. (Or

perhaps the reference might be to Deu-

234 !0<t>OKAEOYS

calion and Pyrrha.) Cp. Find. Neni. 6. i

eV dvSp&v, eV 6ev -yeVos* K /xias 5e irvto-

jj.ev //ar/305 d/x06re/xn (since Uranos andGaia were also parents of Cronos).' [AddHorn. h. Ap. 335 TITT^J re deot, roi v-rrb

X&ovi vaierdovres\ Tdprapov d/A0i fj-tyav,

r&v e avdpes re deoi re, Orph.h. 37. i Tt-

rTjves, Talrjs re Kal Qtipavov 07X001 reVvo,\

r}/jiT^p(i}v Trpbyovoi irartpwv.] 'But cLfxepais very suspicious. Blaydes conj. etiQpova

(unus concubitus pairis ct matris}. Her-

werden, dSova (in the same sense).'The reference to the Titans seems far-

fetched: the context rather requires the

identity of our common nature to beaffirmed as the result of all alike being

sprung from a human father and mother.

Eur. fr. 52, 6 tdiov ovdtv t<rxo/J.w viad yovd |

r6 r' evyevts Kal TO dvayevts.Menander fr. 533, 6 (in 157 K.) ovdev 5'

xovffi T\e?oi' o55' epets ory |

O$K elffl

TrcuTTror TTO)S -yap fytvovr' av wore; Butthe words as they stand admit neither

this nor any intelligible meaning. Whatis wanted might be obtained by the sub-

stitution of a yovd for dptpa :

' our birth

from sire and mother proves us all,' i.e.

is the hall-mark of our equality. This

suggestion, which occurred independentlyto the present editor, is due to Holzner,and the same sense is given by Wecklein'sd cnropd. Weil and Stadtmueller propos-ed dpfjioyd, which Herwerden approved.Badham (Praef. Eur. /. T. p. 12) preferredJJ.L' e'Setêj' <eV6s> |

Kal Trctrpoj /cat /iarposK /Mas

| d^pa KTe. Jebb's rendering of

eêtê (^0ucre Blaydes) is difficult to sup-

port : if sound, it must rather be used as

in dpxh dvSpa 5dj-ei (Bias ap. Arist. eth.

N. 5. i. rr3Oa

i), XPOVO S SiKaiov dvopa5eiKvv<riv n6vos (0. T. 614).3 ?P\a<TTv, 'with e, as in EL 440,

1095, and Phil. 1311 : while in El. 238(eV rivL TOUT' fi\a<?Tev dvdpdnrwv) the e is

long.' (J.)4 ff.

'

But, though men are thus equalby origin, there is a great inequality in

their fortunes.' (J.) Cf. Pind. Nem. 7.

2 ff. avev atdev (sc. EtXet0u/as) ov...e\dxo-

fj.ev | dy\a6yviov "HjSav. \ dvajrvô/uLev 5'

oi>x awavres tiri foa'\ eipyei 5e Trbr/j.^

vytv6' 'erepov ^repa. Observe how the

closing phrase re-echoes the first of the

two preceding and contrasted clauses.

This is a characteristic device of Sopho-clean style : see Jebb on 0. T. 338, Ant.

465 ff. f36o-KCi, with contemptuous or

pitying tone : see on fr. 140. Here we

might render :

' To some a doom of evil

days is their meat.' (Psalm 42. 3 my tears

have been my meat day and night. ) Onthe ground that vv. 4 6 ought to corre-

spond metrically with vv. i 3 Nauckassumed that a lacuna existed after 8ov-

Xcfas to be filled with such words as eV

auXcus dXXor/Hcuj or other metrical equi-valent. For the same reason he altered

Zffxw to eVx'. So H. conjectured roi)y

5 SouXeta <r < vvoiKovs| dp>aXâs> vybv

fox' dvdyKas after Bacchyl. n. 72.Gleditsch (Can/tea, p. 227), readinge^'oxos aXXou ZfiXacrTev in v. 3, makes

correspondence by continuing here r)/j,&v

<KCU Kpdros>- dXXovs 5^ SouXeias /ere.

But the sense is complete as the text

stands, for 8ov\eias (dov\ias or 8oti\iov

Blaydes) may well be an adjective quali-

fying dvdyKas and the metrical assump-tion stands in need ofjustification. Tucker

(C. R. xvn 191), who rewrites v. 2 f. as

Kal fj-arpos dp/j.d ('union') iravras' aXXos

eôX05 |

OVK tp\a(TT(v otXXou proposes 2<rxev

e'^ dvdyicas in v. 6. &r)(^v : the aor. is

ingressive ('seized'). See Jebb on Phil.

33 1 -

H. renders as follows :

' We are one from father and mother,All human children of earth;

Not one more high than another,

Or lower babe at his birth :

But the daily food of his livingIs that which Destiny gave;

And Weal or Woe is her giving,Or hardest yoke of the slave.'

The metre is prosodiac-enhoplic and the

scheme as follows:

The concluding phrase an adoneus in

place of a choriambus is the same as

in At. 181 at the end of a similar system.The character of the rhythm resembles

that of Track. 94 ff. For the metre

generally see Blass, Bacchylides,3Praef.

p. xxxv sqq. ;and for the colon

ib. p. xxxvin (there is a good instance

in Pind. fr. 102) ; J. W. White, Verse ofGk. Comedy, 482.

THPEYI 235

XOP.

592

ctXXct TOJV 7ro\\o)v

L

TOV TT\.OVTOV

drac

Tracrat? /icraXXacrcroucrt^

592. 3 <t>povris eKTptyet Herwerden et Tucker: <j>povrls ^/crp^0et codd.,i Bergk, <f>povris dvrptyei. Herwerden, eKffrptyei (ppovrls Gleditsch. 4 chorirtK^.4- C I .A- "D^^.1,. . S* x-x,l,-l I >/. .. Tnotam habet

SM : u>/o<xs Aydp Bergk: 5' codd. Dindorf : faav vel codd. 6 upais

592 Plut. awaT. poet. 4 p. 21 B di/ri-

Trapa0ri(r(i TroXXa TU)J> Zo0o/cXôvs, c5f...

ical<dXX&...7rXoOroj'' (vv. i 3). Stob.

flor. 98. 45 (= iv p. 837, 8 Hense) 2o0o-

K\OVS Trjpei.'ret? . . . upais

'

(vv. 4 6).

Relying on the similarity of meaning as

well as on the exact metrical correspon-dence of the two passages, Bergk con-

jectured that vv. i 3 were to be assignedto the Teretis, and were antistrophic to

vv. 4 6. His view was accepted by Din-dorf and Nauck, and the latter printedthe lines as if they were consecutive, butwith vv. 4 6 standing first. [Bergk's

original view was that TO.V yap...<j}pais

followed immediately after vybv &r%ej/

dvdyKas (fr. 591), and completed the

strophe, and that d\Xa TWV . . .TT\OVTOV

was the corresponding portion of the

antistrophe.] It is difficult to see howthe words dXXA...7rXoOrov, which should

contain a qualification of or exception to

what precedes, can properly follow a

statement that human life is continually

shifting to sorrow. If therefore the lines

are continuous, I should prefer to supposethat vv. 4 6 came last, explaining the

reason why unrighteous prospeiity is pre-carious. The evidence is not conclusive

that the two passages are closely con

nected, still less that they stood originallyin immediate proximity to each other.

Nevertheless, Bergk's conjecture has a

high degree of probability, and it is

convenient to print the lines together in

view of the similarity of their contents.

The leading thought is that Wealth,

although not necessarily an evil in itself,

is always a source of danger leading to

temptation. The reckless want of pru-dence which is natural to the over-rich

man gives their opportunity to the cunningagents of Destruction, who are waiting to

overthrow his prosperity. The extract

reads like a familiar echo of Aesch. Ag.392 ff. ou yap %<TTiv 7raXi$

|

TrXotfrou TT/Wxbpov av8pi

|

XaKricravrt /Jt,yai> Ai/fas I

^difj.bv els dfpdveiav. j fiiarou 5' a rdXaiva

Ileitfw,| Trpoj3ov\ov TTCUS #0epros "Aras :

see Headlam's masterly exposition in

Cambridge Praelections , pp. 114 118.

But the standpoint of the two poets is

different : Sophocles moralizes in a toneof mournful resignation, Aeschylus withthe fervour of an inspired preacher.

1 ff. TCOV TroXXcov KaXwv XL? )^dpis :

' what delight is there in (his) high goodfortune?' So Eur. Med. 226 O?XOA" Se

KO.I j3lov | ^dpiv fjiedeiffa Kardave'iv xPTlfaiand other examples quoted by Blaydes onAr. Lys. 865. Cf. Aesch. Ag. 362 7roXXu;j>

yap ArfXwp TTJV ovt]<j(.v etX6/x?7J/. For TroX-

Xwv KaXwi/ see on fr. 938. KaKojBouXos<j>povrs is the opposite of fiadeias <ppov-ridos ffdjTtjpiov in Aesch. Suppl. 412. Its

manifestation is the Aeschylean v/3/ns :

Eum. 536 dvaffepias JJLCV vfSpis T^KOS d>s

eri^ywws,|

K 5' vyteias j (ppev&v 6 Traaiv

<t>i\o$ |

Kal TToXtievKTOs oX/Sos. The movingspirit is that of arrogant self-seeking:Pers. 826 /J,r)d rts

| vireptppovfiffas rbv

Trapbvra dalfj.oi>a |

&\\<>)v tpaaOds SKftovIt is another aspect of the

theme that ill-gotten gains are soon spent :

see on Eur. HeL 905, Headlam in fount.Phil, xxili 275 f. The distraction of the

mind is a sign of impending ruin : Aesch.

Suppl. 116, Lys. 6. 22 Kairot TTWS oti 0ewi>

TIS TTJV TOUTOV yv(i)/nr)v di<j>6eipv ;' The

sentiment applies to the subject of the

play. The guilt of Tereus towards Philo-

mela, and the crime of the avenging

236 !0<t>OKAEOYZ

sisters, combined to ruin all three.' (J.)

CKrpi\|/i: see cr. n. 'Verse 6 showsthat a molossus

( )is required, (i)

Bergk conj. K<rTpe'\|/i, which might betaken as in Ar. Nub. 88 ^Kffrpe\f/ov ws

TdxKTTo, TOUS ffavrov rpbirovs, "turn inside

out," completely change. In //. 17. 58

fibdpov T' ee<TTpe\f/e, a wind wrests the

tree from its place in the ground uprootsit. The metaphor of uprooting would,however, be somewhat obscure here with-

out further explanation. (2) Herwerden

conj. dvTpo|/i, "overthrow." Cp. Aesch.Pers. 163 f. H.T\ /x^yas bai^wv Koviaas ovoas

avrptyrj irodi| 6\fiov. But the presump-

tion is that the genuine word began withe/c.' (J.) The best conjecture is Tucker's

tKTptyei (anticipated by Herwerden, Exerc.Crit. p. 23), which I have adopted. Cf.

O. T. 428. The possible 'claim of eKrpt-

\f/ei (<p and ^ confused : Cobet N. -L.

p. 782), which would be the easiest al-

teration, must be rejected. eKTpfiretv is

to turn aside, divert ; and, even if the

words would bear the meaning, the idea

of diverting wealth which is the sourceof happiness to a harmful purpose is

foreign to the thought. Wealth is not

regarded as an instrument to be well or

ill applied, but as a secure endowmentwhich is imperilled by sinful conduct.

TOV eucucova irXovrov is wealth as the

necessary condition of prosperity, in it-

self harmless: Aesch. Pers. 171 &m yapTrAouros y' d,u.e/u,<pris, Ag. 477 Kpivw 5'

atpdovov 6'X/3cw. So we read in the case

of Oedipus at the summit of his fortune

of TOV ira.vr' fvoainovos 6\[3ov (O. T.

1198).4 -y^P : see cr - n - It occasionally

happens that 5^ has been substituted for

yap, as here (Cobet, N. L. p. 419); but

the converse case is far more common(Headlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. 119).5 f. iroiKiXo|JLT]Ti8s drat -TrTjfJLaTWV,

'lit. "wily mischiefs of calamity." The

genitive is one of quality, or definition =TTTjyuara fapovaai. The Homeric epithetof Odysseus is given to the area, because

these mischiefs are half-personified, as

subtle tempters of men's minds. Cf. v. 2.'

(J.) There are similar half-personifica-tions in Aesch. Ag. 765, Cho. 465 KCU

Trapdfjiovffos aras|ai/xar6e(rcra TrAcrya.

Stronger is Ag. 397 irpofiovXov TTGUS

a0epros "Aras. For the gen. cf. Aesch.

Cho. 584 Sci/idrwj' axy, Eur. Hel. 1055

ffUTtjptas a/cos. ira<rais...wpais, 'at all

seasons.''

Burges conj. avpcus ("with

ever-varying winds of fortune ") : Lehrs,

fj.Ta\\d<rffovffi )xop4>ais, which might be

taken with Tr^/idrwi/: "with all forms of

calamity." I do not see the need of

emendation.' (J.)

For the metre see on fr. 591. Thescheme, which is repeated, is as follows:

H. rendered, from Nauck's text:

'P"or the Life of Man is the sport of

sorrowful change ;

Dark treacherous Harms float round it,

subtle and strange,And seek occasion against him at every

hour of the day:

Yet with all his opulent blessings, whereis his joy,

If Care's anxiety vex, her malice annoy,And mar his happiness, fretting his

lauded riches away?'

593

ov x/07?T^ 7

"'

av9pa)iT(Dv jjieyav oXfiov airo-

/3A.ei//ar Tavv(f>XoLov yap tcra/xepto?

593. 1 sq. avdpuirov Gleditsch|

&rt /3X<tyat Gleditsch

593 Porphyr. in Stob. flor. 105. 57

(IV p. 944, 6 Hense) 17 re yap atyeipos,

ujj (patrlv dXXoi re /cai nXo^rap^s (fr - inc.

147 Bernardakis), <pt.\oTri>0i)s /cat dreX^s

Trpbs Kapiroyoviav. 8t6 /cat 2o0o/cX?js %v

THTI (f)t]ffiv

'ov xp^---d7ro/3dXXet.' For the

words v ricri Bergk proposed ev Trjpei,

and Bernardakis ei> HOL^CTL; but T. W.Allen has shown that lv TIVL, tv run are

regular formulae in later Greek with the

meaning' in some of his writings, in

certain passages,' etc.; see C. Q. II 216,III 286. Stob.^r. 98. 46 (

= iv p. 837,12 Hense) tv rating (vicl. fr. 592). '^"uiot

...e/97ret.' Here again Bergk conjecturedthat the parallel extracts belonged to the

same chorus. The considerations are

much the same as in fr. 592, but Bergk'scase is weaker.

1 ff. The substantial thought is the

THPEYI 237

ayeipov

Tt? avOpatTTMV TO KOLTOLfJiap 07TCU5

iropcrvvw TO 8* e? avpiov at-

ei Tv<f)Xov epireu.

3 (pvXXois rts (0uXXot<rij' Gleditsch, rts Bergk) scrips! : 6'<ms codd. 4 f^r;

Wagner | auap Blaydes: iyâ/o codd. 5 aSicrra G. Wolff: rj8i(TTa codd.5 sq. TO, 7<i/3 atfpiov ws ^s rvtftXbv 'epiret. Gleditsch

vanity of riches as measured by the frailtyof human life : so Theogn. 725 f. rd yap

irdvra| xpTj/xar' xwt/ ovdels p-

els 'Aldew. See also on Eur. Phoen.

555. diropXc'^cu, which in classical Greekis usually accompanied by et's or wpos, ap-

pears here to govern a single accusative.

The word does not occur elsewhere in

Sophocles. Blaydes conj. avop' es rbv

for dvOp&iruv. The text is open to sus-

picion, but it should be observed that the

passive use of ci7ro/3X^7r60-0cu in Ar. EccL

726, the verbal dirofiXeirTos in Eur. Hec.

355, and the co-ordination with other

transitive verbs in Dem. 19. 265 oi>x OTTWS

. . . KoXdfelV -fit-low T0t)s Tavra TTOlOVVTdS, ClXX'

direfiXeirov, effiXovv, erlnwv, avopas r)yovt>TO

show that dTTo^X^weLv was tending to bear

a transitive force. In late Greek the usageis well established : cf. Philostr. vit. Apoll.

5. 24 irpotovTa. 6e$ taa Q.TT^\TTOV. Lucianvit. auct. 10 OVTU yap diropXfyoi'Tai <re Kal

avdpelov viro\r]\{/ovTai. Anth. Pal. 9. 283"A\7rets

|

at 'Pr/vov -rrpoxoas 6771)5 airofi\t-

Trere. But in Theophr. fr. 8 de vertig. 8

i\Lyyi&<ri Se Kal oi rd v\f/r)\d Kal rd p.eyd\aKal d-jroTOfJia dTrofiXtirovTes the meaning is

'to look down from a height.' If a changewere required, ?rp6s for TTOT' would be the

simplest. Tavu<j>Xoov /ere. :

' For short-

lived as the leaves of the slender poplara man sheds his life' (J.). Some allusion

to the leaves of the poplar appears to be

necessary, since the lines are only a par-ticular application of the famous simile in

Horn. Z 146. But, inasmuch as dwopdX-Xei requires a personal subject, I have

preferred <pu\\ois TLS to <f)uXXoiffii> (see cr.

n.): TIS is then collective, as in At. 965(with J.'s note). J. was inclined either to

read dvdpuirov in v. i or to substitute rts

KX&ffiv for Sorts; but the latter is open to

the objection that the /cXtoves do not perish

every season. Duentzer omitted yap andretained &TTIS. With respect to the mean-

ing of ravvQXoiov, ]. writes: '//. 16. 767

ravv<pXoi6v re updveiav (" jw00M-barked

cornel-tree," A. Lang). Leaf adloc. says,

"with thin bark." He remarks that

"thin" or "smooth" generally suit the

compounds of raw- indifferently, and are

preferable to "long," though this is thesense of rava6s.

'

But the traditional ex-

planation of Tavti<f>\oios as = ' with long-stretched bark,' i.e.

' of tall or slender

growth'

(L. and S.) appears to be correct

here. J. quotes Horn, t] 106 ofci re 0tfXXa/j.aKedv7)S alyeipoio, K 5 ro paKpai T' atyeipoi.4 ff.

' Let a man so live as to providebest for the happiness of each day ; theevent of the morrow ever comes unfore-

seen.' &CMU: see cr. n. The Ionic formoccurs in El. 157, and O. C. 1213, so that

it seems unnecessary to change it. Forthe collective TIS with jussive verb cf. Eur.Hriid. 827 (n.), Aesch.um. 549 irpbsTddeTLS TOKWV <r^8as eD TrpoTiuv...ZffTw, Xen.

Cyr* 3- 3- 6 1 (Holden). The sentiment is

similar to that of Matth. 6. 34 ,ur? ovv fjLept-

fj.vriffr)Tels Tyvatipiov Tjydp avpiovfj.epifj.vri-

o~ei eavrr/r dpKerbv rfj ri/u.tpa r/ KaKia avrrjs:

cf. Eur. fr. 196 ri dfjr' tv &Xty fj.ri (ra0ei

jSe^/cores |

ov ^dêv cos ^5ia"ra /A?; Xvirov-

pevoi; Her. 503 fJUKpd jjv rd TOV fiiov, |

TOVTOV 5' STTCOS r/5tcrra 5ia7repd<rere | î)/j.tpas es V^KTO. ^ \virovpevoi. Wilamo-witz well illustrates by referring to the

v8vfj,la of Democritus (fr. 189). Tr. fr.

adesp. 95 irdcriv de BVTJTOIS /SouXo/ocat irapai-veo~a.i

| Tov(prj/j.epov ffiv ^5^ws. For rdKar* a|iap cf. Phil. 1089 (Jebb's n.).

dSio-ra : see cr. n. For- the principles

governing the restoration of a for rj in

dramatic lyrics see Tucker's Choephori,

p. 246. Tv|>X6v is unseen, as in Track.

1104 TV<t>\r)s UTT' ariys (J.). H. quotesFind. 01. 12. 9 T&V oe yweXX6vTWf rerv-

<j>\(avTOu. <(>paoal. Add Pyth. 10. 63 rd 6'

eis Irtavrdp dr^K/j-aprov irpoi>oij<rat.

H. renders:' Never before thy view

Let a man's great Wealth be a star;For his days that flourish are fewAs the long-stemmed poplar's are ;

As the tree that sheddeth in sorrowHer shaken leaves to the ground:

ZOO>OKAEOYI

Let a man live, being a man,With brief dispose for the day,

As within that narrower spanTo enjoy what pleasure he may;

For the path is blind of the morrow,And darkness wrappeth it round.'

The metrical scheme is :

For the hypercatalectic colon (v. 3) see

on fr. 591.

594

594 Hesych. I p. 70 aiy\r)' xXtSuij'

(alyXrjxldwv cod.: corr. Scaliger). 2o0o-K\i)$ Typei. [X<-TUV] Kal irtSf] trapd 'Eiri-

X<**PW & Bd/cxcus (fr. 20 K.). M. Schmidt,whom Nauck follows, was probably rightin regarding %trwi' as an interpolation in-

tended to replace the corrupt xûv - Seealso Bekk. anecd. p. 354, 17 aty\v)...Kal

X'hlSuV dt TLS OVTUS KO\ITO. ZviOl 6t faffl'

a">jfj.aivt Kal rbv irepLirbOLov K6<T/Ji,ov i) rbv

(1. TO.) dyU0i5ect f) aTrXws \l/e\\iov. crrj/maivei

5 Kal TTJV Trtdijv 7) aiyXrj, ci>s nap* 'Eiri-

This is derived from Pausanias

the Atticist (ed. Schwabe, p. 95). Hesych.I.e. aiy\as- dyw0i5âs, Kal \Âta rd irepl

Tyv VVLV TOV ap6rpov. There is enoughhere to show that afyXt) could be usedfor a personal ornament, whether as

made with shining metal or set with

precious stones. Probably, but not ne-

cessarily, an armlet is meant : Asius fr.

13 K. 5cufid\eoi 5 ^XtSwi/es ap' dfJL(j>l

(3paxioaii> yaw. But this fragment shouldnot be used to explain Phil. 830, for whichsee C. Jt. xxv 246.

595

595 Arist. poet. 16 p. i454b36 etdrj

Se dvayvupiffeus, irpuTi) ptv TJ aTexvoTdrr)

...rj 8td rdov arjfjieiuv . . . detirepai d at ire-

i VTTO TOV TTOITJTOU, 5lO d

rtfj 2000/cXeoiis Trjpel rj TOV

Tyrvvhitt was the first to recognize that

KcpKiSos (jxovTJ are the actual words of

Sophocles. For the circumstances see

Introductory Note, and cf. Apollod. 3.

194 i] 5 v<j>-f)va.(ra iv ir^Tr\^> ypd/m,fj.aTa did

TOVTWV ^/j.r]vvae Hp6Kvrj rds tdias <Tv/j.(f>opds.

The tradition of Sophocles seems to be

closely followed by Achill. Tat. 5. 5 ij

yap îXo^Xas TCX^ ffiuir&aav evp-rjKe

v<j>aivei ydp irir\ov ayye\ov Kal

SpdjU-a TrXe/cei rat? KpbKais Kal fj.i/ueiTat

TVJV y\u>TTai> i) x^tpi Kai NpOKjtTjs TOIS

6<t>6a\fjiOLS rd TWV WTWV /jwjvvei Kal wpbsavTT)v a Trtirovde TTJ KepKidi XaXe?. It

should be observed that, whereas Apollo-dorus intimates that letters inwoven werethe medium of information, Achilles (5. 3)describes a picture of the outrage as actu-

ally embroidered on the robe. Moreoverthe latter represents Philomela as presentwhile Procne examines the picture : that,at any rate, cannot be Sophoclean. Notethat KepKiSos practically= #0ao>ta, andcf. Eur. ffec. 1153 /ce/>/d5' 'HSwi'^s %e/9os |

TJVOVV. <f>b>VTJ was not intended to suggestthe noise of the moving shuttle : see onfr. 890.

THPEYI TPITTTOAEMO! 239

TPIT7TOAEMOI

Pliny (n. h. 1 8. 65 = Soph. fr. 600) states that the Triptolemuswas produced 145 years before the death of Alexander. SinceAlexander died in 323 B.C., the date of the Triptolemus is

accordingly fixed as 468 B.C. If Pliny's remark is to be construed

strictly, the Triptolemus was put on the stage in the year before

the production of the Septem contra Tliebas of Aeschylus. It hasbeen observed that the fragments of the Triptolemus recall the

Prometheus Vinctus, not only by reason of the structure and com-

pass of the speech in which Demeter despatched Triptolemus onhis mission, but also by the appearance of the particular phraseaddressed by Prometheus to lo 1

. The date of the Prometheus is

uncertain, and some recent authorities place it later than 468 B.C.2

They do not seem to have noticed that, if the relevance of the

Sophoclean fragments is admitted, there can be no questionwhich of the two poets was the imitator. Although there is

no good reason for discrediting Pliny's evidence, Welcker 3

minimized its importance by interpreting it to mean only that

the subject of Triptolemus was handled by Sophocles, whocommenced to write for the stage in 468. For that year, in

which Apsephion was archon, was famous as the occasion of the

first appearance of Sophocles in the Dionysiac contest at the ageof 28, when he was adjudged the first prize to the chagrin of

Aeschylus4

. There are, in any case, sufficient grounds for

believing that the Triptolemus was an early work, belonging to a

time when the author was still largely influenced by the mannerof his great predecessor. We should not therefore be surprisedto find in it a plot free from complicated action, together with anabundance of narrative and description.

The scene of the play was almost certainly Eleusis- Tripto-lemus is an Eleusinian chieftain in Horn. h. Dem. 153, which is

the earliest mention of his name, and is one of those to whomthe institution of the Eleusinian mysteries was entrusted (ib. 474).But the Homeric hymn, in which Triptolemus only appears

incidentally, was not the source of the play of Sophocles.The later authorities, who, of course, drew upon Attic

sources, agree in representing Triptolemus as the favourite of

1 See on fr. 597.2 Dieterich in Pauly-Wissowa I 1079, Sikes and Willson, Introd. p. xxxvm; on

the other side see Wecklein, Einl. p. 24, and Christ-Schmid, Gr. Lit. p. 297.3

p. 310.4 Plut. dm. 8, Marm. Par. 56.

24o I000KAEOYI

Demeter, who inspired him to invent the plough, and to teachmen the art of agriculture. Cf. Verg. Georg. i. 19 uncique puermonstrator aratri. Callim. h. Dem. 22 aviKa Tpt7rroXeyLto9 dyaOaveSiSdo-Kero re^vav. The goddess also sent him forth fromEleusis in a magic chariot drawn by a pair of dragons

1,to

traverse the earth, and to diffuse among mankind the blessingswhich had been first bestowed upon Attica. Cf. Ov. Trist. 3. 8. 2nunc ego Triptolemi cuperem conscendere currus,

\

misit in ignotamqui rude semen kumum. Cornut. 28 p. 53, 22 ravTijv (i.e. corn)8e /JLvOeverai cnrelpai Sta rij^ oiKov/jLewrjs 6 TptTrroXeyiio? o

'EXeucrtV/09 dva/Sifiao-dar)? avrov eVt, Trrepwrwv paK.ovrwv oîj/ma

TJ79 A>7yLt7;Tpo9. Himer. or. 25. 3 TOV ^\evaivuov efyrjftov dpOfjvai,

\0709 77-^09 AriiJirjTpos, Lva rrjv vofJidba Tpcnreâv rj/biepoi,?

Trvpols. For the distribution in this manner of77,0-6/909

throughout Greece see Pausan. 7. 18. 2, 8. 4. i. The orators werenever weary of pointing out to their audience the distinction ofAttica as the original home of agriculture

2.

But there was a wide-spread divergence of opinion concerningthe identity of Triptolemus, as may be seen from the variant

accounts given in Pausan. i. 14. 2 3. This shows that, though his

civilizing mission was accepted as beyond question, the story of

Triptolemus did not rest upon any dominant literary tradition.

How then did Sophocles treat the subject ? From the fragmentsthemselves all that can be made out with certainty is that the

play contained a description of the journey of Triptolemus overthe earth in the chariot drawn by serpents. Frs. 597 599, and

possibly also frs. 600 604, belong to the speech of DemetenSeveral of the words or phrases refer to crops, or articles of diet :

see frs. 606 6io 4. But we must look elsewhere for indications

of the tragic conflict, which must somehow or other have beenconnected with the favour shown to Triptolemus. (i) Gruppe,.

Ariadne, p. 358, found it in the story of Lyncus, the Scythianking, who, as related by Ov. Met. 5. 642 66 1, attempted to putTriptolemus to death, in order to supplant him, and was subse-

quently transformed into a lynx. (2) Petersen, in a review of

Welcker, treated Charnabon (fr. 604 n.) as the chief opponent5.

It is unnecessary to discuss these suggestions, in view of what

1It is altogether improbable that this was an invention of Sophocles : see Gruppe,

5445. Philochorus evidently regarded it as belonging to ancient tradition, when herationalized it as a ship of war (FHG I 388).

2e.g. Isocr. 4. 25.

3 See also Frazer's note.4 No doubt most of these describe the diet of the peoples whom Triptolemus was

to visit.5 Nauck refers to a Hanover dissertation of Jul. Schonemann (1886), p. 118, as

reviving this opinion. Knaack also thought that Charnabon appeared in the play(Jahrb.f. Philol. cxxxv [1887], p. 800).

TPITTTOAEMO! 241

will presently be said about Welcker's theory. (3) Welckerfound a clue to the chief subject of the tragedy in the concludingpart of Hygin. fab. 147. The other authorities which containthe same story are Serv. Verg. Georg. 1.19, schol. Stat Theb. 2. 382,and Mytkogr. Vat. 1 1 99. It is said that, after Triptolemus hadreturned from his journey, a king named Cepheus or Celeus

sought to kill him through jealousy, but was compelled byDemeter to yield his kingdom to her favourite. Triptolemus is

represented as the son of Eleusinus, and is declared to havefounded a town called Eleusis after his father, who had insti-

tuted in honour of Demeter the feast known as Thesmophoria.Welcker's view was accepted by Preller (Myth. I p. 636) and byH. W. Stoll in Roscher II 1028, but it involves the difficulty that if

the drama included the departure of Triptolemus, as well as thesuccessful issue of the conflict after his return, the unity of timewas destroyed

1. Welcker frankly admitted this, but claimed that

the successful completion of the adventurous journey rather thanits inception deserved to be represented, and that the foundation

of the Eleusinia was subsequent to the spread of agriculture over

the world by Triptolemus. He escaped from the dilemma by the

assumptions that Triptolemus on his return himself described

how he had been despatched on his mission by Demeter, andthat the goddess was not represented on the stage at this periodof the action. The expedient is hardly successful. I think that,

if any one will examine frs. 597 599 without prejudice, he will

hesitate to conclude that they are all taken from a speech of

Triptolemus describing the nature of the commission which was

assigned to him. Moreover, Welcker's assumption contradicts

the express statement of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (fr. 598),that Sophocles put Demeter on the stage giving directions to

Triptolemus concerning the lands which he would have to

traverse in spreading abroad the bounty of the goddess. It is

unreasonable to reject the single piece of trustworthy evidence

which bears on the plot in favour of a mere guess for it is

nothing more that the conflict with Cepheus provided the

climax of the action. So far from agreeing with Welcker that

the departure of Triptolemus could not have formed the con-

clusion of the play, I believe that the gift of corn was the maintheme to which the rest of the action was subordinate. Themomentous character of the commission entrusted to Triptolemus,and the lustre which it shed upon Attica in the eyes of posterity,combined to make his departure on a divinely ordered journey

eminently suitable as the finale of a play in which the young1 This consequence was accepted by Ahrens, who compared the Eumcnides of

Aeschylus as a similar case.

p. H. 16

242 !04>OKAEOY!

dramatist sought to celebrate the Eleusinian hero for the first

time before a wider public. But that which chiefly ^needed

explanation was the reason why Triptolemus had been so highlyblessed. In order to discover an answer, we must return to the

domestic history of Celeus, the Eleusinian, whose house washonoured by a visit from Demeter, when, disguised as an old

woman, she was mourning for the loss of Persephone. In the

Homeric hymn the daughters of Celeus found her at the 'Maiden

well,' and introduced her as nurse to their infant brother

Demophon. Metanira, the mother, was alarmed by the strange

proceedings of the goddess, who stealthily by night bathed the

child in the fire, in order to make him immortal. So she cried

aloud in dismay ;but Demeter was wroth with her, and put

down the child. Before leaving the house, she revealed herself,

and explained how the mother's folly had frustrated her son's

happiness. This story was subsequently combined with the local

tradition which made Triptolemus the minister of Demeter's

bounty. Thus in Ov. Fast. 4. 507 560 the child's name has

been changed to Triptolemus, and the goddess, when interrupted,

promises that he shall be the first man to plough and sow, as a

compensation for the loss of his immortality. In Hygin. fab.

147 the facts are similar, but the father's name, as we have seen,is different, and he is killed by the goddess in anger. There is

good reason to suppose that this version goes back to Panyassis(EGF p. 263). The death of the father, who however is called

Celeus, is mentioned also in Nonn. 19. 85, where Demeter con-

soles Triptolemus and Metanira. But the death of Celeus

seems to have occurred after the gift of corn, although the

description is far from clear;and the story perhaps ran parallel

to the legend of Icarius. In Apollod. I. 31 f. the mother

interrupts, as in the hymn, with the result that the child

(Demophon) was consumed in the flames. Demeter then pro-vided the winged car for Triptolemus, the elder of Metanira's

children, and gave him wheat to sow over the whole world. It

is obvious that, if Triptolemus was to be made the hero of a play,and the events which led to his mission were to be included in

the scope of the action, the version preserved in Apollodoruswas alone suitable for the purpose

1. It is therefore suggested

that the identification of Triptolemus with the elder son of

Metanira may have been taken from Sophocles, and that the

earlier part of his play included the coming of Demeter to

Eleusis, and the failure of her first attempt to reward the hospi-

tality of Celeus.

1Hartung overlooked this when he supposed that in Sophocles Triptolemus was

Demeter's nurseling (p. 159).

TPITTTOAEMO! 243

Strabo 27 compares the play with the prologue to the Bacchae,as illustrating the carelessness in geographical matters of later

writers as contrasted with Homer : o yue*/ rov kiovvvov Imbvrard edvr) (f>pdci)v, o Se rov TpL7rr6\fj,ov rr/v KaraffrreLpoîkvrjvra fjuev rroXv Sieo-rwra o-vvdrrrovcrw 77^9, rd Be

Brunck inferred that it was a satyr-play on the strength offrs. 606, 610, 6 1 1, but has found no one to agree with him.

For fragments conjecturally assigned to this play see onfrs. 804, 837, 844, 959, 1089, 1116.

596

opaKovre Oaipov d

596 SpdKovTe Koen : bpdnovTa Etym. M.| daipbv Rufus al. : 5' alpov Etym. M.

596 Etyjn. M. p. 395, u 7TXtV0-e<r0cu

yap TO fidSrjv oiafiaiveiv, Kal TT\Ly/j,a TO

8idffTTf]fJ.a TWV TTob&V. Zo00/cX?7S

/U(fj 'Spd.KOVTa 5' alpov d,u0i7rXt

(ei'X?70oTe DV).' Trepi^d8fjv. Ruf. Ephes.p. 147, 4 (cf. p. 240 f.) TO 8e /Lteraî) ovxôvKal lyTToa-TTj/xaros Kal /mtjpov 7rXt%d5a, Kal

r6 8ia/3aiviv 8iair\icro'eu''

/cat

' '

6aipdi'...i\r)(f>6Te,' ucnrep av ei

6T (j3e/3\77 Cd) T6v daipbv.Rufus was a medical writer of the age of

Trajan, from whom Pollux made consider-

able excerpts in his second book: see

Poll. i. 172, where the same extract

appears with unimportant variations.

Schol. Ar. Ach. 217 tvdev /cat TO

/j,<f>iir\ij; irapd So0ofcXet v

(hence the same appears in

Suid. s.vv. dirir\iaTo, irepifidbriv, 7rX^|,

and Greg. Cor. p. 548). Hesych. np. 297 6aip6s

'

6 o(."t)Kb}v airo TOV dvu

[dpovs ^ws KOLTW <TT/)o0eu$ TTJs dtipas, TI

a%uv. 2o0o/cX7)s TpnTToXt/j.^. Eustath.

//. p. 914, 34 (Ael. Dion. fr. 391 Schw.)datpbs 6 aûv irapd 2o0o/(Xe?. Cf. Phot.

ed. Reitz. p. 103, 10 d/A0i7rX/'

?rXi^ yap TO

The line describes the car drawn bywinged dragons or serpents, whichDemeter gave to Triptolemus at the

commencement of his journey.'It may

be seen on a vase from Kertsch, figuredin Baumeister's Denkmaler, p. 1858.The two serpents have twined the middle

parts of their bodies round the axle,thus harnessing themselves to the chariot,

in which is seated Triptolemus, his headwreathed with a white band, from whichtwo yellow corn-ears stand up : in his left

hand he holds a sceptre; with his righthe holds out a shallow saucer, into whichDemeter is pouring wine, as he departs.'

(J.) Frazer on Pausan. 7. 18. 3 (iv p. 142)

gives a list of the references to Triptolemusand his car in ancient works of art (seealso Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 569), andremarks :

' Sometimes the car has wingsattached to the wheels, but no serpents;sometimes it is drawn by serpents without

wings ; sometimes both the serpents andthe wings are depicted attached to the

car.' The literary authorities speak of a

car drawn by two winged serpents :

Apollod. i. 32 Sl(ppov irTTjv&v opaxovTUv,Cornut. 28 p. 54, r TTTepuT&v dpaKdvTuv

schol. Aristid. in p. 54 Dind.

o<f>euv TrTe/owTwv, Nonn. Dionys.13. i9off. TptTTToXe/uos... bl<ppov

v&ra 8pai<bvT<i)v, Ov. Met. 5.

642 geminos deafertilis angues |

curribus

admovit frenisque coercuit ora. Fast.

4. 497 frenatos curribus angues | iungit.The view that the magic car was aninvention of Sophocles has no probability

(see Introductory Note). Gruppe, p. 8072,thinks that serpents were associated with

the sun, and that it was as a sun-god that

Triptolemus rode in the winged car.

O. Kern, Eleusin. Beitr. Halle, 1909,

p. ii, shows that Sophocles drew his

description from the Eleusinian mystery-

8cup6v here is clearly the axle, and the

16 2

244 !0OKAEOYS

connexion between this meaning and that

found in Horn. M 459 (iron pegs workingin stone sockets, serving as hinges to a

door, as explained by Leaf) appears in

the explanation of Hesychius (I.e.). It

should, however, be mentioned that in

Poll. i. 253 GaipoL appears to be the

name given to the side-boards whichform part of the vireprepia or body of the

car. d(x<f>iirXftj is glossed by Trepifiddrjv

(see above), and here suggests that the

serpents drew the car by holding the axle

within their grip, that is to say, by coilingthemselves round it (wcrirep av el e<p-t)

7rept/3e/377/c6re rbv 0aip6v). The wordmeans strictly

'

having the legs a-straddle'

(Achill. Tat. i. i: Europa riding on the

bull, ov TrepLJSddrjv dXXd /card wXevpdv),and is the exact equivalent of dyu0i/3aWin Eur. Phoen. 1406 (n.), which in prosewould be 7re/u/3aVre (wepifiejSrjKbTe). Cf.

Archil, fr. 58 ov 0iX<?w [teyav ffTpaTtjybvov8t diaTreTrXiy/uLevov, which corresponds

to eu Stands. The cognates of

are discussed by Cobet, V.L. p. 135, who

quotes Hesych. Ill p. 346 ir\iyp.a- dirb

T&V KV\ioi*ev(j}v Kail rraXaLovT&v , orav

Trepifidvres rots ffKeXeffi /far^xuxrtz/.

Thus in the account of a wrestling-match in Heliod. 10. 32 a^tyifiaiveLrots iroffi Kal rots /card roi)j /3ov[3&vas rd

aKeXy Karcnreipas, i.e. 'pinning his legs

by gripping them with his feet and the

inside of his thighs.' Strattis fr. 63, I

729 K. rd dvydrpia \ -nrepl rijv XeKavrjvairavra irepiireTrXiy/êva.

There is little doubt that Trooxrt ?rept-

TrXt/crots should be read in Theocr. 18. 8,

of the maze of interlacingfeet. See also

Heyne on Horn. \^ 120. The derivation

of these words does not appear to be

known, and Curtius refused to connect

them with TrXeKta (G. E. 165): Headlam

pointed out that the senses of diairXiaffeiv,

7rXi, TrXtxas 'the fork,' correspond to

those of the Engl. split (C.R. xvii 292).

597

ere 8* eV fypevos SeXrotcri rovs e/xovs Xoyous597 <re 5' lv V: ou5' av A, 6es 5' ev Scaliger, <ri> 5' lv Meineke, 6ov 5' tv Nauck

597 Schol. Find. Ol. 10 [IT], i xai

ev HpirrroXefJUf)'

o-^ 5' ev...

In Aesch. Prom. 815 the phrase is

used by Prometheus, when instructing loin the course her wanderings are to take :

o"oi irp&TOv 'lot TroXvdovov TrXdvrjv <ppda(t), \

TIV eyypa<f>ov av /j.vr)/jLo<nv deXroLS (ppev&v.Hence it may be safely assumed that

these are the words of Demeter addressedto Triptolemus. The whole of her speech ,

describing the wanderings of Triptolemus,seems to have been based upon the Pro-metheus of Aeschylus (Haigh, Tragic

Drama, p. 144) : see the IntroductoryNote. Cf. Phil. 1325 Kai raOr' eTrtarw, /cat

ypdfiov (ppevuiv ecru. Track. 682 TraprfKO,

dea^dv ovftev, dXX' <rq)6fJi'r)Vj [ %aX/c?5s

OTTOJS dvffVLTTTov eK de\TOv ypa<f>7)]'. Aesch.Cho. 448 rotaOr' aKovuv ev <f>pealv ypa.<f>ov.

Eum. 275 5e\Toypd<j>({) de trdvr' eirwrrq.

<f>pvi. Suppl. 185 rA/i' ewrj BeXrov-

/jJevovs. Pind. OL 10. 2 irbdi (ppevbs

tuas yeypa.irTa.1.. The publication ofDrachmann's edition of the scholia hasaltered the data (see cr. n.), but Scaliger's6es remains an attractive conjecture.

598

TO,'

eôTTLcrOe êtyaos es ra Sefia

OivaiTpCa re iracra /cat

/coXTros Aiyvo-TiKij re yrj ere

598. 1 et's codd. 2 Tvpp-rjviKbs codd.

598 Dionys. Hal. Ant. Rom. i. 12

fjLaprvpei dt /JLOV ry \6y({) 2o0o/cX^s fji^v

o TpayydoTTOibs ev TpnrToXe/JUf) 8pd/j.ari.

ydp avrtf ^p.-qr^p 8i8d<rKovaa

, b'crrjv x&pav dvayKacrBrjareTai

airelpwv rot? dodeiffiv UTT' avrrjs Kapirols

TPIHTOAEMOZ 245

'a rjs'IraXi'as, ij <TTLV curb d"/cpas 'lawvylas

iropd/uov SiKeXtKou, /cat /xerd rouro

dvriKpv atf/a/mtvy 2i/feX/as eVl TTJV

'IraXiav avdts avaffrptyei Kal rdr&v OIKOIJVTUV TT]V irapaXiov

ravTr]v edv&v die^px^rat, rrjv apxty a7I"o

TTJS Qivurp&v oi/cT^reus Tronjo-aêV??. dir6-

i 'rd 5' e"67ri(r0e... Several.'

The extract is taken from the speechof Demeter to Triptolemus. J. thus

paraphrases Dionysius :

'after mentioning

eastern Italy first which extends fromthe lapygian promontory to the Sicilian

strait (iropQuov) she next touches on

Sicily, which lies opposite; then shereturns to Italy, taking the western coast,

and enumerates the principal nations whodwell on that seaboard, beginning withthe settlements of the Oenotri.'

1 rd 8' |6mo-e. '(i) Ellendt andL. and S. take this as = "

thereafter,"

deincepS) as eôTricrw is used in Od. 4. 35,and often in other poets. (2) It mightalso mean "to the west," if Tri-ptolemusis supposed to be moving down the east

coast. But, as it ought to come nextafter the mention of Sicily, this seemsless likely.

: So J. writes, remarking in

respect of \ctpos es TO, 8eia that

'Triptolemus may be supposed to havearrived in Sicily, and to be facing west-

ward. The west coast of Italy wouldthen be on his right.' The supposition ap-

pears arbitrary, and the explanation of rdeo7rt(r0e open to grave doubt; for the

close connexion with xeipos es ra 5etafavours a local rather than a temporal

meaning, and the run of the sentence

suggests that it is the subject and not anadverbial accusative. Further, there is

no evidence that dirlffw etc. can mean'the west.' On the contrary 6iria8t.a

denotes the east in Cleomed. circ.

doctr. I. I. p. 12 6irL<r0ia 8 rd Trpbs

rrj avaroiXj}' dirb TOIJT&V yap rri rb

2airpo<rOft> irpbeiffiv (sc. 6 tf60>tos) : but this

is a technical (Stoic) passage, which has

little bearing on the interpretation of

Sophocles. For these reasons I conclude

that, although the words es ra. deid relate

to x fipfc (Theocr. 28. 18 re^s tiri 5eid

Xei/>6s, Horn. h. Herm. 153 xêV dpiffrepd xeipds etpywv), the latter is

also to be connected with ^6-n-iffde, andthat this is established by fr. 534 eôiriffu

Xe/>6s. So Bacchyl. 13. 10 rd Trap x eipfaof what is close at hand, and similar

phrases, in which xeiP^ expresses the

local relation of the person in question,

although the mention of the hand as a

separate member has no particular signifi-cance. Cf. virb x Wa i ava Xfipa i andso forth. The meaning is simply 'the

regions lying behind you on the right,'and the words ra...5eta form the subject,to which OivuTpia...yTJ is attributive.

We are thus required to imagineTriptolemus as situated on the Italian

side of the straits of Messina and lookingtowards Sicily : that this position was

contemplated by the speaker is suggestedby the words in which Dionysius refers

to Sicily as r^s avTiKpti (supra).2 f. Olvwrpia. . .iracra,

' he is to traverse

it from end to end. This name was

given by the Greeks to the western sea-

board of Italy from the straits as far

north as the gulf of Paestum, thus

including Bruttium and Lucania. Theregion north of Oenotria was called bythe Greeks Opikia (Kiepert, Hellas,

map n): north of that came Tyrrhenia.The name 'IraXta was with the Greeksin the fifth century coextensive with

Oenotria and lapygia, but not with

the whole peninsula (Bevan, p. 484).'

(J.) Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece,

p. 259, gives reasons for holding that the

Oenotrians of south Italy were Pelasgians.

Tvpo-rjviKos KoXiros.' This must mean

here the mare Etruscum, the sea off the

coast of Latium and Etruria, as it

represents the stage northwards fromOenotria to Liguria. The mare Tyr-rhenum, ordinarily so called, was off the

coasts of Lucania and Bruttium. Aiyu-OTTIKTJ T yfj. The A/yues, a collective

name for the dwellers in the Maritime

Alps of north-west Italy. They werefound also in ancient Corsica (Kiepert,Anc. Geo. 204).' (J.) For the Ligurianssee Ridgeway, op, cit. p. 240, whoidentifies them with the Aborigines.

246 Z000KAEOYI

599o /' >

CT

599 c

599 Schol. Soph. O.C. 504 xpêu/i,' êupetV] xPe^7 (x/37? conj. Blaydes andNauck needlessly) ftrrcu /card avvaXoi^vXptfffTai. avrl TOU XP6^7? o"rai, SfjXoCrcu

5 TavTov Ty derj<rei' Kal v TptTrroX^/iC;;

'X/JT^trrai 5^ o~* tvdfrd' aSrts.'

It is unnecessary to repeat here the

facts collected in Jebb's Appendix to

O.C. 504 (p. 280), but it should be addedthat the truth of Ahrens's view is nowmore generally recognized (Brugmann,

avris

hs vulgo

Comp. Gr. n p. 488 E. tr. ; Kuehner-Blass II 222). Wilamowitz on Eur.Her. 311 advocated the restoration of

XP^ in Eur. fr. 733 ro 7dp XP7? ('XPet*}V

codd.) /ielfoj/ T) rd /JLTJ XP&V>and Diels

prints rd XP7? fovra in Democritus (frs.

174, 256). I cannot see the advantage of

writing xpVffTai - No doubt XP7?" was a

unit, as exp7?" shows, but xp^TaL cannotever have been regarded as an ordinaryfuture. For avns see on fr. 314, 227 f.

600

\et fortunatam Italiam frumento canere candido\6OO Plin. n. h. 18. 65 hae fuere

sententiae Alexandra Magno regnante,cum clarissima fnit Graecia atque in toto

orbe terrarum potentissirna, ita tamen ut

ante mortem eius annis fere CXLVSophocles poeta in fabula Triptolemo

frumentum Italicum ante cuncta lauda-

verit, ad verbum translata sententia f

et

fortunatam . . . candido.'

The fertility of the Italian corn-lands,as compared with those of their owncountry, was well known to the Greeks.

Polybius (2. 15) instances the cheapnessof wheat in his own time as a proof of

the abundance of corn grown in Italy;and Strabo (242) praises the productive-

ness of Campania. The Athenians, wholived principally on imported corn (Dem.20. 31), proposed in the year 325-324 B.C.

to found a colony on the shore of theAdriatic for the purpose of the corn-trade

(CIA II 809; Dittenberger, 6>//.2153).

No doubt evda.lfj.ova was the original of

fortunatam : cf. I5ausan. i. 12. i T^V re

'IraXi'ai' StSdo'/foi'rey, uis evdai/j-ovias %vK.a

avrl TrAffrjs et-rj TT)S 'EXXdSos.

For Pliny's reference to the productionof the Triptolemus see Introductory Note.For the meaning of 'IraXta see on fr.

598, 2 ; and for the cultivation of thevine there cf. Ant. 1119, Lucian navig.23-

601

6O1 Hesych. n p. 356 'IXXupts 701/77

avrl rou 'IXXupts yeved (yovta cod. : corr.

Musurus). ypdfarat 8 Kal yvvf). 6 de

KaXXiorparos yvrj avrl rou 777' xP^VTai

yap OVTWS. So0o/cX?7S T/JiTrroXîcy. M.Schmidt preferred to write 'IXXu/uj 701/77

'

...yovta, which is hardly intelligible.Musurus was surely right : so rptrocr7r6/3y

701/77 in Aesch. Pers. 820 is explained byschol. M as Tplrr) rdv (jLerayevfGTtpiav

yeveq..

It is hazardous to guess at the context,but it is probably safe to infer that -yovrj

had a concrete sense, perhaps that of

prodiice. Illyria was famous for cattle

rather than corn: see [Arist.j mir. ausc.

128, quoted by Grote in p. 423. Wecannot tell what moved Callistratus to

support the variant 71/77; but it is sur-

prising to find the authority of an earlyAlexandrian cited in favour of the fem.

7^77, which since Elmsley's note on Eur.Hclid. 839 has been always condemnedas a late error. 71/1/77 was probably amere blunder; and it is worthy of men-tion that 71/i/cu and 7op<x are variants for

the genuine 71^01 in Ant. 569.

TPITTTOAEMOS 247

602

ovos Se AC/oacrTreS* < rjv >6O2 T> add. Bergk:

6O2 Schol. Eur. Tro. 221 rtj/es <pa<ri

Kai 7T}v 'Pci/AT;? Kal Triv KapxySbva irpb

(Schwartz : dirb A) TT^S Trpurrr/s 6Xvfj.Tri.ddos

KTlffdijVCLi. 2iO<pOK\T)S 5 <:7ri T&V KOLlp&V

1i)t>cu (ijjKiffQai Schwartz,

Wilamowitz) TTJV Kapx^Sbva, v

Cobet conjectured from KpdaTreSes the

reading of cod. N [a copy of A, accordingto Schwartz] Kpd<nred' Z<TT\ B. do-Trdfoucu,

but! it is very unlikely, as van Leeuwenremarked (de Soph. Ai. authentia, p. 38),that Sophocles in his earliest play divided

a line between two speakers in this way.

Blaydes, suspecting Kpd<nre8a, suggestedTrdyKapira TreSt' or the like. Hermann,followed by Ahrens, read TrpocrrdrT;!/. It

is to be regretted that the quotation breaksoff so abruptly : why did Demeter, if she

is the speaker, take occasion to greet the

name of Carthage? Since the Triptolernus

KpdffTreda d<T7rao/iu Awas an early play, it must be rememberedthat the name of Carthage had becomefamiliar to the Greeks at the end of the

Persian wars in consequence of the simul-

taneous struggle waged by their kinsmenin Sicily against the Punic invaders. Theanachronism mentioned by the schol. neednot trouble us : although the name doesnot occur elsewhere in tragedy, many be-

lieve that Carthage is referred to in Eur.Phoen. 204. Eudoxus of Cnidos (c. 365B.C.) is quoted immediately before the

above extract in connexion with the

foundation of Carthage, but a centuryearlier Sophocles may well have treated

the settlement as being of immemorial

antiquity. For Kpdo-irtS' cf. Eur. fr. 381ffxôbv Trap' avTois Kpao"irtdois

Suppl. 66 1 Trpos Kpao~Tre5oi<ri

TeTayp.vov.

603

6O3 Proverb, cod. S (Paris, suppl.Gr. 676; L. Cohn Zu den Paroemiogr.in Breslauer philol. Abhandl. II 2 p. 71)

<n\(piov \i/m.(ji}v'

ô<f>oK\ijs TpnrToXtfJUj)

Trepl TTJS (1. 7775) fv Ai|8irj7 rb <rt\<pioi>

ot de e!56s TI TT}S Aifivys <ri\-

Hesych. IV p. 30 cri\<piov Xei/x.uu'.

trepi (eirl Meineke) 7775 ev Aifitirj

TO ffi\(piov 0epou<T7;s Acre. Prov. append.

4. 70 (Paroet/i. I 451) ffi.\<piov \ei/j.<j)v'

eI56s TI TTJS AI/SUTJS ffi\(piov.

H. points out that eI5os here must surelymean a kind of plant, i.e. efSos A.i8vKov

not eldos rrjs Aifivr)s. The text, he sug-

gests, has either arisen from a var. lect.

Trepi TTJJ AiftvTjs TO <ri\<piov (pepotiffrjs, whichhas somehow or other attached itself in

part to elSos, or else there is a lacuna,

e.g. ot 5 eWos <'Hp65oros 5e ^pos> Trjs

Aifiviis TO ai\<pioi>, for Herodotus (4. 169,

192) uses r6 <rL\<f>iov of the district where

the silphium grew. According to Theo-

phrastus (hist. pi. 6. 3. 3) and Pliny (n.

h- 5- 33) tne reg'on was 4000 stadia

square. Leutsch, however, in rejecting

Schott's proposed addition of /Jordj/Tjs,

suggests that etSos is used in the sense of

spice (' speciem odoratam, cuius generiserat silphium: sic enim proprie T& etdyrecentioribus sunt usitata').

What <r\<j>iov (laserpiciuni= lac sirpi-

cum ' milk of silphium,' or laser piceum}really was has long been a matter of con-

jecture. John Evelyn and Bentley (see his

Correspondence, II p. 234 f.) thought it wasthe large umbelliferous plant of Persia andthe East Indies (Ferula or Narthex asa-

foetidd] : see Ellis on Catull. 7. 4, Sonnen-schein on Plaut. Rud. 630. It was largelyused in Greek cookery and also as a

medicine; and -the demand for it wasthe principal reason of the prosperity of

Cyrene, with which town it is alwaysconnected. The trade subsequently de-

cayed, but for what reason is unknown(Neil on Ar. Eq. 893). Ridgeway (EarlyAge. of Greece, pp. 223-228) suggests that

<ri\(piov is to be identified with the Ho-meric lotus-plant, the legend of which is

the embodiment of a vague tradition that

on the north coast of Africa fronting the

Syrtis there grew a plant elsewhere un-

known but possessing rare virtues.

'

248 ZOOKAEO\Z

/ecu

604

9 a/Xet

6O4 6s Terwv Lobeck : on T&V 6's 76 cod. Haun., Sorts TWP c35e cod. Vind.

6O4 Herodian irepi fj.ov. Xc|. p. 9, 30v. 2o0o/cX?7S TptTrroXe/uy

'/cat

The text was restored and the relevancyof the quotation established by Lobeck,

Aglaoph. p. 215, from Hygin. poet. astr.

2. 14 hunc (Ophiuchum) compluresCharnabonta dixerunt nomine Getarum

regem, qui sunt in Mysia regione, fuisse :

qui eodem tempore regno est potitns quoprimum seminafrugum mortalibus tradita

esse existimantur. Ceres enim cunt sua

bcneficia largiretur horninibus, Triptole-

imirn, cuius ipsa fuerat nutrix, in curru

draconum collocatum...iussit omnium na-

tionum agros circumeuntem semina partiri. . .qui cum pervenisset ad eum quern supradiximus Getarum regem, ab eo primumhospitaliter acceptus, deinde . . .insidiis

captus...pene perdidit vitam. Charna-bontis enim iussu cum draco unus eorumesset inter/ectus... Ceres eo venisse et

ereptum adolescenti currum dracone altero

subiecto reddidisse, regem...poena nonmediocri affecisse narratur. Charnabon,who is a doublet of the Scythian Lyncus(Ov. Met. 5. 645) and of the Eleusinian

Celeus or Cepheus (Hygin. fab. 147), is

otherwise unknown; but Carnabas is the

name given by Eustath. //. p. 448, 8 to

the Perrhaebian who took refuge at Zeleia

in the Troad, after killing his father

Triopas. Curiously enough Triopas is

confused with Charnabon in a schol. onOv. Met. i. 138, and an extract quotedby Ellis on Ov. Ib. 287. These two

passages were pointed out by Knaack in

Jahrb. f. Philol. cxxxv (1887) 318 f., but

are not of any independent value in ex-

plaining the tradition which Sophoclesfollowed. This is the earliest reference

to the Getae : cf. Hdt. 4. 93. The trans-

ference of the Balkan tribe to Mysia maybe connected with the flight of Carnabasto Zeleia. For migration between Thraceand Mysia see Macan on Hdt. 7. 20.

605

Se Acus #ctXeia,

6O5 0aXeta Kuster : t.. cod.|

6O5 Hesych. I p. 455/cXvjs

'

ri\6e 5...6euv.' ij 5t'

i-vioi 8 ras Mowras.This line appears to describe one of the

blessings which followed from the gift of

Demeter, when it had been distributed

by Triptolemus. There may have beena contrast with the wretched diet which

prevailed before : see on fr. 606.

The personification of Acus is literaryrather than religious, as is shown by the

adoption of the Homeric epithet (7 420etc.). Similar deifications of abstract

ideas in Sophocles are Ileiflw in fr. 865,

Xot/x6s in O. 7\ 27, <I?d/wa, daughter of

'EXvrt's, in O. T. 157, and Aids "Op/cos in

O. C. 1767. The latter is taken from

Oewv.

rfj cod. : corr. Musurus

lies. Theog. 231, and Gruppe, Gr. Myth.p. 1068, points out that the theogonieshad much to do with the growth of these

abstract deities. irp6<r|3icrTi] here pointsto the same influence : cf. Hes. Theog.363 7rpeo-/3irraTcu Kovpai, and for the wordfr. 582. With Euripides the use of 0e6s

to describe abstract ideas has sunk almostto the level of a stylistic mannerism : see

nn. on Soph. fr. 922, Eur. Hel. 559 f.,

Phoen. 506. For the personification of

abstract ideas in general see Farnell,Cults of the Greek States, v p. 444.The commentator who referred to the

Muses(T-TJV

'Mov<rai' Heinsius) was misled

by 6a\eia.

TPITTTOAEMOI 249

606

>S' T TaXoLivoL SoGcraot>

6O6 Pollux 6. 65 ydpos, u>$ So0o-icX?7s 'oW i]... ydpov.' The name of the

play is preserved by Athen. 67 C 2o0o/f\?)s

T/3i7rro\^y 'roC To.pixnpov ydpov.' Cf.

[Herodian] Philetaer. (in Moerised. Pier-

son, p. 437) o -yd/Jos dpffeviK&s* TOV ix^vuv

ydpov' (Aesch. fr. 211) /ecu ydpov rbv lx-tiveiov So0o/c\7js. If the context of these

passages is examined, there is not muchdoubt that they are all ultimately deducedfrom the same lexicographical source ;

and, though the quotation of Pollux is

the fullest, it is not unlikely that thewords given by Athenaeus are correct.

In that case Pollux or his immediate

authority may have quoted loosely andwithout giving the true order of the

words : the original may have been oi)5'

}]TaXaiva TOV Tapixypov ydpov \

oovo~\

The common origin of the three sources

renders improbable the view to which

Headlam, Blaydes, and Mekler inclined,that Herodian's ydpov rbv ixdveiov should

be quoted as a fragment distinct fromthat preserved by Pollux and Athenaeus.

ypovThe 3>iXeTat/>os is a sorry abridgementwhich does not justify the attribution of

txOueios to Sophocles. It should bestated that Diintzer regarded oovaa as

a corruption of TOV. ]. writes :

'I should

conj. Sous: "nor the wretched feast on a

preserve of salt fish" (when the gifts of

Triptolemus have come, this will be the

people's portion no more).' In that case

dais would be ironical, like the fipaxriaScu'j of Menedemus (Lycophr. fr. 3, TGFp. 8 1 8), who sometimes served ra.pLx<-ov to

his guests. Meineke restored a trochaic

tetrameter, ovotv 17 rdXaiva oovo~a. rov

T. y. ; Bergk an iambic trimeter, <rv 5',

i) rdXaiva, 56s r. 7. Blomfield's rdXcuv'

dXoO<ra rapx'npov is meaningless. ydpov,a sort of caviare, made of brine and

pickled fish. See the commentators onHor. Sat. 2. 8. 46 garo de suds piscisIberi. Zahn in Pauly-Wissowa vn 841 ff.

shows that there were many varieties of

ydpos (gamrn), and that it was by nomeans exclusively a luxury.

607

6O7 Hesych. I. p. 138 a/iaXXcu

(ayuaXXa cod.: corr. Alberti from Etym.M.)

'

dpdy/j.ara, 8^07x77 (S&r/xcu cod.) T&V

dcrraxuwi'. So0o/cX^s T/3t7rroX^^. Etym.Af. p. 76, 46 a/zaXXar TCL 8pdyfj.ara TO,

TOV alrov.

Demeter is naturally the goddess of 38, etc.

the sheaves: hence the epithets d/*aXXo-r6/<:os Nonn. Dion. 31. 38, 45. 101, 48.

678; djUaXXo06/oos Eustath. //. p. 1162,

27, Nonn. Dion. 17. 153; 'louXci Semus

ap. Athen. 6i8D, from fouXos yS^ ei's

Ar)fji.r)Tpa Phot. lex. p. 109, 10, Poll. I.

608

6O8 Harpocr. p. 125, 26

da-rrpiov tarl o-irtpy.a., teal dpffeviK&s \tyov<ri'

\tfJLOV ACG, rpliroXÔV B)'

BCG) /LteXtvrjs: Phot. lex. p. 255, 25and Suid. s.v. /xeX/j'Tj, which are abbrevi-

ated from the same source : So0o/cX7js ptv

yap Kal 'E.p68oros Kat

elirov /j.e\tvr).

Millet was extensively grown as a

cereal, at any rate in Thrace (Dem. 8.

45). Nauck thought that KVTJH.T] was

corrupt and proposed KVJKOV, comparingHesych. II p. 497 KVT]Kos...eld6s TI <rirtp-

250 ZO<t>OKAEOY!

juaros' Kal irvpbs. But Campbell aptlyrefers to Theophr. hist, plant. 9. 13. 5,

and hesitates between the meanings' the

space between two knots in the stalk,'

and ' the long rounded ear of the millet

plant.' I see no reason why the growth

of the plant should not be so described.

Ellendt preposterously suggests that thesecond syllable of /ieX/j^s was long : if

the metre was iambic, why not KvrjfjLij

<re> j,e\ivr]S?

60Q

6O9 Athen. 1 10 E dpivdov (dpvidovcod. : corr. Casaubon) 5' dpTov fjie/j.vr)Tai

4v Tpl7TT()X<:yUCj}, iJTOl TOV %

yevofj.evov 7} dirb TOV ev AlOioiria

Hesych. Ill p. 219 opivSrjv &PTOV irapd

Aldio\f/i. Kal <nrepiJ.a Trapair\ri<Tiov <rr)<rd/j.r)

(fftcrafjir) cod.), tiirep \j/oi>TS ffiTouvrai.

Tives 5e opvfav.These passages evidently go back to

the same original : see also Bekk. anecd.

p. 54,i^ (Phryn. praep. soph. p. 93, 7)

6piv8a' rjv 01 tro\\ol opvâv KaXovo'iv, andPollux 6. 73 dplvdyv Tiva ApTov AiOioires,

TOV e% opivdtov yiyvbuevov, o tan

8/j.otov

apTov

Rice-growing is usually mentioned in

connexion with India, but 6pivSr|s apros.seems to have been introduced here

rather as the food of the Aethiopians,to whom Triptolemus brought the gift

of Demeter. Certainly rice was not

a Greek food, although Chrysippus, awriter on cookery, included dpvfiT-rjs

jrXaKovs in a list of cakes (Athen. 647 D).

Megasthenes ap. Athen. 153 E mentionsboiled rice together with various kinds

of dressed meats (?a sort of curry) as

served up at an Indian banquet. In

Hor. Sat. i. 3. 155 tisanariutn oryzae^'

rice-tea,' is, the diet of an invalid.

610

OP Se TOP êpcralop ouS* vcrlp < TTOTOP >

61 cwcV valv iroTbv Mekler: ou dveiv cod.

61 Athen. 447 B rbv 5^ ttpidwov olvov

l fipvrbv rives Ka\ovcriv, cos 2o0o/cX^s kv'

fipVTOV . . .5vli>.' Kal

(fr. 32)''

UKTTrep <?rap'>fipvTov ?i Qprjit- a.vT)p | ^ $/3u^ gfipvfc,

5' fjv Trovevv.vr)S /j.vr)[ji.ovftiei TOV TrciyU-aros

At<rx5Xos tv AvKotipyy (fr. 124)'KO.K TUV-

5' Zirtve fipvrov icfxyaivwv (ta-xyaiiiov conj.Headlam in C.R. xvi 4342) XP&V I

Kaffefj-voKOfjuret roOr' ev dvdpeia artyy.''EXXdvi/cos 8' ev KTCCTCCTI Kal e/c pif&it,

(prjffi, KaraffKevdêrai rb (3pvTov ypd<pb)vu?5e (FHG I 59)

*'irlvovffi 5e fipvrov ZK

TLVUV ptfufv, KaBdirep ol Qpq.Kes K rCov

Kpid&v.' 'E/caralos 5' ev devr^pit} irepir)-

yrjaews elirwv Trepl Aiyvirriwv cos dpro(pdyoi.dfflv diruptpei (FHG I 20)

' ' ras K/>i0as

ts TO TTco/ia KaTa\ovaiv.' ev 5e TTJ TTJS

EupcoTTTjs ?rept65cp Ylaiovds <prj<ri. iriveiv

(3pvTov diro TWV Kpid&v Kal irapafiiyv dirb

I have transcribed the passage of

Athenaeus at length, as giving prac-

tically all the available information con-

cerning fipvrov (-os). It will be seen that

it is spoken of contemptuously as thedrink of uncivilized or remote tribes;and Miss Harrison has noticed (ProL-

p. 423) that it never appears as the

national drink of Hellas even in primitivetimes. In Aeschylus it is the drink

of the savage Lycurgus, who opposedthe worship of Dionysus; and H. con-

jectured that the text represents a speechof Charnabon, the adversary of Triptole-mus. If so, he made use of the Greek

contempt for barbarian beer-drinkers

(Aesch. Suppl. 964) to oppose the claims

of agriculture. I suppose that xcPCT>a i vmeans 'muddy,' i.e. coming from the

earth and not maturing like the grape in

the open air, for I can see no point in

the 'landsman's beer' (Hartung). Butthere is no similar use of x P ffai*> unless

TPinTOAEMOZ 251

some support may be drawn from Tr. fr.

adesp. 261 voris irpoffavpifavaa x P(ra âTPXV> f rain falling into a dry rut : cf.

Ant, 251 <TTV<P\OS 8e yrj Kai xtyff s-

Knaack defended the word by quotingJulian's well-known epigram : r <re XP?)KaXteiv AT)/mr}Tpiov,ov A.i6vvo~ov, \irvpoyevijfj,d\\ov Kai J3p6/j.ov ov Pp6/j.tov (Anth. Pal.

9. 368). Herwerden suggested Kptdatov= Kpidiv6i>. The latter part of the line

has been brilliantly emended by Mekler,and independently by Tucker (C.R. xvni

246), who suggested that the lost adjective

may also have been y\vKvv or <f>L\ov.

This conjecture is much to be preferredto M. Schmidt's oI5' vrivlav, Knaack's ov

pi\oi irieii>, or the more recent pro-

posal of Wecklein oi>x T]8vv trtelv. H.,who accepted it, quoted in its supportAnth. Pal. 9. 487 ^pw/x-ctrd poi x*Pw"

ffVKifrfJifrwv Trpotd-rjKas. 12. 197 (Fv&v

ftpdo/j-a. Com.fr. adesp. 1205, 4 (in 606 K.)a Kai KVffiv Treivdoffiv ov\l /3/juxrtyU.a. Eur.

fr. 469 v6(ji,os 8e Xeâi/' fc/SdXXro Kvcriv.

611

ov Tparreôvrai

611 Pollux 10. 79 TVV 5' dirvd/jt,ei>oi>

ev TptTrroXf^Kd)TOV &?6fUUfVHesych. I p. 267 dirvvSaKUTOs- a7nj0fj.evos.

2o0o/c\T7s T/)i7rro\^yu,v. Schol. Horn. A 634in Cramer anecd. Paris. Ill p. 16, n

jrapoifj.La wapa Sw/cpdre: (So00K\et Cramer)'

aTrw5dK<t)Tos...KV\t.' Cf. Mantiss. pro-verb. i. 22 (Paroem. II 747). The line is

also referred to by Etym. M. p. 133, 50,Eustath. //. p. 870, 27. (Pausan. fr.

289 Schw. ) There is a more interestingallusion to it in Demetr. de eloc. 114,

who, without giving the author's name,cites it as an example of frigidity, withthe interpretation : avrl TOV dirijdfjifvos tirl

TU\I% ov ridfTai. TO yap ITpaypaov ov 5^xeTai oyKOV roaovTov

See Roberts, p. 232, who givessome English parallels, and refers for

similar criticisms of Sophocles to de

sublim. 33. 5 6 5 Hivdapos Kai 6 ZOore /j,i> olov Travra Trt<t>\eyov(ri rrj

fffitvvvvTai 5' d\6ytt}s 7roXXd/ct$, /cat TTITT-

rovffiv drvx^rara, and to Dion. Hal.de vet. script, cens. 2. 1 1 Kai TroXXcim e/c

roO [Jieytdovs els oiaKevov

,olov ets travrdTracri

Welcker's (p. 308) defence of Sophoclesis unconvincing: he suggests that the

verse refers not to a trivial incident of

ordinary life, but to the feasts of the

initiated at the Eleusinian mysteries. Weare, however, perhaps justified in re-

calling that the play was probably an

early one (see Introductory Note). Thewine-cooler, ^VKT-TIP, also called St^cs, is

thus described by Poll. 6. 99 ov /u.r)i> %ei

irvOfdva, dXX' d<TTpaya\l<rKovs, i.e. it was

supported by little knobs. Cf. schol.

Ar. Vesp. 618 8ivos 84 effnv ayyeiov...

fi6.(Tt.v OVK %xov dXXot Kdrudev virorpoxov.Athen. 481 D classes Kv/j,(3ia among cupsTTvdfjL^va /ULTJ txbvTuv. Homer's dftfaOeTovin ^ 270 was sometimes explained as rty

dirv0/j.ei>oi> (pidXrjv (Athen. 501 A). Nestor's

cup had two irvO^ve^ (Horn. A 635) : see

the discussion in Athen. 488 E. Lucian

Lexiph. 13 has Tror^pta evirvvSdKWTa,which Mekler thinks may be a reminis-

cence of Sophocles. rpOLTTfôvrai : is set

on the table. Hence 47riTpair^w/j.aTa of

the various dishes served : see Athen.

170 F.

612

19 OpVO612 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 92, i

ei's opQbv (ppovfiv dvTL TOV /caXtDs <t>povelv.

2o0oX^s TpiTrroX^yLic^. Priscian inst. 18.

202 (II p. 305, 16 Herz) z'//z e^s 6p6bv

<f>povC) et ets TavTrjv irp6d<ru>. Sallustius :

1 in hunc moduni disseruit"1

pro ''hoc modo?

The use of els op06v and the like pre-

cisely as equivalent to adverbs of manneris not common: cf. Track. 347 <t>uvl

Sky* ts dpdbv. Jebb there quotes Thuc.6. 82 & (al. ws) TO d/c/)tj3^s direlv, but a

better parallel is Eur. Phoen. 1210 TOUT'

252 !0<1>OKAEOY!

ei's VTTOTTTOV eliras. The use is morecommon with nouns : see the examplesquoted on Eur. Hel. 904 es dpirayds,and add Holden on Xen. Cyr. 8. 1-33.The adverbial ets opQbv can be traced to

a local origin : 0. T. 50 ordures r' es

6p66v, Eur. Or. 231 au0ts /*' is opdbv

crTij<roi>, Suppl. 1229 HQVOV <ru fj,e \

es 6pdbv

iffrr), Tro. 465 afy>er' els opdbv 5e"/is,

fr. 262 5s yap &v <r<pa.\ri |

ets 6p6bv fory,fr. 382, 8 17 /-lei/ et's <5/>0dj> pia, \

Xoa 5'

eV' avTTJs rpeis Kareo'T'rjpiy/j.fraL \

elcriv (theletter E). els K<t\6v does not appear to

be used except with r)Keu> (e.g. Plat.

symp. 174 E) or some other verb of

motion.

613

613 Hesych. I p. 339cunWros, d/ua^s. So0o/cX^s

a(ppa.ff^wv do-êros. Bekk. anecd. p. 472,

13 a<ppa<Tfjut}v a<rvveTos. 2o^>o/cX^s.

The form d^pad/Mtav given by Hesychiusis contrary to the alphabetical order,

following immediately after d0/>d/crous.

It was therefore rightly corrected to

a.(j>pd(r(JLWv by Nauck, and H. points out

that in Aesch. Pers. 420 several MSShave d^paS/^ws. For the history of the

variation in form see Brugmann, Comp.Gr. ii p. 173 E. tr. For the meaning of

the word cf. Aesch. Ag. 1400 ireipa<rdt

fjiov yvvaiKos ws

614

614 Hesych. II p. 67 %\KV)' \virat.

The purpose of the note was to call

attention to the metaphorical use of gXxos,which would be more vigorous than in

the case of the English' wound.' ' Sore'

or 'stab' would come nearer. Cf. Solon

4. 17 roOr' tfSr) irdar) ?r6Xei />xerU

d(pvKTov, which seems to be followed in

Aesch. Ag. 645 7r6Xet ^h X*os ev, r6

5^/xioj' ri/xetj'. Find. Pyth. 2. 91 iviira^v\-\KOS 65vvapov eq. irptxrde KapSia, \ irpiv

ova 0/)ovH5t /j,r)Tioi>Tai rvêlv. Soph.Ant. 652 ri ydp \ yfroiT' av e'X/cos

f)KaKbs 0iXos; fr. 741.

615

'Ecrria

615 Philodem. de piet. p. 23 /cat

So0o/cX?7S e<v 'Ivd>xV (fr - /29) TVyrjv /A<7jr^>pa r&v Qeuv <j>rjriv>, ev

For the identification of Ge with Hestiacf. Eur. fr. 944 /cat Fata fj,rjTep- 'Earia?

5^ <r' oi (ro0oi | fiporCjv KaXovo'iv j\^vt\v fv

cuW/u, which is said to contain a reference

to the teaching of Anaxagoras (Diels,

Fragm. d. Vorsokratiker*, 46 A 2Ob). Ata later date the Stoics adopted the sameview: see on fr. 1128, 7. So far as I can

discover, there is no other early evidenceof a connexion between the worship of

the two goddesses, and it is interestingto find Sophocles taking notice of what

appears to be a philosophical speculationbased on the supposed etymology of

Hestia. It should be added that the

Pythagoreans called their central fire bythe names 'Ecrrta rou TTOLVT^ and MT-qpdewv: cf. Philolaus ap. Stob. eel. i. 22. i

d

p. 196, 1 8 W. See also Suss in Pauly-Wissowa vni 1 295, who thinks it probablethat the original identification was popularrather than philosophical, but admits that

there is no evidence available to prove it.

TPITTTOAEMOI TPQIAOI 253

616

616 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 97, ploughman, or (2) a charioteer. IfHesych.33 &vrfijbA.Ttft So0o:X?7S TpurToXtu.y. I.e. belongs here, the reference must beHesych. n p. 256 frvy^drw /xera^d-njs, to the car of Triptolemus : see Intro-

hvloxos. ductory Note. The fern.

This word might mean either (r) a occurs in fr. 878.

"lavva

617 According to Hesych. 11 p. 338 pointed out that the appearance of theSophocles used this word (or 'Idvva?) for word in this play shows that Triptolemus'a Greek woman.' See on fr. 56, where travelled to Asia Minor (Malten in Herm.the passage is set out. It has been XLV 547).

TPQIAOZ

Troilus is mentioned by Homer as one of the sons whomPriam had lost, in a passage (fl 257) where the epithet lirTrioâp-

firjs is taken to indicate his prowess as a warrior 1. Proclus, in

his abstract of the Cypria (EOF p. 20), simply says that Achilles

TpwiXov (frovevei. Apollodorus is somewhat more explicit (epit.

3. 32): /jurj Oappovvrwv be TWV flapffdpcov, 'A^XXev? eveSpeva-as

Tpa)l\ov ev TO) rov Sv/juftpaiov 'ATroXXawo? iepa> (f>ovi>i. He is

confirmed by schol. T Horn, fl 257, who refers to Sophocles as

his authority : evrevOev %o<f)OK\f]s ev TpcoiXw (frrjcrlv avrov

oêvdrjvai, VTTO 'A^tXXeco? wrTTOl/9 yvfJivaôvTa, Trapa TO VfifBpaiovKal aTToOaveiv. Welcker emended 6%vOf)vai to \oyêv0rjvai, onthe strength of Eustath. //. p. 1348, 23 Tpcofaov l

r

mnoâp^}v y

bv (fraGiv ILTTTTOVS ev TO> ufj,/3pai(p yv/JLvdôvra Xo^yX?? Treo'elv VTT*

But hebpevo-as in Apollodorus rather suggests: cf. Dio Chrys. 1 1. 77 KOI, Tpon'Xo? re ovra)? a

wv en /cal M-ijarcop /cal a'XXof, TrXe/ou?. %V yap 6'

ev8pev<rai Seti/oVaro? /cal vvtcros 7riOeo-0ai. Although the

Trojans were already shut up in the city, it is clear that the

Thymbraeum was outside the walls (Dio Chrys. 1 1. 78). Fr. 619shows that Sophocles agreed with the other authorities in repre-

1 Schol. A (see Lehrs, Ar. 2190 f.) contends that ot vaorepot based the story of

Troilus e0' 'iirirov SiwKopeitos on this epithet. Others think that the epithet is rather

an allusion to a story already existing: Gruppe, p. 672^2 The same correction has already been made by Maass.

254 SO<J>OKAEOY!

senting Troilus as a mere stripling: see note in loc. and addCallim. fr. 363, where he is introduced as an illustration of awposOdvaros. Vergil's allusion (A en. I. 474 parte alia fugiensamissis Troilus armis, \ infelix puer atque impar congressusAchilli, \fertur equis, etc.) certainly suggests that Troilus waskilled in battle, while fighting against Achilles : cf. Sen. Ag. 785.On the other hand, in Sophocles he was surprised by Achilles

while exercising his horses, and it would seem that his sister

Polyxena had gone with him to fetch water from the spring (cf.

fr. 621). The presence of Polyxena, who escaped, is inferred fromartistic evidence alone : see Robert, Bild u. Lied, p. 16, Gruppe,p. 672^ Troilus was accompanied by an attendant whom the

Greeks regarded as the oriental counterpart of the TraiSaywyos :

see frs. 619, 62O 1. The scene was somewhere in the neighbour-

hood of the temple of the Thymbraean Apollo, and Welckerthinks that the chorus consisted of priests or country folk. It is

perhaps more likely that they were the attendants of Troilus or

Polyxena.With what motive then did Achilles waylay the youthful

Troilus ? As an isolated incident of guerilla warfare, the death

of Troilus might find its place in the epics, but does not seem to

possess any dramatic value. Welcker meets the difficulty byconjecturing that the account of Lycophron (307 313) wasfounded on the play of Sophocles. There Troilus is beloved byAchilles, but infuriates him by rejecting his advances, and is

slain at the altar of Apollo2,where he had taken refuge.

Welcker does not suggest that in Sophocles Achilles pursuedTroilus, because he was attracted by his beauty. Rather, he

killed him in a skirmish, mistaking him for a full-grown warrior;

but, when he saw the dead body, he was overcome with pity for

the beautiful boy whom he had unwittingly slain. This is morefanciful than convincing. We can hardly draw any inference

from the appearance of the eiôOô?, but it might be plausibly

argued that the love-motive was known to Sophocles from the

fact that Phrynichus (TGF p. 723, PLG III 561) seems to haveintroduced Troilus in the character of epai/jLevo? : Xa/ATret

'

eVt

TroptyvpeaLs Trapyai (o>9 eptoro?. It is curious that Sophocleshimself is said to have quoted this passage, according to the

anecdote in Athen. 604 A. On the other hand, there was a legendthat Troy could not be taken, if Troilus reached the age of

twenty3

. This was referred to by Menander in his At9 eâ-jrar^v,

1 For the oriental view of eunuchs as trustworthy servants see Hdt. 8. 105, Xen.

Cyr. 7. 5. 6064.2 There was a tradition that Apollo was Troilus' father: Apollod. 3. 151.3Mythogr. Vatic. I. 210 Troilo dictum erat quod, si ad annos XX pervenisset,

Troia everli non potuisset.

TPQIAOZ 255

the original of Plautus's Bacchides, where it is mentioned at

v. 954 ;and there seems to be good reason for supposing that it

was at least as old as the time of Sophocles1

. If so, he was

hardly likely to have neglected it, more especially as it providesan excellent explanation of the ambuscade which Achilles is said

to have laid for Troilus. There is no room to speculate whetherAchilles may have been swayed by conflicting motives, his dutyto his country, and his love for Troilus

;and it is equally idle to

enquire how he was affected by the presence of Polyxena2

.

It should be . mentioned that Strattis wrote a comedyentitled Troilus (r 723 K.), and that this is supposed by somecritics to have been a parody of Sophocles' play. Meineke even

suggested (Hist. crit. p. 233) that a line of Strattis, jj ^TTOT, wTrat Z^z/d?, e? TCLVTOV ^0X779 (schol. Ar. Vesp. 1346), was borrowedfrom Sophocles. Headlam suspected that in the line (fr. 42)

quoted by Athen. 76 E epivov ovv TIV avrij<t ir\rj(Tiov \ vevorj/cas

<>vra; there was an allusion to the epweos of Horn. 2433, A 167.Ahrens was inclined to doubt whether Achilles appeared in

the play at all, and thought that a considerable portion of it was

occupied with the lamentations for the deafti of Troilus, and the

description of his burial. But it is difficult to agree with a viewwhich robs the story of its chief dramatic motive.

618

v a<j)06yyov<;r TravTOfJiopa) QertSt crLyxTrXa/cets irore.

618. 2 iravTo^bp4>if Heath : irovroubpQtf D, iravra^p^ BV

618 Schol. Find. Nem. 3. 60 irepi been explained; and Ellendt adopts a

7s yweraMO/>0u><rews aur^s (sc. Qtndos) /ecu conjecture a<f>d6vovs, explaining it as

tfi<rlv ei> TpwlXtf'

tyr)[j.ei>... "unenviable." I believe that aj>66yyovsrefers to the shapes of animals (serpent

v "s yTlK>6V ^s a euphemism and lion) into which Thetis metamor-

designed to avoid speaking of the marriage phosed herself in her struggle with her

as fraught with evil consequences. Cf. suitor Peleus. See Soph. fr. 150 (Peleus

Eur. Tro. 630 6'XwXei/ ws 6\u\ev (Andro- speaks) T/S yap ê ^xôs oik tTreffTarei ;\

mache of Polyxena's death), and see n. X<W dpaKwv re, irvp, vdup (Cp. Find.

on Eur. Hel. 718. So O.T. 1376 dXX' TJ Nem. 4. 62 ff.). This reference in a<t>eby-

TKVWV Srjr' 6ij/is r\v <t>i/nepos, \ JBXaaTOvff' yovs is brought out both by TravTojiopô)

STTUS /3XcKrre, irpo<r\ev<rveiv t/j.oi, O. C. 336, and by <rvfiir\aKfe. The latter does not

Track. 1234 /ZTJT/H pet* daveiv /j.6vr) \ /xereU- mean simply "united with her," but

rtos <roi d''a$6u cbs ^xs *X" Eur - I-A - "wrestling with her" as Peleus is

649 i8ov, ytyrjdd a' ws 7^777$' opuv, TKVOV. depicted on a red-figured vase in the

<x<J>06yyoTs<

y*HLOVS- 'This has never Berlin Museum, by Peithinos (figured

1 See Gruppe, p. 67?!.a See p. 163.

256 SO*OKAEOYZ

in Baumeister, p. 1797). Cp. Her. 3. 78

"when Gobryas had grappled with him."

Translate, then: ''His was an ill-omened

bride, and bereft of speech, when hewrestled of yore with Thetis of manyshapes." Other interpretations are :

(r) d<f>86yyovs = d0ctrous (L. and S.),"unutterable." (i) d<j>06yyovs refers to

the sea-goddess as not speaking withhuman speech, but only as gods speak :

Cp. Od. 5. 334 (Ino) rj irpiv fjiev ^v fipOTOs

avdtfeffffa, \

vvv 5' dXos ev ire\ayea<ndeuv ? g/tytope rt^s.' (J.) Jebb's view

may perhaps be supported by Eur. Tro.

671 /carrot TO drjpL&Ses &<f>0oyyov T'

<t>v, Hipp. 646 a<f>6oyya 5' aurcus <rvy-

KaToixlgeiv daKt]\ dtjp&i', passages tend-

ing to show that the word &<f>9oyyoswould readily suggest dypia. The force of

the epithet is then transferred, as in dvara

i<rTopla ('the record of mortality') Anth.Pal. 7. 49, and other instances discussed

by Headlam in C.R. xvi 437 f. See also

Wecklein on Eur. Med. 1010 dbfrs

evayytXov, for the freedom with whichthe idiom is employed in tragedy. Buta better explanation is suggested by the

Cretan folk-lore story recorded by Bernh.

Schmidt, Volksleben der Neugriechen,p. 1 1 6. The Nereids danced to the

music of a young peasant from Sgouro-kephali, who fell in love with one of

them. On the advice of an old woman,he seized her by the hair, and held herfast till cock-crow, though she changedto a dog, a serpent; a camel, and fire.

Then she followed him home, and bore a

son to him, but never exchanged a single'word with her husband. The husband

pretended to throw the child into the

oven, when the mother cried out 'Leave

go of my child, dog!', seized her child,and vanished. The parts are reversed

here, but the coincidence with the storyof Peleus and Thetis is remarkable. Thespell which binds the Nereid to her mortal

spouse is broken by her speech. I amindebted to Mekler for first calling myattention to Schmidt's explanation of

d<pd6yyov$, which he has recently repeatedand reinforced in Netiejahrb.f. kl. Altert*

xxvii (1911) 648 ff. It should, how-ever, be observed that in the older storyit was the cry of Peleus that causedThetis to depart (fr. 151 n.), so that thetaboo must have been somewhat different.

The illustrations from Greek art which

depict the metamorphoses of Thetis are

quoted by Frazer on Pausan. 5. 18. 5(ill p. 614) ireTroirjTai 5e Kal 6er<s

irapdevos, Aa/u/3cu'eTcu oe avrrjs IT^Xei/s,.

Kal dirb TTJS x lPos TW Qtrcdos o<f>i$ eirl

TOV HrjXta effrlv op/u.un', who partlyabstracts the Cretan story quoted above,and gives other parallels from modern-folk-lore. See also P. Gardner in Journ*Phil, vn 216, and other authoritiesreferred to by Gruppe, Gr. Myth.p. H79 p- 663 4_6

. The current opinion-

is that this story is not derived from the

epics ; but was a popular version pie-served by oral tradition, as contrastedwith the heroic legend to be traced to-

the Cypria and Hesiod's eirida.Xd/j.i.ot' ei's

IlTjX&i Kal Qtnv according to which the

marriage was arranged in a council ofthe gods and graced by their presence :

see especially Reitzenstein, Herm. xxxv73 ff.

2 <rv(iir\aKis is doubly significant,

being at once a vox amatoria, and atechnical term in the wrestling ring.The metaphorical application of Tra\aietv

and the like is best known to us fromAesch. Ag. 1205 dXX' TJV 7raXcucrr7?$ /capr'

e/j.ol irvtuiv x&pw- Cf. fr. 941, 13, AchilLTat. 5. 3 Qpg.% 6 Trjpevs frtiQavro <&i\ofj.rj\a.

iraXaiwv iraXriv 'A0po5t0-tcu/...&/ dyKaXatsetxe ryv QiXouriXav 6 Typeus, %\KUV 717)6?

eavrbv ws ivyv TO (TtD/aa Kal fftyiyywv ey

XPV ""7" (rvfAirXoK-fiv. For <rvfj.TrXoKrt

cf. ib. i. 9 (of lovers' mutual glances)Kaivj] yap ctrrt (rw/idrw^ <rvfj,ir\oicf). Thereis the same play ib. 2. 38. So LucianAsin. 9 crvfj-TrX^Kov T< dvTayuvKrTr], wherethe whole passage is full of metaphorsfrom the palaestra : hencein Ar. Ach. 274.

TPQIAOI 257

619

TOV dz'SpoTrcuSa SecnroTTqv

619 deffTrbr-riv G (compendia), coniecerat Blomfield :

CQBCP

| diru>\<T(v)

619 Schol. Find. Pyth. 2. 121 pov\aid Trpeo-jStfrepcu] olov, vrrtp rrjv vebr-rjTa

f3ov\evr)'

/cat ScxôccX^s eVi roO TpwtXov

av5pa 5e r

di/5p67rcus'

dv8poij/J.evos

Hesych. I p. 189d-r) TTWS

'

^ di/Spds

w/Xy. In

Hesychius TTCUS should undoubtedly beread for TTWS, and %xwv âls probably for

^Xovres; and the words are so printed byBlomfield on Aesch. Theb. p. 156, but

whether by his own conjecture or not

does not appear. He was also justifiedin restoring 8ea"rrbTiji> for beffirbrrj^ (cr. n. ),

for the words are appropriate to the

character of the waidaywybs, on whomsee Introductory Note. We may take it

that Troilus is referred to as dvdpb-rraida ;

he is generally described as a boy: cf.

Dio Chrys. u. 77 T/>on\os re otfrws

irals u>i> ZTI, Quint. 4. 431| vTjUa, vrj-jriaxoH

t, A. P. 12. 191 oi>x

TpwtXos wv. Verg. Aen.i. 475 infdix puer, Hor. Carm. i. 9. 15

iinpubern Troilon.

The word dvSpdirais signifies a lad onthe verge of manhood, and is synonymouswith avrlTrais, which it is sometimes usedto explain : see on fr. 564. Aeschylusused it in his description of Partheno-

paeus : Theb. 520 /SXaoTT/jiia Ko\\lTrp({)pov

a.v8p6irais dvrjp. Tzetzes (on Lycophr.1345 a\Krj veavdpos ei)7rpe7r^<rTaros yvovs)refers to the passage in Aeschylus thus:

rb A^x^Xetoc* 6v yap avdpb-

<pr]<ni> AtVxiyXos, euros veavdpov, ws

620

yap /SacriAts efcre/xôvcr' e

62O Pollux jo. 165 $0ov$ 5e 6Vo/xa

elvai papfiapiKbv r) VKaXfJ.?], 2o0o-etirbvTOS v TpwiXy

'

Welcker supposed that these wordswere spoken by the iraidaywyos of

Troilus: see Introd. Note. In order to

avoid the reference to Hecuba, Bergkread (r/caX/u^, but this was clearly a case of

qui facit per alium facit per se, which as

a grammatical principle I have illustrated

on Eur. Hel. 1125, Hclid. 949. AddXen. Ages. i. 35, Andoc. i. 20, 58.

Blaydes conj. eKT^rfjirjK' ô^s or ^/creTyU??^

nov. The accent of tr/cdX/to; was corrected

by Dindorf from, Arcad. p. no, 2

(Chandler, 13 2?.

621

7T/305 vapa TTora.

621 vapa Kai M : vapa 5e plerique codd.

621 Etym. M. p. 597, 45 vapbv, rb

vypbv . . . 2o$o/cX?7s TpwiXy'

irpbs . . . irord.'

The same extract with unimportantvariations is found in Etym. Gud. p. 409,i (cf. p. 627, 10) and in Orion p. no, i.

Etym. M. continues : oflrw QiXbêvos. Kai

tffus i) ffvvriBeta rpl^/affa. TO a (Is e X^yet

vepbv. Orion adds an important par-

ticular, which determines the source of

the quotation, that the information is

P. II.

drawn from Philoxenus lv ry irepl

ffv\\dp<i)v pyfjidTw. This work, whichis known from several quotations (see

Lobeck, Paralip. p. 69), was written byPhiloxenus of Alexandria, a grammariancontemporary with Varro, and is one of

the chief sources to which the Byzantine

Etymologica are ultimately traceable

(Reitzenstein in Pauly-Wissowa VI 809).

vapa. The word strictly means 'flow-

17

2 5 8 ZO*OKAEOYI

ing'

: cf. Aesch. fr. 347 vapas re

which Photius explains by pevffTiKrjs. Forthe root cf. "Ivax^ varop fr. 270. Thearticle in Phrynichus (xxiv Ruth. [p. 42Lob.] vypbv vdwp /AT/Sct/Aws, d\\a irpbff-

(ftaTov, dKpai<t>vts} shows that he considered

vi)p6s to be a by-form of veapos, whereasit is connected with Nypefa and N^/njis,and survives in the modern Greek vepbs.No doubt, as Rutherford observes, it

persisted in local dialects, although it

had disappeared from literature ; and his

inference is confirmed by the remark in

the Rtymologicum Magnum. KCU : see

cr. n. The corruption is due to theconfusion of the tachygraphic symbolsfor 8^ and Kal. Kpyvalov irorbv, of a

spring, occurs in Phil. 21. See also

Track. 14 Kpovvol dieppaivovTO KpyvaiovTTOTOV.

622

432622 Hesych. II p.

xXcupcus (Ka,Tapj36\oi %Xatms cod. : corr.

Musurus)1

TT 081?)pew, uxrre Kal eirl ras

dp(3v\as %aXacrât. 2o0o/cX^s TpwtX^. Cf.

P- 3^5 KaddpftvXos xâv^' Tro8ripr)s a>s

TWJ/ dp(3v\ui> (afitiXuv cod.).

Amelung (in Pauly-Wissowa ill 2337)

compares the Homeric epithets fieyd\tj

521, and ^Kradlri K 134 (see howeverLeaf in loc.), as indicating that the "x\alva,

which might be worn double, was often

of considerable size. It should be addedthat the dtp/ma \tovros mentioned in K 24,

178, which was worn as a x^^va byAgamemnon and Diomedes, is described

as irodiji'eKts. In the absence of context

we cannot tell whether any more specialallusion e.g. to an oriental dress wasintended.

623

623 Suid. s.v. e/xcKrxaX^T; 2o0o-ev TpTOV /xacrxaXicr/u.oi' /cai ev

'

The word ^/xaa-xaXto-^T? is

omitted by Bernhardy on the authorityof three MSS. The text of Suidas is

obviously corrupt. Nauck suggests the

insertion of Kal after ei'pTj/ce, in whichcase we should have to assume that two

fragments were cited from the Troilits,

one as above, and the other rov yua<r%a-

\i<r/j.6v. This is not very plausible ; but

it is still less likely that the words should

be reshuffled as Bernhardy proposes,rbv

though that probably gives the generalsense. Harles in Fabric. Bibl. Gr. II

p. xvi quoted from Siebenkees's papersthe following note :

' Electra et Troilus

citantur in Msc. Angelicae Bibliotliecae,

fjiaffxd\iffd-r]a"r] TTOT^ ;

'

but the clue doesnot appear to have been followed up.Nauck thinks that the passage referred

to is to be found in Apostol. n. 4

(Paroem. II 516) /uacrxctXtcrflmrT? irore...

a,0 ou TJKa

<rav avrd (sc. ra fj-opia) Kai 2o0o/cX^s ev

'HXtKTpq. Kal TpwlXy. Rohde, Psyche,I4

p. 324, conjectured TOV rpdxr]\ov for

TOV yu,acrxaXi(T,u6i', and this is perhapsthe most satisfactory solution.

The ancient evidence relating to ycta-

crXaXto-/i6s has been so fully discussed

by Jebb in his note and Appendixon Rl. 444 f. 0' ^s QO.V&V ari/x,os ware

dva(j,i>i)S | eyaaa-xaXi'o-^17, that it is unneces-

sary to recapitulate it here. It may how-ever be remarked that the similar customs

existing among savage tribes, as collected

by Tylor, Primitive Culture*^, I p. 451 ff. ,

are conclusive to show that the real

motive for the mutilation was fear of

the ghost of a slain enemy. Kaibel onEl. I.e. called attention to the strange-ness of the assertion that the severed

parts were strung together and fastened

to the arm-pits, and holds that this cannot

have been the origin of the name /maaxa-

Xi0>i6s. We should rather understand

yuacrxaXêti' as'

to cut off the arm as far

as the /xcurxdX??,' with the purpose of

TPQIAOI 259

rendering the murdered man, or rather

his ghost, which would inherit his bodilydefects, powerless to execute revenge ;

afterwards it was generalized so as to

apply to the other members. See also

Wilamowitz on Aesch. Cho. p. 201.

Rohde, however, argued forcibly in

favour of the explanation of Aristophanesthat the /xopia, known as âa-xaXâyiara,were strung together, suspended roundthe neck, carried under the arm-pits, andfastened across the back (Psyche*',

I pp.

322 326). The whole matter is discussed

by Kittridge in AJPvi 151. The wordsu>Vre dv<rfjt,evri$ seem to imply that mutila-

tion of the dead bodies of their enemieswas an ordinary Greek custom. Wemust suppose that Sophocles intendedto reproduce the manners of the heroic

age, for which he had sufficient justifica-tion in Horn. S 180, X 371. Certainlyhe cannot be taken to represent the

feelings of his contemporaries : such at

least is the inference to be drawn fromHdt. 9. 79, where Pausanias repudiates

a proposal to impale the corpse of Mar-donius with the words :

' Such things are

fitter for barbarians than for Greeks, andodious even in them.' To the sameeffect Moschion fr. 3 (FTG p. 813) KCVOV

BavovTOS dvdpbs nlicl{ei* trKidv\ fuWas

Ko\dfeii>, ov 0av6vTas eu(re/3&. Even as

a punishment for the living mutilation is

rarely mentioned in Greek literature, and

nearly always with abhorrence. Thecases of Melanthius (Horn. % 475) and

Deiphobus ( Verg. Aen. 6.496) are excep-tional. Elsewhere it is attributed to a

mythical ogre like Echetus (Horn. 0-85),to Xerxes as a punishment inflicted onthe Thracians (Aelian var. hist. 5. n),and threatened to the Athenians (Aristid.

I 128), to the savage Scythians (Athen.524 E), to the Colchian Aeetes in his

threats against the Argonauts (Apoll.Rhod. 3. 378), or to the inhumanity of

the tyrants (Plat. Gorg. 4730). Ofespecial significance is Aesch. Eum.1 86 ff. , where oriental usages are referred

to. Cf. fr. 528.

624

624 Hesych. II p. 57 eXcuouTcu

The advantage of oil to the growth of

the hair was recognized : Plat. Prot. 334 B

TO ^Xaiov...rats QpiQv TroXe/uurraroj' TCUS

T&V &\\(av tycw ir\T)v TCUS rov

rats 5e TOU avdpuirov dpuyov /cat

(r<jjfJia.Ti. But the excessive use of it andthe elaborate adornment of the hair wascondemned as a sign of oriental rpv<pri, or

of effeminacy. So should be interpreted

Horn. A 385 ntpai dy\ae, addressed to

Paris. Cf. Verg. Aen. 12. 99 semiviri

Phrygis (sc. corpus loricamque), etfoedarcin pulvere crinis

|vibratos calido ferro

murraque madentis. Cic. Sest. 18 (of

Gabinius) unguentis adfluens, calami*

strata coma, Juv. 13. 165 (of the

Germans) madido torquentem cornuacirro. From the comment of Aristarchus

Hartung drew the extraordinary infer-

ence that Troilus was dragged throughthe mud, and that eXcuoO<r#cu is ironical.

625

625 Hesych. I p. 141 d/idtrercu' dirb

rrjs d/x77<reajs, olovei (r<pd$-t (0"0acu cod.).

iXy cod.).The word has been suspected, and

M. Schmidt thought that the originalwas aifj.d<r<rtTai or d//.wr<rercu, and that

the gloss was added after the corruptionhad taken place. What then became of

the original gloss ? No inference can bedrawn from the fact that the word occurs

out of its alphabetical order, between

dfAfiaffiv and dâidrjif. Possibly the

Doric form (dô-erai conj. Blaydes) has

stimulated the doubt ; for the metaphorwas familiar enough : see on fr. 724, 4,

and the passages quoted by Jebb on Ant.602. Add Philostr. her. 3. 32 Afaj 5' 6

TOVS fj.kv TO.

Pausan. 8. 7. 7 /xeXXe 5^ ctpa 6 dalfjui)i>

Kal TO ytvos rb Kacradvopov /ca/cwy

ffll>.

IT 2

260 I04>OKAEOY!

626

626 a


dirfoKt)'fiuoi 5t yvfJi-vd #17/075 (fl^/ccus cod. :

corr. M. Schmidt) r6a. 2o0o-\^s Tpc^Xy

(rpc&Xy cod.). Bekk. anecd. p. 422, 33

airtffKiT yv/mvci O^Kys r6a.M. Schmidt conjectured that the words

of Sophocles were r6' aTrecr/o}, and that

aireffic/is was an adjective formed from

TTÔ-KOS. This rare word can be shownto have meant (i) a sheep-skin : Hesych.Ill p. 325 = Phot. lex. p. 425, 27 irea-Kewv-

v. Suid. s.v. TT&T/COS* 5fy/m, /cct>-

codd. : corr. M. Schmidt

5to'. Etym. M. p. 665, 50

arnj-aiveL Kvpiws rb TOV Trpofidrov

(cf. ib. p. 68, 21 ; p. 257, 47). (2) The

peel or rind of a fruit : schol. Nic. Ther.

549 TT^/cos 5e TOP <p\oibv TT/S (SoTdvrjs

tfyovv TO X^TTOS <pr)<riv, 6 naff-rjo-as e?r^7;/ce

ry Tpav/j-ari. It might therefore have

been applied to a bow-case.

was derived by metathesis from

(Etym. M.), so that a7reovc^s

(Lobeck, /'flM. ^/. I 512).

627

a/TTlOTO?

627 Hesych. I p. 242 a7rt<rros-

aTrapdnrio-Tos, aTret^Tjs. Soô/cXiys TpwtXy.airitrTos in the sense of disobedient

occurs in Aesch. 7%^. 827 /SouXat 8'

&7ri<rToi Aatou, /<5. 102 1 %xovff'

airia-TOv

T-fjvd' dvapxiav 7r6Xei, Eur. /. Z". 1476#OTIS KXiyCOV aTTttTTOS, OU/C 6pd&S (frpOVfl.

For &TriffTfiv see on fr. 32. Nauck pre-fers to write aTreitrros* a7ra/)d7reicrTo$ with

Bernardus, rightly as regards the gloss.

But there is no evidence to support the

spelling #7rei(TTos, and it is fanciful to

insist on the distinction. In Aesch.Theb. 86 1, where the verbal force is

strongly marked, <j)l\wv #7rerroi is givenby most modern texts

;and e^Tretora is

well-supported in At. 151. Tucker onAr. Kan. 505 sensibly remarks that weare not in a position to settle such

questions.

628

acras

628 Hesych. I p. 297 aeras- p\d\f/as'

^/SXaâj. So0oKX?7S Tpw/Xy. Nauck pro-

posed to delete /3\aâs : the less likelyalternative would be to read do-as andomit jSXdâj. Perhaps, however, there

has been a conflation of two distinct

glosses. The only other evidence for

this Homeric word in tragedy is Bekk.anecd. p. 450, 33 oVai' /SXai/'cu' ourws

(fr. 417).

629

629 Hesych. I p. 301 dcroXoixov (d<r6-

\VKOV cod.)' ijfji.epot>, irpoa-rivh, o

Did the word refer to Troilus himself?

As it is neuter, it may have agreed with

e.g. \7}fj.a. <ro\oiKos occurs in Anacreon

(fr. 79): Koifuaov 5' w Zev <TO\OIKOV <j>d6yyov,and developed much in the same way as

jSdp/Sapos and AypotKos.

63O Hesych. n p. 192

TPQIAOZ

630

8ir\a.

There is no doubt that dVXa is hereused of defensive armour: so Horn. A 137

6' jjv <p6pfiv fyvpa XP*1 Zpws

261

Theocr. 25. 278 /cat d

| epKos evva\iov

(Heracles is speaking of thelion's skin).

631

631 According to Hesych. u p. 338s.v. "lawa this word was employed bySoph, as fidpfiapov 6privrj/j.a. We are

reminded of Aristophanes' allusion to

the Persae\ Ran. 1029 6 xPsTO) x&P* &81 ZvyKpovffas elirev iavoi. InAr. Eccl. 1179, Lys. 1292 iai appears as

a wild exclamation of delight.

632

117109

632 Hesych. n p. 349 177105...dXXaKal dprjvov cnrj/jiaivei, u>5 So0o/cX77S TpwiXy/cat "Iwv EupimSats (fr. 12 p. 734 N.), ws

afXti'oJ', tciXe/ios. In the omitted words

Hesych. explains that 177105 was an epithetof Apollo: cf. O.T. 154, 1096. But it

is also an epithet of /Soiy etc. when usedfor a cry of lamentation. So Eur. Phoen.

1036 ff. irjL-îov Podv, \ Irji-fjiov fd\os \aXXos

aXX' eiruTdrvfr\ 5ta5oxats dva ?rr6Xt/, El.

1210. It must not be inferred from the

gloss that Soph, used Irjios as a noun.

633

633 Schol. Plat. rep. 566 D (r* 5' 01)

/) fj^\\ei' ot/ce, <f)aivTat, 5o/cet, wsvvv '

Trapd 5 So0o/cXet TpwtXy yiteêt.

Hesych. Ill p. 88 ^XXet- 0aêrat, ot/ce,

These are puzzling statements, but weshould hardly reject them as incredible.

The intention is to quote from Sophoclesan instance of /uAXet with a sense entirelydifferent from that in the republic, and

capable of being represented by titvei.

Now, in the sense of delaying or holdingpack /uL\\<t) and n&w almost coincide, as

may be seen e.g. in Horn. 1318 for] /xotpa

Kal el /idXa ris TroXe/xi'fot. Wemight therefore guess that the passage in

the Troilus was parallel to Phil. 1256dXXa Ka/u. rot

\

ratirbv r65' 6^77 dp&vraKOV fdXXovr' ?ri, or El. 318 TJOI>TOS rj

fj,\\oi>Tos ; The objection would be that

the regular gloss for /uAXw in this sense

is Ppadtivu : see schol. L on //. cc.tand

Phot., Suid., Etym. M. etc. However,schol. rec. on Aesch. Prom. 654 gives

dvaâ\\-r) in explanation of /*AXets, andthe choice of ptvei here may have beeninfluenced by the particular context.

634

opocrayyai634 Claudius Casilo irapd rots 'Arrt/cots p^ro/acrt quoted on fr. 183.

262 ZOÔKAEOYI

635

635 Photius lex. p. 497, 3

((ra.KodepfjLrjT'rjsBachm. anecd. I 361,

9). So0oK\^s T/3wXy. ot fjv TOV 6(f>iv,

ot 5e ffKt!}\r)Ka <rbv> (add. Bachm.

anecd.} ra S^pfj-ara ie<rdlovTa. aptivov

5 rbv tni Tt$ Mpân x^KOV 2x VTa i 7raP'

Q<sov ra aaKr) ^wixa\Ka. Cf. Hesych. IV

p. 4 (Ta/coSep/iicmys &(piv crdtfos %x VTa"

ot 5e (TKw\-r]Ka, Trap' 5<roj> dep/j.i<TTTis OVTOS.

voeiv.... At this point Palmerius intro-

duced words which are misplaced in the

MS of Hesychius : uxrei Ae7e xaX/co5ep-ra 7ap (rd/fKT? eirlxa^Ka Xêiconj. M. Schmidt).

See on fr. 449. It will be observed

that the note in Photius supports the

view there taken, that Aristarchus and

Didymus interpreted SC/JÔ-T^S correctly.There can be no doubt that M. Schmidtwas right (Didym. p. 21) in identifying

dep/j.yo'T'/is and ffa^K^KoSep/j.rja'T^^, although

Stephanus, whom L. and S. follow, held

that they were entirely distinct. Schmidt

interprets the word, on the analogy of

ffaKKOtrripa, as 'qui hirtum pellem co-

medit '

; but I prefer the form with

00.KO-, understanding'

devouring the hide

of the shield'

(cf. 5tp/j.a Ke\aii>6t> in Z 117).The activity of the grub would be ap-

propriate to the sentiment which hasbeen illustrated in connexion \vrith fr. 286.

The tradition of the note in Hesychiushas suffered confusion : I suggest that weshould read < ot fjt,ev > 6(piv tret/cos effdiovra.

This would bring it into agreement with

Photius, and relieve Aristarchus from anysuspicion of having supported the viewthat is recommended in the latter part of

the note : Fritzsche and Reitzenstein (fr.

449 n.) even thought that Aristarchus

supposed Soph, to refer to a serpent

painted on a shield (reading txov)'Schmidt says :

'

Didymus aperte Aristarchi

interpretationem amplexus est. namquod Aristarchus <rdi<os dixerat, xaX/coDi'

8tp(jt.a esse monstrat.' This appears to

me open to serious question, and to beinconsistent with the testimony of Photius.

I take the view introduced by &/j.eu>ov

(jSArtoj/) to be due to some later gram-marian who was puzzled by the word,and had forgotten the early prevalenceof leather shields. See now B. Keil in

Herm. XLVIII 103.

TYMHANIITAI

Nauck says, 'de argumento non constat.' Most critics,

however, have accepted Welcker's inference that the ^vîraincrraiwas concerned with the legend of Phineus, even if they have not

gone so far as he did in identifying it with one of the two playsnamed after him. Fr. 645 proves that the second marriage of

Phineus was mentioned by Sophocles in this play, although of

course this might have been an incidental allusion, like that in

the A ntigone (966 fT.).But it is remarkable that of the other eight

fragments remaining two clearly relate to the ancestry of

Phineus (637, 643), and that one of these, which contains a pro-noun of the first person plural, mentions the Sarpedonian cave,

to which Orithyia was carried by Boreas. It seems unlikelythat these facts are to be attributed entirely to accident.

Possibly Cleopatra was the speaker of fr. 637x

,but there is

1 Or, as Hiller v. Gaertringen (p. 59) prefers, the pronoun may refer to the sons of

Orithyia.

TPQIAOI TYMfTANIITAI 263

nothing else in the fragments which gives any clue to the

probable action of the play. For the various possibilities see

Introductory Note to the Phineus.The title undoubtedly describes the chorus, and was applied

to the devotees of Dionysus or Cybele. Cf. Eur. Bacch. 58(Dionysus speaks) aipeaOe rd-m^topC eV Tro'Xej, <^>pvywv \ rv/jLTrava,

Pea? re /JLrjTpbs 6/Jbd ff evprj/juara. rv/jiTrava (Diet. Ant. II 914)were small drums, in the form of (i) a tambourine, or (2) a kettle-

drum. They were covered with hides (Eur. Hel. 1347 rvirava...

ffvpcroTevfj), and were beaten with the hand. Because the beatingof timbrels is occasionally spoken of with a certain degree of

contempt (Ar. Lys. 388, Dem. 18. 284), it does not follow that

Boeckh (TV. Gr. princ. p. 129) and Hermann (de Aesch. Niobe,

p. 4) were justified in concluding that this was a satyr-play. But,if the Thracian Salmydessus was the scene of the play, a chorus of

Bacchic devotees would not be out of place. For the connexionof Dionysus with Thrace see the evidence collected by Kern in

Pauly-Wissowa V ion f., and cf. Hdt. 5. 7, Eur. Hec. 1267. Thetitle is clearly suggestive of foreign ritual : cf. Apul. de deo Socr.

14 p. 22, 8 Aegyptia numina gaudent plangoribus, Graeca chords,barbara autem strepitu cymbalistarum et tympanistarum et

choraularum.

636

<j)v <f>v, ri TOVTOV âpôi //,eioz' av

TOV 7775 77 iifjavo1

'avroL Ka0' VTTOcrTcy-fl

GLKOvcrai i//aKaSos evSovcry <j>pevi ;

636. 1 0fO 0eu om. Stob., TTOT post Xa^Sots addito 2 TOV gnomol. Frobenii :

rw SMA| Kq.6' virb artyy Meineke (Cur. crit. 1813, p. 39) : /cat viro

virb ffreyrj Cic., /cai ffrtyrjs VTTO Heath

636 Stob. flor. 59. 12 (iv p. 402, Akominatos (Archbishop of Athens

13 Hense) ZoôKXôus fvfj.iravio'T&v (rcDi/ c. 1200 A.D.) I p. 27, 13 <j>ev 0eO, rl

TraviffT&v M).'

ri TOVTOV... <ppevL.' v. i is TOV KCLT avTov fiiov Xdftot TIS fj.eifov;

quoted without the name of either poet appears to refer to this line ; and heor play by Plut. prooem. vit. Timol. may have become acquainted with it

p. 235 (=

p. 255, formerly treated as through a source independent of Plutarch.

Aem. Paull. i). Part of v. 2 and v. 3 4>v, 'ah!', admirantis, as in Eur.are quoted. by Cic. Att. 2. 7. 4 cupio Hclid. 535, Phoen. 1740, and often.

istorum naufragia ex terra intueri ; cupio, 2 f. The general sentiment is that ofut ait tuns amicus Sophocles,

4/cch/ virb... Zenob. 3. 95 (Paroem. I 8r) tZdvT-rjs

<f)pevi.' \fvo~o~d) TOV/JLOV KOLKOV &\\ov ZXOVTO., who1 See cr. n. It seems more likely refers for tt-dvrris to Plat. Phaedr. 244 E;

that TTOT^ was a later addition after 0eD and in its application to seafaring, which

0eO had disappeared than that Valckenaer is implied by yijs 7ri\//avo~a.i>Ta., is best

{diatr. p. 194) was right in accepting illustrated by the famous lines of Lucretius

Stobaeus' text with roOSe for TOIJTOV. (2. if.): suave mari magno ttirbantibus

Papageorgius points out that Michael aequora ventis|

e terra magnum alterius

264 204>OKAEOY!

spectarelaborem. Archipp.fr. 43 (i 688 K.)u>s r)8 ft TT)v 6d\aTrav dirb T^J 7775 bpav, |

a)

fj-yrep, tori /JLT) ir\tovTa fj.-rj8afji.ov. Hor.

Epist. i . ii. i o Neptunum procul e terra

spectare furentem. For the followingwords they quote Tibull. i. i. 45 ff.

quam iuvat immites ventos audire cuban-tem

j

et dominant tenero continuisse sinu|

aut) gelidas hibernus aquas cum fuderttAuster,

|

securum somnos imbre iu-

vante sequi. See especially the simile

in Ap. Rhod. 2. 1085 ff- &s 5' oirdre

KpOVldyS TTVKLvty e<j>1)K Xaâfav I

^K

vefptuv dvd r' a<rrv Kal otxia, rot 5' vtrb

roiffivIevvatrai Kbvafiov reyttov virep

eio-aiozres|^J/TCU dicfiv, ^TTCI otf cr0e

/car^XXa/3e xe 'Aia7"os u>/7 | dirpotpdrajs, dXXd

Trpiv (KOLprvvavTO fi\adpov. For Kara,which is nothing but a strengthened elra,

following a participle, cf. Ar. Lys. 560dcrTT/5' âw /cal ropyoj'a rts K$T'

KopaifLvovs, Eq. 391 dXX' 6'/xws

oSros rotouTos cSj/ OLTravTO. rov fiiov | /c^tr'

avyp tdo&v elvai, Plat. 6*^^. 457 B eav

5^ prjTOpiKOS ~yev6(j.v6$ ru /c^ra raur?; rr;

dvvdfjLei Kal rfj r^xvt) dSiKrj, Blaydes on

Ar. Nub. 624. H., who quotes Av. 674dXX' uxrirep (pov vrj Af diroXâvra XP?] I

aTro rrjs Ke<f>a\r)s r6 X^/i/xa /c$^' OUTCJ

0iXe/, and Ael. w<7/. aw. 6. 64, holds that

this idiomatic use of /c$ra expresses a

rapid transition to the sequel, sometimes

unexpected, of the previous action. Hewell compares Catull. 31. 7 o quid solutis

est beatius curis,|

cum metis onus reponif,ac peregrine |

labore fessi venimus laremad nostrum

| desideratoque acquiescimus

lecto, where the last clause has the sameeffect. Starkie on Vesp. 49 collects the

examples in Aristophanes, but I cannotfollow him in attributing the idiom to

anacoluthon. For the corruption ofKAI0see Cobet, N. L. p. 101. Blomfield's con-

jecture eTri\f>av(rai re is thus unnecessary.-

irvKVTis KTC.,'

to hear the patter of the

rain-drops with slumbering sense.' P.

Shorey in Class. Phil. V 83 ff. arguesthat evSovo-T) <{>pvi is only a convenient

periphrasis for a modal adverb,'

sleepily,'so to speak. He has collected lists of

similar datives accompanied by adjectivesand participles (so faxy, Kapdia, voy,

6vw, 7VCJM77, \epi, nodi, Tp6ir<{., rvxy, jSty,

TexvD an<^ niany others) with the objectof showing that little or no stress is laid

on the noun, and that its appearance is

merely a stylistic artifice. He has done

good service in noticing the tendency,but it is extremely difficult to estimate

exactly the subtlety of intention which

may have been present to various writers

at different times. Each case must be

judged on its own merits, and here at

any rate I do not feel that <f>pevl is otiose :

cf. Aesch. Ag. 287 /3/>tfotf(n?s 0pe/6s.H. renders :

Ah, what joyCan out-joy this to reach the land

and then,

Safe-lodged, with happy drowsing senseto hear

The raindrops pattering on the roof

outside !

637

ls 8' ev avrpois, iivOa 2,apTrr)$a)v Trerpa

637 avrpois Bergk : aarpois cod.

637 Herodian TT. fj.ov. Xe|. p. 9, napTTTjScWs, eire 6 ypus, eire ^

,et're i} dxT??, efre 77 vijcros

' ws irapd

For the Sarpedon promontory see onfr. 46. That however must be distin-

guished from the wild spot to whichBoreas carried off Orithyia : Apoll. Rhod.I. 213 <rxaTlV QpiiKtjs dv<Txe<-V-tpov...Kal

fj.iv aywif Ka0ev, âpTrrjdovirjv 861 irerp-rjv |

/cXetoimi'. The scholiast on this passage

quotes Simonides (PLG in 382) and

Pherecydes (FffG i 97) as authorities

for the legend. Cf. Ant. 9835' ev avrpois rpd(pTf] 0v\\a.t<ru> ev ira-

r/xâts | Bopeds a'/UTTTros opdoirodos virep

rrdyov. Jebb there points out that the

cave of Boreas was far to the north in

Mt Haemus. Add Callim. A. Del. 62

5 ntv tr^dof -fjireipoto | rjêvos

Kopv<f>rjs ZTTI Gp^t/cos A.'ifjLov| 6ovp

(j>v\aKT] 6e avv tvreai, rw 5^ ot I'TTTTW|

TTTd/j.vxov Bopeao Trapd (TTTÔS TjvXiôvTO.

For the confusion of avTpov and acrrpov

Blaydes refers to Eur. fr. 755 (schol. Ar.

Ran. 1328).

TYMTTANI2TAI 265

638

re XoAScuo? re KOLL 2<vpa)v #1/09

638 Steph. Byz. p. 680, 14 XaXScnot

.etVt 5e /cal XaXScuoi Zdvos Tr\r]criov rrjs

These peoples are grouped togetheras inhabitants of the farthest east.

Originally Chaldaea was the name of a

strip of coastland to the north-west of

the Persian Gulf; but by the majority of

classical writers it was used as syno-

nymous with Assyria : see Baumstark in

Pauly-Wissowa ill 2044. Dittenbergerin Hermes XLII 212 remarks that this is

the earliest example of Evpos in place of

Ztfptos. He holds that the shortened formarose from the compound Avi<6<rvpos (cf.

lirTroTrdra/Jios : ITTTTOS Trord/mios, etc.), andthinks there may be some significance in

the fact that this passage refers to thenorthern Syrians.

639

639 Hesych. I p. 44 aorjfjiov OVK

ovTa. 2o0o/f\^s Tu^TravKTrais.which is not recorded else-

where, was apparently synonymous with

a,Tr65r)[jios. For similar doublets see on

fr. 558. If &dr)fj.os expressed nothing morethan a temporary absence from home,analogy does not support the usage. Weshould rather expect it to be applied to an

exile, like ctTroXts and (Warios.

640

64O Hesych. n p. 510vo/J.ifcTa.1, X^yercu. oirep eariv rf

Kock (i 806) assigns this to the

Tai (or TvfJiiravlo'Tpiai) of Auto-

crates, and there is nothing to determinewhether he is right as against those whohave claimed it for Sophocles. Kock's

only ground for making the attribu-

tion is that, inasmuch as the title

Tvfj.TraviffTpiai is more appropriate than

TvfjLTravKTTal to the fragment (fr. r) quoted

by Ael. nat. an. 12. 9, it is likely to bethe true title of Autocrates' play. In the

fragment referred to (fr. i, 3 f.), whereit is clear that something has fallen out,H. would read Kov<pa inj5&<Tai. <-jrodoiv

Kdva<rfiov(rai> KOfiav, quoting Ar. Lys.

1308 18, Eur. Bacch. 240. rj has

been corrected to iv (Musurus) : but this

would introduce an unusual formula of

quotation, and it is obvious that the

whole gloss is 'corrupt. I infer fromH. 's notes that he thought the originalwas something like <eVr> Ktbvo/udêTai-

<tffri Kai> VO/J.L fercu 17 \eyerai Strep

fffri, i.e.'is thought or called what it

really is,' where name and nature corre-

spond. He finds the earliest occurrence

of this thought in Aesch. Pers. 657 0eo/7-

ffrwp 5' KiK\r}0-KTO n^/xrcus, 6eofJ.r)<TTup

5' tffKev, and adds the following list of

illustrations : Eur. Ion 309 TOV deov

K^K\rjfji.ai 5ov\os el/jd V, w &vr], Dio

Chrys. 56. 5 irdvTes yap OVTOI, oOs <rv

vvv 6vofJ.dfeis, /SacriXets fKoXovvro Kal rjcrav,

38. 19 ravra tv rots /ca/cot$ Tarrerat Kal

oiirws < ws> ^X l Ka-i vevofjuarai Kal

AcaXf?rai KaK&, Phot, epist. 239 euffe/Siys

pera TOV elvai Kai ovofjidêrai, Xen. mem.1. T. 20 old TIS av Kal \tyuv Kai irpdrruv

ef>; re Kal vofj-Lôiro eiHrefitffTaTos, Cyr. i.

2. 3 t&pxovrai TrjviKavra e/s TOVS yepai-

r^povs ovras re Kal Ka\ov/j,frovs, Aristaen.

2. J2 <TTI 6e Kal TOV Tpbtrov Kal TO&vo[J.a

Aetj/o/tcixTj, Lucian de dea Syr. I /caXêrcu

dt'Ip?}, Kal ZffTiv IpT) T^S Hpr;s, paras. 44TOV 'Ax^XXâ, offirep ^56/cet re Kal yv TO

<rw/j.a yevvaioTaTOS, Alciphr. 3. 44 ratfrTjs

(SC. Ttix 1!*) TVX^V T)5vS J-ffTL Kal VOfJ-lffTai,

Plut. brut. rat. ut. 7 p. 990 A i) fj-ev yapy\&TTa . . , yvufjiuv fort re Kal Xeêrai,

Epict. man. 15 d^ws Oeiot re ^<rav Kal

(\tyovTo, Cic. Att. i. 15. i praeterceteros d>t\^\\iivfs et sunnis e.t habemur.

266

641

641 Hesych. I p. 197 dêrcDs' ava-

Phavorinus corrected the explanation to

dvaTTafj,tvws, and so the gloss is printed

by the editors of Hesych. and Soph.,regardless of the fact that dveTtDs oughtto mean exactly the opposite of avarera-

/j.tvws. Tucker (C. R. xvm 431) pro-

posed drcj'tDs, and the same correction

was made independently by Housman(C. Q. iv 117). I should prefer to read

dva.TreirTaiJ.ti>us in the sense of '

openly,

frankly,' for ava.ireTavvvfj.1 is a commonword in scholiastic Greek. There is no

other certain instance of the word averts

(or perhaps rather d^rws, as Housman,and before him Lobeck, Paralip. p. 481,

preferred) ;but Lobeck (Phryn. p. 70)

was probably right in restoring it in

Hesych. I p. 313 drerws' aQpovrlaTus.In the new papyrus of the Aetia of

Callimachus (Ox. Pap. vii p. 26) at

v. 39 the MS seems to have 77 5' dêruJs

wav tKa\v\(/ev ^TTOS, but this is obviously

impossible and has been variouslyemended : see the remarks of Platt (C. Q.IV 112), who proposes KaveKoXvêv, andHousman (I.e.).

642

642 Hesych. I p. 215So00K\?;s Tv/JuraviffTai

The only recorded meaning of

is 'to require an equivalent,' which doesnot suit dvTio-Tp^<j>w. The usage of the

simple verb might justify us in supposingthat it also meant 'to make (or deem) equi-

valent'; and in that sense it might havebeen used to explain dvTKrrptyw (\6yov) =' to retort,' since dpraiu> could hardly be

intransitive. But I believe the true read-

ing is &vTioQ, and that Soph, used dvri-

(TTptyeiv for'

to be opposed to'

or ' to

correspond to.' The idea that di/Ttoos

was solely Ionic and poetical is probablyincorrect. It was a technical trade termwith carpenters and masons ;

and there

is plenty of evidence of its survival in

Hellenistic and Byzantine times.

643

Spa/cauXos

643 Etym. M. p. 287, 14 and Suid.

s.v. Spd/caiAos. Soô/cX^s Tv/i,7raj>i<rrcus.

eTrei i) 'Adyvd doKei Trap' aurcus av\l<rat

TOV dpaKOvra rats K^KJOOTTOS dvyarpdcnv$ tin {rvvavXifrvTai /card TO ei/cos Ke/fpoTriovn di<f>vei" rj 6'n crvvavXiferai /j.ia T$ tv

rrj di<poTrb\ei dpaKOvri, irpoff'rj/Jiepevovffa rrj

Ocy. Hesych. I p. 534 5pd/cavXos- eireidr]

'Adrjva irap avrols av\i<rcu rbv

2o0o/cX^s TvfjnravKrTcus'

rj OTI

The first explanation of this obscureword refers to the story of Erichthonius,whom Athena was said to have enclosed

in a chest immediately after his birth,

and to have entrusted to the guardianshipof the three daughters of Cecrops. She

charged them strictly that they should onno account open the chest. Nevertheless,

impelled by curiosity, one or more of the

three sisters, Aglauros, Pandrosos, and

Herse, examined the box, and saw the

child with one or two (according to others)

serpents coiled around him. Accordingto one account, the offenders were killed

by the serpent ; but others said that theywere visited with frenzy in consequenceof their disobedience to the goddess, andthrew themselves down the rock of the

Acropolis. The chief authorities are

Eur. Ion 21 ff., 271 ff. ; Ov. Met. 2.

552 ff.; Apollod. 3. 189. The second

explanation mentions the association of

his daughters with Cecrops, for whom

TYMHANIZTAI 267

cf. Ar. Vesp. 438 c5 K^/cpoi/' T?/>WS dVa,TO. irpbs TTod&v ApaKovrtdrj. According to

the third view, one of the sisters servedthe goddess as attendant on her sacred

serpent which lived on the Acropolis :

for the oiKovpbs 8(pis see Hdt. 8. 41, Ar.

Lys. 758. Frazer (on Pausan. i. 18. 2)holds that Erichthonius was originally a

personification of this serpent.From the above evidence modern

authorities (Jessen in Pauly-Wissowa v1646, Gruppe Gr. Myth. p. 808) drawthe inference that SpaicauXos was a title

of Athena. The more natural conclusionis that it was employed as an epithet of

the daughters of Cecrops or of one ofthem. But the word itself, which doesnot recur, is mysterious. It was inter-

preted as fy>a/toj>T-avXos, and Lobeck(Paral. p. 48, Phryn. p. 669) comparesit with \e6-rrap5os, yvvaiâvrjs, 'ArXcryei/^s,and the like. See also the examples of

metaplasm in -n- stems given by Brug-mann, Comp. Gr. n p. 27 E. tr. Butthe compound

*

snake-dwelling'

can with

difficulty be forced to bear the meaning'

living with a snake'

; and we may sus-

pect that the traditional explanationshave grown out of the popular derivation

of an obsolete word. Crusius, however,

suggests (in Roscher I 1200) that the

second part of the compound is to be

explained by the association of sacred

serpents with particular caves or hollows,and refers to Asclepius Aulonius (Pausan.4. 36. 7), and Aulis, the name of one of

the Praxidicae (Suid. s.v.}. SpaKavXoswould then be an epithet of the guardiansnake itself. It is worth notice that anallusion .to Erichthonius would be natural

in the Tympanistae, if the fortunes of

Phineus were its subject ;for Orithyia,

the mother of Cleopatra, was the daughterof Erechtheus (Ant. 981 f.).

644

644 Athen. 176 F, for which see on fr. 450.

645

645 Schol. Soph. Ant. 981 fjêra 5e

rbv KXeoTrdrpas Q6.vo.rov eireyrmev (sc.

Phineus) 'I5aaj/ rty Aapddvov, /caret 5<:

Tivas EidoOtav rr]v KdS/xov dSeX^r, rjs

Kdl dVTOS 2o00/tX^S /ULVr/fJ-OVC^tL V Tu/A-

TrcuucTTCus'

rJTis ^ tTrt/Soi/X^s ru0Xcocra(ra<TOI>S> r-i}? KXeoTrdrpas TrcuSas v rct0y

Kadeipiêv, ujs 5^ rives (pa<riv on /carei/'etf-

craro avrwv are dri irfipaaavruv avrrfv ty'ols dTrarr/deis 6 3>Lvevs dfj.ffoore'povs ri/0Xoi

'

raGra 5e iaropel 'A7roXX65w/)os ev rfj

(3. 206)'

rives 8e iaropovcrLv

ireptov<rav TT]V KXeoTrarpai' 6 3>ivevs

Kal rriv 'IdaLav e'ire'yri/j,ei', TI be

TOI)S eavrrjs eru^Xaxrej' 7ra?5as.

This passage is so important that it

requires to be set out at length ; but it is

impossible to determine on the evidencewhich it affords taken by itself how muchof the story and which version of it wereincluded in the Tympanistae. For the

difficult questions involved see Intro-

ductory Note to the Phineus (p. 313).Here it is enough to point out that the

scholiast refers to three different versions

of the blinding of the Phineidae, according

to which the agent in the savage deedwas either (i) the stepmother Idaea (or

Idothea), (2) Phineus, or (3) Cleopatra.The first two are repeated in schol. Ap.Rhod. i. 211. According to schol.

Apoll. Rhod. 2. 178 (fr. 704) Sophoclesadopted (2). But in the Antigone (973

978) he clearly follows (i), not only in

describing the outrage as inflicted by the

stepmother, but also in referring to the

imprisonment of the sons. Moreover, if

Jebb is right in inferring that the fate of

Cleopatra was the subject of the com-

parison made in the Antigone, the poethas there in part introduced the version

of (3) ;for according to (i) and (2) [/xera

5 rbv KXeoTraT/ras ddvarov] Cleopatrawas already dead.

The schol. appears to say that Idotheawas the name of the stepmother in the

Tympanistae ; but, as there is definite

evidence that Sophocles elsewhere if not

here called her Idaea (see on fr. 704),G. Wolff's suggestion that rjs goes backto 'Idaiav has met with some favour.

268 104>OKAEOY!

TYNAAPEQZUntil quite recently only a single quotation (fr. 646) was

referred to the title Tyndareus. Welcker accordingly conjectured

(p. 216) that Tyndareus was a character in the Aletes, to which

play the lines should be attributed. Ribbeck (p. 268) took a

similar view, but preferred to assign the fragment to the

Hermione; and Bernhardy (Gr. Litt? II. 2 p. 334) thought that

the lines bore the stamp of a later period and should be regardedas the work of the younger Sophocles. Now that a second

quotation has come to light in the newly-discovered Photius

(fr. 647), the probability of error is proportionately diminished.

Wilamowitz 1

, however, still thinks that Bernhardy's judgment of

fr. 646 was correct, and Hense suggests that the real Tyndareusfragment and the lemma to which the words quoted belong havebeen lost from the text of Stobaeus.

Tyndareus is not a character whose own fortunes are likelyto have been made the subject of a play ;

for there is nothingdramatic in the story of his banishment, as related by Pausan. 3.

i. 4, and Apollod. 3. 124 f. He rather became notorious owingto the evil deeds of his daughters : Eur. Or. 540 eya) Se raXXa

7r6<pv/c avrjp, \ 7r\r)v 69 Quyarepw TOVTO 8' ov/c evSat-

This passage suggests that fr. 646 refers to a time whenthe prosperity of Tyndareus was impaired in consequence of the

sorrows of his descendants, and the allusion to old age in fr. 647

points in the same direction. One legend made him the

accuser of Orestes in his trial at Athens (Apollod. epit. 6. 25)2

.

Tyndareus was the title of a tragedy by Nicomachus, for

whom see Haigh, Tragic Drama, p. 469.

646

ov yjpJ) TTOT v TrpdcrcrovTOS 6X/3tcrai

irplv avro) Trai^reXai? 17817

8iK7Tpa0rj KOL

646. 3 diK7repa6fj Nauck : dieKTrepavQ-g codd.| 5p6ju.ov H. : fiiov codd.

646 Stob. flor. 105. 3 (IV p. 928, 5 Plclid. 865 rbv evTvx&v doKouvra /JLT] fr/AoOi',

Hense) 2o00K\ôus TwScxpews. 'ov xPV irpiv&v |

davbvr t8r) ris* ws e<f>rifj.epoi TJ^CU,...rd5e.' For the genuineness of the where see n. for the famous saw of Solon:

fragment see Introductory Note. see also Jebb on 0. T. 1529. For the

1 6 No one must be pronounced instability of wealth see on fr. 106.

happy before his death : so insecure is 2 f. PIOS with filov following has

human fortune. To the same effect Eur. naturally been suspected : hence Blom-

1Sitzungsb. Berl. Akad. 1907 p. 6.

2 See also Introductory Note to Erigone, I p. 173.

TYNAAPEQZ 269

iv yap fipayel Ka0i\

7ra/x7rXot>Toi> o\ftov Sai/xoi>os KOLKOV

OTOLV peracTTrj KCU Oeols 80/07 raSe.

4 KoXiyi? S, Kai

Meineke, K&XLyovcodd. : corr. Gesner

M, K&V dXiyw A, KOU /j.axp$ coni. Bergk,Enger, fort. KaXdyy 5 irav TT\OVTOV vel TTOLV TT\OVTOV

field proposed XP "05 - Bergk 7r6r/tios, andF. W. Schmidt rpf/3os. But it is more

likely that filov is faulty, and H.'s con-

jecture 8p6[xov is the best remedy that has

been suggested. He quotes in supportof it fr. 856, schol. Ar. Lys. 60 r (rrtywosws rbv fiiov 8i7iyvi<r/j.frois, Epicrates fr. 3,

1 8 (II 283 K.) eirei 8 SoXixov rots ereffiv

tf5r] rpexet>Paul 2 Tim. 4. 7, ^/. Apost.

20. 24, 13. 25. Earlier suggestions were

T\VTT/)ffas <pavrj (Schneidewin),reXevn}0"j7/caXcDs (Heimsoeth), TeXeurija-cu'T' tSfls

(Meineke) : the last-named scholar sub-

sequently gave the preference to Trai'TeXws

tfdri plov...T6\VTi)df) xpbvos- I adoptNauck's SieKirepaOfj, as the change is in-

considerable, and SifKirepav fiiov occurs

in Eur. Supp. 954. It should be observed

also that irepav is used in the parallel

passages O. T. 1529, Eur. Andr. 102.

For the subjunctive after irpiv without av

see Jebb on Phil. 917.4 4v ppaxi...KXfya) \p6vu is open

to obvious objection, and, if written bySophocles, belongs to one of his least

happy moments. Dindorf quotes Euseb.

dent. ev. 3 p. 89 A oi tv 6\iy<{) Kai j8pctx

XP&W TTJJ/ TTOLffav Trepi5pafjt.ovfj.evoL oiKov^-

vi]v, but the authority of Eusebius is not

convincing. Lucian Nigrin. 33 6X170-

Xpoviov Kai /3/>axetccs TjdovTJs, as F. W.Schmidt justly remarks, does not defend

the text. The same critic argues in

favour of the adoption of KciXtyy Tro^y,

quoting O.C. 1341 fipax^ <?vv oyKi^ Kai

Xpoi'v (where irbvy has some MS support),and padlws Kai raxv and similar combina-tions in late authors. Perhaps howeverwe might read Ka\6y(^ 'incalculable': the

word was used by Soph. (fr. 262), andfor the sense I would compare Thuc. 6.

46, where the comparative is to be ex-

plained according to the n. on Eur.

Hclid. no, 'incalculable rather than not.'

For the use of the preposition kv in

such phrases see Jebb on 0. C. 88.

5 f. Exception has been taken to two

points in these lines : (i) Soo-is is altered

to fitvos by F. W. Schmidt, and to <j)66vos

by Herzer (rl<ris conj. Blaydes) ; (2) Nauck(Index, p. xin ) thought that v. 6 did not

cohere with the preceding words, andthat it must have been wrongly attachedto the present fragment. Taking the

latter criticism first, I understand Ka/c6s

daifj-wv as the subject of |iTa<rTfj, appliedhere, as in Plat. rep. 55312, to that whichcomes into being as the result of change.The form of expression is familiar to

tragedy : cf. Aesch. Pers. 161 ei ri /J.TJ

daifMWV TTdXcUOS VVV /ieÔ-TT/KC (TTpaT$,ib. 944 daijj.b)!' yap od' av

| /êrdrpoTrosfir' efjioL (where Paley rightly explains

a5), Theb. 693 eird dalfj-wv| X^/uaros a5

rpoiraia xP v ^-a M^raX-|

Xa/crds f(ra>s av

Eur. Ale. 912 [jifTairlirTOVTOS oal-

Tro. 1 02 fjt,eTaj3d\\ojjievov dal/j.ovos.

It is not always easy to seize the exact

force of Sai/xwv, which was rapidly

moving towards the impersonal sense :

see on fr. 653. But Saipovos KO.KOV

86<ris here is not merely' the dispensation

of a cruel fate.' In these words we can

hardly fail to see the expression of a

belief in the subjection to the control

of a mysterious and destructive power,which is sometimes imagined as per-

meating its victim (cf. KaKodai/movav : so

I should incline to explain Ai. 1214dveirat <TTvyep$ daipovi), but more often

as assailing him from without (0. T. 1301T/S 6 Tn>)d'/)(Tas |

[Aeifava daifMuv r&v ^ca/ci-

ffTtdv| ?rpds ff~fi dvff5ai/j.ovL (j-oipa ; Pers.

356 yp&v M^, w 5e<riroiva, rou iravrbs

KaKov| (paveis dXcto'TW/3 17 Ka/c6s oaLfji&v

TTodev). I will only add that the well-

known line of Menander (fr. 550, in

167 K. airavTi dat/AW avdpi avfj.Trapta'Ta-

rai|

evdvs yevop:ev(p) does not imply that

every one is always guided by an un-

changeable daifj.ui'. The influences to

which we are exposed are various, andeven if El. 916 ro?s at>Tol<rl rot

| oi>x

aurds dei daipovuv irapao-raTei is not to

be taken in the fullest sense (see Kaibel's

n.), it points to the existence of a popularbelief to that effect. The Stoics took

account of current opinion, when they

incorporated this doctrine in their system :

cf. Pint. qu. Rom. 51 p. 277 A Kaddirepoi Trepi XpiATiTTTroj' o'lovrai <pt\6ffo<poi <pav\a

daifj-ovia irepwooTeiv, ofs oi deoi

2;o !0<t>OKAEOY

XPWVTCU /ecu KoXaffTais tiri TOVS avoviovs be dispelled by a reference to Eur. Hipp.

Kaia8lKovsdi'dp67rovs. If these considera- 1433 f. (quoted on fr. 665), and that the

tions are recognized, there is the less gifts of the '

gods'

may be evil is con-

difficulty in 56<ris (see 0. T. 1518, fr. 964, stantly laid down (Headlam, On editing

Aesch. Pers. 1042); for if any doubt is Aeschylus, p. 89). raSc refers to the

felt as to the agency imputed to it, it will action of

647

i

'

oxx' VTTO

647 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 89, 20 dp- p\vuireii>, according to Harpocr. p. 14,

p\v(j)aei- 2o0o/cX?7S Tuv5d/>e^''

d^Xvâei 18 n. Pollux 2.51 similarly states that

...yripws.' d/j-fiXvATTuv is better than d,u/3Ai>w7r6s,

d|i(3Xv<f>aiv, not elsewhere recorded, is which is Trot^rt/cwrepo^. Cf. fr. TOOL

a poetical variant for appXvdrTctv, which Wilamowitz, doubting the existence of

was preferred by Attic writers to d/t- such a verb, proposed d[jip\v<j)ats.

TYPQ A AND B

In Horn, ft 120 Tyro is mentioned as one of the 6V7r\o/ca-

yiuSe? 'Aâtou, who belonged to an earlier generation. In X 235

Odysseus includes her in the list of famous women in the under-

world, whose spirits he questioned, as they came to drink the

blood from the trench. Tyro was the daughter of Salmoneusand the wife of Cretheus his brother. Being enamoured of the

Thessalian 1

river-god Enipeus, she used to pay frequent visits

to the bank of the stream. Here Poseidon wooed her in the

likeness of Enipeus, and begat by her Pelias and Neleus, whoboth became mighty chieftains, Pelias in lolcus, and Neleus in

Pylos. And to Cretheus Tyro bore Aeson, Pheres, and Amy-thaon. Lucian (dial. mar. 13) uses the Homeric account without

adding anything to it;but it scarcely contains the elements of

a dramatic story. According to Apollod. I. 90 92, Tyro, the

daughter of Salmoneus and Alcidice, while she was beingbrought up in the house of Cretheus, her paternal uncle, becameenamoured of Enipeus. The sequel fell out as in Homer; but,when Tyro's twins were born, she concealed the birth, and ex-

posed them. A herd of horses passed by, and a mare trod onone of the infants, leaving a livid mark on its face. The herds-

man reared the children, giving to the injured child the namePelias (from TreXô?), and to the other that of Neleus. When

1 There is nothing in Homer connecting Tyro with the Elean Enipeus: for the

other view see Strabo 356. The Thessalian Enipeus is specified in Prop. i. 13. 21,

3- 19- J 3-

TYNAAPEQZ TYPQ 271

they grew up, they discovered their mother, and put to deathher stepmother Sidero, by whom Tyro had been ill-treated.

Sidero had escaped from them to the sanctuary of Hera, but

Pelias, who subsequently continued to slight the power of the

goddess, cut her down at the altar. The scene is still Thessaly,as is proved by the constant connexion of Cretheus with lolcus 1

.

Diodorus (4. 68), who eliminates all the romantic details, locates

the intrigue with Poseidon in Elis at a time subsequent to the

death of Salmoneus, and makes the marriage with Cretheuslater still. Schol. Horn. K 334 and Eustathius (Od. p. 1681, 52)add to the story of Pelias' disfigurement that the other child wassuckled by a bitch who had lost her puppies. Aelian (v.k. 12. 45)

says that Pelias was reared by a mare. The circumstances of

the children's exposure and their subsequent recognition recall

the legend of Romulus and Remus; and Trieber (Rk. Mus. XLIII

569 fT.) held that Sophocles was the ultimate source from whichDiocles of Peparethos derived the details of the Roman myth

2.

From this rather scanty material 3 we are left to deduce the

plot of Sophocles with such assistance as is provided by certain

external evidence relating to the play. From schol. Eur. Or. 1691we learn that the recognition took place in the concluding scene

(fcard TO reXo<?). Further, Aristotle (poet. 1 6. I454b25) states

that it was effected by means of the cradle in which the babies

were exposed. This incident was the subject of a jesting allusion

in the Lysistrata of Aristophanes (fr. 657). The result of Tyro'sill-treatment by Sidero was made visible to the spectators by the

actor's mask : Pollux 4. 141 (among the examples of ra etco-iceva

TrpocrcoTra) Tvpw 7T6\i,$vr) ra? Trapeta? Trapd o<o/cXe...TOz)TO S'

VTTO T?)? /jLrjrpvids îftrjpovs TrXrjyals4 nrkirovQev. Her disfigure-

ment contrasted markedly with the cream-white complexion,which had earned for her the name of Tyro : see on fr. 648.

Similarly the effect of fr. 659 is much more striking when werecall that her hair was one of the chief ornaments of Tyro's

beauty. Horn, ft 119, referred to above, may be merely formal,but such is hardly the case with Pind. Pyth. 4. 1 36 TupoO? epa-

We cannot suppose that the tragedies of Astydamas (Suid.)and Carcinus (TGF p. 799) had much effect upon the tradition,

1Apollod. i. 96, 107. The version of Apollodorus is clearly an unsuccessful

conflation of two different stories, rpeô^vt] Trapa KpijOei is an attempt to reconcile

the tradition that Tyro was wife of Cretheus with the essential requirement of the

story that she was persecuted by her stepmother.2 See also Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa v 797.3Nothing of importance is added by Libanius or Nonnus ap. Westermann,

Mythogr. pp. 369, 384.4 There is no necessity to follow Nauck in reading

272 I000KAEOYI

and, in view of the dearth of literary evidence, Welcker not

unreasonably illustrated Sophocles by the help of a Cyziceneepigram: A.P. 3. 9 h T&> ITeX/a? KOI N?;Xeu9 eXXeXafewrau,ol IIocretS(WZ>09 TratSe?, e/c SeafAwv rrjv eavrcov jj,r)Tepa pvo/juevoi, r}v

Trpayrjv o Trarrjp JJLCV SaX/Ltcozêu? Sid rrjv (f)6opav eoijGev r) Se /jirj-

Tpvid avTTj^ ZtiSrjpco ra? /3ao"dvov<? avrfj e

fjir) Tvpa) Tpvôi crov enâ\fjbO)Vl yevera r&)8'

ov/cert, <yap $ov\ct)(T6i, ev ep/ceaiv, eyyvOi

N?;Xea fcal TIe\iav r

Engelmann2, however, repudiated the relevance to Sophocles of

this epigram ;and relied on archaeological evidence to prove that

the recognition by Tyro of her sons took place near a fountain

to which she had been sent to fetch water. Even if he is wrong,Welcker's explanation of fr. 660 as referring to Tyro's prison-house is highly improbable. It is much more likely that it

describes an ill-omened incident 3,which interrupted the progress

of a festal banquet. Possibly the same feast is referred to in

fr. 666, from which Welcker inferred that Salmoneus entertained

the two sons on their arrival.

New evidence has recently come to light, which bears on the

circumstances of the recognition ;for we can hardly doubt that

Menand. Epitr. 108116 refers to the Tyro of Sophocles:reOeaaai rpayaySoix;, ol8' on,

/cat ravra /care'êt? Trdvra. N^Xea TIVCL

Y\e\lav r' eVetVou? evpe Trpeo-ffvTrjs dvrjp

atVoXo?, %a)v oiav ya) vvv

a>9 & rjcrOer' avrovs ovras avrovTO TTpdy/ji', &>9 evpev, 0)9

& avrois Trrjpi&iov

% ov /jia06vT<> irdvTd rd K,a& avrov? cra<^>a)9

eyevovro y8acr^Xet9 ol TOT 6We9 atVoXot.

Here there are two facts which appear to be at variance with the

rest of our information : (i) atVoXo? contradicts Apollodorus, and

appears to exclude the etymological explanation of the namePelias. In this respect we may well prefer Menander to Apollo-dorus, for there is nothing to show that the latter drew upon a

tragic source. (2) TrrjpiSLov yva)p(,o-/jbdTcov seems to exclude re-

cognition by means of theo-fcdcfrrj. The statements previously

quoted concerning the o-fcd^r) are such as we cannot reject; but

it is not necessarily inconsistent with them to suppose that the

1 Stadtmueller's text. Wilamowitz (ap. Engelmann, p. 50 n.) proposedin v. 3.

2 Arch. Studien, p. 40 ff.

3 So also Engelmann, p. 46, and Hartung, p. 74.

TYPQ 273

foster-father of the youths, when parting with them, gave themthe crepundia which he had found in the cr/cdfa for the purposeof establishing their rank. Observe that the change of conditionis Menander's point, and the a/cdc^rj might well have appeared an

inadequate token of their origin.

Engelmann seems to be justified in inferring from Aristophanesthat Poseidon appeared at the end of the play as fleo? OLTTO pvixavffr.His appearance was necessary to the complete vindication of

Tyro ;for we must suppose that Salmoneus had acquiesced in

the cruelty of Sidero in consequence of the disgrace which hadbefallen his daughter

1. Further, Engelmann is certainly right

in maintaining that Salmoneus was still alive, though frs. 664and 665 might be otherwise explained than with reference to

the discovery of his error. But the power of a stepmother overthe children of her husband's former wife ceases of necessitywhen their father dies. For similar reasons we ought to con-clude that Tyro was not already the wife of Cretheus, whenshe was seduced by Poseidon. Here at least we may follow

Diodorus, with whom Sophocles probably also agreed in makingElis the scene of the action 2

. The confused narrative of Apollo-dorus seems to have been influenced by a desire to adhere to the

Thessalian Enipeus, although he did not venture to assert that

Salmoneus and Sidero were living in Thessaly. The marriagewith Cretheus must therefore have been subsequent to the re-

habilitation of Tyro, and Engelmann plausibly suggests that

Poseidon ordered Salmoneus to betroth his daughter to his

younger brother.

So far we have attempted to form some notion of the scopeand progress of the play composed on the theme of the sorrowswhich befell Tyro as the result of her union with Poseidon. Weshould expect it to contain an exposition of Tyro's unhappinessand Sidero's cruelty, the arrival of the young men, their meetingwith Salmoneus, their recognition of their mother, the punishmentof Sidero, and the final appearance of Poseidon. But there is

conclusive evidence that Sophocles wrote two plays bearing this

title. What then was the subject of the second play? Welckerhad no hesitation in holding that it was nothing but a revised

edition of the first, and Dindorf agreed with him. Engelmannhas recently revived a suggestion formerly made by Hartung

3

that the subject of the second Tyro is to be found in Hygin.fab. 60 (cf. ib. 239, 254), which has already been abstracted in

the Introductory Note to the Sisyphus, and, in order to fill the

lacuna in the text, he supposes that Sisyphus avenged himself

1 See A. P. 3. 9 (supra).2 Cf. fr. 649, 39.

3p. 77-

P. II. 18

274 !04>OKAEOY1

by persuading Salmoneus to imitate Zeus. Another possibility

is that the tragedy comprised the earlier history of Tyro, and

the circumstances of her betrayal. In that case fr. 653 would

be appropriate to the concealment of Tyro's lot, echoing the

command of Poseidon in \ 251 vvv S' 8p%eu 777309 Swâ,' KOI

i&x60 A67?^' ovofitfvys. Neither Welcker's explanation that the

words were spoken by one of the sons in the recognition-scene,nor Engelmann's that Salmoneus asked that his mistake should

not be published, seems to be entirely satisfactory. But on the

general question Nauck's verdict is hardly to be gainsaid :

'

differential!! (fabularum) rimari nunc non licet.'

Ribbeck 1 thinks that the anonymous Nelei carmen was

largely concerned with this subject.The Tyro was probably produced not long before the Aves

(fr. 654).

"

648

\VKOV avrrjv <SS* eVaiSevcrez' yaXa

648 ov \evKbv Welcker, \evit6v (Xev/cV Cobet) yap Brunck, XvKetov olim Nauckc55' Welcker: 55' codd., OVK Brunck

648 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 108, 6

iraidciav vvv rijv Trai5oTpo<piai>. odev /cat

So0o/cX^s tv IleXia <f>r)<rl

' \evxov avTTjv

6'5' iral5ev<re yciXa.'' Since no IleX/as of

Soph, is mentioned elsewhere, Boettiger

conjectured that it was another name for

the 'Pifor6/i(n, and Hermann that it wasan error for ev IlT/Xet. But a detail is

recorded which points elsewhere : Pelias

was the son of Tyro, who derived her

name from her complexion, white as the

proverbial cheese : Diod. exc. 6. 7. 5

6 SaX/xcopeus ffX QvyaT^pa fvpw, T?TIS

5ia TTJJ' Xef/cor^ra /cat rty TOV trw/Aaros

/x,aXaK6r?jTa ravrris rrjs jrpoffrjyopias ri-

reixe- Since Pelias was Tyro's son, it

is likely that Tyro is referred to in the

fragment ;and ev IleXia presumably means

fv TupoT (a' or /S'),for in that tragedy her

iron-hearted stepmother, Sidero, was

put to death by Pelias.' (H.) Add schol.

Horn. X 235 Tavrrjv eTrwvv/Mas OVTWffdal <f>a<n 5ta rijv \evK6rrjTa. The editors

of Propertius fail to point out the signi-ficance of the epithet in Candida Tyro(i. 28. 51). This explanation is unques-tionably right, but was anticipated byEngelmann (p. 49) for exactly the samereasons. For ircu8vo-v as the equiva-lent of 20pe\l>ev cf. Hesych. in p. 254TTcudeueiv

'

rptyeiv, waidorpofie'ii'. Cobet

(Mnem. IX 84) quoted Nausicrates fr. 2,

II 295 K. at âvdoxp&Tes as K\vdwv Ata>-v i/cos

|

Tra<ruv apiaras v TOTTOIS Traideuerai,and Juvenal's (15. 70) terra malos hominesnunc educat atque pusillos. Ti/pci wasthus a fern, hypocoristic like 'Ti^ci, 'A0pc6,and Et'5c6: Bekk. anecd. p. 857, 9, Eur.Hel. 1 1 n. Especially to the point is thename MtXrco, which was given to Aspasiawhen still a child, because her complexionresembled the rose: Aelian var. hist. 12.1.

1 Rom. Trag. p. 620.

TYPQ 275

649

fr. (a) col. i tcr^ > V

aTTOLV

fr. (b)

]jm

] .

ovS* av eis eXOoi

. vcrrou Sejita?

] . v 7TOT/X05

10

fr. (c)

frs. (a) and (c) col. ii

Oroi aiv

airoiv tajJL p,rj /3yoa[ J . 7T5 Xoyoi5 20

dpa <j> Se'cTTrofii'a ] . //,ara

sons of Tyro. If it were possible to

read the word before dpcovov as IIe\/as,

as Blass suggested, this argument wouldbe decisive

;but the editors state that the

letters as are very doubtful, and that there

is barely room for an t. Weil (Journ.des Savans, 1906, p. 513) admits the

force of the last argument, and sees no

objection to the attribution. The pro-

jection of vv. 23, 26 and 41 to the left

perhaps points to a change of speakers.At any rate vv. 26, 27 are clearly questionand answer.

1 have added breathings and accents

where the word intended is free fromdoubt.

2 might refer to the subject of fr. 648.9 Cf. v. 37.2O /3/>a%â at once suggests itself, but

it is difficult to go further.

18 2

649 These scraps of papyrus from

the wrappings of a mummy were pub-lished by Grenfell and Hunt in Hibeh

Papyri, I p. 17, and dated approximatelyat B.C. 280 240. Blass ascribed the

fragments to the Tyro of Sophocles onthe following grounds : (i) The mentionof the Alpheus in v. 39 agrees with the

fact that Elis was the adopted countryof Salmoneus, father of Tyro. Cf. Eur.

fr. 14 6's r e?r' 'AXêioO poals \

0eoO /navels

gppiif/e Sa\uo>j'et>s 0X670. See also the

Introd. Note at p. 273. (2) The horrible

dream referred to in v. 37 (cf. v. 9) fits

certain extant fragments of the Tyro

(especially frs. 660, 66r); but this is a

very lame argument, as may be seen bya reference to the passages in question.

(3) The prayer in v. 52 f., addressed to

Poseidon, is entirely appropriate to the

!0<1>OKAEOY!

t .T

lv a/COUCrai TOL [ ] ô[

e^ro9 OLKMV T[ . ]cr/c[ ]2 5

ewovs Se ical rctcrS' eicropais irv[0r)Tpi\a<$

opa> r[ ]Sa .... /XTJTC TTTy/xart

/JIT^T ]vcrouo-az/ aXyeu>coj> 7ra[

[ ]i> a/x povov Ae [

[ ]f>T /Cat KOLKOl [ 3

KGUZ/ .

[ ] . ovaxs rocroz/[

et /cat Oavelv XPV irp<*>Tov KT

[.] . aotr[. .]rr'

]jUL/Ot

fr. (d) col. i

{_..-] p. v8[ 35

[. .] . ws x^^fcf r5? F[ ] - [

[<^d]^8os rts avrrjv SelfJLoi T' evvvôp, vrXaâi

[ ] . i>cr' ei^ raiiSe Kowtovti raSe

[ /caA.]Xipoi;i> eV 'AX<êtov iropov

[ ] . . yaVos 40

col. ii ........Xtay yap 770-

. [

dXV e/c KOLKMV ev\_

23 Ovpwvos : it is perhaps significant 32 el KCII,' even supposing that,' is-

that this word occurs twice in Sophocles practically equivalent to /cat et ; for KOLL

(El. 328, 0. T. 1242), but not in Aeschy- does not qualify Qaveiv alone. See Jebblus or Euripides. on 0. T. 305, Wyse on Isae. 5. 25.26 TrevO^rpias : cf. Eur. Hipp. 805 37 Select ^vwxov : f- E-L 410 e/c

Qrjffev, 7rdpet//,t cr&v KaKdv irevd'fjTpia. For deifiaros rov WKrepov, 5o/ce2V ewoi. Aesch.

the formation cf. frs. 98, 99 d-rjXdffTpia, Cho. 523 ^/c r' oveipdruv \

/cat VVKTI.-

/juueijTpia. Track. 922 eiVdrptai' (beside Tr\ayKTuv 5et/xdrwv ireTraX^vrj, where

etivrjTeipa : see on fr. 1040). Aesch. C/t<?. the meaning of the adj. seems to be-

755 (pa.idpiji'Tpia. The termination oc- determined by this passage. Eur. flee.

curred also in words of everyday speech: 69 TI TTOT' aipo/j.ai frvvxos ovrw Set/uacrt

cf, e.g. Ar. Ran. 114, 411. The descrip- <f>d<T[jia<nj> ;

tion clearly refers to the chorus, and 39 The use of running waters to

disposes of Welcker's guess (p. 315) that purge the evil influences contracted fromit was composed of men from Salmone dreams is attested by Aesch. Pers. 201,

(Strabo 356). Ar. Ran. 1340, and perhaps by Pers..

28 Perhaps \\jffovffav aKyew&v Traduiv i. 16.

TYPQ 277

dXX' d)

yanS' er[

[...... ] 45

fr.

KOLKOLl (TV

ayav*x r[

. Off. .]. . .

fr. (f) J . . OKTIV at

. . .].

0,5 (Lxgypp warepa Xtcr<TO//,a[i /u,oXeu>]

aV]a/cra TTOVTOV

TratSa? r7

fr. (g) [........]aêro9 OVK eô-[rt 8ecr[ . ]vâ . er e^Set o-e Kvpi . . [

55

vea 7T/3O5 ['

44 It may be assumed that Tyro is

speaking to her son, and protesting that

she has learnt to tolerate her ill-usage.Cf. Eur. Med. 449 /cotf0wj (j)po6<rrj Kpei<r-

crovwv ôuXeâra. ib. 1018 KOixfxjs Qtpeiv

Xpy Qvr\Tov OVTO. (rv/j.<f>opds.

48 These scraps are the latter halves

of lines, so that the probable restoration

is r&v &yav 68vp/ji.dT(t)v or Tois...6dijpfjiaa'iv.

Cf. Eur. Ale. 797 rr)i> ayav X^trrjv, Or.

708, frs. 54, 573. Soph. Ant. 125177 T' &yav 0-1777, ib. 1256. For the nextline Mekler suggested TWC trpbade /j.a\\6v

rot iraduv rpi/x^t r65e.

52 For the suggestion to read

see above.

650

Oeia vocros

65O OeavT] vrjvos cod.

65O Hesych. II p. 303 6eai>r) videos' i)

CK 6cov, Ocia. So</>o/cX?7S rvpola (i.e. Tupot a')

poiTov. This is a good instance of the

corruption which the text of Hesychiushas suffered ;

for it so happens that the

original can be restored almost with

certainty. The first step was taken bySoping, who saw that vrjaos required

corr. Soping et Dindorf

correction to v&ros ;this was accepted

by Dindorf (in Thesaur. IV 275D), whointroduced OeCa as the necessary conse-

quence. Nauck, admitting that deavri

was intolerable, hesitated to adopt dela ;

but it can hardly be doubted that -vi\ wasdue to dittography, after v6<ros had be-

come vijffos; for few will incline to M.

I000KAEOYI

Schmidt's Beia dvrj v6<ros. It should bementioned that the lemma comes between

Ota/ma and deavuxrrai, so that the corrup-tion was antecedent to the present alpha-betical order, 6da in the gloss is probablyderived from a correction of the corruptlemma, just as poirov represents letters

suprascript to Tvpoi : the name of the

play was restored by Musurus.The use of 0etos=' heaven-sent' is

more frequent in Soph, than in the other

tragedians, and Oeia vbvos occurs in Ai.

1 86, Ant. 421 (v6<rovs rds BeyXdrovs in

fr. 680 is a synonym : Eur. fr. 292 vtxroi

5e dvqr&v . . . at 5' e/c 6e&v irapeunv). Cf.

At. 612 dda fj,avla iWuXos, Phil. 192Bela yap . . . /cat ra irad'rjfji.ara /cetVa irpbs

avrbv . . , eirefir], ib. 1326 e/c deias TI/X?;?,

fr. 196, O.C. 1585 (so Hdt. i. 126, 5.92:the essential contradiction involved in

this phrase has been pointed out byWilamowitz on Eur. Her. 1228 TCI Qe&v

ye Trrcfyiara), Phil. 1039 êvrpov deiov.

The last-quoted passage recalls Aesch.Prom. 709 6da /Aacrriyi, with which H.

compared Eumelus fr. 10 (EGF p. 192)

Qeri\dr(p de tXavvo/jifvos [idffTiyi rbv debv

effirevfie ri/j.wp'rjo'a&dai of Lycuvgus.These examples are enough to showthat in Eur. fr. 841 cucu r65' tfdrj deiov

dvdp&TTOLs Kaicbv Nauck was not well

advised in commending F. W. Schmidt's

conjecture rod' -fjdr] 8eiv6v. Cf. fr. 585.It remains to be proved that Dindorf's

correction is justified by the usage of the

ancient interpreters. Similar examplesare Hesych. n p. 304 dribs pot (from Horn.B 56)' K deov yu-ot, schol. Ai. 186 &H/CC

yap elvai dda votros, 6da, 5^ 17 e/c êou

KaTaa-K7]\l/a<ra ei's atirbv, schol. Phil. 192K de&v yap, ws olpai, ravra irtirovQtv

/ecu rb TTCIÔS virtiieivev Kara (3oti\t)<rii> df&v

KT., schol. rec. Prom. 709 Beta] e/c TOV

651

651

651 Hesych. n p. 247/j.to"/lfjiaTa. So0o/c\^s Tvpdwois (Tupot

Pierson, Tvpoi a' Nauck). Alberti wishedto restore ^x^/*aTa>

DUt Kuester was pro-

bably right in preferring e^^7?/*01'

/îffy/ma,

in view of the occurrence of this gloss in

Phot. lex. p. 45, 21 and Suid. s.v.

It is probable that ^\0T]p.a was used of

cod.

a person, like picry/Aa (EL 289, Aesch.Eum. 73, Theb. 169) and o~rvyr)/j.a (Eur.Or. 480). For the neuter verbal so

applied see Tucker on Cho. 15. Anothersimilar formation is <rrpyrifji,a Trach.

1138. rjo~dr)/j.a' ryv ijSovriv Eupolis fr.

131 (i 292 K.) is altogether anomalous.

652

652 Hesych. n p. 415 Kapiro/u.avr)s'

els xbpov e^fj8pffou<ra. So0o/c\^j TuptXccw

(corrected by Nauck to Tvpoi a : Dindorfat

suggests Tupot )8' i.e. devrepa, or

For els Kbpov Blaydes proposed r?

but the meaning of the text seems satis-

factory ; for Kapirofxavrjs should signify'

luxuriant, with a superfluity of pro-duce.' Analogous are v\o/j.av^s, uXo/xa-veiv : Theophr. caus. pi. 3. i. 5 6 5e

depnos aKapiros yiverai. Kaddirep vkonav&v/cat e^vfipifuv, Clem. Alex. Paed. p. 138Ka6v\o/j.avei yap [Ay K\a5evofjt,&r) i] aîreXos.'

Proprie dicitur de terra ac segete, in

primis de vite, quae per luxuriam et

fecunditatem vXyv profert, id est, herbas

stirpesquefrugibus nocentes'

: Wyttenbachon Pint, de aud. poet. p. 15 F, whoillustrates the metaphorical use of the

word in late Greek. Hippocrates ap.^Stob. flor. 74. 40 is worth quoting : dXX'

O/AWS XPVfc 1 ywy o-i0(j>povioi>Tos'

xei yap(j>uffei Kai TO aKb\acrrov ev eavrfj, oTrep el

/u.77 /ca^'rj/j.^prji' e7ri/c67rrotro, ws ra devdpea

KadvXo/uavei. Similar is the use of 0i>XXo-

lâvelv : see Jebb on Ai. 143 f. rbv i-mrofjiavij

Xei/icDm (p. 219). The last explanation

given by the schol. on Ai. 143 illustrates

this gloss ; f) rbv ayav fj.efj.t]vbra (sc. Xei-

/cat dvdovvra KOI evvfipiôvra. (e^v^pi-

Toup) rrj

TYPQ 279

653

CTTTeiyOe TToXXot? TOV TTCLpOVTOL

yap ecrrt OprjvelcrOai

653. 1 ar) o-Tretp' es tfXXous F. W. Schmidt 2 irptirwv B: irptirov SMA653 Stob.y?<?r. 109. 2 (iv p. 993, 10

Hense) So0o/cXôus TupoGs /3' (so MA:Tvpous om. S).

'

/my <nreLp...irpir<i)vS1

or-ireipc : spread abroad. The meta-

phor is not common : elsewhere we find

only El. 642 crirelpr) paraiav ftd^tv ets

irdffav -jr6\iv, Eur. fr. 846 u>s 6 7rXe?<rros

2a"irapTai \6yos, Xen. Cyr. 5. 2. 30 6

Xoyos 7roXi)s ^5?7 ^ffiraprai, none of whichis so strong as the present passage. Cf.

Theodect. fr. 16 (7^GFp. 806) Tro\v<rirepris

In Plut. /^/M. or. i p. 394 EACCU deplfovres the same

metaphor is differently applied withoutthe notion of scattering being introduced.

Cf. Verg. Aen. \i. 228 rumoresque serit

varios. Campbell strangely says : 'a-jrel-

peiv seems to be used here in the sense

of <?j>5aret<r0ai, "to revile at large."TroXXois, sc. ^TT<riv,

" with many words,"instrumental dative.' The meaning is

clearly parallel to Menander fr. 605 (ill

183 K. )av dijvri ubvos <ptpeiv, \

KO.L w'irldr)\ov TTJV Ttixyv ?roXXo?s TTOITJS. F. W.Schmidt (see cr. n.) is over-subtle in

objecting to the dative, which is as muchin place to express the interest of the

hearers as ei's c. ace. elsewhere to define

the area of extension. Observe howcompletely Saipav has sunk to the level

of rvxili and cf. Eur. Ale. 561 TTUJS ofiv

rbv ira.p6vTa. dai/j-ova, Andr. 973

See also Jebb on Phil. noo. It seems

likely therefore that the editors maketoo much of El. 1306 ou yap ai> /caXws

|

v-mjpeToi-rjv r irapovrt dat/j.ovi, which

simply expresses 'to use my presentfortune.' This use of daL/m-uv is said to

be characteristic of the drama and especi-

ally of Sophocles ; for, although not un-

known in lyric, it is very rare (Find.Isthm. 7. 47 6vq.ffKoiJ.cv yap 6/xws airavres'

\

do.lfj.wv 5' aiaos). But the notion that the

sense of '

apportioner' ' God '

is secondary,and that dal/nuv originally signifiedjfar/wwis altogether perverse (Gruppe, p. 9914).See further Usener, Gotternamen, p. 293 ;

Eur. Phoen. 1653 n.

2 irpe'irwv is personalized as usual

'it is fitting that it should be mourned in

silence.' See Sidgwick's excellent article

in C.R. in 147, and cf. O. T. 9 tirei

Trptwwv (pvs irpb r&vSe (ûveTv. Aesch.

Ag. 1063 (T^v Ofbv) ovdtv Trpoa-r)KOVT

J

iv

76015 irapaffrarfiv .

H. writes :

'

It was one of the cardinal

Greek maxims, not to publish your mis-

fortunes lest your enemies should have

you in derision. Such is the sayingattributed by Demetrius Phalereus in

Stob.yfor. 3. 79 (Diels, Vorsokr* n p. 217,

21) to Periander: 5v<rTvx&v Kptiirre, 'iva

ay TOI)S ex0poi)s ei)0pdfj7S. [See frs. 81,

83 (nn.).] The same idea is implied bythe fear of affording ground of exultationto enemies (Horn. T 51, Z 82, K 192,* 342, Aesch. Ag. 1270). Most of the

passages to this effect are quoted byStobaeusyfor. 109 ;

I may add a fragmentof Archilochus (fr. 10, in schol. Aesch.Prom. 643 as emended) /c/ji/Trrw/iei' 5'

dvirjpa Iloo-eiddwvos avaKTOs\ 5cD/ra, Horn.

<r 142 Ty uri T'LS irore ira.fj.irav dvijp ddeni-oTtos etrj, |

dXX' 6' ye <riyy d&pa de&v ^%oiOTTI dtdoiev, Aeschylus the Alexandrian

(fr. i, Nauck, p. 824) rts 5' for' dvdyKtj

dvcrrvx^f tv irXfloffiv, \e$-6v ffianrav Kdv

ffKbTip Kptiirreiv rdde ; and a tragic frag-ment (Nauck, p. 936) which appears to

be an expression of the same idea : Stob.eel. i. 3. 43 p. 60, 7 W. 6'ffTis X^yei KOLKO.V

(ppov&v criyrj (Travel. The subject of that

chapter is the certain retribution of God's

Justice, and the anthologist must some-how or other have been deceived by afalse reading, when he included a line

which is entirely irrelevant to his pur-

pose. The true sense was restored byF. W. Schmidt : oVrt? 7' ^x ft *<**', eD

(frpov&v fftyrj (Trtyet : and oT^yei may be

right ; but we see from this fragment of

Sophocles that it is not necessary. I

would rather read, oVns 5' %xei K&K\ e <5

<ppov&v ffiyfj o-Ttvei,^^But he that suffers, \

If he be wise, laments in secrecy"' Then

he renders the present lines :

'

Spread not before the world your presentcase;

'Twere best to be lamented silently.'

280 IO<t>OKAEOYI

654

ee8pov654 Schol. Ar. Av. 275 (^ At'

<:Tepos diJTa xovTOs eêopov x^Pav ^Xwl/ )

^K TT/S 2o0o/cXeoi;s devTepas Hvpovs dpx'f]

(CK TOV ~2iO<pOK\eovi apxtf V)*l

Tis...xt>)v.'

ws e/ e?7re xP laj/ ' êdpov de Traprj\\a-

yuevyv. 2o0o/cX?7S 'oi^/c e5/>os dXX' v-

TOTTOS dj>?7/>' (Phil. iii). The note has

been quoted in full, because the com-mentators are not agreed as to the pointof the parody. It is clear that a double

meaning of Zedpos is involved, and I think

that for Aristophanes the schol. is right in

interpreting TrapriX\ay/ji.e)>r)v, i.e. strange,abnormal (Holden on Plut. Them. 24, 2).

For this sense of Zj-eSpos cf. Arist. rhet.

3. 3. I4o6a

35 otfrws e&dpov ryv TTJJ

fjt.oxdtjpias inreppoX-/!?. Ar. means: 'Here'sanother odd-looking customer !

'

Rogers,rendering

' with a foreign aspect,' explainsin his note that the proper meaning is'

belonging to a foreign land.' NowSuidas, who, as is well known, borrowsfrom the Aristophanic scholia, has the

gloss in this form : tt-edpos e&opov xpbaveXwv - TovTeo-Ti Trap-r)\\ayfji.fvrjv. I believe

that Ar. actually wrote XP av an<^ that it

has been corrupted in our texts to x&pa-v'-

the knowledge that Z&dpov x&P-v was infact parodied of course assisted the cor-

ruption. [Blaydes also favoured this

view, and Hall and Geldart, I find, have

printed xp6cw.] This makes everythingplain sailing, except the obscurity of

dpxr). 'Welcker (p. 316) and others (as

Dindorf) suppose that apxy was not partof the verse, but belonged to the words

introducing it : K ri}s S. devrtpas Tvpovs

apX'n ("opening passage"). Nauck thinksthat dpx'n is corrupted, perhaps from ddpei,and represents the first word of the verse.

On the other hand, he ejects O'/HUS.' (J.)Nauck's view is not convincing, and I

prefer to suppose that dpx'n belonged to

the introductory words, and that the

quotation was taken from the openingscene of the play. To make this clearer

Blaydes suggests the addition of rjs T/

before apx~n- It should be added that

in a mutilated passage of the so-called

Philetaerus of Herodian (Moeris ed.

Pierson, p. 435) Zedpos...KaiTTUJS uv eis was 2t;edpoi> x&pw...the last words were emended by Piersonto ?. xupav xuv

'

^(HpoKXrjs ev fvpoi /3'.

L. Cohn in Rh. Mus. XLIII 413 publishedthe same passage from Cod. Vat. 2226:

e5pos 6 /j.i(roTr6vr)pos'

KO.I

els T//XCIS ti;e8poi> x^P(raTijpots, and emended it to !ed/>os opvis'6 irovqpbs Kal

fj.7) alcrios wv eis r//xds*

Ti'/>ot. Bergk's view that this was a dif-

ferent passage from that quoted by the

scholiast on Aristophanes is untenable.

The meaning of Sophocles was : 'Whatis this bird in an ill-omened quarter?'See Hesych. II p. 117 êdpov' rbv OVK

atffiov olwvbv, OVK eijderov 6pvit>, OVK ev

otovn ryv 1-dpav 2x VTa-> Phryn. praep.soph. p. 71, 17 de B. êdpov TO diraiffLov

Kal ^w TT}S vei>o/j.Kr/u.tvris 'edpas. For the

technical sense of edpa in augury cf. Eur.Her. 596 6pviv 5' idwv TIV

:

OVK ev aifflois

tdpais, where Wilamowitzhas an excellent

note. Add Ael. nat. an. 3. 9 o'i re edpas

opi'idwv Kal Tmycreis 7ra/>a0i;XaTTOj'Tes, andother passages quoted by Blomfield onAesch. Prom. 501. For opvts J. refers

to his n. on Ant. 1021.

655

655 Phot. lex. p. 17, 7 eppyvo(3ocrK6s'6 7r/3o/3aro/3o<r/c6s, kv Tupot /3' So0o/cX&wtffus airb TOV dp-rjv. Etym. M. p. 377, 22

pp7]voj3o(rK6s' 6 Trpo/Saro/Socricos, ev Typo?ft' 2o0o/cX?7s. Hesych. I p. 278 dpyvo-jSocr/cos' 7rpoâro/3oa-/c6j. Soô/cX^s Ti;/oot

/3' (rvpolKii) cod.). ypd<perai de eppyvo-y, did re TOV e Kal T&V ovo p. ibid.

p. 276 dpevoj3ocrK6s'

Eustath. //. p. 799, 37 dpTjvoj3oo~Kos 6

7rpoâroj3o(rfc6s /card Havo~dviav (fr. 69Schwabe), e/c pepovs drjXadrj (i.e. dp-fjv

stands to irpbfiaTov as /x^/oos to o'Xoj' : cf.

aTTO fj.povs). ev de d

Xe^t/fy Kal epevofioffKos 6 avTbs

did TOV e.

TYPO 281

The existence of the nom. dpr/v corre-

sponding to the gen. dpvos is now securelyestablished by the evidence of an Attic

inscription belonging to the first half of

the fifth cent. B.C. : see Meisterhans3,

p. 142 ; Brugmann, Comp. Gr. np. 349 E. tr. We need not therefore

discredit the existence of a genitive

dfrijvos as well as apvbs, which is attested

by Rlym. M. p. 140. 54 : dpr/v, TO tirir'f)-

deiov els ei/xty irpbfia.TOV /cat K\tveTai

dprjv, dpr/vos' e ov TO dpvos KOTO, <rvyKoirriv.

/cat a7ro/3oX?7 TOV a prjf olov TrdXtippyves

TroXi'/SoCrat (Horn. I 154). That it shouldbe transferred to the o- declension in

composition is in accordance with analogy:see on fr. 643. Consequently there wouldbe no difficulty in accounting for dprjvo-

j8o<r/c6j. But the evidence given above,which is too strong to be resisted, in-

dicates that the grammarians found

vofioffKbs in the text of Sophocles, and

interpreted it by means of the form dprivwith which they were acquainted. Noother evidence in support of a form

*tpp-rji> (or *tpT)v) is quoted ; but it mayhave been drawn from the Ionic dialect

(Smyth, 134). Philologers must deter-

mine whether the double p is correct andthe phonetic relation to dpr)v and iro\vppt)v.

A similar vowel variation occurs in tppi]-

<pop?t> : dppi)<pop(iv (Meisterhans3, p. 15).

The derivation of that word is quite un-

certain : for a possible explanation see

Giles in C. R. ill 222. It is evident

that no countenance should be given to

Wagner's dpvof3oo'K6s or Bergk's pr}vo-

j3o<r/c6s. Nauck rightly withdrew his

earlier suggestions 4p-r}fioôffK6s and tpe/ji.-

fj,opo<ri(6s. See also on fr. 509.

656

656 Schol. Aesch. Prom. \

(po^Tjdys' 0iXt'a ydp r/5e rdijts) 6 pv0fj.bs

'Ava,Kpe6vTei6s O~TI /ce/cXaaT-t&'os Trpos Tb

bv. fTredrj^cre yap Trj KTTLKTI

cp&v /cat ripfod'n (r/pdcrdr) m) \iav

rols /u^Xeat TOV TpayiKov (the text is clearlymutilated : the sense r

equired is given byWeil's fj.t\<riv O.VTOV 6 Tpa.yi.Kbs, exceptthat the sequel points to the plural).

"P&VTO ^ O-VTols OVK tv TTaVTL

V TOIS 8pT)Vr]TLKOlS, WS /Ctti Z

ft' (so M: r>7/xH om. ft' RV). ^<rri 5

TO.VTO. OJJ.OLO. T(p 'oi'5' dP jjC fdtTCtS [JiedlJOVT'

oiKad' dir\delv'1

(Anacr. fr. 56).The information is useful and important.

Anacreon was a guest at the court of

Hipparchus c. 520 B.C., and his friend-

ship with Critias is acknowledged byPlat. Charm. 157 E. There can be no

doubt, therefore, that the scholiast in-

tended to put on record the influence

exerted by Anacreon on the subsequentmetres of the tragedians. Crusius in

Pauly-Wissowa I 2042 thinks that he is

right in assigning to this source the in-

troduction of ionics into the oldest

tragedies, and refers to Phryn. frs. 6

and 14. The quotation from Anacreonillustrates the appearance of the colon

preceding the ionic dimeter :

in Aeschylus it is followed by two dva-

/cXcfyiei/a. In spite of the evidence of the

scholia, Schroeder refuses to recognizethe presence of ionics in Aesch. Prom.I.e. : see his analysis (Aesch. Cant. p. 38 f.).

For similar ionics in Sophocles with dva~

K\<J)/jiva, introduced by an iambic dimeter,see Phil. 1174 ri8r.

657

ra re/câ ets

657 Schol. Ar. Lys. 138 sq. (OVK

^TOS a0' r/yacD>' clffiv ai Tpayipdiai. \

ovdtv

ydp eff/Afv Tr\T]v HofffLdu>v fcai o~Kd<pr].) els

TT)V 2o<poK\tovs d Tupw TavTO. ffWTfivei.

eKQe1<rav TO. TKVO. et's ffKdtprjv (so R percompendium, as Bergler had conjectured:et's ffKdiprt vulgo, ev ffKdtprj Nauck). ovotv

fo/jLi>, el ytt^ arvt>ovo~idfciv /cat Tt/cretj>. 6 ydpIIo(ri5(Si' t/u-tyTj TTJ Tvpoi /cat tytvvrjcre

For the o-K(i<pr} in which the children

were exposed, and by means of which the

recognition was ultimately effected, see

Introductory Note. Nauck points out

that v. 139 is a parody of certain wordsin the Tyro which are not quoted, and

suggests that they are to be found in

fr. 945, 2 (n.).

282

658

Se

ws criTJpa> Ka

cod. Ac et schol. :658. 2schol. Arist.

658 Arist. rhet. 2. 22. i4OOb17 dXXos

(sc. r67ros) dirb TOV tW/zaros, olov cos 6 So$o-K\r)s

'

<ra0cos. . .Tovvofj.a.'

Schol. zVz /0. fol.

47a 16 d <j)ri(rlv 6 fiidfav (iralfav conj. Her-

werden) TT/OOS XT/P 2i5i;/3c6t

avT'T)...Tovvofj,a.'

Eustath. //. p. 158, 24 /card T^P irapoi-

vaiKa (popelv TO olKtiov 6fo/*a. Eustath.

Od. p. 1940, 57 #TI 5^ /cai dpacrvT-rjTos

XdXrj/xd ecrTLV 6 o~i8r]pos, STjXot'

ApurTo->

T?7 /car' aurî' prjTopiKr)

dpao~eiav TTJV Si577/)a> r3

(popeiv 6vo(j.a.

The reference is to Sidero, the step-mother and oppressor of Tyro: see In-

troductory Note. There has naturallybeen a tendency to connect her namewith her cruelty: Horn. X 491 fj yap aoi

ye ffidripeos ev <ppe<rl dv/j.6<:, Starkie on Ar.

Ach. 491. Hence Cobet, perceiving that

the connexion is not warranted by the

traditional text, proposed to substitute

cos KeK\i]fJ,evr)...2ii5rip<j} Kal (ppovovo~a. Thisis ingenious, and at first sight plausible,

although <ppoveiv To&vo/j.a would require

justification. But Cobet does not notice

(fropovcra

w Aristotelis codd. plerique | (pepovva

that |iax>fios makes his changes unneces-

sary, and that the integrity of the text is

supported by the evidence of Eustathius,who declares that Sidero is representednot as cruel but as brave or fierce. Tr.

therefore :

'

as indeed a wielder of the

sword, whose name she bears.' The

application is just as natural as in the

cases of the Huguenot Bras de Fer andCromwell's Ironsides ; nor ought we to

deny it to Sophocles, because the other

is the more usual. In Ai. 430 ff. the hero

derives his name from cu'cu, although, as

Jebb points out, it was popularly connectedwith cu'er65. For the word-play on the

proper name see on fr. 965, Lobeck onAi. 430, and Cope on Arist. rhet. I.e.

F. W. Schmidt seeks to improve the

passage by writing ws Kal xpu/J-^vr}\ ^06-

/Sws ffidrjpy, but <ra(pu>s, like 6p0<2s, ertf/uos

etc. (for which see on fr. 965), marks the

etymology. For the confusion of <popeiv

and <ptpeiv see on fr. 930. Here at least

<{>opov(ra has superior authority, and in

O. C. 60 Nauck substituted (popovo-i for

659

Se 7reV$os Xayâô) TTO)\OV

17x15 crvvapTracrOelo'a ]3ovKoXwv VTTO

659. 2

659 Aelian nat. an. n. 18 6rj\iav5 ITTTTOV s d<f>podlffia \vTTr)<racrai' irdvv

ff<p65pa Travaai padiws <rriv, ujs 'Aptoro-

(h.a. 6. 18. 572b

8) X^y, et rts

aTTOKetpeie ras /card TOV TCVOVTOS

at'Setrai y&p, Kal OVK aTa/cret,

iraêrat TTJS vfipeus Kal TOV ffKipT'f)-

TOV TroXXou, KaTt](p'rjffaa'a tirl T{J

TOVT6 roi /cat So0o/cX^s cuWr-

Terat ev Trj Tvpot [TO; ipdfJMTt], ire-

iroirjTat. dt ol avTt) \4yovffa,, /cat a

malit Nauck

raurd eo~Tiv' '

/coM^J.-.ô/S^v.' I havebracketed the words T 5pdyu.art : so

Hercher in the Paris ed. of 1858, but

he subsequently changed his mind. Cf.

ibid. 2. 10 fj.d\LffTa d K0fj.&cra ITTTTOS

dri^tdfet 700^ dvafirjvai TOVS ovovs avrr/v,

de yafj.ovfj.evr/ r;5erat, /cat eavTT]v

T&V fji.eyia'Twv, otrep ofiv (rui'et56res

oi ôv\6fj.evoi ri/Jiiovovs o~<p(<n yeveffdai,

dwo8pi<ravTes Trjs ITTTTOV TT]V xa ^T7?" et'

K^

TYPO 283

Oepos OepLcrOfj av0ov

crrracrOeiora 8* e<? Xet/xaiâ

CLTTO,

TTOTCO^

3 fj,dv8paio~iv codd. : corr. Brunck 5 o~Traff0e'io~a codd. : o~Ta0fio~a Hartung,d<f>e0io~a Heath, Kvpaaaa Brunck, 7rXa0et<ra Reiske, o~rrdo-ovo~a Hermannscripsi : iv Xet/x.wj'i codd.

Kai ws ZTVxfv, elTa H^VTOI. TOVS ovovs ti

1'

i} de vTrofJ-fffi Tbv adoôv ?

irp&Tov aidovfjifv-fj. /cat

K\fjs 5e HOIKS fj./J.v7)ff0ai TOV Trd0ovs. Plut.

amat. 9 p. 754 A b 8e O~VO~T\\(J)V TT~V yv-

vaiKa...6fji.oi6s eaTi TOIS diroKeipovo'i. ras

ITTTTOUS elra TT pbs iroTafj.bi' T) \lfj.vT~v

ayovffi' KaO opdaav yap e/cd ffTrjv T-r\v

eiKbva XT}? oi/'ews dicaXX^ Kai &/J.op-

<f>ov, d<f)^vai. TO. <j>pvdy/j.aTa

Xen. de re eq. 5. 8 ai yap d-yeXcucu T&V'iTnr(jt}-> ovx bfjioiias VTro/u.evovo'i roi)s Bvovs

TTl TTJ OX'# ^WS OLV KOfJiClffiV 0V (zVCKa Kai

Trpbs T-TJV oxeiav ras I'TTTTOVS

oi ovoâroui'Tes. Columella 6. 35rara quidem sed et haec est equarum nota

rabies, ut cum in aqua imaginem suamviderint, amore inani capiantttr, et perhunc oblitae pabuli, tabe cupidinis inter-

eant. eius vesaniae signa sunt cum perpascua veluti extimulatae concursant,subinde ut circumspicientes requirere ac

desiderare aliquid videantur. mentis

error discutitur si deducas ad aquam.tune demum speculatae defornutatemsuam, pristinae imaginis abolent me-moriam.The passage from Plutarch shows that

the two extracts from Aelian do not refer

to two separate occasions on which a

mare's mane is to be cut, but that mule-

breeding is always the purpose in view.

Columella's account is unintelligible as

it stands.

2 f3ovKoX,cov is generalized of herds-

men', so in Homer T 221 TOV r/)i(r%tXicu

I'TTTTOI eXos Kara ÔVKO\OVTO. See n. onEur. Phoen. 28 i7T7ro/3oi>/c6Xoi, and Postgatein C.Q. n 295, and cf. fr. 1057.3 o/ypia x P^ according to Shorey

(Class. Phil, v 90) is practically equiva-lent to dypib)~:. So \nrapei Xept in El-

1377, as he points out, is glossed byXiTrct/xos, o-vvex&s. Here, however, x pt

is clearly instrumental. See also on fr.

636.4 0pos 0pur9fj. The metaphor is

expressly associated with dTT0pio~a (d?ro-

0eplfr) in Eur. Hel. 1188, Or. 128: 0pl%and 0tpos have no etymological connexion.

Cf. Callim. A. ZW. 298 0fyos r6 irpurovloti\<i)v. For the subj. without av in a

relative clause of general assumption see

Goodw. 540, 0. C. 395 (J.'s n.), frs. 680,

2, 682, 3, 808, 837, 841, 929.5f. are corrupt as given in the MSS,

and have not hitherto been satisfactorilyemended. The passage of Plutarch (see

above) determines one condition to which

any reconstruction of v. 5 must conform,

namely, that the filly's presence on the

bank of the stream is part of the herds-

men's purpose. <nra<r0i<ra is suitable in

itself (Xen. eq. 7. i), but cannot stand

with iv \eifj.wvL. I propose to substitute

es Xeifiwva : iv and et's are sometimesconfused (Bast in Schaefer's Greg. Cor.

pp. 429, 726) and Xei/uiw would be a

necessary consequence of the misreading.e?ri Xei/xwpa would also be possible (Bast,

p. 742; Cobet, V.L. p. 281 f.), but is

condemned by the rhythm. Of the con-

jectures which assume that the fault lies

with o"-raff0eio-a the best is Hartung'so~Ta0e'io~a

) suggested independently byPowell (C.R. xix 230) and Paley (AJ.P.ill 128). H. mooted the possibility of

(nraffdeiaa being used for o~Tra.ffa.fj.evr) (seeon fr. 837), 'quaffing the water.' Hequotes Phaedr. 12 cut fontem cervus, cumbibisset, restitit,

|

etin liqnore vidit effigietn

suam, but this solution does not commenditself. Weil adopted Hermann's o-ird-

(rovffa, with vypbv for virb and Kovpds in

v. 7 as the object of t8y. Blaydes con-

jectured iroTa.fji.iif TTortfJ, with avydo~ao~^

C5wp in v. 6. J. held that, if the text is

sound, TTOTUIV is governed by inrb in v. 6;

but, apart from the difficulty of a.vya.o'de'io'a,,

any such solution is excluded, as soon as

we perceive that the herdsmen's intention

to bring the mare to the water must be

clearly indicated. iroTap.ft>v TTOTWV: the

genitive is descriptive, as we speak of a

water-meadow : cf. <rtX0/ou \eifjLwv fr. 603.For the sense cf. Phil. 1454 NV0cu r'

gvvSpoi Xei/AWJ/ttiSes, Eur. Bacch. 1051

HyKOS dfj.(f)iKp7}/j.vov, (!5ct<ri didfipoxov, Hipp.77 f. \ei/j.&v' ...Aldus St TroTafj.lai.o~ i Kijweijei

5p6<rois. The presence of running water

was essential to the pasture-lands : Eur.

284 204>OKAEOYZ

1877 cr/aa? eiSwA.oi' avravyes

StarertX/xeVT;?Kovpas<>i), KCLV oiKTipeie viv

oia

TrevOovcra /cat K\aiovo~a<f>6/3r)i>.

10

virtf) scripsi : avyaadeio~' VTTO codd., avyaffdeiffd irov Meineke,v-rrb Haupt, avycurdeitr' vSup Wecklein 7 dri^cis Wakefield

| 8iaTeTi\/j.evr)s

scripsi (SictTeTiXyuejî/ <j>6p-r]i> Brunck, diaTTL\fj.evr] fapyv Ellendt) : SiareriXyU

TTi\/uitvr] cod. Reg.) $6/3775 codd. 8 oiKreipeie vulgo 1O T^P Trctpos

Brunck

06077*'

s (5ia-

Phoen. 659 pctyuar' Hvvdpa KO.I peedpa

xXofya. o-Kicis ctSwXov, where o-Ktas is

genitive of definition, occurs also in

Aesch. ^^ 830, Chaeremon fr. 14, 15

(TGF p. 786). dvTCuryte Tuirw. Thereis no evidence, notwithstanding L. and S.,

that au7ct^"w in classical Greek ever meant

anything but to see, gaze at; so that, evenif v-n-6 could be explained, the renderingof ctirycurfletcr' as 'mirrored' would require

justification. Hence the emendation of

Wecklein (see cr. n.), with which avya-ffde'iff' would be deponent like 5e/>x#ei's

(fr. 837 n.). The sense thus obtained,*

gazing at the water,' is tame and (after

t6r)) redundant, and a reference to the

reflexion of the image seems to be re-

quired. For this the regular words were

avravyelv and its cognates, and I have

accordingly restored avravyts TUTTI? :

Philostr. iniag. i. 22 (of Narcissus) kx.-

rvTrCoffav ere TO u5w/>, oJov cTSes avro, OVK

olffda. The loss of the first syllable of

ANJAY TEC might have been the

starting-point of the error. I ought to

mention that Hartung proposed the im-

possible avyals ZVTVTTOV, but Tvwif occurred

to me independently. H. was inclined to

read virbv for vir6, but it does not appearhow he rendered avyao-fteicr'.

7 8iaTTi\(ievt]s is strictly'

separated

by plucking,'

with the same prepositionalforce as dia<nrav, Sictre/ij/eij'. L. and S.'s

rendering'

to pluck bare'

is misleading.The part, agrees with <mas and the ace.

<J>6(3T]v (see cr. n.) is idiomatic: see nn.

on Eur. Phoen, 267, 1403. It would beover-subtle to suppose that diaTeTi\/m.cvTis

depends directly on etdwXov (sc. eai/rr^s).

The termination of ^b^-rjv was assimilated

to the preceding word by a common error

(cf. fr. 503, 3).

8 f. Nauck says that these lines are4in libris graviter corrupti,' but, as J.

remarks, it is difficult to see why. Kav

avoiKTtpfuov TIS oiKTipeie vtv : cf. O. T.

1296 TOIOVTOV olov KOI ffTvyovvr'<rat. Ai. 924 ws /cat Trap' ex^Pdprjvwv Tvxeiv. alo-^vvTio-iv appears to

be the reading of the MSS, and it is better

not to interfere with it. The evidence

reported by Meisterhans3 , p. i2of., esta-

blishes that up to 420 B.C. on inscriptionsthe prevalent form of the dat. plural after

consonants was -770-1 (occasionally -770-1),

which after 420 B.C. was superseded by-cus. Whatever the history of -auri (after

consonants), it is clearly, so far as Attic

and Ionic are concerned, a later form:see Weir-Smyth, Ionic Dialect, 450453. Wilamowitz (Einl.gr. Tr. p. 127)concludes that no rule can be laid downfor Soph, and Eur. in this respect,

although Aesch. probably wrote -770-1.

Where the MSS preserve traces of the

older forms, it seems unreasonable not

to follow them, remembering that in all

probability Sophocles himself was incon-

sistent. See also Tucker on Aesch. Theb.

447. ota follows oiKTipete with the sense

of OTI Totavra : see n. on Soph. Ai. 5iof.in J.'s abridged edition. Eur. Hel. 740eoi <r', Offov Au>77,u' ^xets

I'EXepTjs, airo-

TTTuffeiav (n.). Kuehner-Gerth 551, 9.

For [JLcuvercu Enger suggested ai*fi\vveTo.i,

Weil /ifyercu, and Herwerden avaiveTou;

but (j.aii><r6ai may be as well applied to

extreme dejection (Aesch. Theb. 952) as

to the corresponding elation (El. 1153).1O <JH>PT]V. Brunck's x^7/" (recently

revived independently by Weil, and

approved by Nauck and Blaydes) is anundoubted improvement, but its proba-

bility is not so great as to warrant us in

restoring it to the text. Cf. El. 52.

J., with the MS text in vv. 5 7, trans-

lated as follows :

' And it is mine to mournfor my hair, like a filly, which, seized byherdsmen, has its yellow mane shorn from

its neck in the stable by a rough hand ;

and then, dragged forward on the plain,sees the image of its shadow where it is

285

mirrored in the waters of the river, whenits hair has been cruelly ravaged by theshears. Ah ! even a hard heart would

pity the creature, as it cowers in shame,to see how it rages in mourning and grieffor the adornment that it has lost.'

660

crtra KOLL

66O. 2 o-tra Macrob. : criria TO. Athen.

66O Athen. 475 A (illustrating theuse of the word Ka.pxnffi.ov) So0o/c\?7$ 5e

Tupot 'irpocTTT]t>aL...KapXTi<ria,' trpos TTJV

Tpairefav (pdffKtav irpocrehrjXvdfrai roi)s

dpcLKovTas /ecu yevfoffcu irtpl TO. <rtrta KOLI

TO Kapxri<ria. Macrob. Saturn. 5. 21. 6

Sophocles in fabula quae inscribitur Tyro'irpbs PHIS!' AEIMI (*7>As -Hjvdc noi

Jan) TPATTEZA &tut>i...KapxJ<ria..'

On what occasion did the serpents ap-pear? Welcker (see Introductory Note)supposed that these lines came from a

description of Tyro's prison-house ; butthe words rather suggest a festal celebra-

tion, and it may be conjectured that theentertainment given by Salmoneus to

Neleus and Pelias was interrupted in themanner described. The portent bearssome resemblance to the appearance ofthe serpent in Horn. B 308 ff., but thereis a much closer parallel in the circum-stances of the sacrifice in honour of An-chises as related by Verg. Aen. 5. 84 ff.

See especially v. 90 ff.: ille (sc. anguis)agmine longo \

tandem inter pa (eras et

levia pocula serpens \ libavitque dapes,rursitsque innoxius imo

\successit tumulo,

et depasta altaria liquit. There too the

cups from which Aeneas had poured thelibations are described as carchesia (v. 77).A similar occurrence which happened

to Tib. Gracchus in Lucania during theSecond Punic War was regarded as a

presage of misfortune : ad exta sacriftcio

perpetrate an'gues duo ex occulto adlapsiadedere iocur conspectique repente ex oculis

abierunt (Liv. 25. 16: cf. Val. Max. i.

6. 8). Add Ov. Fast. 2. 711 ecce, nefasvisit, mediis altaritms anguis \ exit, et

exstinctis ignibus exta rapit (Liv. i. 56).1 irpo<rrrjvai ought to mean 'ap-

proached,' as is indicated by Athenaeus'

paraphrase, but that the verb could bearthis meaning and be followed by an ace.

of the place visited is not generally

credited.^ Jebb on El. 1378 r\ (re TroXXd

di) | d<p' wv e'xot/u XiTTCtjOet irpotiffTtjv x*p'L

held that the two passages afforded eachother mutual support in establishing the

meaning'

to present oneself at a place*

or 'before a person.' But I think that

Kaibel's criticism is justified, viz. that,even if TrpoffTTjvat could in ritual languageaccommodate itself to the construction of

iKfrtiJu, it would not follow that it couldbe applied to any voluntary entrance, noris it credible that the serpents presentedthemselves as i/^rcu. In his text ofAthenaeus Kaibel prints Bergk's irpoo-n-TT)-

vai, without altogether approving it ; butto think of winged serpents is an un-warrantable strain on the imagination.Schweighauser's wpocrffTTJixn. is less opento obvious objection, and has the supportof Aesch. Pers. 206 /Swywov Trpoa^r^v.Nevertheless the notion of the serpents'

taking up their position before the table'

is unsuitable, and contrasts unfavourablywith Vergil's lapsusque per aras (v. 86)and Livy's ad exta adlapsi. Surely the

simplest remedy is Trpoa-pijvai, a sugges-tion which has been anticipated byHartung and Wagner. It would bearthe appropriate meaning 'mounted the

table,' for which see Headlam in J. P.xxx 309 f.

2Kapx;n<ria. According to the autho-

rity of Callixenus of Rhodes (c. 220 B.C.)

quoted by Athen. 474 E (FHG III 65),the Kapx'nfftov was lengthy in form,

slightly contracted towards the middle,with two handles reaching from top to

bottom. It was suitable to a royal feast :

see Diet. Ant. I 363 b.

There is no reason to suppose that this

fr. refers to a dream, as was suggested byGrenfell and Hunt (fr. 649 n.) : seeMekler in Bursians Jahresb. CXLVII

104.

286 ZOc(>OKAEOY!

661

TroXX' ev KOLKocri

661 Stob.yfor. 20. 29 (in p. 544, 14Hense) Zo0o/cX??s ^ Tu/xu (ev Ttf/3 S, e?

[vel -pw] MA).'

7r6XX'...6/3oIt is strange that nearly all the critics

Wagner seems to be the only exceptionshould have missed the meaning of the

line, more particularly as the chapter of

Stobaeus in which it is quoted is entitled

irepi opyrjs, and all the quotations relate

to the same subject. Nevertheless,Ellendt says

' videtur quasi habitantem,nodes diesque in mails agentem significare

'

(a mind bedded'in misery), and Campbellrenders: 'A soul in misery sees muchasleep.' The same misconception appearsin Herzer's conjecture evêvxdeis, whichNauck thinks it worth while to cite

(Index, p. xm). H. rightly prefers :

' Passion in suffering lulled to rest sees

much,' comparing O. C. 592 0v/ubs d' ev

KaKois ov t>yU0o/)OJ>, fr. 589. 3, Eur. fr.

[078 dvdp&v rd5' effTiv e'vdlKwv re Kal

(TOfp&V, \

KOLV TOIS KOLKoiffL [J.i) TeBvfJiUXTdai

Beois. With WT]0is cf. Apoll. Rhod. 3.

evvrjOels 6pa.

tooo eirel xoXoi/ e&vacre MiVws, Opp. Cyn.2. 626 dXX ovd' u>s âeddjv XQ\OV evvatre,

Nonn. Dion. 13. -276 o\f/i/j.os evvrio-as

irpoTepov %6Aoj> apirayi vlKTjs. The meta-

phor suggested by the verb is that of ' a

wave of passion': so Aesch. Cho. 182K\VOUVIOV xoX-iys, Eum. 835 Koi/u.a K\atvov

KV/JLOLTOS iriKpov ^j/os, Prom. 206 rrjv 5'

dTtpa.fj.vov oropeaas opyrjv (with Blomfield's

note), Eur. Hclid. 702 X^ft

(TT6pvv<ri xpbv s- Suid. s.v.

dfcoi/o-as TOLVVV 6 Aio7^^s raOra, TOV fiev

6vfj.bv (desire) KareffTopecrev.The general sense may be illustrated

by Menand. fr. 573 (in 175 K.) avrv)

(sc. opyr)) Kparei vvv, &v 5e fj.LKpbv trapa-

K/j.d<r-ri,\ KarbêraL TI /j.a\\ov els TO crvfj.-

<f>epov, Eur. fr. 760 w yap opyrj^ ?ras

dvijp (To^wTepos, Arist. fr. 660 uxnrep 6

nairvos eTTiSdKvwv rds oêts OVK eg. fiKeireivTO KeifJievov ev rots TTOCTIV, OUTOJS 6 0vfj.os

e'traipofj.evos ry Xoytcr/m^) eiridKOTet /cat

TO (rvfj.j3r)cr6fj,evov e^ aurou ATOTTOV OVK

Trj diavola

662

W/itey' 177175, TTplv T\tVTri<TavT 18175.

662 peyav Stobaei codd. SMA et Cic. nonnulli

662 Stob. flor. 105. 21 (iv p. 934, 4.Hense) 2o0o/cX^s ev Tupot". '/U^TTW...

uifls.' The line is quoted without the

name of author or play in Miller, Me"I.

de lift. gr. p. 381 /iO77rw...t'5?7J. eVi T&V

6avfj.a6vTCi}v rous TO, /j.eyd\a viri.cr'xyoviJ.e-

vovs' ov ydp eo~TL irplv diro6avovTa t'Sij?,

dXXd Trplv els r^Xoj dyaybvT^ ?5?;s, /XT/

dav/j-dcrris TOV peydXa Kavx^f^ffov ; andalso by Cic. Att. 4. 8a. i, schol. B Horn.O 5 (77 irapoifJiia

'

fj-rjira} . . . tdrjs'

ijyovv /JLT)

6av/j,d<rr)s T&V fjieya tTrayye\\6/Ji.evov), Joh.Chumnos epist. 5 (in Boissonade, anecd.

nov. p. 215) /card r~r\v Trapoifj-iav '^TTW...

^5775,' dXXd Kal els TeXos Syirovdev IS&v

dyaybvTa TOV Tayadd (pdpevov.With the words divorced from their

context it is impossible to determinewhether TcXevTô-avr' is neut. ace. plur.or masc. ace. sing. But, so far as con-

cerns the isolated line, the former view,

which is strongly recommended byTyrrell on Cic. I.e., is much the moreattractive :

'

don't cry till you're out of

the wood.' It is also the more likelyfor two reasons : (i) /meya eiirelv is moresuitable as applied to the speaker's ownactions than to those of another ; see At.

386 fj.r]dev fiey' elV^s and the instances

quoted by Jebb on El. 830 woev p.ey'

dvo-ys, Aesch. Theb. 552, Ant. 127, 1350,Ar. Ran. 835 ; (2) the line would more

easily have become proverbial, if its

meaning were self-contained. It is notcertain that there is a reference to this

passage in Plat. Soph. 238 A, where the

Eleatic Stranger deprecates prematureboasting : r^Xos youv o.v diroptas 6 \6yos

%oi. ^TJTTCO ju.ey' ei-rrys' CTI ydp, u>

jua/cdpie, &rn, Kal raOrd ê r&v diropi&v

}) /ueylo-TT) Kal TT/JCOTT;. The same pointwithout any close verbal resemblance is

TYPQ 287

made in Gregor. Naz. II p. 6 B

fj.ey' ei'TTTjj CTUI/TO/AWS dV#po>7ros wv, and

p. 157 D /Jt,r}dfv /j.ey' efrrfls evirXowv irpb

-TretVâros. Plutarch (reg. et imp. apoph.

p. 184 B) relates how, when Eumenes was

reported dead and his brother Attains

had married his wife, Eumenes, returningto Pergamus, saluted his brother in the

usual manner and whispered in his ear :

JJ.TJ (TTreCSe yty/xcu irplv reXeunfair' tdys.

Here the point of the parody lies in the

special application of reXevT^cravT' tdys,

and the fact that the participle can betreated as masc. sing, does not excludethe possibility that it was neut. plur. in

the original. When the line stood byitself, it was natural that it should beconnected with the famous precept of

Solon (cf. fr. 646 n.), and that reXeirr^-1

should be interpreted accordingly.

Hence the corruption in the MSS ofStobaeus and Cicero (see cr. n.). Ellendtwas influenced by the same consideration,but evidently found it difficult to makeup his mind. The grammarian whose

explanation is given in Miller's codex

clearly knew the passage only as a quota-tion : he rightly refused to take reXeu-n?-ffavra as dirodavdvra, but, seeing the

difficulty of combining /^TTW pey' etTryswith his interpretation of TeXevrrjo-avTaas els T\OS dyaybvra, he was reduced to

the desperate expedient of supposing that' don't boast

'

was equivalent to' don't

admire the boaster.' F. W. Schmidt

escaped from this dilemma by readingirplv T\evT-/i<ras rtfxfls, but it does notseem likely that the text is corrupt.For irpCv followed by the subj. withoutd> see on fr. 646, 2.

663

TlKTOVCTl KCU

663 Stob. flor. 99. 19 (iv p. 860,r Hense) Zo0o/cXôvs TupoPs (so MA,TupoGs om. S).

'

riKTOv(rt...5v<r0v/j.iai.' Cf.

Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 89, 19 dvcrdu-

fjua'

2iO<f)OK\Tjs Tupot. ,

TOI indicates that the saying wasfamiliar: cf. Eur. fr. 1071 \virai yapdvOp&Troiffi TiKTovffii> i/ocrous, Philemonfr. 1 06 (II 512 K.) 5ia \virrjv /cat /mavia

yap yiyverat |TroXXotcrt, Kai pocnûar' OVK

Idvifjia, Antiphanes fr. 107 (n 54 K.)CLTTOLV TO \VTTOVV effTLV dvdpdjTTQ vbffOS. InEur. Hipp. 159 the chorus conjecturethat such may be the case with Phaedra :

Xi^TTct 5' virep TraOewv evvaia dtderai \j/vxdv ;

8txr9v|xia (treated inadequately in L.

and S.) tends to express not so much

a single emotion as the state of mind in-

duced by frequent disappointment : see

El. 218, Eur. fr. 822, Theophr. fr. 120

(ap. Athen. 463 c) irapa/ut-vdeiTat yap 6

olvos Kai TIJV TOV yrjpws SwrOvftlar, the

depression of old age. In the Stoic

system 8va&v/j.ta is an efSos of X^TT-T) (eir'

d\ijTif) ^ 8v(rKivr)T<{}), and consequentlybelongs to the irddr) (Sto. vet.fr. ill 414,

420 Am.). Here the plural emphasizesthe recurrence of the frddos, and it is

worth observing that the Stoics regardedthe continuance of certain emotions as

producing conditions analogous to bodilysickness, which were accordingly de-

scribed as voariâTa and appwoTTj/xara :

see especially Cic. Tusc. 4. 23 25.

664

SiSaa(7KL TTCLVTOL9 f

664 Stob. fior. 115. 8 (iv p. 1021,

14 Hense) 2io<poK\ovs Tvpovs (so MA,fvpovs om. S).

'

yrjpa$...Tpif3ri.'

H. renders: 'Age teaches all, andtime's experience.' The sentiment is

akin to the well-known saw fiov\ai ye-

povrtav, for which see on fr. 260. Cf.

Aesch. Prom. 1013 dXX' ^/c5t5dcr/cei trdvd'

6 yrjpdffKwv xpôs, Eur. fr. 291 6 yap

6. 2diday/Jia 7roi/ciXc6Taro', Antiphonxpfo * yv-P xal i) eûTreipta rot /ATJ

Xpovov rpi-tj is not merely the lapse of

time regarded objectively, although this

would be sufficient to explain Ant. 1078,if it stood alone, but the effect upon us

of its passage. This comes out clearlyin Plat. rep. 493 B Kara/J-aO^v re ravra

288 ZOÔKAEOYZ

irdvra %vvovcria re Kal xpovou Tpifi-fi, andis implied in the use of rpifi-f) for delay ,

as well as in the meaning of diarpi^^.There is a good example in Moschionfr. 6, 1 8 (p. 814 Nauck), which is parti-

cularly relevant here : etrel 8' 6 TIKTUV

jrdvra Kal Tp<p<av xpbvos |

rbv dvrjrov

ii> filov, |

e?r' o$v ^pi/j-vav

|

efr' oftv dvdyKf)v eire

rrj /j.aKpg, Tpifirj \avrrjv irapaff-^^v TT]V

(pixnv diddffKaXov, where 'long experience'is the obvious meaning. It might seem

hardly worth while to call attention to

this point, had not a failure to observe

it given unnecessary difficulty to some of

the commentators on Aesch. Ag. 471 (seefor instance Wecklein's note). In fact,

Aeschylus' powerful phrase

rpifia jftov might be paraphrased prosaic-

ally as 'experience of misfortune': the

man of mere fortune cannot stand againstthe wearing influence of reverse when its

turn comes. This is, I suppose, what

Kennedy meant by his 'luck-reversingbrunt of life,' and is not far removedfrom Headlam's view, although the latter

presses still further the meaning of Tpi(3r).

A. Gennadius proposed xpâ f r 7Was>

quoting Archytas ap. Plut. fr. XXII. 6

Xpeiw irdvr e5t5a|e, and Nauck (p. XXIv)inclined to TroXXd (for irdvra), after Solonfr. 18 etc.; but the text does not seem to

require amendment.

665

aKO)v 8' a OVTIS

666 Stob. Jlor. 46. 6 (iv p. 119, 18

Hense) Zo00K\ôus Tvpot (Tvpd S, rvpuM).

'

aKUV...KO.K6s.'

The thought was a common-place :

Track. 727 d\X' d/j,<f>i TOIS <T0aXer<ri /iij '^

e/coi/'crtaj| ^717 Trtireipa, 0. C. 977 ircDs av

rb 7' O.KOV Trpay/j.' civ etV6rws i/'^yots; Phil.

1318 6'crot 5' Kov<rLoi(riv ZyKeivTai /3Xa/3cus |

...TOi/Tou odre <rvyyv<j)[Jir)i' %eic |

dlKaiov

tvTiv Kre., Eur. Hipp. 1433 &KUV yapw\ffds viv

'

dvdpwTrotcri de\

de&v didovTwv

eti<6s âfjiaprdveiv, Tr. fr. adesp. 80 etirep

ydp ou5e TO?S KO.K&S dedpaxdo'u' \

dKov&i&s

dpyrjv ireaeiv, Thuc. 3. 40 &y-5' e<rrl TO aKovffiov, Dem. 18. 274

OLKUV '

(rvyyvwfj.r)v dvrl rijs

Sen. Here. Oct. 886 haut

est nocens quicumque non sponte tst nocens.

Such moral judgements may seem trivial

to us, but were fresh and vital in a com-

munity where accidental homicide mightbe visited with a year's exile. All the

more startling was Socrates' pronounce-ment in the face of common opinion that

ovSeis CKWV Trovrjpds ;and this he was pre-

pared to defend by the still more remark-able paradox that a voluntary wrong is

better than an involuntary. See Plat.

Hipp. min. 371 E 372 D, where Socrates

formulates his position : ot /SXaTrroiresTOI)S dvOp&irovs /ecu ddiKOVvres KO.I \>ev86-

[tevoi KO.I eâTraTwvTes Kal d/Aaprdv

e/c6vTes, dXXci/LIT) aKOvres, /SeXrtoi/s

(sc. (f)aivovTa.L) rj oi &KOVTCS.

666

(TLTOICTL

666 <ri.Toi(ri Porson : ot Toi<rt A

666 Athen. 99 F (in the course of a

discussion on the use of xoprdeiv) So0o-K\TJS T iv Tf/30t

'

ffiTOtffl...^viÔfJI.V.'

This line is supposed to refer to the

entertainment offered by Salmoneus to

Pelias and Neleus on their arrival.

jr<ryxopT<H"tv : it does not seem pos-sible to determine whether this word is

merely the equivalent of Travroios, or

whether it retains any of the contemptuous

significance which clearly attached to

%6pros and x<V>ra*w as applied to humanfood. For xopTos cf. Hippon. fr. 20 o-O/ca

ytterpta rp&ywv |

/cat KpWivov /c6XXt/ca, 5oi^-

Xioi' %6prov, and for the verb Plat. rep.

586A jSoaKtjfj.dTuv diKrjir KCITW del /3Xe7roj>res

Kal KKV<J>OTS els yrfv Kal eis Tpairefas

fibaKovrai. xopra^^tevoi. The speaker in

Athenaeus, who is asked why he substi-

tuted -xopTaadrfvaL for Kopeffdyvai, adduces

TYPQ 289

a number of instances from comic poetsof the application of the verb to men.The limitation is significant; and, so far

as we can tell, if Sophocles used the

adjective of human food without any de-

preciatory sense, such an employment was

exceptional. But in later Greek xoP-fcffdai loses its innuendo, and is generally

equivalent to ^TrXô-^vat,' to be filled

'

with food. Cf. Epict. diss. i. 9. 19 tirav

XopTa<r0rjT 0"/i/j.tpov, Kadrjtrde xXdovres wepiTTJS atfpiov irbOev (fidyijTe. Matth. ev. 5. 6

(jLCtKapioi oi Treti/wi/res Kal Sii/'wi/res rrjv

diKaiofftivyv, o'rt avrol xoprao-^ô'oi'Tat.On the other hand, Plutarch in qu.conv. i. 2. 2 p. 616 B is influenced by thePlatonic usage.

667

XOP. 7roXXaij> S' iv 7TO\V7r\f]6ia TreXercu

OVT OLTT evyeveajv

fro \LOLV /CGIK09'

OVT

TTl&TQV OL>>8eV.

667. 1 Chori notam apponit S|

TTO\\UV suspectum\iav Grotius, irdXiv Meineke, del Wecklein, rotiniraKiv J.

Blaydes) : /3/>OT< codd.

667 Stob. flor. 87. 3 (iv p. 715, 10

Hense) So^>o/c\^s Tupot.<

7ro\XtDi'...ou5^'.'

The general sentiment, that birth is nocriterion of merit, is thus expressed byEur. El- 370: ydy yap eldov dvdpa yev-vaiov iraTpbs |

r6 nydef ovra, xpf]GT& T' IK

KO-KUV. There is a note of pessimism,such as often characterizes him, in the

version of Sophocles. Cf. also Ant. 375eieis rdxa |

efr' evyevrjs ireQvKas eir'

1 iroXXcov is generally suspected. ThusHerwerden proposed ou TTO\IJ with <r6\6v

in v. 2 and Kanbv in v. 3 ; Blaydes, otf wdvv

or Ppor&v ; Mekler, ir6\fuv ; Nauck (In-

dex, p. xiii) XacDf. The last is the best

suggestion that has been made, but the

uncertainty of the metre makes conjecturehazardous. J. writes: 'I incline to think

that this first verse may be sound. The

redundancy of 7roXXcoj'...7roXu7rX770i$ has a

cumulative emphasis, like that of El. 851

vv T atavi.' But the fact that TroXXtDv is

here unqualified makes it difficult to be-

lieve in its genuineness. iro\virXT]0a,

multitude, does not occur elsewhere in

tragedy ; but we have ira/jiir\r]6ia (whichBlomfield wished to introduce here) in

fr. 373, and dvdpoTr\rideta in Aesch. Pers.

238. Dindorf (in Thes. s.v.) remarkedthat Tro\vjr\-r)6elq. might stand here, so far

as metre is concerned.

2 f. a.\pd(nv, as corresponding to ev-

3 TO \Lav codd.: 6

V J. (fipOT&V...O\>8tvl

is an instance of the political

application of moral terms. From thearistocratic point of view ol dx/oetoi arethe rabble'. Hdt. 3. 81 (the advocate 6f

oligarchy speaks) 6/j.l\ov yap dxprjiov otfSe'v

ten dffvveruTepov otf5 v^ptffrdTepov. InThuc. 2. 40 Pericles, representing the de-

mocracy, neatly turned the tables on theleisured classes, who accepted the word

dirpdyfjiwv as a compliment, by retorting :

rbv in}5kv Tajvde (sc. rCov iro\iTiK&v) /xer^-

Xovra OVK dirpayp.ova dXX' dxpeiois vo/j.io-

fj,ev. See Neil's excellent discussion of

political nomenclature in his edition of

the Equites, pp. 202 209, where how-ever, in dealing with dxpeios at p. 208,he does not mention its application to

the masses. TO XCav is undoubtedlycorrupt. Jacobs conjectured otfr' dxpeiuveuro Xi'dp, but \lav is unsatisfactory in anycase : other suggestions are mentionedin the cr. n. J. writes :

'I would read

Tovi[AiraXiv," contrariwise." The similar

rhythms in the latter parts of vv. 2 and 3indicate that these two verses were in the

same measure. roHp.ira\(.v restores this

metrical agreement.' The metrical con-

ditions are very uncertain : see below.

Pporwv. J.'s conjecture was accepted byH. The former quotes 0. T. 1 195 Ppor&vovSh /xaKctp/fw, and his view is simplerand better than Herwerden's proposal to

read (riropq..

The metre is doubtful. As the text

P. II.

290 Z000KAEOYI

stands, vv. i, i appear to be Aeolic poly-schematist trimeters, akin to the Asclepiad,and the first acephalous. The nearest

parallel I can find is in Find. 1stkm. 8. 5.

See J. W. White in C. Q. in 296. Thethird line, if irdXtv (e.g.) is accepted,

would be an iambic trimeter catalectic.

The scheme is then :

H

668

TOV

668 Schol. Ar. Ran. 357 (w^ Kpa-rlvov TOV Tavpo<pdyovy\(l)TTr)s

X6r077)[=Suid. s.v.

irapa rb So0o/c\ôus K Tvpovs'

TOV Tavpo<pdyov.' Cf. Phot. lex. p. 571,

13 (Etym. M.^ p. 747, 49, Suid. I.e.)

Tavpo<pdyov TOV &.ibvv(rov 2o<poK\i]S tv

fvpoi. Hesych. IV p. 133 Tavpo<payos- 6

The epithet of Dionysus was transferred

to Cratinus by Aristophanes for reasons

which may be conjectured with more or

less certainty : see Tucker in loc. In

regard to Dionysus himself, there is suffi-

cient evidence that a bull was a customarysacrifice to him. At Cynaetha in Arcadia

fverywinter a bull was selected from the

erd, and carried to the sanctuary of

Dionysus to be sacrificed (Pausan. 8. 19.

2). At Tenedos a new-born calf wasshod in cothurni, and then sacrificed to

Dionysus; but the sacrificing priest whoused the axe was pelted with stones andfled to the sea (Ael. hist. an. 12. 34).The axe used in a similar sacrifice at lulis

in Ceos was called by Simonides (fr. 172)

pov(j>6vos 6epdTr<av of Dionysus (Athen.456 D, E). At Athens on the occasionof the Great Dionysia the Ephebi offered

a bull to the god, after leading it in pro-cession round the city (CIG I 157). Butthe epithet may relate to the god not so

much as the recipient of a regular andformal sacrifice, but rather as sharing the

orgies of his worshippers, in whose per-sons he becomes incarnate, when theyseek to establish a divine communion bydevouring the raw flesh of the sacredanimal : see Eur. Bacch. 737 ff., fr. 472,12; and for discussions bearing on the

significance of these rites Robertson Smithin Encyd. Brit? xxi 137; J. G. Frazer,G.B.2

II p. 165; Miss J. E. Harrison,

Proleg. p. 482 ff. Hence Phot. I.e. is

justified in adding the explanation wfj.t)-

ffT-fjv, which other evidence ascribes to the

god as a title (Gruppe, p. 732; Rohde,Psyche*, II p. 15^, and schol. V on Ar.I.e. adds explicitly dirb TOV cru/i^ScuVoi'Tos

rcus /3a/cxais' difoiruv yap fiovs KCU T]<sQiov

co/ua Kpta. For Dionysus as a bull-godsee also on fr. 959.

669

669 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 98, 1 1

fyeyKov e?ri irpdrov irpoa&Trov. I,o<poK\7]s

Tupot,'

Apto-ToQdvrjs Qeff/j.o<f)0piais (742).

In Ar. Thesm. 742 yveyKov is immedi-

ately followed by ijveyKas <rv;and Cobet

(N.L. p. 2 f.) concluded that yveyKa andelTra are equally illegitimate in Attic, andthat ZveyKov and vtyKas are the productsof a late age. On the other hand, Ruther-

ford's modified statement (New Phryn.p. 220), derived from Veitch, that 'in the

indicative and imperative the forms in

alpha were used in Attic, except when the

requirements of metre or a wish to avoid

hiatus suggested yveyKov and ZveyKov'1

), requires correction in view of

the facts recorded by Meisterhans3 , p. 183.The latter shows that TjveyKov is the older

form, and quotes eveyxtTw from inscrip-tions of the fifth century and dinji>eyKoi>

from shortly after 403 B.C. On the other

hand, eV^x/cas is the only recorded form of

the participle. In the first person singular

TjveyKor is more frequent, and, so far as

our evidence goes and excluding com-

pounds, more Attic than fyeyKa (El. 13,Eur. Ion 38). The Atticist tradition (Ael.Dion. fr. 156 Schw., Phryn. praep. soph.

p. 73, i de B.) recognized yveyKov and

riveyKa as equally legitimate, so that the

purpose of the Antiatlicist is obscure.

TYPQ YBPII 291

YBPII

Nothing is known which will explain this title, but the per-sonification recalls M&5/U09 and "E/ot?. It should however bementioned that Hybris was the mother of Pan, according to theMS reading of Apollod. i. 22, and Tzetz. Lycophr. 772. Thebirth of Pan would of course be an event suitable to be recordedin a satyr-play.

670

re TT)V

67O. 1 TT}V irdvruv Blaydes : rrjv irdvr' SMA, xai TTJV irdvr'1

Gesner, TT]V

Wagner, rijv rd iravr'1

Gomperz, riet (vel re/ceo/ coll. Hes. Theog. 227) rty irdvr' Bue-

cheler, r' ^x i(vel T

'

&yci) fty Trdvr'' Hense

something kept back from oneself, the

genitive follows diroffrepelffdat in prefer-ence to the accusative. Eur. Her. 137'EXXas c5 vfji.fjidxovs \

O'LOVS oiovs 6X^<racra

roua-5' dTro<TTepr]ffri is only an apparentexception, for Toti<rde is governed by 6X^-

<ra<ra. And here, to use the language of

Aristotle, Lethe is regarded as dreX^srather than Treirijp&fj.frr) : de anim. 3. i.

42 5a9 Tracrcu dpa ai al(rBuffets 2xoVTai ^1r^

r&vIJLT] dr\u>v fjLt]5^ TreTrr]p(ii)/JLv(t}v. Cf.

Anon. T^x^n 13 (Gomperz, Apologie der

Heilskunst, p. 62) ir}TpiKrj...dTra'Tpr)fj.^v'rj

TI I5eit> oi/'et, $ rd wavra irdvres'

67O Stob. flor. 26. 3 (in p. 610, 4

Hense) 2o0o/c\ôus "T/3pews ffartjpov (so

MA: (rartpov om. S, varvpuv Meineke.But Hense defends the singular by quotingDemetr. de eloc. 169 ev ffarvpy /cat tv

K(t}fj.if}dLaiS...irel ffdrvpov ypa\f/ei avrl rpa-

yydias. See also H. Richards in C. R.XIV 2O5 T ).

l

\-r]d'r)i'...at>avdoi>.'

1 Ai]0T]v : a rare personification, al-

though in Hes. Theog. 227 Ki\Qt\ is the

daughter ofEpts. In Eur. Or. 213 c3 WOT-

via A.ir)di) riav KO.K&I', cos el <ro<f>i) |

Kal TOiffi

8vffTUX!v<Fi9 evKTaia ê6s, she is conceived

differently. irdvTwv is the best correction

of WO.VT' for two reasons, (i) When the

chief idea is that of separation from an

object and not the wrongful act of another,to be ivithoiit something rather than to have

6/ocDo-t. (2) The corruption is in this waymost easily accounted for, since

would have been written iravr.

2 Blaydes conj. dvavdov T\

671

671 Athen. 6 A dp<re-

There are obvious metrical considera-

tions in favour of Dindorf's conjecture6e\uv. Nauck withdrew his earlier view

that 6\uv eaQieiv should be read. Inan earlier book (p. 375 A) Athenaeus had

argued that, as connected with 5A.0vsand a5eX06s, the word is strictly feminine ;

but the masc. occurs as early as Epichar-mus (fr. 100 K.).

192

292

YAP04>OPOI

Welcker inferred (p. 286) from the corresponding title of

Aeschylus 2eyu,e'X?7 j) "TSpocfropoi, (TGF p. 73) that the subjectwas the birth of Dionysus as related in Hygin. fab. 179 andelsewhere. The conclusion is very doubtful, although some

might see a slight confirmation in fr. 674. E. A. I. Ahrensheld that the vSpofopoi in Aeschylus were the women whoattend the mother in child-birth, and bathe the new-born child.

See also E. Maass, de Aesch. SuppL (1890), p. 10.

672

'A/cecrrcuoicn,!' e/x/3ey8&>9 TrdSa

672 Phot. lex. p. 366, 13 6'xos 'A/ceo- -

<7cuos'

eSbtiovv al St/ceXtxat Tj/j,lovoi elvat

<nrovdalai'

TJ yap "AKecrcra 2tKeXt/cr; 7r6Xis.

2o0o/tX77s 'T5po06pots. But the line of

Sophocles, which should have followed,has found its way to the wrong place :

ib. p. 365, I 6xa-voi>' odev 7} aairis Kparei-rcu

7r65a.' û,/3eu>s is preserved by cod. A of

Suid. s.v. oxavov, which reproduces Phot.

Hesych. I p. 96 aKecrrcuot #x l'

2t/ceXt/fa

6%/jlMTCi, (The words X^yercu de Kai 6xtf~

/xara 2i/ceXi*a airk 7r6Xews 2tKeX/as are also

wrongly placed under the lemma d/cecrrai

0pês aQ\G)v.) Hesych. in p. 249 oôs'Afceo-raTos (dô-ratscod.)

' cVei at 2t/ceXtfcat

i)/j,ioi>oi crirovdcuoi. T]V 5 'A/c^crr?? ?r6XiS

2i/ceXtas. Steph. Byz. p. 59, 9 'AK^TTJ?r6Xts 2i/ceXias...ro tdvinbv 'A/ce(rra?os.

oôis, of a single car, is an instance of

pluralis maiestatis, probably with refer-

ence to its composite structure : cf. El.

727 Ba/3/cctfots 6'xots, and see Gildersleeve,

52, Kuehner-Gerth, 348. 3, Anm. i.

: Acesta is an old variant

for the name of the town called Egesta byThuc., Aegesta by Diodorus and Strabo,and Segesta by the Romans, which is

situated in the north-west corner of Sicily.

Vergil treats it as a Trojan settlement,named in honour of the semi-TrojanAcestes (known also as Aegestes or

Aegestus) : Aen. 5. 715 urbem appella-bunt permisso nomine Acestam. Theallusion may be to a mule-car (aTr^),as contrasted with ci'p/xa, since Sicily was

regarded as the home of the former : Pind.fr. 106 (quoted by J.) d'p/ua Qfjâiov dXX'aTTO ras a7Xao/cd/)7rou |

2t:eXtas 6x~nfJ-o-

daiSaXoev fAaretieiv, Critias fr. 2 Diels elra

5' 6'xos 2i/ceX6s /cdXXei dairavrj re /c/)drt(rros.

For Sicilian horses see fr. 162 and Jebbon 0. C. 3F2. e'fipcpws ir68a : with footîrmly planted. Cf. Eur. Phoen. 172 5s

ap/j.a \evKoi> yvioeTpofai /3e/3ws, and see

the commentators on Hipp. 1189. Forthe ace. see my nn. on Eur. Hel. 526,Hclid. 1 68, and other evidence collected

by Blaydes on Ar. Eccl. 161.

673

7TO\VKOLVOV^

673 Schol. Soph. Ant. i TO de KOLVOV

6 2o0o/cX?)s crvvex&s M TOV d5eX0oO ridt)- 'T8po06/>ots'

iroKtiKowov (cod. ...*G(.v olov Kai ev rats 'T5po06/)ois rfTa.-x.ev [Nauck's iroMKWfAov is probably a mis-'TioXtiKowov

'

A/j.<J>iTplTai>'

d>/ri rou TroXu- print]) 'Afj.<j>iTpiTr)v.'

a5eX0oj'. Hesych. II p. 503 /cowoj... Amphitrite is called 'many-sistered,' as

YAP04>OPOI <t>AIAKES 293

being one of the Nereids : see Apollod.i. n. Her sisters are the eKar6Aro5e$

N?7/)^5es of O.C. 718. The other passagesin Sophocles which the scholiast had in

mind as justifying his interpretation of

Kotvds by d8e\<f)6s are : O. T. 261 KOLV&V re

iV &v, el Kelv(^ yevos \fj.i) '5u(TTi5-

&" ^/C7re0u/c6ra, O.C. 535 Koival

ye 7rarp6s dde\<f>eal, and perhaps Ant.202 rj6\r)<re 5' atyuaros KOLVOV Trdcraa'dai.

The meaning is not established in Pindar,as might be inferred from L. and S.

The unusual force of the compoundepithet led Seyffert to conjecture TroXtf-

KOITOV. ' One may suspect that Sophoclessaid-.-TToXuKifyccu'' 'Afj-faTplrai', the epithetof the sea in Solon, Empedocles and a

fragment in Suidas TroXuKi/yuovos 6a\do'(rir)s :

cf. Horn. y 91, /u 60.' Headlam in C.R.xviil 243. Blaydes conj.

674

674 Schol. Soph. Phil. 1199 &mfjifrTOt \afieiv Kai ftpovrds dvrl rov fipov-

T?7<ras (Nauck conj. f3poi>Tr)Tris), KaddirepKai ev 'T5po06/>ot$ rov Ai^rwroy el?re Ba/cxâvri TOU Ba/cxeurdf (Ba/cxeur?;!' Blaydes).

Apart from its association with the

names of birds (drrayds etc.), the termina-

tion -as,when used to form common nouns,was a vulgarism expressive of contempt :

cf. xecras, rpecras, \f/aKadds (Starkie on Ar.

Ach. 1150). Karaâyds is attributed to

Aeschylus (fr. 428, Phryn. p. 433 Lobeck).Neil (on hx.Eq. 5 34 Kovvd$) holds that the

force of the suffix was similar, as applied

to proper names. It is clear that dimi-nutives were so formed, as they often

appear beside the full name, and Blass

(Gramm. neut. Gr. p. 71) has collected

several examples from the language of

the New Testament. Lobeck pointedout that the present notice indicates that

the suffix was not entirely colloquial;and the name Menas, formally given to

a Spartan in Thuc. 5. 19, shows that

Athenian usage was not necessarily simi-

lar to that of the other Greeks. But wecannot trace the associations

AIAKE!

According to Welcker 1,this play was a sequel to the Nan-

sicaa, containing the entrance of Odysseus into the palace of

Alcinous, the narrative of his previous history, and his dismissal

to continue his journey. Consequently he assigned to this playfrs. 86 1 and 965, which Brunck, followed by Dindorf (frs. 407,

408), included in the fragments of the Niptra*. Welcker thoughtthat the words Kai fiopds aprvâra (fr. 675) were part of Odys-seus' narrative, but it is at least as likely that they refer to the

Phaeacians (n.).

Ellendt (s.v. dprva)), partly on the strength of fr. 1122, held

that the Phaeacians was undoubtedly a satyr-play.The evidence as to the plot and general character of the play

is too slight to warrant discussion;and it is not even certain that

1p- 231 f.

2 He added Tr. fr. adesp. 165, which he understood to refer to Circe, but, thoughthe name of Sophocles (fr. 1062) precedes it in Eustathius, there is nothing else to showthat the fragment belongs to him.

294 IO<t>OKAEOY!

Welcker was right in finding its source in the Odyssey. For all

we know, it may have comprised the adventures of the Argonautsin Phaeacia, as described by Apoll. Rhod.4. 982 1222, when the

Colchians overtook them and demanded the surrender of Medea,and, after Alcinous had promised to give her up in case of her

not being actually married to Jason, Arete hurried on the mar-

riage in order to prevent this result. Again, since Pollux 9. 106

refers tor/

O/z,??po9 eV Qaiafy when speaking of Nausicaa playing

ball, it is just possible that the 4>atWe? of Sophocles was an

alternative title for his Nausicaa. We might then comparefr. 675 with Horn, f 76, 209, 246. But the existence of the

recorded alternative Ti\vvrpi,ai makes this improbable.

675

KO!

675 Athen. 67 F ort d/ari/yttara e^rai rifuv dais re 0/X?;, Hor. Ep. i. 2. 27

trapa Soô/cXet '/cai /So/sets dprâra.' The fruges consumere nati} were naturally

quotation is assigned to the Phaeaces on skilled in condiments. Campbell strangelyaccount of Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.} p. 82, misunderstands the Antiatticist, when he

32 dpr^fj-ara'

oi>x TjStfaTiara. So0oKX?7S speaks of TJ5v<rfJi.a as the later Greek equi-<t>atai, which at any rate shows that the valent of aprv|xa. The Atticists con-

word dpr^fj-ara occurred in this play, as demned d/>ri5a> and its derivatives (Moeris,also in frs. 328, 79- P- 198, 9 TjSOi'cu 'Am/cot, dpTv<rai."E\\'rjves);

The Phaeacians (Horn. 6 248 aid 5' and Sophocles is cited to confute them.

676

0,7700-77/^77i>cu

676 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.] p. 83, Index). But the Atticists were wrong if

21 airocr'rjfj.TJvai* avrl TOV 5r/Xu)a-at. So0o- they condemned the word itself as post-

K\ijs 3>ala};i. classical. Thuc. 4. 27 and Plat. Euthyd.The word dirocrrjfjiatveiv in the sense 276B would be enough to prove the con-

of d-rj\ovi> became common in later Greek, trary, even if the present evidence wereas Plutarch's usage shows (v. Wyttenbach's wanting.

4>AIAPA

Welcker held that the plot of the Phaedra, which in its

principal features seems to have resembled the Hippolytus of

Euripides, agreed in detail with the account of Asclepiadespreserved in schol. V Horn. X 321 (FHG III 305). Accordingto him, Theseus, after marrying the daughter of Minos, desired

to protect his son Hippolytus from possible injury at the hands

<f>AIAKEI <t>AIAPA 295

of his stepmother, and consequently sent him to exercise the

sovereignty at Troezen which he himself had inherited throughAethra. Phaedra, who had fallen in love with Hippolytus, built

a temple to Aphrodite at Athens, and on her subsequent arrival

at Troezen endeavoured to move Hippolytus to compliance.When he repulsed her overtures, she was alarmed and inventeda counter-charge against him. accusing him to Theseus of havingassailed her honour. Theseus believed her, and prayed to

Poseidon that, by destroying Hippolytus, he would accomplishin his favour one of the three wishes which he had promised to

fulfil for him. While Hippolytus was exercising his chariot onthe shore, a bull came out of the sea, and the scared horses

overturned the car and dragged Hippolytus to destruction.

Phaedra, when her slander was exposed, hanged herself. Theprincipal points in which this story differs from the extant playof Euripides are (i) the shamelessness of Phaedra's direct over-

tures;and (2) the suicide of Phaedra after the detection of her

treachery. Apollod. epit. I. 18, 19 agrees in regard to both

points, but makes no mention of Troezen. Diod. 4. 62 makesPhaedra return from Troezen to Athens and there give informa-tion to Theseus. In other respects his story is rationalized :

the influence of Poseidon has disappeared, the fatal accidentto Hippolytus was the consequence of his mental agitation, andPhaedra's suicide was due to the fear of detection. Pausan. i.

22. 2, who, though professing to give the Troezenian legend,

clearly depends on Euripides, gives as Theseus's reason for the

sending away of Hippolytus his desire to prevent any rivalryfrom arising between him and the children who might be bornto Phaedra.

But, although the currency of certain variations in the details

of the story is established by these authorities, there is nothingto connect them with Sophocles. When Welcker suggests that

the presentation of Phaedra by Sophocles differed entirely fromthe portrait with which we are familiar, that is probable enough ;

but in assigning to the Sophoclean Phaedra a shameless hardness

of character he is speculating without any evidence to supporthim. Hence his view was rightly rejected by Leo (Obs. in Senec.

p. 174) and Kalkmann (de Hipp. Eur. p. 47). On the other

hand, it is certain that in the Hippolytus Ka^vTrropevos of

Euripides the character of Phaedra was represented in a muchmore odious light than in the revised play (TGF p. 491). Henceit has been suggested that the versions of Ovid (Her. 4) and of

Seneca in his Phaedra, in which the same features appear, were

derived wholly or in part from the 'ITTTTOXUTO

(see Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 209, and Herm. XV 483).

296 !0<t>OKAEOYZ

It must be admitted that we know little or nothing concerningthe Phaedra of Sophocles which helps us to discover its character.

It is, however, certain that in the course of the play Theseusreturned from his unfortunate expedition to the underworld (seefrs. 686, 687 with the nn.); and it is remarkable that the order of

events is the same in Ovid (v. 109) and in Seneca (vv. 98, 225,

843). But it would be unsafe to infer further identity1 of treat-

ment from that coincidence, for Euripides in his earlier play mayhave represented the absence of Theseus as due to the samecause (fr. 443). Kalkmann (l.c. p. 44) was perhaps justified in

concluding from Ar. Ran. 1043 ff. that Sophocles' portrait of

Phaedra must have been at least free from grosser traits; and,

if that is so, her infatuation may have been excused as the

consequence of her husband's desertion, who had abandonedher to assist his friend in a hopeless expedition. Similar

suggestions have been made by R. Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 143,

and Gruppe, p. 6o62 ,as well as by Ilberg in Roscher III 2223,

who thinks that Sophocles' play in point of date came betweenthe two plays of Euripides. On the other hand, Wilamowitz is

confident that the Phaedra of Sophocles was subsequent to the

extant Hippolytus, and that its principal purpose was to reinstate

the reputation of the heroine. He argues (Eur. Hipp. p. 57) that

fr. 682 is part of a polemic directed against the Euripidean

standpoint, that fr. 683 perhaps refers to the political debate

in the Supplices, and that the expedition to the underworld wasreintroduced into the story with the specific object explainedabove.

1Weil, Sept tragedies tfEuripide, p. 6, thinks the lines unsuitable to the supposed

occasion, on the ground that Theseus had fortunately escaped from peril. But, thoughhis life had been saved by Heracles, his own expedition was a disastrous failure.

However this may be, in the extant Hippolytus the absence of Theseus is differentlyaccounted for (792), and the whole scheme of his residence at Troezen (34) is incon-

sistent with the undertaking of an expedition to the underworld. Observing that

Seneca laid the scene of action at Athens, we are entitled to infer that a play whichintroduced the return from Hades would agree also with Seneca in the matter of

locality. The inference is valid for Sophocles, but is obviously less cogent in regardto the KdAuTrro/Aej'os. No weight can be assigned to the reading of the MSS in the

Argument of Aristophanes :i) ffKyvri rou dpdfj.ct.Tos ev Qrifiais KCITOU. This patent

blunder is usually corrected to iv TpoL^jvi. Schwartz however emended : ev < Ipoiffjvi

Kal ov KaQawep TOV irportpov tv > '

Aflâts, and Murray accepts ev 'AJHjrw, thinkingthat it may apply to the earlier play. Eitrem's conclusions on these points (Pauly-Wissowa vm 1865) are much too positive. Wilamowitz made much of his contention

that in the KaXvirrbnevos Theseus escaped from Hades by means of the second of the

three wishes which Poseidon had promised to fulfil. The only solid support for his

argument is the statement of schol. Eur. Hipp. 887, which says nothing at all about

Euripides.

4>AIAPA 297

677

SIov yap IKCUOV av

OTTOV ye

Spa yevvatov

LrjSiicaia

re/3i//erat.

677. 2 Sirov ye /ATJ Schneidewin : OTTOU

/WT; Blaydes | repireran Orion

677 Stob. flor. 17. 2 (ill p. 490, i

Hense) Soô/cXeovs QaiSpq. (MA : rov

avrov 0a...S).t

ov...rep\l>eTo.L.'>

Also in

Orion y/,c>r. 6. 7 p. 49, 15, with the lemma

KCU Stobaeus, 8-irov ye Orion, STTOV TCL

1 f. The words are obviously suitable

to Hippolytus. <j>pc'vas should be takenwith T^pireiv. It would be unnecessaryto point this out, if Ellendt had not

quoted the passage as if <t>pe~t>as qualified

yevvcuov. (f>prfv or, as distributed in its

functions, 0p6vr, is often the central

consciousness not yet distinguished as

reason, will, or sensation : cf. fr. 636. 3

evdoticrri <ppevi. Here we should accord-

ingly render by heart or mind, without

importing a specific reference to the

senses. Cf. Ant. 315 6 8p&v <r' aviq. ras

(f>pet>as r& 5' wr' ^yc6, Eur. Ion 1180 us

daffffov X0wa' ol'5' ^s ydov&s <ppev&v, Tro.

635 ci's <roi rep\f/iv ^/XjSaXw <f>pevi. rtptrfiv

<t>peva occurs in Eur. Or. 1176, Ifdid.

663, 939. Y is normal in a relative

clause with causal implication : see onfr. 84, and cf. Eur. Or. 544 6716 rot Trpos

rt Xi'TTTjcretj' <ppva. Te'pxj/trat is better

than Ttpirerat :' where his joy is like to

be shameful.' For the gnomic force of

the future tense see Gildersleeve, Greek

Syntax, 258; and for the fut. midd.with passive sense cf. Ant. 691.

678

678 Hesych. I p. 234\6yovs

'

d.Tre/j.tij;a.TO TOVS \6yovs, avrl rov

d7T<rTpd<j>r}. 2o00KX^s <&al8pq,. Phryn.praep. soph. p. 49, 12 de B. (Bekk.anted, p. 28, 8) airoTrTij(rai \6yovs' dirop-

pi\l/at K.a.1 (J,i) wpoffto'da.i.

The same phrase for rejection is foundin Aesch. Eum. 303 ciXX'

\6yovs : cf. Eur. /. A. 874 TTWS;

u> yepait, fj.v8ov ov yap eu (fipovets. But

with Euripides the metaphor is losing its

force : in Hel. 664 direirrvGa. fj.ev \6yov,olov olov effoL<ro/jt.ai the verb is simply

'

I

loathe.' Hence cbr^Trruau ('Far be it

from me ! ') as an emphatic formula bywhich the speaker dissociates himself

from a thought suggested to him : Hec.

1276, Hipp. 614, I. T. 1161. The re-

ference was almost certainly to Hippo-lytus.

679

crvyyv(t)T Kapcrêcre ereyaurcu1 TO yap

yvvai^lv ai(r\pov crvv yvvaiKa Set

679. 2 ffvv yvvcuKa Set Meineke : crvv yvvaiid del A, ev yvvaiKi Set S, ev yvvaiid

rj M679 Stob. flor. 74. 16 (iv p. 575, 14

Hense)

For the general sense cf. Eur. Andr.

955 ffvyyvucfTa ptv vvv <rol rdd', dXX'

|KOfffjLeiv yvvaticas rds yvvaiKeias

v6<rov$. The reading of A would mean,'

you should help a woman to conceal awoman's shame '

: see e.g. Xen. anab. 3.

2. 31 fiv \f>ri<f>i<nfjffde Tov...VTvyxa.vovTa

298 Z000KAEOYI

0t>v ry dpxovri KoiXdfetv. But we wantrather,

'

you as a woman should help meto conceal a woman's shame.' Hence

J. rightly adopted Meineke's conjecture,

comparing for the adverbial use of <rvv

Ant. 85 Kpv<f>ri 5e Kevde, <rbv 5' aurws ^yw,and ib. 432 <riV 6t viv

\ Byptifjied' evdtis.

Add At. 959, 1288, EL 299, 746 (unlessiv should be read there). Tucker, in

C. R. xvm 246, supports the same

suggestion, apparently without beingaware that it had been anticipated. J.was disposed to make a distinction be-

tween the adverbial use of prepositionsand their so-called tmesis : see his nn.

on O.T. 27, EL 299, Ant. 1107. Thedistinction is not always easy to maintain,and the term 'tmesis,' if strictly under-

stood, is historically misleading : Monro,H. G. 176. No doubt, however, in

consequence of the increase in the num-ber of compound verbs since the time of

Homer, the tragic poets were consciously

archaizing when they separated the pre-

position : see Wilamowitz on Eur. Her.

53. It should be added that usually in

Sophocles the prep, is placed at the

beginning of the clause (Kuehner-Gerth,445, 6 : but cf. fr. 796). The substitution

of yvvacid was a natural error (see on fr.

659, 5), and fv and vtiv are constantlyconfounded (fr. 724, Cobet, V.L. p. 199,Coll. Crit. p. 293). 'Nauck formerly

conj. e$ yvvaiKa del (rreyeiv. He nowreads, after Vitelli and F. W. Schmidt,Set yvvalK

1

del areyeiv (quite unwarrant-

ably). R. Ellis prefers eV yvvaiid Set

o-rtyeiv,"

in the case of a woman ": but

this seems weak here, where only womenare in question. Worst of all is Cobet's

TTjv yvvaiKa oe? areyeivS (J.) Add that

Grotius adopted ev yvvaij-i, and Ellendt

<ri>v yvvait-1 Set areyetv. P. Schroeder

proposed avyytivaiKa.. H. conj. aiyCoffav

(or fftyuffrj?) in v. i, following Nauck,as I suppose, in v. 2 : this is as if the

speaker's silence were alone in question.For <TTyiv cf. Track. 596, and for

dva<rx<r0 (ri-ywo-ai At. 75 ou <rly' dveêt;

Gomperz quotes Eur. fr. 683 ero0oi

otVcetas

680

av etsxeV, <w ywat/ces, ouS'

7TO0', d> Koi Zevs <f)opfjujo"rj/ca/ca

'

avdyKr) ras ê^Xarou?

68O. 2 ^00/0^0-77 SM,

68O Stob. flor. 108. 53 (iv p. 970,

9 Hense) 2o0o/cXôus QaiSpq.. 'al'crx7...

1 nV. The Greeks saw a contrast

everywhere, and sometimes overdid it :

so here there is no real opposition be-

tween the fdv- and Se'-clauses, but the

5^-clause corroborates the yueV-clause.' Since heaven-sent disgrace cannot be

avoided, we must bear it.' See also

Jebb on Ai. 622 ff. Holzner, quotingsuch passages as Aesch. fr. 362 oflr' iv

0-7^777 rts rf/xo'os irap' effriq, \ favyet TI

yttaXXof TOV ireTrpdififrov fj.6pov, and Eur.Hdid. 615 fji6p<nfji,a 5' O&TL Qvyeiv

proposed to substitute a xpti f r

But the context probably warranted the

mention of disgrace, to avoid which wasPhaedra's special concern in Eur. Hipp.4o5ff., 498ff.2 Brunck was not justified in reading

tf ye ($ TTfp Dobree, ol<ri Hermann), for

KaC after the relative is entirely idiomatic.

It marks the statement of the relative

clause as corresponding to, sometimes

actually as limiting, that of the mainsentence : see e.g. Dem. 5. 16 Kai yapal {TVfj.fJ.axiai- TOVTOV ^xovffl rov Tpbwov,wv Kai (ppovriffeiev av rts. This simpleuse of Kai has also troubled the editors

in Horn. A 249. eôpixtjo-r), immiserit.

This use of the verb does not occur else-

where in tragedy, but is Homeric (F 165)and Ionic : see Lexx. For the omissionof dv see on fr. 659, 4. Cf. O. C. 252 01)

yap tdois av adp&v /SporcDv, |

6'<rrts dv, et

debs dyoi, \ eitQvyeiv Stivairo.

3 vocrovs, generally of mental distrac-

tion. See on fr. 650. Probably the

passion of love is intended here, as in

Track. 445. For the general sentiment

see on frs. 585, 964.

<J>AIAPA 299

68i

TO S' evrvyovvTo. TrdvT dpi0fjLr)<Tai,

OVK Icrnv OVTOS ovnv evpijcreis eW.

681 . 1 TO 5' evrvxovvra M : rb d'

681 Stob. flor. 105. 39 (iv p. 939,12 Hense) 2o0oKX&>us 3>ai8pa. 'TO 5'

evrvxovvra... .eva."1 The extract is omitted

altogether by S.

The critics are not of much assistance

in elucidating this difficult fragment.Nauck says :

' de restituendo loco despero :

sed v. i pro dpidneiv verbo potius epevvdv

requiro.' But that leads nowhere. Cobet

(Co!!. Crit. p. 198), after making the bad

conjecture dievrvxovvra, adds :

'

reliquanon expedio.' Grotius, who restored rbv

5' evrvxovvra and dpi6ur/<ras, has, I think,followed a false scent, which has misled

many (rbv evrvxovvra Papageorgius, <ri>

5' evrvxovvra Enger, rovs 5' evrvxovvrasWecklein, irav evrvxovvra irdvras ddprjffasF. W. Schmidt). Others have found fault

with ofrros (OZ/TCOS Gesner a doubtful

word for Sophocles [Wilamowitz on Eur.Her. 6n: see however his Eur. Hipp.p. 57, where he approves the conjecture,

holding the play to be late] ; ol/cos or

6p0ws with Pporov in v. i F. W. Schmidt).

J. writes :

' On the whole I would read

rbv 6 evrvxovvra (with Grotius) and

explain thus: "But as for the fortunateman, when thou hast reckoned up all

things, there is not one mortal whomthou wilt find (to be such)." The article

may be explained by the position of rbv

5' evrvxovvra at the beginning of the

sentence denoting that 6 evrvx&v is the

object of the search. Cp. Her. i. 32ouVos tKetvos rbv cry ^reeis, 6 6'X/3ios

KeK\f)ffdai at6s e'cm.' He might have

quoted O. T. 449 rbv avdpa rovrov, ov

TrdXcu f^Tets... OUTOS effrw evddoe : butneither the treatment of OUTOS nor the

combination of irdvr' dpida-f/a-as is satis-

factory. As an alternative, J. recon-

stituted the first line as TCI 5' cV0X' exovrairdvr' dpLd/jLTJcrat fipor&v,

' one who cancount (as his own) all good things.'Tucker (C. JR. xvn 191) proposed TCI 5'

TO, irdvr' dpi6/JL-r)<ras,...ov irpovbvr'is $va. Headlam, without dis-

cussing the difficulty of the first line,

thought the second should be OVK eanvou (or y or OVK lo~0' &'TTOU) TO^P TIP' (or

TOIODTOP) evp-rjffeis fva (J. P. XX 305).Holzner re-wrote as follows : OVK

2 evo. codd. : fort, evbv

ovros irpdyu,ar' d6prjO'as fipor&v \

6v evrv-

Xovvr1

airavr' ^0u/>^crets dei, but wasafterwards contented with a milder

remedy TOP evrvxovvra, irdvrJ

dptfl/rtyeras,

dd...pporwv (Philol. LV 566). Papa-basileios conjectured irov 5' evrvxovvrairdvr' av ddprj<rais pporov ; Blaydesfinally preferred : irdvr' evrvxovvra irdv

dpi6/j.ri<ras yevos |

OVK eanv ov8eis 8vnv'

evprjcrcts fipor&v.I think it will hardly be disputed that

the general sentiment is the same as that

of Eur. fr. 45 wcrr' ouYis dvdpwv els

airavr evSaiuovei, and fr. 66 1 OVK eyriv

6'crm irdvr' dvi)p evdaiuovei (quoted byCobet). Cf. Bacchyl. 5. 53 ou ydp nseirixQoviwv |

irdvra y' evdaiuwv e"<pv, Pind.Nem. ^.^^rvx^vb' ev' dbvvarov

|

evdaiuoviav

airaffav dveXouevov. Surely Heath and

Musgrave were right in Eur. Ion 382,where they restored eva d' av evrvx?)-.-

fiiov. Pausan. 8. 24. 14 avdpa de o~vu(pop)vdel arrdvra dKrbs...oi>K effriv O'TTCOS 8vvr)ff6-

ue6a eevpctv. That is to say, iravr*

must be construed with evTvôvvra. Onthe other hand, the form of the mainsentence is an echo of Horn, f 201 OVK<r0' OUTOS dvrip diepbs fipords, ovde yevyrai, \

8s Kev...iKriTai, and IT 437 OVK ea6' OUTOS

dvTjp ou5' eaaerai ovde yevrjrai, \

8s K(V...

eiroiffei, so that OVTOS looks forward. If

these premisses be granted, I believe that

the reading of M maybe translated thus:

'As for counting a man happy in all

respects, there lives not that mortalwhom you will discover such no ! notone.' The introductory infinitive withthe article is thus parallel to Track. 545TO 5' oJu t-vvoLKelv rfjd' ouov ris av yvvr)

\

dvvairo ; and the leaning of Sophocles to

such constructions is well known. I feel,

however, some doubt about ?va, and, butfor the existence of such passages as Eur.Hclid. 328 eva ydp ev TroXXots icrws

| evpoisav offris etrri fii] xfLPwv irarpos, Astyd. fr. 8

(TGFp. 780) ev Kar6v effriv evpelv avdp'eva, should have more confidence in pro-

posing evbv, which would give additional

support to the introductory infinitive.

For dpi6|j.T)<rak cf. A. P. 9. 262

TrdpTes 'j

3oo !04>OKAEOYZ

682

OVTOJ yvvaiKOS ovStv av fJLiov KOLKOV

Aca/CTJs dvr^p KTTJCTOLLT' av ovoe cr

KpLo~orov iraOouv S* e/cacrro? a)v

682. 1 OVTOI F. W. Schmidt

682 Stob.far. 69. 14 (iv p. 527, 15

Hense) So00K\v}s QaiSpa. 'o#rw...X^yei.'The earliest occurrence of this piece of

proverbial philosophy is in Hes. Op. 700ov [AV yap TI yvvaiKbs avrip X^'têr' d/metvov

\

TTJS ayadrjs, rfjs 5' avre KCLKTJS ov plyiov

AXXo, whose words are closely followed

by Semonid. fr. 6 ywaiKos ovStv XPVI*'

avyp Xvjiferai \effdXrjs d/ULeivov, ovSe piyiov

KaKrjs. Cf. also Eur. fr. 494 T?)S ntvKCLKIOV ovdtv ylyveTai | yvva.u<6s,

T)S 8' ov8v cis VTrepô\~r]v \ Treû/c'

&fMivoV 8ia<ptpovcri 8' ai (ptiffeis.

1 OVTW may be inferential(=

itaque),a rare usage, which occurs in Sophoclesperhaps only at Ant. 677 oi)rws a^vvrÎcrrl rots KOfffJiov/môis. F. W. Schmidt,and independently Gomperz, proposedoflroi, which is accepted by Nauck. But,

though OVTW seems unnatural, it is rash

to alter it in the absence of the context.

In Aesch. Suppl. 779 Schuetz proposedotiroi in the place of an inferential OVTW :

but he has not succeeded in convincingthe editors. See also on Eur. ffel. 810.

Wilamowitz (Eur. Hipp. p. 57) quotesEur. Ion 400, which is not an instance,and Suppl. 917, which i doubtful. Heargues that the speaker is summing up

Xeyei.

primitus S : corr. S 1

the result of the previous discussion, and

deprecating the universal hatred of womenpreached by Euripides in the Hippolytus.2 K-njcraiT* dv : Nauck conjectured

Xâcur' av, on account of the passagesin Hesiod and Semonides (supra). Butin such cases the general tendency is to

paraphrase the thought without repro-

ducing the actual words.3 ira6wv...X <

y6i: each man gives his

opinion according to his own experience.iraduv holds the place of emphasis, since

the thought is intended to echo Hes. Op.218 iraduv 8 T vriTTios Zyvu (Horn. P 32

pex^ oV Te vrjirtos tyvw) : see also Blom-field on Aesch. Ag. 170 (187). Thewords &v Tvxfi have been needlessly

suspected: av TL>XV (sc. iraduv) Campbell,ei'Sws &v \tyot or &? Slicy \tyoi Blaydes,oIS' ws eS \ty<ji) Herwerden. They pointto the conception of marriage as a lottery,with Fortune as sole arbitress : cf. pseud.

-

Epich. (fr. 35 p. 265 Lorenz) TO 8k ya.iJ.tiv

OfJiOl6v <TTl T$ Tpis ^ Tpels KtifioVS \

CLTTO

TVXW fiaXeiv /ere., Eur. fr. 1056 <rv/j.<f>opa

5' 5s SLV TVXTJ \ /cct/c^s yvvcui(6s, evTvx*i 5'

^<r^X^s TVX&V. For the subj. without av

see on fr. 659, 4.

683

ov

ev

av av

y

TTOT av yvQir av acra? 770X1,9,

Ta pev oiKaia Kal ra orax^pova

Traretrat, /cwrtXos'

avrjp Xa/Ba)v

Travovpya êpcrlv Kevrpa Ac^Sevet TTO\LV.

683. 1 ytvowr av Stob. S, ytvoiTo A | da0aXeis 7r6Xets Stob. S (d<T(j>a\r)s TroXis

corr. m. pr.), d(r^>aX7js ?r6Xets M 4 x Pa''-v schol. Luc. : x P^v Stob. SMA|

Stob.: tpya schol. Luc.| KySevoi schol. Luc.

683 Stob. fior. 43. 5 (iv p. 2, 7

Hense) So0oicXôi;s QaiSpa.'ov yap...

7r6Xu>.' Schol. Lucian. p. 199, 21 RabeXci 7raTJ7(ras...ws Kal Iv TpaycoSla 2o0o-AcX^s 'ou yap... ir6\iv.'

14 ' Translate :

" That city cannever attain to safety, in which justiceand virtue are trampled under heel ; whilea babbler directs the state, with the goadof mischief in his hands." The wordy

4>AIAPA 301

demagogue is likened to a reckless driver.

The iravovp-ya Kt'vrpa are the evil incen-

tives which he applies to the citizens.' ( J.)The figure is not so completely workedout that we should think of the dijuos as

a team urged by a malicious charioteer

to trample under foot his more scrupulousopponents. So Theogn. 846 Xa 4irifia

drjua) Kevebcppovi, TVTTTC 8 K^vrpif \ 6t,/ecu ^y\t)v 8va\ocpov ducpiriBei, but So-

phocles appears to follow Solon fr. 36(Arist. Ath. pol. \i. 4) Ktvrpov 5' ciXXos

us eyw Xafidv, | KaKo^padris re nai cpi\o-

KTr/UUV dvfjp, |

OVK av KO.T^ff")(.^ 0~TJ/J.OV.

Whether in using Ktvrpa he impliedanything more than a symbol of power,

or, in other words, whether he was

consciously suggesting the mental in-

centives by which the demagogue swayshis hearers, must remain uncertain, al-

though the word Ktvrpov often bears the

latter meaning (e.g. in Aesch. Eum. 430).It is curious that K^vrpa occurs, thoughwith a different application, in the similar

context of Eur. Suppl. 240 ff. ot 5' OVK

...^s TOI>$ xo>/Tas Ktvrp1

dcpiacrtv

y\ucr<rais Trov^pfav TrpocrraTuv cpr)-

\ovfj.voi. Wilamowitz assumes a direct

reference to this passage : see Intro-

ductory Note. For v. i Nauck quotesEur. Suppl. 447 TTWS ovv fr' av 7^1/017-' civ

Icfxypa 7r6Xis ; Ar. Av. 829 Kai TTWJ av tri

ytvoir' civ eflra/cros 7r6Xts ; See on Hel. 77.

do-<j>a\T]s. Neil (Ar. Eq. p. 203) re-

marks that this word may have a political

significance as='

conservative,' and givesseveral clear instances in Thucydides.Xa-yS-qv irareiTai, as elsewhere, of moral

transgression : Tucker on Aesch. Cho.

640. KwriXos, 'garrulous. (Ant. 756/AT? /cu>TiXX^ />te, do not try to cajole me.)

Theognis 295 /cwriXy avdpfbirtf) crtydv

XaXeTTUjraroj' &x&os.' (J.) X P*t : seecr. n.

'

Perhaps x6/30"' Tavovpya K^vrpa..'

(J.) x Pff^ iravovpyos, Blaydes. KT\-Sevct iroXiv. Herwerden conj. KydenwvirAet, to avoid the awkwardness of ^6X1âfter v. i. But the idiom is the same as

that explained by Jebb on 0. C. 424.

684

ov

vS' av yvât/ca?, aXXa KOL 6ea)v

rapacrcret /COLTTI TTOVTOV

684. 3 Tctpdcrcret Clem.: xaP l'ffffi Stob.|

Ka.Trnr6vTwv cod. M Stobaei

684 Stob./or. 63. 25 (iv p. 440, 16

Hense) So0o/cXôus Qaidpa (so MA, rou

auroO 3?al8pcu S [The extract follows

Track. 441 ff.]).'

fyws yap...yK\iveTai..'>

'

vv. i 3 are quoted by Clem. Alex.strom. 6 p. 745, and attributed by himto Euripides :

'

Avaxpeovros ya(fr. 65) "Epwra yap rbv afipbv

consequently assumed that the error laywith Stobaeus, and remarked that the

style clearly betrayed the hand of Euri-

pides. There is no definite peculiarityof diction which can be used as evidence ;

and here, as in fr. 941, Nauck was in-

fluenced rather by the reflective tonethan by considerations of vocabulary andstructure. Such impressions are often

illusory ; and, if the external evidenceis examined alone, it appears somewhatmore probable that Clement (or his

source) erred in naming Euripides, thanthat the anthologist blundered in the

name of the play as well as in that of the

author. Elter and Hense both think that

Stobaeus was right, and the latter addsthat the style is not remarkable in a late

play. Musgrave took the view that the

first three lines belonged to Euripides,and the last two to Sophocles.

For the general sense cf. fr. 941, 9 15with the nn., and observe that 6euv &vwechoes 4v deo'is aw in v. 12.

1 ir^px.Tai, 'attacks,' as in Horn.h. Pan. 33 0dXe yap ir66os vypbs 4we\6wv

|

Apuo?ros

3 See cr. n. xa/)c"r <ret > though pre-

ferred by Nauck and Dindorf, requires

justification, as used to describe the action

of love ; or, if it is interpreted' moves to

anger,' one might expect the allusion

to be made more definite. Tap<x<r<ro> is

applied to the divisions caused by the

passion of love in Ant. 794, and Aristo-

phon fr. ii, II 280 K. (Love was banished

302 !0<J>OKAEOY!

Kal TOILS' aire'ipyeiv ovS' 6 TrayKparrjS <rOt

Zeus, aXX' vTreiKti Kal Oe\a)v

5 KOV 6t\wv coni. Herwerden

by the gods) erdparre KaKeivovs yapt/jipd\\wv ffrdffLv. Here however it

rather denotes the turmoil set up within

the breast by the invasion of love : cf.

Eur. Hipp. 969 orav rapd^y Kvirpis 7)/3u>-

<rav <f>pei>a. Thus it is 'to agitate,' as

applied to that which causes emotion in

general: cf. Eur. Bacch. 1322, and

(perhaps) fr. 1079, 4'

5 See cr. n. Herwerden's KOV 6\wvis at first sight attractive, and removesthe logical inconsequence of a willing

submission to restraint. Musgrave had

previously conjectured ye\}v as'

elegan-tius.' But 0e\o)v is well-adapted to the

easy sway of Love: cf. fr. 941, 15 Atos

rvpavvei Tr\evfji.6va)v dvfv dop6s, \avev

(ridripov. It would be over-subtle to

suppose that the poet by the use of

Q\uv attempted to reconcile the omni-

potence of Zeus with his subjection to

Love, much as the Stoics recommendeda free acceptance of Necessity (Cleanth.

fr. 91 n.).

685

a\X' elcrl prjrpl TrcuSe? ayKvpai /3toi>.

685 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 18, 19 (Bekk.anecd. p. 338, 16) ayKvpai- ex /j-eraQopasai d(r<pd\eiai. So^>o/cX?7S. 'el\X'.../8oi>.'

Hesych. I p. 24 ayxvpai- /j.Ta<j>opiKws ai

d<T(pd\eiat. 2o<poK\ijs $aidpa. Suid. s.v.

^dffb) rr)i> lepav dyicvpav dyxvpa //.era-

airb rCiv vrjutv 77 d<r<pd\ia, cbs

s tv 3?aidpa Kal EupiTr/S^s tv

d^ (79).An anchor was a symbol of security,

and, inasmuch as anchors were often

used to ride out a storm, also of hope.The former idea is prominent in O.C. 148Kdiri vfjiiKpois yti^yas wpfj.ovi>, Eur. fr. 866

fide fj,ot T/>o$6s, I fJ.^Tfjpj a5eX0?7, dfj-iois,

ayKvpa ar^y^ (?), and may be so here.

But there is generally combined with it

that of hope for the future : Eur. Hel.

277 (n.) aynvpa 5' TJ /J.QV rds ri/%as c3%et

) t|

trtxnv Trod' rjêcv /ere., Heliod. 4.

19 XapiAfXfid pot j3ios yv, eXTris Kal 5ta5o%7jTOV ytvovs- XaplK\eia /ULOVT) irapatyvxT] Kal

us eiirelv ayKvpa. Neil on Eq. 1244 seemsto hesitate unnecessarily over the identi-

fication of e?r' eXirldos 6xei<r6ai. It is nodoubt true that (5xe?c-0cu ^TTI (c. gen.)

might be attached to anything to whicha shipwrecked sailor could cling, such as

a spar or a raft, but the normal phrase is

^TT' dyKvpas. The familiarity of the meta-

phor is indicated by Dem. 56. 44 /m.rjd' eirl

dvoiv ayKvpaiv opfj-elv avrovs edre,' don't

let them have two strings to their bow.'

Blaydes on Ar. Lys. 31 has collected a

number of more or less relevant exam-

ples.Welcker thought that the Nurse was

speaking to Phaedra in remonstrance.

686

. > ov yap Trp /Ltotpas rj

686. 2 These! nomen add. Nauck

686 Stob. eel. i. 5. 13 p. 77, 4 W.So</>oKX?7$ 3>ai5pq. (so F, but P omits the

lemma).'

<?f77S.../3ideTcu.'

This fragment is of considerable im-

portance, as showing that during part of

the action Theseus was absent on his

expedition with Pirithous to the nether

world : see Introductory Note. Observethe correspondence of the situation with

Ov. Her. 4. 109 tempore abest, aberitqtiediu Neptunius heros :

|ilium Pirithoi de-

tinet ora sui.

4>AIAPA 303

:

' so y u are alive, not deadand gone, as we thought ?

' The imper-fects are practically equivalent to presents,

expressing a sudden appreciation of the

real state of affairs: see on fr. 577, I.

The pleonastic repetition of the idea in

negative form lends emphasis : cf. Eur.

Phoen. 596, 906.2 irpo poipas: 'fate' is viewed as a

fixed term, not to be disturbed by fortune.

Horn. T 336. But Antigone dies, irpiv

uoi uoipav ej-rJKiv (3lov (An/. 896). Isocr.

i r. 8 6 (sc. Busiris) irpb uoipas TOVS

fwi/ras dn6XXvcr. For the verb cf. Eur.

Ale. 147 ireirpwuevr) yap yutpa /3tdercu.

[In his first edition Nauck included

this fragment among the adespola on the

ground of the omission of the lemma in

the Paris MS. But he accepted as genuine(fr. 6 1 1) certain lines which appear to beascribed to our play by Stob. eel. i. 5.

ii p. 76, ii (v. Wachsmuth in loc.)

irepiuffi' a<pVKTa re\ uridea iravTodairav

(3ov\av ddauavrlvais\ v<f>atvTai Keptciaiv

alcra. It has, however, been clearlyshown by Wilamowitz, hyllos von Epi-dauros, p. 16, that they ought to be joinedto the lyrical fragment (PLG ill 733,fr. adesp. 140) which in Stobaeus divides

them from the present fragment of Sopho-cles. And this view was accepted byNauck in his second edition (p. xx),where he also recognized Sophocles as

the author of the iambics.]

687

(TCLivev ovpa Kv\\aiv(j*v Kara).

687 20Tat tirovpavwTiKvd\dvvcov KOI rb cod.: corr. Hemsterhuis, Brunck, Hiller

687 Hesych. II p. 551 Kv\\aivuv

(Kv\aiv<j}v cod.) KO.TW. So0o\'X^9 3>aidpa.ra wra /cara/SaXc^, airep (oirep Bind.,

T/Trep Nauck) oi ffaivovres <KVVCS> iroiov-

ffLV. '<7TCU.../CCtt T6.'

The corrupt words of the quotationwere emended to foaivev ovpav cSra.../cara>

by Hemsterhuis (Zcraiv' eTr' ovpav Jensius).Brunck went a step further with Zaaivev

(Zvaivt v? Blaydes) ovpq. rwra, modified

with rc3re by Herwerden and /x' c5re byE. Hiller. On the other hand, Nauck

accepted Naber's vwra with Brunck's

Zvaivev ovpq.. But, as J. remarks, <3ra

(or wre) is clearly right, as is shown not

only by the gloss in Hesych., but byHorn, p 302 ovpfj fjt.ev p' 6 y' Zvrjve /cat

ovara KdpfiaXev dfj.<pu, which Sophocles

probably had in his mind. J. adds :

'If

Zvaivev ovpq. /j.'be read, cp. for the ace.

Ar. Eq. 1030 Kvva Kepfiepov... |

6s

ffa.lvuv ff\ oirorav deiirvrjs, KTC. I do notunderstand how Zvaiv' ir' ovpdv, whichDind. accepted, can be defended ("hemade a waggling movement towards the

tail," L. Campbell).'Leo, with whom Nauck agrees, con-

jectured that the allusion is to Cerberus.In that case, Theseus is describing his

descent to Hades, and it is perhaps someconfirmation of this view that Horace,speaking of the descent of Orpheus (C.**" I 3- 33)> says: quid mirum, ubi illis

carminibus stupens |

'dimittit atras belua

centiceps |aures? Cf. Hes. Theog. 770

(of Cerberus) ts utv l6vTas\

valvei O/AWS

OVpri T /CCU OVafflV d/J,<pOTtpOt<TLV | ^\6fLV5' OVK avris $ ird\iv. Welcker with less

probability supposed that the reference

was to a hound of Hippolytus. ForKara) = downwards, cf. Ant. 527

688

aeXXaSe? <^>a)âi

688 deXXdSes cod. Leid. : cteXXai vulgo

688 Etym. M. p. 19, 53 deXXa-

crv<TTpo<pi) dvuov...Kai deXXat (pwvai, irapd

2o0o/cXet cv 3>ai5pa.It may be taken as certain that the

meaning is 'storm-swift voices,' for the

constant association of cteXXa is with the

idea of speed: Eur. Bacch. 873 wKvdpo-(jiois dVXXcus. So de\\6irovs from Homeronwards. Cf. 0. T. 466 deXXddwv iiriruv,

O.C. 1081 deXXa/a TreXetds. It should be

304 I04>OKAEOY!

added that the grammarians regularly in-

terpret the metaphorical use of deXXtis,

deXX67rovs, by means of the gloss ra%tfs

without mentioning any other. Hencewe may exclude Campbell's alternative

version 'voices of the storm,' and Valc-

kenaer's attempt to bring the phraseinto line with ^%w %^6i'tos in Eur. Hipp.1 20 1. Welcker guessed that (fxaval was

the rumour coming to Theseus of the

death of Phaedra ; but we cannot eventell whether there is so much as an allu-

sion to the proverbial swiftness of Fame,for which cf. Horn, w 412 "Oacra 5' ap

:

&yye\os WKa Kara irrtiXiv $XTO iravry.

Blaydes conjectured (pyvat, on the strengthof 0. C. 108 1 quoted above.

689

ayos689 Hesych. I p. 30 #705- ayvurfj-a,

dvffia (6v<rLas cod.). 2o0o/cX^s Qaldpa. Cf.

Bekk. anecd. p. 330, 31 0705- /car' dvri-

<ppa<riv (fr. 116) rb fjiij<ros...<rrifJMli>i 8t Kal

ayfifffj-a Kal 6vffiav.

The double meaning of a-yo? is often

affirmed : Suid. s.v. is practically iden-

tical with Bekk. anecd. Eustath. //.

p. 1357, 59 rb TOV ayovs 5nr\6a"r]/j.ov.

Etym. M. p. 12, 26 ayos ffyfj-alvei 660, r6

re Ka0ap6v, tiirep Kvpiw Kal rb pvirapbv,Kara dvTl<ppa<T<.v. Schol. Soph. O. T. 656

0705 yap rb iepbv 0-^3as.../cctT' ei)077/u0>tdi'

de Kal ra pudapara ayrj \tyerat, but of the

former meaning he can give no better

example than 01777 a' ?x ei (Horn. $221).Schol. O. C. 1526 Kadapd- ffrjfJLaivei yapKal rb ayos TOVTO. Anthropologists (e.g.

Frazer, G.B.'Z il p. 304; Pausan.iv p. 138)have made it easy for us to understand howa word with similar associations to those ofthe savage 'taboo' might be used equallywell for objects of reverence and abhor-rence: see on fr. 253. Thus, whatever is

consecrated to a god may be <ryos, butthere is no other extant example of this

sense except Ant. 775, a passage whichseems to require that TO<TOVTOI> should bemade correlative to STTWS rather than to

ws. Curtius, who referred the meaningsto two separate roots, wished to write

ayos in Ant. I.e. But it is hard to believein the entire dissociation of oVyos (

=/xt'a<r/xa)

from ayvds ; and the evidence, such as it

is, favours the retention of the smooth

breathing.

69O Hesych. 99 d/cXeTrror otf

dpq. (-cus cod.).The meaning of the verbal adj. corre-

sponds to the use of K\^TTTW 'to speak

falsely'

in Ai. 189 K\TTTOVOL (jujdovs, Phil.

57 r6<5' oi^x* /cXeTTTôj', whereas in El. 56the verb is employed somewhat differently

(='to deceive'). Parallel also is Eur.

Hel. 1277 K\tirTeu> j/6/xiyLta, where see

note. To the illustrations there quotedadd Plut. Timol. 17 K^TTTUV rrfv cvjAfjia-

X<'av >Arat. 10 KKtyui ra Trpdy/JLara, coni.

praec. 19 p. 140 D ovdevl yap Oe&v IfpaK\eTTT6fJLeva Kal \av6dvovra dparai Kexapi-CTfJLtvdJS virb yvvaiKbs. It is assumed that

the word was attached to some such nounas \6yoi, and that the verbal is not '

active.'

Tucker on Aesch. Cho. 853 apparently

analyses otherwise.

691 Hesych. I p. 328 ai)ro/x6Xws'

irpodoTiK&s. 2,o<poK\TJ$ Qaidpa. The gloss

avTO/j,6\w 7rpo5oTi/cws, but without the

addition Soô/cXr^s $al5pa, occurs also in

Bekk. anecd. p. 466, 7, and in Suid. s.v.

In the latter it is followed by Kal airro-

fj.o\TJ<rai effrl TO irpodovvai TOW I8iovs KTC.

On these facts Nauck bases the unwar-

rantable conjecture that the words So0o-K\rjs $aidpa have accidentally attached

0AIAPA <J>OIQT!AEI 305

themselves to the wrong gloss in He-

sychius, and that they resrlly belong to

avToircuda (fr. 1029).

avrofioXos and its cognates seem not

to occur in literature before Herodotus.

During the Peloponnesian War the word

acquired a special significance at Athens

owing to the wholesale desertion of the

slave population (Ar. Eq. 21 ff., Thuc. 7.

27). The verb is applied to turncoats in

Aeschin. 3. 75 ov ffv/j.jj.eTa.Trl'jrTei TO?J airro-

/jt.o\ou<riv v rrj TroXirei'p. Here possiblythe reference was to the betrayal of

Phaedra's secret without her consent,

just as in Eur. Hipp. 591 ff. the Chorus

say to Phaedra when the Nurse's attemptfails : TppooVSocrcu, (pi\a . . . Trpbdoros tK <f>L\uv.

692

692 Hesych. I p. 347 a\f/e<t>ts- d<pp6v-TKTTOV. 2o<poK\i)5 3>al5pq.. Bekk. anecd.

p. 476, i d\j/e<f>ts' a.<j>pbvTLffTov. OUTW

This isolated word, together with the

gloss immediately following (atyeQtuv

appears to be connected with

0os) and Pindar's \j/e(f>T)i'6s or

(Ncm. 3. 71). The common

term may perhaps be found in Horace'satra euro, and Pindar's ^Xaivav Kapbiav

(fr. 123). Cf. Hesych. II p. 438 /cara-

\^0ei... &r#' 6Ve 8 /cat TO <f>povTlfciv OUTWSX<:

<

you0'ii'. ib. IV p. 309 i^^0et* d^SoiKev,

evrptirei, \virei, (frpovrlfci.. There is also

an obscure \f/t8eu> (ibid. p. 307) glossed by/,

fftpovrifrLv.Cf. Et. Gud. p. 574,

45

693

693 Hesych. in p. 135 /uwXus* 6

Nauck supposed that jue/iwXuoyi^ wasthe word attributed to Sophocles, and

naturally felt some distrust of the tradi-

tion. The same view is assumed byEllendt, and seems to have been inherited

from Brunck. But it is more probablethat |io>\vs is the lemma to which the

whole gloss belongs, and that it was used

by Sophocles as a feminine adjective, beingthus equivalent to /te/iwXuo-^n;, i.e. Trapci-

fi^vrj. For the meaning see schol. Nic.

Ther. 32 yuwXus 5e ]8pa5us KOA. vwdr^s r)

/j,oyp6s" T) j/wxeX^s icai aira\6s, 6 yey-rjpa-

/cws 60ts /cat /x6Xis fialvbiv. Observe that

M. Schmidt corrects Cyrill. 63 to n&Xvs'which favours the view

taken above.

The subject of this play is unknown, as Welcker's identifica-

tion with the Peleus has been shown (p. 142) to be untenable.

Aristotle (poet. 18. I456a

i) cited the Phthiotides as an exampleof a tragedy of character. The title warrants us in assuming(i) that the action of the play took place at Phthia, and (2)that the female interest was prominent. These conditions donot fit Campbell's guess that the subject was the education of

Achilles. But it is not easy to find an appropriate story.

p. ii. 20

i

306 I04>OKAEOYZ

Perhaps the most likely solution is that Pkthiotides was analternative title to the Hermione 1

. In that case fr. 695 mightbe referred to Peleus and Phoenix, whom Hyginus (fab. 257)includes in a list of examples of mutual friendship. Fr. 696might be connected with the parricidal impulse to which Phoenixconfesses in Horn. I 458 461; but I should prefer to explain it

in reference to the claim made by Neoptolemus against Apollothat he should pay the penalty for the death of Achilles : see

Eur. Andr. 53, 1108, Or. 1657. Then TrarpotcTovos BL/CTJ wouldbe a 'trial for slaying the father of another! just as in Eur. Or.

193 Electra calls Clytaemnestra Trarpoôvov fjuarpos, and in Soph.Track. 1125 Heracles describes Deianira to Hyllus as Trarpo-

Ahrens conjectured that the subject-matter was taken fromthe earlier adventures of Peleus, as related by Apollod. 3. 163 ff.,

and particularly from the tragic incidents which followed his

marriage to Antigone the daughter of Eurytion.

694

i>e'os Tre'^v/cas' TToXXa /cat paOeiv ere Set,

/cat TrdXX' d/coucrat /cat StSacr/cecr#at

694 Stob. eel. II 31. i6,p. 204, 18 W. emphasis to the following words (= 'e'en').

2o0o/cXôu$ 4>^twri5wi' (0oio>r5 L: corr. There is a similar instance in Phil. 13

Gaisford).'

j/ôs.../*a:pd.' The extract /*T? /ecu /xdtfr/ /A' TIKOVTO. /cd/cx^w TO irav\

is immediately followed by the line det 0"60t0ywi.

TI J3ov\ov xpfow '' irpocrâv6avLv (Tr. fr. 2 paicpd. So we might speak of

adesp. 516 a), but Nauck rightly recog- 'wide' studies, where the student's in-

nized that it was an independent quota- vestigations have extended to manytion to which the lemma had been lost. branches of learning. For naxpos used

It does in fact illustrate a different senti- otherwise than of extension in space or

ment, that of Solon fr. 17 yrjpda'KW 5' det time cf. Ai. 825 cuTTjcro/iai dt d 01) /AaKpovTToXXd 5i5aa-/c6/xefos. 7^/>as Xax", Track. 1217 x^-PLV ^po-X âv

For the thought cf. Menand. mon. 373 TT/JOS /j.a.Kpois aXXois dtdovs. It is speciallyiôs 7re0u/ccbs TToXXd xP7

}crT L̂ p-divOave. attached to 6X/3os, TrXouros, etc. (Find.,

1 iroXXa /ere. The asyndeton is nor- Soph., Arist). There is no reason to

mal, since the second clause expresses a suppose that the word is corrupt, and

consequence of the first: see Kuehner- Meineke's âKpdv (= diu) is no improve-

Gerth, II 342, 5 a. KaC should not be ment. Still less do we require Blaydes'saltered (rot or 5if) Blaydes): the order of cro^d.

the words shows conclusively that it does Vater guessed that Andromache wasnot mean 'both,' but merely gives a slight speaking to her son Molossus.

1 This suggestion has previously been made by Vater (Naiejahrb. f. Philol. Suppl.Bd. xvii 1 80), who also explained fr. 696 as I do. He added that the words are

such as might have been spoken by Orestes in reference to Aegisthus. Ahrens thoughtthat Antigone was speaking of Peleus, who had slain her father Eurytion by accident

(Apollod. 3. 163).

4>OIQTIAEI <t>IAOKTHTH! 307

695

ypovTa695 Aul. Cell. 13. 19. 3 sed etiam

tile versus non minus notus *y4pvf..*iy&%

et in tragoedia Sophocli scriptus est, cui

tiiulus est 0iu>Ties (0iXon5es codd. :

corr. Casaubon), et in Bacchis Euripidi(193)-

> J /cr eyco.

For -rrcuSa-ywya) as applied to the oldsee on fr. 487. The possibility of coin-

cidence is somewhat greater here than in

the case of fr. 14 (n.) ; or the line in theBacchae may have been a conscious echoof Sophocles.

696

696. 2 KK\rJT' Cobet :

81/07

'

vulg.

696 Bekk. anecd. p. 128, 5 6 av

ffvvdefffji.03 ffwrdafferaL ... (sc. CVKTLKOIS)

n\rjs

The form /ce/cXrjr' has been restored byCobet (JV.L. p. 224) with general ap-

proval, as the context indicates that the

grammarian was dealing with the opta-tive. For the form cf. Phil. 119, Jebbon 0. T. 49 ; and for the accent Chandler,

786. SKTJV KdXtlv is used of the pre-sident of the Court (0eo>co#^T77s, #pxwj/

>

or as the case may be): Ar. Vesp. 1441ws CLV TTJV dlicrjv apxuv KaXy, Blaydes onNub. 780. The force of the perfect opta-tive with av may be given thus :

' hewould find himself in court (with his

case called on) on a trial for homicide.'

Observe that, in the absence of context,

we cannot tell whether the trial in ques-tion was in the past or in the future fromthe standpoint of the speaker : it is onlythe ' ascertainment of the completed ac-

tion' which lies in the future (Gildersleeve,288, 440). irarpoKTovos SCici). The

present passage might be used to showthat fjwjTpoKTdvovs dy&vas in Eur. Tro. 363refers to the trial of Orestes (5iicr)i> ai'/âros

fji-r)TpoKTt>vo\j Or. 1649), and n t> as it ap-

pears generally to be taken, to the murderitself. There is no ground for writing irar-

pbKTovos here, as suggested by Ellendt and

preferred by Blaydes, as if the sense were'

concerning a slain father.' See n. on fr.

1 1 , and particularly Elmsleyon Eur. Bacch.

139, who pointed out that these adjec-tives have an active force. For the refer-

ence of the words see Introductory Note.

4>IAOKTHTH2 EN TPOIAI

There cannot be much doubt that the leading events recorded

in the Philoctetes at Troy were the healing of Philoctetes, and his

slaying of Paris. The Little Iliad contained the earliest version

of the story of which we have any knowledge. The abstract of

Proclus (EGF p. 36) runs thus : /juerd ravra 'O&vcro-evs Xoêra?\afj,/3avi, KOI %pijcravTO<t Trepl rfjs aX,oe)O"6ft)9 TOVTOV Afo-

etc ATJ/JLVOV <&i\oKTr)Tr]v avdyei. laBels Se OUTO? VTTO Ma-*

/col TOV ve/cpbv VTTO

20 2

308 IO<t>OKAEOYZ

/caraiKiaOevTa dve\6/jLvoi, Qdiriovaiv ol Tpwe9. Thedeath of Paris, the original offender, which Philoctetes alone wasdestined to achieve, was the climax towards which the action ofthe play was directed. There is nothing in the extant fragmentswhich gives any clue concerning the development of the plot.

The events in question are summarized in the propheticspeech of Heracles in Phil. 1423 ff.: \0cov Se crvv T&>' dvbpl 7rpo9 TO

^pwiKov | TToX-tcryLta, TTpWTOV /JLev voffov Travcrrj \vypd$, I apery re

Tr/jcaro? e/c/cpiOels arparevfJiaTO^ \ Tldpiv fj,ev, 09 rw^S' airios K.CLKWV

(f>v, | roôidi rot9 e/jiolcn voo-(f)i,eL^ jSiov, | irepaeis re Tpoiav /ere.

Further on (v. 1437) ne promises : <yco 8* 'Aa/c\r)7riov\ Travo-rfjpa

Tre/jL^co crr?9 vo<Tov 7rpo9 "\\iov. This raises a difficulty, because in

v. 1333 Neoptolemus had assured Philoctetes, on the authorityof Helenus, that the sons of Asclepius would effect his cure. It

has not been satisfactorily explained why Sophocles allowed an

inconsistency, of which he must have been aware, to appear after

so short an interval. It is therefore idle to speculate whetherthe writer of this play, like most of the later authorities 1

,followed

the Little Iliad in ascribing to Machaon the performance of the

cure, or whether he agreed with the minority2 in preferring

Podalirius.

Dindorf prints with the fragments of this play (fr. 632) twolines which are twice quoted by Plutarch (an seni sit ger. resp. 9p. 789 A, Solon 20) as addressed to Philoctetes :

T9 v 0e vvpT), r9 e Trpevos vea

SegaiT dv ; ev yovv &>9 â^lv eêt9Hermann first assigned these lines to the present play, whichhe strangely thought was satyric. They had previously beenascribed to Euripides ;

but Matthiae took a different line, in

referring them to the Philoctetes of Strattis (ill 609 K.). Her-werden argued that the lines must be tragic, on the ground that

in comedy the vocative of raXa? is always rd\av (Exerc. Crit.

p. 87). It is not clear that the criterion applies, but in the

present state of our knowledge Nauck is right in classing the

fragment with the tragic adespota (fr. 10); for it is either tragic,or paratragoedic.

Blaydes (on Soph. Phil. 357) thought that the line ov iral?

'A%tXXea)9, XX' efcelvos auro9 et (Tr. fr. adesp. 363) might havebeen taken from the Philotetes at Troy. But, if Sophoclean at

all, it is more relevant to the plot of the Scyrians.

1 See e.g. schol. Find. Pyth. i. 109, Prop. 2. i. 59.2Apollod. epit. 5. 8 (Machaon has already been killed by Penthesilea). Qu. 9.

461 ff. (Machaon was one of the victims of Eurypylus, 6. 392 ff.; the arrival of Philoc-

tetes is much later than in the Little Iliad}.

<NAOKTHTH! 309

697

607x779 fJLOV OTTO)? ///r) /3apVV0TJ(TeO'8 fJLOV

697 Priscian./w^. 18. 169 (n p. 284,

7)'

fiapvvofJiat TOITTOU' Kai'

virb TOUTOU' KO.L

Tpot'p'

607*775.../iou,' dj/ri TOU UTTO TT)S

The Paris cod. 7499 (O) has pbvov us

for /uou STTWS, whence Person conjectured/j.bvov OTTOJS. But to this the rhythm is an

insuperable objection. Dindorf proposed6071775 oirus WOU...TTOU, Campbell 607*775

OTTWS TOI, E. A. I. Ahrens fjv ovv ws.

It seems most likely, however, that Pris-

cian's authority shifted the order of the

words in order to enforce his grammaticalpoint by putting 6071775 first: thus, the

original may have been OTTWS <de> /J.TJ

fiapvvdirjcreffd^ {JLOV\6074775. The gram-

marian's remark is illustrated by Phil.

890 /AT? fiapvvduaiv KaKrj \ 60707 irpb TOU

deovros. For the so-called causal geni-tive in Sophocles, appearing especiallyafter verbs which express anger, pity,

wonder, and the like, cf. Ant. 1177 ira-

(pbvov, El. 920 TT}S avolas uis

ib. 1027 f>7\cD o"e rou vov,

dei\ias orirytD, 0. T. 48 (o*^)

TTJS Trcipos TTpodvfîas, At. 1117 roO

5^ o-ou i//60ou |

OVK &v ffrpafalyv, Track.

287 ddâra \ ^77 iraTpuy Zrjvi TT}? a\t6-

o-ews. The construction is less remark-

able, where the genitive is partly at anyrate supported by a noun: see At. 41,Track. 269, O.T. 697, Phil. 327, 751,

1308. Yet (e.g.] in Ai. I.e. X<^V Papvv-6eis TU>V 'AxiXXeiwp oTrXcov it is clear that

oTrXuw is at least as much affected byfiapwdds as by x^V- Delbriick, Vergl.

Synt. 89, treats some of these genitivesas ablatival in origin, but it is very hardto draw the line between the genitiveand ablative which probably fell together.

Blaydes's proposal to read 607177 is un-

critical.

698

ecr#' 6 OGLVCLTOS Xourô? iarpos

698 Stob. flor. 120. 7 (iv p. 1080,1 5 Hense) 2o0o/cX&>us Î\OKT-TITOV.

' dXX'

. . .vbauv.'' The name of the play is omitted

by S, and depends on the authority of A,as M leaves out the extract altogether.

XoicrOos,'

at the last'

(for the form see

Eur. Hel. 1597). Cf. O.C. 1220 6 5'

eiriKOvpos iVor^XeoTos,|

"Ai'5os ore (Moip'

avvfj.eva.ios\ &\vpos &xopos avairtyrji'e, \

6dva.Tos ^s reXevrdv. This fine pointis lost if Nauck's X<o-ros is adopted. Forthe general sense cf. Aesch. fr. 255 wddvare iraidv, ^ /*' dTtyudcrTjs (j.o\e'iv

fj.6vos 7<3ip el <ri> r&v dvrjKfoTwv KUKW

i'arpos, &\yos 5' ovdev aTrrerat veicpov,

Eur. Hipp. 1373 /cat /wot ddvaros iraiav

\6oi, Hclid. 595 TO y&p daveiv\KOLK&V

fM^yiCTTOv (pdp/j.a.Kov vofj,ieTai (n.). Diphil.fr. 88, n 570 K. oik ô-Tt /3fos 6s oi>xi

KaKd . . .TOIJTCdV 6 QaVOiTOS Kddd-

OVK

trep larpbs <j>avds \

dvîravire TOI)S ZXOJSTO.S.

In Trach. 1209 Heracles implores Hyllusto put an end to his sufferings : uiv xwiraiwi'iov

|

Kai IJ.QVVOV laTrjpa rdov jj,)v

KO.K&I>. H. refers to Com. fr. adesp. 116III 429 K. (Plut. mor. HOE) eZr'

r}dri<rd' 6ri TOLOVTOV rbv (3toj>, \

tpiuffe, &v dirjvTvx'ntre'' dV,|

6

OVK evKatpos' el 5' TjveyKev &v (so H. for

au) |

OUTOS 6 ^3/oj Tt rdov dvriK^ffTWv, fausI

6 Qdvaros avrbs aov ytyovev evvovaTepos.Cf. Max. Tyr. 13. 5 'oT Bdvare Traidv

'

el /jv Tavra X^yets dXXaTT6/x,e'os KO.KOV

KaKov, OVK airo8xlj-ai TW VXW' et' ^

?Vyet Ty 6'j'Tt rbv ddvarov Tra.ia.va flvai Kai

a.Tra\\aKTi]i> /ca/cou Kai dirXriffTov Kai voae-

pov Bpe'/j.jj.aTos, ijyei /caXws' e^xou Kai /fdXet

rbv iratava. A parallel Welsh proverb is

quoted by Rhys Roberts in C.R. XV 361.

3io I04>OKAEOY1

699 Musurus :

699

o~6at).

Hesych. ill p. 420dvTi TOV rcus /cwTTttts, Sid TO

(so M. Schmidt for dparre-l ev iXoKT77T77 T< iv Tpoiy,

dvrl TOV \j/o<pu5rj K<ti

Nauck seems to be justifiedin his inference that the words pa KT-TJplots

KtvTpoLo-iv came from another play of

Sophocles.'

Uttering harsh and discordant cries.'

Cf. Ai. 976 (TevKpov) PO&VTOS OLTTJS 7770-5'

eirt<TKoirov yu^Xos. The words are exactly

appropriate to describe the shrieks of

pain with which Philoctetes disturbed

699

avav\a KCU- paKTijpiacod.

|

avav\a Bergk: avavda cod., avavda vulgo

the Greeks (Phil. 9 dypiais

I have no doubt, therefore, that

POWV is a participle, although Hartung,

Campbell, and Jebb (on Ai. 976) agreein taking it as the gen. plur. of /3oOs.

|X\T] avavXa, unmusical strains, is an

oxymoron like K&/J.OV dvav\6raTov Eur.

Phoen. 791 (n.) ; but &vav\os there has

special reference to the flute, whereashere its application is generalized, as is

sometimes the case with fftii>av\os and

oVauXos. Cf. Tr. fr. adesp. 93TrdpavXa

70O

>a/coi/ra

7OO Hesych. I p. 534 opaKovra' TO

KrjpijKLov (KypvKetov has been proposed,but there is evidence that Kypviaov wasan alternative form in late Greek). 2o</>o-

This appears to be the earliest reference

in literature to the snake as a constituent

emblem of the Kypvueiov (paftdos). Thecurrent representation in art shows twosnakes facing each other on either side

of the central stem : see Diet. Ant. i

322 b. Cf. schol. Thuc. i. 53t<TTl tJ\OV 6p66v ?XOV fKaT^pU0VTrepnrTT\yfJi.{i>ovs Kal dvTiirpovibirovs irpos

d\\r]\ovs Kfiftfrovs. Serv. auct. Aen. 8.

138 caduceum Mercurio ideo assignatur,

quod fide media hostes in ainicitiam con-

ducat, quae virga ideo serpentibus illigataest. But this form was a later develop-ment, and the three forks

Horn. h. Herm. 530) have been held to

point to an original use of the staff as a

divining-rod (Preller-Robert, Gr. Myth.i p. 412). The snake was a symbol of

the underworld : J. E. Harrison, Proleg.

p. 46. It has been assumed that a refer-

ence to Hermes is implied here. But, in-

asmuch as there is evidence that, at anyrate in Hellenistic times, a snake was

represented as surrounding the staff of

Asclepius (Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1444,Thraemer in Pauly-Wissowa n 1682),and as Heracles had promised that As-

clepius should come to Troy and heal

Philoctetes (Phil. 1437), it is temptingto think of him in this connexion. This

inference is perhaps confirmed by the

next fr., in which 'Ep/j.ala would be sur-

plusage in the description of a staff actu-

ally carried by Hermes.

701

a)? KijpvKos ia SiTrXoi)

7O1 Phot. ed.Reitz.p. 101, 21 quotes For the see on fr. 700. ButEur. Her. 1274 for d(j.<j>lKpavos vdpa, and that fragment is probably not to be iden

continues: < d> /x0kpai/os pdfidos 2o0o- tified with this, if for no other reason,

fcX^s î\OKTrjTr)(

Kal...d/Ji(plKpai>os.' Cf. because Hesych. would not have taken

Hesych. I p. 162 d/j.<pLKpavov'

dôT^pia- dpdKovTa as the lemma in citing the pre-Qev fyov KfQaXds, which is supposed to sent passage,be a reference to Eur. I.e.

0IAOKTHTHZ <J>INEY!

702

SpvoTrayrj crroXov

7O2 Hesych. I p. 538 dpvoirayi) 076-

\ov (8pvoirayr)ffTO\ot> cod.)' TOV irdffaa\ov.

2o0o/cX?7s<l>iXoKT^TT7. Eustath. Od. p. 1726,1 6 Kal dpvoTrayrjs <rr6Xos 6 opvivos irdcr-

ffaXos' <rr6\ovs ydp, <f>a<riv, ZXeyov TCL

d-jrej;v<r/j.t>a (a7rou(r/AeVa Stallb., leg. diru-

^va/meva), 8id TO (rvveffraXdai.

Blaydes is sceptical, wishing either to

read TV\OI>, or to correct the explanationby introducing the ordinary sense of ' a

fleet.' This is light-hearted criticism;for the genuineness of our authorities is

supported by the obvious resemblance in

shape between a wooden peg and the

bows of a boat, in which latter sense

0T6Xos is used by Aesch. Pers. 411 andelsewhere. And the Medicean scholia

on Aesch. I.e. show that such was exactlythe point of view taken by the ancient

grammarians: 0-T6\ov] TO eV/SoXov Xyei'O~TO\OV d \tyei Trap

1

oaov els 6i> <rvve<rTa\-

fjAvai fiaiv ovrcos yap ZXeyov oroXop rd

a.TT(i)%v[j.iJ.va. TOV ?fj.ô\ov irapa TO e/s 6i-v

ffvi><TTd\6ai. Hesych. IV p. 81 or6Xos...

Kal o Trjs veus ^/3oXos Xêrat, TO ei's o>(rvveo'TdXfj.tt'ov (a'vveffTpafJLfJL^vov cod. : corr.

Blomfield). Schol. Ap. Rhod. i. 1089<rr6Xos 5^ Xêrai TO &xov 7r6 Trjs TTTIV-

Xys Kai diijKov &xpi TTJS irp^pas j-u\ov.

703

7O3 Hesych. II p. 257 ftyXcD* /xa/ca-

pifa. 2o0o/cX?7S $tXo/CT7jT?7 iv Tpoiq..

This is the ordinary gloss : see schol.

Ai. 552 Kai vvv (re (AaKapifa OTL fjuxpos u>v

KT. foXovv] naKapifciv. Schol. Eur. Or.

!673 f^Xto] [jiaKapifa. Schol. ib. 521 oi)6V

(re f;Xw] ^"17X0) TO [taKapifa, tvTavda o

avTt TOV eVawcD. eVet yap ir\'r)<rid'ovffiv

Tpbirov TWO, TO eTraweiv Kal TO

fjiaKapieii>, OVK OKvei Xa/j-ftdveiv TO frepovdvTi TOV eT^pov. The last note is a goodexample of the narrowness of scholiastic

methods. Suid. s.v. i^Xu). paKaptfa,quoting Ar. 7^hesm. 175, Ach. 1008, Eg.837, Vesp. 1450.

4>INEYI A AND B

The story of Phineus and his sons, so far as it is given bySophocles himself in the Antigone (966 987), is as follows.

Phineus dwelt at Salmydessus in Thrace, on the west coast of

the Euxine, and close to the Bosporus. His first wife was

Cleopatra, the daughter of Boreas, but she either died 1 or was

put away and imprisoned. Phineus married again ;and the

1Jebb (on v. 966) thinks that the intention of the poet was to compare Antigone

with Cleopatra, and that the imprisonment of the latter is implied in 986. The pointis doubtful; and the schol. certainly thought otherwise, as appears from his allusion

to the death of Cleopatra and from the words TT)S KXeoirdTpas waldas tv T<f0yKadeip%ev. There was however a version which made Cleopatra survive, as weshall see.

312 Z000KAEOYI

cruel stepmother1 dealt a blinding wound to Cleopatra's two

sons, using her shuttle as a dagger to strike them in the eyes.So their high lineage did not avail to save them from a miserable

doom.

Sophocles does not give the reason of the stepmother's cruelty,but this is supplied by other authorities. It is a story of a well-

known type. The stepmother, whose name is variously recorded,

chagrined, we may suppose, at a repulse by one of them, accusedher stepsons to their father of attempting to violate her. Phineusbelieved her accusation, and blinded them, but was himself

afflicted with blindness as a punishment either by Zeus, or, ac-

cording to Apollodorus, by the Argonauts, who were sailing

along the coast with Boreas in their company. See Apollod.3. 200, Hygin. fab. 19, schol. Ov. Ib. 265, 27 1

2.

Asclepiades3

,who gives to the stepmother the name Eurytia,

states that Zeus offered to Phineus the alternative of death or

blindness. Phineus chose the latter, and the sun-god, incensedin consequence, afflicted him yet further by sending the Harpiesto persecute him. We thus pass to the later history of Phineus,which is familiar from the Argonautica of Apollonius (2. i/Sff.).Here the Argonauts appear as the rescuers of Phineus, not, as in

Apollodorus, as his punishers. Phineus had been punished withblindness and the unremitting persecution of the Harpies becauseof an act of impiety: endowed with powers of divination, he hadrevealed more of the future than was lawful 4

. He welcomed the

Argonauts and promised to show them the means whereby theymight pass through the Symplegades, and so reach Colchis, if

only they would deliver him from the plague of the Harpies.

Accordingly, Calais and Zetes, the sons of Boreas, attacked the

Harpies, and drove them away as far as the Strophades islands,where they desisted from the pursuit.

Sophocles wrote two plays entitled Phineus; and, if we turn

to the fragments which have been preserved, we find clear traces

1 Her name is not given. Sophocles called her Idothea in the Tympanistae(fr. 645), but Idaea in a play which is not named (fr. 704). Cf. Ov. Kern. Am. 454.

2 The story has been traced back to Hesiod (fr. 54) through Serv. Verg. Aen.

3- 209-3 Schol. Horn, yu 69 (FHG in 302). The schol. Ap. Rh. 2. 1/8181 (Etym.

gen. ap. Reitzenstein, Ind. lect. acad. Rost. 1891/92) makes the alternatives the

possession of the art of divination coupled with blindness on the one hand, and ashort life in normal condition on the other. On Phineus choosing the former Apollowas incensed and maimed him. This particular version is absurd, since Apollo'saction involves no further punishment. Nevertheless something of the kind wasrelated by Hesiod in the Ca(alogi(h. 52), which was undoubtedly the ultimate literarysource bearing on the connexion of Phineus with the Argonauts (Sittig in Pauly-Wissowa vii 2424).

4 Hes. fr. 151 made his crime consist in showing the way to Phrixus; and thereare other variants.

313

of the later history of Phineus in frs. 709, 713 and 714, whichseem to refer to the attacks of the Harpies, and in fr. 712, whichdescribes the emaciated condition of Phineus himself. On the

other hand, frs. 715 and 710 undoubtedly refer to the blindingof the Phineidae. Fr. 710, which testifies to the cure of the twosons by Asclepius, is corroborated by the parallel statement of

Phylarchus (fr. 17, FHG I 338)1

,who adds that it was his in-

tention to gratify Cleopatra. From A.P. 3. 4 it appears that,

according to one version of the story, the Phineidae ultimately

put their stepmother to death, in order to avenge their mother's

wrongs, and that Cleopatra survived, and was present to rejoicein the act of justice

2. Diodorus (4. 43, 44), in a rationalized

narrative, confirms the final victory of Cleopatra and her sons,whom he supposes to have been rescued by the Argonauts.

We are justified in concluding from these facts that the two

plays of Sophocles were concerned with the history of Idaea's

cruelty and the punishment of Phineus respectively; and that

the first play ended with the rescue of the Phineidae and the

execution of their vengeance, and the second with the release

of Phineus from the Harpies. To speculate further on the

details, as for example whether Cleopatra shared in her sons'

triumph, seems unprofitable.Welcker 3 treated the account of Asclepiades

4 as furnishingthe basis of the plot, and held that the Phineus was producedin a revised edition, which he identified with the Tympanistae.His theory was approved by Dindorf, but may now be regardedas obsolete, in so far as it limits the activity of Sophocles to the

composition and revision of a single play. G. Wolff in PhiloL

XXVIII 343 f. identified the Tympanistae with the earlier Phineus,the plot of which was to be found in schol. Ant. 980 and schol.

Ap. Rhod. 2. 178. He avoided the difficulty arising from the

name Idothea, which is said to have been given to the step-mother in the Tympanistae, by supposing that in fr. 645 the

words Kara Se nva^...aS6\(f>riv are parenthetic, and that 779 refers

to Idaea. But the natural interpretation of the scholium rather

points to a contrast between /cal auro? Soô/cXj}? and /card nvas.I think, however, that Wolff was right in refusing to attach much

1Bakhuyzen, de parodia, p. 185, wrongly refers this to the healing of Phineus,

notwithstanding the evidence of Phylarchus.2wrpviav KXtfrtos /cat K\vr6voos HoXvfji^drjs \

Krdvovcn Qpvylyv, /larpos uirtp <r0e-

re/ras. | KXetOTrdrp?; 5' eirl Tolatv aydXXerai, ^ a<f>Lv eirfWev\T&V Qivtus ya/mfrav

da/u.i'afjLeviji' 6<r/ws. Idaea is called a Phrygian, as the daughter of Dardanus. Herbarbarian origin explains her cruelty : Diodorus makes her a Scythian, just as

Sophocles made Idothea a Phoenician (fr. 645).3

p. 329 ff.

4Jessen rightly regards it as a conflation : it is now established that Asclepiades

did not preserve the plots of single plays. See Pauly-Wissowa n 1628.

314 ZOÔKAEOYl

importance to the disagreement of the schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 178,to which may now be added Etym. gen. cod. Vat. (fr. 705), with

fr. 645 as well as with Soph. Ant. 973, in respect to the state-

ment that the blinding of his sons was the act of Phineushimself. For by giving credit to the slander of his wife, and

delivering his sons into her power, Phineus made himself

responsible for her cruelty.Wolff's view of the second Phineus was the same as that

which has been taken above 1

,and he made a good point in

suggesting that Sophocles may have found occasion to exhibit

the chastening effect of suffering upon the character of Phineus,

just as Oedipus changes in the interval between the two playswhich bear his name. Jessen

2 held that in the first PhineusPhineus himself blinded his sons at the instigation of Idaea,and that their sight was subsequently restored by Asclepius.On the other hand, he believes that the Tympanistae was a

distinct play, though dealing with the same material. HereIdothea blinded her stepsons with *;e/3/a8e9, and threw theminto a dungeon, after Cleopatra's death. The sequel related

the punishment of Phineus by the Argonauts, to whom the

mention of Colchis in fr. 638 points. Boreas was with them,and was the speaker of fr. 637. Jessen's view is deserving of

approval in so far as it is the only one which does not gobeyond or strain the evidence; but the result a double treat-

ment of the same story in different plays3 does not commend

itself as probable. It must be admitted that, with the evidenceat our disposal, the problem of the Tympanistae is insoluble.

Aeschylus wrote a Phineus, produced with the Persae in

472 B.C., which is known to have referred to the Harpies (TGFp. 83). Aesch. Bum. 50 also shows that the Harpies were

represented in contemporary art 4. Aristotle has a mysterious

allusion to an otherwise unknown play entitled Qtvelbai: poet.1 6. I455

a IO Kai V (a-vayva>pi(Ti?) eV rot? <&ivel$ai<$, ISovaai yaprov TOTTOV o-vve\oyicravTO rrjv elâpfjiev^v on ev TOVTW ei/jbapro

airoOavelv avrais, teal yap eêreOâav evravOa. There is nothingin the extant versions of the legend of Phineus which helps to

1 So also Ribbeck, p. 540, and Jessen in Roscher ill 2361, so that this result

appears to be well settled. The original form of the story, in which Phineus was

punished for disobedience to the gods, was entirely distinct from that of his treatment

of his sons. This is shown by the conflicting roles of the Argonauts.2 Roscher in 2362.3 It will be observed that the effect is much the same as that of Welcker's revised

edition. Hiller v. Gaertingen, p. 59 ff., had taken a similar view, holding that Apollo-dorus reproduced the substance of the first Phineus, and that in the TympanistaeIdothea blinded and imprisoned the Phineidae.

4 For the extant archaeological evidence see Gruppe, p. 5705; Frazt r, Pausan.in p. 6i.

0INEYI 315

explain this. Nor can anything be made of the fragmentsattributed to the Phinidae of Accius. However, it is clear

that the blinding of the Phineidae was a favourite incident ofthe tragic stage. Thus Timocles in the &iovvo-idov(rai (II 453K.), perhaps in reference to Sophocles' play : rou9 yapirpaJTov, et /3ouA,e

elal QiveiSai TV$\oi.

704

\J.Trr)p9ri ras ot//t9 6 <&ivv<; on rous e/c KAeoTrar/ms

7O4 Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 2. 178^Tnjpud'r] de rds fleets 6 ^tj'ei)? /card, yitei'

friovs VTTO rou'HXi'ou, 5ta rd wo\vv XP^VOV

atTTJ(rcu /uiSXXov rjv rj ftX^wetv' Kara 8

evlovs, on ^7re/3oi/Xeucre Ylep<rel. 25^, on TOVS K KXeoTrdrpas i>toi)s t

"OapOov (HapOtvtov H. Keil from schol.

on v. 140) /cat Kpdyuôr (Kdpanfiut Hol-

stenius) Trettrêts 5ia/3oXais 'ISat'as r^s

If we may press these words to their

full extent, Sophocles is made to repre-sent the blinding of Phineus as a punish-

ment for his own act in blinding his

sons at the instigation of Idaea. See

Introductory Note. The names of the

sons are elsewhere given as Plexippusand Pandion (Apollod. 3. 200, schol.

Soph. Ant. 981), Terymbas and Aspon-dus (schol. Soph. Ant. 981), Crambusand Parthenius (schol. Apoll. Rhod. 2.

140), Bithynus and Mariandynus (Etym.gen. : cf. FHG in 594), and Polidector

and Polidophus (schol. Ov. Ib. 271).Welcker and Bergk substituted Oreithyiusfor Oarthus here.

705

on TO,

7O5 Etym. gen. cod. Vat. (Reitzen-stein, Ind. lect. acad. Rost. a. 1891/92p. 15) So0o/cX?}s 5 tv Qivei (<J>tcei5cus

corr. Reitzenstein) irripuO^vaL avrbv <f>ri<riv

(avrbv (patnv cod.) 6'rt rd Hdia r^Kva avel-

Xej>.

There is no other evidence of a formof the story in which Phineus killed his

sons;and since in the Phineus the sons

, tSia reKva

recovered their sight (fr. 710), Reitzen-

stein substituted Qiveidais (Arist. poet. 16.

1455* 10) for Qiise?. But there is nothingto connect Sophocles with that title; andthe text is probably a loosely abbreviated

statement to the effect that Phineus was

punished for the blinding of his sons;

or, in other words, it is an echo of

fr. 704.

706

yepcriv

7O6 Schol. Horn. H 76 (Oxyrhynch.Pap.VI II p. 105, 35) r6 apirayos, evdev eir\^-

dvvev AtVxtfXos ev 3>ivei apTrayot xepoiv,Kal So0o/fX^s ev 3>tvei a -xtpalv dpTrdyois.

This quotation, illustrating the use of

j, is taken from a long note on

treated as typical of a certain

class of irapwvi'iULa, i.e. those which con-

vert an original genitive into a new nomi-native. The 7rapu>j'u/xa themselves are oneof the seven classes into which DionysiusThrax

( 14) divided derivative (irapdyu-

ZO*OKAEOYI

ya) (rrpwrbrvTra.} nouns, and are so called

as having no common characteristic (un-like irarpuvvfUKd, KT^TLKO. etc.) other thanthe fact of their derivation from a noun-stem (Bekk. anecd. p. 858, 9ff.). Forthe transference of other stems into the

o- declension, which is a common feature

of most Indo-European languages, see

Brugmann, Conip. Gr. II p. no E. tr.

The word apirayos had hitherto beenknown only from schol. Dorv. Ar. Plut.

800 and Arcad. p. 102, 9.

The reference both in Aesch. and Soph,must surely be to the Harpies : cf. Apoll.Rhod. 2. 1 88 "Apirviai crT6/iaros x iP&v T

'

a.irb yafj(.(j>ri\riaiv | (rfve^ws ypirafyv. It

should be remembered that the most an-

cient archaeological evidence representsthe Harpies not as birds, but as wingedwomen : see Gruppe, p. 847,), and Sittigin Pauly-Wissowa VII 2422. Even Vergil,who definitely describes them as volucres,

speaks of uncae manus (Aen. 3. 217).

707

OLV TO BocrTrdpeto^ iv

7O7 Steph. Byz. p. 179, 7 B6o-7ropos...rb tdvLKOV Bo(T7T(fyHOS...Zo00/cX?7S 5' &3>ivet irp<j}T(^ did di<f)66yyov rrjv irpb r\ovs

<j>r)oi TO KTrjTiKov (wpiov cod. : corr. Gave-

lius) 'oW &v . . .H>8(ap.' The quotationwithout the name of the play appearsalso in Etym. M. cod. Voss. p. 590 EGaisf.

For the form cf. 'E00-eta fr. 97. InAnt. 969 Roffirbpicu aKrat, i.e. the Thra-cian Bosporus, occurs with reference to

the story of the Phineidae ; but here the

words tv S/cu0cus appear to indicate the

Cimmerian Bosporus, for which cf. Aesch.Prom. 759.

708

7O8 Hesych. I p. 342rptiirava

'

TO, typvyia Trupeta.$ivei devrtpfp (<f>r)vei /3w cod.).has not been explained, but Bergk's con-

jecture (frptiyava would be a change for

the worse. It is possible that the word

points to some ceremonial lighting of a

sacred fire not otherwise recorded, justas the fire of the Vestal Virgins was re-

kindled every year on the ist March bythe same primitive method : see WardeFowler, Roman Festivals, p. 1475.The allusion is to the

'

fire-drill,' to

adopt the name chosen by Tylor to de-

scribe the contrivance whereby a stick

roughly pointed is twirled between the

hands in a hole scooped in a flat piece of

soft wood, till fire is produced. irvpeiais the general name given to the imple-ments required, which are distinguishedas rpiJTravov and crropevs (or effxaP^)- Cf.

Apoll. Rhod. i. 1184 rol 6'

where the schol. gives the best

existing account of the process. The in-

vention of it was ascribed to Hermes :

Horn. h. Herm. 109 in. Cf. Phil.

296. Since the ordinary Tptiravov wasfashioned of metal, we should recognizehere an instance of oxymoron parallel to

Aesch. Cho. 493 Treats 5' dxaX/ceurois

tdrjpevdrjs, wdrep Agamemnon entrappedby Clytaemnestra. Eur. fr. 595 cu'SoDs

dxa.\K6Totfftv ZfcvKTcu Tr^dais. To the

same class belong Eur. Or. 621 ws

fx^rjê 5w,a' dj'^âiVTy wvpl of Aegis-thus, Aesch. Prom. 829 Zyvbs aKpayetsKfoas of the griffins, ib. 905 oforpov

dpdis d-n-vpos. Arist. poet. 21. I457b30,

referring to this form of qualified meta-

phor (irpoffayopevffavTa rb aXXdrpiov d?ro-

<pri<rai TUV oiKeiwv TI), chooses as an ima-

ginary example the description of a shield

4>INEY! 317

709

7O9 Hesych. I p. 293 dprij(j.a<ri' rots

7T/)6s TTJV dvfflav VTpTTlÔfJ.VOiS. Zo00:X?7SQivei ft? (i.e. devrtpy, as conjectured by

Schow for the cod.

See on fr. 675. There seems no groundfor suspicion, but Blaydes conjecturesapy/j,a.(n in the sense of Kardpy/uiafft. It

is suggested that the context contained a

description of the preparations for a sacri-

ficial feast, which was interrupted by the

appearance of the Harpies : Apoll. Rhod.2. 184 ovde ydvv<r8ai

\

da a.Treipe<rloi<ri.v8<r<ra, oi cu'ei

| 0^<r0aT

irepivai^raL of/caS' ayapov.

710

OLVTL "/Up TV(f)\.OV

/cat XeXdjJi'n'pvvTaL

TraiaWs ev/x,e*>ous

71 Ar. Plut. 634636 'CU/TI. . .

Schol. rec. on \. 635 (i.e. as reported ori-

ginally in the Aldine ed.) says : e/c <IWo;s

So0o/cX&>us 6 (TTiôs. Schol. V on v. 636says : dvrl TOV evfêveffrdTov. raura 5 e/c

rou <IWws 2o0o/cX&>us Aa/Se^. Aelian//>/. aw. 17. 20, quoting from Aristotle's

account of the white swallow, which, if

its eyes are stabbed out, becomes blind

for the moment, adds : /tera raOra 5

bpq,, cos e/cet'6s

It is strange that Nauck has omittedto refer to Aelian. His evidence is im-

portant, as showing that v. 2 was a fami-

liar quotation ; and, although he does not

refer to his source, the citation makes it

more likely that Sophocles was the authorof the line. For, if it had been a jestof Aristophanes, a parody of Sophoclesrather than an actual transcript of his

words, the inherent absurdity of the

quotation would have made it less suit-

able for Aelian's purpose. Anyhow,Nauck was clearly right in withdrawingfrom the position which he took up in

his first edition, that only v. 636 of the

Plutus belongs to Sophocles. Cobetmade the just remark ' Scholia in Codd.non ad certum versum adscribi' (Coll.Crit. p. 199); and their evidence hereis not sufficient to determine exactly the

limits of the quotation (or parody).Hence I have added the words dvrl yapTV<J>\OV, which, whether Sophoclean or

not, are necessary for the completion ofthe period. Unfortunately, the wholecontext in Aristophanes is paratragoedic,so that we are deprived of the usual in-

dications which enable his tragic quota-tions to be fixed. There is a further

element of obscurity in schol. V's dvrl

TOV etf/ieyeoTaTou, which Blaydes moresuo desires to emend. It would not be

legitimate to deduce from this commentthat Sophocles wrote 'Atr/cX^TrtoO irat&vos

evfJieveardTov, and that Aristophanes for

his own purposes cut down his original.We conclude that, though Aristophanesmay have abbreviated or adapted the

tragic text, he has not blurred or trans-

formed its essential features. It is fair

to add that from Pollux 2. 59 KO.I efafj.-

ârdxTdaL <pr)aw 'ApHTTO<pdt>r]s rbv UXovrovev 'Aor/fX^TTtou it might be argued that

ôfji/j-arova-dai. was not taken from Sopho-cles. But that is purely negative evidencewhich should not be allowed to displacethe positive considerations pointing the

other way.That the general sense relates to the

healing of the Phineidae and not to that

of Phineus himself is proved by Phylar-chus ap. Sext. Emp. math. i. 262 (fr. 17,FHG I 337) $u\apxos v rr

('AcrKX-rj-rriov KKpavi>u<rda.i \tyci) did TO

roi)s 'S'lJ'^cos utous TV<f>\(i)6vTa,s aTro/cara-

O'TTjo'at, xapi6/j,fj>ov OLVT&V Trj fjirjTpl KXeo-

irdTpq. TTJ 'E/>ex0^ws (dvyaTpitirj add. Stern-

bach, unless Trj dirb is read). See also

Introductory Note.

IO*OKAEOYI

1 dvTl...Tv<|>Xov, if from Sophocles,would be parallel to O.T. 454 ru0X6s yapK dedopKbros |

KOI Trror^ds dvrl irXovaiov,Ai. 1020 dov\os \byoKnv dvr' <=\ev0epov

2 eo>[Ji|j.dTa>Tcu : so metaphorically in

Aesch. Prom. 514 QXoywira <r-f}/j.aTa \

^w/u.yu.druxra, irpfodev 6W eTrdpye/ma

(where it should be observed that tirdp-

yefjios is a medical term : see fr. 233).Philo I p. 455 M. KOI TO fipaxtiraTov

dpeTT)s...Ta TÔJJ fjLe/mvKOTa Kai rv(p\d efwyu-

/idrwa-e. But a difficulty is imported fromEur. fr. 541 r)/j.is de Ho\vj3ov TratS' epei-

ffavres Tr5<{) j%o/j.fj.a.ToviJ.et> Kal 5t6X\v[j.ei>

icbpas, where ôâ.Tovv = to deprive ofBright. Hence several critics, from Byzan-tine times onwards (see scholl.), have

supposed that Aristophanes intended to

direct attention to a ridiculous ambiguityof language, holding that XeXdjUTrpwraialso covered a reference to the disease

Xetf/cw/ta. This is quite unjustifiable; for

the usage of eKfipovrav, KK-rjpv<r<riv, e/c-

v (although it is not intended to

suggest that they all stand on the same

footing) shows that there was a tendencyfor verbs compounded with K to developea particular sense denoting expulsion bythe side of their ordinary meaning in

which the preposition bears a slightly in-

tensive force. \\d|iirpwTpT]v 6 /AfAaffiv

XayWTTpvverai.3 ircuwvos. TTCUWJ', as well as Tratdv

and irarfwi', is one of the regular ^Tri/cX??-

<rets of Asclepius : see Bergk in PLG II

245, and the references given byGruppe,Gr. Myth. p. 1455 f., and Thraemer in

Pauly-Wissowa n 1677. In C.R. xxv246 I have pointed out that there is areference to Asclepius in Phil. 832.

V|xcvovs is predicative in accordance witha common idiom

; for the participle which

might have been expected (i.e. oWoshere)is often omitted. Cf. O.C. 1482 tvo.iaiov

d crov TIJXOI(JU. Eur. Tro. 734 ai/r?? r'

'Axcuwi' Trpi>fj.i>e(TTtpui> TVXOIS. Hel.

1300 (n.). See also Holden on Plut.

Dem. 14, 3.

711

711 7'] S' A| dvyXlov 7rj/Xai Crusius : Kairi/j\eiov 06pcu Pollux

711 PollUX 7. 193 TO 5^ TWV /Ca7TT7-

\wv epyaffTypiov KaTn)\elov eipr

f)K.a.aiv ol

KUfjLtpdodiddffKaXoi, Kal rb

ev 2o0o/cXôus Qivei '

y ajs KairrjKdov 66pai' (Com. fr. adesp.

493, ill 500 K.).Several critics have perceived that

KairrjXelov dtpai was substituted by the

parodist for the actual words of Sopho-cles, and that the general sense of the

original was ' his eyes are closed as fast

as the gates of Hades.' Thus Gomperzconjectured /3.

K. rdvdpbs ws "AiSou TrtfXcu,

and F. W. Schmidt /3. /ce/fX^rat 7' tbs

dvrjXioi Tnj\ai\

"Aidov. Better than these,

however, is the proposal of Crusius (seecr. n.), which is derived from Zenob. 4.

86 (Paroem. I 246) es Kwovapyes, s

dvr)\iov TTi^Xas: eni TWV bôiwv Kai aSrat,i.e. iri T&V ei's dd^vara dvafia\\ou.ev(j)v.

Cf. Arsen. 200 ei's Kw6<rapyes, eis dvr)\iovs: eipTjTat eiri T&V i>(3pL Kai dpats

The point of the comparison would

then be that Hades is a warder whonever lets his prisoners escape : Theogn.709 Kvavtas re TrvXas Trapa/xet'êrat, al're

davbvTuv| i/'i'xds eipyovaiv Kaiirep dvaivo-

idvas, Prop. 4. 11. 2 panditur ad nullas

ianua nigra preces ;|

cum semel infernasintrarzint ftinera leges, |

non exorato slant

adamante viae. Hence the entrance is

firmly secured ([Plat.] Axioch. 371 B rd5e TrpbTrv\a rijs ets IIXouTWJ'os odov ffidr)-

POLS K\eidpois Kai K\eiaiv u)x^) wrat)

anc^

the traveller who arrives must knock in

order to procure admission (Theocr. 2.

1 60). Note that Lucr. 5. 373 impliesthat the gate of death was proverbially

kept closed. Nevertheless, admission

was readily granted : the counterpart of

Hades TrvXdprrjs is Hades iro\v8ey/ji.<i}i',

TroXtêpos (Aesch. Suppl. 163), iravdoKevs

(Lycophr. 655) ;and it is rather in the

latter character that he resembles an inn-

keeper. Iambi, vit. Pyth. p. 196 roi)s rd

yU.a0T7yU.ara KairrjKetiovras Kai rds

ws Travdoxî-ov 6vpas dvoiyovras iravrl

<t>INEY! 319

i rdv avdp&irwv. But the humourof the parody depended chiefly on the

similarity of sound, and Sophocles can

hardly have written u>s iroXvêvoL TriyXcu

after the pattern of O.C. 1570. The

parodist ludicrously substituted an openfor a shut door, although of course a be-

lated guest might arrive to find the tavernclosed : Ar. Lys. 426 irol 5' aft <rt> ^X^reu, |

ovdtv TTOidv dXX' ^ KaTnjXeiov OKOTT&V ;

712

rdpiyos elo-opav

712 post j/e/cp6s interpunxerunt Jacobs, Dobree

712 Athen. 119 c (on the word

rdpixs) 2o0ofcX?7S T' ev Qwei' 'veKpbs...

Ai'71/TTTlOS.'

It may be inferred with a high degreeof probability that these words are a

description of Phineus, as he appearedto the Argonauts, in the state of ema-ciation to which he was reduced by the

persecutions of the Harpies : cf. Apoll.Rhod. i. 197 6p0w6eis 5' evvrjBev, aK-fipiov

tyjT1

ttveipov, | jSdfCTjoy (T/c?77rT6/Aej>os pi/côts

iroalv 776 6vpae \...iriv($ d ol auo'TaXeos

Xpws | d(TK\r)Ki, pivol de crvv oarea /JLOVVOV

gepyov. The credit of having first per-ceived this belongs to F. Jacobs (Addit.Animadv. in Athen. p. 83), who also

quotes for the metaphor Sophron fr. 54 K.TO yap direxd^/J-ffov yrjpas afj.e p.apaivov

Add Aesch. Cho, 295a^ddpT^ pbpq. The re-

ference to the Egyptian mummies wasno doubt prompted by a recollection of

Herod. 2. 86 90, and may therefore beadded to the list of cases where Sopho-cles can be shown to have been influenced

by Herodotus : see on fr. 29. Moreover,Herodotus uses the word rdpi\os of a

corpse : 9. 120 (Protesilaus) Kal reBvews/cat rd/nôs ewv. Add Aelian nat. anim.

13. 21 X^yei Ar)fj.6<TTpaTo$ tv Tavdypg.Oedcraffdcu rdpixov Tpiruva, Tzetz. Chil-

li 33 (of Cleopatra's corpse) Kal Trpbs

Ti]v 'P&MV rdpixos orAXerai x^P 1" ^âs

(Benndorf in Festschrift Th. Gomperz,p. 405).

713

713 Hesych. I p. 233 direvwricrav'

atreffTpetyav ra vCora. So0o/cX^s Qtvel

((f)Lv"

cod.).L. and S. wrongly quote this fragment

as an instance of the transitive usage

(=fugare). But the gloss of Hesych.clearly indicates terga vertere as the

meaning : so the simple verb in O. T.

193 ("Apea) TraXtVcruTOv dpdfj.-r)fj.a

(where the scholl. give both views), andEur. Andr. 1141 irpbs (pvyty ev&THrav.

Cf. Suid. vurifa' rd v&ra /ieracrrp^w.One may guess that the flight of the

Harpies was described: Apoll. Rhod. 2.

270 cti 5' afjC dvrf) \

iravra

virtp irbvTOio (fiepovTO \ r^Xe i

714

KarappaKTOLL

714 Hesych. II p. 432ox^Tos, ptia!-. Kal 6 der6s.

Aao/c6o>i'Tt (fr. 377). Kal rapirvias iv

Qlvt). The last words were corrected

by Musurus to /cat rds dpirvLas tv 4>tj/ei.

Bakhuyzen with less probability suggestedKal 17 apTrvia

For the word KaTappaKTTjs see on fr.

377. Its suitability as applied to the

Harpies may be judged from Apoll.Rhod. 2. 187 dXXd 5td ve<ptuv aQvuTrAas dto-a-ovffai

| "ApTrutai, ibid. 267 al 5'

d<pap r)VT' &e\\ai dSev/cês, r) ffrepoiral cils,|

dirp6<paToi

320 !0<t>OKAEOYS

715

715 Hesych. II p. 477 K-rfpLo/j-a (K-TJ-

pLwfj.a. Salmasius) 6/j.i\rjfj,a (97 X^/AT; conj.Dindorf ). &TTI yap TO K-rjpiov, $ (6v cod.)

irpoffeiKafa TOI>S 6<f)da\iJ,ovs T&V $iveidwi>.

Nauck includes the fr. here, acceptingthe view of Perger and Dobree. I havefollowed him with hesitation

;for there

was a well-known 3>iveWai of uncertain

authorship (Arist. poet. 16. 1455* 10),

and the subject was a favourite (Timoclesfr. 6, 13 ii 453 K.). If the view takenin the Introductory Note is right, it be-

longs to $>ivetis a. The rheum whichhas gathered in the empty eye-sockets is

compared to honey in the cell of the

honeycomb. M. Schmidt would have

preferred K-fjpwâ.'

o-^yua, but Krjpiov is

against this.

716

jLtacrra/cas

716 Eustath. Od. p. 1496, 53 (Ael.Paus. fr. 253 Schw.) tv$f. pr}TopiK<^ Xei/c

evpfjvTa,L Kal /idcrra/ces*

ai aKpiSes. /ecu

X^yercu KeiffBai. TOVTO trapa 2o0o/c\et ev

$ivei. Phot. lex. p. 248, 18 /ida-ra/<as*

ras dupioas. 2o0o/c\^s.For further evidence of this meaning

see Etym. M. p. 216, 9 ^do-ra^ /caXetrai,

Trapa TO fj.a<Ta<r6cu' NiKavSpos (Ther. 802)

(rtTo/36/)y eâXty/cios.

5e (prjffiv OTI. KO.TO.

/caXeirai 17 aKpls. [This is the Clitarchus

whose work 'on 7X0)0- (rat is often quotedby Athenaeus : see Susemihl, n I9if.]But the passage is confused by abbre-

viation; for in Nicander also /udora^ is

a locust (-fjyovv aKpldi, Trj ffLTot^dy^ fyoiaKT. schol.). The comparison of the

Harpies to locusts is apt (Sittig in Pauly-Wissowa vii 2427).

717

717 Cyrill. cod. Messan. (Reitzen-

stein, 2nd. lect. acad. Rost. a. 1890/91

p. 5) &fMV\W O/JLOKOITOV, fftiyiCOlTOV, 6/J.OV

For the word cf. fr. 24, 5 and Hesych.there quoted. Phot. lex. p. 331, 5 ofj.av-

\OV '

6/J.6KOLTOV.

00INIH

The play which Euripides composed under this title was

widely known, and is the subject of a familiar allusion in Ar.

Ach. 421 : it must, therefore, have been produced before 425 B.C.

It is definitely ascertained that the subject is outlined in Apollod.3. 175 Qolvit; o Â/jLvvTopo<;...v7rb rov Trarpos ervcf)\d)0rj /cara-

tyevaa/JLevr]? <f)0opav 4>^ta? TT)? rov Trarpbs TraA-Xa/CT}?. n^Xei)?Se avrbv 7T/009 Xeipwva /coya/cra?, UTT' e/ceivov OepaTrevOevra ra?

o'v/ret? flao-i\ea /caTearrja-e AoXoTroJTA Echoes of the Euripidean

<t>INEYI <t>OINIE 321

story appear in A.P. 3. 3 'AXtft/u-e&j %vv6nevvov '\fjuvvropa

epvtcei, |

OoiW/co? &' e$eA,et iravcrai %b\ov <

yveTov..../ceivo<>

i(T/Ji,aaiv ijÔero Kovpw, \ rjye 8' e? 6(f)Oa\/jLo

,and in Prop. 2. I. 60 Phoenicis Chiron lumina

Phillyrides (sc. sanavif).We have already seen 1 that Welcker postulated an entirely

different argument for the Sophoclean Phoenix, and have givenreasons for rejecting his theory

2. It is in any case more probable

that .Sophocles whether he preceded or followed Euripides in

selecting Phoenix for the title-role of a play, was occupied rather

with the pathetic history recounted in the ninth book of the

Iliad, than with an entirely subordinate incident in his later

life. Moreover, fr. 720 is naturally interpreted as a reference

to Phthia. The story as related by Homer comprised certain

primitive elements which Euripides avoided (schol. A Horn.I 453 dva/j,dprr)TOv elaayei rov tfpwa eV TO> <t>olviKi) \

but it

would be rash to infer from rofc rpayitcoLs in schol. A Horn.I 448 that Sophocles and Euripides were agreed. Nor can we

lay stress on the plural in Suid. s.v. eTrrjXvydôvTai' ol S' ovv

Trepl 7r\ei(TTov nde/JievoL ra rov <$>OIVIKO<$, KaXkvvovres dpa TO

KCLKOV avrov KOI eTTT/AiAyafoz'Te?, aX,Xo>9 <f)aa-\ rovro yeveaOat,

Epict. diss. i. 28. 32 probably refers to the Phoenix of Euripides;but if wider scope were allowed to the mention of the tragic hero

as the victim of a false judgement, the allusion would be con-

sistent with the view which has been advocated above.

718

iravra ir\r)0vL

718 Athen. 70 A Kivdpa. ravTTjv So- rty irb\iv. We have no better authority<t>oK\ij$ ei' KoXxtVi (fr. 348) Kwapav KaXfi, to follow for the meaning. Athenaeusiv d ôLvLKi

'

Kvva.pos...yt'riv.' Eustath. states that in his time Kivdpa rather thanOd. p. 1822, 17 dirb KVVOS Xêrat vvvrt- Kvvdpa was the current form (71 A), andBelcrdaL Tra/oct So0o/c\ei KaUjKi/vapos &Kav0a, Galen de alim. facult, i. 51 treats the

i} /cat Kvvdpa.. spelling Kvvdpa as an affectation ((fievyovTesLater on (70 c) Athenaeus introduces TO <rvi>r]6t$). But it seems that Kivdpa was

the comment of Didymus on Kvvapos the name given to the artichoke at theaKavOa in Sophocles: //-i^Trore, <pfi<ri, rr\v time when Athenaeus wrote, and Schweig-Kvt>6o-pa.TOJ> ('dog-thorn') Xêt did TO hauser infers that he confused it withdi<aj>d5es K.a.1 rpa%i) elvai r6 (pvrbv KO.I Kwdpa, which was an entirely different

ydp ij Hvdia $-v\lvT]v Ktiva avro elirev, KO.I plant. Kuvapos was an adj., which6 Ao/cpdj xp^fôv \a/3ui> teel TTO\IV oiKifeiis Sophocles treated as having either twoOTTOU Af UTTO %v\tvr)s Kw6s 8r)x&jj, /cara/xu- or three terminations ; but Hecataeus

%êis TT]v Kvri/j.r]i> VTTO Kvvoofidrov <-KTi<re {FHG I 12) and Scylax or Polemon

1 See Introductory Note to the Dolopes, I p. 119.2Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 224, also differs from Welcker as to the subject of the

Phoenix.

P. II. 21

3 22 !0<J>OKAEOYS

(fr. 92 Preller) are quoted by Athenaeusas employing &Kav6a Kvvapa.

irXtjOvei. Dindorf in his Lex. Soph.conjectured TrXT/tfiêi in accordance withthe view that TrX^flwoj is the transitive

form of TrXTjfli/w. But in his edition hemade no sign, and the lexicons strangely

quote this fragment as an example of

ir\r)0v(ji} used intransitively. It is still

open to question whether a valid distinc-

tion can be drawn between TrX^fltfw and

7rA?70wa in this respect ; see the edd. onAesch. Suppl. 612. In Hdt. 2. 93 mostcritics keep the reading of the MSS : eireav

de TrX-rjdveadaL apxyrai 6 NeZXos. irX^^^wand TrXyOvb) are often confused : Jebb onO. C. 377 (cr. n.), Theophr. c. pi. r. 19. 5,

Plut. mor. 1005 F. So tflwopras (intrans.)was corrected in Ap. Rhod. i. 323.

719

719 Socrates hist. eccl. 3. 7 p. 176 Bs tv T<> Kara <sro>.-

TriKKTTrj Kal fidpfiapov diroKaXel TT)V

\eiv /J.f]de yap Trapd TKTL T&V TraXai&v

eiprj(r6ai. el 5e TTOV Kal eOp^rcu, fit) ravra

o"r]iui.aiveii> e</>' wv vvv

irapa fji^v yap So0o/c

evtdpav (rTj/j.aiveiv TTJV VTroffracnv, irapa d

(fr. 462, 10, III 132 K.) raThis is copied by Jul.

Poll. hist. phys. p. 376. For Julios

Polydeukes, a late Byzantine chronicler,see Krumbacher, Geschichte d. Byz. Lit-

teratur, p. 135. Irenaeus, the pupil of

Heliodorus, was a grammarian who be-

longed to the latter part of the first

century A.D. He was the earliest of the

Atticists, and is frequently referred to as

6 'Arrt/cto-r^?. Hence the error in Socrates'

quotation, which appears to be drawn fromthe book irepl aTTLKi<T/JLov : see Cohn in

Pauly-Wissowa V 2122.

Irenaeus declared that vir6(TTa<ris in

the philosophical sense was unknown to

Attic writers. No other instance of u?r6-

ffTacris as' ambush '

is quoted ; but wemay compare Eur. Anar. 1114 ry de

adeis, Hdt. 8. 91 Afytf^rcu VTroffravres e'i>

720

<f>opfid<;

72O Eustath. //. p. 1088, 35 (poppas

yvvf), irapd So0o/fXet, (pa<riv, ev $olviKi TJ

TroXXots Trpoffo/JLiXovaa rpotprfs xdpt^. Thesource of Eustathius was Suetonius irepl

/3Xd(T077 /uicDj' : see Miller, Melanges, p. 414,

and Cohri in Pauly-Wissowa VI 1477.Prostitutes are compared to cattle

browsing on the public land : cf. Pind.

fr. 122 (poppdduv Kopav dyeXavyviov. So we should explain Theogn.86 1 ff. o't jjie (pl\oi Trpodidovcri, Kal

TI dovvai\ dvbpCjv (aLvoe

OVK

dXX' 670) avTOfj-drr)\ eo-jreplr) T'

opdpiij adris ftreiycu : see Hiller-Crusius,Anthol. Lyr. p. XXXI. Pollux 7. 203Kal (popfiddas d' av rds Trbpvas Xtyots.

The story of Phrixus has already been discussed in connexionwith the Athamas (l p. i), and any attempt to reconstruct the

plot of the Phrixus must take into account the results of* that

investigation.. The internal evidence is insignificant, and generalprobability can alone decide the issue. Urlichs conjectured that

4>OINIZ cJ>PIEO! 323

the Phrixus related to the fortunes of the hero subsequent to his

arrival in Colchis. But Welcker's reply (p. 317) is conclusive,that the tradition records no adventure of Phrixus in that countrywhich could have formed the plot of a tragedy. Welcker himselffound the substance of the plot in Hygm.J>oet. astron. 2. 20 Cretheaautem habuisse Demodicen uxorem, quam alii Biadicen dixerunt..,hancautem Phrixi, Athamantis filii, corpore inductam in amo-rem incidisse : neque ab eo, ut sibi copiam faceret, impetrarepotuisse : itaque necessario coactam criminari eum ad Crethea

coepisse, quod diceret, ab eo vim sibi paene adlatam, et horumsimilia mulierum consuetudine dixisse. quo facto Crethea^ utuxoris amantem et regem decebat, permotum ut de eo suppliciumsumeret persuasisse. Nu'bem autem intervenisse et ereptumPhrixum . . .ipsum autem (i.e. Phrixus, after dedicating the fleece

of the ram at Colchis) a Mercurio ad A thamantem esse reduction

qui patri eius satisfecerit eum innocentia confisum profugisse.Another version made Demodice the step-mother of Phrixus,and this, as I have endeavoured to show in Class. Rev. XXIII

255, is referred to by Pind. Pyth. 4. 161 Seppa re tcpiov /3a0v-

/jia\\ov ayeiv, \

TO) TTOT etc TTOVTOV aawOr]\

etc re /uarpvids adewv

ffeXewv. The scholiast on Pindar comments as follows: e/ca/caydrj

jap &ia TTJV /jurjTpviav epaaOelaav avrov KCLI e7re/3ouXe vOrj. ravTyv3e o fjbev nivftapos <lv V/JLVOIS AT/yLtoSt/cT/^,

t

\Tr7ria<$ Se T'opyaj'iriv

Socô/cX?)? Be ev 'AOdfjiavn NeêXry^' QepefcvSr)? e/i/tcrrce). Un-

fortunately, the scholiast, so far from elucidating the problem,adds to the confusion by his statement that Sophocles in the

Athamas called the step-mother Nephele. This can hardlybe anything but a blunder, and was perhaps abbreviated from a

statement which made the union with Nephele subsequent to

the marriage with Ino. Such was in fact the account given

by Philostephanus (fr. 37, FHG III 34), who related that Nepheleleft her husband, finding that he was still intriguing with Ino,and that Ino was then restored to her former position. Escher

(in Pauly-Wissowa II 1931) preferred to explain that Nephele'sname is given as that of the prime contriver of the mischief,

i.e. of the sacrifice of Athamas. However that may be, the

statement of the scholiast does not in any way assist the con-

clusion that the Demodice-story was the central incident in the

Phrixus. Welcker's conjecture is thus little more than a guess,but he is justified in remarking (p. 319) that Phrixus was

probably the leading character in the play which bears his

name, and that the proposed plot agrees well enough with that

assumption. There is however another possible solution whichmust not be overlooked, viz. that the Phrixus contained the

earlier part of the story of Ino's plot up to the time of the

21 2

324 SO<t>OKAEOY!

escape of the two children, whereas the Athamas, as has alreadybeen suggested (I p. 2), narrated the subsequent punishment of

their father. On the other hand, Ahrens thought that the

Phrixus contained the concluding part of the story given byHyginus, that is to say, the return of Phrixus to his native

land and the establishment of his innocence.

Ribbeck (Rom. Trag. p. 526), who wrongly concludes that

the story of Demodice was a late copy of that of Phaedra and

Hippolytus, and cannot therefore be attributed to Sophocles,is driven to suggest that the Phrixus was a satyr-play.

721

opia K\ev0ov TTJcrSe yrjs Tryooacrrta?

721 Steph. Byz. p. 140, i &arv...

irpodffTios. otfrw yap KO.I TO 0rj\VKbv evpl-

cr/ceTcu, Trpoaffrla 777, tv 4>/j^y 2o0o/cXôus'

opia . . . irpoaffTias.'

The words as quoted are unintelligible.Ellendt's attempt to join opia KeXevOov (as

if recta viae), making 777$ depend on the

combined notion, with the sense 'via

recte ducens per regiones urbi finitimas'

cannot be approved ; for the sense givento Spia is improbable, and tragic usage

requires that it should be joined to 777$

(Eur. Her. 82, Tro. 375). Hartung con-

jectured r' Aefofl for KeXetdov, but we are

hardly warranted in suspecting a corrup-tion of the text. At the same time, it

must be admitted that it is not easy to

frame a context which will quite satis-

factorily account for KeXetidov. For the

completion of the sense something like

Sid yu,a/cpas 7re/>w seems to be demanded.But in that case, unless there is a lacuna

in the quotation (e.g. 8pia Ke\evdov <8id

paKpas CKpLypevos \ irdpei/j,'

'

Axaiuiv>T7)<r-5e KT.), we should be obliged to assumea hyperbaton : see on Eur. HeL 719,Hclid. 1 60, Phoen. 1318.

722

KWTJOOV

722 Etym. Gud. p. 330, 43ov Kalrb KJ>vfr)6iJi6s

(so cod. Paris, in Anecd. Paris, iv

p. 73, 32 : 0/nfw cod. Gud.)'

Kw-rjdbv

e^Trpaâv Kw^bpevov (KVÔV^VOV cod.

Paris.).'The text is obviously corrupt, and the

following corrections have been proposed :

(i) Dobree, eatrapaâv. This is modified

by Blaydes to e<rirdpa^ vu>. (2) Blom-

field, e^Kpaâv ws Kvv^êvot.. (3) Tucker's

eîrpa^d viv, 'I finished him off' (C.R.xvn 191), was anticipated by Papabasi-leios. (4) Wagner, e^pa^d VLV. Of these

Blomfield's has met with most favour.

J. remarks that iKKpdfa denotes a sound

very different from KwêiaOai ; but KVV-

pi6fj.6swas usedôf a dog sqitealing from

pain (i) T&V KVV&V v\aKr) ddvpriicri Suid.,

who has also Kw^bêvov OTCVOVTO.), or

howling for his master (Ael. nat. an. i.

8), and Hdt. 2. 2 uses KW^ÔLTO. for theinarticulate cries of babies. It does nottherefore seem impossible that it shouldbe used of a shrill cry. Kwr|86v is formedlike iTnrridbv, ravprjdov, and other adverbs

quoted by Bla)des on Ar. Nub. 491.Blomfield argued that in Phot. lex. p. 187,

3 Kijvp-r)'

TrXoiov eldos So0o/c\7?s. Kvvrj-

dov d>s Ktiwv, the name 2o^>o/cX^s shouldbe transposed so as to follow KV&V: butsee on fr. 127. Kvvov>[ivov. /o/ufdo/icu,

which also occurs, is more in accordancewith analogy (cf. (B\r)xdo/j.ai, /xiy/cdoât,

j8/)i;%do/x.at, etc.) ; but Kwêo/mai is sup-ported by the best MSS in O. C. 1571 andAr. Vesp. 977. (J.) Wilamowitz, Text-

gcschichte d. Btikoliker, p. 20, rejects KVV-

in Theocritus.

<t>PIEOI <t>PYrEI 325

723

723 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 83, 23 is quoted, it seems to be implied by the

d0e\?7s. So0o/cXr;s <J>/of|(f}. stylistic use, which appears in Aristotle

d<j>e\TJs. Dindorf in Thes. 2625 C says (rhet. 3. 9. i4O9b

18). So also d0Aeta ofof this word: '

Frequentant recentiores artistic handiwork in Antiph. fr. 163, II

vocabulum a prosa Atticorum, ut videtur, 77 K. It is remarkable that the earliest

alienum.' The fact was observed by the example Theogn. 1211 /AT? /*' d0eXws iral-

Atticists of the second century A.D, ,and fbu<ra 0iXous dtwaê TOKijas illustrates the

it maybe assumed that the Antiatticist bad sense shameless, brazen: cf. A. P. 5.

maintained by his reference to Sophocles 41, Aristid. II 116 (Plato is blamed for

that the word was current in Attic. One attacking Miltiades and others in the

would suppose that it was employed in Gorgias) Kal raDr' d0eX<3s ourws /cai avu-the sense which it usually bears in later juntas. For ancient criticism on the wordGreek, that of simple, artless, naif; for, .see the schol. on Kr.Eq. 527, from which

though no early instance of this meaning Suidas made extracts.

0PYFEI

Welcker 1 had no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that

the Phryges of Sophocles was to be compared with the <&pvyes rj

"Ei/cropos \vrpa of Aeschylus, and that the subject of both playswas the visit made by Priam to the tent -of Achilles in order to

ransom the body of Hector, which is described in the last bookof the Iliad. He was to some extent influenced by schol. Aesch.Prom. 452 (TiwrruxTi yap Trapa TO?? Tro^rat? ra Trpoa-wTra rj Si

avOdSeiav, &>9 'A^tXXeu? eV rot? 4>puî 2o<o/cXeou<? : but the state-

ment in the Life of Aeschylus (p. 3, 11=467, 25 W.), togetherwith Ar. Ran. 911 and the schol., prove that Menage was rightin regarding the mention of Sophocles as an error. When the

evidence for Sophocles' play consisted of a single quotation,there was some reason for Bergk's opinion

2 that the title shouldbe eliminated altogether; and Wecklein 3 also conjectured that

fr. 724 ought to be assigned to Aeschylus. But the recent

discovery of a new fragment (725) alters the conditions of the

problem, although it is far from certain that the plot of Sophocles'

play was the same as that of its Aeschylean namesake 4.

1p- 135-

2 Rh. Mus. xxxv 254 : his purpose was to show that Sophocles and Euripidesdeliberately avoided the subjects contained in the Iliad.

3Sitzungsb. k. b. Akad. 1891, p. 363.

4 See p. 192. For the views of Blass and Reitzenstein see below. It has also

been suggested that the titles 3>p6yes and Hpla.fj.os should be identified : see p. 160.

326 IO<t>OKAEOYZ

Welcker and Hermann held that the Hectoris Lutra of Enniuswas adapted, not from Aeschylus but from the Phryges of

Sophocles; but it is extremely unlikely that in the case sup-

posed Ennius would have altered the title 1.

724

evyevels yap KayaOovs, (5 TTCU,

ZvoLipeiv oi Se Trj yXaxrcrr)d/ras e'/cro? etcrt ran* KOLKCOV

yap ouSe^ TCOV /ca/ca>j' X<UTICT<U.

724. 2 tvalpeiv B (cod. Paris. 1985) m. sec.: (rvvatpeiv SMA 4 ovdevaschol..//.

| Xwrêrcu C. Keil et Conington : Xoyifcrcu Stob., Xêrcu schol. //.

724 Stob. flor. 8. 5 (ill p. 341, ro

Hense) Zoô/cXôus $pvy&v'roi/s evye-

j'cts...Xo7tferot.' v. 4 is quoted withoutname of poet or play by schol. Horn. B833.The general sentiment, summed up in

the last line belongs to proverbial philo-

sophy: Anacreon fr. 101 Kaprepos yv iro-

A^tois Tifjidxpiros, ov r65f (ra/xcr| "Apijs 5'

OVK dyaduv 0et5ercu dXXa, KOLKUV, Aesch.fr. 100 dXX' *Apr)$ </>iXet |

del ra Xyarajrdvra ravdpuiruv (Trdi/r

5

airavdiêiv Kidd)arparov, Eur. fr. 728 0iXe? rot 7r6Xe/xos ov

KCLKOVS 8e jjuffet, Soph. Phil.

436 Tr6\e/j.os ovdtv' iLvdp' eKtov| alpei TTO^JJ-

p6v, d\Xd roi)s XP7!

"7" ^ ^ L - See also

fr- 554-2 Valckenaer proposed dvatpetv, but

this is another instance (see cr. n.) of theconfusion of v with ativ, for which see onfr. 679.3 aras. For the plural of the ab-

stract noun used distributively see Gilder-

sleeve, 45. For TWV KO.KCOV, which is

certainly awkward in view of its repeti-tion, Nauck wished to substitute

no doubt with a mind to Aesch. Prom.

279 oVris TTT/judraH' e?|o; 7r65a %, Eur.

Hipp. 1293 TTTâros w 7r65a roOS' d?r^-

Xets. The words e/cr6s etVt rtDi' /ca/cwi'

are intended to recall the proverb w71-97X01) 7r65a (schol. Aesch. Cho. 693);but it does not follow that irri/j.dTuv is

required: see Ai. 88, Phil. 1260, Hclid.

109 (n.). Buecheler also conj. r&v /taxuv,but see on fr. 314, 350, and on Eur. Hel.

674.4 XwTi^rai is doubtless right. As

contrasted with dfj.av (A. P. 9. 362 'EXXd-5os d/j.<j}wv aya/ji.ov (rrdxvv, Hor. C. 4. 14.

3 r primosqite et extremos metendo sti avit

humum} or deplfciv (Aesch. Suppl. 646),the verb Xom fc<rdai implies selection : see

on Eur. Hel. 1593. Nauck quotes En-

nius'yfor delibatus populi (353 M.). AddEur. Suppl. 449 orav rts ws Xet/icDj'os

rjpivou o~rdxvv\r6\fj.as d(f>aiprj /cdTroXwrt'^T/

vtovs. Blass in Rh. Mus. LXII 272 sug-

gested that the lines might have been

spoken by Priam to Paris with reference

to the death of Hector. Welcker as-

sumed that they were addressed to

Achilles.

725

ov X^fer', ov 7ra,vcrecr#e rovcrSe rou?

725 Phot. ed. Reitz.

< d> v v/mevaiovv <J>p

151, 7

>pv!-li>' ov

Reitzenstein conjectured that the

speaker was Cassandra, and that she wasalluding to the ceremonies connected

1 Skutsch in Pauly-Wissowa v 2593.

0PYTEI XPYIHZ 327

with the marriage of Paris and Helen. (Escher in Pauly-Wissowa I 239). Blass

Blass, however, who held that the play treated the metre as trochaic tetrameter,related to a much later period in the but the absence of the caesura at the end

story (see on fr. 724), assigned the frag- of the second dipody (Jebb on Phil. 1402)ment to a messenger who announced the is a fatal objection to this view, as hasdeath of Achilles by the hands of Paris been pointed out by Mekler (Bursiansand Deiphobus. He supposed accord- Jahresb. CXLVII 114). The latter prefers

ingly that the wedding was that of to suppose that the syllable -at- is short-

Achilles and Polyxena, referring to ened in avvfitvaiouvres, for which see on

Hygin. fab. no. According to some fr. 956, 3. It is perhaps better to assume

authorities, a meeting was arranged bethat a word (e.g. y5cus) has dropped out

tween Priam and Achilles to take place between yd/j.ovs and avv/m-evaLovvres. Thein the grove of the Thymbraean Apollo verb awfievaiovv is otherwise unknown,for the negotiation of the marriage; and but may be compared with avv/j.vetv,

on that occasion Achilles was waylaid dvev<f>r]fji.eTv, dvafioav, dvaxopetieiv, etc.

XPY1HI

Naeke (Opusc. I p. 91) was the first who perceived that the

plot of this play was to be found in Hygin. fab. 120, 121. After

relating the story of Orestes and Iphigenia according to the ver-

sion of Euripides in his Iphigenia in Tauris, the mythographeradds (at the end offab. 120) that Iphigenia succeeded in carryingoff the image, and, setting sail with Orestes and Pylades, wasborne by a favourable wind to the island Sminthe, the homeof Chryses, priest of Apollo. The title Sminthius (Smintheus)was especially connected with the worship of Apollo at Chrysa,a town in the Troad (see on frs. 40, 384); but Strabo (605) de-

clared that it was to be found at several other places in the westof Asia Minor, and in the islands off the coast. Whether by* the island Sminthe '

is meant the island Chryse to the east of

Lemnos 1

,and whether in any case the name is taken from

Sophocles we cannot tell. After referring to the events con-

nected with Chryses and Chryseis, as related in the first bookof the Iliad, Hyginus (fab. 121) proceeds with the sequel of

their history. When Agamemnon restored Chryseis, she was

already pregnant, but denied that she was with child by Aga-memnon

; and, after the birth of a son to whom also the nameof Chryses was given, declared that Apollo was his father. This

younger Chryses was grown to manhood at the time when Iphi-

genia, pursued by Thoas, arrived at the island. Thoas demandedthe surrender of the fugitives, and Chryses was disposed to complywith the request, when his mother Chryseis

2, learning that Iphi-

genia and Orestes were the children of Agamemnon, divulged to

1 Ribbeck thinks that Sminthe represents Tenedos: see on fr. 726.2 I follow M. Schmidt's text of Hyginus: according to the MS it was the elder

Chryses.

328 Z000KAEOYZ

her son the true story of his birth. Thereupon Chryses assisted

his newly-found brother Orestes to kill Thoas, after which the

image of Artemis was safely conveyed to Mycenae.Pacuvius also wrote a play with the title Chryses, which Naeke

supposed to be an adaptation of Sophocles. He is followed byWelcker, Nauck, and Ribbeck

;but Wilamowitz preferred to

suppose that Pacuvius made use of a post-Euripidean drama

dealing with the story of Iphigenia1

. In any case, the fragmentsof Pacuvius would be but of little assistance for the elucidation

of Sophocles' plot; and the question is further complicated bythe doubt whether some of the most significant belong to the

Chryses or to some other play2

.

According to a tradition preserved in late authorities 3,the

name of Chryses was connected with the foundation of Chryso-polis on the Bithynian coast of the Bosporus opposite to

Byzantium. After the death of Agamemnon Chryses fled fromthe machinations of Clytaemnestra, and went in search of Iphi-

genia; but died at the place afterwards known as Chrysopolis,where he was buried. Wilamowitz 4 believes that this legendwas adopted by Sophocles, and denies that the story recorded

by Hyginus can have been employed in the play. His reason

is to be found in the conviction that the plot of the Iphigeniain Tauris was invented by Euripides, and cannot therefore havebeen known to Sophocles at the time of the production of the

Chryses (before 414 B.C.5

).

It is a remarkable fact that two, if not three 6,of the five

extant fragments appear to be comic in intention. This stronglyfavours the inference that the Chryses was a satyr-play, and the

story of Hyginus was obviously capable of comic treatment.

On the other hand, not only did Pacuvius adapt Sophocleselsewhere, but no other play than the Chryses is known whichcould have served as the model of the Pacuvian tragedy.

O. Rossbach 7 referred to this play a mutilated papyrusfragment published by Grenfell and Hunt in New Class. Frag-ments II (Oxford, 1897), p. 3, which he restored as -v/reuS^ 8e

<E>oi/3o? ijyayev ere âvrea, an address of Agamemnon to Calchas

(Horn. A 106). This is a very remote possibility.

1 Herm. xvm 257.2 Tr. Rom. Frag.* p. 143 ff. ; see also Reid on Cic. Lael. 24. Ribbeck claims for

the Chryses, in preference to the Dulorestes^ the famous scene in which Orestes and

Pylades disputed over their identity, in order that each might save the other fromimminent death. The conclusion is supported by Non. s.v. opino (Pacuv. 101 R.).

3Hesychius of Miletus (6th cent. A.D.) : see FHG iv 148. Cf. Etym. M.

P- 815, 55.4

I.e. 256.5 Fr. 727.

6 Frs. 728, 729, and 726.7 Berl. ph. Wochenschr. 1899, 16300".

XPYIHI 329

726

at Trpojpoi \oi/3rj^ 'Ecrria, /cXvet? raSe ;

726 Schol. V Ar.

ras dirapxas 805

. 846 rr, yapiroiewdai. /ecu

(with 6m for'Eo-rta). Schol. Find.

li. 5 /cat Zo0o/cX?7S' 'E-

At every sacrifice the first offering, or

libation, was made to Hestia: Plat. Crat.

40 1 D r6 irpb TTOLVTUV 6ev rfj ^crrLa Trpwry

TTpodtieii'. There is good authority for the

statement that she was also honoured last,

but it is not clear whether this was the

case at every meal or only on the occasion

of a sacrifice: Horn. h. 29. 4 ou yap arepcrov eiXaTriPcu Qvr\TQ\GLv, Iv* oi)

ri re\ 'Born? dpô/uevos ffir

olvov, Cornut. 28, p. 53 Lang, Ka66

Kav TCUS dvfftais ol "EXXrjpes airb irp&Trjs re

airr?}? tfpxovro Kal els ayja.T-r)V a.vrr\v /care-

iravov. But the first offering is the more

frequently mentioned, so that d0' 'Eortas

dpxeffdat became proverbial for'to begin

at the beginning,' or 'to start aright'

(Plat. Crat. 401 B, Euthyphr. 3 A, Eur.

fr. 781, 35 'Ecrrtas 6' 5os, j d0' rjs ye?ras ai> &pxf<r6aL 0Aot, Dio Chrys.

56 vtrrepov rjyavcLKTOvv tiri ro?j ire-

s, tbv a<p' 'Ecrrias KOiXvew). Seefurther Gruppe, Gr. Myth., p. 14054,Suss in Pauly-Wissowa VI 1 1 1272 ff.

irptopa. The form of expression, whichstrikes us as quaint, illustrates the pre-valence of sea-faring metaphors at Athens

etc.). Cf. Aesch. Suppl. 1000 evirpij/j.i>ri

0pev6s, Ag. 245 <TT6fj,aTos

In Eur. 7V0. 103 [Ayde Trpocrtarw

fiidrov | irpbs Kvpa TrXôuaa ri)x

think that j3t6rou should be taken with

Kv/j.a rather than with irptppav, but the

figure is in any case remarkable. ForicXveis Papageorgius reads /cXiôis ; perhapsrightly, since the line seems more likely to

be a prayer than an indignant question.Ribbeck thinks that the mention of

Hestia suggests the identification of

Sminthe with Tenedos : see Find. Nem.n. i ff. Perhaps, he adds, the fugitivestook refuge at her altar. Welcker thoughtthe words were an exclamation by the

younger Chryses on learning the truth.

727

Zrjvos e

727 Schol. Ar. Av. 1240 roDro <p-r)<ri

irapa TO Soô/cXeKW ev XpiKTy (so Fritzsche

on Ar. Thesm. 300 : XPVffV codd. )

The words of Aristophanes (OTTWS fj,-/]

<rov ytvos iravwXedpov \

Ai6s /x,a/c^XX?7 irav

ava(TTp\l/ri AlKy) are an intentionally ab-

surd perversion of this passage, wherehowever we do not know what the sub-

ject to fâvaffrpa(f>y was, and of Aesch.

Ag. 530 Tpoiav KaTa(TKd\J/avTa TOV 5iKr)<p6-

pov |

At6s /JiaKt\\ri, rrj KareipyaaTai irtdov.

[xctKtXXa, an agricultural implement,which may best be rendered mattock and

probably resembled a pick rather than a

spade (Suid. Phot, glossed by StcceXXa'

fork,' schol. Aesch. Giradrj), was usedfor breaking up the ground : Horn. 4> 259,

Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1533. But the verb

points to the demolition of buildings :

cf. Aesch. Pers. 813 dat/Abvuv 6' idpti-

/j.ara| wpoppifa (ptipdriv eâv^ffTpaTrrat f3d-

dpwv. I have followed Nauck in accept-

ing Fritzsche's ev Xpijo-rj. Dindorf (fr.

767) retains the vulg. xpuo-^, but it is

not easy to explain the epithet. It is true

that the gods' possessions are commonlylabelled as golden (cf. O. C. 1051 xP vffâ

K\ys, and epithets like xpvaTjvios and

XpvffrjXdKaros) ; but it seems inept to

extend this fancy to //.d/ceXXct. Ellendt

suggests alternatively that the thunder-bolt is meant : 'fulmen coruscum cumligonis dentibus comparatum.' But its

representations in art do not make it

likely that the Kepawos would have been

figured as //.d/ceXXa.

330 I000KAEOYI XPYIHI

728

TOIOUT09 TOll)Se TOV

728 #pete cod. 6 : apet RV, Apets Aid., (TV Brunck

728 Schol. Ar. Ran. 191 Kpewv, tbs

'AplffTapxos (prjfflv e?ri TUIV ffu/j-aTuv \au-

ftdveffOai TroAXdfct?, /cat Trapa T< 2o0o/cXet& Xpwrry

'

rotoi)TOS...A:p^ws.'rowSe TOV Kpe'ws is generally assumed

on the authority of Aristarchus to be a

periphrasis for the pronoun uov (or pos-

sibly eKeLvov). The only extant parallelsare Ar. Eq. 421 c5 Se^twraroi' /cpâs, andz^. 457 w yevviK&TaTOv Kptas. Observehowever that the words may have bornea stronger meaning

' master of this myflesh.' But in neither case is it credible

that Kptas would have been used, if the

quotation was taken from a tragedy.Outside the Cyclops, /cpâs is only appliedto human flesh in reference to the banquetof Thyestes. It is possible, therefore,and perhaps not unlikely that the Chryseswas a satyric play. Brunck cut the knot

by reading ev Kpkret, supposing that thereference was to the promise of Helen to

Paris, and he was followed by Ellendt.

Welcker and Ribbeck assigned the speechto a barbarian, Welcker to Chryses andRibbeck to Thoas ; but barbarians do not

speak so, unless they are represented as

comic characters. The parallel instancesof

o-dp^ quoted by Welcker, and the peri-

phrastic use of <rwAta, 5ûas, and Kapareferred to by Blaydes do not solve the

difficulty. In favour of Brunck's dpeis<rv, which he would make interrogative,

Blaydes quotes Ar. Eq. 1307 ov STJT' uov

y' dpei TTOT', Lys. 631 dXX' euov uev ov

Tvpavvev(rov<r\ Eur. Her. 258 dXX' OVK

^fjiov (TV 5ecr7r6<retj âtpon' TTOT^. This is

an attractive conjecture, but in such adoubtful context we cannot condemn

729

jjuav

729 filav fj.tv Lehrs|

729 Apollon. lex. Horn. p. 91, 34lov6d5o$...Ta$ yap T&V rp^&v pifas I6v8ovs

\eyei Zo0o/cX??s ei> Xpv<rri'

eyu...Tpixas.'

Hesych. II p. 126 itiov6ifa [tiovdifa]

rpixa'

Kdidb)fji.i. (m yap tovdos pifa

Tpix&v tf <r6> virepexov (virepex^^ cod.).The meaning of |iov0^ is hardly

doubtful : it denotes the first sproutingof the beard on the chin. Cf. Suid.tovdos i] TTpiioT-rj ^/c0i><rtj T&V Tpt^cDi/, a.irb

TOV iva.i Kal avdelv. Etym. M. p. 473,17. Schol. Horn. 50 tovdoi de tfavd-f)-

in Hesych. is'

that which rises from the

Hesych. : Apollon.

surface': cf. Phryn. praep. Soph. p. 77,

17 de B. tovQos' i) 4irl TOV irpocr&Trov a/xaT-r TUV Tpixv expvffei TV irpTWV yivo-

utvr} otdTjffts. If p.cav is right, there is

reason to doubt whether the tone is

serious, and this might bear on the in-

terpretation of fr. 728. Otherwise, thereis much to be said for Lehrs's /xAati/av.

Wagaer's (3ia /j.i> is unintelligible. Bergk(PLG III 711) retains rpixas with /miav

l^tv, interpreting the latter as ' one byone' like fj.iav p.Lav fr. 201. Butis probably a mere blunder.

730

73O Ammon. ed. Valck. p. 34 irapa

^vpnrLdri eo~x&pa avTi TOV jSw/ioO KetTai

HXcio-Oevei (fr. 628)'

fj.r)\o<r<payei re

TT' ecr^dpats'

Kal 2o^>o/cX^s iv

Xpv<rr}. Eustath. Od. p. 1564, 32 So0o-

oldev

The distinction between /Sw/ôs and c-

<rxdpa has already been discussed in thenote on fr. 38.

WV2V

END OF VOLUME II

PRINTED BY J. B. PEACE, M.A.,

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

r

BINDING SECT. APR 8

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVECARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

PAU13191917v.2

SophoclesFragments

Documents

The Fragments of Sophocles, vol. 2/3